ID: 10994

Patrick M. Raher, Esq.
Hogan & Hartson, L.L.P.
Columbia Square
555 Thirteenth Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20004-1109

Dear Mr. Raher:

This responds to your request for an interpretation of the seat position specifications of Standards No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection, and No. 214, Side Impact Protection. These specifications, which are part of the test conditions for the standards' dynamic crash tests, indicate how a vehicle's seats are positioned in those tests. You asked how the specifications apply in the case of power seats which have different maximum seating locations in the forward and rearward position depending on seat height. As discussed below, the seats would be positioned midway between the forwardmost and rearmost positions (with the forwardmost and rearmost positions being determined irrespective of seat height), and at the lowest possible height at that midway position. This appears to correspond to Option 1 in your letter.

In your letter, you described a power seat design whose seat position potential is trapezoidal rather than rectangular, due to the mechanism utilized in the power seat operation. In particular, the seat can move further forward in its highest position than in its lowest position, and further rearward in its lowest position than in its highest position. You also indicated that a lowering of the seat from a higher position has the effect of moving the seat backward.

The seat position specifications of Standards No. 208 (S8.1.2) and No. 214 (S6.3) read as follows:

Adjustable seats are in the adjustment position midway between the forwardmost and rearmost positions, and if separately adjustable in a vertical direction, are at the lowest position. If an adjustment position does not exist midway between the forwardmost and rearmost positions, the closest adjustment position to the rear of the midpoint is used.

This provision sets forth two conditions concerning how an adjustable seat is positioned in a crash test. The first condition, for the longitudinal position of the seat, is for the seat to be in the adjustment position midway between the forwardmost and rearmost positions. The terms "forwardmost" and "rearmost" are not qualified by height, so the absolute forwardmost and rearmost positions would be used, irrespective of seat height at those positions.

The second condition, for the vertical position of a seat which is separately adjustable in a vertical direction, is for the seat to be in the lowest position. We interpret this to refer to the lowest vertical position that can be attained at the longitudinal position described above. Therefore, in positioning a seat for a crash test, we would not change the longitudinal position of the seat merely because the mechanism was designed so that lowering the seat from a higher position had the effect of moving the seat backward. Instead, we would find the lowest vertical position that could be attained at the specified longitudinal position.

I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions, please feel free to call Edward Glancy of my staff at 366-2992.

Sincerely,

John Womack Acting Chief Counsel

ref:208 d:8/31/95

ID: 10999

Mr. Tim Phillips
International Tire Marketers
358 West Heber Street
Glendora, CA 91741

Dear Mr. Phillips:

This responds to your letter of June 21, 1995, in which you asked us to update your information on new tire sizing codes used in the DOT identification of tires. Please be advised that this agency no longer specifies tire size codes.

49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) '574.5, Tire identification requirements (copy enclosed), requires tire manufacturers to label on one sidewall of each tire it produces a tire identification number (TIN), and specifies that the TIN will be composed of four groupings, the second of which "shall be used to identify the tire size."

The size requirement in the TIN was first promulgated as '574.4 on November 10, 1970 (35 FR 17257). At that time, NHTSA (then the National Highway Safety Bureau) specified in Table 1 of the regulation the codes to be used to designate the various tire sizes. In the following two years, the agency amended Table 1 numerous times to add new codes to represent additional tire sizes. On November 8, 1972 NHTSA published a final rule rescinding Table 1 and the agency-specified tire codes (37 FR 23727). The agency explained that because of the many new tire sizes being introduced, available new codes had become exhausted and it was necessary to change the system to one permitting greater flexibility. Accordingly, the agency amended the regulation to permit manufacturers to assign their own two-digit code to represent tire size and to permit retreaders to use either a self-assigned matrix code or a self-assigned tire size code. The November 8, 1972 amendment also required each new tire manufacturer and retreader to maintain a record of each symbol used and provide that information to NHTSA upon written request. Those requirements remain in effect (49 CFR '574.5(b)).

In summary, 49 CFR '574.5 no longer specifies tire size codes for use as the second grouping of symbols in TINs. Rather, the regulation permits manufacturers and retreaders to use their own tire size codes in that grouping of the TIN.

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

Sincerely,

John Womack Acting Chief Counsel

Enclosure

ref:574 d:8/4/95

ID: 11-000612 M.Edie (Part 523)

ID: aiam1360

Dear Mr. Jones: This is in reply to your letter of November 14, 1973, to Michael Pesko of our Chief Counsel's Office, asking whether dealers must record the name and address of the tire purchaser on the appropriate form at the same time the tire is sold. You indicate that most dealers record the information on their sales tickets and put it on registration forms at some later time, as the press of business allows.; The Tire Identification and Recordkeeping regulations (49 CFR Part 574 do not require dealers to record the information on the registration form at any specific time. The 'scare stories' to which you refer are not true at all. A recent NHTSA investigation of dealer recording practices was intended only to discover whether dealers were writing down the tire ID number and the purchaser's name, and not whether they were recording the information on particular forms.; The Tire Identification regulation (S 574.8(b)) requires th information to be supplied to the manufacturer (or person maintaining the information) every 30 days, unless less than 40 tires are sold (your letter to us incorrectly stated less than 60 tires), in which case the information must be reported when 40 tires are sold or 6 months elapses, whichever occurs first.; I hope this clarifies the situation. Sincerely, Lawrence R. Schneider, Chief Counsel

ID: aiam4498

"Dear Mrs. Bicking: This is a response to your letter of last fall i which you asked a number of questions concerning seat-belts and large school buses. I apologize for the delay in responding. In your correspondence, you enclosed a letter of January 19, 1984, from this Office to Thomas Built Buses, Inc., (Thomas), and the incoming letter from Thomas that was the basis of our interpretation. Your first question references the January 1984 letter, and asks why the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) decided that when school bus manufacturers install seat-belts or seat-belt anchorages on large school buses (over 10,000 lbs. gross vehicle weight rating GVWR ), the manufacturers do not have to certify that the belts or anchorages meet Federal motor vehicle safety standards 208, 209, and 210. The answer to this question is that NHTSA does not require a school bus manufacturer to install seat-belts on large school buses. Our regulations require a motor vehicle manufacturer to certify compliance to all applicable standards. You ask whether this decision still stands. The answer to that question is 'yes' for the reason just stated. The agency does not require large buses to have seat-belts because the 'compartmentalization' concept (to which you allude in your letter) supplies adequate protection for passengers in large school buses. Let me give you some background information on our school bus regulations that I think will help address your questions. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is responsible for developing safety standards applicable to all new motor vehicles, including school buses. In 1977, we issued a set of motor vehicle safety standards regulating various aspects of school bus performance. Among those standards is Standard 222, School Bus Passenger Seating and Crash Protection. Standard 222 requires large school buses to have passenger crash protection through 'compartmentalization.' Compartmentalization requires large school buses to incorporate certain protective elements into the vehicles' interior construction, thereby reducing the risk of injury to school bus passengers without the need for safety belts. These elements include high seats with heavily padded backs and improved seat spacing and performance. (Our regulations require a safety belt for the school bus driver because the driver's position is not compartmentalized. Further, because small school buses experience greater force levels in a crash, passengers on these vehicles need the added safety benefits of the belts.) You also asked whether there have been any improvements in school bus seating compartments since 1977, and whether the improvements are mandatory. The answer to your question is that there have been no major changes in the school bus safety standards since they became effective in April, 1977. However, the agency continuously reviews school bus safety standards to assess whether it is appropriate to add or amend a requirement. You may be interested to know that school buses continue to have one of the lowest fatality rates for any class of motor vehicle. Large school buses are among the safest motor vehicles because of their size and weight (which generally reduce an occupant's exposure to injury-threatening crash forces), the drivers' training and experience, and the extra care other motorists take when they are near a school bus. For these reasons, NHTSA has not required safety belts in large school buses. I hope you find this information helpful. If you have further questions, please contace Joan Tilghman, of my staff, at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel";

ID: aiam5323

"Dear Mr. Slaughter: This responds to your inquiry about whether logging trailer known as the 'knuckle boom loader trailer' that you manufacture is a motor vehicle that would have to comply with the applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. You explained that your trailer stays in the woods the majority of its life and is infrequently transported over public roads between job sites. I am pleased to have this opportunity to explain our regulations to you. This agency interprets and enforces the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act ('Safety Act' 13 U.S.C. 1392 et seq.) under which the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards are promulgated. The Act defines the term 'motor vehicle' as follows: 'any vehicle driven or drawn by mechanical power manufactured primarily for use on the public streets, roads, and highways, except any vehicle operated exclusively on a rail or rails.' Whether the agency considers your trailer to be a motor vehicle depends on its use. It is the agency's position that this statutory definition does not encompass mobile construction equipment, such as cranes and scrapers, which use the highway only to move between job sites and which typically spend extended periods of time at a single job site. In such cases, the on-highway use of the vehicle is merely incidental and is not the primary purpose for which the vehicle was manufactured. In contrast are instances where vehicles, such as dump trucks, frequently use the highway going to and from job sites, and stay at a job site for only a limited time. Such vehicles are considered motor vehicles for purposes of the Safety Act, since the on-highway use is more than 'incidental.' Based on the available information, it appears that your trailer is not a 'motor vehicle' within the meaning of the Safety Act. This conclusion is based on statements in your letter and brochures that this equipment spends extended periods of time at a single construction site and only uses the public roads infrequently to move between job sites. Thus, the agency would consider the use of your device on the public roads to be incidental and not its primary purpose. Since your trailer is not a motor vehicle, it would not be subject to our Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. If the agency were to receive additional information indicating that your trailer used the roads more than on an incidental basis, then the agency would reassess this interpretation. If the agency were to determine that your trailer is a motor vehicle, then the trailer would have to comply with the applicable Standards, including Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment, which addresses conspicuity, Standard No. 115, Vehicle Identification Numbers, Standard No. 120, Tire Selection and Rims for Motor Vehicles Other Than Passenger Cars, and Standard No. 121 Air Brake Systems which requires automatic slack adjusters and brakes to act on all wheels. I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions about NHTSA's safety standards, please feel free to contact Marvin Shaw of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, John Womack Acting Chief Counsel";

ID: aiam0121

Dear Mr. Hoffman: Thank you for your letter of July 30, 1968, in which you reques additional information in regard to certification requirements.; The statement in your letter to the effect that because detailed labe requirements are now being prepared, you are not required to affix a certification label on your motorcycles currently being manufactured is not exactly correct. The 'Certification Requirement Notice,' published in the Federal Register, Volume 32, Number 215, dated November 4, 1967, a copy of which is enclosed, states that a certification label or tag should be affixed to each applicable motor vehicle if manufactured on or after January 1, 1968. In your case the only safety standard that currently involves motorcycles is Number 205, 'Glazing Materials,' pertaining to windshields. On January 1, 1969, another safety standard, Number 108, 'Lamps, reflecting Devices, and Associated Equipment,' will involve motorcycles manufactured on or after that date.; For your immediate information, a copy of the Federal Motor Vehicl Safety Standards with Amendments is enclosed, with particular attention called to Table III, page MVSS 108-18 (1969) and Table IV, page MVSS 108-20 and 21 (1969).; In regard to your question as to whether you have to add the year o manufacture to your serial numbers, this is not a specific requirement, but would be an aid to clarifying the serial numbering system that identifies applicable vehicles as manufactured on or after January 1, 1968.; The study involving the possibility of specific changes t certification requirements is currently in the proposed rule making category and if changes do become finalized they will be published in the Federal Register.; Please furnish this office with the requirements shown in paragraph in the enclosed Certification Requirement Notice at your earliest convenience.; I trust this information will be of assistance to you in regard to you inquiries.; Sincerely, Francis Armstrong, Director, Office of Performance Analysis Motor Vehicle Safety Performance Service;

ID: aiam4861

"Dear Mr. Haywood: This responds to your letter of March 20, 1991 wit respect to 'the sale of a very limited number of specially built cars in the U.S.' Components would be manufactured by Porsche. The chassis would be 'a carbon fiber 962 racing tub' with a hand built body. The car could be imported either as an assembled vehicle or as a kit and assembled here. You have asked for information regarding 'low volume manufacturers exemptions from certain DOT regulations, emissions, passive restraints, bumper height, and all other pertinent information regarding manufacturing and sale of vehicles in the U.S.' You have not enclosed a photo of the car but your remark that the chassis is a 'racing tub' raises the possibility that the vehicle may be intended for racing purposes. Single-seat vehicles imported for competition on closed circuit courses and not used on the public roads are generally not 'motor vehicles' under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, and no regulations apply to them. If you wish to pursue this possibility further, please send us more information on the vehicle. Assuming that the car is subject to the Safety Act, its manufacturer is eligible to apply for a temporary exemption from one or more of the Federal motor vehicle safety standards on several grounds. Exemptions of up to three years may be provided a manufacturer whose total motor vehicle production was 10,000 units or less in the year preceding the filing of its petition. Alternatively, exemptions of up to two years may be provided covering up to 2,500 vehicles per year if the manufacturer-petitioner can demonstrate that the exemption would facilitate the field evaluation of innovative safety features or low-emission vehicles, or if, in the absence of an exemption, the manufacturer would be prevented from selling a motor vehicle whose overall level of safety is at least equivalent to that of a vehicle complying with all the safety standards. However, the exemption authority extends only to the safety standards. The bumper height standard was issued under the authority of the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act which contains no exemption provisions. The emission standards are issued by the Environmental Protection Agency, which is not part of the Department of Transportation, and you will have to contact them as to their requirements. If the intent is to import a fully assembled motor vehicle into the United States, at the time of entry it will have to bear the certification of its manufacturer that it complies with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety, bumper, and theft prevention standards (the certification label must also list the standards from which exemptions may have been provided). If the intent is to ship the vehicle in a disassembled state for assembly by the purchaser or manufacturer's agent in the United States, and if the kit contains l00% of the parts necessary for assembly, we regard the foreign supplier as the 'manufacturer', responsible for ensuring compliance with all Federal requirements, including provision of certification. I enclose an information sheet with respect to the regulations that we administer, and will be pleased to answer any further questions you may have. If you prefer to telephone, Taylor Vinson of this Office will be able to help you (202-366-5263). Sincerely, Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel";

ID: aiam0571

Dear Mr. Schlegel: This is in reply to your letter of December 13, 1971, concerning you conversation with Michael Peskoe regarding 'the provisions of Section 566.5, Manufacturer Identification.' You ask two questions which concern that regulation, the Certification regulations, and regulations concerning 'Vehicles Manufactured in Two or More Stages' (49 CFR Parts 567, 568).; Your first question is whether, 'as a manufacturer of Modular Homes which are built in a factory and then transported on a low-bed type trailer to the job site, are we required to label our units the same as a mobile home?' The requirements for labeling are found in Parts 567 and 568, and are part of the requirement that manufacturers certify compliance with all motor vehicle safety standards applicable to the particular vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment they manufacture. Modular homes are not motor vehicles under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. S1381 *et seq*.) and accordingly there are no requirements that they be certified or labeled.; Your second question is as follows: ' . . . we do manufacture some o these low-bed trailers, they are strictly for our own use in transporting our modular homes, and in this case are we required to submit this report and also label any trailers we would build in the future?' Trailers are motor vehicles under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act and are required to comply with applicable standards. They are also required to be certified by the manufacturer in accordance with the Certification regulations (Part 567), and as a manufacturer of trailers you are required to submit the information specified in Part 566.; A copy of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, and Part 566, 567, and 568 are enclosed, as is a notice describing how to obtain a copy of the motor vehicle safety standards.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel

ID: aiam5289

Dear Ms. Rose: Your letter of October 12, 1993, to the Office of Moto Carriers in Sacramento, has reached us for reply. Your company produces a 'trailer skirting' for van trailers, and some of your customers have asked 'whether it is legal to have the retroreflective tape which is required by Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 to be applied to the length of the trailer be placed below the trailer, on the trailer skirting.' The letter does not indicate whether the skirting is intended as original or aftermarket equipment. If the skirting is original equipment that is added to the trailer at the time of its manufacture and intended to remain there for the life of the trailer, the conspicuity treatment required by the standard may be affixed to it, provided that it is mounted as near as practicable within a range that is not less than 375mm and not more than 1525mm (approximately 15 to 60 inches) above the road surface. Under that condition, the portion of the trailer side that is above the skirting need not be equipped with the conspicuity treatment. If the skirting is aftermarket equipment, there is no requirement or restriction relating to conspicuity treatment of the skirting. We assume that the trailer to which it will be attached, if manufactured on or after December 1, 1993, will bear conspicuity markings in accordance with the standard. Sincerely, John Womack Acting Chief Counsel;