Interpretation ID: 1984-3.50

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 12/10/84

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank Berndt; NHTSA

TO: Lufkin Industries, Inc. -- LaVan Watts, Chief Engineer, Trailer Div.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in reply to your letter of November 12, 1984, concerning the permissibility of additional lighting equipment to the fronts of closed van and flat bed-type trailers, specifically the "additional amber reflectors" shown on the sheet you enclosed.

You have asked whether you may manufacture trailers with "additional lamps or reflectors . . . in the manner shown . . . and a customer not be cited in violation of present standards." As you know, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 requires wide trailers to be equipped with two clearance lamps at the front, but does not require them either to have identification lamps, as are required on the other wide motor vehicle, or front amber reflex reflectors, which are not required on any motor vehicle. Paragraph S4.1.3 of Standard No. 108 precludes the addition of non-required motor vehicle equipment if it impairs the effectiveness of required lighting equipment. Your addition of these reflectors would not appear to impair the effectiveness of other lamps and reflectors and therefore would be permitted by Standard No. 108.

Although your drawing does not indicate it, your question indicates that you are considering supplementary front amber clearance lamps, instead of the reflectors depicted. Thus, the question is whether they would impair the effectiveness of the required clearance lamps, or front side marker lamps and reflectors. We assume that these additional lamps would have the same or less candela as the required front clearance lamps, and in that event they too would appear not to impair the other lighting equipment mentioned.

You have expressed concern that customers not be cited for violation of "the standard." Local enforcement officers, of course have no authority to interpret Federal lighting requirements. Those who add supplementary lighting equipment risk running afoul of State prohibitions. The preemptive provisions of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act prohibit a State from having safety standards that differ from Federal ones covering "the same aspect of performance." Thus, a State could not require four front clearance lamps when Standard No. 108 requires only two. Whether it could prohibit four front clearance lamps or two front reflectors is another question. Because of the possibility that a court could narrowly construe the preemption provisions of the Act in favor of a State prohibition against front reflex reflectors or supplementary clearance lamps, even if permitted by Standard No. 108, we suggest that you contact local officials in the areas where your trailers will be operated to obtain their views.

Sincerely,

OCC-1513 November 12, 1984

Frank Berndt Chief Counsel National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Subject: Low Mounted Reflectors On The Front Of Highway Type Trailers

Dear Mr. Berndt:

A question has arisen to which an opinion is needed regarding the placing of amber reflex reflectors on the lower front corners of all highway-type trailers regardless of whether there is clearance lamps present or not. Particularly on a closed van trailer where the clearance lamps are required to be placed "as near the top as practicable." These lamps can be as high as 13' from the ground. So the question: can additional lamps or reflectors be placed in the manner shown on the attached drawing and a customer not be cited in violation of present standards?

Your earliest response is certainly appreciated.

LUFKIN INDUSTRIES, INC. Trailer Division

LaVan Watts Chief Engineer

BY ELW DATE 11/12/84 SUBJECT FMVSS 108 ADDITIONAL REFLECTORS

(Graphics omitted)