ID: nht76-4.33

DATE: 05/07/76

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

TO: Free Enterprise Company

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This responds to your March 12, 1976, request for a listing of Federal motor vehicle safety standards that apply to the manufacturer of a fiberglass hardtop for installation on a Jeep. I am assuming that this top is an aftermarket item and is not incorporated by the Jeep Corporation as the vehicle roof of its product.

The only Federal motor vehicle safety standard applicable to this item of aftermarket motor vehicle equipment is Standard No. 205, Glazing Materials, 49 CFR 571.205. Standard No. 205 specifies requirements for glazing materials used in motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment, including a vehicle top such as you describe. Any glazing material used in the construction of your Jeep top must be certified as being in compliance with Standard No. 205, even though the top itself does not have to be certified. Generally, the prime glazing manufacturer or the glazing fabricator certifies the glazing, so your main concern as manufacturer of the Jeep top is to make certain that you use glazing that has been certified as being in compliance with the standard. If you obtain sheets of glazing from a prime glazing manufacturer and fabricate or mold the glazing yourself, you must mark and certify the glazing as specified in paragraphs S6.4 and S6.5 of Standard No. 205. A copy of the standard is enclosed for your information.

Enclosure

ATTACH.

March 12, 1976

Chief Council -- National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Re: Fiberglass Jeep Top - Safety Requirements

Dear Chief Council:

Our company is presently preparing to mass produce and market a fiberglass hardtop for Jeep Model CJ-5. The top will include five windows, three of which open, two side doors, and one rear lift-up door.

Before we market any tops or commit ourselves irretrievably to a particular form, we need to find out what safety regulations might apply to our product. Therefore, please send us a listing of what requirements for general construction and materials (reinforcement, glass, crash tests, etc.) would apply. In particular, what do the regulations have to say about "suicide" doors (or, doors hinged at the back).

Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely,

Paula J. Redford (Mrs.) -- Manager, Free Enterprise Company

ID: nht76-4.34

DATE: 07/13/76

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; F. Berndt; NHTSA

TO: "Lucite" Acrylic Sheet Products

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in response to your letter of April 9, 1976, concerning the certification and marking requirements for glazing specified in Section 6 of Standard No. 205, Glazing Materials. You asked whether the standard prohibits use of the "DOT" symbol and manufacturer's code number by anyone other than a "prime glazing material manufacturer," as that term is defined in paragraph S6.1.

Our letter to Dupont explained the separate certification and marking requirements that are applicable to glazing prepared by prime glazing material manufacturers, distributors, and vehicle manufacturers. The standard specifies that the "DOT" symbol shall be placed on glazing that is designed by the prime glazing material manufacturer as a component of any specific motor vehicle. The agency's interpretations of several years ago pointed out that the standard requires a person other than a prime glazing manufacturer who cuts glazing materials to mark it in accordance with section 6 of ANS Z26 and to certify it in accordance with section 114 of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966. These interpretations emphasized that a person who cuts and shapes the glazing material received from a prime glazing manufacturer should not include the "DOT" symbol in his marking and certification.

At the time of the earlier interpretations, the NHTSA considered it necessary from the standpoint of enforcement to distinguish between glazing that had been manufactured by the prime glazing manufacturer for use in specific motor vehicles and glazing that had been cut, shaped, or otherwise altered by another party before installation. The agency was also concerned that the use of the "DOT" symbol by anyone other than the prime glazing manufacturer would be misleading and could create confusion.

Since that time, the certification procedures have become more widely understood and uniformly practiced throughout the industry, and this has aided the "traceability" of glazing materials for enforcement purposes. Therefore, the agency no longer prohibits the use of the "DOT" symbol and the prime glazing manufacturer's code number by the distributor or manufacturer who cuts the glazing, if the prime glazing manufacturer grants permission for such use of his code number to the distributor or manufacturer.

Sincerely,

ATTACH.

E. I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS & COMPANY

INCORPORATED April 9, 1976

Mr. Frank A. Berndt, Esq. Office of Chief Counsel Department of Transportation National Highway Traffic Adm. 400 Seventh Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20591

Dear Mr. Berndt:

We have received a letter written by Robert L. Carter, Assoc. Adm., Motor Vehicle Programs reference N41-42, a copy of which is enclosed, relative to identification of plastic glazing under Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 205, Glazing Materials.

Considerable quantities of "Lucite" * AR abrasion resistant sheet are used for bus glazing as well as motorcycles and recreational vehicles. We supply large sheets of glazing material which are fabricated into bus windows by our Official Distributors. The bus manufacturers have required that these suppliers hot stamp the windows with a DOT number in addition to the other required identification and we have authorized these Official Distributors to use our DOT number 80. A literal reading of Mr. Carter's letter would seem to prohibit such practices. This has resulted in confusion and could prove to be quite costly to our business. If the fabricators are prohibited from using the manufacturers' DOT numbers, it will mean the bus manufacturers will have to revise all of their glazing blueprints and specifications removing the DOT number identification. We would like to avoid this extreme if possible. In discussing this with the enforcement group of NHTSA, I was informed that "while the DOT number was not required to be used by our Distributors, it would not be specifically prohibited."

* Du Pont Co. trademark

We are uncertain which interpretation is correct or if they are compatible and have been advised to request from you a clarification and official opinion.

Would you please review the above and advise whether or not our Official Distributors can use the Du Pont DOT number 80 on glazing of "Lucite" AR going into bus and other transportation glazing in order to comply with bus manufacturers' specifications.

Sincerely,

Russell H. Berry -- Marketing Specialist, "Lucite" Acrylic Sheet Products

ID: nht76-4.35

DATE: 07/30/76

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; F. Berndt; NHTSA

TO: Sun Control Products of Virginia, Inc.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This responds to your June 11, 1976, request that Madico solar 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 facilitiate 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 film 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 to 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 he 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,

ATTACH.

SUN CONTROL PRODUCTS OF VIRGINIA, INC.

June 11, 1976

James B. Gregory, Administrator -- National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Dear Dr. Gregory:

It is my understanding and observation that the Ford Motor Company is supplying and selling as an option their "Privacy Glass" for their Club Wagons and Econoline Vans in the 1976 Model year.

The "Privacy Glass" carries the following identification on the installed glass:

"Laminated Safety Glass, 'Carlite', F-6D, R-AS3, DOT-75 FM-M73"

It is my further understanding that the DOT Code number above indicates that certain Solar Optical Properties of the "Privacy Glass" have been supplied by Ford Motor Company (Or the Glass manufacturer) to DOT before DOT issued the code number.

Attached is a copy of the manufacturer's (MADICO) Product Specification sheet of solar protective polyester film, Non-Reflective Laminated FADE SHIELD SERIES FSLW 100-20 Gray. This solar protective film is bonded or laminated to existing, installed clear glass, and attains the same effect as the "Privacy Glass" for reduction of solar heat-gain, solar glare and solar fading.

It is my understanding that the solar optical properties of MADICO'S FSLW-100-20 Gray are equal to or within reasonable tolerance and range of the solar properties of the Ford Motor Company's "Privacy Glass" under DOT-75 FM-M-73.

Accordingly, it is requested that MADICO'S FSLW-100-20 Gray, solar protective film be assigned or designated as acceptable under DOT-75 FM-M73, as an alternate to "Privacy Glass" for installation on existing clear glass of vehicles under the same provisions.

If it is not possible for FSLW-100-20 Gray, solar protective film to be included under DOT-75 FM-M73, it is requested that a DOT CODE NUMBER be issued for FSLW-100-20 Gray.

Thank you for your cooperation, and we look forward to an an early reply.

Cordially, Mark T. Lerche President

[PRODUCT SPECIFICATION SHEET OMITTED]

ID: nht76-4.36

DATE: 03/19/76

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

TO: Almac Plastic Inc.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in reply to your letter of February 26, 1976, to Mr. Guy Hunter of my staff, concerning the use of Lucite AR (plastic) glazing materials in rear windows of buses.

Your state that a rubber harness has been designed to allow the plastic glazing to be inserted into the rear window openings of the bus. You further state that once inserted into the rubber harness, the glazing can be easily pushed out and therefore would fall within the definition of readily removable windows. Thus, plastic glazing could be used in such windows.

It is not clear whether the rear bus window you described in your letter would be classified as a readily removable window as defined in Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 205, Glazing Materials. However, if the glazing can be pushed out as easily as you say, it is clear that it would not meet the window retention requirements specified in FMVSS No. 217, Bus Window Retention and Release.

Standard No. 205 specifies requirements for glazing and the vehicle locations in which various types of glazing may be used. The standard prohibits the use of plastic glazing in rear windows of buses unless they are readily removable as defined in the standard. However, in response to a petition submitted by General Motors Corporation, we are currently preparing a Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) that would amend the standard to permit the use of plastic glazing in all bus windows except windshields and windows to the immediate left and right of the driver. We anticipate that this NPRM will be published in the Federal Register in the near future.

A copy of Standard No. 205 and Standard No. 217 were previously mailed to you. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely,

ATTACH.

February 26, 1976

Guy Hunter -- NHTSA

Dear Mr. Hunter:

This is to thank you for the courtesy shown to the writer on the phone. The subject of discussion that we had, was concerning the usage of Lucite AR material on the rear windows of buses.

As discussed, the original window on the rear of most buses is quite expensive and due to vandalism, the windows are cracked by rocks and bottles are extremely dangerous to passengers due to the splintering.

I am enclosing herewith a schematic brochure that we have created which will more clearly indicate this subject.

To accommodate the AA, AC, AD, AB and AE windows a rubber harness has been designed that allows these windows to be inserted. These windows, once inserted into a rubber harness can be easily pushed out with pressure and therefore, can fall into the classification of readily removable windows.

This is the major point that I tried to make over the phone. I feel that rear windows can comply with your regulation of usage of Lucite AR windows and are identical to the regulations that permit the usage of Lucite AR on your side windows.

If any of this information need further clarification, feel free to call upon Mr. Russell H. Berry of DuPont, the manufacturers of Lucite AR, whose telephone number is 302-774-4639. Or feel free to call the writer Mr. Jack Manne, Engineering Department of Almac Plastics at 212-937-1300.

Mr. Berry is extremely knowledgable on this total subject and I am sure that you would find him extremely helpful in any interpretation that is required.

Either he or I would be pleased to visit with you in Washington, DC if a meeting would assist your decision in this subject.

Thanking you kindly for any attention you give this matter, we beg to remain

Very truly yours,

Jack Manne -- Engineering Department, ALMAC PLASTICS INC.

Enc.

CC: R. H. Berry -- DuPont

(Brochure Omitted)

ID: nht76-4.37

DATE: 03/19/76

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; F. Berndt; NHTSA

TO: Werner Incorporated

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

ID: nht76-4.38

DATE: 02/25/76

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

TO: State of Connecticut

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in response to your letters of June 24, 1975, and May 30, 1975, regarding Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards Nos. 217 and 205. Please excuse our delay in answering your questions.

In your letter of June 24, 1975, you asked whether Standard No. 217 applies to school buses, and if so, whether Connecticut's regulations concerning emergency exits for school buses are in conflict with the Federal standard. By notice published in the Federal Register on January 27, 1976 (41 FR 3871) Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 217, Bus Window Retention and Release, 49 CFR 571.217, was amended to specify requirements for emergency doors for school buses, pursuant to the provisions of Section 202 of the Motor Vehicle and Safety Amendments of 1974 (Pub. L. 93-492, 88 Stat. 1484, 15 U.S.C. 1392).

Since Standard No. 217, as amended, applies to school buses, effective October 26, 1976, any State regulations which differ are voided by @ 103(d) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 (15 U.S.C. 1392(d)). The Connecticut regulations are, therefore, preempted by Standard No. 217, since @ 103(d) requires the State regulations to be "identical" to the Federal standard.

It should be noted, however, that while the State of Connecticut may not issue a regulation which differs from similarly applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard requirements, Connecticut (or any of its political subdivisions) may in its own contracts for school bus purchases require more stringent specifications, as long as the Federal minimum requirements are met.

In your letter of May 30, 1975, you asked whether Lucite AR and other similar rigid plastics are allowed for use as side windows of buses under Standard No. 205, even though S5.1.2.1 does not list the use for "Item 12" rigid plastics.

"Item 12" is a classification created by the NHTSA for rigid plastics which comply with all the tests required of "Item 5" rigid plastics as defined in ANS Z26, with the exception of the test for resistance to undiluted denatured alcohol. Paragraph S5.1.2.1, Item 12 - Rigid plastics, provides that "Item 5" safety plastic materials may be used in motor vehicles only in the locations specified, at levels not requisite for driving visibility. These locations include "Standee windows in buses" and "readily removable windows". However, there is no provision in S5.1.2.1 which allows the use of "Item 12" plastic materials for fixed, side windows in buses.

Standard No. 205 defines readily removable windows in buses having a GVWR of more than 10,000 pounds to include pushout windows and windows mounted in emergency exits that can be manually pushed out of their location in the vehicle without the use of tools, whether or not one side remains hinged to the vehicle. Rigid plastics can only be used for side windows in buses if the side window is a readily removable window as defined by S5.1.1.4 or a standee window.

I hope this letter clarifies your questions concerning Standard Nos. 217 and 205. Please contact us if we can be of any further assistance.

YOURS TRULY,

STATE OF CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES

June 24, 1975

Richard Dyson Assistant Chief Counsel U.S. Department of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

This is in regard to your recent reply to Mr. W. G. Milby, Staff Engineer from the Blue Bird Body Company in Fort Valley, Georgia concerning Connecticut regulations for emergency exits on school buses.

I have no question with the response that State regulations must be identical to Federal standard or are considered void. I can understand the reasoning behind this decision and agree with it completely. The interpretation I would have is; Does Motor Vehicle Safety Standard #217 apply to school buses, and if it does; are Connecticut regulations concerning emergency doors and emergency windows in conflict with Motor Vehicle Safety Standard #217?

I am attaching for your information copies of those sections of Connecticut regulations concerning emergency exits from the "MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR TYPE I SCHOOL BUS CONSTRUCTION AND EQUIPMENT and all correspondence pertaining to this subject.

Thank you for your cooperation and assistance in this regard.

John L. O'Connell Pupil Transportation Administrator

ATTACHMENTS

BLUE BIRD BODY COMPANY

May 19, 1975

Richard Dyson Assistant Chief Counsel U.S. Department of Transportation NHTSA

The State of Connecticut recently adopted new school bus specifications which will become effective on school buses manufactured after January 1, 1976. In two areas these specifications are more restrictive than FMVSS 217 Bus Window Retention and Release.

In section 14-275B-16 (d) and 14-275B-17 (a), (see attached copies), the Connecticut specifications call for emergency exit release forces of between 5 and 15 pounds and 5 and 20 pounds respectively. Since these forces are different than those required by FMVSS 217, this imposes an additional constraint on school bus manufacturers for that state. Also, we are concerned that latch forces as low as 5 pounds could result in inadvertent opening of emergency exits.

We are in receipt of a copy of a letter which you sent to Mr. Donald L. Gibson, dated November 29, 1974, with file reference N40-30 (KK). In that letter you state:

"The federal requirements must be regarded as conclusive with regard to parking brake performance and emergency braking capability in order to maintain the uniformity necessary in a federal regulatory scheme. If states were permitted to impose additional requirements in an area regulated by a federal safety standard, manufacturers would be confronted with an impossible task of compliance. This reasoning formed the basis of the recent decision rendered in a case brought by the Motorcycle Industry Council, Inc., against the State of California in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California concerning the preemption of a California State requirement that motorcycle lamps be wired to operate when the engine is running. The court held that the California requirement is preempted by the Federal Motor Vehicle Standard 108 since the NHTSA intended to cover all aspects of performance directly involving motorcycle headlamps."

It appears to us that this current conflict between the new Connecticut regulations and FMVSS 217 is similar to the matter which you addressed in your letter quoted above.

In the light of such conflicting specifications, what is our responsibility as a school bus manufacturer.

W. G. Milby Staff Manager

cc: JOHN O'CONNELL; DAVE PHELPS

MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR TYPE I SCHOOL BUS CONSTRUCTION AND EQUIPMENT PAGES 9 AND 10 the release mechanism should be turned to open the emergency door shall be painted on the outside of the emergency door in black on the national school bus yellow background. The emergency door shall have a horizontal opening of at least 30 inches and a vertical opening of at least 48 inches measured from the floor level. No steps shall lead to the emergency door. The emergency door or exit shall be devised so as to be opened from the inside and the outside.

(b) The passage to the emergency door shall be kept clear of obstructions. For rear doors the horizontal clearance of 30 inches shall be maintained for a distance of at least twelve inches inside the bus. When the emergency door is in the left side, a minimum horizontal clearance of 30 inches and a vertical clearance of 48 inches shall be maintained between it and the center aisle.

(c) The upper and lower portion of the central rear emergency door shall be equipped with approved safety glass, the exposed area of which shall be not less than four hundred (400) square inches in the upper portion and not less than three hundred (300) square inches in the lower portion. The left side emergency door shall be equipped with safety glass in the upper portion and the lower portion shall be of at least the same gauge metal as the body outer panels. The emergency door shall be hinged on the right side if it is in the rear end of the bus and on the front side if it is in the left side and shall open only outward. Control from the driver's seat shall not be permitted.

(d) The emergency door shall be equipped with a slide-bar, cam-operated latch which shall be a minimum stroke of one inch. The latch shall be equipped with a suitable electric plunger-type switch connected with a distinctive audible signal automatically operated and located in the driver's compartment which shall clearly indicate the unlatching of this door and no cutoff switch shall be installed in the circuit. The switch shall be enclosed in a metal case, and wires leading from the switch shall be concealed in the body. The switch shall be so installed that the plunger contacts the farthest edge of the slide bar in such a manner that any movement of the slide bar will immediately close the circuit and activate the signal. The door latch shall be equipped with an interial handle which shall be capable of quick release upon application of a force between 5 and 15 pounds but shall be protected against accidental release. It shall lift up to release the latch. The outside handle shall be installed in a vertical position when latched so as to minimize hitching and shall be a non-detachable device.

(e) An audio alarm shall indicate to the driver when any door is in the locked position while the ignition switch is in the "on" position.

Sec. 14-275b-17. Emergency Windows. (a) A rear emergency window at least 16 inches height and as wide as practicable shall be provided in any where the emergency door is not in the rear. The rear window shall be designed so as to be opened from either the inside the outside. It shall be hinged at the top and be equipped a linkage or mechanism that will automatically hold the (Illegible Word) window against the force of gravity at a hinge opening angle 60 + 5 degrees measured from the closed window position. Such linkage or mechanism shall not prevent the window from (Illegible Word) a full 90 degrees due to gravitational forces should the bus be inverted. A positive latch on the inside shall provide (Illegible Word) quick release upon application of a force between 5 and 20 pounds but offer protection against accidental release. The outside handle shall be non-detachable and designed to minimize hitching.

(b) Labeling shall indicate in 1/2 inch letters on the inside the window operates and in letters at least two inches in height the words "Emergency Exit" above on the inside and directly below on the outside. clearly indicate to the driver the unlatching of the rear emergency window or the opening of any push-out emergency windows and no cutoff switch shall be installed in the (Illegible Word)

(d) If there is a space between the top of the rear divan seat the inside lower edge of the rear emergency window, such space shall be covered by a material of sufficient strength to sustain 600 pounds weight.

Sec. 14-275b-18. Exhaust System and Muffler. The exhaust system shall include the exhaust manifold and gaskets, piping leading from the flange of the exhaust manifold to and including the muffler(s). The system shall not extend into the body and shall be attached to the chassis. The tail pipe(s) shall be non-flexible sixteen gauge steel or equivalent and shall extend beyond the rear end of the chassis frame but not beyond the rear limit of the bumper. The complete exhaust system shall be tight and free from leaks and shall be properly insulated from the electrical wiring or any combustible part of the bus. It shall not pass within twelve inches of the fuel tank or its connections except that the exhaust system may come within four inches of the tank or its connections if a suitable heat baffle is installed between the exhaust system and such tank or connections. The size of the in the exhaust system shall not be reduced below that at the engine manifold.

BLUE BIRD BODY COMPANY

June 10, 1975

John O'Connell Pupil Transportation Adm. Department of Motor Vehicles

On May 19, 1975, I wrote Mr. Richard Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel for NHTSA with regard to the emergency exit requirements in the new Connecticut School Bus Specifications VS Federal Standard 217, Bus Window Retention and Release per our earlier telephone conversation.

Attached please find a copy of the reply to that letter from Mr. James C. Schultz, Chief Counsel for NHTSA. I think it would be good for us to discuss this reply and so after you have had a few days to review this letter I will plan to call you.

Look forward to talking to you shortly.

W. G. Milby Staff Engineer

c: DAVE PHELPS

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