ID: 18089.ztv

Mr. Donald J. Rager
Chief Operating Officer
Shelby American, Inc.
501 S. Rancho Drive, Suite H-53
Las Vegas, NV 89106

Dear Mr. Rager:

This will acknowledge receipt of the application by Shelby American, Inc., for temporary exemption of the Shelby Series 1 from the automatic restraint requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 208. The application, which is dated May 29, 1998, meets our procedural requirements, and we are preparing a notice for the Federal Register asking for public comment on your request.

We note that you planned to begin production of the Series 1 on July 1, 1998. Because of the statutory requirement that the public be offered an opportunity to comment on exemption applications, we generally afford a 30-day comment period. and a decision is reached 30 to 60 days after that. This means that Shelby must not sell any Series 1 vehicles unless and until the Administrator has responded affirmatively to Shelby's petition for a temporary exemption from Standard No. 208. We shall, of course, inform you when a decision has been made.

We also note (p. 2 of the application) that Shelby requests exemption from S4.1.5 of Standard No. 208, quoting S4.1.5. to the effect that passenger cars manufactured on or after September 1, 1989 must comply with S4.1.2.1. You are using an outdated version of the Standard. Passenger cars manufactured on and after September 1, 1997, must comply with S4.1.5.3, which, in turn, references S4.1..5.1(a)(1).

In the meantime, we have comments on certain information contained in the application regarding the Shelby Cobra CSX3000 Series Continuation Cars ("Continuation Cars"). You have informed us that the Continuation Cars are assembled "from certain new old stock parts surviving from . . . 1965 . . . supplemented by new parts manufactured from original tooling or build new to original specifications." We understand that "These vehicles are registered when sold as 1965 vehicles." We further understand that only two Continuation Cars have been built to date, and that the market for these cars is estimated at one to two units a year.

In our opinion, a vehicle assembled in 1997 or 1998 from parts manufactured in 1965 as well as from parts recently manufactured from original 1965 tooling is a motor vehicle that must comply with the Federal motor vehicle safety standards in effect and applicable to it at the time of its assembly, unless it has been exempted by the Administrator. Because Shelby did not include the Continuation Cars in its petition for exemption from Standard No. 208, we surmise that the company may be proceeding under the assumption that the Continuation Cars are not required to comply with any Federal requirements because they are registered as 1965 models. This is incorrect. We believe that Shelby should review the Continuation Car program in light of its Federal obligations before manufacturing more of them. With respect to the two Continuation Cars that have already been sold, if Shelby determines that they do not comply with the Federal motor vehicle safety standards that applied at the time of their assembly, it is required to notify their owners of that fact and offer to repair, repurchase, or replace them. Alternatively, Shelby, after its determination, may apply to the Administrator for a decision that the noncompliances are inconsequential to safety and that it should be excused from notification and remedy.

Shelby's application explains that parts for the Continuation Cars survive from the original planned production run of 100 cars, approximately half of which were completed in 1965. This was "the basis for homologation of the racing program." We understand that Shelby would like to continue the manufacture of the Continuation Cars indefinitely, until the supply of parts is exhausted. Under our interpretations, the Continuation Car would not be a motor vehicle subject to our regulations if it is manufactured for competition on closed courses, trailered from event to event, and not licensed for use on the public roads. You may wish to consider this approach with respect to future production of the Continuation Cars. Any statement of origin issued for these vehicles under this approach should state that they are not to be titled for highway use.

We have comments as well on the Shelby Cobra CSX4000 Series Component Vehicles ("Component Vehicles"), and the Daytona Coupe and 289 Cobra, which you also inform us are component vehicles. The term "component vehicles" refers to vehicles that are sold without engine and transmission; these components will be installed by the owner or at his or her direction, "and privately register the resulting vehicle." Under our interpretations, the installer is regarded as the manufacturer of the motor vehicle and responsible for its compliance with all applicable Federal regulations. However, Shelby is responsible for the compliance (and certification of compliance) of any part that it has manufactured recently from original tooling if that equipment item is directly covered by a Federal motor vehicle safety standard. The principal components we refer to are the vehicle's glazing and lighting equipment (we assume that brake hoses, brake fluid, tires, and seat belt assemblies are purchased new from suppliers who have certified their compliance with the Federal safety standards). In light of this paragraph, Shelby may wish to consider converting its Continuation Cars into Component Vehicles.

However, I must advise you that, under longstanding interpretations, we would still regard Shelby as the vehicle's manufacturer and responsible for compliance and its certification if it offered the Continuation Car's engine and transmission for sale to the purchaser of a Component Vehicle Continuation Car concurrently with the Component Vehicle or as part of the sales transaction.

We would appreciate your views on this issue.

If you have further questions, please call Taylor Vinson of this Office (202-366-5263).

Sincerely,
Frank Seales, Jr.
Chief Counsel
cc: Mac Yousry
FAX 714-974-3816
d.7/17/98
ref:571

ID: 18109.wkm

Mr. Frank Johnson
Executive Vice-President
Nichirin Inc.
139 Copernicus Boulevard
Brantford, Ontario, Canada
N3P 1N4

Dear Mr. Johnson:

This responds to your letter of May 26, 1998 to Mr. Luis Figueroa of this agency's Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, who referred the letter to this office for response.

You state in your letter that your parent company, Nichirin Company, Ltd. Japan asked you to inquire of this agency whether it is permissible to add optional information to the required labeling of brake hoses. Specifically, you state that your current marking is

DOT NCRN 3/98 1/8 HL

You state that your parent company provides hoses for coupling by another party (Company X). This party requests that Nichirin provide hoses labeled as follows:

DOT NCRN FOR CO. X 3/98 1/8 HL

Assuming from the reference to "HL" in your labeling that the hoses concerned are low expansion hydraulic brake hoses, your current labeling is correct under subsection S5.2.2 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (Standard) No. 106, Brake hoses. The standard makes no provision for marking information in addition to the required information. However, this agency has interpreted Standard 106 to permit the labeling of brake hoses with optional information if the optional information does not confuse or obscure the meaning of the required information. Moreover, in order to avoid confusion with the required information, the optional information must appear on the opposite side of the hose. Thus, you are permitted to label your hoses with the optional information your customer requested so long as that optional information appears on the side of the hose opposite from the required labeling.

I hope this information is helpful to you. Should you have any further questions or need additional information, feel free to contact Walter Myers of my staff at this address or at (202) 366-2992, or fax at (202) 366-3820.

Sincerely,
Frank Seales, Jr.
Chief Counsel
ref:106
d.7/6/98

ID: 18110.wkm

Mr. Joseph Hogan
HYCOP AB
Box 970
S591 29 Motala
Sweden

Dear Mr. Hogan:

This responds to questions you asked in a letter that was faxed to Jeannette Greenfield of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) on May 19, 1998, and in telephone conversations with Walter Myers of my staff on June 3 and 11, 1998. Your questions concern several different requirements in Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 106, Brake hoses (copy enclosed).

Registering a Designation

You explain that you manufacture vacuum brake hose assemblies for Saab Automobile AB (Saab). You state that you would like to "register the DOT label" and ask us to indicate acceptance of the labeling. Standard 106 does not require labeling to be registered, but instead requires manufacturers to file a designation with NHTSA that identifies the manufacturer as the assembler (S9.1.3). The manufacturer, in turn, labels the designation on the vacuum brake hose assembly. We have established a procedure by which our Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance will check to ensure that the designation you wish to use is not already in use, and will inform you under separate cover of the results of its review. I have enclosed a copy of the form you should complete and submit for this purpose.

Labeling the Assembly

The labeling requirements for vacuum brake hose assemblies are set forth in S9.1.3 of Standard 106. That section provides, among other things, that vacuum brake hose assemblies made with end fittings attached by crimping or swaging and plastic tube assemblies made with fittings attached by heat shrinking or dimensional interference fit, except those sold as part of a motor vehicle, shall be labeled either (a) with a band around the assembly, or (b) by marking an end fitting. If option (a) is used, the band must be etched, embossed, or stamped in block capital letters, at least 1/8 inch high, with the symbol "DOT" and the manufacturer's designation that has been filed with NHTSA. If option (b) is used, the assembly manufacturer may etch, stamp, or emboss at least one end fitting of the assembly with the manufacturer's designation, at least 1/16 inch high. You must mark your assemblies using one of these options.

Labeling the Hose With Supplemental Information

You ask whether you may add supplemental labeling to your product, in addition to the marking required by S9.1.3. You told Mr. Myers in your June 11 telephone conversation that Saab wants you to label your hoses as follows:

DOT HYCOP XXX - XX 12.5 x 1.25 OD VL

You explained to Mr. Myers that the "DOT" would indicate compliance with Standard 106; "HYCOP" would be your manufacturer's identification code; XXX would represent the day of manufacture, from 001 to 365, while XX would represent the year; 12.5 would indicate the outside diameter of the hose in millimeters; 1.25 would represent the thickness of the hose wall, also in millimeters; and that OD and VL would represent outside diameter and light duty vacuum brake hose, respectively.

It is permissible for you to label your hose with additional labeling, subject to the following. By marking the hose with the "DOT" symbol, you are indicating that the component complies with Standard 106. Standard 106 has hose marking requirements that you did not have to meet because your hose is sold as part of a hose assembly (see the exception in S9.1.1 that excludes such hose from the labeling requirement). While your hose is excluded from marking requirements, there are performance requirements in the standard that apply to it. We do not prohibit you from providing a repetitious certification (the "DOT" symbol) if you wish to mark the hose that way. However, if you undertake to mark your hose with the DOT symbol, you must mark your hose with the other markings required of vacuum hoses as well, as specified in S9.1.1 of the standard.

Subsection S9.1.1 of the standard sets forth the labeling requirements for bulk vacuum hoses. Those requirements are:

(a) The symbol "DOT", which constitutes the manufacturer's certification that the hose complies with applicable standards;

(b) The manufacturer's designation which, as noted above, is required to be filed with NHTSA;

(c) The month, day, and year or month and year of manufacture;

(d) The nominal inside diameter of the hose, expressed in inches or millimeters; or the nominal outside diameter of plastic tubing, again expressed in inches or millimeters (the abbreviation "mm" must follow hose sizes that are expressed in millimeters), followed by the letters "OD"; and

(e) The letters "VL" or "VH" indicating light or heavy duty brake hose, respectively.

Assuming that we accept "HYCOP" as your designation, your proposed labeling would comply with (a), (b), (c), and (e). However, as noted above, (d) calls for marking either the inside diameter of the hose or, in the case of plastic tubing, you can mark the outside diameter. In neither case is the thickness of the hose wall marked. Thus, the 1.25 figure representing the thickness of the hose wall must be removed. Further, the 12.5 for the outside diameter of the hose must be followed by "mm," indicating a measurement in millimeters, then followed by the letters "OD."

I hope this information is helpful to you. Should you have any questions or need further information, feel free to contact us at this address or by telephone at 001 801 10 (202) 366-2992, fax (202) 366-3820.

Sincerely,
Frank Seales, Jr.
Chief Counsel
Enclosures
d.7/10/98
ref: #106

ID: 1811y

Mr. Thomas C. Gravengood
Agap'e Plastics Inc.
Grand Rapids, MI 49504

Dear Mr. Gravengood:

This is in reply to your letter of April 3, l989, to this Office enclosing samples of plastic lenses. Your company manufactures "heated lights" which appear beneficial in melting snow that accumulates on them in the winter months. In your letter, you stated:

"All lights, lenses, and materials to assemble the heated safety lights have already been certified and passed the Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. l08. We have been advised by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration that there is no motor vehicle safety standard no. for heated lights. In order for us to do business at the O.E.M. level we require a letter of approval from you to us that we may pass on to our customers so they may start ordering and we may start producing."

We have no authority to "approve" or "disapprove" items of motor vehicle equipment. Under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, an equipment manufacturer "approves" each of its own products that are subject to a Federal motor vehicle safety standard by certifying that it meets all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards, or (if it is a vehicle manufacturer), that the vehicle on which the lamp is installed, complies with the standards. However, we can advise you of the relationship of your product to Standard No. l08. This should prove helpful in dealings at the O.E.M. level.

There are two types of O.E.M. lighting equipment: lamps that are required by Standard No. l08, and supplementary lamps that do not come under its coverage. Although your product literature indicates that the highmounted heated taillamp supplements the original equipment lamp, it is not clear whether the heated signal lamp serves as the required signal lamp or is a supplement to the original equipment. Accordingly, this letter discusses how Standard No. l08 treats both original required and original supplemental lighting equipment.

If you are the manufacturer of original lighting equipment required by Standard No. 108, but not the manufacturer of the vehicle on which it is installed, the vehicle manufacturer, and not you, has the legal responsibility under the Act and Standard No. l08 of ensuring that the equipment complies with the standard, and of certifying that the vehicle meets all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. As a practical matter, however, vehicle manufacturers generally insist that equipment manufacturers provide assurance that their products meet Federal standards, but the "certification" they may insist upon is not required by the Act. You are correct that there is no standard that applies to heated lamps as such. The Federal standard that applies is the one imposed by Standard No. l08 for the particular equipment item (taillamps or signal lamps in this instance).

If you are manufacturing a lamp as an original equipment supplement to required original lighting equipment, the burden remains on the vehicle manufacturer who installs it. The only restriction on a supplementary lamp that Standard No. l08 imposes is that it not impair the effectiveness of the required lighting equipment (paragraph S4.1.3). Your lamps "splice into" the wiring for the taillamps and "marker lamps", according to your product literature. Therefore, it is incumbent upon the vehicle manufacturer to ensure that this installation does not negatively affect the performance of the required taillamps and signal lamps, or otherwise impair its effectiveness. If the vehicle manufacturer determines that no impairment exists, then it may certify that its vehicles comply with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards.

Observing that the product literature depicts the heated taillamp installed in the upper corners of a school bus body, we must also call attention to an additional provision of Standard No. l08. The location depicted is one that is frequently used for the clearance lamps required by Standard No. l08. Paragraph S4.4 of Standard No. l08 forbids the optical combination of clearance lamps and taillamps. Thus, your lamp cannot optically combine these two functions if it is to be used as new vehicle equipment.

Other enclosures to your letter indicate that at present the heated lamp is being installed on buses in use, that is to say, as non-original equipment. The requirements imposed by Standard No. l08 and the Act for aftermarket manufacturers of lighting equipment differ from those for original equipment. If the lamp you produce is intended to replace an original equipment certified lamp, it is considered replacement equipment. As a manufacturer of a replacement taillamp or signal lamp, the legal obligation to produce a complying equipment item falls squarely upon you, as does the certification responsibility. If the lamp is intended only to replace a supplemental lamp, you are not required to certify. However, there may be instances in which your lamp is interchangeable with original certified equipment, and even though you may not intend it as replaceable lighting equipment, you may encounter questions from state and federal authorities if it is not manufactured and certified in accordance with Standard No. 108.

Finally, you should be aware of your responsibilities under the Act in the event that your products do not comply with Standard No. l08, or incorporate a safety related defect (an example would be the inability of the lens to withstand the heat produced during the lamp's operation without warping or cracking). If you or this agency determine that a noncompliance or safety related defect occurs in any item of replacement equipment that you manufacture, you have the obligation to notify purchasers, and to remedy the problem through repair, repurchase, or replacement of the item. With respect to original equipment, this obligation falls upon the manufacturer of the vehicle on which it is installed.

If you have any further questions we shall be happy to answer them. We are returning your samples.

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Wood Assistant Chief Counsel for Rulemaking

/ref:108 d:5/l6/89

ID: 18121.ztv

Herr P. Binder
ITT Automotive Europe
Stuttgarter Strasse 119
74321 Bietigheim-Bissingen
Germany

Dear Herr Binder:

This is in reply to your fax of June 4, 1998, to Taylor Vinson of this Office, with respect to the use of light-emitting diodes (LEDs) in a rear lamp that ITT Automotive Europe is developing.

You have asked the factors that must be taken into consideration, the photometric requirements that must be met, "which requirements exist if one LED" fails, and which regulation will be used.

The rear lamp specifications of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated Equipment are based upon incandescent bulb technology where requirements are generally met by using one bulb for each lighted section of the lamp. The specification of 32 candela per lighted section that appear in certain SAE materials incorporated by reference in Standard No. 108 is based upon the highest output of incandescent signal lamp bulbs at the time that the SAE standards were written. When requirements are intended to be met by limited flux light sources such as LEDs, the light output specification cannot be provided by a single light source but must be provided by multiple light sources. However, current interpretations of what is necessary to comply with Standard No. 108 do not contain any differentiation based on type of light source. Thus, if 20 LEDs provide the same illumination as a single filament bulb, a lamp equipped with the former is considered a lamp with three lighted sections for purposes of compliance, not a single-section lamp. To meet the photometric requirements for three-section lamps, manufacturers must use an overly bright and costly array of LEDs.

You have asked what are the requirements if one LED fails. Failure of one light source in a taillamp or a stop lamp with more than one light source is not addressed by Standard No. 108. If a light source fails in a turn signal lamp on a vehicle that is not equipped to tow a trailer, Standard No. 108 requires that the failure be indicated to the driver. We are not aware of any LED turn signals in use, or how manufacturers would design such a unit to comply with this requirement. However, we believe that a failure should be indicated to the driver at the point where an LED turn signal ceases to furnish the minimum photometric performance required by Standard No. 108. In general, the laws of the individual states require all lamps to be fully functional on vehicles in operation but the failure of a single LED is likely to pass unnoticed.

On June 24, 1998, the agency proposed to amend Standard No. 108 to accommodate LED technology (63 FR 34350). Instead of being designed to conform to the photometric requirements based on the number of lighted sections specified in relevant SAE materials, NHTSA has proposed that a lamp equipped with LEDs that needs more than one light source to achieve compliance with the photometric performance required of a single lighted section, shall be designed to conform to photometric requirements based on the dimension of the effective projected luminous lens area for the function being tested. A lamp would be regarded as having one lighted section if the maximum horizontal or vertical linear dimension of the effective projected luminous lens area of the lamp is less than 150 mm, two lighted sections if the dimension is 150-300 mm, and three lighted sections if the dimension is greater than 300 mm.

Comments are due on the proposal not later than August 10, 1998. The proposed effective date is one year after publication of the final rule. I enclose a copy of the proposed rule for your information. We are sending this response by mail, rather than by fax, to ensure that you receive a clear copy.

Sincerely,
Frank Seales, Jr.
Chief Counsel
Enclosure
d.7/10/98
ref:108

ID: 18122.ztv

Mr. Malcolm Currie
President and CEO
Currie Technologies, Inc.
7011 Hayvenhurst Ave., Unit A
Van Nuys, CA 91406

Re: Power-Assisted Electric Bicycle

Dear Mr. Currie:

This is in reply to your letter of June 5, 1998, asking for confirmation that the power-assisted electric bicycle developed by your company is not a "motor vehicle" subject to the regulations of this agency.

According to your letter, the electric power unit of your bicycle does not operate in the absence of muscular input by the operator, who "must continue pedaling and exerting force for the motor to stay on." When a speed of 17-18 mph is reached, "the motor does no work and all of the power is supplied by the rider."

We confirm your understanding. We do not consider your bicycle to be a "motor vehicle." Muscular power is required for the motor to start and to assist in propelling the bicycle. Even with the input of muscular power, the motor ceases to operate at a speed of 17-18 mph, and above that speed the bicycle is propelled by muscular power alone. Most importantly, you have told us that "The bicycle cannot be operated by power assist alone without pedaling." For these reasons, we do not view your bicycle as a vehicle that is "driven by mechanical power" as the phrase is used in the statutory definition of "motor vehicle" (49 U.S.C. 30102(a)(6)).

You also write that your company "plans to sell a stand-alone propulsion system which the consumer can mount to their own bicycle in order to convert it into an electric bicycle." You intend the propulsion system to be sold separately "and not as part of a transaction involving the sale of a new bicycle." You ask for confirmation of your understanding "that there is no compliance responsibility imposed by Federal law," referencing the letter of November 20, 1997, from this Office to Zap Electric Bikes.

Your letter implies that the type of motor you intend to offer will convert the bicycle into a "motor driven cycle" under our regulations. Your understanding is overly broad, but is correct as it applies to your plans. We informed Zap that if it "sells the motor alone and not as part of a transaction involving the sale of a new bicycle, there would be no compliance responsibility imposed by Federal law" on the company. There is a compliance responsibility imposed by Federal law, but it applies to the "manufacturer" of a "motor vehicle," in this case, the person installing the electric motor on the bicycle. Under your scenario, this would be the consumer (though it could be the retailer from whom the consumer has bought the motor). The consumer or retailer, then, would be responsible for ensuring that his or her newly-created "motor driven cycle" meets all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards before it is operated on the public roads.

Nevertheless, we consider the power unit to be "motor vehicle equipment" since, when installed, it will be a "system, part, or component of a motor vehicle as originally manufactured" within the meaning of 49 U.S.C. Sec. 30102(a)(7)(A). If you are the manufacturer of the power unit, you will be responsible for notification and remedy in the event a safety related defect occurs in the power unit. I enclose an information statement that the agency provides manufacturers of motor vehicle equipment .

If you have any further questions, Taylor Vinson of this Office will be able to help you (202-366-5263).

Sincerely,
Frank Seales, Jr.
Chief Counsel
Enclosure
d.7/15/98
ref:571

ID: 18142.drn

Mr. Terry E. Quinn
Corporate Director of Marketing
Hehr International Inc.
3333 Casitas Avenue
Post Office Box 39160
Los Angeles, CA 90039-0160

Dear Mr. Quinn:

This responds to your request for an interpretation whether the release mechanism on your emergency exit windows for non-school buses meets S5.3.2 of Standard No. 217 Bus emergency exits and window retention and release. I regret the delay in this response. Because each window would have two release mechanisms that would each require more than the one "force application" per mechanism specified in S5.3.2, the answer is no.

S5.3.2 states in part:

When tested under the conditions of S6 both before and after the window retention test required by S5.1, each emergency exit not required by S5.2.3 shall allow manual release of the exit by a single occupant using force applications each of which conforms, at the option of the manufacturer, either to S5.3.2(a) or (b) of this section. Each exit shall have not more than two release mechanisms. . . . In the case of exits with two release mechanisms, each mechanism shall require one force application to release the exit.

Your letter describes a new feature that you have added to an existing window design. The feature is a retaining pin with a pull ring, on the release mechanism. The retaining pin fits through holes in the release mechanism's handle and its housing. With the new feature, the emergency exit window would now open as follows: "Pull the retaining pin upward or inward toward the center of the window; rotate emergency handles as before; push window outward." You informed Mr. James Jones of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's Office of Safety Assurance that each emergency exit window would have two release mechanisms.

We would consider each release mechanism to be opened by more than one "force application" because pulling the release pin alone would not open the window. Your window is designed such that for each release mechanism, at least one other force would have to be applied before the window is opened. Because at least two forces must be involved (per mechanism) before the emergency exit window can be opened, the mechanism does not meet S5.3.2's requirement that: "In the case of exits with two release mechanisms, each mechanism shall require one force application to release the exit."

I hope this information is helpful. You have any further questions, please feel free to contact Dorothy Nakama of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,
Frank Seales, Jr.
Chief Counsel
ref.217
d.8/11/99

ID: 18147.ztv

Mr. Robert M. Currie
Senior Vice President
Fiber Light Solutions, LLC
1408 One Hancock Plaza
Gulfport, MS 39501-1980

Dear Mr. Currie:

This is in reply to your letter of June 1, 1998, to Taylor Vinson of this Office, seeking an opinion "regarding the legality of LIGHTRAIL," a product of your company, although you believe that "each state has the final authority of all after market products." You have enclosed an advertising flyer describing a new model of this product. As you note, we previously advised you about LIGHTRAIL on January 31, 1997, in relation to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated Equipment, and the "make inoperative" provisions of 49 U.S.C. Sec. 30122.

The earlier version of LIGHTRAIL had three modes of operation: steady-burning yellow or red in normal operation, steady-burning red when the stop lamps are applied, and flashing yellow/red when the turn signals were operated. We advised you that we considered LIGHTRAIL to be a supplementary side marker lamp, permitted to flash with the turn signal lamps, and that "the operation of the device causes us no concern." We also advised that the color should be red for those devices mounted on the side of the box of pickup trucks, and, on trailers, "amber up to the midpoint of the trailer, and red to the rear of the midpoint."

You inform us that "as described before, LIGHTRAIL, has three modes of operation, steady-burning yellow/amber in normal operation, steady burning red when the brakes are applied, and flashing yellow/red when the turn signals are activated." The flyer states that the "running color" of the device is "yellow," and you confirmed, in a recent phone call to Taylor Vinson, that the entire rail is yellow in normal operation, changing to red when the brakes are applied. This means that you have not addressed our previous concern that a yellow rail, running the length of the bed, will conflict with the red color of the rear side marker system below it. Yellow is the color prescribed by Standard No. 108 for lamps and reflectors at the front and on the middle of vehicles. In our opinion, any lamp or reflector to the rear of the midpoint must be red.

The flyer advertises the availability of two other light systems. The system we have just discussed is called "Flasherz." The other two systems are available in "optional colors . . . to match your truck," and other rails are shown in chartreuse and violet. These two systems are "Thumperz" which "pulsate with your stereo" and "Color Cruiserz" which "glow with steady color." I would like to repeat our previous advice about after market equipment. The sole provision in Federal law that relates to "LIGHTRAIL" as an after market product is a prohibition contained in 49 U.S.C. 30122 against making safety devices and elements inoperative. Under this section, "a manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business may not knowingly make inoperative any part of a device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment in compliance with an applicable [Federal] motor vehicle safety standard. . ." In applying this prohibition to specific products, we first determine whether the product will prevent the regulated elements of the vehicle from operating. Since "LIGHTRAIL" does not involve disconnection of lighting items, we next examine the effect of its performance on the performance of lighting equipment that Standard No. 108 requires as original equipment on motor vehicles. If the auxiliary lighting device is likely to detract from the purpose of a required lighting device, or create confusion, we regard that effect also as a "making inoperative" within the meaning of the prohibition.

For new vehicles, Standard No. 108 requires that all supplementary lamps be wired to be steady burning (S5.5.10(d)). This requirement would prohibit the "Thumperz" system as original equipment because it pulsates with the vehicle's stereo. There are sound safety reasons for not allowing this system because of the confusion and distraction that such a novel system is likely to create when viewed by other motorists. We believe that its installation in the after market by a "manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business" would make the vehicle inoperative with Standard No. 108 within the meaning of Sec. 30122 because Thumperz is not permitted as original equipment. However, the flyer indicates that the LIGHTRAIL system may be designed for installation by the vehicle owner ("Easy to install (little or no drilling required)"). Sec. 30122 does not prohibit the vehicle owner from installing Thumperz , although, as you recognize, the individual states may regulate after market products. Although owner-installation of Thumperz is not prohibited under Federal law, we would encourage states to prohibit the installation and use of an exterior light system that pulses with the vehicle's stereo.

We are also concerned about the optional colors for both Thumperz and Color Cruiserz which, on the latter, "glow with steady color." Under Federal and local laws, red, amber, white, and blue (for emergency vehicles) are the colors specified for motor vehicle lighting equipment. Although Standard No. 108 does not specifically prohibit the use of other colors for supplementary lighting equipment, the availability of non-standard colors for auxiliary equipment adds an element of distraction affecting other motorists. Distraction may turn to confusion when the stop lamps or turn signal lamps operate in the same visual environment as a steady-burning rail lamp in a color other than red. Our remarks in the paragraph above about Sec. 30122 apply to this situation as well, i.e., the installation by a manufacturer, dealer, distributor, or repair business would make the vehicle inoperative with Standard No. 108, and we would encourage states to prohibit the installation and use of a steady-burning exterior light system in colors other than red or amber.

If you have any questions, you may refer them to Taylor Vinson (202-366-5263).

Sincerely,
Frank Seales, Jr.
Chief Counsel
ref:108
d.8/24/98

ID: 18148.drn

Mr. Bill Hooker, ARM
Loss Control Technician
Park District Risk Management Agency
P. O. Box 4320
Wheaton, IL 60189-4320

Dear Mr. Hooker:

This responds to your letter to Donald McNamara, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's (NHTSA's) Region V Administrator, regarding our school bus regulations. You ask how NHTSA's requirements apply to various park and recreation associations, including those offering transportation services to the physically and mentally challenged.

Some background information may be helpful in answering your questions. Federal law and NHTSA's safety standards directly regulate only the manufacture and sale of new motor vehicles. We require any person selling or leasing a new vehicle to sell or lease a vehicle that meets all applicable standards. Under our regulations, a "bus" is any vehicle, including a van, that has a seating capacity of 11 persons or more. A "school bus" is any "bus" which is likely to be "used significantly" to transport "preprimary, primary, and secondary" students to or from school or related events (emphasis added). Therefore, a 15-passenger van that is likely to be used significantly to transport students is a "school bus." No dealer can sell a new van to transport students unless the van is certified as meeting our school bus safety standards. The seller risks substantial penalties if he or she sells a new van for pupil transportation (i.e., a "school bus"), and the van does not meet the school bus standards.

Because our school bus regulations mainly regulate the manufacturer and seller of new school buses (vans), I will focus my answer on whether a dealer is permitted to sell vans to your member associations. Keep in mind that NHTSA does not regulate the use of motor vehicles, which is governed by the States. Because each State is free to impose its own standards regarding use of motor vehicles, including school buses, you should contact State officials for information about Illinois' school bus regulations.

Your questions are restated below, followed by our answers.

Does [NHTSA's statutory authority] regarding buses and vans over 10 passengers apply to a municipal park and recreation agency who provides transportation to participants of all ages and in a wide variety of programs?

A dealer may not sell a new 15-passenger van to a "municipal park and recreation agency" if the van would be "used significantly" to transport "preprimary, primary, or secondary" students to or from school or related events. In such a case, the dealer must sell only a bus that meets NHTSA's school bus standards.

As far as we can tell from your letter, including the copy of the April 30, 1998 memorandum you enclosed from Maribeth Meyers, we believe that our school bus regulations could apply to some of the vehicles sold by dealers to your associations. They would apply to new vehicles that are sold to associations (a) that are connected to a school, e.g., that have an arrangement with a school to provide a recreational program in conjunction with the school; or (b) that are picking up or dropping off students at a school.

I am, for your information, enclosing a copy of our publication, "Frequently Asked Questions About Federal School Bus Safety Requirements." The answer to one of the questions describes "school related events." Other specific situations described in Ms. Meyers memo are addressed below.

If a public sector park and recreation district operates under an intergovernmental agreement with a public school district to provide transportation to and from academic/recreation activities (please see attached letter for specific examples), how might [NHTSA's statutory authority] apply?

This question can best be answered by addressing the three scenerios described in Ms. Meyers' memorandum.

A. Leisure Education - In this situation, "Leisure Education" takes place during the school day and is set up with individual teachers. Registration forms with waivers are sent to each teacher, then are sent home with each child. Before a Special Recreation Association (SRA) will transport any child, a completed registration form must be on file. There is no description of how frequently this activity is offered.

Because the activity takes place during the school day, and is established with the teachers, NHTSA would consider this a "school-related activity." We are unable to determine how often this activity is offered. However, if the activity is offered on a regular basis, we may deem the transportation for the activity to be "significant." If the use of the bus for this activity would be "significant," any dealer wishing to sell a new bus to transport students for this activity must sell only a bus that meets NHTSA's school bus standards.

B. Afterschool Programs - In this situation, SRAs offer afterschool programs where children are picked up at school, go to the program, and are then taken back to school. There is no description of how frequently this program is offered.

The buses are being used to transport children "from school," which is an activity that is covered by our school bus regulations ("to or from school or related events"). If the program is offered on a regular and frequent basis, e.g., several days a week, NHTSA believes it would be a "significant" use of the vehicle. If the bus would be "used significantly" to transport students "from school," NHTSA would require a dealer selling a new bus to sell only a bus that meets NHTSA's school bus standards.

C. Summer Cooperatives - In this situation, during the summer, students attend school in the morning and participate in recreation in the afternoon. Since many of the recreational activities are off school grounds, the students are transported by SRA vehicles for the recreation and then returned to the school afterwards.

NHTSA would consider the afternoon recreational activities to be "school-related." Further, the buses are used to transport children "to or from school." It would appear that the buses are "used significantly" for pupil transportation. As such, a dealer selling a bus to the SRA for the recreational activities must sell only buses that meet NHTSA's school bus standards.

I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact Dorothy Nakama at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,
Frank Seales, Jr.
Chief Counsel
Enclosure
ref:VSA#571.3
d.9/3/98

ID: 18162-1.drn

Ms. Lynn L. White
Executive Director
National Child Care Association
1016 Rosser St.
Conyers, GA 30012

Dear Ms. White:

This responds to your letter regarding sales of new large passenger vans to child care facilities. You ask for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to confirm its longstanding interpretation that child care facilities are not "schools," and thus are not subject to our school bus requirements, even when transporting children to or from schools. As explained below, we have carefully considered your suggested interpretation and regret to inform you that we cannot confirm it.

While we agree that child care facilities providing custodial care are not schools, we cannot agree that all buses sold to such a facility are excluded from Federal school bus regulations regardless of the intended use of the vehicles. If a bus will be used significantly for transporting children to or from school, such a vehicle is a school bus, even if the purchaser is a child care facility.

Our statute at 49 U.S.C. 30112 requires any person selling or leasing a new vehicle to sell or lease a vehicle that meets all applicable standards. Under our regulations, a "bus" is any vehicle, including a van, that has a seating capacity of 11 persons or more. Our statute defines a "school bus" as any vehicle that is designed for carrying 11 or more persons and which is likely to be "used significantly" to transport preprimary, primary, and secondary students "to or from school or an event related to school" (emphasis added). 49 U.S.C. 30125. Therefore, a large van (such as one designed for 15 passengers) that is likely to be used significantly to transport students to or from school is a "school bus," even if it is sold to a custodial child care facility, a dance studio (see enclosed letter of June 1, 1998, to Cox Chevrolet), or the YMCA (see enclosed letter of July 17, 1998, to the YMCA of the USA).

Nothing in NHTSA's statutes or the School Bus Amendments of 1974 (and its legislative history) limit the applicability of NHTSA's statutes to sales to "bona fide schools" (as you describe them). In its interpretation letters addressing dealers' sales, NHTSA focuses not on the nature of the institution or the type of service provided (i.e., educational or custodial care), but on whether the purchaser will use the bus "significantly" to provide transportation for school children "to or from school." Whether buses are "used significantly" to transport the students is an issue that the agency finds appropriate to resolve case-by-case, focusing on the intended use of the vehicle. If the bus will be used for such purpose, a school bus must be sold.

NHTSA has recently addressed the issue of a dealer's sale of a new large passenger van to a child care facility that will significantly use the van for school transportation. The letter is dated

July 23, 1998, to Mr. Don Cote of Northside Ford in San Antonio, Texas (copy enclosed). In that letter, we explain that the large passenger van is a "school bus" under our regulations. Thus, when a dealer sells or leases a new van for such use, the dealer must sell or lease only buses that meet Federal motor vehicle safety standards for school buses, even when the purchaser is a child care facility.⁽¹⁾

The Northside Ford letter discusses NHTSA's reexamination of two previous letters addressed to Ms. Vel McCaslin of Grace After School. In arriving at the conclusions set forth in the Northside Ford letter, NHTSA decided that the letters to Ms. McCaslin did not focus enough on the fact that the buses were being used to transport school children "from school" as specified in 49 U.S.C. 30125. To the extent that the McCaslin letters are inconsistent with it, the Northside Ford letter superceded the letters to Ms. McCaslin.

Because of the increasing number of pre-school aged children being transported by school buses, and the pupil transportation community's request for guidance on how to safely transport them, the agency recently assessed this problem. It is noted that even though most large school buses do not have lap belts or anchorages for attaching child restraints, small school buses are required to have lap belts. NHTSA conducted dynamic tests to evaluate the most beneficial method(s) to transport pre-school aged children, taking into consideration the use of seat belts, child safety seats and available spacing between bus seats. Based on these crash test results, the agency determined that pre-school aged children should be in child restraint systems when they are transported in school buses. In conjunction with many organizations and groups involved in transporting pre-school aged children, NHTSA developed a draft set of guidelines, with the final guidelines to be released in October 1998. NHTSA's draft guidelines recommend the installation of lap belts or anchorages designed for securing child restraint systems on large school buses. The agency does not recommend pre-school aged school bus passengers to wear lap belts as an occupant protection device.

I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact Dorothy Nakama of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,
Frank Seales, Jr.
Chief Counsel
Enclosures (3 letters)
ref:VSA#571.3

1. Please note that NHTSA has never stated that day care facilities that provide only custodial care are "schools." NHTSA's laws do not affect new bus sales to child care facilities that do not provide "significant" transportation for school aged children "to or from" school.