ID: nht79-3.50

DATE: 07/06/79

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; F. Berndt; NHTSA

TO: Wayne Corporation

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This responds to your June 11, 1979, letter asking whether side push-out window exits in school buses installed pursuant to State requirements must be marked in accordance with the emergency exit requirements of S5.5.3 of Standard No. 217, Bus Window Retention and Release. In particular, you want to know whether these additional exits must be labeled on the bus exterior.

Section S5.5.3 of the standard requires that "[each] school bus emergency exit provided in accordance with S5.2.3.1 shall have the designation . . . . on both the inside and outside surfaces of the bus. Section S5.2.3.1, in turn, requires that school buses be equipped with a rear emergency door or a side emergency door and a rear push-out window. Taken together, these two sections require that the required rear or side emergency door or rear push-out window must be appropriately marked on the inside and outside of the bus.

As the agency has frequently stated, all exists installed in school buses beyond those required by S5.2.3.1 need not comply with the exit requirements applicable to school bus exits. All additional exists must comply, however, with the other sections of the standard applicable to non-school buses. In this case, the additional exits would be required to be labeled in accordance with Sections S5.5.1 and S5.5.2 of the standard. Neither of these paragraphs requires the exit to be marked on the bus exterior.

SINCERELY,

Wayne Corporation

June 11, 1979

Frank Berndt Chief Counsel U.S. Department of Transportation % National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Dear Mr. Berndt:

The State of New York Department of Transportation has raised a question concerning the exterior labeling of side push-out windows in school buses. Specifically, they maintain that Section S5.5.3 of FMVSS 217 requires that side emergency push-out windows specified in the New York school bus standard be labeled on the outside of the bus as specified in this section. Wayne maintains that only the rear emergency door, side emergency doors, and rear push-out windows are required to be labeled on the exterior in accordance with the requirements of S5.5.3.

Please advise which of these interpretations is correct. Would you please send a copy of your reply to Mr. Martin Chauvin at the following address.

Mr. Martin V. Chauvin, Chief Carrier Safety Bureau New York State Department of Transportation 1220 Washington Avenue State Campus Albany, New York 12232

Robert B. Kurre Director of Engineering

CC: MARTIN CHAUVIN

ID: nht79-3.6

DATE: 08/27/79

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank Berndt; NHTSA

TO: Mr. Bruce Willhite

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in response to the questions you raised with Ms. Debra Weiner of my office on June 29, 1979, about your intention to start a business that will sell and install auxiliary diesel fuel tanks in passenger cars. You noted that you would like to install the tanks in used vehicles and possibility in new ones. Specifically, you asked what Federal law applies to your proposed activities and whether these activities would violate any Federal law.

The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, as amended, (the Act) authorizes the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to issue Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS's) applicable either to vehicles or to equipment for installation in vehicles. FMVSS 301-75, Fuel System Integrity, (see enclosed copy) is a vehicle standard which applies to vehicles, including passenger cars, which use fuel with a boiling point above 32 degrees F. (this includes both gasoline and diesel fuel).

Under section 108(a)(1)(A) and (b)(1) of the Act, new motor vehicles must comply with the FMVSS's applicable to them until they are first purchased by someone for purposes other than resale. That purchase is completed when the vehicle is delivered to the ultimate consumer. The NHTSA regulations include two measures designed to ensure compliance with applicable FMVSS's until this delivery. First, manufacturers of new vehicles are required to affix to each vehicle they produce a label which certifies the vehicle's compliance with all applicable FMVSS's. Second, any person who prior to the first sale, alters a certified vehicle in a manner that significantly affects either its configuration or purpose is considered to be not only an alterer but also a manufacturer and therefore, must recertify the entire vehicle as complying with all applicable FMVSS's. (49 Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.) 567.7).

Should a noncompliance due to an alterer's modification be discovered in a recertified vehicle, the alterer would be liable for a civil penalty unless he or she could establish that he or she did not have actual knowledge of the noncompliance, and that he or she did not have reason to know in the exercise of due care that the vehicle did not comply. (Section 108(b)(2) of the Act.) The civil penalty imposed could be up to $ 1000 for each violation of an applicable FMVSS. (Section 109 of the Act.)

Since the installation of an auxiliary fuel tank significantly affects the configuration of an automobile, the legal provisions summarized above would apply to you as an installer of auxiliary fuel tanks in new cars (i.e., cars not yet purchased for purposes other than resale and delivered to that purchaser). Thus, upon installing an auxiliary fuel tank in a new vehicle you would be required to affix a label to the vehicle stating that the vehicle as altered conforms to all applicable FMVSS's including FMVSS 301-75 in effect on a date not later than the date on which the alterations were completed (49 C.F.R. Part 567.7). This means that not only must the original gasoline fuel system meet the performance requirements encompassed by FMVSS 301-75 but that the system as supplemented by the auxiliary tank added by you to a new car must meet them also.

As an installer of auxiliary fuel tanks in new vehicles, you will also be subject to the provisions of sections 151 et seq. of the Act (see enclosure). If you or this agency finds that there is a safety defect in the manner in which you have installed auxiliary tanks in new vehicles, you would be required to notify purchasers and remedy the defect. Under sections 108(a)(1)(D) and 109(a) of the Act, any person who fails to provide notification of or remedy for a safety defect is liable for a civil penalty of up to $ 1000 per violation.

As a dealer in and installer of auxiliary fuel tanks in used vehicles, you would be subject to section 108(a)(2)(A) of the Act. Section 108(a)(2)(A) in essence prohibits the entities and persons listed below from knowingly removing, disconnecting or reducing performance of equipment or elements of design installed on a vehicle in accordance with applicable FMVSS's. There is no prohibition against an individual person modifying his or her own vehicle. Specifically, the section provides:

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 . . .

A person or entity found to have violated this section would be liable for a civil penalty of up to $ 1000 for each violation. (Section 109 of the Act.)

If one of the persons or entities listed above adds an auxiliary gasoline tank to a vehicle manufactured in accordance with FMVSS 301-75, and in the process knowingly reduces the performance of the fuel system originally installed in the motor vehicle, he or she has violated section 108(a)(2)(A). (H.R. No. 1191, 93d Cong., 2d Sess. 34 (1974)). Such reduction of performance could occur, for example, if gasoline from the original system (a fuel system includes the filler pipe, tank, gasoline lines, fuel pump, carburetor, and engine) could be leaked through a rupture in the auxiliary tank and fuel lines, and if the design, materials, construction, installation or location of the auxiliary tank and fuel lines made them more susceptible to rupture than the original fuel system.

In closing, I would like to point out that, in addition to the Federal law discussed above, there may be State products liability laws applicable to your proposed activities. As an installer of auxiliary fuel tanks, you could be liable for the manner and location in which the tanks are installed. Therefore, you may wish to consult a local lawyer before starting your new business.

I hope that you will find this response helpful.

ID: nht79-3.7

DATE: 08/27/79

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank Berndt; NHTSA

TO: Shaeen, Lumberg, Callaghan and Berke

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in response to the questions you raised with Ms. Debra Weiner of my office in a telephone conversion of July 9, 1979. Specifically, you asked whether there are any current or proposal regulations applicable to customizers who install plastic auxiliary diesel fuel tanks in Mercedes automobiles. You noted these vehicles would typically be purchased from a dealer and then brought to the customizer for installation of the auxiliary tank.

The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, as amended 1974 (the Act), authorizes the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to issue Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards applicable to motor vehicles and to equipment for installation in vehicles. Safety Standard No. 301-75, Fuel System Integrity (49 CFR 571.301-75), specifies performance requirements for vehicles, including passenger cars, which use fuel with a boiling point above 32 degrees F. (This includes both gasoline and diesel fuel). Under the standard's requirements, no part of a vehicle's entire fuel system can have fuel spillage beyond certain specified amounts during barrier crash tests. Specific performance requirements for individual components of the fuel system, such as the fuel tank, are not currently included in the standard. With the advent of high density polyethlene (plastic) fuel tanks, however, the current "system" performance requirements night not be sufficient to ensure the integrity of vehicle fuel systems. For this reason, the agency recently published an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking concerning the advisability of establishing performance standards for plastic tanks (44 FR 33441, June 11, 1979 copy enclosed).

Under section 108 of the Act, new motor vehicles must comply with Federal safety standards prior to their first purchase in good faith for purposes other than resale. That purchase is completed when the vehicle is delivered to the ultimate consumer. Thus, the extent to which a customizer must ensure that his installation of an auxiliary tank complies with Safety Standard No. 301-75 depends upon whether the tank is installed before or after this delivery.

A customizer who installs an auxiliary fuel tank prior to the vehicle's first purchase would be a vehicle "alterer". Under the provisions of 49 CFR 567.7, he would be required to place an additional label on the vehicle specifying that, as altered, the vehicle continues to be in compliance with all applicable safety standards, including Standard No. 301-75. Additionally, the alterer would be responsible for any safety related defects arising from the installation of the auxiliary tank and would be required under section 151 of the Act to provide notice of and remedy for the defective installation.

If a customerizer installs an auxiliary tank in a vehicle after its delivery to the first purchaser he could be subject to section 108(a)(2)(A) of the Act. That section provides that: 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. . . .

A person or entity found to have violated this section would be liable for a civil penalty of up to $ 1,000 for each violation. (Section 109 of the Act).

If a person subject to section 108(a)(2)(A) adds an auxiliary gasoline tank to a vehicle manufactured in accordance with Safety Standard No. 301-75, and in the process knowingly reduces the performance of the fuel system originally installed in the motor vehicle, he or she has violated section 108(a)(2)(A). (H.R. No. 1191, 93d Cong., 2d Sess. 34 (1974). Such reduction of performance could occur, for example, if gasoline from the original system (a fuel system includes the filler pipe, tank gasoline lines, fuel pump, carburetor, and engine) could be leaked through a rupture in the the auxiliary tank and fuel lines, and if the design materials, construction, installation or location of the auxiliary tank and fuel lines made them more susceptible to rupture than the original fuel system.

Please note that a customizer would be considered a "motor vehicle repair business" since he modifies motor vehicles for compensation.

I hope that you will find this response helpful.

ID: nht79-3.8

DATE: 10/04/79

FROM: FRANK BERNDT -- NHTSA; SIGNATURE BY STEPHEN P. WOOD

TO: Clanahanm, Tanner, Downing and Knowlton

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in response to your letter of July 24 and your telephone conversation with Ms. Debra Weiner of my office in which you inquired about the Federal law applicable to the manufacture and use of auxiliary fuel tanks. You indicated that your client will be in the business of manufacturing auxiliary fuel tanks for use in passenger vehicles and on farm equipment. Most of the tanks will apparently be designed for mounting on the vehicles without connection to the vehicle fuel system, although some will be built with such connections.

Below is a discussion of questions numbered 1 and 6 in your letter, as well as a general discussion of the law applicable to the installation of both types of auxiliary tanks. Following is a brief discussion of the questions numbered 2-5 in your letter.

The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, as amended 1974, (the Act) authorizes the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to issue Federal motor vehicle safety standards applicable either to entire motor vehicles or to equipment for installation in motor vehicles. Agricultural equipment is not encompassed by the term "motor vehicle" because Congress clearly did not intend that such equipment be within the coverage of the Act. Therefore, none of the Federal motor vehicle safety standards are applicable to farm equipment and the rest of this letter will be concerned only with passenger vehicles.

Safety Standard No. 301-75, Fuel System Integrity, is a vehicle standard which applies to certain vehicles, including passenger cars, that use fuel with a boiling point above 32 degrees F. The standard applies to completed vehicles rather than to fuel tanks or other fuel system components and thus is inapplicable to the manufacture of auxiliary fuel tanks.

Despite the inapplicability of Safety Standard No. 301-75 to their manufacture, auxiliary fuel tanks of either type you have mentioned must be designed and manufactured for safety. As a manufacturer of auxiliary fuel tanks, your client would be subject to the defects responsibility provisions of the Act (section 151 et seq). Upon discovery of a safety-related defect by the Secretary of Transportation, the NHTSA Administrator, or the manufacturer himself, your client, as a manufacturer, would be required to notify vehicle owners, purchasers, and dealers and remedy the defect.

A person who installs an auxiliary fuel tank in a new vehicle prior to its first purchase in good faith for purposes other than resale would be a vehicle alterer under NHTSA regulations if that person modified the vehicle during the installation. As an alterer, your client would be required by 49 CFR 567.7 to affix an additional label to the vehicle stating that, as altered, the vehicle conforms to all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards -- including Safety Standard No. 301-75. Should a noncompliance or safety-related defect be discovered in such a vehicle, as a result of the modification, your client would be responsible for notifying vehicle owners and remedying the noncompliance or defect.

If your client connects auxiliary gasoline tanks to used passenger vehicles, he or she would not be required to attach an alterer's label. However, section 108(a)(2)(A) of the Act would apply. Section 108(a)(2)(A) provides in relevant part that:

No manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business shall knowlingly 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. . .

Thus, if your client added an auxiliary tank of either type mentioned in your letter to a used passenger vehicle manufactured in accordance with Safety Standard No. 301-75 and other standards, and in the process knowingly rendered inoperative the compliance of the fuel system or other systems, he or she would have violated section 108(a)(2)(A).

For example, if your client mounted a tank on the exterior of a vehicle, without connection to the fuel system, and one of the mounting bolts caused the existing fuel system to leak in an amount in excess of that permitted by Safety Standard No. 301-75, he would be in violation of section 108(a)(2)(A). Depending upon the way in which he attached the tank to the vehicle or to its fuel system your client could also violate section 108(a)(2)(A) with respect to other safety standards including, but not limited to, the Bumper Standard (49 C.F.R. 581), and Standard No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment.

Questions 2, 3, and 4.

According to the Federal Highway Administration which administers the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations, they apply only to motor carriers and not to passenger vehicles that are not involved in interstate commerce. If you have further questions you might wish to contact the Federal Highway Administration directly.

Question 5. Do 49 C.F.R. 171 et seq. which regulate the transportation of certain hazardous materials apply to the private carrying of such materials on passenger vehicles or farm equipment?

These regulations are administered by the Research and Special Programs Administration, which informs me that the Federal regulations applying to hazardous materials concern the transportation of hazardous materials in commerce. Thus far, the regulations have not been applied to the private carrying of hazardous materials, such as gasoline, in a passenger vehicle or farm machine. If you have further questions you might wish to contact the Research and Special Programs Administration.

In conclusion, please note that, in general, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration discourages the use of auxiliary fuel tanks of any kind because of the grave dangers of fire and explosion posed by their improper manufacture or installation. In the near future this agency will be making a press release warning consumers of these hazards and discouraging them from using auxiliary fuel tanks.

I hope that you will find this response helpful and that you have not been inconvenienced by our delay in sending it to you.

SINCERELY,

CLANAHAN, TANNER, DOWNING AND KNOWLTON

July 24, 1979

Steven Wood, Esq. Office of Chief Counsel NHTSA

Re: Specifications for the Manufacture and Use of Auxiliary Fuel Tanks

Dear Mr. Wood:

This letter is an inquiry regarding the requirements and specifications of the Code of Federal Regulations for auxiliary fuel tanks. The fuel tanks with which we are concerned are those which could be mounted on passenger vehicles and farm equipment. Such vehicles would not be involved in interstate commerce.

I talked with Chuck Keiper in the Denver Office of the NHTSA and he recommended that I contact you concerning the following inquiries. Our questions concern both the applicability of the particular sections of the Code of Federal Regulations enumerated below and whether any other sections are applicable to the manufacture and use of the auxiliary fuel tanks described above. Would you please submit to us your opinions on the following:

1. Does the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard #301 contained in 49 C.F.R. @571.301-75 apply to auxiliary fuel tanks not connected with the fuel system?

2. How do the regulations define "properly mounted fuel tank or tanks" as found in 49 C.F.R. @ 392.51?

3. What are the manufacturing specifications for such fuel tanks referred to in 49 C.F.R. @ 392.51?

4. Do 49 C.F.R. @ 393.65-.67, concerning the construction of liquid fuel tanks, apply to those auxiliary fuel tanks as specified above?

5. Do 49 C.F.R. @ 171 et seq. which regulate the transportation of certain hazardous materials apply to the private carrying of such materials on passenger vehicles or farm equipment?

6. Are there any other regulations of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration or Department of Transportation which would apply to the manufacture and use of such auxiliary fuel tanks?

Mr. Keiper indicated that the NHTSA was considering new regulations regarding auxiliary fuel tanks. Any information concerning such regulations also would be helpful.

Our client is concerned with complying with the regulations as they now exist. Your response to the above inquiries should assist in this regard and will be appreciated. If there is any other information which would be helpful, please contact me at your convenience.

Chuck Reeves Law Clerk

ID: nht79-3.9

DATE: 11/14/79

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank Berndt; NHTSA

TO: Volvo of America

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in response to the questions that you addressed to Mr. Hugh Oates over the telephone with regard to auxiliary fuel tanks. I have enclosed a copy of a letter which was sent to a company that planned to manufacture auxiliary fuel tanks for passenger cars and to do some installation. The principles enunciated in that letter are applicable to auxiliary fuel tanks intended for use in all types of motor vehicles except motor carriers in interstate commerce. If you have any further questions after reading the enclosed letter please feel free to contact Ms. Debra Weiner of my office who is familiar with the issues arising from the manufacture and use of auxiliary fuel tanks.

ID: nht79-4.1

DATE: 05/31/79

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank Berndt; NHTSA

TO: Subaru of America Inc.

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in response to your letter of April 23, 1979, in which you requested the agency's opinion whether a four-wheel drive hatchback sedan could be classified as a multi-purpose passenger vehicle (MPV).

As was stated by Eileen Leahy of my staff in telephone conversations regarding your request, the agency cannot give an opinion regarding this vehicle's classification for purposes of compliance with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards without knowing whether the vehicle has any special features for off-road use other than four-wheel drive. An MPV is defined in 49 CFR @ 571.3(b) as "a motor vehicle with motor power, except a trailer, designed to carry 10 persons or less which is constructed either on a truck chassis or with special features for occasional off-road operation." Since the vehicle you describe is not constructed on a truck chassis, it must have "special features for occasional offroad operation" in order to qualify as an MPV. The agency interprets this language as requiring that the vehicle contain more than a single feature designed for off-road use. This interpretation is based on the use of the word "features" in the plural rather than the singular in the definition, and on the fact that a vehicle's total design determines its likely use. Four-wheel drive would be useful in snow on public streets, roads and highways, so this feature cannot be determinative of the vehicle's classification if there are no features for off-road use.

Also, the agency is reluctant to exempt a vehicle from compliance with any of its safety standards purely on the grounds that it is equipped with four-wheel drive. There is little likelihood that a vehicle that is identical to a passenger car in every other respect will be used differently than other passenger cars. Under these circumstances, the agency sees no reason for treating such vehicles any differently from other passenger cars with respect to the applicability of safety standards.

Therefore, unless you can provide us with additional information (including, but not limited to, pictures or drawings of the vehicle) concerning other special features of this vehicle that would make it suitable for off-road operation, the agency cannot concur with the opinion expressed in your letter that this vehicle should be classified as a multipurpose vehicle for purposes of compliance with Federal motor vehicle safety standards. Also, I would refer you to 49 CFR @ 523.5(b)(2) for a description of some of the characteristics that would be considered as "special features for off-road operation" although that section relates primarily to fuel economy.

If you will provide us with additional information, we will be happy to offer a final opinion.

SINCERELY, SUBARU OF AMERICA, INC.

April 23, 1979

Our Ref. No. 056-79C

Frank Berndt Acting Chief Counsel U.S. Dept. of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Adm.

Gentlemen:

As part of a new car line for 1980, Subaru of America is going to import four-wheel drive hatch back sedans.

This new four-wheel drive sedan was designed for occasional off-road operation. In consideration of the vehicle's various uses we feel it should be classified as a multipurpose passenger vehicle.

Please provide your opinion as to whether or not this vehicle can be classified as an M.P.V.

Should you have any questions, please contact this office.

John Cordner Technical Assistant Product Compliance

ID: nht79-4.10

DATE: 03/13/79

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank Berndt; NHTSA

TO: Blue Bird Body Company

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This responds to your February 1, 1979, letter asking whether any law or regulation prohibits the remanufacture of a school bus with an old chassis and a new body when the completed vehicle does not comply with the new safety standards.

As you are aware, the agency has stated many times that such a remanufactured vehicle need only comply with the standards in effect on the date of manufacture of the chassis as long as the remanufacturing process conforms to the guidelines established in Part 571.7(e) of our regulations. The agency does not view the remanufacturing problem as significant, because a vehicle's chassis normally wears out before its body. The recycling of noncomplying buses will cease when the supply of used chassis manufactured prior to April 1, 1977, disappears.

SINCERELY,

BLUE BIRD BODY COMPANY

February 1, 1979

Joseph J. Levin, Jr. Chief Counsel National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Dear Mr. Levin:

The intent of Public Law 93-492, Motor Vehicle and School Bus Safety Amendments of 1974, and the subsequent regulations resulting from that law was to upgrade the safety of the national school bus fleet.

We have recently become aware of an industry which seems to be designed to circumvent the intent of public law 93-492. The industry (see enclosure) is involved in the restoration and remanufacture of complete school buses including body and chassis.

We are aware of the agency's recent interpretation regarding the manufacture of bodies stating that the bodies must meet the safety standards that were in effect on the date of manufacture of the chassis.

However, we feel that this new industry could indefinitely recycle old buses into the fleet which do not meet the congressionally mandated safety standards for school buses.

In our opinion, we feel that this is a flagrant violation of the intent of the law. Therefore, we would like to ask you if there are any regulations or laws which would prohibit this practice.

Thank you for your early reply.

W. G. Milby Manager, Engineering Services

School Bus Restoration Co.

511 SO. LINCOLN STREET ELKHORN. WISCONSIN 53121 (414) 723-4309

PRICE LIST

EFFECTIVE AUGUST 1, 1978

School Bus Standard Type Forward Engine Cowl Mounted Specification 105

All body types, all lengths up thru 66 pass - Chevrolet Chassis $ 8950 *

All body types, all lengths up thru 66 pass - Ford Chassis $ 9250 *

All body types, all lengths up thru 66 pass - International Chassis $ 9250 *

All body types, all lengths up thru 66 pass - Dodge Chassis $ 8950 *

All body types, all lengths up thru 66 pass - G.M.C. Chassis $ 8950 *

Busses equipped with power steering additional 32500 *

* All Prices Plus Factory Rebult. Or New Engines. (Your Option)

Busses equipped with automatic transmission. Special Quote

School Bus Body Only

All body types, all lengths 48 thru 66 pass - Any Chassis 580000

Add-On eight light warning system 400

Please Add 20000 for each additional row of seats - Bus size over 66 pass. Restoration of internally mounted front engine and rear engine busses - will be on Special Quotation.

Any bus bearing unusual wear or damage will be on Special Quotation. All work performed is Guaranteed for 6 months or 6,000 miles. Guarantees on tires and batteries will be limited to mfg. Guarantee.

Engines are Guaranteed by the engine manufacturer in accordance with their individual policy and not by SCHOOL BUS RESTORATION. Or it's contract manufacturers.

All prices are subject to change without notice.

ID: nht79-4.11

DATE: 09/06/79

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank Berndt; NHTSA

TO: MMC Services Inc.

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This responds to your recent letter requesting an interpretation concerning the proper "designated seating capacity" for the "Dodge D-50" and "Plymouth Arrow" pick-up trucks. The trucks with which you are concerned have bench seats with 53.5 inches of hip room, with a contoured indentation at the center position for the gear shift lever. You believe that only two positions should be designed for this type bench seat.

As stated in the preamble to the recent notice amending the definition of "designated seating position", and noted in your letter, the presence of a floor gear-shift lever would not normally be sufficient to discourage or make use of a center position on a large bench seat impossible, even if the bench seat has a slightly indented contour for the shift lever (44 FR 23232, April 19, 1979). The notice did state that there could conceivably be a vehicle design in which the gear-shift lever would constitute an impediment to sitting. For example, if the lever extended to within a few inches of the seat back, the center position could not easily be used. This does not appear to be the case with the "Dodge D-50" or "Plymouth Arrow", however.

Since the bench seats in the subject vehicles have 53.5 inches of hip room, well over the 50-inch caveat in the amended definition, it is the agency's opinion that there should be three designated seating positions. The photographs enclosed in your letter show that three test dummies can be placed on the bench seat, even though somewhat crowded. Moreover, these photographs show two 95th-percentile male dummies and one 5th-percentile female dummy. If two (or three) 5th-percentile female dummies had been used in your demonstration, instead, you would have illustrated that there is more than ample room for three passengers to sit comfortably on a 53.5-inch bench seat. Also, human beings obviously have more flexibility than the stiff test dummies used in your demonstration. We believe that if you use human subjects in this same experiment (a 95th-percentile male driver and two 5th-percentile female passengers, for example), you will see that three persons can easily and comfortably occupy these bench seats.

Finally, I would emphasize that this letter only represents the agency's opinion based on the information supplied in your letter. The NHTSA does not pass approval on any vehicle design, for any safety standards, prior to the actual events that underlie certification. It is up to the manufacturer to determine whether its vehicles comply with all applicable safety standards and regulations, and to certify its vehicles in accordance with that determination.

SINCERELY,

MMC SERVICES INC. July 12, 1979

Office of Chief Counsel National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Subject: Request for Interpretation of "Designated Seating Position" on small pickup truck

Dear Sir:

MMC Services Inc., on behalf of Mitsubishi Motors corporation, would like to have your official interpretation as to "Designated Seating Position" on the small pickup truck, which Mitsubishi Motors corporation has been manufacturing and which has been sold with the name of "Dodge D-50" and "Plymouth Arrow" in U.S.A. marketed by Chrysler corporation. Each one is a derivative from a basic small pickup truck and the dimentions of both trucks are absolutely same.

The bench seat in the pickup truck was originally designed for two persons by the manufacturer and the pickup truck is equipped with a floor gear-shift lever just in front of the seat which has a indented contour for the shift lever.

In the Federal Register/Vol. 44, No. 77/ Thursday, April 19, 1979 "Designated Seating Position" which is applicable from September 1, 1980 is defined as:

"----. Any bench or split-bench seat in a passenger car, truck or multipurpose passenger vehicle with a GVWR less than 10,000 pounds, having greater than 50 inches of hip room shall have not less than three designated seating positions, unless the seat design or vehicle design is such that the center position cannot be used for seating."

And there is a description in the same Federal Register as:

"--- the presence of a floor gear-shift lever would not normally be sufficient to discourage or make use of a center position or a bench seat impossible, even if the bench seat has a slightly indented contour for the shift lever."

According to the two descriptions relating the standard quoted above, the bench seat therefore seems to be for three persons.

However the bench seat on the D50 and Arrow pickup trucks is very uncomfortable with three people. This is evident when considering the position of the floor gear-shift lever. This gear-shift lever provide an impediment to the third person seated in the middle of the bench seat.

NHTSA interpretation is therefore requested as to whether or not the bench seat should not be designated for two persons.

As the data for your interpretation, we attach illustration (Fig. 1), pictures (Fig. 2 (A), (B), (C), (D) ) and sales catalogues for the pickup trucks.

We would appreciate your interpretation of this matter at your earliest convenience.

T. SHIMADA for T. Ohinouye President

cc: GUY HUNTER--OFC. OF VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS, NHTSA Enclosures omitted

ID: nht79-4.12

DATE: 06/21/79

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank Berndt; NHTSA

TO: Macdonald Equipment Company

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This responds to your January 2, 1979, letter asking whether it is permissible to mount a snow plow on a vehicle when the weight of the snow plow will cause the vehicle to exceed its gross axle weight rating (GAWR). The answer to your question is no.

The GAWR of a vehicle is determined and established by a vehicle's manufacturer and represents a manufacturer's assessment of the maximum weight that each axle can safely sustain. When this weight rating is exceeded by the addition of equipment to a vehicle, the safety of a vehicle is jeopardized. Over a period of time, the excessive weight borne by the axle could result in unusual wear and eventual failure of the axle.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration requires manufacturers to label their vehicles with GAWR's to avoid the overload problem that you mention in your letter. The NHTSA has not granted exceptions from this requirement for snow plows. If you mount a snow plow on a new vehicle prior to first purchase, you must be sure that the vehicle continues to comply with all Federal safety standards and regulations. If the weight of the plow exceeds the GAWR of the vehicle, the vehicle would no longer comply with the certification regulation and would not comply with Standard No. 120, Tire Selection and Rims for Motor Vehicles Other Than Passenger Cars. Further, the compliance of other safety standards could be impacted by the addition of that weight.

In the case of used vehicles on which you mount a snow plow, a manufacturer, repair business, distributor, or dealer may not knowingly render inoperative the compliance of a vehicle with the safety standards. The attachment of a snow plow that exceeds the gross axle weight rating would render inoperative the compliance of the vehicle with Standard No. 120. Accordingly, whether a vehicle is new or used, the additional weight of a snow plow that would exceed the GAWR of a vehicle would not be permissible.

The NHTSA understands the budgetary constraints of municipalities. However, financial considerations must be balanced against the potential loss of life that can occur when vehicles are routinely overloaded. Accordingly, vehicles that have snow plows or other devices mounted on them should have sufficient GAWR's to carry their intended load.

Sincerely,

Macdonald Equipment Company

January 2, 1979

Office of the Chief Counsel National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Gentlemen:

We have talked with your people here in Denver as well as with Mr. Elliot in Washington concerning the mounting of snow plows on trucks and they recommended that we contact your office for an opinion.

We are a disbributor for both a snow plow manufacturer and for a snow plow truck manufacturer and in the course of business we have noticed a trend develop, which we feel needs some clarification. In recent years cities, counties and states agencies responsible for snow removal seem to be purchasing trucks with smaller front axle capacity ratings. This is the result of increased prices on trucks in recent years and the need of these agencies to stay within their budgets.

The result of this trend is that the front axle capacities of these smaller trucks will not allow us to mount a hitch and snow plow on the truck without overloading the front axle or severly limiting the Dump Body capacity to avoid overloading the front axle, which limits the units role in spreading sand on the icy roads.

We would like to know if the weight of the snow plow and hitch must be included when determining the weight on the front axle or if ther is some type of exemption for snow plows. Since snow removal is a necessity in much of our country during the winters and the snow plows are generally on the trucks only in the event of storm it would seem that if there is not an exemption for the snow plows at present, it is an area that some type arrangement needs to be worked out. If the trend to the smaller type trucks with front axles rated at 12,000 pound or less capacity continues and we feel it will, it will be impossible to mount snow plows on most trucks used by these agencies.

Since we feel that we are getting into a situation where front axle load is becoming a question, we would very much appreciate any information or instructions you can give us in this matter. If we can supply you with any further material we would be most happy to do so. Thank you.

Macdonald Equipment Company A. M. Dahm, President

ID: nht79-4.13

DATE: 07/17/79

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank Berndt; NHTSA

TO: Department of Education; Ohio

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This responds to your June 15, 1979, letter asking about the use of standard production vans for the transportation of school children to or from school or related events. In particular, you ask whether a 15-passenger Dodge Maxi-Van can be used for school transportation.

Whether a new vehicle sold for use as a school vehicle must comply with the Federal school bus safety standards depends on whether the vehicle meets our definition of a bus. Our definition provides that a bus is "a motor vehicle with motive power, except a trailer, designed for carrying more than 10 persons." (Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 571.3). Thus, a vehicle that transport 10 or fewer persons may be sold as a school vehicle and need not comply with the Federal school bus safety standards. However, a Dodge Maxi-Van capable of carrying 15 persons is a bus. If such a vehicle is sold new for use as a school vehicle, it must comply with those standards.