Skip to main content
Search Interpretations

Interpretation ID: nht89-2.4

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 06/16/89 EST

FROM: BARRY FELRICE -- NHTSA ASSOCIATE ADMINISTRATOR FOR RULEMAKING

TO: EDWARD P. KIRBY -- MASSACHUSETTS SENATE

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: LETTER DATED 04/11/89 FROM EDWARD P. KIRBY TO BARRY FELRICHE -- NHTSA

TEXT: Dear Senator Kirby:

Thank you for your recent letter enclosing Senate Bill No. 1217 which you have filed in the Massachusetts General Court, and which has been referred to the Committee for Public Safety. Your bill would require all new motor vehicles made or sold in Massa chusetts to have amber-colored directional signals as of January 1, 1990.

Your comment that "such matters are reserved for the Federal government" is essentially correct. The express preemption provisions of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, 15 U.S.C. 1392(d), permit States to have motor vehicle safety standa rds regulating the same aspects of performance as Federal standards provided that the State requirements regarding those aspects are identical to the Federal ones. In instances in which the Federal government has no standard (for example, there are none covering such equipment as horns or fog lamps), a State may have its own standard. As to the subject at hand, 49 C.F.R. 571.108 Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment, prescribes requirements f or the color of motor vehicle turn signals. At the front, they must be amber, and at the rear, either amber or red. Thus, if Senate Bill No. 1217 were enacted, it would be preempted under the Vehicle Safety Act to the extent that it required rear turn signals to be amber.

Years ago, in an attempt to standardize rear lighting, the agency proposed to eliminate the choice regarding the color of turn signals and to pick one of the two permissible colors and mandate its use. Because there were no clear benefits either way, an d because manufacturers wished to continue their existing practice (in general, the domestics preferred red, and the others, amber), the agency terminated rulemaking.

Informal agency studies since then have been similarly inconclusive. NHTSA has always been interested in improving the effectiveness of rear lighting and its present efforts are devoted to the general area of lamp size, separation, and color, of which t urn signal color is a part. However, because no data exist to support a requirement that only amber

2 be used for rear turn signals, there are no present plans to propose an amendment to Standard No. 108 that would eliminate red as a color choice.

We appreciate your interest in turn signal effectiveness, and ask that this letter be considered by the Committee of Public Safety in its deliberations. We would find it helpful if you would send us any data submitted to the Committee relating to the re lative merits of amber and red rear turn signals.

Sincerely,