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: aiam3559OpenMr. Roy Knoedler, Cosco, 2525 State Street, Columbus, IN 47201; Mr. Roy Knoedler Cosco 2525 State Street Columbus IN 47201; Dear Mr. Knoedler: This is to follow-up on your phone conversation with Mr. Stephen Oesc of my staff concerning the application of section 5.4.3.3 and 5.4.3.4 of Standard 213, *Child Restraint Systems* to harnesses. If a harness is used as a portion of child restraint system, such as a booster seat, it must comply with the requirements of S5.4.3.3. If a harness is to be used alone, without any other structure, as a child restraint system, it must comply with section 5.4.3.4 of the standard.; If you have any further questions, please let me know. Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam4766OpenMr. Ron Boucher Energy Savings Systems P.O. Box 294 Centralia, WA 98531; Mr. Ron Boucher Energy Savings Systems P.O. Box 294 Centralia WA 98531; "Dear Mr. Boucher: Thank you for your letter asking whether th products you plan to market would comply with the laws and regulations administered by this agency. As explained below, the laws and regulations administered by this agency would not be applicable to these products. Enclosed with your letter were two brochures describing the 'Signal Flash' personal identification lights. The brochure included pictures and descriptions of several different types of battery-powered lights that are small enough to be carried on one's person, and include straps that make them suitable to be carried on one's arm, around one's wrist, or inserted into a life preserver. The brochures describe these 'Signal Flash' lights as suitable for use in 'diving, mountaineering, jogging, sailing, windsurfing, cycling, fishing, car breakdown, life jacket, etc.' The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (the Safety Act) authorizes this agency to regulate 'motor vehicles' and items of 'motor vehicle equipment.' Section 102(4) of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1391(4)) defines 'motor vehicle equipment', in part, as: any system, part, or component of a motor vehicle as originally manufactured or any similar part or component manufactured or sold for replacement or improvement of such system, part, or component or as any accessory, or addition to the motor vehicle... Your 'Signal Flash' lights are plainly not a 'system, part, or component of a motor vehicle as originally manufactured,' nor are they a 'similar part or component manufactured or sold for replacement or improvement' of an original equipment part of a motor vehicle. The issue is whether these lights would be considered an 'accessory' within the meaning of the Safety Act. In determining whether an item of equipment is considered an 'accessory,' the agency applies the relevant statutory language and the two following criteria: first, whether a substantial portion of the expected uses of the item are related to the operation or maintenance of motor vehicles, and second, whether the item is intended to be used principally by ordinary users of motor vehicles. In evaluating the first criterion, the product literature enclosed with your letter emphasizes the versatility of these personal identification lights. While these lights occasionally may be used in connection with a motor vehicle breakdown or repair, most of the suggested uses involve sports activities that have nothing to do with a motor vehicle. Thus, a substantial portion of the expected uses of the light would not appear related to the operation or maintenance of a vehicle, so these 'Signal Flash' lights would not be considered items of 'motor vehicle equipment.' This conclusion means that the 'Signal Flash' lights are not subject to any of the laws and regulations administered by this agency. You may wish to consult the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission to learn if they have any requirements applicable to these lights. That agency protects the public against unreasonable risks of injury from consumer products. You may write to the Consumer Product Safety Commission at 5401 Westbard Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20207, or contact them by telephone at (301) 492-6580. I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions or need any additional information, please feel free to contact Dorothy Nakama of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel /"; |
|
ID: aiam2718OpenMs. Marguerite Orth, Director of Finance, Hendrickson Mfg. Co., 8001 West Forty-Seventh Street, Lyons, IL 60534; Ms. Marguerite Orth Director of Finance Hendrickson Mfg. Co. 8001 West Forty-Seventh Street Lyons IL 60534; Dear Ms. Orth: This responds to your October 25, 1977, letter and subsequen conversation with Roger Tilton of my staff asking several hypothetical questions concerning the date of manufacture of vehicles and the applicability of Federal motor vehicle safety standards to those vehicles.; The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) i interested in the compliance of motor vehicles with safety standards. The agency does not regulate the model year designation of vehicles. You should note that sale as 'new' of a vehicle, which for our purposes is 'used,' is regulated in many instances by the States. Further, you should consult the Federal Trade Commission with respect to the legality of calling such vehicles new, since that agency is concerned with any consumer fraud that might arise when a vehicle with used parts is sold as a new vehicle.; In your conversation with Mr. Tilton, you stated that you might alte the dates on the certificates of title for the chassis mentioned in your first question. This alteration would change, for example, a 1975 manufacturing date on the chassis title documents to a 1977 manufacturing date. I strongly urge you to obtain legal advice on the practice of altering the dates on these documents.; With respect to the application of Federal safety standards to you vehicles, you ask whether several vehicle chassis manufactured in previous years can be used in the manufacture of new 1977 motor vehicles. For purposes of the applicability of Federal safety standards, a manufacturer is permitted to select as the date of manufacture of a vehicle, the date of manufacture of the chassis, the date of manufacture of the completed vehicle, or any date between those two dates (Volume 49, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 568, *Vehicles Manufactured in Two or More Stages*). Therefore, for a chassis manufactured in previous years and subsequently included in a completed vehicle, the manufacturer has some freedom in the selection of the manufacturing date of the final vehicle. The date of manufacture of the vehicle, as chosen by the manufacturer, would be the date upon which the applicability of all safety standards would be judged, including those applicable to the chassis.; You should note that your Crane Chassis and Yard Tractor may not hav to comply with our requirements regardless of the date of their manufacture. The NHTSA's regulations apply only to motor vehicles which are primarily for use on the public streets, roads, and highways. Accordingly, vehicles designed for off-road use do not have to comply with the agency's requirements. The determination of whether a vehicle is an off-road vehicle depends upon its use. I have enclosed an interpretive letter that describes the criteria for determining which vehicles are motor vehicles under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (Pub. L. 89- 563).; In your final two questions you ask whether our regulations applicabl to glider kits and to rebuilt tractors allow you to consider those vehicles 'used' for the purposes of compliance with Federal safety standards, but 'new' for purposes of their sale. Our glider kit regulation, Part 571.7(3), and our regulations concerning combining new and used components in trailers, Part 571.7(f), describe the limited circumstances under which reconstructed vehicles are not required to meet new motor vehicle safety standards. If the vehicles you reference meet the guidelines established in Parts 571.7(e) and (f) they will not be considered new motor vehicles for purposes of application of Federal motor vehicle safety standards.; I trust that this fully responds to your questions. Sincerely, Joseph J. Levin, Jr., Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam0725OpenMr. B. Fechner: (sic), FMC Corporation, Recreational Vehicles Division, 333 Brokaw Road, Box 664, Santa Clara, CA 95052; Mr. B. Fechner: (sic) FMC Corporation Recreational Vehicles Division 333 Brokaw Road Box 664 Santa Clara CA 95052; Dear Mr. Fechner:#This is in reply to your letter of May 25 inquirin about compliance of your planned motorhome with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards Nos. 101 and 104.#Standard No. 101 requires certain controls to be illuminated. We interpret this to mean sufficiently illuminated that the control identification, if verbal, can be read, or if pictorial, can be understood. Therefore, illumination from any course is satisfactory as long as the basic requirement of comprehension is met.#Standard No. 104 does not describe the type of windshield wiping system that must be used to meet its requirements. It is the manufacturer's responsibility to insure, whatever system is used and whatever configuration of windshield is employed, that the wiped and washed area requirements are met.#Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel; |
|
ID: aiam1837OpenMr. Danny J. Lanzdorf, Supervising Engineer, Oshkosh Truck Corporation, P.O. Box 2566, Oshkosh, WI 54901; Mr. Danny J. Lanzdorf Supervising Engineer Oshkosh Truck Corporation P.O. Box 2566 Oshkosh WI 54901; Dear Mr. Lanzdorf: This is in reply to your letter of February 25, 1975, requesting ou review of certain sections of the 'Part 568' document Oshkosh wishes to use for all its vehicles.; We believe you may use a rubber stamp which states, 'Standard No. 12 Not Applicable' over the part of the document regarding conformity with Standard No. 121, for vehicles to which the standard does not apply. We would, however, add the words, 'to this vehicle.'; Your statement in the document regarding Standard No. 116 also conform to the requirements of Part 568.; Finally, you are correct with respect to the language of S 568.4(a)(7) The reference to '(7)' in that section should be '(6)'.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam5527OpenMr. James M. Hanson Chairman Engineering Committee Transportation Safety Equipment Institute 1325 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20004; Mr. James M. Hanson Chairman Engineering Committee Transportation Safety Equipment Institute 1325 Pennsylvania Ave. N.W. Washington D.C. 20004; Dear Mr. Hanson: This replies to your letter of April 7, 1995, askin for an interpretation of the applicability requirements of paragraph S5.7 of Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108. The conspicuity requirements of S5.7 apply to 'each trailer of 80 or more inches overall width and with a GVWR over 10,000 lbs.' You state that the word 'and' in this paragraph 'could cause some trailer manufacturers to think that both conditions must be present before tape is applied on the trailer', and that some manufacturers could interpret this to avoid applying tape to trailers of the specified width but less than the specified GVWR and vice versa. We have no objection to a manufacturer's applying conspicuity treatment to trailers of any width or GVWR. However, as S5.7 clearly states, a manufacturer is not required to comply with the conspicuity requirements unless its trailer is at least 80 inches in overall width and has a GVWR over 10,000 pounds. If you desire further clarification on this matter, you may call Taylor Vinson of this Office (202-366-5263). Sincerely, John Womack Acting Chief Counsel; |
|
ID: aiam2348OpenMr. S. L. Terry, Vice President, Public Responsibility and Consumer Affairs, Chrysler Corporation, P. O. Box 1910, Detroit, MI 48231; Mr. S. L. Terry Vice President Public Responsibility and Consumer Affairs Chrysler Corporation P. O. Box 1910 Detroit MI 48231; Dear Mr. Terry: This is in response to your March 16, 1976, request for assurance tha paragraph S4.3(f) of Standard No. 209, *Seat Belt Assemblies*, does not apply to the mechanism in a continuous loop seat belt system that limits (prevents) transfer of belt webbing from the shoulder to the pelvic portion of the belt when the buckle is engaged. Your letter recommended that Standard No. 209 be amended to specifically exempt such adjustment mechanisms from the requirements of paragraph 4.3(f) or that separate, appropriate requirements for those mechanisms be established.; The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) ha determined that the adjustment mechanism described in your letter is not a tilt lock' within the meaning of paragraph S4.3(f) of the standard, although the two mechanisms are superficially similar. Therefore, this mechanism does not have to comply with the requirements of paragraph S4.3(f).; We would like to emphasize our comments to you of June 13, 1975 regarding the requirement that a continuous loop assembly have a sufficiently low level of friction at the buckle mechanism to ensure that the lap portion of the belt is automatically adjustable. The friction in the buckle must be low enough that the normal motion of the occupant against the shoulder belt tightens the lap portion of the belt to prevent excessive slack and possible submarining of the occupant.; The NHTSA has also considered Chrysler's petition to amend Standard No 209 to establish separate appropriate requirements' for the adjustment mechanism in question and decided that it should be granted. A notice proposing such modifications of the standard is anticipated in the near future.; As you are aware, the commencement of a rulemaking proceeding does no signify that the rule in question will necessarily be issued. A decision concerning the issuance of a rule is made on the basis of all available information developed in the course of the rulemaking proceeding, in accordance with statutory criteria.; Sincerely, Robert L. Carter, Associate Administrator, Motor Vehicl Programs; |
|
ID: aiam0375OpenMr. Richard I. Moss, Washington Representative, Trailer Coach Association, 1800 North Kent Street, Suite 922, Arlington, VA 22209; Mr. Richard I. Moss Washington Representative Trailer Coach Association 1800 North Kent Street Suite 922 Arlington VA 22209; Dear Mr. Moss: This is in reply to your letter of June 7, 1971, requesting a interpretation of the applicability of the Tire Identification and Record Keeping Regulation to the mobile home and recreational vehicle industry.; You have asked if there is a specific regulation requiring the moto vehicle dealer to report tire data to the motor vehicle manufacturer when the vehicle is sold equipped with new tires installed by the manufacturer. There is no requirement that the vehicle dealer report tire data to the vehicle manufacturer, however, in the event the vehicle is sold with tires different from those shipped on or in the vehicle by the vehicle manufacturer, the vehicle dealer would have to report the name and address of the purchaser along with the tire identification number to the tire manufacturer.; You have asked if the Administrator would apply section 113(f) of th Act to require vehicle dealers to provide tire data to the vehicle manufacturer when the vehicle is sold equipped with tires installed by the vehicle manufacturer. The vehicle manufacturer is required to keep records of tires shipped on or in his vehicles as well as the name and address of the first purchaser. It is doubtful that any additional requirements will be considered unless this system appears to be ineffective.; Regarding your question whether there is a regulation requiring th vehicle manufacturer to report tire data to the tire manufacturer, there is no requirement that (sic) vehicle manufacturer report tire information to the tire manufacturer because the responsibility for issuing defect notification to the first purchaser of the vehicle rests with the vehicle manufacturer and not with the tire manufacturer.; You have also asked, in a situation where a vehicle dealer refuses t provide 'tire records' to the vehicle manufacturer, would this constitute a 'due care' defense for the vehicle manufacturer who would be unable to maintain the records required by the regulation. Because each enforcement action is handled separately, it is impossible to determine in advance whether this would be considered a 'due care' defense in the situation you describe, however, it would be taken into consideration before an enforcement action would be initiated. If vehicle dealers refuse to cooperate and provide first purchaser information which section 113(f) of the Act requires vehicle manufacturers to maintain, the Administration would consider issuing a regulation making this mandatory.; If we can be of any further assistance, please feel free to write. Sincerely, Lawrence R. Schneider, Acting Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam5177OpenMr. A.F. Zang, III P.O. Box 817 Mill Valley, CA 94942; Mr. A.F. Zang III P.O. Box 817 Mill Valley CA 94942; "Dear Mr. Zang: This responds to your letter asking about governmen rules applicable to your product, which you describe as an aftermarket child's car seat cover made out of a plastic-coated fabric. In particular, you were concerned about flammability restrictions that would be applicable to your product. I am pleased to have this opportunity to explain our requirements to you. After providing background information, I will answer the specific questions raised in your letter. By way of background information, NHTSA is authorized to issue Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards that set performance requirements for new motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA does not, however, approve or certify any vehicles or items of equipment. Instead, the Safety Act establishes a 'self-certification' process under which each manufacturer is responsible for certifying that its products meet all applicable safety standards. The agency periodically tests new vehicles and items of equipment for compliance with the standards. In response to your question, there are currently no Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS's) that directly apply to the product you wish to manufacture. Under the authority of the Safety Act, NHTSA has issued Standard No. 213, Child Restraint Systems, which specifies requirements for child restraint systems used in motor vehicles and aircraft. However, Standard No. 213 applies only to new child restraint systems and not to aftermarket components of a child restraint system, such as an aftermarket seat cover. I note, however, that there are other Federal requirements that indirectly affect your manufacture and sale of your product. Under the Safety Act, your product is considered to be an item of motor vehicle equipment. As a manufacturer of motor vehicle equipment, you are subject to the requirements in 151-159 of the Safety Act concerning the recall and remedy of products with safety related defects. I have enclosed an information sheet that briefly describes those responsibilities. In the event that you or NHTSA determines that your cover contains a safety-related defect, you would be responsible for notifying purchasers of the defective equipment and remedying the problem free of charge. Manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and motor vehicle repair businesses are subject to 108(a)(2)(A) of the Safety Act, which states: 'No manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business shall knowingly render inoperative ... any device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment in compliance with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard ....' A child restraint has elements of design that could be rendered inoperative by a child seat cover. Standard No. 213 sets flammability resistance requirements for materials used in a child restraint system. (See S5.7 of Standard No. 213, referencing Standard No. 302, 'Flammability of Interior Materials.') While it appears unlikely that persons in the aforementioned categories would be installing your product, if they were to install it, they should ensure that they do not compromise the safety protection provided by the child restraint system. The 'render inoperative' prohibition of 108(a)(2)(A) does not apply to the actions of vehicle owners in adding to or otherwise modifying their vehicles or items of motor vehicle equipment. Thus, if your seat cover were placed on restraints by the restraint owners, your product need not meet any FMVSS's. Nevertheless, in the interest of safety, we suggest you consider conforming your product to a flammability resistance standard equivalent to Standard No. 302. I will now take this opportunity to answer your specific questions. Question One 1. Where can the fabric be tested? The agency does not recommend any test laboratory. However, the following laboratories have conducted similar tests for this agency. Commercial Testing Co Detroit Testing Laboratory 1215 S. Hamilton Street P.O. Box 869 Dalton, GA 30722-0985 Warren, MI 48090-0869 Phone: (404) 278-3935 Phone: (313) 754-9000 Fax: (404) 278-3936 Fax: (313) 754-9045 United States Testing Co. Engineering Services Division 291 Fairfield, NJ 07006 Phone: (201) 575-5252 Fax: (201) 575-8271 Question Two 2. What are the test specifications? As explained above, Standard No. 302 specifies the Federal motor vehicle safety standards applicable to flammability resistance. This standard does not directly apply to aftermarket products such as a seat cover for a child restraint. However, we have enclosed a copy of Standard No. 302 for your information. Question Three 3. Are these questions something that are already available from the factory? We are not certain what information you wished to obtain by this question. We assume that you were asking whether a manufacturer of a product subject to Standard No. 302 can rely on the assurances from the fabric manufacturer that the material meets the standard's flammability requirements. The manufacturer of the product (e.g., a new child restraint system) would be responsible for exercising due care in certifying that the product meets all applicable FMVSS's. The manufacturer of the product would thus be responsible for ensuring that its reliance on the fabric manufacturer's assurances were reasonable and that the assurances were bona fide. Question Four 4. Whether the packaging can state that the fabric has been tested and found to be within compliance with government regulations. Only motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment that are subject to and that meet the FMVSS's may be certified as complying with those standards. NHTSA does not permit manufacturers of products that are not subject to the FMVSS's to certify to those standards because consumers might be confused or misled about a statement that a product complies with a standard when in fact no standard applied. Accordingly, since no FMVSS applies to an aftermarket child seat cover, you must not state on the packaging that the fabric of your product complies with the FMVSS's. Question Five 5. Seeks any other government regulations for children's products. We are not aware of any other Federal government agency that regulates items of motor vehicle equipment. More generally, please be aware that the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission regulates certain consumer products used by children. You may wish to contact that agency at (301) 492-6580 for information about their statutes and regulations related to children's products. I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions about NHTSA's safety standards, please feel free to contact Marvin Shaw of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, John Womack Acting Chief Counsel Enclosure"; |
|
ID: aiam2962OpenMr. John Cordner, Technical Assistant, Product Compliance, Subaru of America, Inc., 7040 Central Highway, Pennsuaken, NJ 08109; Mr. John Cordner Technical Assistant Product Compliance Subaru of America Inc. 7040 Central Highway Pennsuaken NJ 08109; Dear Mr. Cordner:#I regret the delay in responding to your letter o October 17, 1978, requesting an interpretation of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 101-80, *Controls, (sic) and Displays*. You asked whether placing the turn signal symbol on the turn signal switch handle so that the arrows are vertical would comply with the standard.#The answer is no. Section 5.2.1 requires that the turn signal symbol appear preceptually (sic) upright to the driver. The purpose of that requirement is to ensure quick and accurate identification of the vehicle controls. The upright position of a symbol is determined by referring to column 3 of Table 1 of the standard. That table shows that the upright position for the turn signal symbol is with the arrows pointing horizontally. Thus, the arrows must point essentially horizontally in the motor vehicle.#Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Acting 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.