Interpretation ID: 1984-4.16

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 12/24/84

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank Berndt; NHTSA

TO: PACCAR, Inc. -- Kenneth R. Brownstein, Counsel, Law Dept.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. Kenneth R. Brownstein, Esq. Counsel, Law Department PACCAR, Inc. P.O. Box 1518 Bellevue, Washington 98009

This is in response to your letter of October 16,, 1984, asking for an interpretation of Standard No. 108 as it applies to the location of turn signal lamps on truck tractors.

The requirements imposed by Standard No. 108 (Table II, with the exception provided by S4.1.1.1 ) are truck tractors be provided with turn signal lamps mounted on the rear; they are excused from this requirement if the turn signal lamps at or near the front are so located and constructed (double faced) that they meet the requirements for double-spaced turn signals specified in SAE Standard J588e, "Turn Signal Lamps," September 1970.

The drawing which you have enclosed, for which confidential treatment is requested, shows a truck tractor with turn signals mounted at the front, and proposed optional locations for the others . The first proposed location does not meet the requirement that the lamp be located on the rear; the second location is not even on the truck tractor. Thus, neither location appears under Standard No. 108.

Nothing your references to SAE J588f, we would like to point out that the SAE standard incorporated in Standard No. 208 is J588e.

After carefully reviewing your letter and the attached during, I have detemined that they are not entitled to confidential treatment. While the Agency has designated blueprints and engineering drawings as a class of documents which are generally entitled to confidentiality (49 CFR S512.9), this is a rebuttable presumption. Your drawing does not contain the kind and amount of detail whose release would cause substantial competitive harm to Paccar. The Agency's regulation on confidential business information states that substantial competitive harm is likely to occur from the release of blueprints or engineering drawings where the subject could not be manufactured without the blueprints except after significant reverse engineering. No significant reverse engineering would be required in order to locate turn signals at the positions indicated on the attached drawing. Additionally, the letter does not provide any further detail as to the location or design of the proposed turn signals and should not be treated confidentially.

In view of the above, your request for confidentiality is denied. If you disagree with this determination you must submit, within 10 days of your receipt of this letter, additional information showing specifically how the release of the letter and drawing will substantially harm the competitive position of Paccar. If no information is received by the end of that period, I will place these documents in the public viewing file.

Sincerely.

Frank Berndt

Chief Counsel

October 16, 1984

Frank A. Berndt Chief Counsel National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 400 Seventh Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20590

Dear Mr. Berndt:

PACCAR Inc, as a manufacturer of Class 8 motor vehicles under the Kenworth nameplate, respectfully requests an interpretation of FMVSS 108 as applied to proposed turn signal locations for application on Kenworth conventional truck tractors which have been optimized for low aerodynamic drag.

In FMVSS 108, section 4.1.1. 1, it states that truck tractors need not be equipped with turn signal lamps mounted on the rear if the turn signal lamps at or near the front are double-faced and meet the requirements for double-face turn signals in SAE Standard J588f, "Turn Signal Lamps." The rationale in permitting double-faced signals is acknowledgment that (1) turn signals on the rear of a truck tractor are not conspicuous when the tractor is hauling a trailer and (2) combining front and rear turn signals into one double-faced lamp provides acceptable signalling indication to the rear during bobtail operations while providing some signalling information to the side. Considering the truck tractor driver's restricted vision and reduced maneuverability when hauling one or more trailers, turn signal side conspicuity becomes an important element in accident avoidance during lane changes or turns to the right. Both double-faced turn signals and Kenworth's proposed rear turn signal locations (depicted as Option 1 and Option 2 in the enclosed drawing) provide signalling indication to the tractor's rear and sides. PACCAR believes that the proposed rear turn signal locations meet the intent of the present FMVSS 108 and therefore asks that the proposed locations be approved as being compliant with the standard.

October 16, 1984

Additionally, in SAE Standard J588f, referenced above, section 3.9.1 reduces the photometric requirements of a rear turn signal when it is included in a double-faced lamp. As with double-faced turn signals, illumination toward the rear and outboard of the proposed rear turn signal lamps provides adequate signalling indication; illumination inboard of the lamps is unnecessary. PACCAR believes that the proposed turn signal designs meet the intent of SAE Standard 588f.

In the two rear turn signal locations proposed in the enclosed drawing, Kenworth has maintained the side conspicuity of double-faced turn signals without sacrificing aerodynamic performance. Kenworth believes that both proposed designs are superior in safety to turn signals mounted on the front and rear.

PACCAR requests that the information contained in this letter and drawing remain confidential.

Your prompt attention to this matter will be appreciated.

Very truly yours, Kenneth R. Brownstein Counsel KRB:MMS:rts INSERT CHART