Interpretation ID: nht73-1.23

DATE: 08/20/73

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; James B. Gregory; NHTSA

TO: Oregon Traffic Safety Commision

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: Thank you for your letter of July 23, 1973, enclosing an amended version of Oregon House Bill 2721.

We note that Section 2 of the Bill no longer requires a mandatory green-yellow-red rear mounted lighting system but specifies that it may be used on an optional basis, in accordance with the suggestions in Mr. Wilson's letter of July 20, 1973. In order to avoid preemption under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, ORS 483.412(3)(b) [Section 3] should be similarly amended to substitute "may" for "shall" so that all references to a mandatory system are removed from the Bill.

Sincerely,

OREGON TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION

July 23, 1973

James E. Wilson -- Associate Administrator, Traffic Safety Programs, U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

RE: N40-30 (ZTV)

Dear Mr. Wilson:

Attached is an engrossed (amended) version of Oregon House Bill 2721 relating to a series of red-yellow-green taillights.

Note that, as passed, the law is permissive. It does not relate to the manufacturer of a vehicle. A vehicle owner may, under the new law, add an accessory with a red-yellow-green series of taillights on his car.

Since this is in addition to the standard taillight system, it does not conflict with 49 CFR @ 571.108 Standard No. 108, Lamps, reflective devices, and associated equipment.

When you are in Oregon we would be pleased to show you this system. We believe it will reduce rear-end collisions substantially.

Sincerely,

Gil W. Bellamy Administrator

[Enclosure Omitted.]