ID: aiam2520

Dear Mr. Miyazawa: This is in reply to your letter of February 14, 1977, concerning th symbol 'DOT' as a certification of compliance to FMVSS No. 108.; The symbol 'DOT' is permitted by the Standard to be placed on the ite of equipment in lieu of the certification requirements of Section 114 of the 'National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966,' which states, in part '...In the case of an item of motor vehicle equipment such certification may be in the form of a label or tag on such item or on the outside of a container in which such item is delivered...'; 'DOT' on the individual container does not meet the certificatio requirements. The label or tag must state that the item 'conforms to all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards.'; Sincerely, E. T. Driver, Director, Office of Crash Avoidance, Moto Vehicle Programs;

ID: aiam2086

SUBJECT: Certification of Universal Size Motorcycle Helmets You have asked whether a universal motorcycle helmet must b permanently labelled with the DOT label to certify compliance with FMVSS No. 218. As I understand it, these helmets are readily adjustable and can be made to fit the size C headform by means of filler material supplied by the manufacturer for the purpose of allowing such adjustment. Accordingly, they are required to comply with the standard.; The requirements of the standard apply to helmets that fit headfor size C. It is my interpretation that the term 'fit' includes the case where by means of an adjusting mechanism supplied by the manufacturer for the purpose of permitting adjustment to headform size C, *inter* *alia*, the helmet can readily be made to fit headform size C. You should, in testing the helmets for compliance purposes, follow the manufacturer's suggested procedures for fitting the helmet to the size C headform and then proceed as with any other helmet. When other headforms become available, a helmet will be required to pass the requirements for all sizes that it fits.; Frank Berndt, Acting Chief Counsel

ID: aiam2514

Dear Mr. Miyazawa: This is in reply to your letter of February 14, 1977, concerning th symbol 'DOT' as a certification of compliance to FMVSS No. 108.; The symbol 'DOT' is permitted by the Standard to be placed on the ite of equipment in lieu of the certification requirements of Section 114 of the 'National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966,' which states, in part '...In the case of an item of motor vehicle equipment such certification may be in the form of a label or tag on such item or on the outside of a container in which such item is delivered...'; DOT' on the individual container does not meet the certificatio requirements. The label or tag must state that the item 'conforms to all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards.'; Sincerely, E. T. Driver, Director, Office of Crash Avoidance, Moto Vehicle Programs;

ID: 10535

Ms. Patricia Jackson
Patnel Company
25 St. Edward Lane
Florissant, MO 63033

Dear Ms. Jackson:

This responds to your letters asking about safety standards, particularly those about fire safety, for a product you call the Booster Buddy Cushion. According to promotional literature accompanying your letter, the Booster Buddy Cushion is placed under infant/toddler car seats to protect the car's upholstery and to provide additional comfort to young children. The literature also indicates that older children situated in booster seats (and on actual vehicle seats) could lean on this device.

By way of background information, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has the authority to issue Federal motor vehicle safety standards for new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA does not, however, approve or certify any vehicles or items of equipment. Instead, Congress has established a "self-certification" process under which each manufacturer is responsible for certifying that its products meet all applicable safety standards. The following represents our opinion based on the information set forth in your letter and promotional literature.

There currently are no Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSSs) that directly apply to the Booster Buddy Cushion. Our standard for "child restraint systems," FMVSS 213, applies to "any device except Type I or Type II seat belts, designed for use in a motor vehicle or aircraft to restrain, seat, or position children who weigh 50 pounds or less." The standard does not apply to accessory items, such as a pad/cushion that is used with a child safety seat.

While no FMVSS applies to the Booster Buddy Cushion, your product is considered to be an item of motor vehicle equipment. As a manufacturer of motor vehicle equipment, you are subject to the requirements of 49 U.S.C. ''30118-30121 concerning the recall and remedy of products with safety related defects. I have enclosed an information sheet that briefly describes those and other manufacturer responsibilities. In the event you or NHTSA determines that your product contains a safety-related defect, you would be responsible for notifying purchasers of the defective equipment and remedying the problem free of charge.

In addition, while it is unlikely that the Booster Buddy Cushion would be installed by a motor vehicle manufacturer, distributor, dealer or repair business, 49 U.S.C. '30122 prohibits those businesses from installing the device if the installation "makes inoperative" compliance with any safety standard. Our FMVSSs require specific levels of performance for materials used in the occupant compartment of motor vehicles. Specifically, FMVSS No.302 specifies flammability resistance requirements for vehicle interiors. Any person listed in '30122 who installs a Booster Buddy Cushion must ensure that the product does not undermine the vehicle's compliance with those flammability resistance requirements.

The prohibition of '30122 does not apply to individual owners who install equipment in their own vehicles. Thus, individual owners may install any item of motor vehicle equipment regardless of its effect on compliance with Federal motor vehicle safety standards. However, NHTSA encourages vehicle owners not to degrade the safety of their vehicles.

We note that the pad/cushion you wish to manufacture can be used without a child seat, to cushion and support the head of a sleeping older child. We do not consider the pad/cushion to "position children" in a manner that a child seat positions children to better use a vehicle's belt system. Rather, the Booster Buddy Cushion simply provides a surface that a child may lean on. However, we are concerned about the possibility that consumers might use your product, instead of a child seat, with a child who should be restrained in a car seat. We recommend that you inform consumers purchasing your product that the Booster Buddy Cushion is not a child restraint system and must not be used as one.

I hope this information has been helpful. If you have any other questions, please contact Marvin Shaw or Deirdre Fujita of my staff at this address or by phone at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Philip R. Recht Chief Counsel

Enclosure

ref:213#302 d:3/3/95

ID: aiam5313

"Dear Mr. Delapp: This responds to your letter requesting a interpretation of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 206, 'Door locks and door retention components,' as it pertains to the locking mechanism of a so-called '5th' door installed on your limousines. I apologize for the delay in responding. We conclude that the locking mechanism on the 5th door is not prohibited by Standard 206. Based on your letter and a conversation with David Elias of my office, I understand that you have replaced the extra panel on the right side of a 1993 Lincoln Town Car based limousine with a passenger door (i.e., the 5th door). The door consists completely of the original equipment manufacturer's materials and hinges. The 5th door is a supplementary door, and does not replace or effect in any way the two side rear doors with which your vehicles are normally equipped. When the 5th door is closed, its locking mechanism engages automatically, and the door cannot be opened from the inside or the outside. A solenoid locking mechanism that unlocks the 5th door is located inside the vehicle in a 'privacy panel' behind the driver's seat. For the driver to unlock the 5th door, the car must be stopped and the driver must then get out of the car and reach through a window into the area behind the driver's seat. The locking mechanism cannot be reached by the driver while seated in the driver's seat, and cannot be reached by the passengers in the rear seats. The 5th door cannot be accidentally opened, unless the locking mechanism has been actively disengaged, the door remains locked. Disengaging the locking mechanism for the 5th door allows the driver to open the door from the outside, although passengers could push the door open from the inside, as well. There are two pertinent requirements of FMVSS No. 206 to your situation. First, S4.1.3 (Door Locks) states that: Each door shall be equipped with a locking mechanism with an operating means in the interior of the vehicle. In two prior letters, to Mr. Charles Murphy on May 10, 1974, and to Mr. Gary Hackett on April 11, 1988, the agency interpreted S4.1.3 to mean that the locking mechanism must also be operable from within the vehicle. The first question to be addressed is whether the 5th door meets the requirement of S4.1.3. We believe the answer is yes, the door is equipped with a locking mechanism with an operating means in the interior of the vehicle that is operable from within the vehicle. The operating means for the locking mechanism is in the interior of the vehicle in that the locking mechanism engages automatically when the 5th door is closed. While the means to disengage the operating mechanism is not accessible to occupants in the vehicle, Standard 206 does not require the locking mechanism to be capable of being disengaged by an occupant. This is because the purpose of the standard is to minimize the chance that occupants of the vehicle will be ejected in a collision. Thus, the thrust of the standard is to ensure that occupants are retained within the vehicle, such as by requiring doors to have door locks that occupants are capable of locking. The second pertinent requirement is S4.1.3.2 (Side Rear Door Locks), which states that: ... when the locking mechanism is engaged both the outside and inside door handles or other latch release controls shall be inoperative. The 5th door appears to comply with S4.1.3.2, in that it cannot be opened from the outside or inside when the locking mechanism is engaged. In a letter to Ms. C.D. Black, dated April 10, 1987, the agency interpreted a question on child safety locks that is relevant to your situation. The child safety lock operated as a 'secondary locking system' that, when activated, rendered the inside rear door handle incapable of opening the door. (It had no effect on the outside door handle.) As we stated in that letter, our conclusion was that Standard 206 permitted the child safety lock because the standard prohibits only secondary locking systems that interfere with the engagement, but not with the disengagement, of the primary locking system. In that letter, we wrote: The answer to your question about the child locking systems is dependent on whether the systems interfere with an aspect of performance required by Standard No. 206. We have determined that the answer is no, because the requirements of... S4.1.3.2 are written in terms of what must occur when the primary system is engaged and impose no requirements regarding the effects of disengaging the system. Thus, the aspect of performance required by S4.1.3 for the interior operating means for the door locks is that it be capable only of engaging the required door locking mechanisms. The aspect of performance required by S4.1.3.2 for door locks on the rear doors is that the inside and outside door handles be inoperative when the locking mechanism is engaged. Since we have determined that... S4.1.3.2 do es not address the effects of disengaging the required door locks-- i.e., S4.1.3.2 does not require that the inside rear door handles be operative (capable of releasing the door latch) when the required locking system is disengaged--a child locking system may be provided on a vehicle if it does not negate the capability of the door lock plunger (the operating means) to engage the door locks. I hope this information has been helpful. If you have any further questions, feel free to contact Mr. Elias at the above address or by phone at (202) 366- 2992. Sincerely, John Womack Acting Chief Counsel";

ID: aiam2138

Dear Mr. Webber: This is in response to your request of November 21, 1975, for a opinion regarding requirements for certifying universal sized helmets pursuant to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 218.; The requirements of Standard No. 218, *Motorcycle Helmets*, apply t helmets that fit headform size C. This includes the case where, by means of an adjusting mechanism supplied by the manufacturer for the purpose of permitting adjustment to headform size C, the helmet can readily be made to fit headform size C. Thus, any helmet that the manufacturer intends for use by persons with heads in the size C range must meet the requirements of the standard, including the requirement to affix the label required by section 5.6.1 of the standard.; The 'universal' helmet described in your letter seems to fall withi these guidelines in that it is intended to fit, *inter* *alia*, the size C headform. Therefore, notwithstanding the fact that it may also be adjusted to fit other size headforms, it should meet the requirements of FMVSS No. 218, including the labeling requirements.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel

ID: aiam3634

Dear Mr. Burgess: This is in reply to your letter of November 1, 1982, regarding a interpretation of the 'lens area requirements of FMVSS No. 108' as applied to the high contrast lamp whose design you enclosed.; We understand that your design applies to rear lamps. The measuremen for the illuminated area of a rear lamp as specified in SAE J585e, 'Tail Lamps (Rear Position Lamps),' for example, is stated in part as follows:; >>>...'To be considered visible, the lamp must provide an unobstructe projected illuminated area of outer lens surface....'<<<; This applies to the installation requirements, i.e., the device as use on a vehicle. It is not part of the laboratory test procedure.; Further, with regard to photometric requirements of a lamp, n measurement for the illuminated area of a rear lamp is specified in SAE test procedures.; In summary, Standard No. 108 does not prohibit Lucas from manufacturin the lamp in question, but the vehicle manufacturer must be careful to insure that the lamp, when installed, conforms to the standard's requirements for visibility of lens area.; Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel

ID: aiam1682

Dear Mr. Burgess:#This is to confirm your telephone conversation o November 13, 1974, with Mark Schwimmer of this office, concerning your request of October 4 for an interpretation of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 106-74 and its relation to SAE Standard J1403.#You are correct in assuming that all inside diameters listed in Tabled V and VI of Standard No. 106-74 are permitted for both light-wall and heavy-wall vacuum brake hose.#Section 103(d) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 prohibits any State from establishing or continuing in effect a safety standard applicable to an item of motor vehicle equipment performance, where there is an applicable Federal standard covering the same aspect of performance, unless the standards are identical. The NHTSA has determined that FMVSS 106-74 and SAE Standard J1403 are applicable to the same aspect of performance, and that they are not identical. Therefore, the States are prohibited from disapproving the use of brake hose which meets the requirements of Standard no. 106-74 but does not meet SAE Standard J1403.#Yours truly,Richard B. Dyson,Acting Chief Counsel;

ID: aiam2139

Dear Mr. Webber: This is in response to your request of November 21, 1975, for a opinion regarding requirements for certifying universal sized helmets pursuant to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 218.; The requirements of Standard No. 218, *Motorcycle Helmets*, apply t helmets that fit headform size C. This includes the case where, by means of an adjusting mechanism supplied by the manufacturer for the purpose of permitting adjustment to headform size C, the helmet can readily be made to fit headform size C. Thus, any helmet that the manufacturer intends for use by persons with heads in the size C range must meet the requirements of the standard, including the requirement to affix the label required by section 5.6.1 of the standard.; The 'universal' helmet described in your letter seems to fall withi these guidelines in that it is intended to fit, *inter* *alia*, the size C headform. Therefore, notwithstanding the fact that it may also be adjusted to fit other size headforms, it should meet the requirements of FMVSS No. 218, including the labeling requirements.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel

ID: aiam4524

"Dear Mr. Reeser: I am writing in response to your December 4, 198 letter in which you described Caterpillar Inc.'s worldwide program to review lighting used on Caterpillar product lines in order to standardize the devices. You specifically asked if any of Caterpillar's lighting devices were covered by Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 108. You enclosed descriptive literature on the Caterpillar product line. I regret the delay in responding to your question. It must be noted at the outset that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) issues safety standards for 'motor vehicles.' Therefore, Standard 108 and all of our other regulations apply to a vehicle and its manufacturer only if the vehicle qualifies as a 'motor vehicle' under the provisions of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 (15 U.S.C. 1381 et seq.). Section 102(3) of the Act defines 'motor vehicle' as: any vehicle driven or drawn by mechanical power manufactured primarily for use on the public streets, roads, and highways, except any vehicle operated exclusively on a rail or rails. We have interpreted this language as follows. Vehicles that are equipped with tracks or are otherwise incapable of highway travel are plainly not motor vehicles. Agricultural equipment, such as tractors, are not motor vehicles because Congress clearly did not intend to include them in its coverage. Further, vehicles designed and sold solely for off-road use (e.g., Airport runway vehicles and underground mining vehicles) are not considered motor vehicles, even though they may be operationally capable of highway travel. On the other hand, vehicles that use the public highways on a necessary and recurring basis are motor vehicles. For instance, utility vehicles like the Jeep are plainly motor vehicles, even though they are equipped with special features to permit off-road operation. If a vehicle's greatest use will be off-road, but it will spend a substantial amount of time on-road, NHTSA has interpreted the vehicle to be a 'motor vehicle.' Further, if a vehicle is readily usable on the public roads and is in fact used on the public roads by a substantial number of owners, NHTSA has found the vehicle to be a motor vehicle. This finding was made with respect to dune buggies and regardless of the manufacturer's stated intent regarding the terrain on which the vehicles were to be operated. As noted above, this agency has consistently interpreted 'motor vehicle' to exclude vehicles that are equipped with tracks or are otherwise incapable of highway travel. Therefore, the track-type tractors, excavators, track-type loaders, tracked pavement profilers PR-450, PR-750B and PR-1000, concrete slipform pavers & auxiliary equipment, finegraders, front shovels, swing machines, tracked skidders D4H and D5H are not considered to be 'motor vehicles.' In your letter, you described the Caterpillar line of construction and industrial equipment as basically for off-highway use: 'There are occasional uses on the highway for such equipment as motor graders, but obviously none of this equipment is designed for normal highway use or for the transportation of people.' Despite their use of the highway, some vehicles are excepted from the motor vehicle classification. Highway maintenance and construction equipment, lane stripers, self-propelled asphalt pavers, and other vehicles whose maximum speed does not exceed 20 miles per hour and whose abnormal configuration distinguishes them from the traffic flow are not considered 'motor vehicles.' Although many items in the Caterpillar product line have an abnormal configuration that readily distinguishes them from other vehicles, the product literature enclosed with your letter did not provide sufficient information on the maximum speed capabilities or intended uses (i.e., strictly off highway or occasional on-highway use) of the motor graders, off-highway tractors, articulated dump trucks, wheel tractors, compactors, landfill compactors, wheel loaders, integrated toolcarriers, backhoe loaders, pavement profilers PR-75, PR-105 and PR-275, asphalt pavers & auxiliary equipment, compaction equipment, skidders, pipelayers, scrapers, and off-highway trucks to enable me to make a determination whether these would be considered 'motor vehicles.' However, I believe that the guidelines for classifying vehicles that are set forth above will allow you to determine if these are 'motor vehicles.' If they are, they must comply with safety standards, including Standard 108, applicable to trucks. The lighting devices and other features of 'motor vehicles' would be required to comply with the FMVSS (49 CFR Part 571). As you are aware, Standard No. 108, Lamps, reflective devices, and associated equipment (49 CFR 571.108) specifies requirements for original and replacement lamps, reflective devices, and associated equipment necessary for signaling andfor the safe operation of motor vehicles during darkness and other conditions of reduced visibility. Finally, the product literature included several items which did not appear to be self-propelling, including the asphalt drum mixers, aggregate bins, and compaction equipment items TSF-54 and TSM-54. These products fall within NHTSA's jurisdiction if they are 'trailers' as that term is defined at 49 CFR 571.3. That section defines 'trailer' as 'a motor vehicle with or without motive power, designed for carrying persons or property and for being drawn by another motor vehicle.' Based on the depiction in the brochure, the equipment appear to be designed for carrying property (drum mixers, aggregate bins, and compaction equipment) and for being drawn by another vehicle. Therefore, whether the equipment are trailers depends on whether they are 'motor vehicles' within the meaning of the Safety Act and on whether the vehicles the equipment are designed to be drawn by are 'motor vehicles.' Specific information has not been provided about the intended uses of the equipment. If they make frequent use of the highways, and stay at one particular job site for a limited amount of time, the items mentioned above would be motor vehicles, and would fall within the definition of 'trailers.' Trailers are subject to Standard No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment. If, on the other hand, the equipment are intended to be drawn by vehicles that are not motor vehicles, or the equipment stays at a job site for extended periods of time and it travels on the highways only to move to another job site for an extended stay, the equipment would not be considered motor vehicles. It is important to note that NHTSA does not approve motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment, nor do we endorse commercial products. Instead, the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act establishes a 'self certification' process under which each manufacturer is required to certify that its products meet all applicable safety standards. The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act prohibits the manufacture or sale of a noncomplying product. I hope the information provided above will be useful to you and to Caterpillar, Inc. If there are any further questions or if you need further information, please do not hesitate to write to me. Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel";