ID: nht87-2.63

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 08/10/87

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: The Honorable John P. Murtha

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

The Honorable John P. Murtha Member of Congress Post Office Box Johnstown, PA 15907

Dear Mr. Murtha:

Thank you for your letter to the Department of Transportation's Office of Congressional Affairs, which has been referred to me for a response. In an addendum enclosed with your letter, you note that one of your constituents, Mr. Gene Bird, would like inf ormation on the Federal regulations addressing "completing the finishing work on automobiles." Apparently, another manufacturer would send small sports cars to Mr. Bird's business. Your addendum states that these sports cars "will need the following type of work done: installation of the engine, components, radiators, interiors, and the cars will finally have to be tested." I am pleased to have this opportunity to explain our statute and regulations to you.

By way of background, the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1381 et seq.) requires every new motor vehicle sold in the United States to be certified as complying with all applicable federal motor vehicle safety standards. The Safet y Act also specifies that the manufacturer itself must certify that each of its vehicles complies with all applicable safety standards in effect on the date of manufacture. Because of this statutory requirement, this agency does not "approve" any vehicle s or offer assurances that the vehicles comply with the safety standards.

Further, the Safety Act does not require that a manufacturer's certification be based on a specified number of tests or any tests at all. The Safety Act only requires that the certification be made with the exercise of "due care" on the part of the manuf acturer. It is up to the individual manufacturer in the first instance to determine what data, test results, or other information it needs to enable it to certify that its vehicles comply with the safety standards. We would certainly recommend that a new manufacturer test some of its vehicles for compliance with the applicable safety standards.

It is not entirely clear from your addendum whether Mr. Bird would be classified as an "alterer" or a "final stage manufacturer" under our regulations. His company would be considered an "alterer" of motor vehicles, if the second company referred to in y our addendum furnishes completed and certified sports cars to Mr. Bird's company, and Mr. Bird's company changes the engine and other components on those vehicles. If this is the contemplated action, Mr. Bird's company would be treated as an alterer unde r our regulations.

The certification requirements for alterers are set forth in 49 CFR S567.7 (copy enclosed). Generally speaking, that section requires a person who alters a vehicle before its first purchase to supplement the certification label affixed by the original ma nufacturer with its own certification label. The alterer's certification label must include all of the information set forth in Part 567, including a statement that the altered vehicle complies with all applicable safety standards in effect on the date t he vehicle was altered. In the case of sports cars, an alterer must certify that the altered car complies with all of the following:

49 CFR S571.101 Controls and Displays; 49 CFR S571.102 Transmission Shift Lever Sequence; 49 CFR S571.103 Windshield Defrosting and Defogging Systems; 49 CFR S571.104 Windshield Wiping and Washing Systems; 49 CFR S571.105 Hydraulic Brake Systems; 49 CFR S571.106 Brake Hoses; 49 CFR S571.107 Reflecting Surfaces: 49 CFR S571.108 Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment; 49 CFR S571.110 Tire Selection and Rims; 49 CFR S571.111 Rearview Mirrors; 49 CFR S571.112 Headlamp Concealment Devices; 49 CFR S571.113 Hood Latch System; 49 CFR S571.114 Theft Protection; 49 CFR S571.115 Vehicle Identification Number; 49 CFR S571.116 Motor Vehicle Brake Fluids; 49 CFR S571.118 Power-operated Window Systems; 49 CFR S571.124 Accelerator Control Systems; 49 CFR S571.201 Occupant Protection in Interior Impacts; 49 CFR S571.202 Head Restraints; 49 CFR S571.203 Impact Protection for the Driver from the Steering Column; 49 CFR S571.204 Steering Control Rearward Displacement; 49 CFR S571.205 Glazing Materials; 49 CFR S571.206 Door Locks and Door Retention Components; 49 CFR S571.207 Seating Systems; 49 CFR S571.208 Occupant Crash Protection; 49 CFR S571.209 Seat Belt Assemblies; 49 CFR S571.210 Seat Belt Assembly Anchorages; 49 CFR S571.211 Wheel Nuts, Wheel Discs, and Hub Caps; 49 CFR S571.212 Windshield Mounting; 49 CFR S571.214 Side Door Strength; 49 CFR S571.216 Roof Crush Resistance; 49 CFR S571.219 Windshield Zone Intrusion; 49 CFR S571.301 Fuel System Integrity; and 49 CFR S571.302 Flammability of Interior Materials.

Alternatively, Mr. Bird's company may be treated as a "final stage manufacturer," as that term is defined at 49 CFR S568.4. A final stage manufacturer means a person who finishes the manufacturing operations on an incomplete vehicle. Thus, if the second company referred to in your addendum is planning to furnish Mr. Bird's company with sports cars that have no engine, radiator, and so forth, the vehicles provided to Mr. Bird's company would be considered "incomplete vehicles" and Mr. Bird's company woul d be considered a "final stage manufacturer."

If this is the case, Mr. Bird's certification responsibilities depend on the information he is provided by the manufacturer of the incomplete vehicle; i.e., the second company referred to in your addendum. Part 568 (copy enclosed) requires the manufactur er of the incomplete vehicle to furnish Mr. Bird's company with a document that states one of three things for the incomplete vehicle. These are:

1. The vehicle when completed will conform to some or all of the applicable safety standards if no alterations are made to any identified components of the incomplete vehicle.

If Mr. Bird receives such a document and does not make any of the specified alterations, his company could certify compliance with the standards listed in the previous manufacturer's document simply by stating that compliance has not been affected by the operations performed by Mr. Bird's company. See 49 CFR S567.5(c)(7). Mr. Bird's company would have to certify compliance with any applicable standards not listed in this document.

2. The vehicle when completed will conform to some or all of the applicable safety standards if specific conditions are followed by the final stage manufacturer.

If Mr. Bird receives this type of document, his situation will be very similar to that described above. That is, if his company follows the specific conditions, it could certify compliance with the standards listed in the previous manufacturer's document simply by stating that compliance has not been affected by the operations performed by Mr. Bird's company. See 49 CFR S567.5(c)(7). Again, Mr. Bird's company would have to certify compliance with any applicable standards not listed in this document.

3. Conformity with some or all of the standards is not substantially affected by the design of the incomplete vehicle, so the incomplete vehicle manufacturer makes no representation as to conformity with the standards.

If Mr. Bird receives this type of document, his company would be required to certify compliance with the standards identified in the document on its own. This type of document would put Mr. Bird's company in the same position as an alterer for the listed standards.

I have also enclosed a general information sheet for new manufacturers of motor vehicles. This sheet highlights the relevant Federal statutes and the National highway Traffic Safety Administration regulations that may apply and explains how to get copies of our regulations. I hope that this information is helpful. If you have any further questions about our regulations, please contact this office.

Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel Enclosures

JUNE 19 1987 The Honorable John P. Murtha Member, U.S. House of Representatives Post Office Box 180 Johnstown, Pennsylvania 15907

Dear Mr. Murtha:

Thank you for your letter concerning an inquiry from your constituent, Mr. Gene Bird.

I have transmitted your inquiry to the appropriate Departmental officials who are familiar with this matter and they will respond to you directly.

I appreciate your contacting me and hope you will not hesitate to call if I can be of any further assistance.

Sincerely, Edward J. Babbitt Director, Office of Congressional Affairs

Mr. David P. Sloane, Director Office of Congressional Affairs U. S. Department of Transportation 400 Seventh Street, SW Washington, D.C. 20590

Dear Mr. Sloane:

The attached communication from my constituent is submitted for your earnest consideration.

Please investigate the statements contained therein and forward to me information on which I may base a proper reply.

Your early action and advice will be appreciated.

With every good wish,

Sincerely, JOHN P. MURTHA Member of Congress JPM/jm Enclosure

P.S. Please send reply to:

The Honorable John P. Murtha Member of Congress Post Office Box 780 Johnstown, Pennsylvania 15907

ATTN: Jean McAleer

Phone no. (814) 535-2642, FTS 723-9241 or 9370

Inquiry made by phone personal visit TIME: DATE: 6-05-87 Name Gene Bird Classic Motor Works Address 100 Station Street Town Johnstown, PA Zip 15905 Telephone number 814 288-6911 Social Security number Veterans Claim Number COMMENTS: (Please explain only)

Mr. Bird would appreciate the federal stipulations governing completing the finishing work on automobiles.

He said another company would like to do business with him. They will send small sports cars to his business which will need the following type of work done: installation of the engine, components, radiators, interiors, and the cars will finally have to be tested.

ID: nht88-4.12

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 11/22/88 EST

FROM: ERIKA Z. JONES -- CHIEF COUNSEL, NHTSA

TO: CLAIRE HAVEN -- VICE PRESIDENT, QUADWEST

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: LETTER DATED 03-28-88 TO ERIKA JONES, NHTSA, FROM CLAIRE HAVEN, V. P., QUADWEST; OCC-1874; LETTER DATED 03-15-88 TO CLAIRE HAVEN FROM CARL C. CLARK; NRD-12-CC-88048

TEXT: This responds to your letter seeking further agency assurances that installation of one of your company's products will not take the safety belt system out of compliance with applicable Federal standards. I apologize for the delay in this response. You r product is a nylon covered foam pad intended to be attached to the shoulder belt portion of a safety belt to enhance the comfort of the occupant. In keeping with our statutory responsibilities, this agency does not offer any such assurances.

If this pad is installed as original equipment on any new vehicle, section 114 of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1403) requires the vehicle manufacturer to certify that the vehicle complies with standard No. 208, Occupant Cr ash Protection (49 CFR @ 571.208), that the safety belt system complies with Standard No. 209, Seat Belt Assemblies(49 CFR @ 571.209), and that certain vehicle components, including the safety belts, comply with Standard No. 302, Flammability of Interior Materials (49 CFR @ 571.302). Each of these certifications must be valid with the pad installed on the safety belts. Since the Safety Act requires the manufacturer to make this certification, NHTSA has no authority to approve, endorse, or certify any motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment, such as your shoulder belt pad.

If the pad is sold as an aftermarket item, section 108(a)(2)(A) of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(2)(A)) provides that: "No manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business shall knowingly render inoperative, in whole or in part, an y device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle ... in compliance with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard ..." The safety belt systems installed in vehicle are generally an element of design installed in compliance with Standards No. 208, 209, and 302. If the installation of your shoulder belt pad results in the vehicle no longer complying with any or all of these standards, any manufacturer, dealer, distributor, or

repair business that installed the belt pads would have violated this section of the law. Section 109 of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1398) specifies a civil penalty of up to $ 1,000 for each violation of section 108(a)(2)(A), and each installation of a sh oulder belt pad that rendered inoperative compliance with Standard No. 208 would be a separate violation. Please note that the prohibition in section 108(a)(2)(A) does not apply to individual consumers. Thus, under Federal law, individual consumers may purchase and install additional products in their vehicles or otherwise modify existing equipment without violating the "render inoperative" provision.

As noted above for aftermarket items, the Safety Act obliges manufacturers, dealers, distributors, and repair businesses not to knowingly render inoperative devices or elements of design in vehicles installed in compliance with applicable safety standard s. As with new vehicles and items of equipment, it is the responsibility of the manufacturer, not this agency, to determine in the first instance that the use of its product will not result in a "render inoperative" violation of Federal law. Because of this statutory scheme, NHTSA makes determinations of whether the installation of products results in a "render inoperative" violation only in the context of enforcement proceedings, when it reexamines the initial finding made by the manufacture, dealer, distributor, or repair business. In an earlier letter to you about this product, Dr. Clark, the invent or contact for NHTSA, advised you that the installation of this pad prevents the retractor from reeling up the belt completely or in part. This agen cy would be very likely to find a "render inoperative" violation with respect to a device whose installation prevented the retractor from functioning as designed.

Assuming this pad will be marketed as an aftermarket item, you could comply with your legal obligations as the manufacturer of this pad by examining the requirements of Standard Nos. 208, 209, and 302, to determine if the installation of your shoulder be lt pad would result in a noncompliance with these standards. If the installation would not do so, manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and repair businesses can install these pads without violating any provisions of Federal law.

I have enclosed an information sheet for new manufacturers of motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment that explains how to obtain copies of our safety standards and other regulations. I hope this information is helpful.

Enclosure

ID: 15541.pad

Ms. Ginny Schafer
1790 Highgrove Dr.
Alpharetta, GA 30201

Dear Ms. Schafer:

This responds to your June 26, 1997, letter asking whether the "slipcover type product" you wish to make must meet Federal flammability standards. Your letter does not describe the product in detail, but presumably it would be used to protect the vehicle seat against wear and tear. You state that the slipcover "will be slipped on over the seat, and it will not interfere with seat belts or children's car seats. (There will be an opening in the fabric to accommodate seat belts.)" The product would be sold to consumers in the aftermarket for installation in their own vehicles.

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.

There currently is no Federal motor vehicle safety standard that directly applies to your product. Safety Standard No. 302, Flammability of Interior Materials, applies to new, completed vehicles and not to aftermarket items of equipment sold separately from a vehicle, such as a slipcover sold in the aftermarket. Thus, your aftermarket product need not meet Federal flammability requirements.

While no safety standard applies to your product, you should be aware that under 49 U.S.C. 30118-30121, each manufacturer of motor vehicle equipment (such as aftermarket vehicle seat slipcovers) is responsible for ensuring that its product is free of safety-related defects. If you or NHTSA determines that a safety related defect exists, you would be responsible for notifying purchasers of the defective equipment and remedying the problem free of charge.

In addition, 30122 of our statute prohibits motor vehicle manufacturers, distributors, dealers and repair businesses from knowingly making inoperative any part of a device or element of

design installed on or in a vehicle in compliance with the Federal safety standards. While it is unlikely that your product would be installed by persons listed in 30122, if a commercial entity does install it, it must ensure that the product does not undermine the vehicle's compliance with the 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.

Because the slipcover is used with child seats and vehicle belts, you should ensure that the product not interfere with the performance of those safety systems. The opening on the slipcover for the belts must not restrict the belt's ability to remain taut or to tighten up in a crash. The slipcover should not have padding that can compress in a crash and introduce slack into the vehicle belt system. Excessive slack can cause the child seat to move too far out of the seating position in a crash, which can result in a greater likelihood the child's head would contact hard surfaces.

State or local jurisdictions might have their own requirements for the slipcover you wish to produce. For information about those requirements, you should contact the Department of Motor Vehicles in any state in which the equipment will be sold or used.

You identified two types of fabric by name and manufacturer and ask if they meet Federal flammability requirements. NHTSA does not test products before their sale, nor can we assure manufacturers that a particular supplier meets the Federal requirements. If you intend that your slipcovers meet flammability resistance requirements, which would be a decision we would encourage, you should contact the manufacturer of the fabric for information on conformance of the product.

If you have any other questions, please contact Deirdre Fujita of my staff at this address or by phone at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,
John Womack
Acting Chief Counsel
ref:213#302
d.8/21/97

ID: 10932-2

Milford R. Bennett, Director
Safety Affairs and Safety & Restraints Center
General Motors Corporation
30200 Mound Road
Warren, Michigan 48090-9010

Dear Mr. Bennett:

This responds to General Motors' (GM's) May 19, 1995 letter asking whether a sunshade device is permitted under the 70 percent light transmissibility requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 205, Glazing Materials. You describe the device as a screen-like device that is stowed in the back panel shelf area below the rear window and that can be electrically raised and lowered by a driver operated switch. The light transmissibility through the combination of the rear window and the raised sunshade is less than 70 percent. The short answer to your question is that the device is permitted.

Although you note earlier agency interpretations stating that windows with sunshades must still comply with Standard No. 205, you believe that the standard does not apply to your device. You state that those interpretations were distinguishable because the other shading devices were attached to the window, while your device is not.

You are correct in your assertion that installation of your sunshade would not cause a noncompliance with Standard No. 205. The purpose of the 70 percent light transmissibility requirements in Standard No. 205 is to ensure that the driver can see 70 percent of the incident light through the windows that are requisite for driving visibility, under all conditions of lighting. However, the test procedures do not incorporate an in-vehicle test. Instead, they contemplate testing only the glazing itself. Your mesh screen sunshade need not comply with the standard (because it does not meet the definition of glazing) or in combination with the rear window (because it is not attached).

Although our standards do not prohibit this device, we have some safety-related concerns with its use in inappropriate situations. NHTSA hopes that GM plans to take steps to minimize the likelihood that the sunshade will be raised in such situations.

I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact Paul Atelsek of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

John Womack Acting Chief Counsel

ref:205 d:9/1995

ID: 10439

Mr. Donald Orlando
Orlando World Industries
7 Woodside Avenue
White Plains, NY 10604

Dear Mr. Orlando:

This responds to your letter concerning whether your "Seat Belt Buddy" would be affected by any Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards issued by this agency. You describe the product as "a stuffed toy animal with a slit in the center of the animal where you insert the seat belt through and then into the automobile's buckle."

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. The agency does not approve, certify or endorse any vehicles or equipment. Instead, manufacturers are required to certify that their vehicles and equipment meet all applicable standards. The following represents our opinion based on the facts provided in your letter.

There is currently no Federal motor vehicle safety standard that would apply to your product. We do have a standard (Standard 209, Seat belt assemblies) that sets forth requirements for new seat belt assemblies. We also have a standard (Standard No. 302, Flammability of Interior Materials) that sets forth flammability resistance requirements for the originally installed safety belts of the vehicle. However, since your product would not be part of a new seat belt assembly, these standards would not apply.

While no Federal motor vehicle safety standard applies to your product, your device 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, manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and motor vehicle repair businesses are subject to 49 U.S.C. section 30122, which prohibits them from installing the device if the installation "makes inoperative" compliance with any safety standard. It appears unlikely from the nature of your product that it would be placed in vehicles by commercial businesses instead of consumers. However, if your product were to be installed by persons in those categories, they must ensure that its installation does not compromise the safety protection provided by the vehicle belt system. For example, they must ensure that the Seat Belt Buddy does not impair the function of the safety belt or belt retractor, or vitiate the compliance of the belts with Standard No. 302. The prohibition of section 30122 does not apply to the actions of vehicle owners in adding to or otherwise modifying their vehicles or items of motor vehicle equipment.

Please note that the addition of any device to a vehicle's belt system raises possible safety concerns. Our safety standards require specific levels of performance for a vehicle's safety belt system. For example, Standard 208 has requirements that ensure that a vehicle's lap and shoulder belts are installed to distribute the crash forces over the skeletal structure of the occupant. The safety standards also have requirements for belts to automatically lock and retract. We urge you to carefully evaluate whether your product would in any way compromise the safety protection provided by the vehicle belt system, and whether instructions to the consumer are needed to advise about the proper use of the product. Among other things, you should evaluate whether children are likely to play with the "Seat Belt Buddy" in a manner that either introduces excessive slack in the shoulder belt, thereby reducing the protection provided by that belt in the event of a crash, or the inadvertent unlatching of the belt system. Finally, since the originally installed safety belts must meet the requirements of Standard No. 302, Flammability of Interior Materials, we encourage you not to degrade the flammability performance of safety belts.

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

Sincerely,

Philip R. Recht Chief Counsel

Enclosure

ref:208#209 d:1/5/95

ID: 1736y

Mr. Joseph F. Mikoll
Vice President
Transportation Equipment Corp.
712 North Van Buren Way
Hopkins, MN 55343

Dear Mr. Mikoll:

This responds to your letter asking for clarification of my November 3, 1988 letter to you. In a letter dated August 11, 1988, you requested my opinion concerning the acceptability of installing a new product you are developing (a "safety bar") in school buses with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of 10,000 pounds or less instead of installing safety belts in those vehicles. The "safety bar" consists, in part, of two curved metal poles in planes that are parallel to the longitudinal centerline of the bus. The curved metal poles are attached to the outside of the seat in front of the seat whose occupants are to be protected by the "safety bar." These curved poles are joined by three cross or transverse members that are parallel to the seat and are covered with padding. The padded surface extends over the entire width of the seat whose occupants it is intended to protect. When an occupant wishes to be seated, he or she must lift the safety bar and then sit down and allow the safety bar to lower so that it rests on the occupant's thighs. Additionally, a special strap resembling a very long seat belt assembly must be fastened around the safety bar to hold it in position in the event of a crash.

In my November 3, 1988 reply to your letter, I explained that the crash protection requirements for school buses with a GVWR of 10,000 pounds or less are set forth in S5(b) of Standard No. 222, School Bus Passenger Seating and Crash Protection (49 CFR /571.222). That section requires that each designated seating position be equipped with either safety belts or a protection system that requires no action by vehicle occupants. Since the "safety bar" is not a protection system that requires no action by vehicle occupants, my November 3 letter explained that the "safety bar" could not be installed in place of safety belts in small school buses; i.e., school buses with a GVWR of 10,000 pounds or less.

My November 3, 1988 letter also explained that safety bars could be installed in small school buses in addition to safety belts, if the safety bars do not destroy the ability of the required safety belts to comply with the requirements of our safety standards. I also stated that a manufacturer that installed these safety bars in small school buses would have to certify that the bus in which the safety bars were installed complied with the school bus emergency exit requirements of Standard No. 217, Bus Window Retention and Release (49 CFR /571.217) and with the impact zone requirements specified in S5.3 of Standard No. 222.

You asked whether my November 3, 1988 letter addressed the situation for both large school buses (i.e., those with a GVWR of more than 10,000 pounds) and small school buses, or whether it addressed only small school buses. Your previous letter asked only about small school buses, so my November 3 letter addressed those vehicles only. Assuming this was the case, you asked for "an opinion that [the safety bar] does not conflict with any standard for large school bus installation." I am happy to have this chance to explain our regulations to you.

Let me begin by noting that the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act requires each manufacturer to certify that each of its motor vehicles or items of motor vehicle equipment complies with all applicable safety standards. Because of this statutory provision, NHTSA has no authority to approve, endorse, or offer assurances of compliance for your product. Instead, any manufacturer that installs your safety bar in its large school buses must itself certify that those large school buses comply with all applicable safety standards when the safety bars are installed.

The occupant crash protection requirements for large school buses are set forth in Standard No. 222. No provision of Standard No. 222 expressly prohibits the installation of "safety bars" in large school buses. Hence, "safety bars" can be installed in a large school bus, provided that the manufacturer of the bus certifies that it complies with all applicable requirements set forth in the safety standards with the safety bars installed. These requirements include the emergency exit requirements specified in Standard No. 217, all of the requirements of Standard No. 222, and the flammability resistance requirements of Standard No. 302, Flammability of Interior Materials (49 CFR /571.302).

Please let me know if you have any further questions or need additional information.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

/ref:217#222#302#VSA d:3/l0/89

ID: nht76-5.75

DATE: JULY 14, 1976

FROM: WILLIAM K. ROSENBERRY -- ATTORNEY AT LAW

TO: GEORGE SHIFFLETT -- OFFICE OF STANDARDS, NHTSA

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED AUGUST 19, 1978 FROM FRANK BERNDT, NHTSA, TO WILLIAM K. ROSENBERRY

TEXT: It is my understanding that you are responsible for enforcement of the standards promulgated by the Department of Transportation pursuant to the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act. The purpose in my writing is to request information concerning the standards promulgated by the Secretary of Transportation.

I have a client which is anticipating the formation of a business in which new pick-up trucks would be purchased from manufacturers and re-outfitted in the cab area by providing a different seat, new carpeting, and headliners, and then sold through dealers to the general public. It is my understanding that the provisions of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act apply to a company in the position of my client, and in particular, Standard #302 relating to flammability of materials and Standard #207 relating to seating requirements.

I would appreciate knowing if a company in the position of my client which is remodeling new automobiles may rely on the warranty of a fabric manufacturer that the fabric sold meets the requirements of Section #302. A fabric supplier has recently stated that they are required under Federal Regulations to test each lot of fabric for flammability purposes before certification can be given. Please advise whether in fact such certification per lot is necessary by a fabric supplier. I would also appreciate being placed on any mailing list which your Department may keep in order that I may be informed of any future standards or changes which relate to this Act and the standards promulgated by the Secretary of Transportation.

ID: nht91-1.5

DATE: January 3, 1991

FROM: Paul Jackson Rice -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TO: Tom Wiatrak -- Century Products Co.

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 10-19-90 from Tom Wiatrak to Deidre Fujita (OCC 5360)

TEXT:

This responds to your October 19, 1990 letter asking about the application of the labeling requirements of Safety Standard 213, Child Restraint Systems, to a seat pad you plan to produce for new child safety seats. You state that the pad would cover information that Standard 213 requires to be labeled on a child safety seat. You ask whether the labeling requirements of the standard could be met by directly labeling the seat and by permanently labeling a durable tag (made of "tyvek" material) that would be sewn to the pad.

The answer is yes. Paragraph S5.5 of Standard 213 required each add-on child restraint system to be permanently labeled with specified information. Paragraph S5.5.3 requires a portion of the required information to be located on the add-on child restraint system so that it is visible when the system is installed..." Your suggested tag would satisfy paragraph S5.5.3 if it bears the required information and if that information is visible when the seat is installed in the vehicle.

You should be aware that paragraph S5.7 of standard 213 requires "each material used in a child restraint system" to conform to the flammability resistance requirements of Standard 302, Flammability of Interior Materials. Since the tag would be affixed to the child restraint, the tag would have to comply with 302.

I hope this information is helpful.

ID: 21736

Mr. Ronnie H. McDaniel
RHM Enterprises
Star Route 850
Lytle Creek, CA 92358






Dear Mr. McDaniel:

This responds to your letter asking for information about the application of Federal safety standards to a "sun visor extender."

By way of background information, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is authorized by the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act to issue Federal motor vehicle safety standards that set performance requirements for new motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA is not authorized to certify or approve motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment for compliance with our Federal motor vehicle safety standards. Instead, under Chapter 301 of Title 49 of the United States Code, "Motor Vehicle Safety" (copy enclosed), each manufacturer of a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment is responsible for certifying that its products meet all applicable safety standards.

There is currently no Federal motor vehicle safety standard that is directly applicable to a sun visor extender sold directly to a consumer. The Federal safety standard that regulates sun visors (Standard No. 201, Occupant Protection in Interior Impact) applies only to new motor vehicles (i.e., vehicles that have not yet been sold for purposes other than resale) and not to items of aftermarket equipment such as a sun visor extender.

However, there are other Federal requirements that indirectly affect the manufacture and sale of your device. Under Chapter 301, your device is considered to be an item of motor vehicle equipment. As a manufacturer of motor vehicle equipment, you are subject to the requirements in sections 30118-30120 of Chapter 301 concerning the recall and remedy of products with defects relating to motor vehicle safety. I have enclosed an information sheet that briefly describes those responsibilities. In the event that you or NHTSA determines that your sun visor extenders contain a safety-related defect, you would be responsible for notifying purchasers of the defective equipment and remedying the problem free of charge.

As stated above, the sun visor in a new vehicle is regulated by Safety Standard No. 201, which requires that the visor be "constructed of or covered with energy-absorbing material" and that the visor's mounting must "present no material edge radius of less than 0.125 inch that is statically contactable by a spherical 6.5-inch diameter head form." The purpose of the standard is to reduce the injuries that occur when occupants strike the visor or its mounting with their heads. If your sun visor extender were installed by the manufacturer of a new motor vehicle, the visor, as modified by that installation, would have to comply with the visor requirements of the standard. I am enclosing a copy of Standard No. 201 for your review.

Another Federal standard to which the vehicle manufacturer must certify its vehicle as conforming is Standard No. 302, Flammability of Interior Materials (copy enclosed). This standard establishes flammability resistance requirements for certain vehicle components, including sun visors, on new vehicles. If a new vehicle manufacturer installs your product on the new vehicle, that manufacturer would have to certify the vehicle's compliance with Standard No. 302, and thus would be required to ensure that the sun visor conforms to the flammability resistance requirements of the standard and that the extender does not interfere with or prevent that capability to comply.

A commercial business that installs the sun visor extender on new or used vehicles would be subject to provisions of the Safety Act that affect whether the business may install your product on a vehicle. Section 30122 of Chapter 301 states: "A manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business may not knowingly make inoperative ... any part of a 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..." This section requires manufacturers, distributors, dealers or motor vehicle repair businesses (i.e., any person holding him or herself out to the public as in the business of repairing motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment for compensation) installing your sun visor extender on new or used vehicles to ensure that the addition of the device would not negatively affect the compliance of any component or design on a vehicle with applicable Federal safety standards. For example, the commercial entity must ensure that the addition of the device does not reduce the effectiveness of those features and aspects of performance of the sun visor that enabled the vehicle to comply with Standard No. 201 or Standard No. 302.

However, the prohibitions found in Section 30122 do not apply to the actions of a vehicle owner in adding to or otherwise modifying his or her vehicle. Thus, a vehicle owner would not violate Chapter 301 by installing the sun visor extender, even if doing so would negatively affect the safety performance of the sun visor. However, we encourage owners not to degrade the safety of their vehicles.

Please feel free to contact Otto Matheke of this office at (202) 366-2992 if you have further questions.

Sincerely,

Frank Seales, Jr.
Chief Counsel

Enclosures
ref:201
d.9/25/00

ID: 12341.jeg

Mr. Guy Monagas
123 Birch Trail
Kennesaw, Georgia 30152

Dear Mr. Monagas:

This responds to your letter asking what DOT standards would apply to a seat belt system you have designed. I apologize for the delay in our response.

By way of background information, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is authorized to issue safety standards for new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle equipment. The agency does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Instead, manufacturers are required to certify that their vehicles and equipment meet applicable standards.

NHTSA has issued four safety standards concerning safety belt systems. The first is Standard No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection (49 CFR 571.208), which sets forth requirements for occupant protection at the various seating positions in vehicles. The second is Standard No. 209, Seat Belt Assemblies (49 CFR 571.209), which sets forth strength, elongation, webbing width, durability, and other requirements for seat belt assemblies. The third is Standard No. 210, Seat Belt Assembly Anchorages (49 CFR 571.210), which establishes strength and location requirements for seat belt anchorages. The fourth is Standard No. 302, Flammability of Interior Materials (49 CFR 571.302), which specifies burn resistance requirements for materials used in the occupant compartment of motor vehicles. I regret that we are not able to provide an analysis of the requirements of the standards in light of your specific design.

Enclosed is an information sheet we have prepared to provide general information for new manufacturers of motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment. Also enclosed is a copy of an information sheet explaining how to obtain copies of our standards.

I hope this information is helpful. If you have further questions, please feel free to call Edward Glancy of my staff at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,
John Womack
Acting Chief Counsel

Enclosures
ref:208
d:11/5/96