ID: nht94-3.96

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: August 11, 1994

FROM: ASHPY P. LOWRIMORE -- SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, SOUTHERN NATIONAL BANK

TO: Office of Chief Council, NHTSA

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: Attached to 10/4/94 letter from Philip R. Recht to Ashpy Lowrimore (A42; Part 571.3)

TEXT: My purpose in writing you today is to inquire about regulations or laws that govern the use of buses and/or vans as it relates to the transportation of school children. More specifically, my concern has to do with my local church. We own a commercial bu s and a 15 passenger Ford van. I am attempting to determine any restrictions or requirements that must be met as it relates to these two specific vehicles with respect to the transportation of school children. Our church operates a kindergarten and aft er school care program. It is necessary from time to time for us to transport children associated with these programs.

I would like for you to furnish me with complete details as to any requirements that must be met by our church, both for the commercial bus that we own, as well as the 15 passenger van. I would like certain questions answered so that we can be real sure we are complying with all regulations. For example:

1. Can we transport children who are related with our various schools by utilizing the van?

2. Are there restrictions associated with the use of the bus in the transportation of children, young adults or senior adults?

3. If there are special restrictions, can you elaborate on the type of equipment that we must obtain in order to meet any regulations or requirements that are in place?

I think you can understand the gist of my concern and the need for information. I would appreciate any input that you can give me in this regard. I will await hearing from you.

ID: nht94-3.97

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: August 12, 1994

FROM: John Womack -- Acting Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TO: Doris Hull -- Owner, Sikeston Trailer Sales, Inc.

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attachment dated 5/16/94: Letter from Doris Hull to Robert Hellmuth (OCC - 10035)

TEXT: This responds to your letter of May 16, 1994, addressed to Mr. Robert Hellmuth, whom you identified as Chief Counsel. For your future information, Mr. Hellmuth is Chief of the Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance of this agency. I am the Acting Chief Co unsel.

Your letter referred to a May 13, 1994 telephone conversation that you and Mr. David McCormick had with Walter Myers of my staff concerning new and used tires on trailers. You asked for confirmation of your understanding of what was said during that con versation, as follows:

(a) That as a trailer manufacturer you can sell to a dealer new trailers that are stacked one on top of the other, with new tires on the bottom trailer but no tires or wheels on the stacked trailers;

(b) That you can sell used tires and rims but not installed on the new trailers; and

(c) That you can separately sell used tires and rims to the purchaser of a trailer, then install them on the new trailer if the purchaser so requests.

FMVSS No. 120, Tire Selection and Rims for Motor Vehicles Other Than Passenger Cars (copy enclosed) provides that vehicles equipped with pneumatic tires for highway service shall be equipped with tires that meet the requirements either of FMVSS 109, New Pneumatic Tires, or FMVSS No. 119, New Pneumatic Tires for Other Than Passenger Cars. Both those standards specify requirements for new tires. As an exception to those requirements, however, paragraph S5.1.3 of FMVSS No. 120 provides that:

[A] truck, bus, or trailer may at the request of the purchaser be equipped

at the place of manufacture of the vehicle with retreaded or used tires owned or leased by the purchaser, . . . Used tires employed under this provision must have been originally manufactured to comply with Standard No. 119, as evidenced by the DOT symbo l (emphasis added).

With that background in mind, your understanding (a) above is correct. You stated to Mr. Myers that it is common practice in the industry to stack completed trailers one on top of another for shipment, with the bottom trailer being equipped with new tir es. This office stated in a letter to Mr. Steve Thomas dated April 14, 1993 (copy enclosed), that new trailers may be sold without tires and wheels. Accordingly, it is permissible to ship trailers without tires and wheels, with new tires on the bottom trailer that is carrying the others.

Your understanding (b) is also correct, but with a caveat. No provision of Federal law or regulation prohibits you from separately selling used tires and wheels that you own to anyone you want, including dealers. However, the practice you describe impl ies that the dealer will be installing the used tires you've provided on the new trailers, which would amount to a violation of Standard No. 120. The standard specifically provides that used or retreaded tires may be installed on new vehicles only at th e place of manufacture; the dealer is not permitted to install used tires on new trailers, whether or not owned and requested by the purchaser. Further, a manufacturer that includes used tires with new vehicles, even though not installed on the new vehi cle, could be considered to be contributing to a potential violation of the Federal motor vehicle safety standards by the dealer.

With respect to understanding (c), S5.1.3, as noted above, requires that used or retreaded tires installed on a new vehicle be owned or leased by the purchaser of the vehicle. The standard, however, does not specify any length of time that the used or r etreaded tires must be owned or leased by the vehicle purchaser, nor does the standard specify the source(s) from which the purchaser must have acquired the used or retreaded tires. Therefore, there is no prohibition against the purchaser of a trailer p urchasing used or retreaded tires from a trailer manufacturer or from any other source, then requesting the manufacturer to install them on the new trailer.

However, we have the following observations about the practice. The used/retreaded tire exception in S5.1.3 was included in the standard to accommodate bus and truck fleets who either purchase or lease tires on a mileage contract basis or who maintain t ire banks. A mileage contract purchaser or lessor is one who purchases or leases tires on a per-mile basis. A tire

bank is composed of serviceable tires that have been removed from vehicles no longer in service. Mileage contract purchases and tire banks are standard practices in the transportation industry and the agency assumed that those purchasers would select on ly safe, serviceable tires from their inventories for installation on their new vehicles. The agency also assumed that those purchasers would have owned and used those tires for some length of time prior to their being selected for installation on new v ehicles. Thus, the practice of a new vehicle purchaser purchasing used tires from a trailer manufacturer and then asking the manufacturer to install them on the new vehicle was not envisioned by this agency when issuing Standard No. 120.

None of the above would relieve trailer manufacturers from their responsibility to attach the required labels with the recommended tire and rim sizes and inflation pressures in accordance with 49 CFR Part 567.

I hope this information is helpful to you. Should you have any further questions or need additional information, please feel free to contact Mr. Myers at this address or at (202) 366-2992.

Enclosure

ID: nht94-3.98

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: August 12, 1994

FROM: John Womack -- Acting Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TO: John G. Klinge -- Executive Vice President, Visibility Lighting Systems

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attachment dated 6/23/94: Letter from John Klinge to John Womack (OCC-10103)

TEXT:

This responds to your inquiry about whether a warning light device you manufacture would comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 125, Warning devices (49 CFR @ 571.125). Promotional literature accompanying your letter indicates that the "L ightman" is a flashing, battery operated device that is 3 1/2 inches wide by 1 1/2 inches high. You stated that you plan to market this product as a warning light source for use by truck fleets and commercial auto fleets. I am pleased to have this oppo rtunity to explain our regulations to you.

By way of background information, Congress has authorized this agency, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), to issue safety standards applicable to new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. (49 U.S.C. 30101 et s eq.) We have exercised this authority to establish Standard No. 125. NHTSA has no authority to approve, certify, or otherwise endorse any commercial product. Instead, Congress has established a self-certification process under which each manufacturer i s required to certify that each of its products meets all applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard.

Please note that Standard No. 125 applies to "devices, without self-contained energy sources, that are designed to be carried in motor vehicles and used to warn approaching traffic of the presence of a stopped vehicle, except for devices designed to be p ermanently affixed to the vehicle." (Emphasis added; see section S3 of the standard.) In other words, Standard No. 125 does not apply to warning devices with self-contained energy sources. In previous interpretations, the agency has determined that the phrase "self-contained energy sources" includes such things as battery powered lights. Accordingly, a warning device which consists of a battery operated flashing light would not be subject to Standard No. 125.

In a July 20, 1994 conversation with Mr. Marvin Shaw of my staff, you asked about the use of your product by commercial

vehicle operators. Please be aware that NHTSA has the authority to regulate the manufacture but not the use of warning devices. As Mr. Shaw explained, you may wish to contact the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) which is authorized to regulate som e motor vehicle operators and vehicle operations.

I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions about NHTSA's safety standards, please feel free to contact Mr. Shaw of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992.

ID: nht94-3.99

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: August 15, 1994

FROM: Amin Ahmadi

TO: Office of Rule Making

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: Attached to 1/5/95 letter from Philip R. Recht to Amin Ahmadi (A43; Std. 111)

TEXT: Dear Sir/Mom

Recently I made an application to Patent a safety device with Office of Patent and Trade Mark which it will reduce the risk of accidents caused in connection with car side mirror Blind Spot.

As a matter of safety I am sure your office is interested in implementing new devices that can increase the safety factor and decrease the risk factor for drivers of all types of motor vehicles.

My mirror can reduce dramatically (if not eliminating) Blind Spots.

It is a regular mirror that can be manufactured in various shape and size.

To demonstrate how this mirror works, imagine, for example, a 6 inch mirror that has 4 inches shaped at a straight angle and 2 inches angle of 3-5 degree outward variance. This combination of straight and outward angles can cover and eliminate the Blind Spot.

The mirror should have two specifications in molding Process which:

1 - At the point of angle there should not be any line of demarcation (to prevent a "Broken" image).

2 - At the point of angle it should have a very slight bend (to prevent a convex image).

This device will seriously impact and greatly increase the safety and well being of literally every driver of any type of motor vehicle,, and deserves serious consideration in being mandatory on all motor vehicles

Please keep it confidential and I will be more than happy to answer any question.

Sincerely yours

Enclosure

From AMIN AHMADI 8990 19th St. # 319 Alta Loma CA 91701 To MR. MARVIN SHAW

DEAR MR. SHAW

It was a pleasure talking to you. Here is a Drawing for Blind Spot Remover that can be used in Motor Vehicle Industry The Angle should be so Disgned that Eliminates Broken or two Images & also eliminate Conver Image. So there is Very fine line Between Sharp angle & Curve that is the most Important of the MIRROR that gives two picture without Distortion. Please pay attention the drawing is just for Demonstration only in reality as I mentioned there should be no Line in the PART of angle.

[PHOTOGRAPH OMITTED - SEE ORIGINAL SOURCE]

ID: nht94-4.1

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: August 17, 1994

FROM: John Womack -- Acting Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TO: Honorable Thomas H. Andrews -- House of Representatives District Office

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attachment dated 7/7/94: Letter from Suzanne C. Onos to John Horsley

TEXT:

Thank you for your letter from Ms. Suzanne Onos of your staff, concerning a question asked by your constituent, Ms. Betty Williams. Your letter was referred to me for reply. Ms. Williams stated that the design of the safety belt in her 1991 Chrysler is uncomfortable. When she asked her car dealer to change the seat belt, she was told that changing the belt would be against the law. Ms. Williams would like to know if this is true and if there is any alternative to address this problem.

I am pleased to provide the following information to you. By way of background information, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is authorized under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 to issue safety standards for new motor vehicles and new mot or vehicle equipment. One of our safety standards, Standard No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection, requires safety belts in vehicles, and sets performance requirements that ensure that the belts provide a high level of safety. Several other safety standar ds also have requirements that relate to the performance of safety belts.

There is a provision in Chapter 301 (49 U.S.C. @ 30122) which prohibits dealers and certain other commercial entities from knowingly making inoperative any part of a device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipmen t in compliance with an applicable safety standard. Since the safety belt in Ms. Williams' car was installed in accordance with applicable safety standards, the dealer could not lawfully change the safety belt in a manner that would negatively affect co mpliance with a safety standard. The dealer was probably referring to this provision in advising Ms. Williams that it would be against the law for it to change the safety belt.

Ms. Williams asked if there is any alternative to address this problem. If she has not done so, Ms. Williams may wish to check with Chrysler, the manufacturer of her vehicle, to see if it has any suggestions of which the dealer may not have been aware. In

addition, we know there are belt positioning devices that are sold for the advertised purpose of improving the fit of the vehicle's belt, particularly on children and small adults. However, we would like everyone who might consider using a belt position ing device to be aware that such a device could be potentially unsafe, depending on how it affects the vehicle's belt. Our safety concerns are discussed in the enclosed letter (addressed to Ms. Angela R. Caron, March 16, 1994).

NHTSA is aware that many consumers would like to see improvements in the fit of their safety belt, and we have recently addressed this by issuing a rule to improve the fit, comfort and adjustability of the belt system. The rule becomes effective in 1997 , and while it will not affect the belts already on existing vehicles, we anticipate it will greatly improve the fit of belts on future vehicles.

We regret that Ms. Williams finds her safety belt uncomfortable. However, we strongly urge your constituent to wear her safety belt to have the benefits of the safety system in a crash. Please call me if you or Ms. Williams have any further questions o r concerns. Our telephone number is (202) 366-9511.

Enclosure

ID: nht94-4.10

TYPE: Interpretation-NHTSA

DATE: August 26, 1994

FROM: John Womack -- Acting Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TO: Irene M. Thomas (Aurora, CO)

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 6/20/94 from Irene M. Thomas to Dee Fujita (OCC 10151)

TEXT:

This responds to your letter asking about safety regulations for a device you call a "CarMobile." The CarMobile is a type of strap to which three rings are sewn. The CarMobile attaches by "velcro" straps to the handrails located at the top of the inter ior rear car doors. You state that "Toys would be hung from the rings, so that babies and toddlers can play with them as they dangle in front of their carseats."

By way of background information, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has the authority to issue safety standards for new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA does not, however, approve or certify any veh icles or items of equipment. Instead, each manufacturer is responsible for "self-certifying" that its products meet all applicable safety standards. The agency periodically tests vehicles and items of equipment for compliance with the standards.

In response to your question, there is currently no Federal motor vehicle safety standard (FMVSS) that directly applies to the product you wish to manufacture. However, your product is considered to be an item of motor vehicle equipment. As a manufactu rer of motor vehicle equipment, you are subject to the requirements of 49 U.S.C. SS30118-30121 concerning the recall and remedy of products with safety related defects. I have enclosed an information sheet that briefly describes those responsibilities. (1) In the event you or NHTSA determines that your product contains a safety-related defect, you would be responsible for notifying purchasers of the defective equipment and remedying the problem free of charge.

In addition, while it is unlikely that the CarMobile would be installed by a motor vehicle manufacturer, distributor, dealer or repair business, 49 U.S.C. S30122 prohibits those businesses from installing the device if the installation "makes inoperative " compliance with any safety standard. NHTSA's safety standard for built-in child restraint systems (Standard 213) specifies requirements that ensure that the area surrounding a child in a built-in restraint is free from objects that could injure a chil d's head in a crash. If the CarMobile's cord and rings cause the vehicle with the built-in restraint to no longer comply with Standard 213, any of the aforementioned parties installing the CarMobile may have violated S30122.

The prohibition of S30122 does not apply to individual owners who install equipment in their own vehicles. Thus, individual owners may install any item of motor vehicle equipment regardless of its effect on compliance with Federal motor vehicle safety s tandards. However, NHTSA encourages vehicle owners not to degrade the safety of their vehicles, and would discourage them from hanging toys or other objects in front of a seated child that could injure the child in a crash. We also wish to point out th at any kind of ribbon or line that can

wrap around the neck of a child in a crash poses a potential risk of strangulation in a crash. You should consider these and any other relevant safety concerns when designing the CarMobile and when instructing consumers how t use the device.

I hope this is helpful. If you have any other questions, please contact Deirdre Fujita of my staff at this address or by phone at (202 366-2992.

---------------

(1) Please note that the "National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act" and "Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act" to which the information sheet refers have recently been recodified in Title 49 of the United States Code. This means that the citations used in the information sheet are outdated; however, the substantive requirements described in the sheet have not changed.

ID: nht94-4.100

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: December 7, 1994

FROM: Philip R. Recht -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TO: Tom Determan -- Engineering Manager, Brownie Tank Mfg. Co.

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 9/2/94 FROM TOM DETERMAN TO TAYLOR VINSON

TEXT: This is in reply to your letter of September 2, 1994, to Taylor Vinson of this Office. You have inquired about the mounting height requirements specified in Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 for side marker lamps and reflex reflectors installed on t ank trucks.

You understand that "side marker lamps must be mounted at any height above 15" from ground level, and reflex reflectors must be mounted between 15" and 60" from ground level."

You are correct. Standard No. 108 (Tables II and IV) specifies that side reflex reflectors on trucks shall be mounted not less than 15 inches nor more than 60 inches above the road surface, and that side marker lamps must be mounted not less than 15 inc hes above the road surface. This means that side marker lamps may be placed at heights greater than 60 inches.

Noting your thought that enforcement personnel are mistakenly applying requirements for trailers to tank trucks of your customers, I would like to say that the requirements are the same for trailers, except that, under Table II which applies to trailers whose overall width is 80 inches or more, the rear side marker lamps are subject to the same 60-inch height limitation as the side reflex reflectors.

I hope that this is helpful in resolving your problem.

ID: nht94-4.11

TYPE: Interpretation-NHTSA

DATE: August 26, 1994

FROM: John Womack -- Acting Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TO: Richard Kreutziger -- Executive Director, New York School Bus Distributors Association (Penn Yan, NY)

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter (fax) dated 7/19/94 from Richard Kreutziger to John Womack (OCC 10194)

TEXT:

This responds to your facsimile transmittal letter to me of July 19, 1994.

Your letter referred to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 217, Bus Emergency Exits and Window Retention and Release (49 CFR 571.217), and asked whether emergency exits on school buses with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of less that 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) and a passenger capacity of 2 to 16 seated and/or wheelchair positions, are required to be outlined with retroreflective tape as specified in paragraph S5.5.3(c) of the standard.

In 49 CFR 571.3, this agency defines a bus as a motor vehicle, except a trailer, designed to carry more than 10 persons, and further defines a school bus as

(A) bus that is sold, or introduced in interstate commerce, for purposes that include carrying students to and from school or related events, but does not include a bus designed and sold for operation as a common carrier in urban transportati on.

Whether or not a vehicle is a school bus, therefore, depends on its use (transporting the specified students) and seating capacity (more than 10), and not GVWR. Accordingly, if the seating capacity of a vehicle is 10 or less, it is not a bus and likewis e not a school bus, regardless of use or GVWR. Such a vehicle would not be required to comply with the requirements of FMVSS No. 217.

Vehicles meeting the definition of school bus would be subject to the requirements of FMVSS No. 217. Section S5.5 of the standard, Emergency Exit Identification, specifies the marking requirements for emergency exits on all buses. Sections S5.5.1 and S 5.5.2 apply to non-school buses, while section S5.5.3 applies to all school buses, without regard to GVWR.

Paragraph S5.5.3(c) provides:

Each opening for a required emergency exit shall be outlined around its outside perimeter with a minimum 3 centimeters wide retroreflective tape, either red, white, or yellow in color, that when tested under the conditions specified in S6.1 o f 571.131, meets the criteria specified in Table 1.

We would like to emphasize two points with regard to your letter. The first is that only those emergency exits that are required by the standard are subject to this provision. Extra emergency exits added as options are encouraged, but not required, to be outlined with the tape. The other point is one that I made

in May 18, 1994 letter to you. A technical amendment is pending publication which will amend the size requirement for the width of the retroreflective tape, from a minimum of 3 centimeters (cm.) to a minimum of 2.5 cm. That amendment is necessary becau se retroreflective tape is not commercially available in 3 cm. widths. Until the correction is issued, NHTSA will not take enforcement measures regarding tape width size against a manufacturer who uses one inch wide (minimum 2.5 cm.) retroreflective tap e.

In closing, bear in mind that all school buses are required to have a specified number of emergency exits, the number and location of which depend on the seating capacity of the vehicle, regardless of the GVWR, and all REQUIRED emergency exits must be ou tlined with the retroreflective tape.

I hope this information is helpful to you. Should you have any further questions or need any additional information, please feel free to contact Walter Myers of my staff at this address or at (202) 366-2992.

ID: nht94-4.12

TYPE: Interpretation-NHTSA

DATE: August 26, 1994

FROM: John Womack -- Acting Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TO: Barbara Pietra -- Dabble, Inc. (Los Angeles, CA)

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 7/5/94 from Barbara Pietra to John Womack (OCC 10166)

TEXT:

This responds to your letter asking about safety regulations for a device you call a "Cair Bag." You describe the Cair Bag as a "comfort pillow" for children to rest or sleep on while seated in their vehicle seat belt. You explain that the Cair Bag is an "under-stuffed styrene pellet bag" that attaches to the lap portion of the vehicle's Type II seat belt with a reinforced velcro and nylon strap. You state that you will recommend the product for children over 50 pounds "to prevent it from being used as a child restraint system."

By way of background information, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has the authority to issue Federal motor vehicle safety standards for new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA does not, however, appro ve or certify any vehicles or items of equipment.

You state in your letter that everyone you spoke to at NHTSA "felt this was a great product." To avoid any possible misunderstanding about what agency personnel said about your product, I wish to clarify that NHTSA and agency personnel can not and do no t endorse any product, or make commendations about products. If you understood them to say NHTSA approves of or believes your product is "great," that is incorrect, and we apologize for any confusion.

Turning now to your questions, there is currently no Federal motor vehicle safety standard (FMVSS) that directly applies to the Cair Bag. Our standard for "child restraint systems," FMVSS 213, applies to "any device except Type I or Type II seat belts, designed for use in a motor vehicle or aircraft to restrain, seat, or position children who weight 50 pounds or less." (S4 of FMVSS 213) We do not consider the Cair Bag to "position children" in a manner that a child seat positions children to better u se a vehicle's belt system. Rather, the Cair Bag is simply a cushion that a child may lean on. Since your product does not "restrain, seat, or position" children as a child restraint system, the product is not subject to Standard 213 regardless of the w eight of the children for whom you recommend the product.

However, we share your concern that the Cair Bag must not be used in place of a child restraint system. We recommend that the product be clearly labeled with information to the consumer that the product is not a child restraint system and must not be us ed as one.

While no FMVSS applies to the Cair Bag, your product is considered to be an item of motor vehicle equipment. As a manufacturer of motor vehicle equipment, you are subject to the requirements of 49 U.S.C. SS30118-30121 concerning the recall and remedy of products with safety related defects. I have enclosed an information sheet that briefly describes those and other manufacturer responsibilities. (1) In t he event you or NHTSA determines that your product

contains a safety-related defect, you would be responsible for notifying purchasers of the defective equipment and remedying the problem free of charge.

In addition, while it is unlikely that the Cair Bag would be installed by a motor vehicle manufacturer, distributor, dealer or repair business, 49 U.S.C. S30122 prohibits those businesses from installing the device if the installation "makes inoperative" compliance with any safety standard. Our FMVSS's require specific levels of performance for the belt system in a vehicle. For example, Standard 208 has requirements that ensure that a vehicle's lap and shoulder belts are installed to distribute the cr ash forces over the skeletal structure of the occupant. The FMVSS also have requirements for belts to automatically lock and retract, ensuring there is no excessive slack in the belt system. Since the Cair Bag attaches to the lap belt, any person liste d in S30122 must ensure that compliance of the belt system with these requirements is not degraded. Also, FMVSS 302 specifies flammability resistance requirements for vehicle interiors. Any person listed in S30122 who installs a Cair Bag must ensure th at the product does not vitiate the vehicle's compliance with those flammability resistance requirements.

The prohibition of S30122 does not apply to individual owners who install equipment in their own vehicles. Thus, individual owners may install any item of motor vehicle equipment regardless of its effect on compliance with Federal motor vehicle safety s tandards. However, NHTSA encourages vehicle owners not to degrade the safety of their vehicles.

I would like to make a further note in closing. The advertising literature you enclosed with your letter described the Cair Bag as "The Portable 'Air Bag'." We believe this description could be misleading, because the term "air bag" is widely recognized as describing an inflatable device that provides substantial occupant protection in frontal impacts. We are concerned that calling your device a "portable air bag" could mislead some consumers into believing your device offers occupant protection simil ar to that of a vehicle air bag, which of course, is incorrect. To avoid this potential for confusion, please refrain from describing your device as an "air bag."

I hope this information has been helpful. If you have any other questions, please contact Deirdre Fujita of my staff at this address or by phone at (202) 366-2992.

---------------

(1) Please note that the "National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act" and the "Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act" to which the information sheet refers have recently been recodified in Title 49 of the United States Code. This means that the citations used in the information sheet are outdated; however, the substantive requirements described in the sheet have not changed.

ID: nht94-4.13

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: August 26, 1994

FROM: Gary Blouse -- V. P. Engineering, Fitting Image

TO: Office of Chief Console -- NHTSA

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO 2/13/95 LETTER FROM PHILIP R. RECHT TO GARY BLOUSE (A43; VSA 102 (4)

TEXT: Dear Chief Console,

Fitting Image was founded about twelve years ago with the commitment to engineering excellence and to manufacturing the highest quality precision plastic products.

Our latest product under development consideration is a bag holder for the interior of vehicles. This is designed to attach to the head rest of the seats. The hanger is on the back side of the seat allowing hanging storage ability, especially for plasti c grocery bags. Please see enclosed sketch for further explaination.

Are there any after market equipment standards with which this product would need to comply?

We look forward to your prompt response.

We do request confidentially on this matter since the item has not been patented yet. (Drawing omitted.)