NHTSA Interpretation File Search
Overview
NHTSA's Chief Counsel interprets the statutes that the agency administers and the standards and regulations that it issues. Members of the public may submit requests for interpretation, and the Chief Counsel will respond with a letter of interpretation. These interpretation letters look at the particular facts presented in the question and explain the agency’s opinion on how the law applies given those facts. These letters of interpretation are guidance documents. They do not have the force and effect of law and are not meant to bind the public in any way. They are intended only to provide information to the public regarding existing requirements under the law or agency policies.
Understanding NHTSA’s Online Interpretation Files
NHTSA makes its letters of interpretation available to the public on this webpage.
An interpretation letter represents the opinion of the Chief Counsel based on the facts of individual cases at the time the letter was written. While these letters may be helpful in determining how the agency might answer a question that another person has if that question is similar to a previously considered question, do not assume that a prior interpretation will necessarily apply to your situation.
- Your facts may be sufficiently different from those presented in prior interpretations, such that the agency's answer to you might be different from the answer in the prior interpretation letter;
- Your situation may be completely new to the agency and not addressed in an existing interpretation letter;
- The agency's safety standards or regulations may have changed since the prior interpretation letter was written so that the agency's prior interpretation no longer applies; or
- Some combination of the above, or other, factors.
Searching NHTSA’s Online Interpretation Files
Before beginning a search, it’s important to understand how this online search works. Below we provide some examples of searches you can run. In some cases, the search results may include words similar to what you searched because it utilizes a fuzzy search algorithm.
Single word search
Example: car
Result: Any document containing that word.
Multiple word search
Example: car seat requirements
Result: Any document containing any of these words.
Connector word search
Example: car AND seat AND requirements
Result: Any document containing all of these words.
Note: Search operators such as AND or OR must be in all capital letters.
Phrase in double quotes
Example: "headlamp function"
Result: Any document with that phrase.
Conjunctive search
Example: functionally AND minima
Result: Any document with both of those words.
Wildcard
Example: headl*
Result: Any document with a word beginning with those letters (e.g., headlamp, headlight, headlamps).
Example: no*compl*
Result: Any document beginning with the letters “no” followed by the letters “compl” (e.g., noncompliance, non-complying).
Not
Example: headlamp NOT crash
Result: Any document containing the word “headlamp” and not the word “crash.”
Complex searches
You can combine search operators to write more targeted searches.
Note: The database does not currently support phrase searches with wildcards (e.g., “make* inoperative”).
Example: Headl* AND (supplement* OR auxiliary OR impair*)
Result: Any document containing words that are variants of “headlamp” (headlamp, headlights, etc.) and also containing a variant of “supplement” (supplement, supplemental, etc.) or “impair” (impair, impairment, etc.) or the word “auxiliary.”
Search Tool
NHTSA's Interpretation Files Search
| Interpretations | Date |
|---|---|
ID: aiam5424OpenMs. Denise Davis 3177 Lotheridge Rd. Gainesville, GA 30501; Ms. Denise Davis 3177 Lotheridge Rd. Gainesville GA 30501; Dear Ms. Davis: This responds to your letter asking for help in matter involving window tinting on your car. I apologize for the delay in responding. You explain in your letter that you asked a window tinting store for a sticker showing that the tint on your windows met Georgia law. The store informed you that it cannot issue you a sticker because your windows only allow 20 percent sunlight through, and the new law requires 35 percent. To get a sticker, you would have to remove the tint, which you explain will be costly. You also state that your windows were tinted seven years ago when you purchased your car, and at the time you had your windows tinted, you were 'not breaking any law.' I regret that we cannot help you pay to have the tint removed. The primary purpose of this agency is to regulate the manufacture and sale of new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle equipment. We have no authority to provide funds to citizens to help them correct problems with their vehicles or equipment. Please bear in mind that the '35 percent' law was adopted by Georgia to regulate the operation of vehicles. Thus, we suggest that you contact the Georgia Department of Motor Vehicles for information about this matter. We appreciate your efforts to reduce the tint on your vehicle and are sorry that we are unable to assist you. If you have any other questions, please contact Mr. Marvin Shaw of my staff at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, John Womack Acting Chief Counsel; |
|
ID: aiam0276OpenMr. Howard M. Rensin, Lesser & Leaser, Executive Building, 1030 - 15th Street, N. W., Washington, DC 20005; Mr. Howard M. Rensin Lesser & Leaser Executive Building 1030 - 15th Street N. W. Washington DC 20005; Dear Mr. Rensin: This is in reply to your letter of March 26, 1971, concernin regulations pertaining to automobile windshields.; Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 205, *Glazing Materials Passenger Cars, Multipurpose Passenger Vehicles, Motorcycles, Trucks and Buses*, a copy of which is enclosed, specifies the requirements of automotive glazing materials manufactured on or after January 1, 1968. ANSI Standard Z26.1- 1966, incorporated by reference, can be obtained from the American National Standards Institute, 1430 Broadway, New York, New York 10018, at a cost of $4.00.; The marking of the windshield that you depict in your letter of Marc 26 is not sufficient to identify its manufacturer. However, based on the '63' in the marking and the fact that the windshield shape fit the 1969 Plymouth, it can be hypothesized that the material in question is a laminated windshield of the improved design that has been used in 1966 and later models of U.S. automobiles.; There is not a requirement that windshields of this type completel shatter leaving no jagged fragments upon collision.; Sincerely, Clue D. Ferguson, Director, Office of Crashworthiness, Moto Vehicle Programs; |
|
ID: aiam5074OpenWilbur D. Owens, III, Esquire Bouhan, Williams & Levy Attorneys and Counselors at Law The Armstrong House Bull & Gaston Streets Post Office Box 2139 Savannah, GA 31498-1001; Wilbur D. Owens III Esquire Bouhan Williams & Levy Attorneys and Counselors at Law The Armstrong House Bull & Gaston Streets Post Office Box 2139 Savannah GA 31498-1001; "Dear Mr. Owens: This responds to your letter dated September 15, 1992 to the Office of Vehicle Safety Standards, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), regarding Phelps v. General Motors, et al. Reference is also made to your telephone conversation with Mr. Walter Myers of my staff on October 15, 1992. You stated in your letter that your firm represents defendant Grumman Olson in the Phelps lawsuit which arose out of injuries suffered by the plaintiff while operating a 14-foot Grumman Kurbmaster manufactured in 1977. After explaining the theory of the plaintiff's cause of action, you stated that you have looked at current regulations, your main areas of interest being 49 CFR 571.201 through 571.220, and requested our assistance in obtaining those regulations from 1977. You pointed out that in those regulations there are a number of exceptions for walk-in vans, and you asked whether the 14-foot Kurbmaster would be considered a truck or a walk-in van, or both. Please find enclosed, as requested, copies of 49 CFR 571.201 through 220 that were in effect as of October 1, 1977, duly certified as official Federal government documents to make them admissible in Federal court. As Mr. Myers explained to you by telephone, the cost for these copies, as certified, is $30.72. Pursuant to the provisions of 49 CFR Part 7, this charge represents one hour of search time at a cost of $22.22 per hour, plus copying fee of ten cents per page x 85 pages. Please remit a check in that amount, payable to Treasurer of the United States, to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Office of Financial Management, Room 6134, 400 Seventh Street S.W., Washington, D. C. 20590. To ensure that your account will be properly credited, please annotate your check with 'NCC-20.' Before responding to your question about the classification of the 14-foot Kurbmaster, a bit of background information is in order. The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, 15 U.S.C. 1381, et seq. (Safety Act), authorizes the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) to issue Federal motor vehicle safety standards for new motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment. All motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment manufactured or imported for sale in the United States must comply with all applicable safety standards. In accordance with 49 CFR Part 567, Certification, manufacturers of motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment must certify that their products comply with all such standards. Motor vehicles are, and were as of 1977, classified according to six basic types: passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, buses, trailers, and motorcycles. Each type is defined in 49 CFR 571.3. Each safety standard applies to specified types of motor vehicles and/or motor vehicle equipment. Thus, manufacturers must first classify their vehicles in order to ascertain which safety standards apply and then certify that those vehicles meet all applicable standards. For that reason, NHTSA neither classifies vehicles nor does it approve or endorse any vehicle classification before the manufacturer has done so. NHTSA may, however, reexamine the manufacturer's classification during the course of enforcement proceedings. I note that, in the case of the 1977 14-foot Kurbmaster, there have been no enforcement proceedings. The classification given the 1977 14-foot Kurbmaster by the manufacturer will be found on the certification label required by 49 CFR 567.4(a), and NHTSA has not reviewed or taken issue with that classification. Assuming it was classified as a truck, a truck was in 1977, and still is, defined in 49 CFR 571.3 as 'a motor vehicle with motive power, except a trailer, designed primarily for the transportation of property or special purpose equipment.' As you noted in your letter, certain of the Federal motor vehicle safety standards exclude 'walk-in vans' from their coverage. See, e.g., paragraph S2, Standard 203, Impact Protection for the Driver from the Steering Control System (49 CFR 571.203). The term 'walk-in van' is commonly used and understood within the motor vehicle industry, and for many years the Federal motor vehicle safety standards did not include any definition of the term. I note, however, that in a recent rulemaking which extended Standard No. 214, Side Impact Protection, to light trucks, buses and multipurpose passenger vehicles, the agency added a definition of 'walk-in van' to that standard. Effective September 1, 1993, Standard No. 214 defines 'walk-in van' as 'a van in which a person can enter the occupant compartment in an upright position.' See S2.1. I hope this information will be helpful to you. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact Mr. Myers at this address or at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel Enclosure"; |
|
ID: aiam0299OpenMr. Paul A. Tatarski, Manager Engineering Services, Truck Body and Equipment Association, Inc., 5530 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 1220, Washington, DC, 20015; Mr. Paul A. Tatarski Manager Engineering Services Truck Body and Equipment Association Inc. 5530 Wisconsin Avenue Suite 1220 Washington DC 20015; Dear Mr. Tatarski: This is in reply to your letter of February 23, 1971, to Mr. Julian E Leysath of this office requesting an interpretation on the mounting location of rear clearance lamps on slant-sided beverage truck bodies.; Rear clearance lamps mounted on the outermost top corners of the body as indicated on the TBEA diagram, adequately meet the location requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108.; Sincerely, Roger H. Compton, Director, Office of Operating Systems Motor Vehicle Programs; |
|
ID: aiam5561OpenMr. Andrew Grubb Steve's Moped & Bicycle World 40 Park Avenue Dumont, NJ 07628; Mr. Andrew Grubb Steve's Moped & Bicycle World 40 Park Avenue Dumont NJ 07628; Dear Mr. Grubb: This responds to your letter asking whether thi agency's requirements apply to several products you are selling. One is called the 'California Go-Ped,' a small push scooter with non-pneumatic tires, a 2-cycle motor mounted above the rear wheel, and a top speed of 20 mph. Another is called the 'Tsi Power Scooter,' and resembles a scooter in frame style, but has larger pneumatic tires and can be outfitted with a seat. The Power Scooter has a top speed of 15 mph. You cited a previous interpretation stating that a scooter (similar to the Go-Ped) is not a motor vehicle, and thus not subject to our requirements, so I assume that you are asking whether the products you sell are motor vehicles. You also asked about motorized 'skateboards' and motors for mounting on a conventional bicycle. The short answer to your question is that the Go-Ped is not a motor vehicle but the Power Scooter may be, depending on whether it is sold with a seat. Motorized 'skateboards' are not motor vehicles, but motors for mounting on bicycles are 'motor vehicle equipment.' You indicated that you have a copy of a letter dated April 1, 1991, in which we discussed whether a small push scooter called a 'Walk Machine' is considered a motor vehicle for purposes of our standards. In that letter, we discussed the general principles for determining whether a product is a motor vehicle. As discussed in that letter, vehicles that are equipped with tracks or are otherwise incapable of highway travel are plainly not motor vehicles. Further, vehicles designed and sold solely for off-road use (e.g., airport runway vehicles and underground mining devices) are not considered motor vehicles, even though they may be operationally capable of highway travel. On the other hand, vehicles that are or can be operated off-road, but are also used on the public highways on a necessary and recurring basis are motor vehicles. For instance, utility vehicles like the Jeep are plainly motor vehicles, even though they are equipped with special features to permit off- road operation. If a vehicle will spend a substantial amount of time on-road, even though its greatest use will be off-road, NHTSA has found the vehicle to be a 'motor vehicle.' Further, if a vehicle is readily usable on the public roads and is in fact used on the public roads by a substantial number of owners, NHTSA has found the vehicle to be a motor vehicle. This finding was made with respect to dune buggies and regardless of the manufacturer's stated intent regarding the terrain on which the vehicles were to be operated. In discussing whether the Walk Machine is considered a motor vehicle, we noted that NHTSA has stated in previous interpretations that vehicles that regularly use the public roads will not be considered 'motor vehicles' if such vehicles have a maximum attainable speed of 20 miles per hour (mph) or less and an abnormal configuration which readily distinguishes them from other vehicles. We concluded that the Walk Machine is not a motor vehicle since it has a top speed of 16 mph and a configuration that readily distinguishes it from motorcycles and other two-wheeled vehicles. I will now apply these principles to the products you ask about in your letter. First, the California Go-Ped has an almost identical configuration to that of the Walk Machine and a maximum speed of 20 mph. Therefore, we do not consider it to be a motor vehicle, for the same reasons that apply to the Walk Machine. Second, the Power Scooter has a maximum speed of 15 mph and, when sold without a seat, has a configuration similar to that of the Walk Machine. In that configuration, we do not consider it to be a motor vehicle. When equipped with a seat, however, the Power Scooter is considered to be a motor vehicle. Although the advertising literature states that the Power Scooter is 'not for in-street use,' NHTSA believes that it is indistinguishable from a moped, which is an on-street vehicle that we have long interpreted as a motor vehicle. Although most mopeds have chain drives, pedal starters, and lower-mounted engines, we do not think that these distinctions are important. The seated rider on the power scooter appears to other traffic to be riding a moped. We also note that the low ground clearance of the central platform appears poorly suited to off-road use. Further, we consider the Power Scooter, when equipped with a seat, to be a type of motorcycle. A motorcycle is defined as 'a motor vehicle with motive power having a seat or saddle for the use of the rider and designed to travel on not more than three wheels in contact with the ground' (Title 49, section 571.3 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)). Motorcycles are subject to our regulations in 49 CFR Part 571, including Standards for lights (No. 108), rear view mirrors (111), brakes (122), and controls and displays (123). The materials you sent do not disclose the horsepower of the 21 cc engine, but we assume that it is less than 5 brake horsepower. If that assumption is correct, the vehicle would be a 'motor-driven cycle,' a type of motorcycle that is subject to less stringent requirements under our regulations. However, the Power Scooter does not appear to meet even the less stringent requirements. For example, the Scooter lacks lights, dual braking systems, and rear view mirrors. The motors for mounting on a conventional bicycle are designed specifically to convert the bicycle into a motorcycle. Therefore, they are motor vehicle equipment. Despite the notation 'not for in-street use' in the advertising brochure, bicycles are predominantly used in the streets. Merely adding a motor does not change this fact. The motorized 'skateboard' is not a motor vehicle because it was not manufactured for in-street use and is also not used on the public roads. You stated in your letter that you want to clarify the application of our motor vehicle requirements to your products so that you can advise your customers exactly where they can and cannot operate them. We strongly encourage you to read the enclosed information sheet on your responsibilities under Federal law as a retailer of motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment. In addition, while the location of use of particular vehicles can affect our determination of whether a vehicle is a motor vehicle, the actual regulation of the operation of vehicles and motor vehicles is a matter of State law. For information on State laws, you may contact the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators at: 4200 Wilson Blvd., Suite 600, Arlington, VA 22203. I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions about NHTSA's safety standards, please feel free to contact Mr. Paul Atelsek at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, John Womack Acting Chief Counsel Enclosure; |
|
ID: aiam1871OpenMr. Kazuhiko Aoki,2-3 Nihonbashi Koami-cho,1-chome,Chuo-ku, Toykyo, Japan 103; Mr. Kazuhiko Aoki 2-3 Nihonbashi Koami-cho 1-chome Chuo-ku Toykyo Japan 103; Dear Mr. Aoki:#This responds to your January 30, 1975, question whethe the test procedure of S7.7.1 in Standard No. 105-75, *Hydraulic brake systems*, refers to the parking brake in the next to the last sentence which states that it 'may be necessary to reapply *it* if the vehicle move slightly' (emphasis added).#The word 'it' refers to the service brake system, and not the parking brake system. This sentence permit application of the service brake system slack due to rotation of the brake shoes and drum prior to bottoming against the anchor pin.#Sincerely,James C. Schultz,Chief Counsel; |
|
ID: aiam0763OpenMr. J. Stephen Shuckra, Treasurer, Brighton Truck & Equipment Sales, Inc., 2654 West Henrietta Road, Rochester, NY 14623; Mr. J. Stephen Shuckra Treasurer Brighton Truck & Equipment Sales Inc. 2654 West Henrietta Road Rochester NY 14623; Dear Mr. Shuckra: This is in reply to your letter of June 20, 1972, asking severa questions regarding truck certification by final-stage manufacturers. We have repeated your questions below, responding to each.; >>>1. When is the progressive manufacturing report for each vehicl required to be filed?; You appear to be referring to 'incomplete vehicle documents,' which ar furnished by incomplete and intermediate manufacturers to final-stage manufacturers. These documents are not required to be filed, but are to be used by the final-stage manufacturer as a basis for his certification of the completed vehicle. We suggest you save these documents, however, should it be necessary for you to show that you exercised due care in completing and certifying a vehicle.; 2. If we sell a tractor cab and chassis upon which the customer is t install a fifth wheel, who is the final manufacturer? How? And when?; In this case, the customer is the final-stage manufacturer and bear the responsibility for certification (the regulations provide otherwise in the exceptional case where the incomplete vehicle manufacturer assumes this responsibility). If you do no more than sell the incomplete vehicle as it is delivered to you, you may meet your responsibilities under the regulations by forwarding to the customer the incomplete vehicle documents which you receive. Certification by the customer should be accomplished by affixing the required label containing the information specified in section 567.4 of the regulations, at the time of the installation of the fifth wheel.; 3. If we sell a cab and chassis for a van body upon which the custome plans to transfer a used body, who must make final certification, how and when?; The answer to this question is essentially the same as that to questio 2.; 4. Are the customers required to return vehicles to us afte installation of fifth wheel or body for us to issue the final sticker?; No. A customer who completes the vehicle is responsible for affixin the required label.<<<; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam5131OpenMr. Joseph B. Gordon Manager of Engineering EIS Brake Parts P.O. Box 1315 Berlin, CT 06037; Mr. Joseph B. Gordon Manager of Engineering EIS Brake Parts P.O. Box 1315 Berlin CT 06037; "Dear Mr. Gordon: This is in reply to your letter of January 6, 1993 to Rich Van Iderstine of this agency. It has been forwarded to this office because you have, in essence, requested a legal opinion as to the acceptability of a product that your company is considering manufacturing. As you describe it, the product provides an intermittently blinking stop lamp function when the brake pedal is applied. You are concerned that such a device 'might be confused with hazard warning lights', and that there may be 'other problems/restrictions connected with its manufacture.' You have asked for our advice. Motor vehicle lighting in the United States is subject to both Federal and State requirements. The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (Safety Act) and Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment are the Federal requirements to which I refer. Standard No. 108, which was issued under the authority of the Safety Act, prescribes requirements for stop lamps and other lamps that must be followed by the manufacturer of the vehicle, and met at the time the vehicle is sold by the dealer to its first owner. One of these requirements, set forth in S5.5.10(d) of the standard, requires stop lamps to be steady-burning. Because your product would create a flashing light, it could not be used as original equipment on a motor vehicle, whether installed by the manufacturer, or by the distributor or dealer after the vehicle has left the factory and before its first sale to a purchaser for purposes other than resale. The Safety Act includes a provision which governs modifications to vehicles after their initial sale. This Act does not prohibit a vehicle owner from making modifications that affect compliance with Standard No. 108 (or any other Federal motor vehicle safety standard). Thus, a vehicle owner may install your product without violation of Federal requirements. However, we interpret the Safety Act as prohibiting the installation of such a product by a manufacturer, dealer, distributor, or motor vehicle repair business. Under section 108(a)(2)(A) of the Act (15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(2)(A)), these persons shall not 'render inoperative, in whole or in part, any device or element of design installed in accordance with a Federal motor vehicle safety standard.' In our view, this forbids the installation of equipment that would take a vehicle out of compliance with a Federal motor vehicle safety standard. However, the Act does not forbid the sale of componentry such as your product which creates a noncompliance once it is installed. In summary, under Federal law, any person may sell your device, but only a person other than a manufacturer, dealer, distributor, or motor vehicle repair business may install it. We are unable to advise you as to whether the laws of any State prohibit the use of flashing stop lamps, and recommend that you consult the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators for an opinion. Its address is 4600 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Va. 22203. Sincerely, John Womack Acting Chief Counsel"; |
|
ID: aiam0333OpenMr. G. M. Hespeler, Manager, Government Liaison, Mercedes- Benz of North America, Inc., 158 Linwood Plaza, P.O. Box 318, Fort Lee, NJ, 07024; Mr. G. M. Hespeler Manager Government Liaison Mercedes- Benz of North America Inc. 158 Linwood Plaza P.O. Box 318 Fort Lee NJ 07024; Dear Mr. Hespeler: This is in reply to your letter of May 3 asking for confirmation o your understanding with Mr. Vinson of my staff that the 'optical horn' lighting feature is not prohibited by paragraph S4.6(b) of Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108.; Paragraph S4.6(b) which states in part that 'means may be provided t flash headlamps . . . for signaling purposes' allows the use of an automatic device for headlamp flashing, and it follows that a non-automatic system, such as the 'optical horn' incorporates, is also permissible.; Sincerely, Lawrence R. Schneider, Acting Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam1488OpenPeter J. Pitchess, Sheriff, County of Los Angeles, Office of the Sheriff, Hall of Justice, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Peter J. Pitchess Sheriff County of Los Angeles Office of the Sheriff Hall of Justice Los Angeles CA 90012; Dear Mr. Pitchess: This is in response to your letter of May 2, 1974, requesting th results of the public hearing concerning safety standards for police vehicles held on December 10, 1973, and your petition in this regard.; As you know, that hearing was held in conjunction with an advanc notice of proposed rulemaking issued by this agency. We are in the final stage of analysis of both the public hearing and the comments in response to the advance notice, and will issue our conclusions in the near future. In the interim, all Federal Safety Standards continue to be applicable to police vehicles although you remain free to alter your vehicles after they are delivered to you.; Sincerely, Lawrence R. Schneider, Chief Counsel |
|
Request an Interpretation
You may email your request to Interpretations.NHTSA@dot.gov or send your request in hard copy to:
The Chief Counsel
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, W41-326
U.S. Department of Transportation
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE
Washington, DC 20590
If you want to talk to someone at NHTSA about what a request for interpretation should include, call the Office of the Chief Counsel at 202-366-2992.
Please note that NHTSA’s response will be made available in this online database, and that the incoming interpretation request may also be made publicly available.