Skip to main content
Search Interpretations

Interpretation ID: aiam1517

Mr. George C. Nield,Engineering advisor,Busby Rivkin Sherman Levy and Rehm,900 17th Street, N.W., Suite 1100,Washington, D.C, 20006; Mr. George C. Nield
Engineering advisor
Busby Rivkin Sherman Levy and Rehm
900 17th Street
N.W.
Suite 1100
Washington
D.C
20006;

Dear Mr. Nield:#This is in response to your letter of JUne 10, 1974, i which you asked for our interpretation of the preemption provisions of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (sec. 103(d)) with respect to the Pennsylvania position on brake hose. A letter that you enclosed from the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation advised a manufacturer's representative that 'Pennsylvania will continue to approve brake hoses under the SAE Standards for air, hydraulic and vacuum hose,' and that the State 'will continue to require the hose be identified in the same manner as our present regulations.' with the Federally-required labeling placed on 'a separate line' from the State's labeling.#Section 103(d) of the Act, 15 U.S.C 1392(d), plainly prohibits any State from establishing or continuing in effect a safety standard applicable to an item of motor vehicle equipment, where there is an applicable Federal standard, unless the State standard is 'identical to the Federal standard.' This preemption provision takes effect whenever a Federal standard is applicable to the same aspect of performance as the State standard. When the new Federal standard on brake hoses comes into effect, with its testing and labeling requirements, any differing State standards, as Pennsylvania's appear to be will be preempted and void.#Sincerely, Lawrence R, Schneider,Chief Counsel;