ID: 86-3.50

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 06/23/86 EST

FROM: ERIKA Z. JONES -- CHIEF COUNSEL NHTSA

TO: RUDY VALDEZ -- PRODUCT MANAGER; GASKET COMPANY

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: LETTER DATED 05/01/86, TO NHTSA, FROM RUDY VALDEZ, OCC- 0618

TEXT: Dear Mr. Valdez:

This is in reply to your letter of May 1, 1986, with reference to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment.

Your first question concerns the legality of an aftermarket splash guard installed behind the rear wheels which would incorporate a decorative light; the illustration you enclose shows the word "Ford" illuminated. Although the lighting equipment that is required by Standard No. 108 must be located on a rigid part of the vehicle, there is no such requirement for aftermarket equipment such as the device that you propose. If an item of aftermarket equipment is installed before the sale of a new vehicle to its first owner, such an item is permissible under Standard No. 108 provided that it does not impair the effectiveness of the required lighting equipment, but no matter when it is installed, it would be subject to regulation by any State in which a vehicle so equipped is registered or operated. We are not familiar with State laws on this subject, and recommend that you contact the Department of Motor Vehicles in States where you intend to sell your device.

Your second question asks for information on the new center high mounted stop lamp, saying that you have seen some that do not appear to meet Federal requirements. You ask whether we will require retrofitting of vehicles. The new lamp was optional for passenger cars manufactured on or after August 1, 1984, and mandatory for those manufactured on or after September 1, 1985. The coverage of Standard No. 108 also extends to aftermarket items that are manufactured to replace original equipment center high mounted stop lamps, but there are no Federal requirements for

lamps intended for use on cars that were not originally manufactured with them. We encourage manufacturers to meet the Federal specifications as closely as possible, however, and I enclose a copy of the regulation for your information. We have no authority to require retrofitting of vehicles.

I hope that this answers your questions.

ENCLOSURE

Sincerely,

ID: 86-3.6

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 05/02/86

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: South Carolina Legislature

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

The Honorable Ralph Davenport South Carolina Legislature P.O. 1301 Spartanburg, SC 20394

Dear Mr. Davenport:

This is to follow up on your phone conversation with Stephen Oesch of my staff concerning the effect of Federal regulations on the tinting of motor vehicle windows. I hope the following discussion answers your questions.

Some background information on how Federal motor vehicle safety laws and regulations affect the tinting of vehicle windows 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. 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 (70% in areas requisite for driving visibility, which includes all windows in passenger cars).

You first asked if the Federal motor vehicle safety standards apply to foreign vehicles sold in the United States. As with all our standards, Standard No. 205 applies to any new vehicle, whether made by a foreign or domestic company, manufactured for sale in the United States. Thus, no manufacturer or dealer is permitted to install solar films and other sun screen devices in new vehicles without certifying that the vehicle continues to be in compliance with the light transmittance and other requirements of the standard. Violation of Standard No. 205 can result in Federal civil penalties of up to $1,000 for each violation. In addition, a manufacturer of a vehicle that does not comply with our standards is required to remedy any noncompliances in its vehicles.

You also asked how Federal law affects businesses that tinted the windows of used vehicles. 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 100(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. Thus, under Federal law, the owner may install sun screening devices regardless of whether the installation adversely affects the light transmittance, However, the agency recommends that vehicle owners not install materials that would 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,

Original Signed By

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

ID: 86-3.7

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 05/02/86

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Gordon T. Germain; NHTSA

TO: Gordon T. Germain, Esq.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Gordon T. Germain, Esq. Bertram & Germain P.O. Box 132 Monticello, Kentucky 42633

Dear Mr. Germain:

We regret the delay in responding to Your January 1, 1986 letter to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) concerning the applicability of Federal law to the modification of used vans. You explained that in 1980, used 1971 model year vans were purchased by the Wayne County School Board and converted by the Wayne County's school systems into school vehicles. You asked whether Federal law applies to the conversion of the used vehicles by the school systems. As explained below, the answer to your question is no.

Before I begin, I would like to emphasize that our comments relate only to our interpretation of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act from our vantage point as a Federal enforcement agency. This letter explains how our requirements apply to the situation you present and is an opinion on compliance with Safety Act provisions. It does not address the manner in which violations of Safety Act provisions affect private litigation. Such an issue would be a matter for state courts to determine.

The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1381 et seq.), which authorizes NHTSA to issue safety standards applicable to the manufacture and sale of new motor vehicles, includes a limitation on the modification of safety systems installed on used motor vehicles pursuant to those standards, Section 108(a)(2)(A) provides, in part, that:

No manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business shall knowingly render inoperative, in whole or part, any device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment in compliance with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard. . . .

Thus, the applicability of section 108(a)(2)(A) depends in part on the identity of the person converting the vans. That section applies only to the aforementioned commercial-type businesses modifying used vehicles. It does not apply to an owner, such as a state or a school, which

January 7, 1986

Chief Counsel of Erika Z. Jones Office of Chief Counsel N. H. T. S. A. Room 5219 NOA-30 400 7th Street, SW Washington, DC 20590

Dear Ms. Jones:

If you would, please accept this letter as an inquiry for a certified copy of an opinion as to the application of the traffic and motor vehicle safety regulations applicable to a school system purchasing used vans and converting them to use as school buses.

In 1980, the Wayne County School Board purchased used 1971 telephone vans from General Telephone. The school system then took the vans and converted them for use as school buses. My question is whether any of the Federal traffic and motor vehicle safety regulations or standards would apply to the school board in the conversion of these vans. If there are applicable Federal statutes, codes or safety standards, I would appreciate knowing which ones would apply. If no Federal statute, regulation or standard applies, I would appreciate an opinion as to the exemption of the school system from the application.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

Gordon T. Germain

GTG/jj

ID: 86-3.8

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 05/02/86

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: E. Brooks Harper -- General Manager, Backstop, Inc.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. E. Brooks Harper General Manager Backstop, Inc. 240 Pegasus Avenue Northvale, NJ 07647

This responds to your letter asking whether installation of your touch sensitive reverse braking system called "Backstop" on an air brake vehicle would conflict with any Federal motor vehicle safety standards or regulations. According to your letter, Backstop is plumbed into the vehicle air brake system and wired to the back up light circuit. The system is activated only when reverse gear is engaged and works by instantly applying the vehicle brakes when the rear bumper is touched while reversing. Shifting to neutral or a forward gear returns the system to normal braking.

By way of background information, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act places the responsibility on the manufacturer to certify that its vehicles or equipment comply with applicable requirements. The following represents our opinion based on the facts provided in your letter and is limited to the standards and regulations administered by NHTSA. You may wish to contact the Bureau of Motor Carrier Safety (BMCS) concerning whether any of its regulations are relevant to the installation of Backstop.

NHTSA does not have any regulations covering a touch sensitive reverse braking system such as Backstop. However, since installation of Backstop requires plumbing into the vehicle's air brake system and wiring into the vehicle's backup light circuit, it is possible that it could affect a vehicle's compliance with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) No. 121, Air Brake Systems, and Ko. 108, Lamps( reflective devices, and associated equipment. For example, your letter states that a delay of four milliseconds is introduced to the air brake system response by the insertion of the double check valve in the control line. While this delay is very small, it could conceivably affect a vehicle's compliance with the timing requirements of sections S5.3.3 and S5.3.4 of FMVSS No. 121 if the vehicle otherwise was at the edge of compliance. He suggest that you carefully consider whether installation of Backstop in the variety of current vehicles and vehicle configurations would affect compliance with the requirements or FMVSS No. 121 or any other Federal motor vehicle safety standard.

If your device is added to a new motor vehicle prior to its first sale, the person who modified the vehicle would be an alterer of a previously certified motor vehicle and would be required to certify that, as altered, the vehicle continues to comply with the safety standards affected by the alteration. The specific certification requirements for alterers are set forth at 49 CFR Part 567.7, Certification. On the other hand, you as the manufacturer of Backstop would have no certification responsibilities, because we have no safety standards applicable to your equipment. However, an alterer would probably require information from you in order to make the necessary certification.

If your device is installed on a used vehicle by a business such as a garage, the installer would not be required to attach a certification label. However, it would have to make sure that it did not knowingly render inoperative the compliance of the vehicle with any safety standard. This in required by section 108(a)(2)(A) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act.

Should a safety-related defect be discovered in your device, whether by the agency or yourself, you as the manufacturer would be required under sections 151 et seq. of the Act to notify vehicle owners, purchasers, and dealers and provide a remedy for the defect.

Sincerely,

Original Signed By

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

December 3, 1985

Ms. Erika Jones/Chief Counsel National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 400 Seventh Street, S. W. Washington, D.C. 20590

Dear Ms. Jones:

The purpose of this letter is to request an interpretation as to whether or not the installation of a BACKSTOP system on an air brake vehicle would conflict with any federal motor vehicle safety standards or regulations.

BACKSTOP is s touch sensitive reverse braking system for air brake vehicles. It is marketed to truck, bus, and other heavy vehicle operators for the purpose of increasing safety and reducing property damage (see enclosed brochure).

BACKSTOP is plumbed into the vehicle air brake system and wired to the back up light circuit according to the enclosed diagram. The BACKSTOP system is activated only when reverse gear is engaged and works by instantly applying the vehicle brakes when the rear bumper is touched while reversing. Shifting to neutral or a forward gear returns the system to normal braking.

Our tests show that an insignificant delay of four (C) milliseconds is introduced to the air brake system response by the insertion of the double check valve in the control line (refer to enclosed test data). Failure of the BACKSTOP system in any way would not compromise the normal performance of the vehicles original air brake system.

Based on the tests we have performed, discussions with vehicle manufacturer brake system engineers, and our known knowledge of air brake systems, we state that installation of the BACKSTOP system on an air brake vehicle does not degrade that vehicles' compliance with any applicable federal motor vehicle safety standards or regulations.

We request that your office acknowledge our position pith respect to installation of the BACKSTOP system on air brake vehicles.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

BACKSTOP INC.

E. Brooks Harper General Manager

EBH/gm Enclosure

cc: Mr. Duane E. Perrin/NHTSA

November 15, 1985

45 BUDD TRAILER

SEALCO VALVES 30" BRAKE CHAMBERS AUTOMATIC SLACK ADJUSTERS

TEMPERATURE 54 SUPPLY PSI 120 SERVICE CHAMBER PSI 60 ----------------------------------------------------------------TO TEST EFFECT OF TWO WAY CHECK VALVE IN SERVICE LINE OF AIR BRAKE SYSTEM ----------------------------------------------------------------

TWO 2400 CUBIC INCH TANKS -ONE ON SERVICE, ONE ON SUPPLY. BOTH AT 120 PSI. THREE WAY AIR SOLENOID ON SERVICE WITH AN ON SWITCH TO START CLOCK AND OPEN TANK. A SHUT OFF SWITCH ON SERVICE CHAMBER WHEN 60 PSI IS REACHED TO SHUT OFF CLOCK.

WITH VALVE IN SERVICE LINE WITH NO VALVE IN SERVICE LINE

293 288

293 290

293 291

293 292

294 290

294 290

293 288

293 287 ----------------- 2346 2316 Average -293.25 ms. Average 289.5 ms.

ID: 86-4.1

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 06/25/86

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Roger Pezzulich

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. Roger Pezzulich Parts Mgr. Friendly Honda House 549 Dutchess TurnPike Poughkeepsie, N.Y. 12603

Dear Mr. Pezzulich:

This is in reply to Your letter of April 2B, 1986, to Mr. Vinson of this Office pointing out that a center high-mounted stop lamp may be obscured when a luggage rack is in use, and asking for the legal ramifications involved in such use.

Compliance with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment, under which such lamps are now mandatory on new passenger cars, is judged with the luggage rack in place, but not in use. We are not aware of any State restrictions on use of a luggage rack if it would interfere with the output from a center high-mounted stop lamp.

You may have noted that the lamp is placed between the rack and the deck on the rear of some cars on which racks have been installed as standard equipment, and not behind the rack in the parcel shelf area. This appears to be an effective solution to the problem posed by luggage racks.

I hope that this answers your question.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

Mr. Taylor Vinson April 28, 1986 Legal Council Room 5214 N.H.T.S.A.

U.S. Dept. of Transportation 400 7th Street S.W. Washington, D.C. 20590

Dear Mr. Vinson,

This letter is in regard to a legal matter that has been brought to my attention. I am the Parts Manager at a Honda dealership located in Poughkeepsie, New York. One of the accessories offered with our car is a luggage rack that mounts to the trunk of the vehicle. Now, with the new requirement of a 3rd brake light in the rear window, any luggage stored in this rack would obstruct the view of this light.

I would like to know what, if any, are the legal ramifications involved in the use of this luggage rack.

Thank you for your time and help in this matter.

Very truly yours, Roger Pezzulich Parts Mgr.

Very truly yours,

Roger Pezzulich Parts Mgr.

ID: 86-4.10

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 07/09/86

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Rolf Seiferheld

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Service & Technical Bitter Automobile of America, Inc. 401 Willowbrook Lane West Chester, PA 19380

Dear Mr. Seiferheld:

This responds to your letter asking about 49 CFR Part 581, Bumper Standard. We apologize for the delay in our response. You stated that you are considering integrating fog-taillight assemblies in the rear bumper of a car and asked about relevant requirements. You noted in your letter that section S4.1.3 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 (49 CFR 571.108) states that "(n)o additional lamp, reflective device, or other motor vehicle equipment shall be installed that impairs the effectiveness of lighting equipment required by this standard." You stated that this paragraph seems to be relevant but that it is unclear to you.

Both Part 581, Bumper Standard, and Safety Standard No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices( and Associated Equipment, are relevant to the location of fog-taillamp assemblies in the rear bumper. Fog lamps are lighting devices that are not covered by Standard No. 108. Therefore, two questions must be asked: are they permissible, and if so, may they be combined with items of lighting equipment required by Standard No. 108. Under section S4.1.3, quoted above, fog lamps are permissible provided that they do not impair the effectiveness of the lighting equipment that the standard requires. In this instance, the question cannot be answered without reference to whether its combination with the taillamp is permitted, for from the photo and drawing submitted, both appear combined in a single housing incorporating, we assume, one filament for each function. Both lamps are "position lamps", indicating the presence of the vehicle in the roadway ahead to a driver who is following behind. The fog lamp is intended to be activated under extreme conditions of reduced visibility, and hence, would appear to increase the effectiveness of the taillamp rather than impair it. Section S4.4 of Standard No. 108 prohibits combining taillamps only with clearance lamps (not required lighting equipment for passenger cars), and thus combining the taillamp and fog lamp functions are permissible. Section S4.3.1.1 of the standard specifies, among other things, that no part of the vehicle may prevent a taillamp from meeting its photometric output at specified test points. Further, a taillamp located in the bumper must also meet the visibility requirements of SAE Standard J585e Tail Lamps (Rear Position Lamps), September 1977, incorporated by reference in Standard No. 108. Pursuant to Paragraph 4 of J585e taillamps must be visible through a horizontal angle from 45 degrees to the left to 15 degrees to the right; to be considered visible, the lamp must provide an unobstructed projected illuminated area of outer lens surface (excluding reflex), not less than 2 square inches measured at 45 degrees to the longitudinal axis of the vehicle.

Finally, Part 581 Bumper Standard specifies requirements for the impact resistance of vehicles in low speed front and rear collisions. Vehicles must be capable of meeting certain damage criteria, following specified test impacts. Among other things, lamps must be free of cracks and comply with applicable visibility requirements of section S4.3.1.1 of Standard No. 108 following the impacts.

I hope this information is helpful.

Sincerely,

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel

November 18, 1985

Chief Counsel Jeff Miller National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 400 7th St., Southwest NASSIF Bld., Rm. #5219 Washington, D.C. 20590

RE: CFR 49, PART 581 BUMPER STANDARD

Dear Mr. Miller:

This is an Informal inquiry concerning the above referenced subject. Bitter Automobile of America, Inc. is the national importer of the Bitter SC automobile.

This Inquiry is in regard to the configuration of the rear bumper assembly of our automobile. In the past we have had a full face bumper bar without any light assemblies incorporated. However, I have been asked by Bitter K.G. GmbH Engineering staff what the regulations are of incorporating fog-taillight assemblies in the bumper; e.g. integrated into the rear bumper (see attached photograph and drawing). In consulting the Motor Vehicle Standard, No. 108, Part 571; S 108-7 , S 4.1.3, it states:

"No additional lamp reflective device or other motor vehicle equipment shall be installed that impairs the effectiveness of lighting equipment required by this standard."

This paragraph seems to relate to what we are contemplating, but is not clear to me. I kindly ask if the above could be feasible to change to a new style bumper.

I hope to hear from you soon and thank you for your time.

Sincerely,

Rolf Seiferheld Service & Technical

Enclosures

RS/red

ID: 86-4.11

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 07/11/86

FROM: ERIKA Z. JONES -- CHIEF COUNSEL NHTSA

TO: CONNIE HAFENSTINE -- CHIEF, BUREAU OF PERSONNEL SERVICES; NOBLE MORRELL -- ASSISTANT PERSONNEL DIRECTOR KANSAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

TITLE: NONE

TEXT: Dear Ms. Hafenstine and Mr. Norrell:

This responds to your February 19, 1986, letter to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) concerning a school district's modification of its 1985 school bus to accommodate a handicapped student. You asked for our opinion on the district's plan to remove the bench seat located directly behind the driver's seat. This modification is proposed in order to provide necessary leg room for a handicapped child who would occupy the bench seat rearwards of the removed seat.

While you explained that the work on the school bus would probably be performed by the school district itself, you requested us to clarify our requirements for commercial parties modifying used vehicles. The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, which authorizes NHTSA to issue safety standards applicable to the manufacture and sale of new motor vehicles, includes section 108(a)(2)(A) regulating the modification of safety systems on used motor vehicles. Section 108(a)(2)(A) prohibits a manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business from knowingly rendering inoperative any device or element of design installed in a motor vehicle in compliance with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard. This means that Federal law would prohibit a commercial business from degrading or removing the level of safety provided by the equipment or designs of your school bus.

You explained that your school bus was certified as meeting our "compartmentalization" requirements for school bus passenger protection. Compartmentalization provides occupant protection by seat spacing, padding and strength requirements. It is therefore likely that removing a school bus seat would render inoperative the vehicle's compliance with the requirements for compartmentalization since school bus seats are central to that system of occupant protection. As a result, a commercial business would violate @ 108(a)(2)(A) by removing the bench seat in

question if no properly padded restraining device were provided within the distance specified in Standard No. 222 for seat spacing. Violation of @ 108(a)(2)(A) is subject to a maximum civil penalty of $ 1,000 for each violation.

NHTSA is aware that situations may exist where a vehicle must be modified by a commercial facility to accommodate the special needs of a handicapped person. We have been willing to consider some of those modifications and resultant violations of @ 108(a)(2)(A) as being justified by public need, and have exercised our discretion not to take any enforcement action. Such an exception would be made in your situation if removing the school bus seat were necessary to accommodate a student's physical handicaps. However, we urge you to label the bench seat rearward of the removed seat in some manner that will identify it as appropriate only for transporting a handicapped student and distingush it from a regular school bus seat. Further, if the seat would be capable of being used by other school children, we strongly recommend that a mode of occupant protection be provided to all occupants of the seat, and that the level of protection is as safe as that originally provided by the school bus before the modification was made.

Section 108(a)(2)(A) applies only to commercial-type businesses which modify used vehicles. It does not apply to an owner, such as a state or a school district, modifying its own vehicles. Accordingly, Federal law would not prohibit the school district from removing the bench seat on its school bus nor restrict the removal in any manner. Again, however, we do strongly recommend that you ensure that the bench seat rearward of the removed seat is labeled and that an appropriate mode of occupant protection is provided to all children who would occupy it.

The modification of the bus would, of course, still have to comply with any applicable state laws. You should contact your attorney and insurance company to discuss the effect of state law on your modification as well as private liability issues, since your planned modification might affect the vehicle's compliance with safety standards.

I hope this information is helpful. If you have further questions, please contact my office.

Sincerely,

ID: 86-4.12

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 07/11/86

FROM: ERIKA Z. JONES -- CHIEF COUNSEL NHTSA

TO: FRANCISCO DEE TAN -- PRESIDENT FRG INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION

TITLE: NONE

TEXT: Dear Mr. Tan:

This is in reply to your letter of April 15, 1986, asking for our approval of different types of rear stop lamps you wish to import.

The lighting devices depicted in the brochures that you enclosed are not intended as original or replacement motor vehicle equipment, and therefore are not coverd by Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment. If you are required to execute a Form HS-7 at the time of entry, the proper declaration is that provided by Box 1: the equipment was manufactured on a date when no Federal standards applied to it. In any event, this agency has no authority to approve or disapprove items of motor vehicle equipment since the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act provides for self-certification by manufacturers of their products subject to Federal standards.

In the absence of Federal requirements, whether the devices you wish to import are legal for installation and use would be determinable under the laws of the individual States where the devices will be sold and installed.

I hope that this answers your question.

Sincerely

ID: 86-4.13

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 07/15/86

FROM: ERIKA Z. JONES -- CHIEF COUNSEL NHTSA

TO: JAMES J. DABROWSKI -- REGULATIONS STATISTICS COORDINATOR JAGUAR CARS

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: LETTER DATED 06/12/86, TO ERIKA Z. JONES, FROM JAMES J. DABROWSKI, OCC - 0838; RECALL LETTER TO GRAY MARKET VEHICLE OWNERS FROM JAGUAR CARS INC AND RELEASE DOC, DATED 06/12/86 EST

TEXT: Dear Mr. Dabrowski:

This is in reply to your letter of June 12, 1986, asking for confirmation that "Jaguar Cars is not bound by normal NHTSA recall procedures" with reference to cars imported through the Gray Market.

The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act requires that a manufacturer must provide notification and remedy, when the determines that a vehicle or an item of motor vehicle equipment "manufactured by him" contains a safety related defact or noncompliance with an applicable standard. (15 U.S.C. 1411). A "manufacturer" is defined under the Act as "any person engaged in the manufacturing or assembling of motor vehicles..., including any person importing motor vehicles... for resale." (15 USC 1391(5)).

We understand Jaguar Cars, Inc. to be a corporation incorporated in the United States for the purpose of importing and selling motor vehicles that are made in another country by another legal entity. Because it does not manufacture or assemble motor vehicles, Jaguar Cars, Inc., is responsible as a "manufacturer" for notification and remedy only for the motor vehicles that it has imported.

I hope that this clarifies the matter for you.

Sincerely,

ID: 86-4.14

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 07/16/86

FROM: DALTON G. FEAGLER

TO: ADMINISTRATOR -- NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 12/22/86 TO DALTON G. FEAGLER FROM ERIKA Z. JONES, REDBOOK A29 (4); STD 108, VSA 108

TEXT: Dear sir or madam:

Reference is made to 49 CFR 571, Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 108, Docket No. 69-18, revised May 22, 1985. Particular reference is made to paragraph S4.5.4, which is quoted:

"The stoplights on each vehicle shall be activated upon application of the service brakes. The high-mounted stoplamp on each passenger car shall be activated only upon application of the service brakes."

Living in metropolitan Atanta, Georgia, and its highly congested traffic, I soon learned that rear-end collisons, and resulting whip-lash injuries, are to be avoided. I resolved to decrease those possibilities.

In short, I've come up with a switching device which activates the stoplights of a vehicle the moment pressure is released from the accelerator. This is installed without disconnecting, or altering, any functions or systems; the device merely accelerates, by approximately three-quarters of a second, the warning of deacceleration and stopping. Further, this advanced warning increases the safe stopping distance.

We do not alter any of the vehicle's functions; the stoplamps of the vehicle remain activated upon application of the service brakes. We believe our device, known as the "Dee-Tailer", fully complies with cited Standard 108.

Would your agency desire to road-test our device? Before proceeding further, we desire your asessment and comments.

Awaiting your early reply.

Sincerely,