ID: 86-3.22

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 05/12/86

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: The Honorable Leon E. Panetta

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

May 12, 986 The Honorable Leon E. Panetta Member, United States House of Representatives 380 Alvarado Street Monterey, California 93940 Dear Mr. Panetta: Thank you for your letter on behalf of your constituent, Mr. John Cormick of San Luis Obispo, California, regarding Federal regulations for wheelchairs on school buses. Your letter has been referred to my office for reply, since the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) administers Federal laws applying to school buses. Your constituent requested information about two sets of Federal regulation relating to school bus drivers. He first asked about any regulations issued by the Department of Justice for fingerprint checks of school bus drivers. I understand that those questions have been referred to the Justice Department for reply. His second set of concerns, which you asked us to review, pertain to regulations issued by California that permit temporary placement of wheelchairs in the aisle of school buses during operation of the vehicles. Mr. Cormick believes this is unsafe since a wheelchair might impede access from the school bus in the event of an accident and asks what effect Federal law might have on State adoption of such a regulation. As explained below, Federal law does not prohibit States from issuing a regulation for the temporary placing of wheelchairs in school bus aisles. While NHTSA has issued a number of recommendations to the States for operational requirements for school buses, States establish regulations for school bus use, such as the one described by your constituent. Mr. Cormick is thus correct in contacting State officials to express his concerns and suggestions. Since your constituent asks how Federal school bus regulations affect regulations issued by the States, I would like to begin with some background information on our school bus regulations. This agency administers two sets of regulations for school buses. The first set, issued under the authority of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, applies to the manufacture and sale of new motor vehicles and includes NHTSA's motor vehicle safety standards for new school buses. Those school bus safety standards set performance standards for various aspects of school bus safety, such as windows and windshields, fuel systems, emergency exits and seating systems. Under the Vehicle Safety Act, manufacturers of new buses must certify that their buses comply with our school bus safety standards if the vehicles are intended for carrying school children, and sellers of new school buses must ensure that complying school buses are only sold. The requirements of the Vehicle Safety Act and our school bus safety standards are Federal requirements which apply directly to school bus manufacturers and sellers and are thus not dependent on State adoption. On the other hand, the second set of regulations we have for school buses is contingent on State implementation. This set, issued under the Highway Safety Act of 1966, applies to Federal funding of State highway safety programs. Each State submits a highway safety program which is reviewed and approved by NHTSA each year. Highway Safety Program Standard No. 17, Pupil Transportation Safety (copy enclosed), contains guidelines for various aspects of pupil transportation programs including school vehicle identification, maintenance, and driver qualifications. One of its recommendations is that school bus drivers meet all special physical, mental and moral requirements established by the State agency having responsibility for pupil transportation. Since States set the procedures for selecting school bus drivers, State officials would be able to provide Mr. Cormick with more information about California's policies governing school bus driver selection and examination. Because we regulate the manufacture and sale of new school buses and not their use, we would have no authority to prohibit school bus users from placing wheelchairs in aisles of school buses. Further, no recommendations for accommodating wheelchairs in school buses have been made in Program Standard No. 17. However, we are concerned about practices that might affect the safety provided by school buses (such as impeding access to school bus exits) and we encourage States to ensure that school children are transported in the safest possible manner. Mr. Cormick's school district might want to consider using school buses that have seating positions specially modified to accommodate students in wheelchairs. Those vehicles have wheelchair positions to which wheelchairs can be firmly secured, which provides safer accommodations to all occupants of the school bus. Please contact me if you or your constituent have any further questions. Sincerely, Original Signed By Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel Enclosure cc: Washington Office

ID: 86-3.23

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 05/12/86

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Ms. Mary Fulton

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

May 12, 1986 Ms. Mary Fulton Willas USA 8933 Quartz Avenue Northridge, California 91324 Dear Ms. Fulton: This is in reply to your letter of March 24, 1986, enclosing a brochure on your new product "TaleLights," and asking our "opinion of the product's legal standing." The brochure describes TaleLights as a "multi-message signboard" which is mounted "in the same rear window area where the new mandatory 'extra' brakelights are placed." TaleLights features automatically-activated messages such as "STOP," and manually activated ones such as "OOPS! SORRY." The Federal requirements for motor vehicle lighting (Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108) presently cover aftermarket lighting equipment only to the extent that it is intended to replace lighting equipment that is originally installed on a vehicle in compliance with Standard No. 108. We assume from your brochure that your product is intended for installation in vehicles not originally equipped with center high-mounted stop lamps, and under this assumption, your aftermarket product would not be covered by our requirements. It is, however, subject to the laws of each State in which it is to be sold and operated, and we suggest that you contact the motor vehicle administrators of States where you intend to market TaleLights. Your lamp is not an acceptable substitute for a center high-mounted stop lamp and it would be a violation of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act for a dealer, distributor, manufacturer, or motor vehicle repair business to remove a center high-mounted stop lamp and to replace it with TaleLights. Sincerely, Original Signed By Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

ID: 86-3.24

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 05/16/86

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Takeshi Tanuma

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. Takeshi Tanuma Nissan Research & Development, Inc. P.O. Box 8650 Ann Arbor, MI 48104

Dear Mr. Tanuma:

Thank you for your letter of February 5, 1986 (ref. W-141-H), concerning the application of Standard No. 201, Occupant Crash Protection in Interior Impact, to an inside door "pull-handle." You explained that the pull-handle is made of unpadded plastic and does not have a hard inside frame. The drawing provided in your letter shows that the pull-handle is 7.44 inches (186 mm) long, 1.12 inches (28 mm) wide, and projects 1.09 inches (27 mm) from the side of the door. I hope that the following discussion answers your questions.

You first asked if the armrest requirements of S3.5 of the standard would apply to the pull-handle if it is located within the pelvic impact area of either the front or rear passenger door. In determining whether the requirements of S3.5 apply to a structure, the agency has looked at the design and location of the structure to determine whether it is an armrest (See, for example, the agency's interpretation letter of September 21, 1983, to Mr. Suzuki of your company.). In this case, the pull-handle projects far enough from the side of the door so that it could be used to rest the arm. Further, if the pull-handle were located in the pelvic impact area, it is likely to be used to rest the arm. Thus, we would consider such a pull-handle located in the pelvic impact area to be an armrest which must meet the requirements of S3.5 of the standard.

You also asked if the pull-handle would have to meet the requirements of S3.5 of the standard if it were located outside of the pelvic impact area at the upper portion of the door. In a conversation with Mr. Oesch of my staff, Mr. Hayaski explained that the pull-handle would probably be located near the rearmost edge of the door. In this case, it appears that the pull-handle would be positioned above and to the rear of where occupants would normally be expected to rest their arms. Thus, we would not consider a pull-handle located in the upper portion of the door and near the door's rear edge to be an armrest.

If you have any further questions, please let me know.

Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

February 5, 1986 Ref : W-141-H

Ms. Erika Jones Chief Counsel National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 400 7th St., S.W. Washington, D.C. 20590

Dear Ms. Jones:

Re: REQUEST FOR INTERPRETATION - FMVSS 201, "OCCUPANT PROTECTION IN INTERIOR IMPACT"

On behalf of Nissan Motor Co., Ltd. of Tokyo, Japan, Nissan Research & Development, Inc. herewith requests interpretation regarding the applicability of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 201, "Occupant Protection in Interior Impact," to an inside door "pull-handle" as shown below.

(Please insert graphics)

Material Description :

- Plastic, unpadded - Without any hard (for example, metal) inside frame

Question 1.

If such a small handle is located within the "Pelvic Impact Area" of the door of either the front or rear passenger areas, is Section 3.5 of FMVSS 201 (the armrest requirement) applicable to this kind of feature?

ID: 86-3.25

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 05/16/86

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Earl J. Ogletree; John Gaski -- Harley Products Inc.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. Earl J. Ogletree Mr. John Gaski Harley Products Inc. 904 S Prospect Avenue Park Ridge, IL 60068 Dear Mr. Ogletree and Mr. Gaski: Thank you for your letter of March 28, 1986, asking how our regulations would affect a product you intend to manufacture both as an aftermarket item of motor vehicle equipment and as an item of original equipment on some vehicles imported into this country. You described the product as a sun visor that clips onto a vehicle's regular visor. You further explained that the sun visor has an extension arm that allows the visor to be moved to filter out the sun coming in through the window to the left of the driver, or moved below the original equipment visor or between the two original equipment visors. I hope the following discussion explains how our regulations affect your proposed visor.

Some background information on how Federal motor vehicle safety laws and regulations affect your product may be helpful. Our agency is authorized, under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, to issue safety standards applicable to new motor vehicles and certain items of motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA, however, does not approve motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment, nor do we endorse any commercial products. Instead, the Vehicle Safety Act establishes a "self-certification" process under which each manufacturer is responsible for certifying that its products meet all applicable safety standards. The agency periodically tests vehicles and equipment items for compliance with the standards, and also investigates alleged safety-related defects. As explained below, installation of your proposed sun visor in new and used vehicles would be affected by our regulations. In addition, any manufacturer of motor vehicle equipment is subject to the requirements of the Vehicle Safety Act concerning the recall and remedy of products with noncompliances or defects related to motor vehicle safety.

We have issued Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 205, Glazing Materials, which specifies performance and location requirements for glazing used in vehicles. These requirements include specifications for minimum levels of light transmittance (708 in areas requisite for driving visibility, which includes all windows in passenger cars).

No manufacturer or dealer is permitted to install solar films and other sun screen devices, such as the sun visors described in your letter, in new vehicles without certifying that the vehicle continues to be in compliance with the light transmittance and other requirements of the standard.

After a vehicle is first sold to a consumer, modifications to a vehicle are affected by section 108(a)(2)(A) of the Vehicle Safety Act. That section prohibits commercial businesses from tampering with safety equipment installed on a vehicle in compliance with our standards. Thus, no dealer, manufacturer, repair business or distributor can install a sun screen device for the owner of the vehicle, if the device would cause the window not to meet the requirements of Standard No 205. Violation of section 108(a)(2)(A) can result in Federal civil penalties of up to $1,000 for each violation.

Section 108(a)(2)(A) does not affect vehicle owners, who may themselves alter their vehicles as they please, so long as they adhere to all State requirements. Under Federal law, the owner may install sun screening devices regardless of whether the installation adversely affects the light transmittance. However, the agency encourages vehicle owners not to install devices which could impair their vision and thus adversely affect safety. Individual States govern the operational use of vehicles by their owners and therefore it is within the authority of the States to preclude owners from using sun screens in their vehicles.

If you need further information, please let me know.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

LEGAL COUNSEL NHTSB U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ROOM 5219 400 7TH STREET S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20590

DEAR SIR/MS:

I AM REQUESTING A RULING OR INFORMATION ON THE U.S. GOVERNMENTS POSITION ON THE LEGALITY OF MANUFACTURING AND SELLING A NEW TYPE OF SUN VISOR* FOR USE ON AUTOMOBILES IN THE AFTER SALE MARKET IN THE U.S. ALSO WE ARE PLANNING TO INCORPORATE THE NEW SUN VISOR AS ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT ON AUTOMOBILES MANUFACTURED IN KOREA WHICH WILL BE SOLD IN THE U.S. SOLD.

* THE NEW SUN VISOR CLIPS ONTO THE AUTOMOBILES' REGULAR VISOR. WHAT MAKES THE NEW SUN VISOR DIFFERENT IS THAT THE TINTED SUN VISOR CAN BE MOVED TO FILTER OUT THE SUN VIA AN EXTENSION ARM THAT HOLDS THE TINTED SUN VISOR WITHOUT MOVING THE REGULAR OR ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT VISOR. WITH THE NEW SUN VISOR ONE CAN FILTER OUT THE SUN AT THE LEFT SIDE DOOR WINDOW, BELOW THE ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT VISOR AND BETWEEN THE TWO ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT VISORS.

PLEASE ADVISE US AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS A FEDERAL ISSUE OR PROBLEM.

SINCERELY, EARL J. OGLETREE AND JOHN GASKI

ID: 86-3.26

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 05/17/86

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Yueh-An Chen

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Yueh-Am Chen Division Head Planning Division Yue Loong Motor Company, Ltd. P.O. Box 510 Taoyuan Taiwan 330 Republic of China

Dear Sir:

This is in reply to your letter of January 23, 1986, asking questions about features of motor vehicle headlighting systems.

Your first question is "to which regulations the headlamp assembly unit should be conformed, if this model is to be exported to U.S.A." The regulation that applies to motor vehicle headlighting assemblies is Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment. Its official citation is Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations Section 571.108. Standard No. 108 incorporates various materials of the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) pertaining to headlamps, such as photometric performance.

With respect to sealed beam headlamps, you have asked whether "it is necessary for us to set the aiming adjust device in front of the lamp unit, i.e. the aiming can be adjusted outside the vehicle?" The standard requires that all headlamps, whether sealed beam or not, must be capable of mechanical aim, that is to say, with an aiming device placed in front of the lamp unit without the removal of any vehicle parts. However, the actual aim adjustment device such as a screw or knob may be located anywhere.

With respect to replaceable bulb headlamps, you have asked whether there is any regulation "regarding the maximum degree of the inclination" of the lens, such as a 20 degree maximum. No, there is no regulatory limitation. However, the headlamp must comply with the minimum photometric requirements of Standard No. 108 with the lens in its design position, and it must be mechanically aimable using equipment designed to interface with the three aiming pads required to be located on the headlamp lens. The degree to which inclination may be limited is influenced by the design of mechanical aiming equipment available in the field for aim inspection and aiming. Consequently, you should contact manufacturers of such equipment to be sure that your headlamps are designed to be mechanically aimable as required by law.

You have also asked if there is any regulation regarding the necessity of putting on or off the headlamp unit outside the vehicle, i.e. do not need to open hood." No, there is no such U.S. regulation.

Finally, you have asked "If a headlamp unit can satisfy the photometric requirements of the SAP, but a small area of the lens is shaded by the other part of the vehicle" is such a configuration permissible. The answer is yes, as long as the headlamp unit can satisfy the photometric requirements as shaded by that part of the vehicle, and as long as any replacement headlamp units produced by you or others can also meet the photometric requirements in the shaded location.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

January 23, 1986

NHTSA 400 Seventh St., S.W. Washington, D.C. 20590 U.S.A.

Dear Sir,

We are the largest automobile manufacturer in Taiwan, R.O.C. In order to make our newly designed model satisfy the U.S.A. regulation, we are now confronted by some troubles in the part of headlight system. If it is possible, please provide us with the following informations:

1. To which regulations the headlamp assembly unit should be conformed, if this model is to be exported to U.S.A.

2. If adopting sealed beam headlamp unit, is it necessary for us to set the aiming adjust device in front of the lamp unit, i.e., the aiming can be adjusted outside the vehicle?

3. If adopting replaceable-bulb headlamp unit, not sealed beam, is there any regulation regarding the maximum degree of the inclination of glass lense, e.g., must be less than 20o (inclination degree (A) as showed in Fig)?

4. Is there any regulation regarding the necessary of putting on or off the headlamp unit outside the vehicle, i.e., do not need to open the hood:

5. If a headlamp unit can satisfy the photometric requirements of the SAE, but a small area of the lens is shaded by the other part of the vehicle, then, could it pass the regulations or not?

Your kind assistance and earliest reply will be highly appreciated.

Sincerely yours,

Yueh-An Chen Division Head Planning Division

ID: 86-3.27

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 05/17/86

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Jon F. Gasper

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. Jon F. Gasper Box 13 Fairbury, NE 68352

Dear Mr. Gasper:

This is in reply to Your letter of January 21, 1986, to the Office of Standards Enforcement of this agency with respect to the applicability of Federal regulations to "a kit car, especially a turn key unit".

For purposes of discussion, I shall assume that a "turn key" kit car is one that is assembled by the kit car supplier before its sale or delivery, even though it may also be available in kit form. If a person is manufacturing or supplying all parts necessary to produce a completed motor vehicle, and all those parts are newly fabricated, that motor vehicle must comply upon assembly with all Federal motor vehicle safety standards that apply to its vehicle type (e.g. passenger car, truck). In this situation, the kit supplier is regarded as the "manufacturer" responsible for compliance, and for attaching a certification label to the vehicle attesting to its compliance. If final assembly is performed by a person other than the kit supplier, the supplier nonetheless under agency interpretations must provide a certification label in the kit, and instructions sufficient to inform the assembler what must be done so that the vehicle conforms to Federal requirements when it is assembled.

If the "turn key" kit car is assembled using the chassis of a motor vehicle previously in use, and which is likely to retain its original title, then it is regarded as a "used vehicle". A familiar example of this type of vehicle is one comprising a new body placed upon the chassis of a Volkswagen Beetle. If the chassis has been purchased without the body, no Federal motor vehicle safety standards will apply to the vehicle upon its completion, nor will it have to be certified. However, if the operation entails removal of the old body and the installation of a new one, and the person removing the body (if a manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business) is the person installing the new one, he must ensure that the reassembled vehicle continues to comply with standards effective upon its original manufacture (for example, a vehicle comprised of a 1986 body mounted upon a 1972 chassis must meet all applicable 1972 safety standards). A few individual parts such as tires, glazing, brake hoses, brake fluid, lighting equipment, and seat belt assemblies are subject to standards at the time of their manufacture and must comply regardless of the age of the vehicle for which they are intended (for example, the windshield in the 1986/1972 hybrid must meet the 1986 glazing standard if it is newly manufactured, but meet only the 1972 safety standard on windshield retention).

There are some fact situations in which combinations of new and used parts different than those discussed above are used, and for which no general answer applies. However, I hope that this letter has been sufficiently clear to provide an answer for you.

Finally, a manufacturer of vehicles or equipment items will be responsible for notification of purchasers and remedy of any safety related defect or noncompliance with a Federal motor vehicle safety standard that exists in its products.

Sincerely,

Original Signed By

Erika Z. Jones

Chief Counsel

cc (NEF 30) Armstrong/Shifflett

ID: 86-3.28

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 05/21/86

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Ivan Chien -- President, Friendship Over Water, Inc.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

May 21, 1986 Mr. Ivan Chien President Friendship Over Water, Inc. 8F-6, No. 9, San-Min Road Taipei, Taiwan REPUBLIC OF CHINA Dear Mr. Chien: This responds to your letter seeking information about our requirements applicable to "hub covers and wheel covers". The only applicable requirement for those items is set forth in Standard No. 211, Wheel Nuts, Wheel Discs, and Hub Caps (49 CFR 571.211; copy enclosed. That standard specifies that wheel nuts, hub caps, and wheel discs for use on passenger cars and multipurpose passenger cars and multipurpose passenger vehicles shall not incorporate winged projections. Hub covers and wheel covers that you manufacture for use on vehicles other than passenger cars and multipurpose passenger vehicles are not subject to any standards issued by this agency. However, as a manufacturer of hub caps and wheel covers, you incur statutory responsibilities under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1381 et seq.; "the Safety Act"), even for those hub caps and wheel covers not subject to Standard No. 211. If either your company or this agency determines that some of your wheel covers subject to Standard No. 211 do not comply with that standard or determines that any of you wheel covers contain a defect related to motor vehicle safety, you would be required to notify your distributors, dealers, and purchasers of the noncompliance or defect and remedy the noncompliance or defect. In the case of wheel covers, section 154(a)(2)(B) of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1414(a)(2)(B)) requires that, if there is a determination of a noncompliance or defect and remedy the noncompliance or defect, the manufacturer must notify distributors, dealers, and purchasers of the noncompliance or defect and must either: 1. repair the wheel cover so that the defect or noncompliance is removed; or 2. replace the wheel cover with an identical or reasonably equivalent wheel cover that does not have a defect or noncompliance. Whichever of these options is chosen, the manufacturer of the wheel covers must bear the full expense of the recall campaign and cannot charge the purchaser for the remedy if the wheel cover was first purchased less than 8 years before the notification campaign began. We have several regulations relating to defect and noncompliance notification and remedy campaigns. Those regulations are identified in the enclosed information sheet for new manufacturers of motor vehicle equipment. That sheet also gives you a broad overview of our statutory and regulatory requirements applicable to manufacturers. You also asked about obtaining necessary "approvals" before selling these products in the United States. For those items subject to Standard No. 211, NHTSA does not use a certification process similar to the European countries, in which the manufacturer delivers the products to be certified to a governmental entity and that entity tests the products to determine if they can be certified as complying with the applicable standards. Instead, in the United States the manufacturer of the product must certify that its products comply with all applicable safety standards. The manufacturer's certification need not be based on actual tests; the only requirement is that the manufacturer exercise due care in making the certification. Once you have determined that your wheel covers comply with Standard No. 211, section 114 of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1403) requires you to furnish to each of your distributors and dealers at the time of delivery of the wheel covers a certification that those wheel covers conform to all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. That section further provides that your certification "may be in the form of a label or tag on such item or on the outside of a container in which such item is delivered." You also asked how you apply for the approval of the SAE, AAMVA, and CHP. The Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) is a private group that issues recommended practices for the design and performance of motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment. You are not required by the Vehicle Safety Act to obtain the approval of SAE prior to marketing your products in the United States. You obtain information about the SAE standards by contacting that group at the following address: Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc., 400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096, USA. The group may be contacted by telephone at (412) 776-4841. Various States may also have requirements concerning wheel covers. However, section 103(d) of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1392(d)) provides that "(w)henever a Federal motor vehicle safety standard established under this title is in effect, no State or political subdivision of a State shall have any authority to establish, or to continue in effect, with respect to any motor vehicle or time of motor vehicle equipment, any safety standard applicable to the same aspect of performance of such safety standard applicable to the same aspect of performance of such vehicle or item of equipment which is not identical to the Federal standard. Nothing in this section shall be construed as preventing any State from enforcing any safety standard which is identical to a Federal safety standard." Thus, any non-identical State safety standard covering the same aspect of performance as Standard No. 211 would be preempted by the provisions of the Safety Act, making it leagally unenforceable. States do have authority to enforce identical standards related to the same aspect of performance as Standard No. 211, and some may exercise that authority. To learn more about this issue, you should contact the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, 1201 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Suite 910, Washington, D.C. 20036, USA. Their telephone number is (202) 296-1955. The Department of California Highway Patrol may be contacted at the following address: Enforcement Services Division, P.O. Box 898, Sacramento, CA 95804, USA. Their telephone number is (916) 445-1865. For your information, I an enclosing copies of two procedural rules that apply to all parties subject to the standards and regulations of this agency. The first is 49 CFR Part 566, Manufacturer Identification. This requires each manufacturer of motor vehicle equipment subject to one of our safety standards to submit its name, address, and a brief description of the items of motor vehicle equipment it manufactures to this agency within 30 days of the date the motor vehicle equipment is imported into the United States. The other regulation is 49 CFR Part 551, Procedural Rules. This regulation requires all manufacturers of motor vehicle equipment headquartered outside of the United States to designate a permanent resident of the United States as the manufacturer's agent for service of process in this country. Part 551 specifies that the designation of agent must contain the following six items of information: 1. A certification that the designation is valid in form and binding on the manufacturer under the laws, corporate by-laws, or other requirements governing the making of the designation at the time and place where it is made; 2. The full legal name, principal place of business, and mailing address of the manufacturer; 3. Marks, trade names, or other designations of origin of any of the manufacturer's products that do not bear its name; 4. A statement that the designation shall remain in effect until withdrawn or replaced by the manufacturer; 5. A declaration of acceptance duly signed by the agent appointed by the manufacturer, and that agent may be an individual, firm, or U.S. corporation; and 6. The full legal name and address of the designated agent. This designation must be received by this agency before your wheel covers are imported into the United States. If you need further information or a clarification of our regulations, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Original Signed By Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel Enclosures

ID: 86-3.29

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 05/24/86

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Mr. T. Chikada

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

March 24, 1986 Mr. T. Chikada Manager, Automotive Lighting Engineering Control Dept. Stanley Electric Co., Ltd. 2-9-13, Nakameguro, Meguro-ku Tokyo 153, Japan Dear Mr. Chikada: This is in reply to your letter of January 9, 1986, telling of your development of a center high-mounted stop lamp which would utilize light-emitting diodes (LEDs) as a light source, rather than a light source incorporating a tungsten filament. You have asked whether such a device would be permissible under Standard No. 108. In support of your argument that such a light-producing device would be acceptable, you have brought to our attention paragraph S4.1.1.19 which allows a lamp manufacturer to use "bulbs" that are not listed in SAE Information Report J387 Jul83 is appropriate. The SAE defines a "bulb" as "an indivisible assembly which contains a source of light and which is normally used in a lamp." In further support of your position, you have submitted a summary of test results indication that your LED stop lamp meets all applicable requirements of Standard No. 108, except for S4.1.1.41(e). That subparagraph requires the lamp to "provide access for convenient replacement of the bulb without the use of special tools." We have reviewed your request, and have the following comments. As you have pointed out, Standard No. 108 does not define a "bulb," but we interpret that word in a manner similar to the SAE, that it refers to a photometric performance requirements of Standard No. 108, and you have indicated that your LD4ED lamp complies with these requirements. However, your LED lamp must also meet the requirements of S4.1.1.41(e). Access must be provided for convenient replacement, without use of special tools, of either the individual clusters of LEDs which burn out or the entire lamp. If your lamp is designed so that it meets S4.1.1.41(e) in one of these two ways, then your lamp would appear to be acceptable under Standard No. 108. Sincerely, Original Signed By Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

ID: 86-3.3

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 05/01/86

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Elizabeth Hanford Dole; NHTSA

TO: William von Raab -- Commissioner of Customs, U.S. Customs Service

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. William von Raab The Commissioner of Customs United States Customs Service 1301 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, D,C. 20229

This responds to your letter suggesting a potential enforcement problem with the new Federal motor vehicle theft prevention standard promulgated by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). As you noted, the Customs Service will be the agency responsible for enforcing the provisions in the theft prevention standard requiring subject vehicles and parts to be properly marked and certified before they are imported into the United States. You stated that it was essential that the Customs Service be provided a list of "authorized individuals or companies which have been found by (the Department of Transportation) to possess the capability and integrity to properly certify imported vehicles and parts." Accordingly, you requested that we provide you with such a list. The Department of Transportation does not authorize individuals or companies to engage in the business of importing and modifying vehicles. Therefore, we cannot provide you with a list such as you requested.

This issue arises primarily with respect to "direct importers". These direct importers are individuals and commercial enterprises that obtain foreign cars not originally manufactured for sale in the United States, bring them into this country under bond, and modify the cars so that they can be certified as being in compliance with the U.S. vehicle safety, emissions, and bumper standards. This is commonly referred to as the automotive "gray market". The statutes mandating the Federal safety, emissions, and bumper standards (15 U.S.C. 1397(b)(3), 42 U.S.C. 7522(b)(2), and 15 U.S.C. 1916(b)(3)) explicitly authorize vehicles not in compliance to be brought into this country under bond. However, the Theft Act (15 U.S.C. 2021 et seq.) contains no such provision. Therefore, direct importers must modify all their subject vehicles to comply with the theft prevention standard before the vehicles are imported, and must certify that the vehicles are in compliance at the time of entry.

You stated in your letter that the theft prevention standard could be read to allow any person to certify compliance of an imported vehicle with the standard and that the Customs Service would have no way to judge the authenticity of the certification or the "ability of the party to certify to compliance at the time of importation." You suggested that vehicles and parts could be imported without being properly marked, if Customs had to accept the certification of any person importing such vehicles or parts.

We do not believe that reliance on the importers' certifications will cause the enforcement problems you fear. If subject vehicles or parts bear a certification that complies with the requirements of the theft prevention standard, the Customs Service should allow those vehicles or parts to be imported. NHTSA enforcement personnel will conduct spot checks of the direct importers' vehicles and parts. If we discover that some direct importers are certifying compliance with the theft prevention standard without actually marking in accordance with that standard, we will take appropriate enforcement actions. We expect these actions will help deter any direct importers or other manufacturers who are tempted to falsely certify compliance with the theft prevention standard.

Although we share your concern that all authorized manufacturers and importers of motor vehicles comply with the theft prevention standard, we have no authority to require any person or entity to register with the Department of Transportation and show a capability to comply with the standard before importing a vehicle. We do currently collect information about importers after they have imported a vehicle, as does the Customs Service. However, the fact that a potential importer has not previously imported a vehicle has no legal significance for our enforcement efforts.

I appreciate your concern for the effective enforcement of our theft prevention standard. Please feel free to contact me if you have any further suggestions or ideas in this regard.

Sincerely,

Original Signed By Elizabeth Hanford Dole

Dear Secretary Dole:

I am writing with respect to the recently issued regulations from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration implementing the Motor Vehicle Theft Law Enforcement Act of 1984, 50 Fed. Reg. 43166 (October 24, 1985). As you may be aware, the Customs Service is developing regulations for the implementation of the export provisions of the Act as it applies to motor vehicle exports. In addition, the Service is also directed to enforce the import restriction set forth in the Act and implemented by the October 24, 1985 Federal Register notice. I want to direct your attention to a potential enforcement problem which has been brought to my attention with respect to the final regulations issued by NHTSA.

The regulations as issued can be read to allow any person to place a certification label for vehicle identification marking on an imported vehicle. If this is the Department of Transportation's interpretation, the Customs Service will have no basis for judging the authenticity of the certification or the ability of the party to certify to compliance at the time of importation. This raises a significant enforcement issue within the Service. If the Service must accept the certification of any person importing a vehicle or parts, these items may in fact be imported without being properly marked in accordance with the statute. If, however, a list of parties who have the ability to certify compliance can be established and utilized by the Customs Service to approve imported vehicles and parts, the Service could, as it does today, spot check the individuals on this list and carefully check for possible exclusion any other importers. We believe, from an enforcement standpoint, to carry out the purposes of the Motor Vehicle Theft Act that it is essential that the Service have a list of authorized individuals or companies which have been found by your Department to possess the capability and integrity to properly certify imported vehicles and parts.

In order to assure effective enforcement of the Act's regulations, I would appreciate receiving a listing identifying those parties who are authorized to certify compliance as soon as possible so we may proceed with our implementation plans and instructions to the field in a timely fashion.

Yours faithfully,

The Honorable Elizabeth Hanford Dole Secretary of Transportation 400 Seventh Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20590

ID: 86-3.30

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 05/27/86

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Karl-Heinz Faber, Vice President

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Karl-Heinz Faber, Vice President Product Compliance and Service Mercedes-Benz of North America, Inc. One Mercedes Drive, P.O. BoX 350 Montvale, NJ 07645

Dear Mr. Faber:

This responds to your letter addressed to Mr. Barry Felrice concerning Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 101, Controls and Displays, and use of the "fanfare" symbol. According to your letter, all Mercedes-Benz passenger cars are provided with a horn that when activated produces an audible tone. The control for so activating the horn is located in the steering wheel hub. In addition to the standard horn, your company also offers an optional system on some models which permits the driver to choose either the standard tone or a higher frequency tone by means of a dash-board-mounted rocker switch. The rocker switch is identified by the fanfare symbol. The audible tone selected is then produced by activating the horn control in the steering wheel in the usual manner. This letter confirms that the use of the fanfare symbol for the rocker switch described above is permissible under Standard No. 101.

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 and equipment meet applicable safety standards. The following represents our opinion based on the facts provided in your letter.

Standard No. 101 requires that vehicles with any control listed in the standard must meet specified requirements for the location, identification and illumination of such control. See section S5. Among the controls listed in Standard No. 101 is the 'horn' control. See section S5.1 and column 1 of Table 1.

It is our opinion that the "horn" control referred to by Standard No. 101 is limited to that which activates the horn to produce an audible tone. Thus, a separate rocker switch which permits the driver to choose different tones but does not activate the horn to produce an audible tone is not considered to be a "horn" control within the meaning of Standard No. 101. Since a control of this type is not otherwise covered by Standard No. 101 or any other standard, the identification of the control is at the option of the manufacturer.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel