DomFD3S

SEMA's response regarding rumor that NHTSA is going to outlaw aftermarket HIDs (Post #1)

with the discussions going around about the NHTSA possibly outlawing the sale of aftermarket HID kits, i dropped a line to SEMA to see what they knew. here is the response i received:

Thank you for contacting SEMA about the National Highway Traffic Administration's (NHTSA) current regulatory oversight of certain lighting equipment such as HIDs.

SEMA is aware of a rumor that NHTSA is going to shut down the market for all HID kits. This is incorrect. The fact is, if an HID kit does not comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108, it is illegal to market this equipment right now. However, NHTSA has not shut down sales of HIDs that comply with FMVSS No. 108.

In September 2001, NHTSA requested public comment on how to respond to complaints about headlamp glare. NHTSA now intends to propose new lighting rules beginning in late 2003. The rules will address consumer complaints regarding perceived glare from high intensity discharge headlights (HIDs), HID knock-offs, and higher-mounted and supplemental front-mounted auxiliary lamps (ex: fog lamps) and possibly headlamp-aiming requirements as well. We do not expect that NHTSA will ban legal HIDs in these rule making proceedings.

In early 2003, SEMA's Lighting Task Force met with NHTSA officials in Washington, D.C. charged with overseeing federal lighting regulations to discuss the group's goals and to gain insight to pending agency regulatory actions. We learned that NHTSA is still reviewing public comments on the general issue of glare and intends to address glare through several rulemakings. Here is the current anticipated schedule:


§ Publish proposed rule to regulate certain auxiliary lamps (ex: fog lamps) in late 2003
§ Publish proposed rule for headlamp mounting height in early 2004
§ Reach a decision on how to address HIDs and other advanced lighting sources in early 2004 (and probably issue a proposed rule)

§ Issue a proposed rule to regulate HID-knock-offs in early 2004
§ Reach a decision on how to address headlamp aiming issues in mid 2004

Please note, lighting equipment that is offered for sale must meet applicable federal safety standards, specifically FMVSS No. 108. Manufacturers self-certify compliance, which means it is the obligation of the manufacturer to have reasonable certainty that the product meets FMVSS No. 108 (ex: by having it tested by a certification lab). If NHTSA has reason to suspect that such equipment does not comply, it has authority to initiate an inquiry (requesting production data, test certification data, etc.). Such an investigation is limited to the particular product(s) of the company being investigated.

On a related topic, NHTSA provides frequently provides guidance on how it applies a federal safety standard to the industry in the form of "letters of interpretation." On July 17th, NHTSA went one-step further, requesting industry comments on two proposed letters of interpretation governing aftermarket lighting equipment. The first deals with aftermarket equipment that shifts the location of the rear reflex reflectors for Honda Civic tail lamps from the vehicle body lamp to the trunk lamp. NHTSA is proposing to reject this practice. The second is switching the type of color and wattage used in replacement lamps (ex: from a clear bulb to a red bulb). NHTSA is proposing to reject this practice. In both instances, it is NHTSA's position that a replacement item must conform to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108 in the same manner as the original equipment for which the vehicle manufacturer certified compliance. By implication, NHTSA's strict application of FMVSS No. 108 would be potentially applicable to other lighting practices as well. For more information, use this link and scroll down to NHTSA listing: <http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/fedreg/a030717c.html>.

I hope that this information is helpful.

Sincerely,
Steve McDonald
Senior Director, Government and Technical Affairs
Specialty Equipment Market Association
1317 F Street, NW, Suite 500
Washington, DC 20004
202/783-6007, ext. 31
202/783-6024 - fax
stevem@sema.org

r0t0r-rooter

That was very interesting...


Thnx Dom!

RonKMiller

Dom, thanks for the research. Says it all.

When I first saw that thread with the deadline I thought "Blue light special - get 'em now or never folks!"

Yeah, right. Another scammer. Thanks for exposing just another Internet fast buck artist.

DomFD3S

Actually, here is more info I found recently:

"If you look at what has been posted and this response you will see. EXACTLY. NO HID kit out there complys with FMVSS No. 108 Therefore, this letter that was sent to all these manufacturers basically said.. hey look, unless you give us notice otherwise by 8/15/03 with lab results that your HID kits are compliant, you are subject to a Federal fine. Whether or not a importer/manufacturer wants to comply is their business, but you would have to sell TONS of HID kits to pay for the $5,000/day fine that could be imposed on your company.

But the very nature of HID's technology makes them fail automaticall because there is no filament. I believe one of the requirements for No. 108 is that whatever you are replacing the halogen filament bulb with has to have a filament in the same location, but because HID has no filament, wallah, auto-fail. Understand now?

OEM is fine because they are DOT approved. They have gone through extensive research and design and meet the 108 requirements.

This regulation only effects AFTERMARKET HID kits."

"HID kits have never been, nor will they ever be compliant. Neither are ellipsoids or other E-code filament-based headlights, except in a couple states which have provisions that allow their use. People who don't believe this are either naive or in denial.

As I said in the other thread, NHTSA is actually taking steps to enforce the law and people are getting scared. There's no practical way for them to pull an RIAA and come after individual users, so it's only the sellers who have real reason to worry. The salad days may be over.

The other rules they are considering are long overdue. Hopefully, they will make intelligent decisions, but that has not been NHTSA's track record."

DomFD3S

Also, regarding the "For Off-Road Use Disclaimer" that a lot of vendors use to so-called protect themselves...

"As to why "For OffRoad use Only" Does not apply here:

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/...23112.ztv.html


and more for the skeptics. Here is also the FMVSS108 in full test:

http://fmvss108.tripod.com/fmvss108text.htm

you can read through that and tell me how aftermarket HID is compliant and you can comment on the below response:

[quote]
Quote: taken from Federal Register: July 17, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 137)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
...Further, the specific requirements of Standard No. 108 that apply to an item of replacement equipment are determined by reference to the original equipment being replaced and the vehicle for which it was designed.

As we have stated before, the replacement item must conform to the standard in the same manner as the original equipment for which the vehicle manufacturer certified compliance. See our February 4, 2002
letter to Mr. Daniel Watt. See also our March 13, 2003 letter to Mr. Galen Chen.

Thus, replacement lamps must conform to the standard in the same manner as the original equipment lamp on the vehicle as certified by the vehicle manufacturer. Each vehicle is certified to Standard No. 108 using a particular light source for a particular lamp. The lamp's ability to meet the standard's requirements with that light source is an inherent part of the certification.

Therefore, a lamp manufactured to replace the lamp must meet Standard No. 108's requirements using that light source, in order to be designed to conform to the standard. We would use the same light source in testing a replacement lamp for compliance with Standard No. 108 as was used by the vehicle manufacturer for the original lamp in certifying the vehicle's compliance with the standard.
Further, we note that the lighting systems and overall electrical systems of vehicles are designed with specific light sources in mind, both to ensure proper beam patterns, levels of brightness and electrical performance, and to avoid overloads and risk of fire. In the owner's manual, vehicle manufacturers advise owners what replacement bulbs to use. If a replacement lamp were designed to use a different light source from that

used in the original equipment lamp, it might not work properly, or at all, with the original equipment bulb or with the replacement bulbs specified by the vehicle manufacturer. Moreover, use of a different light source might also adversely affect the performance of the
vehicle's overall lighting and electrical systems, and possibly cause overloads and risk of fire."

DomFD3S

http://bimmer.roadfly.org/bmw/forum...=3641265&page=1

SERIES7

Wowsers!

ArchangelX

Good info!!!

bureau_c

Do you REALLY believe that a b.s. loophole like this will actually be enforced in such a way as to ban all HID aftermarket kits? Personally, I'll believe it when I see it.

jds

DomFD3S

Well, I would believe that it would be easily enforceable from the manufacturer/importer level.

All that is needed is a peek in the record books to see a list of vendors that carry the product. From there, take a look at the shipment inventories over the past couple of months,...

All the NHTSA has to do, is post a fine to the manufacturer for "x" number of kits shipped. Then, leave the responsibility of proving that the kits are already sold, to the manufacturer and their vendors. Let the manufacturer and the vendor sort out the mess. That simple. There is no way the NHTSA will individually fine each individual vendor. They will attack the main manufacturer. (That is why a letter from the NHTSA was sent to Catz. Catz then, forwarded the letter to ALL of their vendors).

bureau_c

Well, I guess my point was that since this is clearly the NHTSA picking at bs that doesn't matter, and because the aftermarket automotive industry will have say in this, I fully expect the regulation to be reworded or some arrangement will be made to accomodate aftermarket HID kits. IMO this is a play by the NHTSA to get these aftermarket companies to pony up some cash for the government coffers. They're basically the mob, making the little guys pay for "protection." It'll happen...the technology is just too prevalent and in-demand for the aftermarket to simply say "Fine" and stop selling them.

Of course I could be wrong...only time will tell. I do know one thing....it sure is comforting to see my hard-earned tax dollars protecting us in this manner! NOT.

jds

DomFD3S

I think it does matter, when there are generic HID kits which are assembled and sold for rather cheap. To the point, where these kits are not engineered properly. And to the point, where a lot of these kits are not focused/aimed properly, causing a lot of excessive glare in all directions...Things such as proper beam cutoff are practically non existant from most current aftermarket HID kits.

The NHTSA is basically reacting to complaints that have gone on for quite some time.

And if you think it is a ploy for the NHTSA to pony up cash,....I would think not. The fact of the matter is that a lot of these kits are not up to code. True, the government may have not completely created exact laws regarding the use of HIDs (for the aftermarket), BUT this is what the NHTSA and DOT do. I'm sure you'll see revised rules regarding the HID issue not too long from now...

They recognize that some kits are in violation and are striving to create rules which would eliminate the "inferior" kits from the "good" ones.

DomFD3S

Another update from SEMA. This outlines the anticipated timeline for action on lights in general (and HID in particular):

"NHTSA is still reviewing public comments on the general issue of glare and intends to address glare through several rulemakings. Here is the current anticipated schedule:

- Publish proposed rule to regulate certain auxiliary lamps (ex: fog lamps) in late 2003

- Publish proposed rule for headlamp mounting height in early 2004

- Reach a decision on how to address HIDs and other advanced lighting sources in early 2004 (and probably issue a proposed rule)

- Issue a proposed rule to regulate HID-knock-offs in early 2004

- Reach a decision on how to address headlamp aiming issues in mid 2004 "

also, he has no knowledge of any impending move by NHTSA to suddenly start strictly enforcing any regulations regarding aftermarket HIDs.

BicuspiD

Thanks for clearing that up a little Dom. Now it makes more sense than what I heard - and I still havent been provided with a copy of the letter - so it may have been a total hype up, or truly scared my distributor.

In an case, they can have my HIDs when they pry them from my cold, dead housings...

bureau_c

If you're right, and they're not just making a power play, then they will never attempt to enforce anything so stupid as the "Sorry, no HIDs are compliant with the rules because they don't have a filament like your stock crap lights" bullshit. I agree, many of the aftermarket kits are probably non-compliant in much more significant or meaningful ways. It should be just as easy to enforce rules that do matter, so if they're really trying to solve a problem, HID kits will NOT be affected simply due to the nature of their technology. I guess we'll see what happens!

jds