ID: 11763RLXS10

Lawrence H. Feder, Esq.
2450 Hollywood Blvd.
Suite 401
Hollywood, FL 33020

Dear Mr. Feder:

Thank you for your letter to Secretary Pena on behalf of your client, Mr. David Baret of Baby Comfort Inc., concerning the requirements of this agency for child restraint systems. Your letter was referred to my office for reply.

You explain in your letter that your client would like to sell child restraints manufactured abroad in the United States. However, the seats would apparently not be able to meet the dynamic performance requirements of Standard 213, AChild Restraint Systems,@ when tested according to the procedures of the standard. Those procedures specify that child seats such as those your client wishes to sell are to be secured to the test seat assembly with only a lap belt. You ask that the agency permit your client=s child seats to be tested with a lap and shoulder belt, instead of just the lap belt.

Your client wrote to my office in March asking whether the child restraints in question could be tested with a lap and shoulder belt. We explain in our response to Mr. Baret (copy enclosed) that Standard 213 requires his type of child seat to meet Standard 213's dynamic performance requirements when tested with only a lap belt. Certain types of child restraints are excepted from this testing requirement, but Mr. Baret=s restraint is not among these. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) does not have the authority to grant waivers from the testing or performance requirements of our safety standards, and can only change the requirements through a rulemaking proceeding.

I should note that we do not agree that testing the seat you describe with only a lap belt is inappropriate. Lap belts are provided in the rear seats of many older model vehicles still on the road, as well as in the rear center seating position of many newer model vehicles, which is generally the safest position for child seats. Because the restraint has its own harness system (unlike a belt-positioning seat), some consumers may not readily distinguish it from a conventional child seat and may mistakenly use it in a position that has a lap belt only. In view of such potential use, it would seem appropriate that the seat provide the minimum level of protection required by Standard 213 when restrained with a just a lap belt.

I hope this information is helpful. If you have further questions, please contact Ms. Deirdre Fujita of my staff at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Samuel J. Dubbin Chief Counsel

Enclosure ref:213 d:4/29/96

ID: 11798.MLS

Mr. Michael J. Kroll
Safety Engineering Laboratories, Inc.
27803 College Park Drive
Warren, MI 48093-4879

Dear Mr. Kroll:

This responds to your April 16, 1996 letter asking about the applicability of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 302, Flammability of Interior Materials (49 CFR '571.302), to various materials in the interior of a vehicle. You ask a number of questions about the standard which we have rephrased below, followed by our answers.

Question: Are materials located under the dash (instrument panel) required to meet the FMVSS 302 requirements? Examples of materials located under the dash are: defrost ducts, air distribution ducting, demister tubes and hoses, insulation on wiring, sound deadening materials, electronic and/or electrical component enclosures. Many of these materials are not visible directly but are accessible via heater/defrost outlets and radio speaker grills.

Answer: Section S4.1 of Standard No. 302 lists the components in the vehicle occupant compartment that must comply with the flammability resistance requirements of paragraph S4.3. The components listed are: seat cushions, seat backs, seat belts, headlining, convertible tops, arm rests, all trim panels including door, front, rear, and side panels, compartment shelves, head restraints, floor coverings, sun visors, curtains, shades, wheel housing covers, engine compartment covers, and any other interior materials, including padding and crash deployed elements, that are designed to absorb energy on contact by occupants in the event of a crash. Under S4.1 and S4.2 of the standard, any portion of these components that is within 2 inch of the occupant compartment air space must meet the standard=s requirements.

The materials you list are not included in S4.1. Thus, they do not have to comply with Standard No. 302.

Question: Are materials located within the passenger compartment on or near the fire wall required to meet Standard 302? These include heating/ventilation/air conditioning (HVAC) ducting, carpeting, sound deadening materials, and electronic or electrical component enclosures. On many vehicles, the HVAC ducting material below the dash is clearly visible and intimately associated with other exposed materials such as carpeting and sound deadening material.

Answer: Some materials located on or near the fire wall are subject to Standard 302. Among the items listed in S4.1 of the standard are floor coverings and engine compartment covers. The standard applies to HVAC ducting material that is part of carpeting used as a floor covering or part of the engine compartment cover. The standard also applies to foam directly under the dash coverings, since the agency considers such foam to be padding that is designed to absorb energy on contact by occupants in the event of a crash. This assumes that the HVAC and foam material is within 2 inch of the occupant compartment air space.

Question: Section S4.2 states that AAny portion of a single or composite material which is in 2 inch of the occupant compartment air space shall meet the [flammability resistance] requirements of S4.3.@ Does S4.2 apply to all materials in the occupant compartment air space?

Answer: No, S4.2 only specifies which portions of those components listed in S4.1 must meet the flammability resistance requirements.

Question: Does S4.2 apply to: (i) materials located under the dash and exposed to the occupant compartment air space, (ii) on the fire wall near and/or on the floor of the occupant compartment, (iii) foams directly under vinyl or cloth coverings on seats, (iv) foam directly under dash coverings, and (v) foam used to line the interior of HVAC ducts?

Answer: Standard No. 302 applies to materials on the fire wall near or on the occupant compartment=s floor, foams directly under vinyl or cloth coverings on seats, and foam directly under dash coverings. It does not apply to materials (other than padding) located under the dash and exposed to the occupant compartment space, assuming these materials are not listed in S4.1, or to foam used to line the interior of HVAC ducts.

Question: Does S4.2 apply to composite materials, such as a foam backing on a vinyl headliner tested as a composite?

Answer: Yes, and the composite vinyl headliner is subject to S4.2.2. That section specifies that AAny material that adheres to other material(s) at every point of contact shall meet the requirements of S4.3 when tested as a composite with other material(s).

Question: Does S4.2 apply to a foam backing of a cloth headliner where the foam is not attached to the headliner?

Answer: Yes, and the headliner would be tested subject to S4.2.1, which specifies that AAny material that does not adhere to other material(s) at every point of contact shall meet the requirements of S4.3 when tested separately.@

Question: Does S4.2 apply to any material underneath the carpeting where the total thickness of the carpeting and backing is less than 2 inch?

Answer: Because S4.2 applies to any component in S4.1 that is within 2 inch of the occupant compartment air space, it applies to listed materials such as a floor covering, up to 2 inch.

Question: Under what basis or criteria are some materials within the occupant compartment air space excluded?

Answer: See answer to question one. Section S4.1 of Standard No. 302 provides a comprehensive list of materials subject to the standard. Any material not on this list is not subject to the standard.

I hope this answers your questions. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact Marvin Shaw of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Samuel J. Dubbin Chief Counsel

ref:302 d:5/16/96

ID: 11799.MLS

Mr. Tom Byrne
Vice President
Goodridge (USA) Inc.
20309 Gramercy
Torrance, CA 90501

Dear Mr. Byrne:

This responds to your April 19, 1996 request for an interpretation of certain hydraulic brake hose labeling requirements in Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 106, ABrake Hoses.@

You ask whether a hydraulic brake hose that is sold as part of a brake hose assembly would meet the requirements of S5.2.1 and S5.2.2 if it has the stripes specified in S5.2.1 but does not include the information in S5.2.2(a) through (e). The answer is yes.

Hydraulic brake hoses must be marked with: (1) two stripes meeting the requirements of '5.2.1 of Standard No. 106, unless the hose is of a type excluded under that paragraph; and (2) the information set forth in '5.2.2(a) through (e), until the hose is made into a brake hose assembly. After such assembly, the labeling information of '5.2.2(a) through (e) Aneed not be present on hose . . . .@ (See last sentence of '5.2.2.) However, the hose must continue to have the stripes required by '5.2.1. In addition, the hose assembly would have to be labeled in accordance with the requirements of '5.2.4 or '5.2.4.1 for labeling hydraulic brake hose assemblies.

If you have any further questions, please contact Mr. Marvin Shaw of this office at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Samuel J. Dubbin Chief Counsel

ref:106 d:5/10/96

ID: 11801-5.PJA

Ms. Jane L. Dawson
Thomas Built Buses, Inc.
P.O. Box 2450
1408 Courtesy Road
High Point, NC 27261

Dear Ms. Dawson:

This responds to your April 1, 1996, letter seeking clarification about some conclusions contained in an interpretation dated March 20, 1996 from this office to Mr. Tom Turner of the Blue Bird Body Company, concerning Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 217, Bus emergency exits and window retention and release. You have correctly identified statements in the March 20, 1996, letter to Mr. Turner that should be corrected.

In the March 20 letter, we state that voluntarily installed left side emergency exit doors do not have to meet the location requirements of S5.2.3.2. You agree with that position. However, the March 20 letter then states:

voluntarily installed side exit doors would still be subject to prohibitions and requirements that apply to side exit doors generally. For example, S5.2.3.2(a)(4) prohibits installing two side exit doors "in whole or in part, within the same post and roof bow panel space." In addition, section S5.2.3.2(a)(1) requires "each" side exit door to be hinged on its forward side (not merely those doors installed pursuant to Table 1).

As you point out, the scope of all the requirements of S5.2.3.2 is limited by the introductory sentence of S5.2.3.2, which states "[a]ll emergency exits required by S5.2.3.1(a) and S5.2.3.1(b) shall meet the following criteria: . . ." (emphasis added).

You are correct that the scope of S5.2.3.2's requirements is limited by S5.2.3.2's introductory sentence, and that none of the requirements of that section apply to voluntarily installed exits. To the extent that the March 20 letter stated otherwise, it was incorrect. It would be preferable if voluntary exits conform to S5.2.3.2, so that there will be no differences in hinging, spacing and location that may confuse occupants in an emergency.

This letter also clarifies another point made in the March 20, 1996 letter to Mr. Turner. We state in the third paragraph that voluntarily installed exits on school buses "should" meet the requirements of Standard No. 217, to avoid confusing occupants who may choose the exit for emergency egress. The discussion may have implied that voluntarily installed exits are excluded from Standard No. 217's requirements, which would be incorrect.

Standard No. 217 establishes requirements "for bus emergency exits." (See section S1 of the standard.) Most of the standard's requirements apply generally to all school bus emergency exits, without regard to whether an exit is required or voluntarily installed. All the requirements that apply to exits generally, i.e., which use terms such as "each" or "any" when describing the exit to which the requirement applies, apply to voluntarily installed exits. In some instances, the standard's requirements only apply to a required school bus emergency exit (e.g., S5.5.3(a) and (c), emergency exit identification). Requirements that apply only to required exits do not apply to voluntarily installed exits.

Thank you for bringing the error to our attention. If you have further questions or concerns, please call Paul Atelsek of my staff at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Samuel J. Dubbin
Chief Counsel

cc: Mr. Thomas D. Turner
Blue Bird Body Company

ref:217
d:8/1/96

NCC-20:PAtelsek:6-2992:5/1/96: revised 7/22/96

OCC# 11801.pja
cc: NCC-01 Subject/chron
NCC-20 P.Atelsek
NRM-01; NSA-01

Interp. Std. 217, Redbook (2)

A:\11801­5.PJA

ID: 11804.ZTV

Mr. Donald W. Vierimaa
Vice President - Engineering
Truck Trailer Manufacturers Association
1020 Princess Street
Alexandria, VA 22314

Dear Mr. Vierimaa:

We have received your letter of April 15, 1996, asking for interpretations of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 as it relates to trailer lighting.

You have informed us of "lowbed trailers [with] narrow goosenecks that are attached to a wider load deck which may be less than 15 inches above the ground." Because Table II of Standard No. 108 requires side marker lamps on trailers whose overall width is 80 inches or more to be mounted at a height of not less than 15 inches, you have asked if the lamps may be mounted at a height of less than 15 inches if the height of the mounting location is "as high as practicable."

Your question is asked with reference to a combination clearance/front side marker lamp. As we explain below, this combination lamp cannot be used to meet the requirements of Standard No. 108 in the manner you posit.

The requirement of Standard No. 108 for front side marker lamps is that they be located "as far to the front as practicable" and, at the front, "not less than 15 inches" above the road surface. Thus, the minimum mounting height is expressed as an absolute rather than, like the horizontal location, in terms of practicability. It is our observation that the gooseneck on lowbed trailers is more than 15 inches above the road surface, and that it would be practicable to mount a side marker lamp there, thus complying with the location requirements of Table II.

You have also informed us that, on the typical lowbed trailer with a gooseneck, the combination front clearance/front side marker lamp is mounted at an angle on the front corners of the deck. The manufacturer chooses this location because "[i]f front clearance lamps were mounted on the front face of the deck directly behind the tires of the towing vehicle, they would likely be damaged by debris thrown by the towing vehicle's tires." Based upon certain NHTSA interpretations which you quoted, you asked for confirmation that a combination lamp mounted at such a location complies with Standard No. 108 "without needing to be visible at 45 degrees inboard."

Upon review, we did not find that the interpretations you quoted really provided confirmation of the interpretation that you seek. However, you also called our attention to the following:

"Clearance lamps may be mounted at a location other than on the front and rear . . . for protection from damage during normal operation of the vehicle, and at such a location they need not be visible at 45 degrees inboard." (49 CFR 571.108, S4.3.1.1.1)."

This provision (now renumbered as S5.3.1.1.1) does allow mounting clearance lamps "at a location other than on the front" if the manufacturer determines that the alternate location is needed to protect the lamp from damage during normal operation of the trailer. We believe that the lamps should also be protected from damage if the alternate location is chosen. It seems to us that mounting the clearance lamps at an angle on the front, rather than on the front involves a move of only a few inches at most, and might not provide any greater protection from road debris than mounting the clearance lamps on the front. We ask you to consider this in determining the appropriate location for the clearance lamps, keeping in mind that their primary purpose is to indicate the overall width of the trailer.

This means that a combination clearance/front side marker lamp will not meet the location requirements of Standard No. 108. A separate front side marker lamp must be provided and located on the gooseneck. A separate clearance lamp must be provided, and located in accordance with the views expressed in the preceding paragraph.

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

Sincerely,

Samuel J. Dubbin Chief Counsel

ref:108 d:5/28/96

ID: 11806WKM

Mr. D. L. O'Connor
Manager
Government & Customer Compliance
The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company
Akron, OH 44316-0001

Dear Mr. O'Connor:

This responds to your telephone conversation with Walter Myers of my staff on April 18, 1996, and your follow-up letter also dated April 18, 1996.

You state that Goodyear is encountering difficulties in exporting tires to Venezuela, South America, in that Venezuela wants verification from a U.S. governmental agency that Goodyear tires comply with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards when the DOT symbol is marked on them. You state that this is the same problem that Goodyear encountered in exporting tires to Colombia last year, and that Venezuela would accept the same type of letter from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration that we issued to you last year for Colombia. You request, therefore, that we issue a letter to you similar to the one we issued last year regarding the Colombian imports.

As you requested, please find enclosed a "To Whom It May Concern" letter very similar to the one we provided you on August 9, 1995. As we explained to you at that time, the Federal government cannot and does not approve, certify or endorse vehicles and equipment as do many other countries, including the Central and South American countries. Accordingly, this statement is as far as we can go in describing the Federal government's role in what by law is essentially a manufacturer responsibility.

I hope the enclosed letter will be helpful to you. Should you have further questions or need additional information, please feel free to contact Mr. Myers at this address or at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Samuel J. Dubbin Chief Counsel

Enclosure

ref:571 d:4/30/96

ID: 11807A.SPW

Mr. John Hrabosky
Earth Tool Company LLC
Post Office Box 3
Oconomowoc, WI 53066

Dear Mr. Hrabosky:

This responds to your letter of April 9, 1996, addressed to Walter Myers of my staff, in which you ask what "D.O.T. safety standards [do you] need to be aware of" in producing a vehicle you refer to as a "winch trailer."

You enclosed pictures of your winch trailer, which can be described as a single-axle enclosed trailer whose dimensions are estimated to be approximately 6 to 8 feet long, 5 feet wide, and 4 feet high. The metal enclosure is equipped with side hatches and a back door that open to provide access to the winch and associated tools and equipment mounted inside. The pictures show the trailer hitched to a pickup truck in preparation for towing. You state that the purpose of the winch trailer is "to aid in utility replacement." You also state that the trailer is equipped with electric brakes, has a gross vehicle weight of approximately 4,000 pounds, and has a tongue weight of approximately 250 pounds.

In response to your question about applicable standards, we are enclosing a fact sheet entitled "Federal Requirements for Manufacturers of Trailers," which lists the standards and regulations applicable to trailers. Copies of the listed standards and regulations may be obtained by following the instructions in the enclosed fact sheet entitled "Where to Obtain NHTSA's Safety Standards and Regulations." A copy of the cover of the volume you will need is attached to this fact sheet. The cost of the volume is approximately $40.00.

In addition, we are enclosing the following pertinent information for motor vehicle manufacturers:

a. Chapter 301 of Title 49, U.S. Code (the statutory provisions under which NHTSA has issued its safety standards and regulations); and

b. Fact sheet entitled "Information for New Manufacturers of Motor Vehicles and Motor Vehicle Equipment."

Should you have any further questions or need additional information, feel free to contact this office at the address shown above or at (202) 366-2992, FAX (202) 366-3820.

Sincerely,

Samuel J. Dubbin Chief Counsel

Enclosures

Ref:VSA d:5/9/96

ID: 11814.ZTV

Mr. William J. Schultz
Principal Engineer
United States Motorcycle Manufacturers Association
Dept. 704
3700 W. Juneau Avenue
Milwaukee, WI 53208

Dear Mr. Schultz:

This is in reply to your letter of April 4, 1996, asking for an interpretation of Table IV of Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 as it applies to the location of reflex reflectors on motorcycles.

You point out that agency interpretations permit front turn signal lamps and headlamps "to rotate about the steering axis as long as they are within the location limits specified in the regulation". You ask for confirmation that this interpretation is equally applicable to front side reflex reflectors.

The answer is yes. Table IV requires front side reflex reflectors to be located "on each side. . . as far to the front as practicable." Conformance is determined with the front wheel in the straight-ahead position. The determination of practicability of location is initially that of the motorcycle manufacturer and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration will not question it unless it is clearly erroneous. Thus, a front side reflex reflector may be mounted on a portion of the motorcycle that turns if the manufacturer determines that that location is as far to the front as practicable, even though, during a turn, that reflector may not be visible from the side of the motorcycle.

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

Sincerely,

Samuel J. Dubbin Chief Counsel ref:108 d:5/10/96

ID: 11815.ZTV

Mr. Tom Barron
320 Putnam
Springdale, Arkansas 72764

Dear Mr. Barron:

Thank you for your letter mailed April 10, 1996, telling the Department of Transportation of your "Saf-T-Lit" invention. This consists of a two-lamp unit containing a stop lamp and a turn signal lamp. These lamps would be mounted on each side of a semi trailer, at the top. In your view, they are needed because the original equipment lamps mounted at the bottom of a trailer may be obscured by intervening traffic, or by snow or fog.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is the agency within the Department that establishes the Federal motor vehicle safety standards that apply to the manufacture of vehicles, including trailers. The Federal Highway Administration is the agency that establishes similar standards for the operation of commercial motor vehicles, including trailers, in interstate commerce.

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated Equipment , is the safety standard that applies to original equipment lighting for vehicles, including trailers. Under Standard No. 108, a trailer manufacturer may locate rear turn signal lamps at any point it chooses between 15 and 83 inches above the road surface, and stop lamps between 15 and 72 inches.

Under Standard No. 108, your invention is regarded as supplementary lighting equipment, and it is permissible as original equipment if it does not "impair the effectiveness" of the other lighting equipment required by Standard No. 108. We regard original equipment as including equipment that a dealer may install after receiving a new vehicle from the factory and before the sale of the vehicle to its first purchaser. In your case, we do not believe that your invention , as you have described it to us, would impair the effectiveness of any other rear lighting equipment. However, your diagram shows your lamps in the location generally occupied by clearance lamps. Standard No. 108 requires that trailers whose overall width is 80 inches or more have a pair of clearance lamps to indicate the overall width of the vehicle and located as near the top as practicable. Thus, your invention could not be installed to replace these lamps without creating a noncompliance with Standard No. 108. We assume that your invention would therefore be mounted below these lamps.

With respect to the aftermarket, there is no Federal restriction on the sale of supplementary lamps but the question under Federal law is whether their installation by a manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business (this does not include the owner's own service facilities if restricted to its own vehicles) would "make inoperative" any of the lighting equipment required by Standard No. 108. Generally, we interpret "make inoperative" to equate to "impair the effectiveness". We have previously concluded that your invention is not likely to impair the effectiveness of the required lighting equipment if installed before the initial sale of a trailer, and, for this reason, we do not believe that your invention would have an inoperative effect on other rear lighting equipment when installed after the initial sale of the vehicle, keeping in mind my previous comment about the clearance lamps. The Office of Motor Carriers of the Federal Highway Administration has advised that operation of semi trailers with your invention installed would be permissible under its regulations, provided that the installation does not impair the effectiveness of the lighting equipment required by Standard No. 108.

Please bear in mind that the sale and use of supplementary lighting equipment, though permissible under Federal law, is also subject to the laws of the individual states. We are unable to advise you on state law but an interpretation can be provided by the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, 4600 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Va. 22203.

We appreciate your writing us of your concerns and your efforts to improve safety on our nation's highways. If you have any questions, Taylor Vinson of this Office will be pleased to answer them. His phone number is 202-366-5263.

Sincerely,

Samuel J. Dubbin Chief Counsel ref:108 d:5/16/96

ID: 11842.ZTV

Mr. John D. Higinbothom
John S. Connor, Inc.
The World Trade Center
401 E. Pratt Street
Suite 700
Baltimore, MD 21202
Ref. 554761
Dear Mr. Higinbothom:

This is in reply to your letter of April 18, 1996, with respect to scrappage of a 1993 Toyota Starlet that does not conform to the Federal motor vehicle safety standards. You stated that the vehicle is currently in a bonded warehouse, and the importer has decided to destroy the car rather than spend the money necessary to bring it into conformity with Federal standards. You have asked "whether any of the parts on the car can be used on other vehicles".

The brake hoses, lamps and reflectors, tires, glazing, and seat belt assemblies may be permanently imported if they are marked with a DOT symbol. This constitutes the equipment manufacturer's certification of compliance that the equipment complies with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards, and it is permissible to import DOT-marked equipment even if the vehicle from which it is taken has not been certified by the vehicle manufacturer as meeting Federal standards. However, the remainder of the vehicle (or the entire vehicle, if none of the parts listed above) must be exported.

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

Sincerely,

Samuel J. Dubbin Chief Counsel

ref:591#VSA d:5/23/96