Interpretation ID: aiam4368
Director
Automotive Safety Engineering
General Motors Corporation
General Motors Technical Center
30400 Mound Road
Warren
MI 48090-9015;
Dear Mr. Rogers: This responds to your letter of April 15, 1987, concerning Genera Motors' (GM's) basis for certification of its electronic displays of shift lever positions, i.e., Park- Reverse-Neutral-Drive-Low (PRNDL), to section S3.2 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 102, *Transmission Shift Lever Sequence, Starter Interlock, and Transmission Braking Effect*. You requested our concurrence that section S3.2 is satisfied if the PRNDL is displayed whenever the vehicle is capable of mobility and the opportunity exists for shifting the transmission. As discussed below, we disagree that the present wording of the standard would accommodate your suggested interpretation. However, we will consider your letter to be a petition for rulemaking on this point, as you requested, and we will process it accordingly.; By way of background information, the National Highway Traffic Safet 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 or equipment comply with applicable standards. The following represents our opinion based on the facts provided in your letter.; According to your letter, GM's electronic PRNDL display is illuminate whenever the ignition switch is in the 'on' or 'off' position. The display is not illuminated when the ignition is in the 'lock,' accessory' or 'start' position.; Section S3.2 of Standard No. 102 requires that the '(i)dentification o shift lever positions of automatic transmissions and of the shift lever pattern of manual transmissions . . . shall be *permanently displayed in view of the driver.' (Emphasis added.); In an interpretation letter to Ford, dated April 17, 1978, NHTS addressed the requirements of section S3.2 with respect to a proposed design for an actively lighted gear position indicator that would not normally be visible to the driver when the ignition switch was in the 'off' or 'lock' position. The indicator in question would become illuminated when the ignition was in the 'on,' 'start,' or 'accessory' position. NHTSA concluded that section S3.2's requirement that the identification of the shift lever positions 'shall be permanently displayed' requires a display which can be seen regardless of the operating mode of the engine. Thus, the agency stated that 'a device that would only be seen when the ignition is in the 'on,' 'start,' or 'accessory' position would not comply with the requirements of the standard.'; In an interpretation letter to Mr. David Cima, dated December 24, 1986 NHTSA addressed the issue of whether it is permissible under section S3.2 for an electronic display to become activated when the driver sits down in the driver's seat and, if so, whether it must remain activated indefinitely as long as the driver remains in that seat, even if the ignition is not turned on. The agency stated the following:; >>>It is our opinion that it is permissible for an electronic displa to become activated at the time the driver enters the car and need not be activated when there is no person in the driver's seating position. Section S3.2's requirement that the identification of shift lever positions of automatic transmission be 'permanently displayed' is modified by the phrase 'in view of the driver.' It is our opinion that no such display is required at times when no driver is in the car, i.e., no person in the driver's seating position. We also conclude, however, that such a display must remain activated indefinitely as long as the driver remains in the driver's seating position even if the ignition is not turned on. If the display only remained activated for a specific period of time, such as five minutes, it would not be 'permanently' displayed.<<<; Your letter indicates that the GM electronic PRNDL display is no illuminated, i.e., activated, when the ignition switch is in the 'lock,' 'accessory' or 'start' positions. This is true regardless of whether there is a driver in the car, i.e., a person in the driver's seating position. Thus, the PRNDL display appears not to comply with section S3.2, since it is not permanently displayed in view of the driver.; According to your letter, GM carefully considered both the section S3. wording and the 1978 NHTSA interpretation letter in developing its electronic PRNDL display. You stated that you believe, for purposes of Standard No. 102, that 'a driver is a vehicle operator who is capable of using and has a need for the PRNDL information.'; The term 'driver' is specifically defined in 49 CFR Part 571.3 as 'th occupant of a motor vehicle seated immediately behind the steering control system.' The definition is not limited to situations where the car is somehow capable of mobility.; In a May 21, 1977 meeting, you suggested that the Part 571.3 definitio of 'driver' is necessary but not sufficient to determine the meaning of driver in the context of particular safety standards. You stated that in applying the definition to Standard No. 101, for example, some assumptions must be made about the 'occupant . . . seated immediately behind the steering control system.' That standard requires that certain controls be located so as to be operable by the driver and that certain displays be located so as to be visible to the driver. For the requirement that controls be operable, you stated that an assumption must be made that the occupant is not a six-month year (sic) old child. For the requirement that displays be visible, you stated that an assumption must be made that the occupant is not visually impaired. You suggested that this same line of reasoning would support an interpretation that a driver is a vehicle operator who is capable of using and has a need for the PRNDL information.; We believe, however, that your examples relating to Standard No. 10 are fundamentally different from your suggested interpretation. First, an interpretation that the term 'driver' is not meant to refer to a six-month year old child or to a person who has a serious visual impairment would simply be filling in an obvious detail, since such persons could not be licensed to drive by any state. However, a determination as to when a vehicle operator has a 'need' for PRNDL information is the type of issue that needs to be addressed in rulemaking and, in fact, was addressed by the agency in proposing and then adopting the requirement that the information be 'permanently displayed in view of the driver.' Also, while your Standard No. 101 examples relate solely to the nature of the occupant, your suggested interpretation requires consideration of the nature of the vehicle. Finally, your suggested approach would result in different interpretations of 'driver' for different standards, while Part 571.3 sets forth one definition that applies to all standards.; With response to the 1978 interpretation letter, you stated that it i your understanding 'that the agency was attempting to address the possibility of driving the vehicle 'regardless of the operating mode of the engine,' and that PRNDL visibility is therefore required independent of engine operating mode.' You also stated that the 1978 interpretation is accommodated in GM designs by virtue of PRNDL illumination in both the 'on' and 'off' ignition switch positions. However, the 1978 interpretation letter nowhere suggests that the interpretation is limited to situations where the vehicle may be driven or otherwise supports such a reading. To the contrary, we believe the 1978 letter is on point with respect to whether the GM electronic PRNDL display complies with section S3.2, i.e., the letter makes it clear that the reach of the visibility requirement is not limited to any particular combination of ignition positions.; Your letter suggests that a feature of GM vehicle designs which yo believe has an important bearing on the interpretation issue is the shift interlock system. While this feature is relevant to the mobility argument you have advanced, we disagree that this feature is relevant to the interpretation issue. The shift interlock system has no bearing on whether or not the PRNDL display is permanently displayed in view of the driver. However, the feature may be relevant in other contexts.; For example, you stated that if NHTSA does not provide th interpretation suggested by your letter, the letter should be considered a petition for rulemaking. As noted above, the agency will process the letter as a petition for rulemaking, and consider the shift interlock system in that context.; You also requested that NHTSA not take any enforcement action agains existing designs 'until the ambiguity of the section 3.2 requirement is resolved through the appropriate administrative procedures.' Since we do not agree that section S3.2 is ambiguous and, in fact, believe that our 1978 interpretation letter was precisely on point, we decline to adopt any type of general nonenforcement policy with respect to that requirement. If you have additional questions about the enforcement issues raised by your letter, you should direct them to the Associate Administrator for Enforcement.; Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones, Chief Counsel