Interpretation ID: nht91-6.38

DATE: October 23, 1991

FROM: Paul Jackson Rice -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TO: Gary Starr -- Solar Electric Engineering

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 9-9-91 from Gary Starr to NHTSA

TEXT:

The agency recently received an unsigned petition dated September 9, 1991, in which Solar Electric Engineering asked for a temporary exemption from the Federal motor vehicle safety standards. The petition named you as the company's contact.

According to the petition, Solar Electric's product "is a standard vehicle manufactured under NHTSA standards and originally certified by the O.E.M. . . . ." A NHTSA engineer has suggested to the company that "the NHTSA may not require the exemption application." because the vehicle is "altered." This comment relates to the obligations imposed by 49 CFR Sec. 567.7 on a person who alters, in more than minor respects, a previously certified vehicle before its sale to its first owner. Such an alterer is required to affix his own certification label stating that the vehicle as altered conforms to all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. Solar Electric appears hesitant to certify compliance with all standards, and, given the magnitude of conversion from internal combustion power to electric power, NHTSA would regard it as a "manufacturer" who is eligible to file a temporary exemption petition.

However, before a petition can be processed, it must meet the agency's procedural requirements (in this instance, 49 CFR Sec. 555.5(b) and 555.6(c)). Although Solar Electric's petition attempts to do so, it falls short in several respects. Its most major failure is that does not state with specificity the standards for which exemption is requested, as required by Sec. 555.5(b)(4). Although paragraph 2) i) of your letter states that the vehicle would "perhaps" differ with Standards Nos. 103, 105, 208 "specifically part 572 (Anthropomorphic Test Dummy), . . . and perhaps other standards which are unknown at this time or would not apply to an electric vehicle", this is too indefinite to fulfill the requirements of Sec. 555.5(b)(4). Further, to the extent that your paragraph 2) i) is intended to fulfill the requirements of Sec. 555.6(c)(2)(i), it fails to provide the "detailed description" of how the motor vehicle, if exempted, would differ from one that complies with the standard." We recommend, therefore, that Solar Electric review the Federal motor vehicle safety standards with a view towards amending its petition in accordance with our comments.

In addition, section 555.6(c)(2)(iv) requires a petitioner to provide reasons why an exemption from each standard requested "does not unreasonably degrade the safety of the vehicle." When Solar Electric has determined the standards from which it requests exemption, its supplementary petition should contain arguments addressing this point.

With the thought that it may assist you, I enclose a copy of a Federal Register notice that discusses the petition of another vehicle converter, and the way that it presented the information required by our regulations. Although the notice was published in 1975, our requirements have not changed since that time.

We would also appreciate knowing the make, model, and model year of the vehicles intended for conversion. Please also ensure that the amendment to the petition is signed by a company official.

When we have received information sufficient to meet our procedural requirements, we shall be pleased to consider the petition further. If you have any questions, Taylor Vinson of my staff will be pleased to answer them (202-366-5263).

Enclosure

Copy of the Federal Register, volume 40, number 120 (6/20/75) titled Electric Fuel Propulsion Corporation; Petition for Temporary Exemption From Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (Text omitted)