Interpretation ID: 2396y
Automotive Safety Engineering
Environmental Activities Staff
General Motors Corporation
General Motors Technical Center
30400 Mound Road
Warren, MI 48090-9015
Dear Mr. Rogers:
This is in reply to your letter asking for confirmation that an interpretation of a notice of proposed rulemaking remains in effect with respect to the final rule based upon that proposal. I regret the delay in responding.
Specifically, you reference an interpretation dated September 12, l988, that this Office provided Koito Corporation, informing it that each of the two Vehicle Headlamp Aiming Device (VHAD) designs depicted "complies with the intent of S7.7.5.2" of Standard No. l08. The second design consisted of a detachable spirit level that would be inserted in the bulb socket for the purpose of aiming the headlamp. We informed Koito that "under subsection (b)(7) photometric testing is provided for "the VHAD and headlamp assembly (if the headlamp is separable or intended to be used with the VHAD)", and that this meant that the VHAD may be integral with the headlamp assembly or separate from it. However, we also cautioned that our comments were based upon the proposal, and could change with the issuance of the final rule.
You have commented that the final rule was the same with respect to the pertinent VHAD wording. This is not entirely true. The final rule (paragraph S7.7.5.2(b)(vii)) omitted the parenthetical phrase "(if the headlamp is separable or intended to be used with the VHAD)". You also noted that paragraph S7.7.5.2(c)(l) of the final rule defines a headlamp assembly as "(the headlamp(s) and the integral or separate VHAD mechanism)". The intent of this language is to specify a VHAD that is a permanent part of the headlamp, and hence integral, or to have a separate VHAD that is part of the mounting mechanism. It was not meant as permitting a VHAD that could be physically separated from headlamp or the mounting mechanism. Thus, in our view and upon our further consideration of the matter, a detachable VHAD does not meet the "intent" of the final rule. This means that the spirit level design described in your letter, which is not integral to the headlamp or mounting mechanism, is not permissible. We shall provide Koito with a copy of this letter.
Sincerely,
Stephen P. Wood Acting Chief Counsel
ref:l08 d:4/9/90