ID: nht69-1.45

DATE: 09/11/69

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; H. M. Jackin for W. M. Jacklin, Jr.; NHTSA

TO: Hon. W. Proxmire - U.S. Senate

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: Thank you for your letter of August 27, 1969, to the Director, Legislative Liaison, Department of Transportation, concerning Mr. Eugene J. Shermeister's comments on headlamps for motor vehicles.

Enclosed for Mr. Shermeister's information is a copy of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 on lighting requirements for the vehicles specified in the standard. Standard No. 108 is applicable to new vehicles manufactured on or after the effective date of January 1, 1969. In accordance with the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, the initial safety standards were based on existing standards. Headlighting requirements, as specified in Standard No. 108, were therefore based on existing Bureau of Motor Carrier Safety Regulations, certain State regulations and the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) Standards. On this basis, Standard No. 108 specifies that headlamps for all vehicles except motorcycles conform to SAE Standards J579a and J580a, entitled, respectively, "Sealed Beam Headlamp Units for Motor Vehicles" and "Sealed Beam Headlamp." To provide protection from blinding effects to oncoming drivers, SAE Standard J579a specifies a maximum lamp output of 37,500 candlepower. This candlepower value is considerably less than the candlepower output of quartz iodine type headlamps.

As indicated in paragraph S2 of Standard No. 108, the standard is applicable to lighting on new vehicles and not to replacement lighting equipment. Except for vehicles subject to the Bureau of Motor Carrier Safety Regulations, the requirements for replacement lighting equipment, as well as lighting requirements for vehicles in use, are those requirements as set by the regulatory agencies of the individual states.

The National Highway Safety Bureau is sponsoring a research contract on improved forward lighting for motor vehicles. Results of this contract will not only provide us with well-founded data for use in amending the standard, but will also assist us in evaluating the relative merits of sealed beam, quartz iodine and other types of headlamps.

ENCLOSURE

ID: nht69-1.46

DATE: 09/10/69

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; C. A. Baker; NHTSA

TO: Blue Bird Body Company

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: Thank you for your letter of August 8, 1969, concerning the operation of red warning lamps on school buses.

Paragraph S3.1.3.2 (b)(2) of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 appears to require that the red warning lamps be e-nergized when a school bus door is opened for any purpose. However the intent of the standard is that the red warning lamps be energized only when the bus entrance door is open for the admission or discharge of passengers (i.e. that the red lamps be activated automatically only after manual energization of the amber lamps), and many manufacturers have, in our view, correctly go interpreted S3.1.3.2 (b)(2).

ID: nht69-1.47

DATE: 09/04/69

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; C. A. Baker; NHTSA

TO: Department of California Highway Patrol

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: Thank you for your letters of August 12, 1969, to Dr. Robert Brenner, Acting Director, National Highway Safety Bureau, concerning visibility angles for turn-signal, stop and tall lamps on all vehicles requiring such lamps, and stop lamp operation on motorcycles.

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 requires that turn signal, stop and tail lamps, upon installation on vehicles subject to the Standard, meet the 45 degree, vicibility requirements specified in SAE Standards J538d, J586c and J585c.

The dual switching of stop lamps, with activation both by foot brake and hand brake on motorcycles, is required by Standard No. 108 in paragraph S3.4.4

ID: nht69-1.48

DATE: 01/16/69

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; William Haddon, Jr.; NHTSA

TO: State of Iowa

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: Thank you for your letter of November 7, 1968, concerning the requirements for school bus signal lamps as specified in Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108.

With respect to the number and color of lamps in your six-lamp system, I would agree that, when viewed singly from the front or rear, your system would have the same general appearance as a four-or eight-lamp system of other states. However, as mentioned in the third paragraph of your letter, Standard No. 108 also specifies a standard method of energizing the lamps in a four-and eight-lamp system, including the front-and rear-mounted lamps. Therefore, a motorist, who is familiar with the four-or eight-lamp system in other states, could be easily confused when viewing alternately the front and rear of a six-lamp system, since on a system basis it would not conform to either the four-or eight-lamp system.

As stated in my recent letters to your Congressional Delegation, any person adversely affected by the safety standards may, under the procedural rules of the Federal Highway Administration, petition the Administrator under Part 206, Subchapter B, Section 216.31 or Section 216.35, published in the Federal Register on November 17, 1967, a copy of which is again enclosed for your convenience. Your attention is particularly invited to paragraph (d) of Section 216.35 which reads, "Unless the Administrator otherwise provides, the filing of a petition does not stay the effectiveness of the rule."

With respect to the questions raised in Mr. Arthur Roberts' letter of February 22, 1968, to Mr. David A. Fay of this Bureau, and also relating to your preparation of proposals for new school buses, I would call your attention to Section 103 (d) of Public Law 89-563, a copy of which is enclosed.

In part, this section reads, "Whenever a Federal motor vehicle safety standard established under this title is in effect, no state or political subdivision of a state shall have any authority either to establish, or to continue in effect, with respect to any motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment any safety standard applicable to the same aspect of performance of such vehicle or item of equipment which is not identical to the Federal standard." It would appear therefore that preparation of your proposals for new school buses could be initiated on the basis of Standard No. 103 requirements and prior to the next meeting of your legislature in January, 1969.

Again, as indicated in my recent letters to your Congressional Delegation, it is the position of this Bureau that the provision of Standard No. 103 permitting optional use of either the four-lamp or eight-lamp signal system is reasonable, practicable and in the interest of highway safety. A consideration of the information presented in your letter has not altered this position. Therefore, we still do not believe that a change in the provision of Standard No. 108 to permit optional use of a third or six-lamp system is justified.

Thank you for writing.

ID: nht69-1.49

DATE: 04/10/69

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Charles A. Baker; NHTSA

TO: Department of California Highway Patrol

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: Thank you for your letter of January 24, 1969, to Dr. William Haddon, Jr., former Director, National Highway Safety Bureau, concerning the installation of front identification lamps on various vehicles manufactured in more than one stage.

Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 specifies that multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, truck tractors, and buses of 80 inches or more in overall width shall be equipped with three identification lamps on the front of the completed vehicle. This standard is applicable to the completed vehicle and it is the responsibility of the final assembler to certify that such vehicle conforms to the standard. A manufacturer of a chassis-cab is not required to mount identification lamps on the chassis-cab. However, if he does so, the manufacturer who adds a body to the chassis-cab is not required to add identification lamps to the front of the body.

ID: nht69-1.5

DATE: 05/01/69 EST

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Robert Brenner; NHTSA

TO: Concorde Rubber Company

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in reply to your letter of April 2, 1969, requesting a Department of Transportation (DOT) code number be assigned the Concorde Rubber Company. According to your letter, Concorde has tires manufactured for it by (Illegible Word) Tire and Rubber Company of Hadera, Israel, and by Lee Tire and Rubber Company of Conehehocken, Pennsylvania, which are labeled with Concorde's brand name and the manufacturer's code number (alliance Tire and Rubber Company uses approved code number DOT 187 and Lee Tire and Rubber Company uses approved code number 152).

Pursuant to Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 109, DOT numbers to be molded onto new tires, where a brand name is used rather than the manufacturer's own name, are assigned to tire manufacturers so the seller of the tire may identify the manufacturer to a purchaser upon request.

The legislative history of section 201 of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 (15 U.S.C. 4121) e.g., see 112 Cong. Rec. 18792 (daily ed. August 17, 1966), and the plain meaning of section 201 of the Act demonstrates that Congress intended to have tires made for sale under the private brand of a merchandiser bear the name or code mark of the concern that actually produces the tire, not merely an identification of the merchandiser distributing and selling the tires to the public.

The Act provides that tire labeling shall include "suitable identification of the manufacturer . . . unless the tire contains a brand name other than the name of the manufacturer in which case it shall also contain a code mark which would permit the seller of such tire to identify the manufacturer thereof to the purchaser upon his request." Accordingly, your request for the Concorde Rubber Company's own code number, so that tires manufactured for Concorde by different tire producers can have the same code number, must be denied.

ID: nht69-1.50

DATE: 04/29/69

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Charles A. Baker; NHTSA

TO: Hueck and Company

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: Thank you for your letter of March 22, 1969, requesting a clarification of the location requirements for license plate lamps as specified in Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108.

As you indicated, Standard No. 108 currently references SAE Standard J587B and also permits the location of license plate lamps at the top, side or bottom of the license plate. The latest revision of SAE Standard J587 (J587c) is no way changes the location provision of Standard No. 108. Therefore, a license plate lamp assembly may be tested according to SAE Standard J587b and Standard No. 108 when the license plate is illuminated from the bottom.

Section 103(d) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 states: "Whenever a Federal motor vehicle safety standard established under this title is in effect, no State or political subdivision of a State shall have any authority either to establish, or to continue in effect, with respect to any motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment any safety standard applicable to the same aspect of performance of such vehicle or item of equipment which is not identical to the Federal standard." Therefore, any State regulations on the location of license plate lamps should be identical to the requirements of Standard No. 108 on and after the effective date of the standard.

ID: nht69-1.6

DATE: 07/09/69

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Charles A. Baker; NHTSA

TO: The Cleveland Columbus and Cincinnati Highway Inc.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

ID: nht69-1.7

DATE: 01/24/69

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Charles A. Baker; NHTSA

TO: Baker Equipment Engineering Company

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

ID: nht69-1.8

DATE: 02/03/69

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Charles A. Baker; NHTSA

TO: Utility Body Company

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: Thank you for your letter of January 8, 1969, to Mr. Andrew K. Ness, National Highway Safety Bureau, concerning your request for an interpretation relative to the mounting of clearance lamps.

It is required by Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 that clearance lamps be mounted as near as practicable to the upper right and left extreme edges of the vehicle. Lamps mounted at the right and left extreme edges of the widest part of the body panel shown in your sketch would meet the requirements. The mounting height of these lamps should be as high as practicable without causing objectionable glare in the rearview mirror. Retention of cab mounted clearance lamps is optional.

With respect to the requirements of Standard No. 108, I must point out that this Bureau does not issue approval on items of lighting equipment or on vehicle designs incorporating this equipment. Therefore, comments of this Bureau are for information purposes only and in no way relieve any vehicle manufacturer from his responsibility for certifying that the assembled vehicle meets the requirements of Standard No. 108.