Interpretation ID: nht93-2.23

DATE: March 23, 1993

FROM: John Womack -- Acting Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TO: James L. Vasko

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 11-1-89 from Stephen P. Wood to John K. Moody; Also attached to letter dated 2-17-93 from James L. Vasko to John Womack (OCC 8337)

TEXT: Thank your for your letter of February 17, 1993, replying to my letter of February 11 with respect to your invention, the "Front Brake Light System."

Although you did not address my assumption that your invention flashes both front signal lamps when the brake pedal is applied, it would appear from your latest letter that the system activates the front signal lamps in a steady-burning state, with a flashing turn signal overriding the steady-burning front stop signal when the turn signal is activated. We derive this from your statement that a driver pulling into traffic "would see the turn signal and the brake light showing that the vehicle was braking and turning."

This agency administers the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, under which we issue the Federal motor vehicle safety standards. Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 LAMPS, REFLECTIVE DEVICES, AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT specifies the requirements for lamps and reflectors that are used as original equipment on motor vehicles. There is no restriction under the Safety Act or Standard No. 108 as to the manufacture and sale of your invention. Equipment that is not specified in the standard, such as the "Front Brake Light System," may be installed by either the vehicle manufacturer or the dealer, provided that the equipment does not impair the effectiveness of the lighting equipment that the standard requires. Thus the question is whether a front turn signal would be impaired by the illuminated presence of its counterpart in a steady-burning mode on the other side of the vehicle. The decision is initially to be made by the installer. If the decision appears clearly erroneous, NHTSA will inform the appropriate party who made the decision. We note that the possibility of impairment exists if an observer is momentarily confused as to the message that the vehicle driver is sending, and that such momentary confusion can exist when novel lighting devices are used on motor vehicles, or when familiar lamps are used in unfamiliar ways.

The legality of the "Front Brake Light System" in the aftermarket, when a vehicle has been sold and is in use, is determinable under the Safety Act itself. The Act prohibits a manufacturer, dealer, distributor, or motor vehicle repair business from "knowingly rendering inoperative, in whole or part, any device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle ... in compliance with a Federal motor vehicle safety standard ...." We tend to equate impairment with partial inoperability. Thus, if your invention, as original equipment, impairs the effectiveness of the front turn signal it would also, as aftermarket equipment, render the turn signal partially inoperative within the meaning of our interpretation of the Safety Act. However, the Safety Act does not prohibit a vehicle owner from personally-modifying his or her vehicle in any manner.

Optional lighting equipment such as your invention is also subject to the laws of the States in which the equipment will be used. We are unable to advise you on State laws, and recommend that you contact, for an opinion, the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, 4600 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Va. 22203. We have previously given an interpretation with respect to a front stop light indicator system, and I enclose for your information a copy of our letter of November 1, 1989, to John K. Moody.