ID: nht79-4.45

DATE: 01/11/79

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Joseph J. Levin, Jr.; NHSTA

TO: Grumman Flxible

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20590

JAN 11 1979

NOA-30

Mr. R. L. Ratz, P.E. Product Safety Engineering Grumman Flxible 970 Pittsburgh Drive Delaware, Ohio 43015

Dear Mr. Ratz:

This is in reply to your letter of December 8, 1978, asking whether the front and rear clearance lamps on your Model 870 Urban transit coach comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108.

The front clearance lamps on the Model 870 are combined with the turn signal lamps, side marker lamps, and side reflex reflectors. The units are located "on line with and just outboard of each rectangular headlamp," with lens center 32 inches above the road surface, at a point that appears to be at the vehicle's overall width. The rear clearance lamps are combined with the stop lamps and rear side marker lamps, their horizontal center lines 64 inches above the road surface, at approximately the vehicle's overall width. Front and rear identification lamps are mounted at the top of the vehicle.

The general rule expressed by Table II of Standard No. 108 is that clearance lamps must be mounted "to indicate the overall width of the vehicle ... and as near the top thereof as practicable." But a partial exception is provided by S4.3.1.4.: When the rear identification lamps are mounted at the extreme height of the vehicle, rear clearance lamps need not meet the requirement of Table II that they be located as close as practicable to the top of the vehicle."

This means that the mid-body location of the rear clearance lamp is acceptable since the rear identification lamps are at the extreme height of the vehicle. But the exception does not extend to the front clearance lamps. While Standard No. 108 allows the manufacturer to determine what location is "as close as practicable to the top of the vehicle", there will be instances when the overall width of the vehicle will not be indicated by the highest location. In such instances the best location will be the one that most closely approximates the intent behind the requirement - to indicate the overall width.

Specifically with reference to the Model 870, it appears to us that the close proximity of the combination lamp to the headlamp may result in the effectiveness of the clearance lamp being impaired by the brightness of the headlamp, and that the most practicable location sufficiently indicating the overall width of the vehicle, would be at the outer edges of the body directly below the windshield.

Sincerely,

Joseph J. Levin, Jr.

Chief Counsel

GRUMMAN FLXIBLE 970 PITTSBURGH DRIVE DELAWARE, OHIO 43015 614/369-7671 Telex : 245484 70-0220rlr

December 8, 1978

Office of Chief Counsel National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 400 Seventh Street S.W. Washington, D.C. 20590

References: (a) FMVSS No. 108. Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment, current edition. (b) Grumman flxible Model 870 Advanced Design Transit Coach, photographs attached. (c) Certificates of conformance copies attached.

Dear Sirs:

Your assistance is requested with respect to an official interpretation of reference (a) above as it relates to the installation location of the clearance lamps on our new Grumnan Flxible Model 870 urban transit coach as shown in the enclosed photographs.

Refering to Photograph #1, the amber lamp seen on line with and just outboard of each dual, rectangular headlamp is a combination lamp which performs the functions of a turn signal lamp, a clearance lamp, a sidemarker lamp and a side reflex reflector. The lamp contains a single, dual-filament bulb. A 3 c.p. filament provides the light source for the combination clearance/sidemarker lamp functions. and a 32 c.p. filament provides the light source for the front turn signal function. This lamp has been certified as being in conformance with FMVSS No. 108 by the manufacturer (See Attachment #1) and certificates of approval have been issued by the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (See Attachment #2) and the Department of California Highway Patrol (See Attachment #3). These lamps are mounted with lense centers 32 inches above road surface, on the outermost edges of the vehicle front view envelope thus indicating the overall width of the Model 870. It should be noted from Photo #1 that the vehicle sides converge from a point just beneath the baseline of the windshield up to the topmost roof corners. The amount of this convergence is such that each roof corner is eleven inches inboard if the base of the windshield cornerpost. Therefore, clearance lamps mounted at the top-most roof corners would identify the vehicle as being twenty-two inches narrower than it actually is.

Our rear exterior lamp configuration is shown in Photo #4. The upper red lamp on each outer edge of the rear view functions as a stop signal lamp, a clearance lamp and a sidemarker lamp. The horizontal center line of this lamp as installed is 64 inches above road surface. The lower red lamp functions as a tail lamp, a turn signal lamp, rear reflex reflector and a side reflex reflector. It's horizontal center line as intalled is 50 inches above road surface. Each lamp contains a single, dual-filament 3 c.p. & 32 c.p.) bulb. The stop signal and turn signal functions utilize the 32 c.p. filament. The clearance, sidemarker and tail lamp functions utilize the 32 c.p. filament.

The white lamp shown between the two red lamps on each side are backup lamps. Attachments #4, #5 and #6 are copies of the certificates associated with these lamp units.

We would greatly appreciate a review and evaluation by the Office of the Chief Counsel, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, of the installation locations of the clearance lamps on the Model 870 bus as regards to conformance with the applicable requirements of FMVSS No. 108.

Sincerely,

R.L. Ratz, P.E.

Product Safety Engineering

Enclosures

ID: nht90-3.24

TYPE: Interpretation-NHTSA

DATE: July 19, 1990

FROM: Guy Dorleans -- Manager, Regulatory Affairs Department Division Eclairage-France

TO: P. J. Rice -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TITLE: Ref: gd 862 M90

ATTACHMT: Attached to drawing (graphics omitted); Also attached to letter dated 9-12-90 from P.J. Rice to M.G. Dorleans (A36; Std. 108)

TEXT:

Valeo Lighting, manufacturer of car headlamps, hereby submits this request for an interpretation relating to the replaceable bulb headlamp aiming provisions in Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 108," Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated Equipment ."

In its edition of May 9th 1989, the Federal Register Vol. 54 N 88 allows the use of lamps with moving reflectors. This possibility is an important step in the direction of world harmonization, since this concept is widely used in Europe and in Japan. V aleo lighting is determined to use this possibility as soon as possible, and in this purpose has studied the:

"Aiming concept for headlamps. Solution 3." The attached documents explain how our engineers have solved the problems of providing the aiming feature on each lamp, and summarize the instructions which will be written in the maintenance book of each car. These instructions will emphasize on the nov elty in using SAE J602 headlamp external aimers.

We would greatly appreciate if you would kindly treat all the drawings as confidential, because they involve our own idea for development of on-vehicle aiming which has something related to a patent application.

We would ask you to provide us with your confirmation of our interpretation of the Standard 108 in this matter. We are ready to demonstrate NHTSA a working prototype if you deem it necessary.

Upon your kind review to this matter, your promptly reply would be greatly appreciated.

Enclosure

July 19th, 1990

Aiming concept for headlamps. Solution 3. 1) Description of the headlamp.

The lens has 3 aiming pads on which can be attached a mechanical aiming device as per SAE J602 Oct 80. The housing contains a movable reflector, a horizontal aiming feature and a vertical aiming feature. These parts and the fixed point are designed so that there is no possibility to modify

the horizontal aim when aiming vertically, and vice versa.

The vertical aiming feature consists in two combined coaxial screw and nut, hereafter referred to as AV and BV:

AV is used on the assembly lines of the lamp manufacturer and also on the assembly lines of the car manufacturer. While the aiming plane is placed in its designed position, the low beam is photometrically aimed and the fiducial mark of BV is set to zero . The rotation of AV achieves this initial aim, while BV can not move. Then the cap is inserted. This cap can not be removed using simple tools. The repair shops and the dealers have the necessary equipment to remove the cap. AV is also the aiming f eature which must be used to repair the vehicle after accident damage.

BH is the aiming nut which must be used during normal reaim operations

The horizontal aiming feature is so designed that when a torque is applied to BV, AV rotates with the same angle. In other terms, the friction torque between BV and AV is far bigger than the friction torque between AV and the housing.

The horizontal aiming feature, consisting of a screw AH and a nut BH, uses basically the same principle as its vertical counterpart.

Both vertical and horizontal reaim features are permanently attached to the headlamp.

2) Vertical reaim.

A commonly available mechanical aimer must be used. This kind of aimer has been used in the US since the early '50s, and are available in each repair shop or dealers. Among them, the Hopkins B4A is a good example of easy-to-use external aimer, with aer odynamic headlamps capability thanks to its articulated vacuum cup and universal extender.

The ground surface must be substentially flat. The car must fulfill the requirements of SAE J 599 May '81.

2 1) Set to zero the fiducial mark on BV

2 2) Attach calibration fixtures to the aimers, place aimers at the centerline of each wheel on one side of the vehicle. Level each unit by adjusting screw on each calibration fixture.

2 3) Transfer the reading indicated on the horizontal dial to the floor level dial on each aimer. Set the "vertical" dial of each aimer at zero.

2 4) Remove calibration fixture

2 5) Check that universal extenders are set to the values engraved on the lens, and attach each mechanical aimer to its designated lamp. Check the sight openings face each other.

2 6) Rotate the "vertical" dial of each aimer intil the bubble is centered

in the vial. Tranfer to BV the value the "vertical" dials indicate for each side of the car.

3) Horizontal reaim.

3 1) The horizontal dials and the BH nuts must be set to zero.

3 2) Rotate each "horizontal" dials until the the split image of each aimer are aligned.

3 3) Respective of the side, transfer the readings of the aimers to the BH nuts.

4) After accident damage.

This procedure is not part of the normal maintenance of the car. It involves tools which are normally owned by dealers or repair shops. The floor must be rigid, flat and horizontal The special tools allow to remove the cap, thus giving access to the A H and AV screws. The BH and BV nuts being securely maintained in zero position, the operator:

4 1) Checks the angles of the aiming plane 4 2) Uses a screen at 7.6 m, or a fractional balance aiming machine, or a pair of string aimers.

Guy Dorleans Valeo Lighting.

Enclosure: 1

(Drawing attached, graphics omitted)

ID: 2520y

Mr. Peter Brown
President, KC HiLites, Inc.
Avenida de Luces
Williams, AZ 86046

Dear Mr. Brown:

This is in reply to your letter of April 25, l990, asking for our "comments and approval" regarding an automotive lighting product that your company intends to market. The product is intended for use in a four headlamp systems with lens designations of "L", "LF" or "HB4" on the outboard lamps, and "U", "UF" or "HB3" on the inboard lamps. In normal operation, the lower beam is extinguished when the upper beam is activated; your device would ensure that the lower beam would remain activated when the upper beam is used. You view this as permissible under S5.5.8 of Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. l08.

Initially, let me note that we have no authority to "approve" any device or invention for use on motor vehicles. We advise whether such products are permissible under the Federal motor vehicle safety standards, but this advice must not be represented in advertising as Federal approval of the device or invention.

Section S5.5.8 of Standard No. l08 states in pertinent part that "On a motor vehicle equipped with a headlighting system designed to conform to the photometric requirements of Figure 15, the lamps marked "L" or "LF" may be wired to remain permanently activated when the lamps marked "U" or "UF" are activated. Standard No. 108 further specifies that headlamps designed to conform to Figure l5 are the four-lamp sealed beam system Type F (S7.3.7(b)), and a four-headlamp integral beam system (S7.4(a)(1)). In addition, certain types of replaceable bulb headlamp systems may also be designed to conform to Figure l5 photometrics, as shown in recently-adopted Figure 26 (copy enclosed). Replaceable bulb headlamps are also required to have the HB Type number on the lens, as well as the "U" and "L" markings. Therefore, installation of your device on the headlighting systems mentioned above would be permitted by Standard No. l08, and you need not be limited to systems that use HB3 and HB4 light sources.

With respect to the copy on the material you submitted for review, it would be more accurate to reword the marking references to state "'LF', 'L', or 'L' and 'HB4' on the upper. . . and the corresponding designation 'UF', 'U', or 'U' and 'HB3' on the lower. . . ."

We also note your remark "Quad-Beam gives you this extra margin of lighting safety that the factory left out." There is no basis in fact for this statement. Some drivers prefer more foreground light, but there is no indication that the addition of the lower beam when the upper beam is in use has a positive effect upon lighting safety.

As you requested, we are returning your samples.

Sincerely,

Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel Enclosures /ref:l08 d:7/2/90

ID: 15209.ztv

Mr. Steve Law
Magnet Marelli UK Ltd.
Lighting Division
Walkmill Lane, Cannock
Staffordshire
WS11 3LP
England

Dear Mr. Law:

This is in reply to your FAX of April 30, 1997, to Mr. Van Iderstine of this agency asking for an interpretation of Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 as it applies to "optical centre marking on visually aimable headlamps."

You present three drawings ("a," "b," and "c") of rectangular headlamps with various markings and ask are "any of these options mandatory/preferred/unacceptable."

Paragraph S7.8.5.3(f)(1) of Standard No. 108 requires that there "be a mark or markings identifying the optical axis of the headlamp," and that "[t]he manufacturer is free to choose the design of the mark or markings." Option "a" shows a marking in the center of the rectangle, whereas options (b) and (c) have four markings, one each at the center of each of the four sides.

With respect to your rectangular headlamp drawings, the optical axis runs directly through the center of the headlamp at 90 degrees to the lens face. This means that only option "a" identifies the optical axis of the rectangular headlamps. Options (b) and (c) are insufficient to identify the optical axis on the rectangular headlamp drawings and thus do not meet the requirements of paragraph S7.8.5.3(f)(1).

If you have further questions, you may refer them to Taylor Vinson of this office (FAX 202-366-3820).

Sincerely,
John Womack
Acting Chief Counsel
ref:108
d.6/16/97

ID: 18948.ztv

Mr. Dennis G. Moore
President
Sierra Products, Inc.
1113 Greenville Road
Livermore, CA 94550

Dear Mr. Moore:

This is in reply to your letter of October 15, 1998, calling our attention to what you believe may be a violation of Federal regulations.

Specifically, you believe that two items of lighting equipment sold in the aftermarket (a turn signal lamp, a combination stop, tail, and turn signal lamp) are being marketed as suitable for use on all vehicles when, in fact, their lens area does not comply with the specifications for these lamps on vehicles whose overall width is 80 or more inches. You believe that the product and its packaging should indicate "what vehicle width these lights can legally be used on."

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 does not specify any labeling requirements for replacement lighting equipment such as that which you have brought to our attention. However, replacement lighting equipment must be certified as conforming to all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. For purposes of this discussion, we shall assume that the lamps bear a DOT symbol, or that the cartons in which they are shipped bear an appropriate certification of compliance. That certification would cover conformance of replacement lamps on vehicles whose overall width is less than 80 inches. We agree that an indication of appropriate use would be helpful to the buyer, but we do not believe that the failure to do so is a violation of any Federal regulation.

There is a possibility that the lamps could be bought by a vehicle manufacturer for use as original equipment on vehicles whose overall width is 80 or more inches. If this occurs, the vehicles would fail to conform to Standard No. 108, its certification of compliance would be false and misleading, and the manufacturer would have to conduct a notification and remedy campaign. Further, to avoid a civil penalty, the manufacturer would have to demonstrate to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration that it had no reason to know of the noncompliance in the exercise of reasonable care. To avoid these expenses and sanctions, manufacturers as a general rule, are familiar with Standard No. 108 and other Federal safety regulations. For this reason, we also believe it unlikely that the lamps would be used as original equipment on wider vehicles.

However, if you find any such OEM applications on vehicles whose width is 80 inches or more, please let us know about them.

If you have any questions, you may call Taylor Vinson of this Office (202-366-5263).

Sincerely,
Frank Seales, Jr.
Chief Counsel
ref:108
d.11/18/98

ID: nht89-2.76

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 08/23/89

FROM: STEPHEN P. WOOD -- NHTSA ACTING CHIEF COUNSEL

TO: TAKAYOSHI CHIKADA -- MANAGER OF AUTOMOTIVE LIGHTING ENGINEERING CONTROL DEPT. STANLEY ELECTRIC CO., LTD.

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: LETTER DATED 06/16/89 FROM TAKAYOSHI CHIKADA TO RICHARD L. VANIDERSTINE -- NHTSA; RE REVISION OF FMVSS NO 108 [DOCKET NO 85-15 NOTICE 8]

TEXT: Dear Mr. Chikada:

This is in reply to your letter of June 16, 1989, to Mr. Van Iderstine of this agency, by FAX as you requested. You have asked four questions with respect to the recently amended Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108.

We responded to your first two questions in a letter dated June 19 to Mr. Hasegawa of your office. A copy is enclosed for your reference. Since that time, however, in response to a petition by General Motors, we have changed the effective date of parag raph S7.7.5.1(a) to December 1, 1989, with respect to replaceable bulb headlamp systems. A copy of this notice is also enclosed.

Your third question is:

How should we prove the confirmation to the requirement of S7.7.2.2? We think the combination of Horizontal and Vertical angle within the aim range will be so huge and it is not practicable to test for all combinations.

This paragraph applies to headlamps aimed by moving the reflector relative to the lens and headlamp housing, or vice versa. The agency has frequently advised manufacturers that there is no legal requirement that conformance be demonstrated through the t est procedures stated in the standard. While the agency will use those procedures in its compliance testing, the manufacturer may certify compliance with the performance requirements of a standard through engineering studies, computer simulations, mathe matical calculations, or other means intended as an exercise of due care and affording a reasonable basis upon which to certify compliance.

Your final question is:

It is acceptable to set up initial "O" point of S7.7.5.2(a)(2) not mechanically but photometrically?

You may determine the "O" point by whatever means you deem appropriate for the headlighting system, as long as the method achieves a horizontal "O" point that may be used for the purposes of paragraph S7.7.5.2(a)(2), and any other paragraph in which the horizontal "O" mark is required to be determined.

In the future, please address your requests for interpretations of Standard No. 108 to this office.

Sincerely,

ENCLOSURE

ID: 24524.ztv

D.W. Robertson, Captain
Commonwealth of Virginia
Department of State Police
491 Southlake Boulevard
Richmond, VA 23236

Dear Captain Robertson:

This is in reply to your letter of May 20, 2002, to Taylor Vinson of this Office, which we received on June 3. The subject of your letter was "road lamps."

Specifically, you reported that the 2001 and 2002 model year Acura CL coupes are equipped with "road lamps." You stated that "these lamps are not marked, and from my understanding do not fall under FMVSS 108. These lamps produce 5 watts of power, and the lens and reflector are not specifically focused to any point." You related that "Honda advised that these lamps are located below the headlights . . . and are used in conjunction with both the low beam and high beam headlamps . . . ."

You asked two questions: "1. Are road lamps, as described, sanctioned by FMVSS 108?," and "2. If they are not sanctioned by FMVSS 108, are they sanctioned by NHTSA in some other rule or regulation?"

The lamps you describe are not required by FMVSS No. 108. The question then arises whether lamps other than required lamps are allowed. FMVSS No. 108 permits a new vehicle to be manufactured and/or sold with supplementary lamps, subject to the prohibition imposed by S5.1.3 of the standard that "No additional lamp, reflective device, or other item of motor vehicle equipment shall be installed that impairs the effectiveness of lighting equipment required by this standard."

We have not tested Acura vehicles to judge whether additional lamps of 5 watts located below the headlamps in the front bumper, and operating in conjunction with them, will impair the effectiveness of the upper or lower beam headlamps, or of the front turn signal, parking, or hazard warning system lamps. The label that Honda affixes to each Acura CL coupe certifying that the vehicle complies with all applicable FMVSS represents, in part, its determination that the road lamps do not impair the effectiveness of other front lighting equipment within the meaning of S5.1.3. We have no basis to question that determination.

As for your second question, "road lamps" are motor vehicle equipment and subject to the agencys safety notification and remedy requirements if a safety-related defect occurs in them. Apart from regulations implementing these requirements, there are no other NHTSA regulations that pertain to auxiliary lighting equipment such as road lamps. This means that any State may regulate these lamps, and their use, as appears appropriate to the State.

If you have any further concerns, please call Taylor Vinson at 202-366-5263.

ref:108

d.7/29/02

ID: nht76-2.47

DATE: 02/12/76

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; R. L. Carter; NHTSA

TO: F. A. McNiel

COPYEE: HON. J. J. PICKLE

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in reply to your petition of November 7, 1975, "for the correction of subsection S4.5.4 and S4.6(b) as set forth by existing Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108."

It is your opinion that S4.5.4, which requires activation of stop lamps upon application of the service brakes, is design restrictive, and "leaves no opportunity for innovation by the private sector for other solutions for the activation of a motor vehicle's stoplamps". You have suggested that S4.5.4 be amended to include at its end "or by other beneficial means which will not impair the lighting system or the mechanical functioning of the vehicle".

Any performance standard is design restrictive to some extent; it must restrict manufacturers to designs that meet the desired performance requirements. Its validity as a performance standard depends on whether the restrictions of the standard are only as narrow as reasonably necessary to achieve the desired safety performance. In this case we have found that the requirement meets this test. A signal to other drivers that the service brakes are being applied is precisely the performance being sought in S4.5.4. A signal based on some other condition (e.g., vehicle deceleration, might not be as timely, or might fail altogether to operate at the critical moment (as where it is based on lifting the accelerator pedal). Since the requirement is limited to the desired safety performance, we find it valid, and your petition in this area is denied.

You also ask for an amendment of S4.6(b) to include "rearlamps" among those that may be flashed for signalling purposes, since you believe that conventional wiring circuits presently allow these lamps to be flashed when headlamps are flashed. When the headlamps are flashed by means of the on-off switch, it is true that rear lamps will flash. But that type of flashing is in no way restricted by the standard. The flashing intended to be regulated by S4.6(b) is by automatic means (see S3 definitions) and, except for rear turn signal lamps, these automatic devices would not be connected to rear lamp circuits. Thus, there appears to be no need for the amendment you suggest and your petition is accordingly denied.

We appreciate your continuing efforts on behalf of traffic safety.

Sincerely,

ATTACH.

F. A. McNiel 611 Bouldin Avenue Austin, Texas 78704

NOVEMBER 7, 1975

U. S. Department of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Re: A petition for the correction of sub-sections S4.5.4 and S4.6(b) as set forth by existing Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108.

Gentlemen:

Quoting from a letter date of Jan. 29, 1968, from William Heddon Jr., Director of the Department of Transportation National Highway Safety Bureau, in answer to a letter that Congressman J. J. Pickle had forwarded to the Department of Transportation in my behalf, - Director Haddon states:

"under the law the Congress directed us to set 'performance' standards and not standards requiring specific devices or designs. The Congress chose this approach to give the private sector the greatest opportunity for innovation and to permit a variety of solutions in meeting specific performance requirements".

The 'performance' standards as established by FMVSS No. 108 for the functioning of a motor vehicle's stoplamps are as follows;

Except for the size, location, lens type, and candlepower, the only standard 'set' for stoplamp functioning that is covered by FMVSS No. 108 is sub-section S4.5.4, which states:

"The stoplamps on each vehicle shall be activated upon application of the service brakes".

Sub-section S4.5.4 is in direct conflict with Director Haddon's letter on two seperate counts, i.e.

1. Said section as worded constitutes a mandate of intendence that a 'specific design' (use of the service brakes) shall be the only means used to activate a motor vehicle's stoplamps.

2. Also, as worded sub-section S4.5.4 leaves no opportunity for innovation by the private sector for other solutions for the activation of a motor vehicle's stoplamps.

In order to comply with Director Haddon's interpretation of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, I propose that sub-section S4.5.4 be expanded to read as follows:

"The stoplamps on each vehicle shall be activated upon the application of the service brakes, or by other beneficial means which will not impair the lighting system or the mechanical functioning of the vehicle".

Under Section S4.5 'special wiring requirements'

Sub-section S4.5.7 states - (a) "When the parking lamps are activated the taillamps, license plate lamps, and side marker lamps shall also be activated", - and (b) "When the headlamps are activated in a steady-burning state, the taillamps, license plate lamps, and side marker lamps shall also be activated". - Thus, the said section stipulates that it is mandatory that the side marker lamps be in-circuit with the taillamps and license plate lamps.

Under Section S4.6 'when activated'

S4.6 states, - (a) "Turn signal lamps, hazard warning lamps, and school bus warning lamps shall flash", - and (b) "All other lamps shall be steady-burning, except that means may be provided to flash headlamps and side marker lamps for signaling purposes".

Contextually, S4.5.7 (a) and (b), and S4.6 (b) make it unlawful to flash headlamps and side marker lamps by use of the conventional lamp activating means, as this act would also flash taillamps and license plate lamps.

The only manner by which headlamps and side marker lamps could be flashed and still leave taillamps and license plate lamps steady-burning would be to isolate headlamps and side marker lamps from the conventional wiring circuit by means of auxiliary wiring and switching means which would operate indipendent of the conventional lighting system.

Installation of such auxiliary wiring and switching means would tend to be costly, - and to what avail? In what instance could the flashing of headlamps and side marker lamps for signaling purposes enhance traffic safety, - and at the same time, the flashing of taillamps and license plate lamps be detrimental to traffic safety?

To make S4.6(b) credible, and to prevent perhaps millions of motorists from unwittingly breaking the letter of the law by flashing a vehicle's lights with the conventional light switch, I propose that the word 'rearlamps' be inserted after the word 'headlamps' to make the sub-section read -- "All other lamps shall be steady-burning, except that means may be provided to flash headlamps, rearlamps, and side marker lamps for signaling purposes".

In order to bring FMVSS No. 108 more into line with the apparent intent of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, I respectfully petition the Department of Transportation for rule making to re-phrase sub-sections S4.5.4 and S4.6 (b) of the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 to include the wording that I have proposed.

Such re-phrasing would establish a standard against which any beneficial means for activating a motor vehicle's stoplamps could be tested.

Such a standard would provide an opportunity for the private sector to innovate means for improving the 'performance' of a motor vehicle's conventional stoplamps in a manner that could materially reduce the toll of "10 percent of the fatal motor vehicle accidents and 49 percent of all motor vehicle accidents" ascribed by the National Highway Safety Bureau as resulting from rear end collision type accidents.

Such re-phrasing would also remove the current restriction that now makes it unlawful under any circumstances for a motorist to flash a vehicle's lamps by the use of the conventional lamp activating switching means.

Respectfully,

Fred A. McNiel Traffic Safety Advocate

copy: Hon. J. J. Pickle

ID: 14635.ztv

Mr. Mark Boykin
J&M Enterprises
1523 Grand Ave.
Spring Valley, CA 91977

Dear Mr. Boykin:

This is in reply to your letter of March 26, 1997, telling us of your interest in manufacturing side marker lamps. You ask whether these lights are required to be "DOT approved". You also ask for information on state and local laws.

We are pleased to try to help you. First, the applicable laws do not provide authority for "DOT approval" of vehicles or equipment items. Under these laws, a manufacturer must satisfy itself, through testing for example, that its product conforms to all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. The manufacturer then must certify its product. No permission or approval by DOT is needed.

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated Equipment contains specifications for original and replacement side marker lamps, which have been required on all new passenger cars since January 1, 1969. These requirements are those of SAE Standard J592e, July 1972. I enclose a copy for your information.

However, it is not immediately clear that these requirements would apply to you. The color photo you enclosed shows a side marker lamp installed on a contemporary Saab car, just behind the front wheelwell. The Saab also has a yellow lens before the front wheelwell that appears to be part of the front lamp assembly. We take this to be the front side marker lamp required by Standard No. 108. The second lamp which you indicate by an arrow, the lamp you are interested in manufacturing, is a side-mounted turn signal, not a side marker lamp in this photo. On this vehicle, the lamp in question flashes in phase with the required front and rear mounted turn signal lamps. Supplemental lamps, regardless of their purpose, need not meet any Federal specifications.

If you intend to sell the lamp for installation as original or replacement equipment on vehicles, trailers for example, then even this lamp would not have to meet any specifications because side-mounted turn signal lamps are not an item regulated by Standard No. 108. However, other requirements would come into play: the necessity to file a one-page manufacturer identification statement with the agency, and the obligation to notify and remedy in the event that a noncompliance or safety-related defect is found to exist in the lamp.

A state may impose its own requirements for aspects of performance not covered by Standard No. 108, in this case, with SAE Standard J914 Side Turn Signal Lamps. We are not able to advise you on state laws and suggest that you contact the Department of Motor Vehicles in states where you intend to market the device.

If you have further questions, you may call Taylor Vinson of this Office at 202-366-5263.

Sincerely,
John Womack
Acting Chief Counsel
Enclosure
ref:108
d.6/16/97

ID: nht89-1.16

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 02/06/89 EST

FROM: ERIKA Z. JONES -- CHIEF COUNSEL NHTSA

TO: LEONARD M. PERKINS

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: LETTER DATED 09/07/88 FROM LEONARD M. PERKINS TO ROBERT BURNLEY -- DOT

TEXT: Dear Mr. Perkins:

Secretary Burnley has asked me to respond to your letter of September 7, 1988, with respect to your lighting device. In essence, this is a center high-mounted stop lamp, with turn signal lamps adjacent to it. You believe that high-mounted turn signals "joined with the rear window brake light should have a dramatic effect on rear and side collections", but you have been told that "this conception is at present illegal."

Paragraph S4.4 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 states that "no high-mounted stop lamp shall be combined with any other lamp or reflective device." We interpret this as prohibiting lamps or reflective devices that share a single lens or c ompartment with the center highmounted lamp. Your device shows lamp adjacent to the center highmounted lamp but not combined with it. Therefore, your device is not prohibited by that paragraph of the standard if you wish to market this device as origina l equipment. The next question to ask is whether it impairs the effectiveness of required lighting equipment (paragraph S4.1.3), principally the center stoplamp. For example, if the yellow turn signals were too bright or if the color of the turn signal were red, these lamps might "impair the effectiveness" of the center stoplamp. However, this is a determination to be made, in the first instance, by the manufacturer of the vehicle who must certify compliance with Standard No. 108.

If you wish to sell your device in the aftermarket, it is acceptable under Federal law if its installation does not adversely affect the operation of motor vehicle equipment installed in accordance with a Federal motor vehicle safety standard so that the equipment would no longer comply with the standard. Assuming that the installation does not have this effect, the legality of installing or using such a device must then be determined according to the laws of any State in which a vehicle so equipped is registered or operated, and these auxiliary lamps must

comply with any State requirements. We cannot advise you on State laws. One source of advice is the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, 4600 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, Va. 22203.

Sincerely,