Interpretation ID: nht93-8.10
DATE: November 15, 1993
FROM: Richard L. Plath --Selecto-Flash, Inc.
TO: Taylor Vinson -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA
TITLE: None
ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 11/30/93 from John Womack to Richard L. Plath (A41; Std. 108)
TEXT:
I know that Jim Peepas from our company has contacted you concerning the conspicuity program. I am responsible for sales for Selecto Flash and thought I would share with you some of the concerns of the various manufacturer's.
In our discussions with the trailer and container manufacturer's who supply this equipment, there seems to be differences of opinion as to the actual requirements. For this reason I will outline the procedure as we understand it and will further ask for confirmation on several issues set forth within this letter.
1) A chassis for purposes of the conspicuity requirement shall be considered to be a trailer.
2) That the total length of the chassis shall be used in computing the 50 per cent coverage of high intensity reflective for each individual side.
3) In the case of a forty eight foot chassis, the law will thus require a minimum of 24 feet of the approved reflective sheeting to be applied to each side. Further, there shall not be more than 18 inches of either red or silver reflective in a continuous strip and that there shall not be an allowed void of more than 48 inches between modules.
4) It shall be recognized that a chassis may travel both with and without a container. In the case of a gooseneck chassis, the gooseneck portion is not visible when the chassis is loaded with a container. The gooseneck portion is generally about 8 feet in length. When the chassis is not loaded with a container, the application of 24 feet per side of a 48 foot chassis of evenly spaced reflective modules would comply with the law as we understand it. It would identify the extreme front and rear portions of the chassis.
The confusion is the treatment of the same gooseneck chassis that is loaded with a container. It is our understanding that the requirements now are for the entire 24 feet (50 per cent of length) to be applied behind the gooseneck. In general this would mean that the rear 40 foot portion of the chassis would contain the 24 feet of reflective modules. Further, we understand that the 50 per cent requirement would be satisfied and that additional modules would not have to be applied to the gooseneck.
If our interpretation is correct, then the gooseneck chassis illustrated above would be in violation if traveling without benefit of a container.
The eight foot gooseneck would be dangerously unmarked creating a hazard and would violate the requirement stating that a void of no more than four
feet is allowable. It is our feeling that since the chassis travels both loaded and unloaded, if the reflective modules were applied evenly spaced along the total length, that the spirit of the law would be realized. Is there a benefit in applying the additional 4 feet of reflective within the rear 40 foot portion of the chassis? If a chassis is considered to be a trailer for purposes of the conspicuity law, then the evenly spaced treatment would seem to be more consistent.
We would appreciate a confirmation from your office indicating the legal application of the law as it pertains to gooseneck chassis.
1) Will we need to apply 24 feet of stripping on a forty eight foot chassis behind the gooseneck plus an additional 4 feet on the gooseneck?
2) Since a chassis is considered to be treated as a trailer, shouldn't we apply the 24 feet evenly spaced from the extreme rear and front portions of the chassis?
3) Is a tire considered a legal obstruction? If so, can we deduct the distance behind the tire from the 50 per cent coverage?
4) We anticipate that the slide mechanism on an extendable chassis will scrape the reflective film from off the chassis. Is the operator then subject to penalties? How will the operator be able to avoid these penalties since they have no control over this process?
We hope that you can respond to these questions well in advance of the December 1st deadline. The application process has already begun and the manufacturer's need to finalize the process.