Pasar al contenido principal
Search Interpretations

Interpretation ID: aiam1852

Mr. J. M. Dabrowski, Vice President-Engineering, The Flxible Co., Loudonville, OH 44842; Mr. J. M. Dabrowski
Vice President-Engineering
The Flxible Co.
Loudonville
OH 44842;

Dear Mr. Dabrowski: This is in response to your letter of February 10, 1975, inquiring a to the effect of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 121 on State laws relating to air brake performance.; Section 103(d) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act o 1966 (15 U.S.C. 1392(d)) provides that no State or political subdivision of a State may promulgate or continue in effect standards applicable to an aspect of motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment performance which is covered by a Federal motor vehicle safety standard, unless the standards are identical.; Standard No. 121 includes provisions relating to truck and bus brak performance, including requirements for stopping distances. A more restrictive State brake requirement than that specified in Standard 121 is voided by S 103(d) since the Federal standard is intended to cover all aspects of air brake performance.; The Federal requirements must be regarded as conclusive with regard t emergency braking capabilities in order to maintain the uniformity necessary in a Federal regulatory scheme. This was affirmed in a recent decision rendered in a case brought by the Motorcycle Industry Council, Inc. against the State of California in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California concerning the preemption of a California State requirement that motorcycle headlamps be wired to operate when the engine is running. The Court held that the California requirement is preempted by the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 since the NHTSA intended to cover all aspects of performance directly involving motorcycle headlamps.; Therefore, requirements such as those described in your letter would b preempted by Standard 121 since the aspects of performance that would be affected are covered by the Federal standard. You should note that this discussion of State 'requirements' only refers to rules of general applicability within a State or municipality. It does not refer to purchase specifications that may be imposed by any person or organization, including a State or municipality, with respect to vehicles purchased for the person or organization's own use. Such specifications are not limited by Federal law, although of course they cannot alter a manufacturer's duty to conform to Federal standards.; I would note that your statement that neither S5.7.2 nor S5.7.2. 'requires anything other than an application capability' is overbroad. Section S5.7.2 requires modulation of the emergency braking capability, that is, application and release. We have interpreted the S5.7.2.2 requirement that emergency brake system failure 'shall not cause the parking brake to be inoperable' to mean that the parking brake must be capable of application but not release. Under S5.6 the parking brake's normal operation must include both application and release.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel