ID: 16958.drn

Mr. Richard L. England
Director of Finance and Operations
Lick-Wilmerding High School
755 Ocean Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94112

Dear Mr. England:

This responds to your request for an interpretation whether a Ford dealership can remove two seats from a new passenger van, before first sale to the customer, so that the van would no longer be classified as a bus. The response is yes, but if the Ford dealership does so, it is responsible for certifying that the altered vehicle meets the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's (NHTSA's) safety standards applicable to multipurpose passenger vehicles.

Some background information may be helpful in understanding our regulations. Under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 Motor Vehicle Safety, NHTSA is authorized to issue Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSSs) applicable to new motor vehicles, including school buses. In 1974, Congress amended this statute (then called the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act) to direct NHTSA to issue FMVSSs on specific aspects of school bus safety. Under our regulations, a "bus" is any vehicle, including a van, that has a capacity of 11 persons or more. A "school bus" is a "bus" that is sold to transport children to or from school or school-related events. The Act requires that when a dealer sells or leases a new "bus" (a vehicle designed for 11 or more persons) to a school, that bus must be a certified school bus.

If a dealer permanently reduces the seating capacity of a bus to fewer than 11, the modified vehicle would no longer be a "bus." Because the dealer would not be selling a bus, the requirement to sell a school bus would not apply. However, a dealer modifying a vehicle in this manner would have other responsibilities as an "alterer" under our regulations (49 CFR 567.7). The dealer would be changing the vehicle's classification from "bus" to "multipurpose passenger vehicle" (MPV) and would have to certify that the vehicle meets NHTSA's safety standards for MPVs. I am, for your information, enclosing a copy of an April 2, 1996 interpretation letter to Sgt. Stephan C. Turner of the Michigan State Police, that addresses two hypothetical situations where a dealer changes the number of seats in a passenger van.

While NHTSA regulates the manufacture, sale and lease of new vehicles (including MPVs and school buses), this agency does not regulate used vehicles, or the use of vehicles. Therefore, how students are to be transported to and from school or school-related activities is determined by

State law. This is because the individual States, not the Federal government, have authority over the use of motor vehicles. However, use of vehicles other than school buses could result in increased liability in the event of an accident. You might wish to consult with your school's attorney and insurance company to discuss this matter. I must emphasize NHTSA's position that a vehicle meeting Federal school bus standards is the safest way to transport students. I encourage your school to give its most careful consideration to the possible consequences of transporting students in vehicles that do not comply with the school bus standards.

I hope you find this information helpful. If you have further questions, please contact Dorothy Nakama of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,
John Womack
Acting Chief Counsel
Enclosure
ref:571.3#VSA
d.4/8/98

ID: 19024.wkm

Mr. William E. Daniels, Jr.
Precision Husky Corporation
P.O. Box Drawer 507
Leeds, AL 35094-0507

Dear Mr. Daniels:

Please pardon the delay in responding to your letter to Walter Myers of my staff in which you asked whether the tub grinders your company produces would constitute motor vehicles. The answer is no.

You stated that the purpose of the tub grinders is the processing of organic waste materials. The grinders are used at composting facilities and land fills world-wide. You stated that normally, a customer will purchase a grinder at the factory, after which it is transported to the distributor for final inspection, then delivered to the customer's work site. Once there it typically remains at that site for its useful life, considered to be approximately 5 to 7 years. The grinder may be towed over the public roads on rare occasions, however, such as from job site to job site, back to the factory for rebuilding, and resold and towed to the next buyer. You also referred to a problem with shipping a grinder into Canada.

Chapter 301 of Title 49, U.S. Code (U.S.C.) (Safety Act) authorizes the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to establish Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS) applicable to new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. The Safety Act, at 49 U.S.C. 30102(a)(6), defines "motor vehicle" as:

[A] vehicle driven or drawn by mechanical power and manufactured primarily for use on public streets, roads, and highways, but does not include a vehicle operated only on a rail line.

Based on your description of your tub grinders and the product brochures you enclosed with your letter, it appears that the grinders are not motor vehicles within the statutory definition quoted above. They obviously are designed to be used primarily at off-road job sites for extended periods of time, although they are capable of being towed to other locations. In such cases, the on-road transport of these items is merely incidental and not the primary purpose for which they were manufactured. This contrasts with instances in which vehicles such as dump trucks frequently use the public roads going to and from off-road job sites, but stay at the sites for only a limited time. Such vehicles are considered motor vehicles for purposes of the Safety Act, since their on-road use is more than merely "incidental."

With respect to shipping grinders to Canada, since they are not "motor vehicles" within the definition of the Safety Act, they are not required to comply with the FMVSSs. They may, however, be driven, towed, or otherwise transported to the U.S. border or to a U.S. port for further shipment to a foreign market so long as they are labeled on the vehicle or equipment clearly indicating intent to export. There is no prescribed form or format for the export label, but the label must be legible, obvious, and clearly indicate "For Export Only."

I hope this information is helpful to you. Should you have any questions or need further information, feel free to contact Mr. Myers at this address or at (202) 366-2992, or fax at (202) 366-3820.

Sincerely,
Frank Seales, Jr.
Chief Counsel
ref:567
d.2/3/99

ID: 14119.drn

Ms. Jo. Campfield
Vice President
Ultra Bond Licensing Corporation
2458 I-70 Business Loop, Ste. B-1
Grand Junction, CO 81501

Dear Ms. Campfield:

This responds to your request for an interpretation of this agency's laws that apply to your new product, EDGEGUARD, a clear material that is placed on the outer three inches or less of a windshield perimeter to prevent cracks. I apologize for the delay in responding.

As you are aware from past correspondence, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has the authority to regulate the manufacture of new motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA has promulgated Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 205, Glazing Materials, which specifies performance and location requirements for motor vehicle glazing. For windshields, Standard No. 205 specifies minimum levels of light transmittance (70 percent) and light stability; resistance to abrasion, delamination (humidity and boil tests), impact and penetration; and maximum levels of optical deviation and distortion. The various tests and criteria are contained in ANSI/SAE Z26.1, which is incorporated by reference in Standard No. 205.

NHTSA has stated in past interpretation letters that films such as the type your letter describes are not glazing materials themselves, and would not have to meet Standard No. 205. However, depending on who installs the glazing, installation of such films on new motor vehicles may be prohibited if, after installation, the vehicle glazing no longer meets the requirements of Standard No. 205, such as those for light transmittance, abrasion resistance and optical distortion.

A vehicle manufacturer or dealer placing your film on glazing in a new vehicle prior to sale of the vehicle must certify that the glazing continues to meet Standard No. 205. 49 U.S.C. Section 30112(a) prohibits any person from manufacturing for sale, offering for sale or selling any motor vehicle or equipment that fails to comply with applicable safety standards, including Standard No. 205. After the vehicle has been sold to the first purchaser, the owner may modify the vehicle as he or she pleases, subject to State requirements. Under Federal law, the owner could install your product on the vehicle whether or not such installation adversely affects the light transmittance and other properties of the vehicle's glazing. However, we urge consumers not to degrade the safety of their vehicles.

49 U.S.C. Section 30122(b) provides that a manufacturer, distributor, dealer or motor vehicle repair business "may not knowingly make inoperative" any device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle in compliance with an applicable motor vehicle safety standard. "Make inoperative" means to remove, disconnect or degrade the performance of a system or element of design installed pursuant to the FMVSSs. Thus, none of these persons may knowingly install your film on a vehicle for its owner if the installation would make inoperative the light transmittance or abrasion resistance of the vehicle glazing. Violations of this section may result in Federal civil penalties of up to $1,100 for each violation.

Because State law may affect the installation of your product on owners' vehicles, you should check the law in the States where you believe your product may be sold or installed for any applicable requirements.

I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions, please contact Dorothy Nakama of my staff at this address or at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,
John Womack
Acting Chief Counsel
ref:205
d.7/3/97

ID: nht90-3.78

TYPE: Interpretation-NHTSA

DATE: August 31, 1990

FROM: Paul Jackson Rice -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA; Signature by Stephen P. Wood

TO: Samuel Kimmelman -- Engineering Product Manager, Ideal Division, EPICOR Industries, Inc.

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 8-2-90 from S. Kimmelman to P.J. Rice (OCC 5074)

TEXT:

This is in reply to your letter of August 2, 1990, with respect to Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108.

It is your understanding that, when a vehicle is delivered to its purchaser with dealer-installed trailer hitch and associated wiring, it must conform to all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. You interpret the standards as requiring thre e specific aspects of performance, and you ask whether we agree with those interpretations. These aspects are:

"1. The turn signal flasher must be certified as meeting the FMVSS-108 requirements of a variable load turn signal flasher, over a minimum load equal to that of the vehicle turn signal load and a maximum load equal to that of the vehicle plus the trailer ."

This is essentially correct. However, it is not the flasher that is certified but the vehicle in which the flasher is installed; Standard No. 108 does not require certification of original equipment lighting items, only replacement equipment items. Sta ndard No. 108's requirements for turn signal flashers are those of SAE Standard J590b, Automotive Turn Signal Flasher, October 1965, which are incorporated by reference. Under the Standard's Scope, the flashers "are intended to operate at the design loa d for the turn signal system as stated by the manufacturer." If a vehicle is designed for towing purposes, and its manufacturer offers an optional trailer hitch and associated wiring, then that manufacturer must equip the vehicle with a flasher capable of meeting a minimum load equal that of the vehicle turn signal load, and a maximum load equal to that of the vehicle plus the trailer. That will be a variable load turn signal flasher. The manufacturer of the vehicle is the person responsible for ensu ring that the flasher meets the vehicle's design load requirements, and that the vehicle is certified as conforming to Standard No. 108.

"2. The hazard warning signal flasher must be certified as meeting the requirements of FMVSS-108 over a load range of 2 lamps to the combined hazard warning loads of the vehicle plus the trailer."

This is also essentially correct, and our comments are similar. Standard No. 108's requirements for hazard warning signal flashers are those of SAE Recommended Practice J945 Vehicular Hazard Warning Signal Flasher, February 1966, which are incorporated by reference. The Practice's Scope specifies that the flashers "are required to operate from two signal lamps to the maximum design load. . . . as stated by the manufacturer. Thus, in

order for the vehicle manufacturer to certify compliance with Standard No. 108, it must equip the vehicle with a flasher that operates over a load range of two lamps to the total hazard warning system load of the vehicle plus the trailer.

"3. The requirement to provide turn signal outage is voided due to the trailer towing capability of the vehicle."

This is correct. Under section S5.5.6 of Standard No. 108, any vehicle equipped to tow trailers and which uses a variable-load turn signal flasher is exempted from the failure indication requirements of the SAE standards on turn signals.

I hope that this answers your questions.

ID: 23010.ztv

Mr. Tomas P. Quintanilla
Customs & Quarantine Officer III
1501 Central Avenue
Tiyan, GU 96913





Dear Mr. Quintanilla:

This is in reply to your fax of April 18, 2001 asking several questions about a 1954 BMW motorcycle recently imported into Guam. You report that "the motorcycle has all the original parts affixed when it was manufactured excluding the tires." We understand this to mean that the tires on the vehicle are not the original ones.

You asked "If the tires on the motorcycle are specifically made for that type and year of motorcycle/vehicle and manufactured after 1966, should it or does it have to comply with the FMVSS?"

This is an interesting question, and the answer is no. The motorcycle itself, of course, is not required to meet the Federal motor vehicle safety standards since it is a motor vehicle that is "at least 25 years old" (49 U.S.C. 30112(b)(9)). On the other hand, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 119, "New Pneumatic Tires for Vehicles Other Than Passenger Cars," is an equipment standard. It does not apply to motorcycles but to "new pneumatic tires designed for highway use on . . . motorcycles manufactured after 1948" (S3, 49 CFR 571.119). There is no question that new replacement tires for a 1954 BMW motorcycle would have to meet Standard No. 119. Nor is there any question, under our interpretations, that, if the BMW's tires were shipped separately, they would have to comply with Standard No. 119 if they were manufactured on or after September 1, 1974, the effective date of Standard No. 119 (Unlike its treatment of motor vehicles, Section 30112(b)(9) does not exclude motor vehicle equipment from applicability of the Federal motor vehicle safety standards on the basis of age).

However, when a single motor vehicle that is no longer required to comply with our regulations because of its age is imported into the United States, we would not require any individual replacement equipment item installed on the vehicle at the time of entry to meet a Federal requirement that might be appropriate were the equipment item detached and shipped separately. This means that the tires of the BMW motorcycle do not have to comply with Standard No. 119 if the motorcycle is imported with them installed (or if they are detached and were manufactured before September 1, 1974).

You have also asked: "If an individual imports a . . . 1950/1960 model vehicle and needs to replace any glass item with an original replacement (windshield, window lights . . . .) do these items need to comply with FMVSS?"

The answer is yes. Any glazing that is manufactured to replace any glazing in any motor vehicle, no matter what its age, must be manufactured and marked in accordance with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 205, Glazing Materials, Glazing installed in a motor vehicle at the time of its importation need not comply with Standard No. 205 when the vehicle itself is excused from compliance because it is 25 years or older in age.

Sincerely,

John Womack
Acting Chief Counsel

ref:591
d.5/15/01

ID: GF001071

Mr. David Regan
Trecan Combustion Limited
4049 St Margarets Bay Road
Hubley, Nova Scotia B3Z1C2
Canada

Dear Mr. Regan:

This responds to your February 10, 2004, letter and phone conversation with George Feygin of my staff. You ask whether snow melting machines manufactured by your company would be classified as "motor vehicles." You manufacture three different machines with the primary function of melting large quantities of snow. In order to move from location to location, these machines are equipped with wheels and function much like a trailer. As explained below, based on the information you provided us, we would not consider these machines to be motor vehicles for the purposes of our regulations.

Title 49 U.S.C Chapter 301 authorizes the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to prescribe Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSSs) applicable to new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. Section 30102(a)(6) defines "motor vehicle" as:

"[A] vehicle driven or drawn by mechanical power and manufactured primarily for use on the public streets, roads, and highways, but does not include a vehicle operated only on a rail line."

NHTSA has issued several interpretations of this language. We have stated that vehicles equipped with tracks, agricultural equipment, and other vehicles incapable of highway travel are not motor vehicles. We have also determined that certain vehicles designed and sold solely for off-road use (e.g., airport runway vehicles and underground mining vehicles) are not motor vehicles, even if they may be operationally capable of highway travel. Finally, we have concluded that items of mobile construction equipment that use the highways only to move between job sites and that typically spend extended periods of time at a single site are not motor vehicles. However, we do consider vehicles that use the public roads on a necessary and recurring basis to be motor vehicles.

In the present case, your letter states that your snow melting machines are designed primarily for use by airports and other large facilities, such as parking garages. While these machines are capable of highways travel, you state that in all likelihood such travel will be limited to reaching permanent or semi-permanent job sites (i.e specific locations where large snow piles are continuously accumulated). Based on this information, it appears that these machines are akin to airport runway vehicles or items of mobile construction equipment that do not travel on highways on a recurring basis. Accordingly, we find that the snow melting machines described in your letter are not "motor vehicles." Because these machines are not motor vehicles, they are not subject to our regulations and requirements, including the requirement to meet all applicable FMVSSs.

We note that our finding is limited specifically to the equipment described in your letter, and is largely based on your representation of its intended use. In your correspondence, you state that some snow melting machines may be sold to large cities, but you do not elaborate further. We presume that snow melting machines purchased by large cities would also remain mostly at some single location designated for snow melting activities. However, we wish to caution that our finding does not apply to snow melting equipment that is intended to be used extensively on public roads on a recurring basis.

I hope you find this information helpful. If you have any other questions please contact Mr. George Feygin at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Jacqueline Glassman
Chief Counsel

ref:571
d.3/12/04

ID: GF004709

Mr. Paul Brooks
220 Rogers Street
Ulster Park, NY 12487

Dear Mr. Brooks:

This is in response to your e-mail of July 12, 2004, in which you ask several questions related to adhesive numbers designed to be affixed to tires. Specifically, you ask whether vehicle owners are permitted to affix large-print adhesive numbers onto the tire sidewalls of their vehicles. You also ask whether the manufacturer of this product would be subject to recall responsibilities.

You describe your large-print adhesive numbers as follows. The numbers, made from either rubber or vinyl and measuring one to three inches in size, would be affixed to the tire sidewalls by adhesive. This would enable vehicle operators to more clearly see the tire pressure information molded onto the tire sidewall or provided elsewhere on the vehicle. You intend to either provide vehicle owners with the correct tire pressure information for their vehicles or more likely, instruct them to consult appropriate information already on the vehicle. Based on the information you have provided, we understand that you intend to sell your large-print adhesive numbers to consumers but do not intend to participate in the installation or application of these adhesive numbers.

By way of background, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) issues FMVSSs applicable to the manufacture and sale of new motor vehicles and certain items of motor vehicle equipment. However, NHTSA does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301, manufacturers are required to certify that their vehicles and equipment meet applicable requirements.

49 U.S.C. 30102(a)(7)(B) defines motor vehicle equipment as:

"any component manufactured or sold for replacement or improvement of a system, part, or component, or as an accessory or addition to a motor vehicle"

The large-print adhesive numbers described in your e-mail would be considered an item of motor vehicle equipment as defined in 49 U.S.C. 30102(a)(7)(B) because they are accessories to a motor vehicle. Because these numbers are an item of motor vehicle equipment, they would be subject to the notification and remedy (recall) provisions of 49 U.S.C. 30118-30120. Accordingly, if you or NHTSA determine that your product contains a safety-related defect, you will be responsible for notifying purchasers of the large-print adhesive numbers and remedying the problem free of charge.

Additionally, we note that vehicle owners themselves are not prohibited from affixing large-print adhesive numbers to the tire sidewalls of their vehicles. Generally, Federal law does not prohibit vehicle owners from modifying their own vehicles, even if the installation were to result in the vehicle no longer complying with applicable safety standards.

Finally, we note that S4.3 of the Federal motor vehicle safety standard (FMVSS) No. 110, requires that each vehicle subject to the standard be equipped with a placard which contains tire inflation and certain other information related to tire load limits and proper inflation levels for the safe operation of a motor vehicle. An improved version of this tire information placard will be required beginning September 1, 2005. Although it is not required by our standards, you may wish to advise vehicle owners to consult the tire information placard to find out the proper tire inflation pressure.

I hope you find this information helpful. If you have further questions, you may contact Mr. George Feygin of my staff at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Jacqueline Glassman
Chief Counsel

ref:110
d.8/27/04

ID: 8083

Air Mail

Mr. M.K. Chaudhari Director ARAI The Automotive Research Association of India Post Box No. 832 Survey No. 102, Vetal Hill Off Paud Road, Lothrud Pune-411 004 INDIA

Dear Mr. Chaudhari:

This responds to your follow-up letter of November 16, 1992, subsequent to our response, dated August 12, 1992, to your earlier letter. I am pleased that the information given you in our previous letter is proving helpful in your work. In your current letter you request information regarding DOT certification of automotive components in general, and "brake hose ends" in particular.

I would like to clarify the relevant points made in our last letter to clear up any misunderstandings. Neither the Department of Transportation (DOT), nor the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA, a part of DOT) conduct any certification testing. Under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (Safety Act), a copy of which I have enclosed, the manufacturer is responsible for certifying that its components or vehicles are in compliance with NHTSA's safety standards.

Manufacturers must have some basis for their certification that a product complies with all applicable safety standards. This does not necessarily mean that a manufacturer must conduct the specific tests set forth in an applicable standard. Certifications may be based on, among other things, engineering analyses, actual testing, and computer simulations.

NHTSA tests vehicles and equipment sold to consumers for compliance with the FMVSS's and investigates defects relating to motor vehicle safety. If a manufacturer or NHTSA determines that a noncompliance or safety-related defect exists, the manufacturer must notify purchasers of its product and remedy the problem free of charge. A manufacturer of noncomplying or defective products is also subject to civil penalties.

With respect to your specific question about "brake hose ends," Standard No. 106, "Brake Hoses," applies to new motor vehicles and to "brake hoses" (which include plastic tubing), brake hose end fittings, and brake hose assemblies. A copy of the standard is enclosed. The standard specifies labeling and performance requirements for these products to reduce the likelihood of brake system failure from ruptures in the brake hose or brake hose assembly. New brake hoses, end fittings, and assemblies must meet these requirements to be sold in or imported into this country. If the items do not comply, the manufacturer is subject to the civil penalties and the recall responsibilities mentioned above.

I have enclosed a copy of the test procedure manual used by the agency in its tests to verify compliance of the brake hoses. However, please see the Note on page 1 of the procedure manual regarding a manufacturer's certification testing.

NHTSA does not authorize testing agencies to perform certification procedures. Therefore, we cannot provide a list of the agencies in India or elsewhere that are capable of certifying motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment.

I hope this information clarifies NHTSA's role in the certification process. If you have any further questions about NHTSA's safety standards, please feel free to contact David Elias of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992. Our fax number is (202) 366-3820.

Sincerely,

John Womack Acting Chief Counsel

Enclosure ref:106 d:2/9/93

ID: 2631y

Mr. Samuel Kimmelman
Engineering Product Manager
Ideal Division
EPICOR Industries, Inc.
3200 Parker Drive
St. Augustine, FL 32084-0891

Dear Mr. Kimmelman:

This is in reply to your letter of August 2, l990, with respect to Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. l08.

It is your understanding that, when a vehicle is delivered to its purchaser with dealer-installed trailer hitch and associated wiring, it must conform to all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. You interpret the standards as requiring three specific aspects of performance, and you ask whether we agree with those interpretations. These aspects are:

"l. The turn signal flasher must be certified as meeting the FMVSS-108 requirements of a variable load turn signal flasher, over a minimum load equal to that of the vehicle turn signal load and a maximum load equal to that of the vehicle plus the trailer."

This is essentially correct. However, it is not the flasher that is certified but the vehicle in which the flasher is installed; Standard No. l08 does not require certification of original equipment lighting items, only replacement equipment items. Standard No. l08's requirements for turn signal flashers are those of SAE Standard J590b, Automotive Turn Signal Flasher, October l965, which are incorporated by reference. Under the Standard's Scope, the flashers "are intended to operate at the design load for the turn signal system as stated by the manufacturer." If a vehicle is designed for towing purposes, and its manufacturer offers an optional trailer hitch and associated wiring, then that manufacturer must equip the vehicle with a flasher capable of meeting a minimum load equal to that of the vehicle turn signal load, and a maximum load equal to that of the vehicle plus the trailer. That will be a variable load turn signal flasher. The manufacturer of the vehicle is the person responsible for ensuring that the flasher meets the vehicle's design load requirements, and that the vehicle is certified as conforming to Standard No. l08.

"2. The hazard warning signal flasher must be certified as meeting the requirements of FMVSS-l08 over a load range of 2 lamps to the combined hazard warning loads of the vehicle plus the trailer."

This is also essentially correct, and our comments are similar. Standard No. 108's requirements for hazard warning signal flashers are those of SAE Recommended Practice J945 Vehicular Hazard Warning Signal Flasher, February l966, which are incorporated by reference. The Practice's Scope specifies that the flashers "are required to operate from two signal lamps to the maximum design load . . . as stated by the manufacturer." Thus, in order for the vehicle manufacturer to certify compliance with Standard No. l08, it must equip the vehic1e with a flasher that operates over a load range of two lamps to the total hazard warning system load of the vehicle plus the trailer.

"3. The requirement to provide turn signal outage is voided due to the trailer towing capability of the vehicle."

This is correct. Under section S5.5.6 of Standard No. l08, any vehicle equipped to tow trailers and which uses a variable-load turn signal flasher is exempted from the failure indication requirements of the SAE standards on turn signals.

I hope that this answers your questions.

Sincerely,

Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel

ref:l08 d:8/3l/90

ID: 3041yy

Mrs. Elizabeth Anania
3045 Granville Drive
Raleigh, NC 27609

Dear Mrs. Anania:

This responds to your letter to Mr. Steve Kratzke of my staff, requesting that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) grant permission to a repair business to modify your motor vehicle.

You explained that your husband, Vincent Anania, has some paralysis of his right arm and hand as a result of a stroke a year ago. You explained that your husband wishes to begin driving again and was recently evaluated by Bryant Driving School in Raleigh who determined that he was qualified to drive. However, the seat in your automobile does not move far enough back to allow your husband to enter the vehicle. You asked for permission to have your vehicle modified so that the seat can move further back. I hope the following discussion explaining our regulations will be of assistance to you.

I would like to begin by clarifying that there is no procedure by which persons petition for and are granted permission from NHTSA to arrange to have a motor vehicle repair business modify their motor vehicle. Repair businesses are permitted to modify vehicles without obtaining permission from NHTSA to do so, but are subject to certain regulatory limits on the type of modifications they may make. In certain limited situations, we have exercised our discretion in enforcing our regulations to provide some allowances to a repair business which cannot conform to our regulations when making modifications to accommodate the special needs of persons with disabilities. Since your situation is among those given special consideration by NHTSA, this letter should provide you with the relief you seek.

Our agency is authorized to issue Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) that set performance requirements for new motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment. Manufacturers are required by the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (Safety Act) to certify that their products conform to our safety standards before they can be offered for sale. Manufacturers, distributors, dealers and repair businesses modifying certified vehicles are affected by 108(a)(2)(A) of the Safety Act. It prohibits those businesses from knowingly rendering inoperative any elements of design installed on a vehicle in compliance with a FMVSS. In general, 108(a)(2)(A) would require repair businesses which modify motor vehicles to ensure that they do not remove, disconnect or degrade the performance of safety equipment installed in compliance with an applicable safety standard. Violations of 108(a)(2)(A) are punishable by civil fines up to $1,000 per violation.

In situations such as yours where a vehicle must be modified to accommodate the needs of a particular disability, we have been willing to consider any violation of 108(a)(2)(A) a purely technical one justified by public need. I can assure you that NHTSA would not institute enforcement proceedings against a repair business that modifies the seat on your vehicle to accommodate your husband's condition. We caution, however, that only modifications necessary to accommodate your husband's condition should be made to the seat.

If you have further questions or need some additional information in this area, please contact Mary Versailles of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel

/ref:VSA, 207 d:6/24/9l