ID: 20674.ztv

Mr. Vann H. Wilber
Director, Vehicle Safety and Harmonization
Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers
1401 H Street, NW - Suite 1409
Washington, DC 20005

Dear Mr. Wilber:

We are replying to your letter of September 10, 1999, with reference to marking headlamps with the symbol "DOT."

Paragraph S7.2(a) of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated Equipment, requires the lens of each headlamp and beam contributor to be marked with the symbol "DOT" to certify its compliance with all applicable requirements. You state that "lens" can be interpreted on some contemporary headlamp designs to "include several elements on the reflector or other interior components that contribute to the photometric performance of the forward light." You ask that we interpret S7.2(a) to allow the DOT symbol to be located on internal optical elements "as long as it is visible from the front when installed on the vehicle without removal of any part."

You reference our interpretation of April 25, 1996, to Guy Dorleans "that could appear to conflict with the interpretation we are seeking here," and you seek to distinguish it "on the basis that the question addressed by the agency in that letter apparently presumed that the only 'lens' in the headlamp assembly at issue there was the 'clear lens' in the front of the headlamp housing, whereas the advanced designs we are asking you to consider here include optical elements ('lens') on the interior of the lamp." In the event we cannot distinguish it, you ask that we "reverse the conclusions in that interpretation to the extent they would preclude marking the 'DOT' symbol on interior optical elements."

I am sorry to say that we cannot distinguish your request from the Dorleans letter or reverse the conclusions to the extent that we can allow certification to be placed on interior optical elements. As you pointed out, the DOT marking requirement originated as a certification applied to the lenses of sealed beam headlamps. You are correct that Standard No. 108 does not define the word "lens." In the absence of a definition, we believe that the word "lens" has been clearly understood over the years to refer to the glass or plastic front of the headlamp housing through which light is emitted, and not to the other components of a headlamp, the reflector and the light source. Thus, whether a headlamp is sealed beam, replaceable bulb, integral beam, its lens has been clearly identifiable as such for purposes of affixing the DOT marking. We cannot interpret the word "lens" in a manner that departs from the common understanding of the word. However, we intend to address the concern of your members by rulemaking to amend Standard No. 108 to adopt a definition of "lens" broad enough to encompass interior optical elements where the certification symbol could be placed .

Sincerely,
Frank Seales, Jr.
Chief Counsel
ref:108
d.11/9/99

ID: 2067y

Mr. Douglas Shoner
S.E.M. Co.
12244 Truro Avenue
Hawthorne, CA 90250

Dear Mr. Shoner:

This responds to your letter asking about NHTSA's regulation of foam-filled tires. Specifically, you asked what criteria must be satisfied in order for a foam-filled tire to be approved by this Department, and whether any foam-filled tires have satisfied these criteria. As explained below, NHTSA does not "approve" any motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment. Instead, the manufacturer itself must certify that the vehicle or item of equipment complies with any and all applicable safety standards.

By way of background information, the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1381 et seq.; the Safety Act) gives this agency the authority to issue safety standards applicable to new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. When the agency has issued an applicable safety standard, section 108(a)(1)(A) of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(1)(A)) provides that no person shall "manufacture for sale, sell, offer for sale, or introduce or deliver for introduction in interstate commerce, or import into the United States" any new motor vehicle or new item of equipment unless the vehicles or equipment comply with the applicable standard.

A manufacturer is not required to get "approval" or "recognition" from this agency before selling its motor vehicles or items of motor vehicle equipment. In fact, NHTSA has no authority under the Safety Act to approve, certify, or otherwise endorse any commercial product. Instead, section 114 of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1403) establishes a self-certification process under which every manufacturer is required to certify that each of its products meet all applicable Federal safety standards.

I note that, following a telephone conversation with you, Marvin Shaw of my staff sent you a copy of our September 2, 1986 letter to Mr. Andrew Kroll explaining how NHTSA's regulations apply to foam-filled tires. That letter remains an accurate expression of this agency's regulation of foam-filled tires. If you have any further questions or need additional information on this subject, please feel free to contact Marvin Shaw of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Wood Acting Chief Counsel

Enclosure ref:l09 d:l0/5/89

ID: 20687.drn

Mr. Alan C. Reiffe, CPA
Business Administrator/Board Secretary
Allendale Public Schools
100 Brookside Avenue
Allendale, NJ 07401-1975

Dear Mr. Reiffe:

This responds to your letter concerning how Allendale Public School children must be transported when they go on field trips. You ask, "Inasmuch as New Jersey requires seat belts on public school buses, is there a similar requirement for coach buses when they are used to transport children on school field trips?"

Your question is determined by New Jersey law. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) regulates motor vehicle manufacturers and dealers that sell or lease new vehicles. We have no statutory authority to specify how children must be transported, or whether the vehicles they are transported in must have seat belts.

For information about New Jersey's requirements for transporting your students, please contact New Jersey's Director for Pupil Transportation:

Ms. Linda Wells
Director, Office of Pupil Transportation
New Jersey Department of Education
P.O. Box 500
Trenton, NJ 08625-0500
Telephone: (609) 984-5757

We would like to conclude by restating the importance that our agency attaches to the use of safe buses to transport children. It remains our position that a school bus meeting the motor vehicle safety standards is the safest means of transportation for school children. It may not be the most comfortable for long trips, since it lacks the reclining seats and restroom facilities of some coach buses, but it has safety features that coach buses lack, such as seat backs designed to cushion impacts, windows that prevent ejections, and exits that facilitate escape after crashes. We urge schools and school districts to consider these features when determining the transportation needs of their school children.

I hope this information is helpful. If you have any questions about NHTSA's programs please feel free to contact Dorothy Nakama at this address or at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,
Frank Seales, Jr.
Chief Counsel
ref:VSA#571.3
d.10/14/99

ID: 20690.ztv

Mr. Darrell R. Young
Sr. Partner
Learn Technology!
8967 Estebury Circle
Colorado Springs, CO 80920

Dear Mr. Young:

This is in reply to your email of September 16, 1999, to Taylor Vinson of this Office with respect to strobe lighting on motorcycles. You "propose to enable the owners of motorcycles to install strobelights on their motorcycle that can be lit by pressing a button on the handlebar." The operator would use the light as needed to alert drivers of other vehicles to his or her presence.

Your research indicates that we would consider the use of the lights to be legal if they were installed by the owner of the vehicle and "the application does not deter or impact the original intent and use any of the required lighting already in place on the vehicle, i.e., headlights, brake lights, turn signals as it relates to Standard #108." You have asked for assistance in the interpretation in your request.

I enclose a letter of this Office, dated March 25, 1996, to Cybernet Services Incorp. which is relevant to your concern. You will see that a strobe light is impermissible as original vehicle equipment because it is not one of the lamps that Standard No. 108 permits to flash. When a strobe light is sold in the aftermarket, its installation by a manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business is prohibited by 49 U.S.C. 30122 because the addition of a non-steady burning lamp creates a noncompliance with Standard No. 108. However, the statutory prohibition does not extend to the vehicle owner. Thus, while it is not quite correct to say that we would consider the use of the lights to be "legal" if they were installed by the owner of the vehicle, it is correct to say that installation of strobe lights by the vehicle owner does not violate Federal law. However, as the 1996 letter indicates, use of strobe lights is subject to local laws.

If you have any questions you may email Taylor Vinson again.

Sincerely,
Frank Seales, Jr.
Chief Counsel
ref:108
d.10/26/99

ID: 20696.ogm

Mr. Tom Brunson
Trailer Component Innovations
111 Park Drive
Forsyth, GA 31029

Dear Mr. Brunson:

This is in response to your letter requesting information regarding the regulations applicable to the use of hydraulic brakes on trailers with axle capacities of 3500 to 8000 pounds per axle. I apologize for the delay in our response. Specifically, you wish to know if trailers of this type would be required to be equipped with an antilock braking system (ABS).

Your letter states that the trailers would be equipped with hydraulic axle brakes controlled by an electric brake controller. This electric brake controller, similar in design to the type usually used for electric trailer brakes, would draw electric power from the tow vehicle. In addition, electric power from the tow vehicle would be used to power an air compressor mounted on the trailer. You then ask if ABS would be required for a non-commercial trailer with a gross vehicle weight rating of less than 26,000 pounds under the following two scenarios:

1. An electric brake controller is mounted on the tow vehicle with the force used to apply the trailer brakes being supplied by compressed air from an air tank and air compressor mounted on the trailer. Application of the hydraulic trailer brakes would be controlled by the electric brake controller. The controller would, when it sensed the tow vehicle decelerating or accelerating or when activated by an electric control available to the driver, electrically activate valves modulating the air pressure supplied to the mechanism used to apply or release the hydraulic trailer brakes.
2. An electric brake controller is mounted on the tow vehicle. A spring mechanism would be used to supply the force used to apply the trailer brakes. The amount of force applied to actuate the hydraulic brakes by the spring mechanism would be controlled by air pressure supplied by an air tank and air compressor mounted on the trailer. Application of the hydraulic trailer brakes would be controlled by the electric brake controller when it sensed deceleration or acceleration of the tow vehicle or when activated by an electric control available to the driver. The controller would, as required, electrically activate valves modulating the air pressure supplied to counteract the force applied to the hydraulic brakes by the spring mechanism.

I am pleased to have this opportunity to explain our regulations to you. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act ("Safety Act"), it is the responsibility of the manufacturer to ensure that its vehicles or equipment comply with applicable standards issued by this agency. A manufacturer then certifies that its vehicles or equipment comply with applicable standards.

NHTSA has issued several standards applicable to brake systems: Standard No. 105, Hydraulic Brake Systems; Standard No. 121, Air Brake Systems; and Standard No. 135, Passenger Car Brake Systems. Standard No. 105 specifies requirements for hydraulic service brake and associated parking brake systems, and applies to new passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, and buses equipped with hydraulic brake systems. Standard No. 121 establishes performance and equipment requirements for braking systems on vehicles equipped with air brake systems, and applies to almost all new trucks, buses, and trailers equipped with air brake systems. Standard No. 135 specifies requirements for hydraulic service brake and associated parking brake systems for new passenger cars built after September 1, 2000 and for new multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks and buses with a gross vehicle weight rating of 3,500 kilograms (7,716 pounds) or less built after September 1, 2002. Of these three standards, Standard No. 121 is the only standard which applies to trailers.

Standard No. 121 (49 CFR 571.121) specifies performance requirements for trucks, buses and trailers equipped with air brake systems. The purpose of the standard is to insure safe braking performance of vehicles under normal and emergency conditions. S5.1.6 of Standard No. 121 requires that truck tractors equipped with air brake systems manufactured on and after March 1, 1997 and single-unit trucks, buses, trailers, and trailer converter dollies equipped with air brake systems manufactured on and after March 1, 1998 must be equipped with antilock brake systems (ABS) in order to operate in the United States (U.S.).

We note, however, that Standard No. 121 only applies to vehicles with air brake systems. An air brake system is defined in S4 of the Standard as follows:

Air brake system means a system that uses air as a medium for transmitting pressure or force from the driver control to the service brake, including an air-over-hydraulic brake subsystem, but does not include a system that uses compressed air or vacuum only to assist the driver in applying muscular force to hydraulic or mechanical components.

The devices described in your letter appear to use compressed air as a means to actuate or control the hydraulic service brakes of a trailer. The application of this compressed air is controlled not by the driver, but by the electric brake controller. While the driver may, in some applications, have the ability to activate the electric brake controller through a dash mounted switch, air is not used as a medium for transmitting pressure or force from the driver control to the service brake on the trailer. Accordingly, the system you describe is not, under Standard No. 121, an air brake system and is not subject to the ABS requirements of that Standard.

You should, however, also be aware of the requirements of Standard No. 106, Brake Hoses, which specifies requirements for motor vehicle brake hose, brake hose assemblies, and brake hose end fittings. That standard applies to new motor vehicle equipment as well as to new motor vehicles. You should check to see if any parts of your devices are subject to the requirements of Standard No. 106. In addition, Standard No. 116, Motor Vehicle Brake Fluids, sets forth the requirements for all fluid for use in motor vehicle hydraulic brake systems. Any fluid used in a hydraulic brake system must meet the requirements of Standard No. 116.

I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions about NHTSA's safety standards, please feel free to contact Otto Matheke of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,
Frank Seales, Jr.
Chief Counsel
ref:121
d.5/4/00

ID: 2069y

Mr. Jim Bowen
Vice President of Quality, Service and Parts
Gulf Stream Coach, Inc.
P.O. Box l005
Nappanee, IN 46550

Dear Mr. Bowen:

This responds to your letter concerning the installation of a television receiver in view of the driver of a vehicle. You asked whether the television is required to be off, when the ignition switch is turned on. I regret the delay in responding. Your question is responded to below.

By way of background information, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, it is the responsibility of the manufacturer to ensure that its vehicles and equipment meet applicable standards. The following represents our opinion based on the facts provided in your letter.

I have enclosed a copy of a June 4, l987 letter, addressed to Panasonic, which discusses a number of issues relating to the installation of television receivers in motor vehicles. The letter notes that NHTSA does not have any safety standards specifically covering television receivers. The letter also explains that is possible that the installation of a television receiver could affect the compliance of a vehicle with some safety standards.

With respect to your specific question concerning whether a television receiver installed in view of the driver of a vehicle is required to be off when the ignition is turned on, I would like to draw your attention to one requirement of Standard No. l0l, Controls and Displays. Section S5.3.5 of that standard reads as follows:

Any source of illumination within the passenger compartment which is forward of a transverse vertical plane 4.35 inch (ll0.6 mm) rearward of the manikin "H" point with the driver's seat in its rearmost driving position, which is not used for the controls and displays regulated by this standard, which is not a telltale, and which is capable of being illuminated while the vehicle is in motion, shall have either (l) light intensity which is manually or automatically adjustable to provide at least two levels of brightness, (2) a single intensity that is barely discernible to a driver who has adapted to dark ambient roadway conditions, or (3) a means of being turned off. This requirement does not apply to buses that are normally operated with the passenger compartment illuminated.

The purpose of this requirement is to prevent glare visible to the driver. If a television receiver installed in view of the driver is capable of operation while the vehicle is in motion, it would be subject to this requirement.

While NHTSA does not have any safety standards specifically covering television receivers, the installation of a television receiver in view of the driver which is capable of operation while the vehicle is in motion would raise obvious safety concerns related to possible driver distraction. If you are considering such installation, we recommend that you carefully evaluate the safety implications of such action.

Finally, I note that state laws may cover the installation of television receivers in motor vehicles. The American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators may be able to provide information on that issue. Its address is: 4200 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 600, Arlington, Virginia 22203.

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Wood Acting Chief Counsel

ref:l0l d:9/2l/89

ID: 20702.ogm

Mark W. Peterson, Esq.
Suite 900
88 South Sixth Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402

Dear Mr. Peterson:

This responds to your letter regarding the manufacture of motorcycles. You indicate that your client intends to manufacture and sell custom motorcycles. You ask that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration confirm your understanding that no certificate of authority or other similar document from the United States government is necessary before your client can hold itself out as a manufacturer of these vehicles.

Your understanding is correct. There is no requirement that a manufacturer of vehicles obtain a certificate of authority before it can represent itself as a manufacturer of motor vehicles. There are, however, other requirements applicable to new manufacturers of motor vehicles which are addressed below.

By way of background, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is authorized by Congress (49 U.S.C. Chapter 301) to issue Federal motor vehicle safety standards that set performance requirements for new motor vehicles and new items of equipment. NHTSA does not approve or certify any motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Instead, our statute establishes a "self certification" process under which each manufacturer has the responsibility to certify that its product meets all applicable standards.

The following Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (49 CFR Part 571) apply to motorcycles: Standard No. 106, Brake hoses; Standard No. 108, Lamps, reflective devices, and associated equipment; Standard No. 111, Rearview mirrors; Standard No. 116, Motor vehicle brake fluids; Standard No. 119, New pneumatic tires for vehicles other than passenger cars; Standard No. 120, Tire selection and rims for motor vehicles other than passenger cars; Standard No. 122, Motorcycle brake systems; and Standard No. 123, Motorcycle controls and displays. In addition, each motorcycle must have a unique vehicle identification number (VIN) in accordance with 49 CFR Part 565.

Each motorcycle must be certified by its manufacturer as meeting all applicable safety standards. The certification must be made in accordance with 49 CFR Part 567, Certification. In addition, if a vehicle contains a safety-related defect, the vehicle manufacturer must notify all owners, purchasers, and dealers of the defect and provide a remedy without charge.

A new manufacturer of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment must submit information identifying itself and its products to NHTSA not later than 30 days after it begins manufacture (49 CFR Part 566, Manufacturer Identification). I am, for your information, enclosing an information sheet, "Information for New Manufacturers of Motor Vehicles and Motor Vehicle Equipment" and another sheet that describes how you may obtain copies of NHTSA's standards.

In addition, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has established motor vehicle noise and emission standards. For information on EPA's requirements, please contact:

Office of Transportation and Air Quality
401 M Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20460
Mail Code 6401A
Telephone (202) 564-1682
Fax (202) 564-1686

I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact Otto Matheke of my staff at this address or at (202) 366-5263.

Sincerely,
Frank Seales, Jr.
Chief Counsel
ref:567
d.6/14/00

ID: 20706.drn

The Honorable Judd Gregg
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510-2904

Dear Senator Gregg:

Thank you for your letter to Mr. Peter Halpin, Director of the Department of Transportation's Office of Congressional Affairs, on behalf of your constituent, Ms. Anne Duguay of Bedford. Ms. Duguay has contacted you to find out about "a federal law recently passed which sets requirements for transporting groups of children in vans ... which hold 8 to 15 passengers."

Because the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) administers Federal regulations for school buses, your letter has been referred to my office for reply. At the outset, let me state that there is no new Federal law that regulates how children must be transported. Requirements regulating how persons must be transported are determined by State law.

Some background information may be helpful. NHTSA is authorized to issue and enforce Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS) applicable to new motor vehicles. 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. Accordingly, persons selling or leasing a new "school bus" must sell or lease a vehicle that meets the safety standards applicable to school buses. Our statute defines a "schoolbus" as any vehicle that is designed for carrying a driver and more than 10 passengers and which, NHTSA decides, is likely to be "used significantly" to transport "preprimary, primary, and secondary" students to or from school or related events. 49 U.S.C. 30125. By regulation, the capacity threshold for school buses corresponds to that of buses -- vehicles designed for carrying more than ten (10) persons. For example, a 15-person van that is likely to be used significantly to transport students is a "school bus." Persons selling or leasing new 15-person vans for such use must sell or lease a van that meets our school bus standards.

In determining whether a dealer must sell a school bus to a facility, we distinguish between facilities that provide educational programs and those that are strictly custodial. We do not consider facilities that provide custodial programs to be "schools." However, in recent interpretations (see the attached July 23, 1998 letter to Mr. Don Cote) we have stressed that, even if a bus were sold to a facility that provides custodial care, if that facility were purchasing the new bus to use significantly to transport students to or from a school or events related to a school, a dealer knowing of this purpose would be required to sell a school bus.

Because our laws apply only to the manufacture and sale of new motor vehicles, we do not prohibit schools or child care facilities from using large vans to transport school children, even when the vehicles do not meet Federal school bus safety standards. However, each State has the authority to set its own standards regarding the use of motor vehicles, including school buses. For this reason, New Hampshire law should be consulted to see if there are regulations about how children must be transported.

We wish to emphasize that school buses are one of the safest forms of transportation in this country, and that we therefore strongly recommend that all buses that are used to transport school children be certified as meeting NHTSA's school bus safety standards. In addition, using 15-person vans that do not meet NHTSA's school bus standards to transport students could result in liability in the event of a crash.

I am enclosing NHTSA's publication: "School Bus Safety: Safe Passage for America's Children." This brochure explains the safety enhancements of a school bus that makes school buses safer than "conventional vans." There are small school buses available that seat 15 children. While school buses are more expensive than large vans, we believe that the cost difference is not so large that it should prevent child care centers from acquiring school buses. The cost range for 15-passenger school buses is approximately $30-32,000, compared to $25-28,000 for 15-passenger vans. The longer service life for school buses will offset a part of this difference.

Our belief that vehicles providing the safety of school buses should be used whenever transporting children in buses is shared by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). At a June 8, 1999, public meeting, the NTSB issued the attached abstract of a special investigative report on nonconforming buses. The NTSB issued the report after investigating four crashes in 1998 and 1999 in which 9 people were killed and 36 injured when riding in "nonconforming buses." NTSB defines "nonconforming bus" as a "bus that does not meet the FMVSSs specific to school buses." Most of the victims, including eight of the fatalities, were children.

In the abstract of its report, the NTSB issued several Safety Recommendations, including the following that was directed to child care providers such as the National Association of Child Care Professionals, the National Child Care Association, and Young Mens' and Young Women's Christian Associations:

Inform your members about the circumstances of the accidents discussed in this special investigation report and urge that they use school buses or buses having equivalent occupant protection to school buses to transport children.

I am also enclosing NHTSA's February 1999 "Guideline for the Safe Transportation of Pre-school Age Children in School Buses." This guideline establishes NHTSA's recommendations for how pre-school age children should be transported in school buses.

I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions about NHTSA's programs, please feel free to contact me.

Sincerely,
Frank Seales, Jr.
Chief Counsel
Enclosures
ref:VSA#571.3
d.10/14/99

ID: 2070y

Mr. David G. Gould
Legislation Department
Lotus Engineering
Hethel, Norwich,
Norfolk NR14 8EZ
ENGLAND

Your ref: DGG/JCG

Dear Mr. Gould:

Thank you for your letter asking whether a world manufacturer identifier (WMI) assigned by the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) pursuant to a contract with this agency may be deleted from SAE's register of assigned WMIs upon request of a foreign national governmental agency, but without the consent of the holder of the WMI. Absent some extraordinary circumstances, the answer to your question is no.

49 CFR Part 565, Vehicle Identification Number - Content Requirements, sets forth format and content requirements for vehicle identification numbers (VINs). Section 565.4(a) specifies that the first three characters of the VIN shall be the manufacturer's WMI, which is "assigned in accordance with /565.5(c) of this part." Section 565.5(c) specifies that the SAE assigns WMIs to vehicle manufacturers under contract with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).

No provision in NHTSA's regulations sets forth any procedures for deleting assigned WMIs from the SAE register upon the request of any party, even the manufacturer assigned the WMI. Similarly, no provision in the contract specifically addresses the issue of deleting assigned WMIs for any reason. In its contract with NHTSA, SAE has agreed to "furnish the facilities, materials, personnel and services necessary to accomplish the work..."

We contacted the SAE's WMI Coordinator to learn how they have handled this situation in the past. We were informed that the WMIs are assigned by the SAE for an indefinite period with no express provision for revocation of the assignment. There have been a few isolated instances in which the party to whom a WMI was assigned has contacted SAE and asked that the WMI assignment be revoked. In those instances, the SAE has granted the manufacturer's request but the revoked WMI is never reassigned to another manufacturer. To date, SAE has never been asked to delete an assigned WMI by any party other than the manufacturer to whom the WMI was assigned. If a situation arose in which the SAE was asked to delete an assigned WMI without the knowledge and consent of the manufacturer to whom the WMI was assigned, the SAE assures us that they would not act on the request without consulting this agency.

If and when we are ever consulted by SAE for our opinion on how to handle such a request, we would carefully consider the circumstances of the particular case before advising SAE on how to respond to the request. As a general matter, however, NHTSA does not favor the deletion of assigned WMIs for any reason.

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Wood Acting Chief Counsel

ref:565 d:9/29/89

ID: 20718nhf

Mr. Robert Boston
Adaptive Mobility Systems, Inc.
5865-B Oakbrook Parkway
Norcross, GA 30093

Dear Mr. Boston:

This responds to your letter to Nicole Fradette, formerly of my staff, requesting permission to modify pre-owned 1993-1995 Dodge Grand Caravans for your disabled clients. I regret the delay in responding.

You explain that you mainly modify these vehicles by lowering the floor and relocating the fuel tank behind the lowered floor. (You explain that you cannot lower the floor without relocating the fuel tank.) You state that you use "accepted engineering practices" and perform this modification according to standards established by the Society of Automotive Engineers. You also explain that you ensure that there are no sharp angles or protruding bolts surrounding the relocated tank. Nonetheless, you are concerned that lowering the floor and relocating the gasoline tank will affect the vehicles compliance with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 301, Fuel System Integrity. You request blanket approval to perform any modifications which may require an exemption from the "make inoperative" provision of our statute. As explained below, we decline this request.

By way of background, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is authorized to issue Federal motor vehicle safety standards that set performance requirements for new motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment. Manufacturers are required to certify that their new products conform to our safety standards before the products can be offered for sale. Manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and repair businesses are prohibited from "knowingly making inoperative" any device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle in compliance with an applicable standard. In general, the "make inoperative" prohibition (49 U.S.C. 30122) would require businesses which modify motor vehicles to ensure that they do not remove, disconnect, or degrade the performance of safety equipment installed in compliance with an applicable standard. Violations of this prohibition are punishable by civil fines up to $1,100 per violation.

There is no procedure by which modifiers or repair businesses petition for and are granted permission from NHTSA to modify a motor vehicle. Modifiers are permitted to modify vehicles without obtaining permission from NHTSA to do so, but are subject to the make inoperative provision of 49 U.S.C. 30122. In certain limited situations, we have exercised our discretion in enforcing our requirements to provide some allowances to a repair business which cannot conform to our requirements when making modifications to accommodate the special needs of persons with disabilities. We have issued letters stating that we would not institute enforcement proceedings against a repair business that modified a vehicle to accommodate a particular person's disability. We have always done this on an individual, case-by-case basis. While we understand your desire to avoid writing to the agency each time you need to modify a vehicle to accommodate a particular person's disability, we can not grant blanket approval at this time for all such modifications.

Further, we have not granted, and in all likelihood will not grant, an exemption from Standard No. 301. We do not believe such an exemption is justified or needed. In order to reduce deaths and injuries occurring from fires caused by leaking fuel during and after a crash, Standard No. 301 sets performance requirements for fuel systems in crashes. Preserving fuel system integrity in a crash to prevent occupant exposure to fire is extremely important to all persons, but perhaps even more so for persons with disabilities, since they often require more time to exit a vehicle. In addition, we believe that compliance with Standard No. 301 can be preserved in modified vehicles. We are aware of one tank manufacturer who has demonstrated that when its tank was correctly installed in the rear of a 1992 Ford E150 with a lowered floor and raised body, the vehicle met the performance requirements of Standard No. 301.

For your information, on September 28, 1998 (63 FR 51547), we published a proposal to regulate the aftermarket modification of vehicles for persons with disabilities by setting out exemptions from the make inoperative prohibition for certain standards and under certain conditions. In place of our reviewing each request for exemption case-by-case, the proposal would give clear guidance to modifiers about principles to follow when considering vehicle modifications to accommodate someone's disabilities. However, we announced in the NPRM that we strongly believe that a make inoperative exemption for Standard No. 301 is not justified. Standard No. 301 was not included in these standards because of the safety need to assure fuel system integrity in vehicles modified for persons with disabilities and because it is possible to modify vehicles while maintaining conformance to Standard No. 301. We anticipate publishing a final decision on the NPRM in the near future.

In closing, you do not have to ask NHTSA for an exemption from Standard No. 301 if the modification is done without compromising a modified vehicle's compliance with the standard. We urge you to ensure that the vehicles you modify will continue to meet the standard.

I hope this information has been helpful. If you have any other questions, please contact us at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,
Frank Seales, Jr.
Chief Counsel
Enclosure
ref:VSA#301
d.3/20/00