ID: nht76-4.39

DATE: 11/10/76

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; F. Berndt; NHTSA

TO: Solar Control Products

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in response to your September 22, 1976, letter regarding the use of "Solar Control Reflective Films" in motor vehicles. You asked several questions concerning the applicability of Federal requirements to the manufacture and sale of your "Scotchtint" protective film.

I am enclosing a copy of a letter to Mr. Mark T. Lerche from this agency that discussed the applicability of Federal requirements to his company's "Madico" solar protective film. The discussion in that letter is equally applicable to "Scotchtint" protective film and should answer your questions. The main point to be noted is that these protective films that are attached to glass are not "glazing" themselves and, therefore, the requirements of Federal Safety Standard No. 205 are not applicable to the manufacture of the film. It is the responsibility of the manufacturer, dealer, or vehicle repair business that applies the film to ensure that glazing remains in compliance with the standard. Of course, if your company applies the film to any glazing you would fall in this same category.

It is laudable that your company is interested in ensuring that its film is not used in a manner that would be detrimental to the safety of the motoring public. Although it is not your responsibility to do so, a safety warning to your consumers that "Scotchtint" should not be placed on vehicle glazing in "areas requisite for driving visibility," would be helpful.

We appreciate your interest in motor vehicle safety.

SINCERELY,

Industrial Tape Division

September 22, 1976

Frank Berndt Acting Chief Council National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Subject: Usage of Solar Control Reflective Films in Vehicles

Our organization is presently manufacturing sun control films under the brand name "SCOTCHTINT".

When originally invented and taken to the marketplace the products were designed and intended for application to existing window glass for the purpose of reducing the transmission of heat, glare and ultraviolet light.

Following the introduction of the original product concept, additional product variations have been developed in response to specific customer/market demand with the result that today there is a family of products marketed.

An assortment of technical and promotional literature on our products is enclosed for your reference.

In the marketing of our products we have taken the position that the application of "SCOTCHTINT" Brand Films to automobiles is not recommended and our dealer applicator training and consumer do-it-yourself literature stipulate this fact. However, the demand for a sun control film has been increasing, particularly for recreational vehicles. We are also aware that other manufacturers of reflective films are implementing aggressive programs to sell their products in the automotive/recreational van market areas. All of this activity causes us to re-evaluate our own position.

We have been soliciting information and assistance from various sources and take this opportunity to review with you our understanding and ask for your verification and/or clarification:

1) It is our understanding that if we actively promote the sale of sun control films to vehicle manufacturers, then we must determine whether the products being offered are in compliance with Section 108 of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966. This would apply to visible light transmittance, abrasion resistance, etc.

2) If the products are marketed to automotive refinish shops, the same conditions would apply as to selling to the automotive manufacturers in that an automotive refinish shop may only use products that are in compliance with the act cited above.

3) Insofar as the after-market is concerned, i.e. selling directly to the consumer for self-application, the above act does not apply.

To elaborate on points 1 and 2 we further understand that compliance must be determined by the manufacturer and should compliance be challenged or questioned by the Office of Standard Enforcement, then they would have the product evaluated by an independent agency or laboratory. Should it be found that the manufacturer is not in compliance they would be cited accordingly and appropriate fines would be levied.

Should we promote the sale of reflective films for the after-market, we should do so with the stipulation that the film should not be applied to the windshield or front side windows of any vehicle, be it automobile or recreational van. However, application is permissible, and legal under Federal law, on rear side windows and on the rear window so long as the vehicle has an outside rear view mirror.

We visualize a fairly good sales potential in recreational vehicles, such as trailers and self-contained units, if we restrict application to rear side windows and rear windows. We know that a need exists for our product and that our products will make a contribution not only in passenger comfort, but also in the area of energy conservation, i.e. air conditioning equipment will function more efficiently and reduce fuel consumption.

We want to approach this market in an ethical manner, and therefore, respectfully request your guidance.

Your prompt response to this letter and your cooperation will be sincerely appreciated.

M. P. McNiff, Global Market Planning Manager Solar Control Products

dc: D. ALLEN G. A. BERGER; J. R. BERG; T. J. SCHEUERMAN

ID: nht76-4.4

DATE: 03/01/76 EST

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; F. Berndt; NHTSA

TO: ICI United States, Inc.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

ID: nht76-4.40

DATE: 03/10/76

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; R. L. Carter; NHTSA

TO: Monsanto Polymers and Petrochemicals Co.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in response to your letter of December 22, 1975, to Mr. Guy Hunter of my staff, concerning our reasons for prohibiting the use of tempered glass in windshields of motor vehicles.

The use of tempered glass in windshields is prohibited for the following reasons:

1. Tempered glass has little, if any, energy absorbing capability while laminated glass has intrinsic deflective characteristics that provide such capability.

2. When tempered glass breaks, it usually either "crazes" or shatters into many small pieces. If crazing occurs, the driver's vision becomes obscured thus not only endangering himself but others as well. If the glass shatters, the driver and other vehicle occupants are showered with glass pellets which could not only result in loss of control of the vehicle but is also likely to cause eye injuries.

3. When cracked, tempered glass has essentially no retentive capability, thus the likelihood of occupant ejection through the windshield opening is greatly increased in crash situations. Laminated glass, on the other hand, possesses significant retentive capability even after initial cracking of the glass laminate on either side of the plastic interlayer.

If I can be of further help, do not hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely,

MONSANTO POLYMERS & PETROCHEMICALS CO.

December 22, 1975

Guy Hunter -- National Highway Traffic Safety Admin.

Dear Guy:

Our Monsanto Europe associates receive, from time to time, inquiries from a variety of industry and independent sources concerning NHTSA's position on the question of tempered vs. laminated HPR windshields. While I am aware of your position in this matter, would you be willing to document your feelings in a letter which I could distribute to our associates.

Should you agree, it would be appreciated if you could define the reasons for which NHTSA would be opposed to permitting tempered windshield use in the American market, and perhaps include an endorsement of the HPR windshield.

Thank you for your assistance.

Kindest regards,

E. Lacey -- Industry Technical Specialist, Laminated Glass

ID: nht76-4.41

DATE: 03/26/76

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; R. B. Dyson; NHTSA

TO: Thomas A. Kirwan III - Capco

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in response to your letter of February 25, 1976, requesting information concerning the Federal motor vehicle safety standards and regulations applicable to transit vehicles, specifically, Dodge vans that will be used in a rural transportation system.

The answers to your questions are as follows:

(1) "Which FMVSS apply to vans used in transit service?"

If your Dodge vans are designed to carry 10 persons or less they would qualify as "multipurpose passenger vehicles", as defined in 49 CFR Part 571.3. As multipurpose passenger vehicles, the Dodge vans would be subject to the requirements of the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards listed below. The standards marked with an asterick (*) are equipment standards and do not apply to the vehicles themselves. Rather, these standards set forth requirements for manufacturers of motor vehicle equipment for use in multipurpose passenger vehicles.

No. 101 - Control Location, Identification, and Illumination.

No. 102 - Transmission Shift Lever Sequence, Starter Interlock, and Transmission Braking Effect.

No. 103 - Windshield Defrosting and Defogging Systems.

No. 104 - Windshield Wiping and Washing Systems.

*No. 106-74 - Brake Hoses.

No. 107 - Reflecting Surfaces.

No. 108 - Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment.

No. 111 - Rearview Mirrors.

No. 112 - Headlamp Concealment Devices.

No. 113 - Hood Latch System.

*No. 116 - Motor Vehicle Brake Fluids.

No. 118 - Power Operated Window Systems.

*No. 119 - New Pneumatic Tires for Vehicles Other Than Passenger Cars.

No. 120 - Tire Selection and Rims for Vehicles Other than Passenger Cars.

No. 124 - Accelerator Control Systems.

*No. 125 - Warning Devices.

*No. 205 - Glazing Materials.

No. 206 - Door Locks and Door Retention Components.

No. 207 - Seating Systems.

No. 208 - Occupant Crash Protection.

*No. 209 - Seat Belt Assemblies.

No. 210 - Seat Belt Assembly Anchorages.

No. 211 - Wheel Nuts, Wheel Discs and Hub Caps.

No. 213 - Child Seating Systems.

No. 219 - Windshield Zone Intrusion.

No. 301-75 - Fuel System Integrity.

No. 302 - Flammability of Interior Materials.

The manufacturer of the Dodge vans must affix a label to each vehicle certifying that the vehicle is in compliance with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards and regulations, as required by 49 CFR Part 567, Certification. This certification label should be affixed to the door or door post of each vehicle, and you should check to make certain that it is present.

Please note that if the Dodge vans are designed to carry more than 10 persons, they would be classified as "buses" under 49 CFR Part 567.3, and the list of applicable safety standards would differ.

(2) "Does NHTSA recommend a set of vehicle specifications for vans used in transit?"

No. The NHTSA has issued only the requirements found in the motor vehicle safety standards and regulations.

(3) "Do any FMVSS apply specifically to modified vans (e.g. those filled with hydraulic lift for wheelchairs and a raised roof)?"

No. Such vehicles must meet the same standards as other MPV's.

(4) "Are there any regulations which apply to fiberglass bubbletops on vans in transit service?"

Yes. Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 205, Glazing Materials, 49 CFR 571.205, specifies requirements for glazing materials for use in motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment. Rigid plastic materials that are to be used as covers for openings in the roof of a vehicle must conform to the requirements specified in paragraph S5.1.2.1 of Standard No. 205.

(5) "Are there any regulations, perhaps within the Federal Highway Safety Act, which apply to driver qualifications?"

Yes. Driver qualifications for transit vehicles are governed by Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations, 49 CFR Part 391, Qualifications of Drivers.

(6) "Could you provide any further information which you feel would contribute to the safe operation of our transit system?"

At the present time the NHTSA has not issued any general guidelines concerning the organization or operation of transit systems. You may, however, wish to contact the Urban Mass Transportation Administration of this Department for information on this subject.

I hope this letter has been responsive to your questions. Please contact us if we can of any further assistance.

Yours truly,

ATTACH.

CAPCO

February 25, 1976

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Gentlemen:

The Capital Area Planning Council is in the process of implementing a rural transportation system as part of the Federal Highway Administration's Rural Highway Public Transportation Demonstration Program (Section 147 of the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1973). We are, therefore, interested in obtaining information concerning vehicle specifications and safety standards for transit vehicles.

Since our transit fleet will be entirely composed of Dodge vans rather than standard transit buses, we are uncertain as to which Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards apply specifically to vans used in transit operations. Could you assist us by providing the answers to the following questions:

1) Which FMVSS apply to vans used in transit service?

2) Does NHTSA recommend a set of vehicle specifications for vans used in transit?

3) Do any FMVSS apply specifically to modified vans (e.g. those fitted with hydraulic lift for wheelchairs and a raised roof)? 4) Are there any regulations which apply to fiberglass bubbletops on vans in transit service?

5) Are there any regulations, perhaps within the Federal Highway Safety Act, which apply to driver qualifications?

6) Could you provide any further information which you feel would contribute to the safe operation of our transit system.

Enclosed is a draft of our vehicle specifications. I would appreciate your comments and suggestions prior to March 10 so the necessary revisions may be made before our public hearings begin.

Yours very truly,

Thomas A. Kirwan III -- Transportation Planning Intern

Enclosure

Vehicle Specifications (Minimum Requirements)

1 ton - 125" wheelbase 350 cu. in. 8 cyl. engine 7400 lbs. GVW Min. Front Axle 3300 lbs., Rear Axle 5050 lbs. Automatic Transmission Power Disc Brakes Power Steering Heavy Duty Front/Rear Shock Absorbers Heavy Duty Front/Rear Springs Heavy Duty Alternator Heavy Duty Battery Heater (High Capacity) Air Conditioning (High Capacity) - 22,000 B.T.U. Slant Line or Vented Tinted Glass Windows Gauges - Oil Pressure and Ammeter Lighting Package (Door Actuated) Exterior Lighting to meet F.M.V.S.S. Insulation Package Undercoating Dual Electric Horn and Horn Bar Large Lo-Mount Side Mirrors Seat Belts for all Passengers Two Speed Electric Wipers and Window Washer Exhaust Emission Controls to meet F.M.V.S.S. and State Code High Capacity Fuel Tank Tires 8.00 x 16.5 (10 Ply Truck Type or Steel Radial) Front Stabilizer Bar Oil Filter - 1 Quart Freight, Handling, and Dealer Preparation

Modifications

Raised, Collapse Resistant Steel Roof Cap Restructured, penetration resistant sidewalls, and rear end sections Gas Tank Shield Drive Shaft Guards Passenger Door Entrance Heavy Duty Driver Door Control (manual) Entrance Door and Front Section Padding Passenger Grab Rails Two Leaf Side Door (Extended Doorway) Electric Hydraulic Lift, Expanded Metal Ramp, Semi-Automatic/Manual Override (minimum lift capacity 500 lbs.) Wheelchair Tie Downs (2 prs. mounted at 45 degrees) Rubber Non-Skid Flooring First Aid Kit 2 3/4 lbs. - 10 BC Dry Chemical Fire Extinguisher Reflector Flare Kit

ID: nht76-4.42

DATE: 02/25/76

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; R. B. Dyson; NHTSA

TO: Byron A. Crampton

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in response to your letter of January 16, 1976, concerning crew cab doors for use on fire trucks, and the interpretation of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 206, Door Locks and Door Retention Components.

You asked two questions in your letter:

(1) Is it the intent of FMVSS 206 to actually address door hardware for doors that are adjacent to a walkway and not a seat?

Standard No. 206 is applicable to the type of vehicle that you described. Paragraph S4 of the standard states that "component on any side door leading directly into a compartment that contains one or more seating accommodations shall conform to this standard". The standard does not require the door to be directly adjacent to a seat. The door on your vehicle leads directly "into a compartment that contains one or more seating accommodations," so the standard is applicable. The presence of a walkway is irrevelant.

(2) If the standard does apply would not the installation of an untested conventional door structure in place of a folding door result in a safer vehicle?

The NHTSA hopes that manufacturers would install conventional hinged door structures instead of folding doors on fire trucks, if the hinged doors would result in producing safer vehicles. The cost of testing the components of hinged doors for purposes of Standard 206 should not be determinative of whether the manufacturer will install hinged doors or folding doors on the fire trucks. Rather, the safety of the firemen who must use the trucks should be the determinative factor.

You should be aware that the tests in Standard No. 206 are laboratory tests of the components, and do not involve the vehicle as a whole. These component systems are generally available from suppliers and are already warranted as being in compliance with Federal standards. Therefore, the cost of using conventional hinged doors might not be as prohibitive as you had supposed.

Please contact us if we can be of any further assistance.

YOURS TRULY,

TRUCK BODY AND EQUIPMENT ASSOCIATION, INC.

January 16, 1976

Richard B. Dyson, Asst. Chief Counsel NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION

The Fire Apparatus Manufacturers Division (FAMD) of the Truck Body and Equipment Association (TBEA) represents more than fifty manufacturers of fire apparatus, who in turn account for approximately 85% of the pieces of equipment sold within the United States.

Recently several FAMD members have questioned this office as to specific requirements of FMVSS 206 as applicable to fire apparatus equipped with crew cabs. The vehicles in question (see sketch) are generally produced on a commercial truck chassis by adding fire fighting equipment, a fire apparatus body, and finally - a crew cab which allows the vehicle to carry additional personnel.

From the sketch, it can be seen, that the crew cab doors open up to a walkway to the passenger compartment and not onto a designated seating position. The three designated seating positions furnished with the crew cab are set back into the compartment to allow personnel clothed (Illegible Words) and breathing apparatus to walk to their seat.

Section S4 of FMVSS 206 states that the standard does not apply to folding doors or doors that are designed to be easily attached and removed, and therefore when faced with the high costs of testing a few completed vehicles to FMVSS 206 or installing either folding doors or quick release hinges, the decision is simple - but inconsistent with our aim toward developing the best piece of fire apparatus possible.

With this dilema in mind, our questions are as follows:

1. Is it the intent of FMVSS 206 to actually address door hardware for doors that are adjacent to a walkway and not a seat?

2. If the standard does apply, would not the installation of an untested conventional door structure in place of a folding door result in a safer vehicle?

We would appreciate any additional comments that you may have concerning this situation.

Byron A. Crampton Manager of Engineering Services

* Notes

1. Crew cab doors are presently the folding type or equipped with quick disconnect hinges.

FIRE APPARATUS with CREW CAB

(Graphics omitted)

ID: nht76-4.43

DATE: 09/02/76

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; F. Berndt; NHTSA

TO: Nissan Motor Co., Ltd.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This responds to Nissan Motor Company's June 2, 1976, question whether a passenger car rear seat cushion assembly which is hinged to rotate forward about its lower front corner is subject to the requirement of S4.3 of Standard No. 207, Seating Systems, for a self-locking restraining device with certain dynamic characteristics. If a restraining device is required, you request to know the test procedures appropriate for it under S4.3.2.1(a).

Section S4.3 of Standard No. 207 states, with two exceptions, "a hinged or folding occupant seat or occupant seat back shall be equipped with a self-locking device for restraining the hinged or folding device." The NHTSA does not consider the words "occupant seat or occupant seat back" to refer to the seat cushion alone, and therefore a restraining device for the cushion alone is not required. The requirement of S4.2(a) in the case of seating systems with separate backs and cushions is considered a sufficient test of the seat cushion retention characteristics. In the case of the seat cushion assembly you describe, our estimate of the cushion center of gravity in relation to the hinge point indicates that some form of restraint is probably necessary to comply with the requirement for application of a 20g force in the forward direction.

This interpretation supersedes our November 27, 1972, letter to the Recreational Vehicle Institute to the degree that its discussion of seat cushion restraint is inconsistent with this interpretation.

YOURS TRULY,

NISSAN MOTOR CO. LTD.

June 2, 1976

Frank A. Berndt Acting Chief Counsel National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

We would like to take this opportunity to ask you for your interpretation regarding the application of S.4.3 in FMVSS 207 "Seating Systems".

1) Is S.4.3 applied to the hinged seat cushion which is shown in the attachment No. 1? In other words, should the hinged seat cushion be equipped with a self-locking device for restraining itself and a control for releasing that restraining device? Should its restraining device meet the requirements of static force and acceleration stated in S.4.3.2.1 (a) and S.4.3.2.2 respectively?

2) If the answer of the above question is yes, in which direction of (X) or (Z) described in the attachment No. 2 should the restraining device be subjected to an acceleration of 20 g when tested in accordance with S.4.3.2.2?

Thank you for your attention to this matter. We look forward to hearing your interpretation of the above in the near future.

Tokio Iinuma Staff, Safety

CC: ROBERT E. NELSON

Condition of using seat

Condition of folding seat

Attachment No. 1 - the hinged seat cushion installed for the rear seating system of station wagon

(Graphics omitted)

(Graphics omitted)

ID: nht76-4.44

DATE: 09/27/76

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; F. Berndt; NHTSA

TO: Joseph G. Bishop -- U.S. Coach Corp.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in response to your July 7, 1976, request for information regarding the applicability of Federal motor vehicle safety standards to "rumble seat kits" for installation in passenger cars. The answers to your questions are as follows:

(1) "Is there any Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards or Regulations that would preclude the installation of rumble seats in passenger cars?"

The answer to your question is no.

(2) "What are the current Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards and Regulations that would be specifically applicable to the installation of rumble seats in passenger cars?"

Installation of the rumble seats could affect compliance of the vehicle with the following safety standards: Standard No. 207, Seating Systems; Standard No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection; Standard No. 209, Seat Belt Assemblies; Standard No. 210, Seat Belt Assembly Anchorages; and Standard No. 110, Tire Selection and Rims.

We are assuming that the rumble seats would be installed in completed vehicles that are already certified, in which case the alterer would be required to meet the requirements of 49 CFR Part 567. Section 567.7 requires one who alters a previously certified vehicle, prior to its first sale, (by other than readily attachable components) to affix an additional label to the vehicle, stating that the vehicle remains in compliance with all applicable safety standards after the alteration. It should be noted that any additional weight created by the rumble seats or a change in the distribution of weight could also affect the vehicle's compliance with other safety standards whose test procedures require a barrier crash test.

We also would point out that 49 CFR Part 575 requires manufacturers to provide consumer information regarding vehicle stopping distance, tire reserve load, and acceleration and passing ability, at the point of first sale of the vehicle and along with the purchased vehicle. The increased weight created by the rumble seats could require modification of the information that would have to be provided.

(3) "Is there any State or Local Motor Vehicle Safety Standards that to your knowledge may preclude the installation of rumble seats in passenger vehicles?"

We are not aware of any State or local regulations that would preclude installation of rumble seats in passenger vehicles.

(4) Can you furnish a list of Government approved independent testing facilities for FMVSS compliance testing?" The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) does not approve independent testing facilities, nor will it recommend that any particular testing center be utilized. You might wish to contact the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators concerning this subject, at 1201 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C.

(5) "Can the NHTSA make any design recommendations related to the installation of rumble seats in passenger vehicles?"

The NHTSA does not provide engineering expertise regarding the manufactuer of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. However, the agency will answer specific questions that a manufacturer might have concerning the basis for a particular performance requirement.

(6) "Is there any future or pending legislation that may be related to the installation of rumble seats in passenger vehicles?"

At the present time there is no pending Federal legislation relating to the installation of rumble seats in passenger vehicles, nor is any such legislation anticipated by the NHTSA in the immediate future.

The statements made above are directed primarily to the situation in which rumble seats would be installed prior to first sale of the vehicle, and in which the vehicle would have to be certified as being in compliance with all applicable motor vehicle safety standards. Please note, however, that the aftermarket installation of rumble seats might also be subject to Federal requirements.

Section 108(a)(2)(A) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 provides that, with one exception, "no manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business shall knowingly render inoperative, in whole or part, any device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment in compliance with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard . . ." Therefore, no manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or repair business may install the rumble seats in a motor vehicle if he knows that such installation would alter the vehicle's compliance with any safety standard. For example, installation of rumble seats could possibly affect components of the vehicle that are subject to the requirements of safety standards such as Standard No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment, or Standard No. 301, Fuel System Integrity.

SINCERELY,

U.S. COACH CORP.

July 7, 1976

Robert L. Carter Associate Administrator - Motor Vehicle Programs National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Re: Request for FMVSS Information Covering Automotive Accessories

U.S. Coach Corporation designs, engineers and manufactures automotive accessory items for installation on passenger car vehicles at distribution centers throughout the United States. Several of our products are installed on vehicles prior to sale to the original owner at the dealer level and are therefore considered O.E.M. products requiring our certification that structural modifications are in compliance with all applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards.

We are currently designing and developing a "Rumble Seat Kit" that will accomodate two passengers in a seat located in the trunk or luggage compartment of passenger vehicles. My review of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 as amended, did not reveal any preclusion of the use of a 'Rumble Seat Option' in passenger vehicles.

It is our intent to proceed with our program to meet the passenger restraint requirements of Standards 208, 209 and 210 with Type 1 seat belts and installed in a manner that compliance with all Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards is preserved.

Since our Corporate intent is to manufacture and sell products that not only meet or exceed all existing Federal Safety Standards but will also afford the highest level of protection to the consumer, we are very interested in any recommendations the N.H.T.S.A. may offer pertaining to occupant protection in open vehicle passenger accomodation specifically in the "Rumble Seat" application.

Would you please respond to the following questions as well as making any comments or suggestions relating to our program:

1. Is there any Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards or Regulations that would preclude the installation of rumble seats in passenger vehicles?

2. What are the current Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards and Regulations that would be specifically applicable to the installation of rumble seats in passenger vehicles?

3. Is there any State or Local Motor Vehicle Safety Standards that to your knowledge may preclude the installation of rumble seats in passenger vehicles?

4. Can you furnish a list of Government approved independent testing facilities for FMVSS compliance testing?

5. Can the N.H.T.S.A. make any design recommendations related to the installation of rumble seats in passenger vehicles?

6. Is there any furture or pending legislation that may be related to the installation of rumble seats in passenger vehicles?

We sincerely appreciate any assistance you may provide in the above matter.

Joseph G. Bishop President

ID: nht76-4.45

DATE: 01/12/76

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; R. B. Dyson; NHTSA

TO: Bureau of Standards

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

ID: nht76-4.46

DATE: 04/21/76

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; S. P. Wood; NHTSA

TO: Nissan Motor Co., Ltd.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This responds to your March 15, 1976, question whether a passenger car is considered a convertible for purposes of compliance with motor vehicle safety standards if its roof includes a "sun roof" or has two removable sections fitted into the roof over the outboard front designated seating positions in such a fashion that they do not join each other (Hurst Hatch Roof). You also request confirmation that convertibles are excluded from the requirements of Standard No. 216, Roof Crush Resistance, and are required to meet S4.1.2.3.2 of Standard No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection.

The answer to your first question is no. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration considers a convertible to be a vehicle whose "A" pillar or windshield peripheral support is not joined with the "B" pillar (or rear roof support rearward of the "B" pillar position) by a fixed, rigid structural member. Passenger cars equipped with a "sun roof" or a "Hurst Hatch Roof" do not qualify as convertible, because they have a fixed, rigid structural member in the described location.

With regard to your other question, passenger cars manufactured from September 1, 1973, to August 31, 1976, inclusive, are required to meet one of three options specified in Standard No. 208. If a manufacturer chooses to meet the third option listed (S4.1.2.3), separate requirements are specified for convertibles in S4.1.2.3.2. Convertibles are excluded from Standard No. 216, although a manufacturer may choose to meet the standard in place of certain requirements of Standard No. 208 that are not presently mandatory.

YOURS TRULY,

NISSAN MOTOR CO., LTD.

March 15, 1976

Frank A. Berndt Acting Chief Counsel National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Re: Hurst Hatch Roof and FMVSS No. 216

I would like to take this opportunity to ask you a few questions regarding your interpretation of the word "Convertible", which can be seen in FMVSS No. 216, S3.

In the recent model cars, there have been passenger cars equipped with a new type of roof called "Hurst Hatch Roof", which is shown in the picture in the attachment to this letter (No.1). The structure of the Hurst Hatch Roof Body is completely different from the conventional sun roof, which is also shown in the attachment (No.2). It seems to show a different performance if tested to FMVSS No. 216.

My questions are as follows:

1) Is the Hurst Hatch Roof car defined as a convertible?

2) Is the conventional sun roof car defined as a convertible?

3) If the convertibles are manufactured in the production line, those cars do not have to comply with FMVSS No. 216. However, they have to meet the requirement of S4.1.2.3.2 of FMVSS No.208. Is my understanding correct?

It would be greatly appreciated if your clear interpretation would be given to me by letter as soon as possible.

Naoyoshi Suzuki Staff, Safety

ATTACHMENT

(NO.1)

(NO. 2)

(Graphics omitted)

ID: nht76-4.47

DATE: 01/08/76

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; R. B. Dyson; NHTSA

TO: American Safety Equipment Corporation

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This responds to American Safety's December 5, 1975, question whether a state or local government agency such as a municipal police department may modify Type II seat belt assemblies to permit detachment of the upper torso restraint, and whether a seat belt manufacturer may "participate in the modifications of the vehicle and seat belt assemblies."

Section 108(a)(2) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (the Act) (15 U.S.C. @ 1397(a)(2) prohibits a manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or repair business from "knowingly [rendering] inoperative, in whole or part, any device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment in compliance with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard [except during a repair]." This prohibition applies to changing a non-detachable upper torso restraint to a detachable upper torso restraint.

Under this language of the Act, the police department would not be prohibited from modification of the seat belts. A manufacturer could not actively participate in the modification of the vehicles. Sale of a seat belt assembly to the police department would not of itself, however, constitute a violation of the Act.

YOURS TRULY,

American Safety

December 5, 1975

Mr. Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel Office of Chief Counsel U. S. Department of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

This will acknowledge receipt of your letter dated November 18, 1975, reference N40-30, which was in response to our letter of October 10, 1975.

Apparently there has been a misunderstanding as to the question(s) raised by our October 10th inquiry, as your letter makes reference to seat belt assembly installations in newly manufactured vehicles. The first paragraph of our October 10th letter is addressed to the question of modification of seat belt assemblies in existing vehicles; this modification would result in the shoulder belt portion of the assembly being a "detachable" belt.

In any event, your letter of November 18, 1975 advised that Standard No. 209 does not prohibit the manufacture of seat belt assemblies with detachable upper torso restraints. However, while your letter does state that a municipal government could not specify Type 2 seat belt assemblies with detachable upper torso restraints at the front outboard designated seating position, it is silent in the question of whether the government agency is still free to alter the vehicle after delivery to the agency. You will note that our letter of October 10, 1975 included a copy of an NHTSA letter of May 15, 1974 addressed to Los Angeles County Sheriff, Peter J. Pitchess wherein it was stated that the sheriff was free to alter the department vehicles after delivery. We are again including a copy with this letter for your information.

Accordingly, we would appreciate hearing from you with regard to the questions:

(a) are states and their political subdivisions free to alter their vehicles after delivery by modifying the seat belt assembly wherein the shoulder belt portion of the assembly is "detachable".

(b) assuming that states and their political subdivision may alter their vehicles after delivery, may a manufacturer of seat belt assemblies participate in the modification of the vehicle(s) and seat belt assembly(s) wherein the shoulder belt portion of the assembly(s) is "detachable".

We hope this will correct any misunderstanding.

W. A. May Corporate Secretary