Interpretation ID: aiam2362
President
Sun Control Products of Virginia
Inc.
P. O. Box 122
Petersburg
VA 23803;
Dear Mr. Lerche: This responds to your June 11, 1976, request that Madico sola protective polyester film be 'designated as acceptable' under Ford Motor Company's DOT code number for the Ford product 'Privacy Glass' or, in the alternative, that the Madico product be assigned a separate DOT glazing code number. You state that the Madico film achieves the same effect as 'Privacy Glass' for reduction of solar heat, glare and fading.; Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 205, *Glazing Materials* specifies requirements for glazing materials for use in motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment. Section S6 of the standard outlines the procedures required for certification and marking of glazing materials, to certify that the glazing complies with all the requirements of the standard. Paragraph S6.2 of that section requires certain manufacturers to mark their glazing materials with the 'DOT' symbol and a manufacturer's code number, which is assigned to the manufacturer by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration upon written request. Each code number is the unique mark of a single manufacturer, and is intended to facilitate the traceability of the glazing to the original manufacturer. Therefore, Ford's code number (DOT - 75 FM-M73) cannot be used by Madico or by another glazing manufacturer or distributor.; Your letter states that the Madico Product is a solar protective fil that is 'bonded or laminated to existing, installed clear glass.' We conclude that this 'protective film' is not glazing material and is not subject to the requirements of Standard No. 205. Therefore, a glazing manufacturer's code number cannot be assigned for the product.; Whether or not the Madico protective film is otherwise subject t Federal Requirements depends upon who uses the product. If a vehicle manufacturer or a dealer places the film on glazing in a vehicle prior to sale of the vehicle, he must certify that the glazing continues to be in compliance with the requirements of Standard No. 205.; On the other hand, the vehicle owner may alter his vehicle as h pleases, so long as he adheres to all State requirements. The owner could install the protective film on glazing in his vehicle whether or not such installation affected compliance with Standard No. 205. It should be noted, however, that section 108(a)(2)(A) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 provides that no manufacturer, dealer, distributor, or motor vehicle repair business shall knowingly render inoperative any device or element of design installed in a motor vehicle in compliance with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard. Therefore, no manufacturer, distributor, dealer or repair business may knowingly install the Madico protective film on a vehicle for its owner in a manner that would destroy the conformity of the glazing with the requirements of Standard No. 205.; Sincerely, Frank A. Berndt, Acting Chief Counsel