Interpretation ID: nht90-3.93

TYPE: Interpretation-NHTSA

DATE: September 10, 1990

FROM: Paul Jackson Rice -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TO: Lawrence F. Henneberger -- Arent, Fox, Kintner, Plotkin & Kahn

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 6-22-90 from L.F. Henneberger to P.J. Rice (OCC 4927); Also attached to Ford Bulletin number 10 dated 12-15-89 entitled Splicing Into The Stop Lamp Electrical Circuit, signed by R.R. Chestnut; Also attached to memo date d 6-6-90 from Tekonsha Engineering Company; Also attached to letter dated 8-31-78 from J.J. Levin, Jr. to L.F. Henneberger; Also attached to letter dated 5-2-84 from F. Berndt to L.F. Henneberger; Also attached to letter dated 11-30-81 from F. Berndt to K.G. Moyer (A23; Redbook 3; Std. 108)

TEXT:

This is in reply to your letter of June 22, 1990, on behalf of your client, Tekonsha Engineering Company, a subsidiary of Echlin, Inc., asking for confirmation of your interpretation that a provision of the California Vehicle Code conflicts with, and is preempted by, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment

Tekonsha has developed the "Commander Electronic Brake Control", which will allow the driver of a vehicle-trailer combination "to use the hand control to override the trailer brakes in an emergency mode to control swaying." The system has been designed specifically to avoid splicing into the stop lamp switch circuit. This eliminates electrical interference which can deactivate anti-lock brake system operation, or prevent the speed control from disengaging upon braking. The hand control activates only the trailer brakes, and not the service brakes of the towing vehicle.

You state that the California Highway Patrol has taken the position that the towing vehicle's stop lamps must be activated when the Commander Electronic Brake Control manual trailer brake override is used, even though the service brakes of the towing veh icle are not applied. Section 24603(f) of the California Vehicle Code provides, in pertinent part:

Stoplamps shall be activated upon application of the service (foot) brake and the hand control head for air, vaccuum, or electric brakes...

You believe that this is in conflict with section S5.5.4 of Standard No. 108, which requires:

The stop lamps on each vehicle shall be activated upon application of the service brakes. The high-mounted stop lamp on each passenger car shall be activated only upon application of the service brakes.

You argue that California is incorrect because the use of the device is not intended to and usually does not result in diminished vehicle speeds, does not involve application of the service brakes, and would provide an

"unsafe", false braking signal if connected to the stop lamp system.

In further support of your argument you cite past interpretations of this agency, specifically our letters to you of August 31, 1978, and May 2, 1984, with respect to the Jacobs device, and a letter of November 30, 1981 to Kenneth Moyer. I appreciate th e fact that you enclosed copies for our reference.

In reviewing this matter, I can understand the basis for a conclusion by California that section 24603(f) is not preempted by section S5.5.4. The second sentence of S5.5.4 restricts operation of the center stop lamp to application of the service brakes, but no such restriction exists in the first sentence. Although the first sentence requires operation of the stop lamps upon application of the service brakes, when considered in conjunction with the restriction stated in the second sentence, it can be read as implying that there may be other conditions under which activation of the stop lamps is permissible. However, the reason for the difference in the two sentences is otherwise. Commonly, in red rear combination lamps, the same filament serves bot h the stop and turn signal functions. If the turn signal is functioning when the brakes are applied, tbe first sentence of S5.5.4 ensures that the stop signal overrides the turn signal.

The meaning of the first sentence of S5.5.4 has been set forth and explained in long-standing letters of interpretation. These letters demonstrate that the agency's clear intent is that stop lamps be activated only when fulfilling their definitional pur pose. Standard No. 108 incorporates by reference SAE Standard J586 FEB84 Stop Lamps, which defines a stop lamp as one that gives "a steady light to the rear of a vehicle to indicate the intention of the operator of a vehicle to stop or diminish speed by braking." Most recently, in a letter of January 25, 1990, to Larry S. Snowhite, the agency stated that an aftermarket device that activated the stop lamps when it sensed that pressure was being released from the accelerator did not necessarily indicate that the operator would subsequently apply the brake pedal, and that, therefore, it would render the stop lamps partially inoperative within the prohibition of 15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(2)(A) applicable to vehicles in use. This is consistent with the Moyer inte rpretation of 1981 where the stop lamps were activated when all pressure had been released from the accelerator and the agency expressed its opinion that the use of required lighting equipment for a purpose other than the defined one created an "impairme nt" within the original equipment prohibition of section S4.1.3 of Standard No. 108 (now S5.1.3). To the same effect is our 1978 letter to you which held that activation of the stop lamps by use of the Jacobs brake foundation control device was permissi ble as the effect of the device was to diminish the speed of the vehicle by braking it.

For the reasons expressed above, we confirm your interpretation that section S5.5.4 of 49 CFR 571.108 Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment preempts section 24603(f) of the California Vehicle Code to t he extent that it may be read as requiring stop lamps to be activated on motor vehicles equipped with the Commander Electronic Brake Control, when the Control is hand activated in an emergency mode to provide sway control. The authority for our conclusi on is Title 15, United States Code, Section 1392(d) which states

in pertinent part:

(d) Whenever a Federal motor vehicle safety standard . . . is in effect, no State . . . shall have any authority either to establish, or to continue in effect, with respect to any motor vehicle or item of equipment any safety standard applicable to the same aspect of performance of such vehicle or item of equipment which is not identical to the Federal standard."

With best regards.