ID: 7396

Mr. Matt Decker
Project Engineer
Wenger Corporation
555 Park Drive
Owatonna, MN 55060

Dear Mr. Decker:

We have received your letter of October 25, 1994, petitioning for exemption from S5.7 of Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108, which establishes conspicuity requirements for large trailers.

Your letter states that Wenger Corporation "manufactures and sells a complete line of music education and performance equipment" including "Wenger Showmobiles, mobile performance stages in trailer form." The reason for your request is that "[t]he addition of the conspicuity striping is unacceptable for many of our potential customers because of how it would impact their graphics on the sides and rear of the product."

The agency's exemption authority is prescribed by statute, and has been implemented by a regulation, 49 CFR Part 555, a copy of which I enclose. Your letter does not contain the information needed for an exemption petition. There appear to be two bases upon which Wenger could apply for an exemption, under the hardship provisions of Sec. 555.6(a) and the safety level provisions of Sec. 555.6(d). If Wenger submits an application that contains the information required by Part 555, we shall give the matter further consideration. The desire of manufacturers to use retroreflective logos as a substitute for conspicuity marking was considered in the rulemaking proceedings that established S5.7 but was not adopted because the agency saw greater safety benefits in adopting a standardized pattern.

We have studied the photo in your product literature that shows the trailer ready for performance. It would appear that the upper rear conspicuity treatment is not visible to an audience when the trailer is open. Noting that Wenger

provides an optional skirt for the platform, we see that the skirt hides the lower side and rear conspicuity treatment required by S5.7. We believe that the simplest solution is to provide the skirt as standard equipment with the trailer.

Sincerely,

Philip R. Recht Chief Counsel ref:108#555 d:11/16/94

ID: 7400

Mr. Le Van Lac
Vice President
Pioneer Electronic Services, Inc.
P.O. Box 1760
Long Beach, CA 90801-1760

Dear Sir:

This responds to your letter of June 5, 1992, with reference to your plan to sell a new car speaker in the U.S. It will be installed "in the rear deck" with the "Pioneer brand name to be printed on the rear side of the speaker cabinet." The brand name will be lit "with blue color at night" and "there are 8 lamps for each left and right speaker." The brightness of the lamp is "just 1/40 of the high mount stop lamp." You believe that the "illuminated speaker will not impair the effectiveness of the existing lighting equipment installed into the car."

We understand that the speaker will be sold as aftermarket equipment, not as original equipment. Installation of the speaker by a manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business is permissible under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act as long as it does not render inoperative, in whole or in part, any of the rear view mirror or lighting equipment that is required by Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108. The drawing you enclosed, and the description of the speaker, are insufficient for us to provide you a definitive interpretation. For instance, it is not possible to tell whether the light is oriented to the rear, so that it will be seen through the rear window, adjacent to the center highmounted stop lamp, or whether it is oriented to the front, so that it will reflect in the rear view mirror. In either location, it may have the potential to affect negatively the safety performance of rear view mirrors or the rear center stop lamp. Taylor Vinson of this Office telephoned your company on June 22, suggesting that it furnish a clearer drawing and a better description. As of the date of this response, we have heard nothing further from you.

Further, there are state laws that prohibit illumination in vehicle interiors under certain conditions. We are unable to advise you of these laws. The American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, 4600 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Va. 22203, may be able to provide you with an interpretation.

Sincerely,

Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel

ref:VSA d:7/31/92

ID: 7402

Mr. Jeffrey Puentes, President
Sacramento Registration Service
11684 Ventura Blvd., Suite 271
Studio City, CA 91604

Dear Mr. Puentes:

This responds to your request for information on laws and regulations administered by this agency that would apply to motorcycle frames, a product that your client wishes to manufacture and sell. Since motorcycle frames would constitute "motor vehicle equipment," the product would be subject to NHTSA's jurisdiction as follows.

Your letter stated that your client intends the frames to be sold to the "retail public" and to be used to replace frames of damaged Harley Davidson motorcycles. In a telephone conversation with Dorothy Nakama of my staff, you stated that your client is a domestic manufacturer, and the term "serial number" in your letter meant vehicle identification numbers (VINs), as specified by this agency.

The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (the Safety Act) authorizes this agency to regulate "motor vehicles" and items of "motor vehicle equipment." Section 102(4) of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1391(4)) defines "motor vehicle equipment," in part, as:

any system, part, or component of a motor vehicle as originally manufactured or any similar part or component manufactured or sold for replacement or improvement of such system, part, or component ...

In your letter, you stated that your client intends its motorcycle frames to be used to replace frames in damaged motorcycles. Thus, the motorcycle frames would be "motor vehicle equipment" since they are "similar parts" that will be "sold for replacement" of a part.

If your client's motorcycle frames should be installed into a motorcycle by a commercial business, Section 108(a)(2)(A) of the Safety Act could affect such installations. That section of the Act requires manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and motor vehicle repair businesses to ensure that they do not knowingly render inoperative any device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment in compliance with an applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS).

The above-named businesses could sell the motorcycle frames but could not install them if the installation would adversely affect a motorcycle's compliance with any of the applicable FMVSS's. In the first instance, it would be the responsibility of these entities to determine whether there is any possibility of such an effect.

The prohibitions of Section 108(a)(2)(A) do not apply to the actions of a vehicle owner in adding to or otherwise modifying his or her motorcycle. Thus, a motorcycle owner would not violate the Safety Act by replacing the motorcycle frame, even if doing so would adversely affect some safety feature in his or her motorcycle.

Manufacturers of motor vehicle equipment such as motorcycle frames are also subject to the requirements in sections 151- 159 of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1411-1419) concerning the recall and remedy of products with defects related to motor vehicle safety. The Safety Act specifies that if either your client's company or this agency determines that a safety-related defect exists in the motorcycle frame, that company as the manufacturer must notify purchasers of the safety-related defect and must either:

(1) repair the product so that the defect is removed; or

(2) replace the product with identical or reasonably equivalent products which do not have a defect.

Whichever of these options is chosen, the manufacturer must bear the full expense and cannot charge the owner for the remedy if the equipment was purchased less than 8 years before the notification campaign.

You also asked about vehicle identification numbers (VINs) (referred to in your letter as "serial numbers") and whether motorcycle frames must be identified with VINs. As you may be aware, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 115; Vehicle identification number- basic requirements specifies that vehicles manufactured in one or more stages must have a VIN assigned by the manufacturer. Your client is a motorcycle frame manufacturer, not a motor vehicle manufacturer. Therefore, your client should not assign VINs to the motorcycle frames that it manufactures. Please note, however, that NHTSA regulations would not preclude your client from assigning "serial numbers" to the frames it manufactures, if the numbers are for its own inventory, recordkeeping, or other internal purposes.

You further requested information about laws regulating retail businesses that may affect your client. Other than the matters that have previously been discussed in this letter, NHTSA has no laws or regulations affecting your client as a retail business selling motorcycle frames. Regulation of retail businesses is generally a matter of state law. For more specific information, I would suggest you investigate the requirements for each state in which your client intends to begin a retail establishment.

For your information, I have enclosed a copy of an information sheet for new manufacturers of motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment. This sheet gives a brief description of our regulations and explains how to obtain copies of those regulations. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact Dorothy Nakama of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel

Enclosure ref:VSA#115 d:7/l3/92

ID: 7405

Mr. Michael F. Hecker
Micho Industries
P.O. Box 1791
Goleta, CA 93116

Dear Mr. Hecker:

This responds to your letter of June 8, 1992 concerning how the "R-Bar" should be positioned during testing under Standard No. 222, School bus passenger seating and crash protection. The R-BAR is a padded restraining device, and the ends of the device attach to the rear of a school bus seatback. The device folds down for the purpose of restraining the passengers seated in the next rearward seat. Your letter states that, under the test condition set forth in S6.4 of the standard, you believe that the test should be performed with the R-Bar in its most upright position. As discussed below, your understanding is incorrect.

Section S6 of Standard No. 222 sets forth a number of test conditions which apply to the requirements specified in section S5 of the standard. One of these requirements, set forth in section S6.4, reads as follows: "If adjustable, a seat back is adjusted to its most upright position." This test condition addresses seat backs which may be adjusted to different angles for the comfort of the seat occupant. Your letter raises the issue of whether this condition also addresses the position of a restraining bar which is attached to the seat back.

It is our opinion that S6.4 only addresses the position (degree of uprightness) of a seat back as a whole, and not the position of individual components that can separately be placed in different positions without affecting the degree of uprightness of the seat back. In the case of the R-Bar, the position of the R-Bar (up or down) has no effect on the degree of uprightness of the seat back. Therefore, Standard No. 222 does not expressly address the position of a device such as the R-Bar.

As a general matter, when a standard does not specify a particular test condition, there is a presumption that the requirements of the standard must be met at all such test conditions. This presumption that the standard must be met at all positions of unspecified test conditions may be rebutted if the language of the standard as a whole or its purposes indicate an intention to limit unspecified test conditions to a particular condition or conditions.

In the case of Standard No. 222, nothing in the language of the standard suggests that the test procedures is only to be performed with a device such as the R-Bar in only one particular position. Indeed, the purpose of the standard is to reduce the possibility of death or injury to school bus occupants during crashes and sudden driving maneuvers. To serve this purpose, the vehicle must be capable of meeting the requirements of Standard No. 222 with the R-Bar in any position in which it may be placed, since the R-Bar could be at any such position when the seat is occupied.

I hope you find this information helpful. If you have any other questions, please contact Mary Versailles of my staff at this address or by phone at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel

ref:222 d:7/14/92

ID: 7417

Mr. Tim Flagstad
220 West 14th Street
National City, CA 9l950

FAX 619-477-6249

Dear Mr. Flagstad:

This responds to your FAX of July 24, 1992, seeking clarification of our letter to you of July 20.

This matter concerns the importation of a 1981 Kenworth truck from Canada that was manufactured in that country. The truck entered pursuant to the declaration that the vehicle was manufactured to conform to all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards, and bore a certification label to that effect. The current owner of the truck says that it bears no U.S. certification label. Our earlier letter informed you that entry under the conformance and certification provisions was therefore erroneous, and that the truck should have been imported under the new provisions for importing nonconforming motor vehicles that became effective on the day of importation.

Your letter of July 24 states that a certification label was attached at the time of importation, and you have asked "As the Certification Label was on the truck at the time it came through Customs, how would this affect the entry status of this vehicle?"

Assuming that the truck bore a certification label, the question is whether the label certified compliance to the U.S. or Canadian Federal motor vehicle safety standards. If the manufacturer certified compliance to the Canadian standards, then my previous advice remains in effect: the entry of this truck as a vehicle conforming, and certified as conforming, to U.S. safety standards was erroneous.

If, on the other hand, the manufacturer certified compliance to the U.S. standards, the truck was properly entered.

However, it appears more likely than not that such certification as may have been affixed was to the Canadian standards. We understand that the truck lacked equipment necessary for conformance to Standard No. 121, "Air Brake Systems", and that its VIN did not consist of 17 characters. These were requirements of the U.S., but not the Canadian, Federal motor vehicle safety standards at the time the truck was manufactured.

The apparently erroneous admission by the U.S. Customs service is understandable. Canada permits certification either in the form of a "National Safety Mark" (maple leaf) or a statement of compliance with "Federal motor vehicle safety standards", the identical phrase used in U.S. certification labels. When a Canadian manufacturer employs this certification statement, a closer examination of the certification label is necessary. If GAWR and GVWR ratings are expressed in pounds, the certification is to the U.S. standards; if expressed in kilograms, the certification covers the requirements of Canada.

Sincerely,

Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel

cc: Ms Joan Moniz 45623 Halekou Road Kaneohe, Hawaii 96744

ref:591#115#VSA d:8/12/92

ID: 7418-2

Mr. Trevor Buttle, Project 4
Southam Drive
Kineton Road Industrial Estate
Southam, Leamington Spa,
Warwickshire, CV33 OFA England

Dear Mr. Buttle:

This responds to your letter concerning Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 102, Transmission Shift Lever Sequence, Starter Interlock, and Transmission Braking Effect. You requested clarification of the standard's requirement that certain information be displayed "in view of the driver." You also asked whether the display must be permanently illuminated. Your questions are responded to below.

By way of background information, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, it is the responsibility of the manufacturer to ensure that its vehicles or equipment comply with applicable standards. The following represents our opinion based on the facts provided in your letter.

For vehicles with automatic transmissions, Standard No. 102 requires that identification of shift lever positions, including the positions in relation to each other and the position selected, must be displayed "in view of the driver" at specified times. See S3.1.4 through S3.1.4.4. For vehicles with manual transmissions, the standard requires that identification of the shift lever pattern of manual transmissions, except three forward speed manual transmissions having the standard "H" pattern, must be displayed "in view of the driver" at specified times. See S3.2.

You stated that you believe that the requirement for certain information to be displayed "in view of the driver" relates to the 95 percent eye range contour, hence requiring a display on or near to the "instrument binacle." You asked whether this is correct, or whether floor shift identification is sufficient.

NHTSA has previously addressed Standard No. 102's requirement that certain information be displayed "in view of the driver" in connection with a request for interpretation concerning the identification of the shift lever pattern of manual transmissions. The agency concluded that the pattern "is deemed to be `displayed in view of the driver' if part of it may be seen from the driver's normal eye position and a reasonable amount of movement of the driver allows him to gain full view of the pattern." (Letter to Daimler-Benz of North America, February 27, 1967.) Thus, the information required by Standard No. 102 to be displayed in view of the driver may be displayed on the instrument panel, floor console, or other locations, so long as these criteria are satisfied.

Your second question asked whether the information required to be displayed by Standard No. 102 must be permanently illuminated for night usage. You stated that some auto makers have made this facility switchable.

NHTSA's requirements concerning the illumination of motor vehicle controls and displays are set forth in Standard No. 101, Controls and Displays. S5.3.1 of the standard requires that if a gauge is listed in column 1 of Table 2 and accompanied by the word "yes" in column 5, then the gauge and its identification must be illuminated whenever the ignition switch and/or the headlamps are activated. The last gauge listed in Table 2 is "automatic gear position," and the word "yes" appears in column 5. Therefore, automatic gear position gauges, i.e., the gauges which provide the information required by Standard No. 102 to be displayed for automatic transmission vehicles, are subject to Standard No. 101's illumination requirement.

Under S5.3.3 of Standard No. 101, an automatic gear position gauge may have levels of brightness at which the gauge and its identification are not visible. It is common, for example, for manufacturers to provide a variable light intensity control that enables the driver to turn the illumination for conventional automatic gear position gauges down to off.

It is important, however, to distinguish between turning the illumination off i.e., no illunimation, but display still visible, and adjusting the gauge itself in a way that it no longer displays the required information. As indicated above, Standard No. 102 requires that certain gear position information be displayed in view of the driver at specified times. This requirement would not be met if it were possible for the driver to adjust the automatic gear position gauge in a way that it no longer displayed the required information during the specified times. An example of this would be an electronic gauge using light emitting diodes, where the driver, while driving, could turn the electronic display down to the off level. In this instance, the gauge would not be displaying the required information.

I hope this responds to your concerns. If you have any further questions, please contact Dorothy Nakama of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel

ref:101#102 d:8/13/92

ID: 7434

Mr. Eugene Welker
774 Harbor Island
Clearwater, FL 34630

Dear Mr. Welker:

This responds to your letter about a mirror system designed to improve a driver's view of areas behind a motor vehicle. You explained that a 35" vertical post would be bolted near a vehicle's rear bumper. This would result in a mirror being located a few inches above the top rear window stop light and facing forward at a 45 angle. You asked whether such a device would be legal. The following discussion and the enclosed information sheet, "Information for New Manufacturers of Motor Vehicles and Motor Vehicle Equipment," explain your responsibility under NHTSA's regulation.

By way of background information, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) does not approve, endorse, or certify motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act ("Safety Act"), the manufacturer is responsible for certifying that its vehicles or equipment comply with applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. The Safety Act requires that these safety standards establish minimum levels of performance for vehicles or equipment. Once the performance level has been established, vehicle or equipment manufacturers are free to choose any means they wish to achieve the required level of performance.

NHTSA has exercised its authority to establish performance requirements for new vehicles in Standard No. 111, Rearview Mirrors (49 CFR 571.111, copy enclosed). Standard No. 111 establishes performance and location requirements for rearview mirrors installed in any new vehicle. This means that the vehicle manufacturer must certify that each vehicle it manufactures complies with the specified requirements. Standard No. 111 requires that passenger cars be equipped with an inside rearview mirror and a driver's side outside rearview mirror that provide the field-of-view specified in S5.1.1. A passenger's side outside rearview mirror is required in situations where the inside rearview mirror does not provide the specified field-of-view. Additional requirements for other vehicle types are set forth in S6, S7, and S8.

No provision in the Standard specifies requirements for a mirror that attaches to the vehicle's rear bumper. Accordingly, a mirror like yours would not be prohibited from being installed on any vehicle by the current requirements in Standard No. 111. Accordingly such a mirror would be permitted, but only as a supplement to the required mirrors.

In installing the mirror, one must take care to avoid obscuring the vehicle's lighting devices, including the center highmounted stop lamps (CHMSL).

Please be aware that NHTSA does not regulate vehicles while they are in use. The American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, 4600 Washington Blvd, Arlington, VA 22203 may be able to advise you about the laws of the individual States related to the use of equipment such as your own.

I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions about NHTSA's safety standards, please feel free to contact Marvin Shaw of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel ref:111 d:8/7/92

ID: 7436

Mr. Peter E. Reinert
Counsel - Transaction
General Electric Company
One Plastics Avenue
Pittsfield, MA 01201

Dear Mr. Reinert:

This responds to your letter requesting an interpretation of Standard No. 205, Glazing Materials (49 CFR 571.205). Specifically, you asked about the certification and marking responsibilities of your company, General Electric (GE), and your distributors under section S6 of Standard No. 205. This interpretation is based on my understanding of the statements in your letter as well as statements made by GE's representatives Mr. Timothy Commons and Mr. Bruce Torry in a July 8, 1992 meeting with Mr. Clark Harper of this agency's Office of Vehicle Safety Standards and Mr. Marvin Shaw of my staff.

We understand that GE manufactures large sheets of LEXAN polycarbonate which are used in both motor vehicle and non- vehicle applications. You explained that under a contractual agreement with GE, your distributors have agreed to mark the LEXAN sheet with GE's manufacturer code mark and the symbol DOT (which you refer to as the DOT number). In other words, GE is sending LEXAN sheets without the manufacturer code mark and the symbol DOT to its distributors who then mark the sheets with this information before shipping them to their motor vehicle customers.

You asked whether shipping LEXAN sheets without the manufacturer code mark and symbol DOT to GE's distributors is consistent with GE's responsibilities as a prime glazing material manufacturer having its own DOT number. I note that Mr. Commons and Mr. Torry raised additional questions about GE's certification responsibilities under Standard No. 205. Specifically, they questioned whether GE was a manufacturer of raw material rather than a prime glazing material manufacturer; and if GE were not a prime glazing material manufacturer, whether each of GE's distributors would be required to mark the LEXAN sheets with its own DOT number rather than GE's number. Your company's questions are addressed below.

Standard No. 205 specifies performance requirements for glazing for use in motor vehicles. Section S6 of Standard No. 205 establishes marking and certification requirements for manufacturers and distributors of glazing materials. Different marking and certification requirements apply depending upon whether an entity is a prime glazing material manufacturer or a manufacturer that cuts sections of glazing material to which Standard No. 205 applies. Further distinction in certification requirements for prime manufacturers depends on whether the glazing is designed for use in a specific motor vehicle or camper, or whether the glazing is designed to be cut into components for use in motor vehicles or items of motor vehicle equipment. None of the marking and certification requirements would apply to manufacturers of raw materials.

Section S6.1 defines a "prime glazing material manufacturer" as "one who fabricates, laminates, or tempers the glazing material." If an entity performs any one of these operations, it must comply with the marking and certification requirements set forth in S6.1 through S6.3 of Standard No. 205.

Before addressing the question posed in your letter, I will respond to your representatives' question concerning whether GE might be a manufacturer of a raw material and thus not be subject to Standard No. 205's marking and certification requirements. In support of this view, they stated that distributors frequently undertake what they termed significant fabricating operations (e.g., drilling, routing, and polishing the glazing) beyond merely cutting the glazing, and thus in such situations should be considered the "prime glazing material manufacturer."

Notwithstanding your representatives' contentions, we consider GE to be the prime glazing material manufacturer in the situation at hand. GE's activities involve a fundamental manufacturing operation that constitutes fabrication of glazing. In contrast, the distributor's operations, though arguably more extensive than mere cutting, constitute relatively minor finishing operations to an item of glazing that has been fabricated by another company. Since GE fabricates the glazing, it is the prime glazing material manufacturer under S6.1. This determination renders moot your representatives' follow-up question about the distributor's marking responsibilities if GE were not a prime glazing material manufacturer.

I will now summarize the marking and certification requirements that apply to GE, as a prime glazing material manufacturer, and to its distributors. S6.1 requires every prime glazing material manufacturer to mark all glazing materials it manufactures with the following information in accordance with section 6 of the American National Standard (ANS) Z26: (1) the words "American National Standard" or the characters "AS," (2) a number identifying the item of glazing, (3) a model number assigned by the manufacturer that identifies the type of construction of the glazing material, and (4) the manufacturer's distinctive designation or trademark.

In addition to the information required by S6.1, if an item of glazing material is designed to be used in a specific motor vehicle, then S6.2 requires each prime glazing material manufacturer to certify such an item of glazing with the symbol "DOT" and a manufacturer's code mark assigned by this agency. The purpose of requiring the manufacturer's code mark is to help NHTSA identify the actual manufacturer of the glazing material for the purpose of defect and noncompliance recall campaigns. Section S6.3 requires each prime glazing material manufacturer to certify compliance with Standard No. 205 for each piece of glazing designed to be cut into components for use in motor vehicles pursuant to the requirements of section 114 of the Safety Act. Under section 114, certification of an item of glazing "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."

Sections S6.4 and S6.5 set forth requirements that apply to each manufacturer or distributor who cuts a section of glazing material to which Standard No. 205 applies for use in a motor vehicle or camper. Section S6.4 requires the manufacturer or distributor to mark that material in accordance with section 6 of ANS Z26. Section S6.5 requires the manufacturer or distributor to certify that its product complies with Standard No. 205, pursuant to section 114.

You asked whether shipping LEXAN sheets without GE's manufacturer code mark and the symbol DOT to GE's distributors is consistent with GE's responsibilities as a prime glazing material manufacturer that has its own DOT number. Under the above requirements, the only type of glazing that a prime glazing material manufacturer is required to mark with its manufacturer code mark and the symbol "DOT" is glazing designed as a component of a specific motor vehicle or camper. GE, as a prime glazing material manufacturer, is not required to mark glazing with the symbol "DOT" and its manufacturer's code mark if such glazing is not designed as a component of a specific motor vehicle or camper.

As for sheets of glazing that a manufacturer or distributor will cut into components for motor vehicles, GE and GE's distributors may contractually agree to have the distributor mark the LEXAN sheets and glazing cut from such sheets with GE's manufacturer code mark. However, there is no requirement for either GE or its distributors to so mark the glazing.

I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions about NHTSA's safety standards, please feel free to contact Marvin Shaw of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel Enclosure

Ref: 205 d:9/4/92

ID: 7437

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

Dear Mr. Chaudhari:

This responds to your letter requesting the testing procedure for and test results of vehicles equipped with anti-skid brake systems. These systems are also referred to as anti-lock brake systems. You also requested the addresses of equipment manufacturers that produce anti-lock brake systems. I am pleased to have this opportunity to provide you information about this topic.

By way of background information, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act ("Safety Act"), it is the responsibility of the manufacturer to ensure that its vehicles or equipment comply with applicable standards issued by this agency. A manufacturer then certifies that its vehicles or equipment comply with the applicable standards. I am enclosing a copy of an information sheet entitled, "Information for New Manufacturers of Motor Vehicles and Motor Vehicle Equipment," which explains a manufacturer's responsibility under NHTSA's regulation.

I am also enclosing a copy of the two safety standards issued by NHTSA that apply to brake systems: Standard No. 105, Hydraulic Brake Systems (49 CFR 571.105) and Standard No. 121, Air Brake Systems (49 CFR 571.121). These standards are intended to insure the safe braking performance of vehicles under normal and emergency conditions. Vehicle manufacturers are required to certify that vehicles they manufacture comply with these performance-oriented standards. Nothing in these standards currently specifies that vehicles be equipped with an anti- lock device. For your information, the agency is considering proposing additional requirements that might require medium and heavy duty vehicles to be equipped with anti-lock brake systems. A copy of that notice is enclosed (57 FR 24212, June 8, 1992). In addition, the agency has issued a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking in which the agency is considering whether to harmonize its passenger car brake standard with international standards. (56 FR 30528, July 3, 1991). A copy of that notice is also enclosed.

With respect to your request for test results related to anti-lock brake performance, I am enclosing the agency's most recent report on this topic. It is entitled "Improved Brake Systems for Commercial Motor Vehicles."

With respect to your inquiry requesting the addresses of equipment manufacturers, the agency is unable to provide such information. The following associations may be able to help you obtain this information:

Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association 7430 Second Avenue, Suite 300, Detroit, MI 48202 (Telephone No. 313-872-4311, Fax No. 313-872-5400)

Brake System Parts Manufacturers Council 300 Sylvan Avenue P.O. Box 1638 Englewood Cliffs, N.J. 07632-0638 (Tel. No. 201-569-8500, Fax No. 569-0159)

I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions about NHTSA's safety standards, please feel free to contact Marvin Shaw of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992. The fax number is (202) 366- 3820.

Sincerely,

Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel

Enclosures

Ref:105#121 d:8/12/92

ID: 7439

Ms. Mary C. Andrews
2510 Glengyle Drive
Vienna, VA 22181

Dear Ms. Andrews:

This responds to your letter asking whether a plastic cone design you are developing would comply with the Department of Transportation's requirements applicable to warning devices. You explained that your device is a 24 inch high inflatable cone with reflector strips on the sides. The cone would be weighted down with sand in an enclosed bottom. Based on the information provided in your letter, it appears that your device would not comply with certain provisions of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 125, Warning Devices (49 CFR 571.125, copy enclosed).

By way of background information, the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1381 et seq., the "Safety Act") gives this agency the authority to issue safety standards applicable to new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. We have exercised this authority to establish Standard No. 125. The Safety Act provides that no person shall "manufacture for sale, sell, offer for sale, or introduce or deliver for introduction in interstate commerce, or import into the United States" any new motor vehicle or new item of motor vehicle equipment unless the vehicle or item of equipment complies with the applicable standard. (See 15 U.S.C 1397(a)(1)(A).) NHTSA has no authority under the Safety Act to approve, certify, or otherwise endorse any commercial product. Instead, the Safety Act establishes a self-certification process under which each manufacturer is required to certify that each of its products meets all applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard. (See 15 U.S.C. 1403.) I am enclosing a general information sheet explaining NHTSA's regulations.

Standard No. 125 applies to devices, without self-contained energy sources, that are designed to be carried in motor vehicles and used to warn approaching traffic of the presence of a stopped vehicle, except for devices designed to be permanently affixed to the vehicle. See section S3. Your planned product appears to be such a device and would therefore need to comply with all of the requirements of Standard No. 125. As the enclosed copy of the standard indicates, your device would have to comply with specific requirements including those for minimum size, durability, material, container, labeling, configuration, color, reflectivity, luminance, and stability. From the information provided in your letter, it appears that your device would not comply with several of these requirements.

Please be aware that violations of Safety Act provisions are punishable by civil fines of up to $1,000 for each violation of a safety standard. In addition, the Act requires manufacturers to remedy their products if they fail to comply with any applicable safety standards.

I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions about NHTSA's safety standards, please feel free to contact Marvin Shaw of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel Enclosure

Ref: 125 U:\NCC20\INTERP\125\7439.mls cc: NCC-01 Subj/Chron, NCC-20 (MLS), NRM-01, NEF-01 Interp.: Std. 125, Redbook (2)