Interpretation ID: 77-2.24

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 04/29/77

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; F. Berndt; NHTSA

TO: SEMA

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This responds to your March 24, 1977, letter asking about the applicability of Standard No. 120, Tire Selection and Rims for Motor Vehicles Other Than Passenger Cars, to aftermarket rims.

Your first assumption that vans and light truck models are classified as vehicles other than passenger cars is correct. Accordingly, rims manufactured for use on these vehicles must comply with the requirements of the standard. Where the rims may be used in the aftermarket either on passenger cars or vehicles other than passenger cars, they must comply with the requirements of Standard No. 120.

On a related matter concerning the aftermarket, you question whether Standard No. 120 has applicability to rims sold for use on used vehicles. Section S3 of the standard states that the requirements apply to motor vehicles other than passenger cars and to rims for use on those vehicles. This indicates that the standard is both a motor vehicle and an equipment standard. Since it is an equipment standard, the requirements apply to all rims manufactured for use on the specified vehicles regardless of whether the rim will be original equipment or sold in the aftermarket.

SINCERELY,

March 24, 1977

Roger Tilton Office of Chief Counsel National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Since I have not heard from you in the past few days, I will assume that the enclosed report from the "Consumer Product Safety Guide" is completely fallacious. As I mentioned during our phone conversation, our association is attempting to provide the aftermarket wheel manufacturers in our membership with timely information concerning the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 120, rim marking requirements, and I do have several questions that pertain to the standard.

We have made the assumption that the van and light truck models in the domestic fleet fall under the category of vehicles other than passenger cars, and would like to know if our assumption is correct. Also, in the February 7, 1977 Federal Register, Page 7142, the discussion of rim marking requirements states that "these marking requirements have no bearing on the use of the rim on passenger cars, except as future labeling requirements in Standard No. 110 might prohibit one or more of the items required by S5.2. This eventuality is considered to be extremely unlikely." We find that the most common bolt circle patterns for wheels are common to both passenger cars and light trucks and vans, and the aftermarket generally does not market separate wheels for trucks and passenger cars. We would like to know if the statement quoted above means that a wheel that has a common application for light trucks and passenger cars can, or must, have the rim markings required by FMVSS 120 by August 1, 1977.

We have also noted that the standard is promulgated to fulfill Section 202 of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, which pertains to equipment requirements for new vehicles or vehicles before the first purchase thereof. We, therefore, request a legal opinion on whether the FMVSS 120 can be construed to apply to a true aftermarket wheel which is purchased by the vehicle owner, usually some time after the first purchase.

This may be a moot point, for in fact, the aftermarket manufacturers market the same wheel models for light truck applications, passenger car applications, new vehicle applications (dealership changeover), and aftermarket. But a legal opinion on the questions that I have raised would be most helpful at this time.

Your assistance would be very much appreciated, and I trust that if you have any questions on this matter, you won't hesitate to call on me.

Paul J. Ryan Staff Engineer

Consumer Product Safety Guide

Rim Requirement Repeated, Mobile Homes De-regulated by NHTSA

A requirement that wheel rims of motor vehicles other than passenger cars be labeled as to their normal dimensions manufacturer, and date of manufacture has been withdrawn by the National Highway Safety Administration. The requirement had been previously issued with a delayed effective date. The NHTSA stated that the (Illegible Word) of the requirement had not interfered with certification and defect actions, and because enforcement might lead to economic waste, the agency has decided it is unnecessary. In responding