ID: nht74-4.19

DATE: 07/22/74

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

TO: Volvo of America Corporation

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This responds to your June 19, 1974, question whether required hose labeling under Standard No. 106, Brake hoses, permits placing some required labeling on each of several hose sections which are joined together in one vacuum brake line to form the required label. You ask how a 2 3/8-inch section could otherwise be labeled.

It is not permitted under S9.1 to label a vacuum brake hose with only part of the required information, whether or not it appears with all other required labeling in the same brake line.

You state that 5 inches is required to place all labeling on vacuum nose. We do not understand why the legend could not be shortened to 2 3/8-inches or less. There is no width requirement for lettering and Notice 11 now permits labeling information to appear in any order on the hose to simplify cutting.

Please write again if we have misunderstood the problem you have posed.

Yours Truly,

Volvo of America Corporation

June 19, 1974

Lawrence Schneider, Chief Counsel National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Volvo hereby requests an interpretation on FMVSS 106. We are planning to use one type of vacuum brake hose of several different lengths jointed together. The shortest piece will have a length of two and three eights inches. The minimum length necessary to provide room for all required FMVSS 106 markings is five inches. My question is can we use a vacuum brake hose, which consists of different lengths of the same hose jointed together, where the marking on the shortest piece is incomplete? If not, what marking would be acceptable for a hose two and three eights inch long?

Thank you for your consideration of this matter and we request your reply as soon as practicable.

Sincerely,

Rick Shue Product Safety Engineer

ID: nht74-4.2

DATE: 06/06/74

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Richard B. Dyson; NHTSA

TO: Earl E. Eckert

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in reply to your letter of May 3, 1974, inquiring as to the applicability of the Federal odometer law to trucks over 16,000 pounds.

The Federal odometer regulation does not require transferors of vehicles with a Gross Vehicle Weight Rating of more than 16,000 pounds to provide an odometer disclosure statement upon transfer of the vehicle. By Gross Vehicle Weight Rating, the regulation is referring to the value specified by the manufacturer as the loaded weight of a single vehicle, which appears on its permanent certification label.

I have enclosed copies of pertinent portions of the Act and the regulation for your information.

ENCLS.

ID: nht74-4.20

DATE: 07/17/74

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

TO: Imperial-Eastman Corporation

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This responds to your June 24, 1974, questions whether brake hose manufactured before September 1, 1974, to comply with all performance requirements of Standard 106-74, Brake hoses, may be marked with the DOT symbol after that date, and whether the DOT may be used on hose, fittings, and assemblies prior to that date.

The answer to your questions is no. The DOT symbol means that a vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment was manufactured in compliance with a Federal motor vehicle safety standard and that it complies with the standard. Therefore, the DOT symbol can not be placed on hose, fitting, or assemblies manufactured before the date the standard becomes applicable to them, whether or not the DOT is actually placed on the hose before or after the effective date.

With regard to your supply of pre-106 vacuum hose, it may be used in assemblies as late as February 28, 1975, and in vehicles as late as August 31, 1975, if it is only clamped to the vehicle and not made into assemblies.

Yours Truly,

Imperial-Eastman Corporation

June 24, 1974

Legal Department National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Attention: T. W. Herlihy

At the present time, Imperial-Eastman has a large quantity (about a two year supply) of 5/8 I. D. SAE J1403 Vacuum Brake Hose in inventory and it is evident this hose will not be sold before the DOT-106 goes into effect on September 1, 1974 or later. Our customers are already changing drawings and all new purchase orders call for brake hose that meets FMVSS 106.

It is impossible for any hose assembly supplier to sell unmarked hose up to the day 106 goes into effect and then switch to hose with the DOT layline without having a lot of old hose left over.

For this reason, it is imperative we get answers to the following questions as soon as possible.

1. Is it permissible for us to return the J1403 brake hose to the manufacturer and have it DOT branded? This hose meets all FMVSS 106 requirements and it would be marked with the original date of manufacture (Jan. 1972).

2. Is it permissible to purchase, couple and sell DOT hose and assemblies prior to the date 106 becomes effective? This is the only way we can balance our hose inventories and use up unbranded hose.

If it would be more convenient and less time consuming to discuss the above, please don't hesitate to call me collect.

M. A. Chermak

ID: nht74-4.21

DATE: 08/14/74

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Richard B. Dyson; NHTSA

TO: Linch-Jones Incorporated

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in response to your August 9, 1974, telephone request for a clarification of a transferor's duties under the disclosure requirements of the Federal odometer law.

The odometer requirements of the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act specify that the transferor of a vehicle provide written disclosure to the transferee of the mileage registered on the odometer at the time of the transaction. If the transferor knows that the odometer reading is incorrect for reasons other than calibration error, a statement to that effect must also be executed at the time ownership of the vehicle is transferred.

In the situation where the accuracy of the odometer is in question, the transferror is required to state that the mileage indicated on the odometer is incorrect in accordance with the form specified in @ 580 of 49 CFR Part 580, Odometer Disclosure Requirements, if there is credible evidence indicating the inaccuracy. If the transferror has no firm basis for a conclusion that the odometer reading is incorrect but feels that it may be wrong, he does not violate the Act by indicating that the true mileage may differ from that shown. In so doing, he provides more information than required, and is not guilty of any violation.

A statement that the mileage may differ from that indicated on the odometer would only be a violation where positive evidence exists suggesting that the odometer reading is incorrect. In such a situation the transferor must inform the buyer of the inaccuracy in the manner prescribed in the odometer disclosure requirements.

If you are in need of any further information, please let us know.

ID: nht74-4.22

DATE: 08/05/74

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

TO: Oshkosh Truck Corporation

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This responds to your July 2, 1974, question whether a truck complies with the dynamometer requirements of S5.4 of Standard No. 121, Air brake systems, if its brakes are actuated by smaller slack adjusters and brake chambers than those specified by the brake manufacturer to establish torque levels which comply with the standard. Your question arises under the interim requirements of S5.3.1.2 and the full requirements of S5.4.2 and S5.4.3 as they apply to the on/off-highway category.

Standard No. 121 is a vehicle requirement, and the NHTSA will conduct compliance testing for dynamometer requirements using the force levels applied to the brakes on the particular vehicle it is testing. This means that if you use 5.5-inch slack adjusters and 30-inch brake chambers on your truck, the NHTSA would use the force applied by these components in its compliance testing. There is no prohibition to your modifying the brake manufacturer's "recommended package" to suit your needs. However, you should be able to show that, in the exercise of due care, the brake assembly meets the requirements of S5.4 as modified.

If you believe that the established dynamometer requirements conflict with optimum handling and stopping performance, you may, under NHTSA procedural rules (49 CFR 563, copy enclosed) petition to modify the standard.

In response to your July 10, 1974, letter asking whether an air-over-hydraulic front brake is subject to certain requirements of Standard No. 105a, I enclose a preamble to that standard which states that air-over-hydraulic systems are regulated only by standard No. 121.

ID: nht74-4.23

DATE: 08/12/74

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

TO: The Weatherland Company

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This responds to your July 10, 1974, request to modify the hose labeling provisions of Standard No. 106-74, Brake hoses, to permit DOT labeling of 1/8-inch O.D. nylon tubing.

To the best of our knowledge 1/8-inch O.D. tubing is not used as brake hose as it is defined by the standard:

"Brake hose" means a flexible conduit manufactured for use in a brake system to transmit or contain the fluid pressure or vacuum used to apply force to a vehicle's brakes.

The tubing is used for pressure gauge lines and in two-speed differentials, but is apparently not used to transmit or contain the pressure used to apply force to a vehicle's brakes. As it is not considered to be brake hose under the standard, it should not be labeled with the DOT symbol.

Aside from this prohibition on the use of the DOT symbol, you are free to label 1/8-inch O.D. nylon tubing as you choose.

The Weatherhead Company

July 10, 1974

Ref. MUE: 468

Mr. Richard B. Dyson Assistant Chief Counsel U.S. Department of Transportation

SUBJECT: Air Brake Hose Labeling 571.106

The Weatherhead Company manufactures nylon air brake tubing (hose) covered by FMVSS 571.106 (effective September 1, 1974). The DOT labeling requirements for this product specified in the safety standard calls for at least 1/8 inch high letters. One of the common sizes of tubing (hose) (1'8 inch outside diameter) used in truck air brake systems does not have adequate outside surface area to accomodate 1/8 inch high lettering.

A specific exemption of this label requirement is requested to allow The Weatherhead Company to DOT label nylon air brake tubing (hose) of 1/8 inch outside diameter with letters smaller than 1/8 inch high.

Since this standard becomes effective September 1, 1974 for manufacturers of hose and because a lead time is necessary to obtain new DOT labeling equipment, a prompt reply to this request would be greatly appreciated.

JOHN H. MUELLER

Manager - Engineering

Standards & Specifications

ENCL.-SAMPLE

ID: nht74-4.24

DATE: 05/10/74

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Richard B. Dyson; NHTSA

TO: Volvo of America Corporation

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in response to your letter of April 16, 1974, requesting an interpretation of the test procedure specified in Standard No. 301 (Docket 73-20; Notice 2) concerning the operation of the vehicle's fuel pump during testing.

Paragraph S7.1.3 of the standard requires that electrically driven fuel pumps be in operation during the barrier crash tests if they normally operate with the activation of the vehicle's electrical system. If the pump is incapable of functioning with the independent activation of the electrical system and requires the operation of the vehicle's engine, then the pump should not be running during the barrier crash tests.

Once the barrier crash tests have been completed, if the fuel pump was operating it may be desctivated, as the standard only requires that it operate during the crashes.

Thank you for your inquiry.

Volvo of America Corporation

April 16, 1974

Lawrence Schneider, Chief Counsel National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Volvo of America Corporation hereby requests an interpretation of the test procedure specified in ammended Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 301, published March 21, 1974, 39 Federal Register 1050 (Docket No. 73-20; Notice 2). Section S7.1.3 of that standard specifies conditions under which electrically driven fuel pumps must be operating at the time of the barrier crash. Volvo requests an interpretation on the operating condition of the fuel pump after the barrier crash.

The electric pump used by Volvo normally ceases to operate when the engine speed drops below 70 RPM. On the basis that the engine is unlikely to remain running after a 30 MPH barrier crash, and that no condition is specified in FMVSS 301, Volvo requests that post-crash evaluation and testing be performed with the fuel pump de-activated.

Volvo thanks you for your consideration of this matter and requests a reply as soon as practical.

Rick Shue Product Safety Engineer

cc: E. Skarin

ID: nht74-4.25

DATE: 05/30/74

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; E. T. Driver; NHTSA

TO: The Philadelphia Inquirer

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in reply to your recent letter to the U.S. Department of Transportation concerning Federal regulations on supplemental lights to be installed on your trucks.

There are no requirements in our Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards which would prohibit the use of a white light on the cab roof to Illuminate information on the front of the truck body. Likewise, we have no specifications for such lights. The use and location of the lights would, however, be subject to regulations imposed by the individual States.

As a matter of information, the front identification lamps and clearance lamps, as shown on the sketch attached to your letter, do not appear to be located in accordance with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 (copy enclosed). Table II requires these lamps to be located as close as practicable to the top of the vehicle. In your unscaled drawing the top of the truck body appears significantly higher than the cab.

Thank you for your interest in highway safety.

ENC.

N.H.T.S.A

We are acquiring a new fleet and we would like to mount a white light on the roof of our cabs that would illuminate the Company Name and vehicle identification number which is located on the front of the truck body. Before installing these lights, we would like to know if there is any part of the D.O.T. regulations which would prohibit their use, or if there are any regulations regarding their location, type, etc. Thank you for your cooperation.

Patrick R. Mulrooney

Fleet Safety MGR.

The Philadelphia Inquirer

ENC.

(Graphics omitted)

ID: nht74-4.26

DATE: DATE:05/07/74

FROM: FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Lawrence R. Schneider; NHTSA

TO: TO: Perkasie Vulcanizing Co., Inc.

TITLE: TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in reply to your letter of March 25, 1974, asking whether, consitently with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 117, maximum permissible load may be labeled in two lines, viz.:

MAXIMUM PERMISSIBLE LOAD XXXXXXXX LBS.

You ask further whether there is a maximum height requirement for the lettering used in the label.

Standard No. 117 does not specify labeling format, and the two-line format you submit conforms to the standard. Paragraphs S6.3.1 and S6.3.2 of Standard No. 117 require all safety labeling, both permanent and affixed, to be at least 0.078 inches in height. No other requirements regarding labeling size are specified.

PERKASIE VULCANIZING CO., INC.

[Illegible Words]

SUBJECT: Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards FMVSS-117 - Auto Tire Retreads

In our letter to you dated January 4, 1974 on the subject we gave you information regarding the requirement that on February 1, 1974 certain information must be permanently molded into or onto the sidewall of an auto tire retread.

As you may have noticed in news releases, the U.S. Court of Appeals on January 8, 1974 modified the requirements as to what information must appear on the sidewall.

The result is -- on Auto Tire Retreads all that is required as of February 1, 1974 is --

"Maximum permissible load"

This information must be permanently molded into or onto the sidewall of Auto Tire Retreads.

All the other information such as tire size, inflation pressure, ply rating, tubeless or tube type, bias ply, bias/belted or radial must be on the tire, or may be labeled onto the tire, either permanently or by the addition of a label that is not easily removable, during the retreading process as we mentioned in a previous letter to you dated May 9, 1973, may still be used.

We will keep you advised of future rulings or changes.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION DATE:05/07/74 FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Lawr

JAS. H. MATTHEWS & CO.

February 18, 1974

Perkesie Vulcanizing Company

ATTENTION: Ralph Perkesie

SUBJECT: Retread Law FMVSS-117

In response to our phone conversation recently in which you had requested us to investigate the retread law FMVSS-117 concerning the character size and length as specified in this law for the labeling of the maximum permissible load designation.

It is our position that we can not presume to interpret or have access to this particular law. This specification should be interpreted by the department of transportation with Perkesie Vulcanizing Company. Any questions concerning this particular law or its' requirements stated in this law should be passed upon the department of transportation. We hope that you can understand that the Jas. H. Matthews & Company is simply the supplier of the tags as specified by a customer. If these tags must meet a specific regulation or a variance of this regulation, this must be interpreted by the customer.

We have our facilities at your disposal in supplying and fulfilling your particular requirements for tags once these specifications have been determined.

We hope this information is of value to you and if we can be of any further service to you in any way please do not hesitate to contact us.

C. R. Parfitt Industry Specialist

ID: nht74-4.27

DATE: 05/14/74

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Richard B. Dyson; NHTSA

TO: L and R Enterprises

COPYEE: HON. JOHN TOWER; HON. LLOYD BENTSEN

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This responds to your February 15, 1974, letter asking whether your installation of spotlights through the left A-pillar of passenger cars is subject to Standards 201 and 216.

Standard 201 does not apply to the instrument panel area on the driver's side from the left door to a longitudinal plane 3-1/4 inches to the right of the steering wheel. The left A pillar is within this excluded area.

Your drilling operation may affect roof strength and I have enclosed a copy of Standard 216, our standard on roof crush resistance. Under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, it is the responsibility of the person who manufacturers or alters a vehicle to determine whether his vehicle meets the requirements.

Your business is subject to these requirements, however, only if you qualify as an alterer of motor vehicles under 49 CFR 567.7, which is enclosed. The mounting of a spotlight by drilling the A-pillar is a "non-readily attachable" alteration. Such an alteration would be subject to the @ 567.7 requirement only if you mount it "before the first purchase of the vehicle in good faith for purposes other than resale."

2 ENCLS

GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

February 19, 1974

Jim Lang President L and R Enterprises

Since the questions raised in your letter of February 15, 1974, are under the jurisdiction of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of Transportation, we have taken the liberty of forwarding it to the General Counsel of that agency.

You can expect to hear directly from that office in the near future.

FRED J. EMERY Director of the Federal Register

cc:w/encl Lawrence R. Schneider, Esq.

General Counsel

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

cc: (1) Honorable John Tower

United States Senate

(2) Honorable Lloyd Bentsen

United States Senate

L and R Enterprises

February 15, 1974

Director Office of Federal Registrar National Archives and Records Service General Services Administration

Ref: Code of Federal Regulations

49 transportation

Parts 200 to 999

Revised October 1, 1972

With reference to part 571 of the above publication and entitled Federal Motor Vehicle Standard; sub-part 571.201 and with specific reference to S3.1.1b and c, has been interpreted to indicate that any rigid projection outboard from the padded dash is or will be illegal. Our exact reference here has to do with a "post mounted spot light which has a rigid handle outboard from said dash." Please provide an exact interpretation of the above for us.

Another question arises in sub-part 571.216 with specific reference the strength of the roof of a vehicle. Said testing is completed the factory, but if a 1/2" to 3/4" hole is drilled in the left or right front corner post, the physical structure is altered and weakened. We would appreciate a positive interpretation on this point also.

L and R Enterprises is a manufacturer of 12 volt lighting devices, and we need these two interpretations so as to know how to schedule our production.

Thanks for your assistance in this matter.

Jim Lang President L and R Enterprises

c/c Honorable John tower Senator from Texas

Honorable Lloyd Pentsen

Senator from Texas