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 |
|---|---|
| search results table | |
ID: aiam1876OpenMr. Owen R. Hildreth, Owen's International Inc., 16725 Van Dam Road, South Holland, IL 60473; Mr. Owen R. Hildreth Owen's International Inc. 16725 Van Dam Road South Holland IL 60473; Dear Mr. Hildreth: This responds to your March 14, 1975, question whether a truck deale or his customer may modify the brake system on a vehicle which is manufactured in conformity with Standard No. 121, *Air brake systems*, after the first purchase of the vehicle in good faith for purposes other than resale.; The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1391 e seq.) requires that a vehicle meet all applicable safety standards at the time of sale. Conformity is not required, however, after the first purchase of the vehicle in good faith for purposes other than resale. In answer to your second question, therefore, the vehicle becomes 'used' after its first purchase in good faith for purposes other than resale. 'Good faith' means that the purchaser could not purchase the vehicle before an agreed-on modification simply to avoid the effect of the standard. Your modifications can be undertaken only on a vehicle which has already been purchased in good faith.; As for modification that you or your customer might wish to undertake he may himself make whatever changes he cares to, subject to State or motor carrier regulations. The Act does, however, prohibit manufacturers, distributors, dealers, or motor vehicle repair businesses from knowingly rendering inoperative any device or element of design installed on a motor vehicle in compliance with an applicable safety standard (except during repairs). Thus you could not modify the 121 system to render it inoperative.; As long as you and customer do not violate these provisions, the futur sale of a modified vehicle would not be in violation of the Act.; Sincerely, James C. Schultz, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam0764OpenMr. T. F. Cathey, Director of Research and Development, Raybestos-Manhattan, 61 Willett Street, Passaic, NJ 07055; Mr. T. F. Cathey Director of Research and Development Raybestos-Manhattan 61 Willett Street Passaic NJ 07055; Dear Mr. Cathey: In your letter of June 30, 1972, you raised two questions that touch o the responsibility of manufacturers who produce components, such as brake blocks, that affect the ability of a vehicle to meet a motor vehicle safety standard.; Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 121, Air Brake Systems, the standar of concern to you, regulates vehicles equipped with air brakes, but it does not regulate the brakes or their components as separate items of equipment. As a component manufacturer, your company is therefore not required by our regulations to certify its products as conforming to Standard 121. This is not to say that your customers will not be concerned about the performance of your products, but only that you have no direct responsibility under the standard.; A vehicle manufacturer who intends to use your brake blocks on a ne vehicle will probably try to get as much test data from you as he can. His vehicle will have to conform to the standard. If our tests disclose a shortcoming in the brakes, he will have to show that he exercised due care in the manufacture of the vehicle and the data he obtains from you may be an important part of his case. Whether you supply him with dynamometer data or complete road test data is a matter to be arranged privately, however, and the subject is not regulated by our rules.; A brake block or other brake component sold as a replacement part i not at this time subject to regulation under Standard 121. A truck owner will presumably want to obtain components that are compatible with the rest of the brake system.; You have also asked for information about agencies equipped to ru tests in accordance with Standard 121. At this time we have not compiled a list of test facilities, but we expect that such information will become widely available in the next few months.; Sincerely, Elwood T. Driver, Director, Office of Operating Systems |
|
ID: aiam2759OpenGeorge L. Spitzmiller, The Reynolds and Reynolds Company, Corporate Offices, Dayton, OH 45401; George L. Spitzmiller The Reynolds and Reynolds Company Corporate Offices Dayton OH 45401; Dear Mr. Spitzmiller: This is in response to your letter of February 3, 1978, requesting tha the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration review your small Odometer Mileage Statement Form ODOM-1030N, your large Odometer Mileage Statement Form ODOM-105-N, and your Retail Buyers Order. It is our opinion that the forms which you submitted meet the Federal odometer requirements which became effective January 1, 1978. Thank you for your cooperation in preparing the forms.; Sincerely, John Womack, Assistant Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam5566OpenRichard Mark Gergel, Esq. Gergel, Burnette, Nickles, Grant & Leclair, P.A. P.O. Box 1866 Columbia, SC 29202-1866; Richard Mark Gergel Esq. Gergel Burnette Nickles Grant & Leclair P.A. P.O. Box 1866 Columbia SC 29202-1866; "Dear Mr. Gergel: We have received your letter of June 5, 1995 concerning 'the applicability of the Motor Vehicle Safety Act to transactions between a local car dealer and purchasers within the same state.' The litigation in which you are involved concerns the sale of a motor vehicle to a school to transport students. This vehicle, which had the capacity to carry more than 10 persons, 'did not meet the safety standards for a `school bus' under the Act.' The defendant dealer asserts that a transaction between a dealer and purchaser within the same state is beyond the scope of the Act 'since such a transaction allegedly is not within interstate commerce.' Taylor Vinson of this office talked with you on June 14 for a clarification of the facts. We understand that the vehicle in this case was a cargo van originally manufactured by Ford Motor Company and which, before its first purchase in good faith other than for resale, by a private school, was altered by persons not yet known to carry more than 10 persons. The vehicle does not appear to carry the certification of its alterer. The plaintiff in your case is the estate of a child killed while being transported in the vehicle. Under South Carolina law, failure to comply with a Federal safety statute is negligence per se. As noted above, the defendant dealer asserts that there is no violation of the Act because the sale of the vehicle did not occur in interstate commerce, and, hence, that it was not negligent per se. This is our interpretation of the relevant portions of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 - Motor Vehicle Safety (formerly known as the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act). Section 30112(a) provides as follows: Except as provided in this section, sections 30113 and 30114 of this title, and subchapter III of this chapter, . . . a person may not manufacture for sale, sell, offer for sale, introduce or deliver for introduction in interstate commerce, or import into the United States, any motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment manufactured on or after the date an applicable motor vehicle safety standard prescribed under this chapter takes effect unless the vehicle or equipment complies with the standard and is covered by a certification issued under section 30115 of this title. The sale or offer for sale of a nonconforming motor vehicle which is not certified as conforming to all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards is a violation of 49 U.S.C. 30112(a), regardless of whether the purchaser and seller reside in the same state. The phrase 'introduce or deliver for introduction in interstate commerce' is self-contained and separated by commas from the rest of the prohibited acts. It in no way modifies the words 'sell' and 'offer for sale,' which are violations separate and distinct from those of introducing or delivering for introduction in interstate commerce a noncomplying or uncertified motor vehicle. Thus, the case that you refer to, National Association of Motor Bus Owners v. Brinegar, 483 F.2d 1294 (D.C. Cir. 1973), is irrelevant to the issue of whether the dealer violated section 30112(a) by selling the vehicle in question. As noted above, the statute provides certain exemptions and defenses that may be applicable to the question of whether there has been a violation of section 30112(a). The general and special exemptions of sections 30113 and 30114, and the import exemptions of subchapter III are not relevant here. However, if the dealer can establish that any of the following defenses set out in section 30112(b) apply, there would be no violation. If the vehicle had previously been in use before it was sold to the school (section 30112(b)(1)) If the dealer had no reason to know at the time it offered for sale and sold the vehicle to the private school, despite exercising reasonable care, that the van did not comply with Federal school bus safety standards. (section 30112(b)(2)(A)) If the dealer held a certificate by the manufacturer stating that the vehicle complied with applicable Federal school bus safety standards, and did not know about the noncompliance before sale to the school. (section 30112(b)(2)(B)) Further, it appears that the alterer of this vehicle may have violated 49 CFR 568.8, a regulation issued under the authority of 49 U.S.C. 30115. Under this regulation, one who alters a certified vehicle before its first purchase in good faith for other than resale must affix its certification that the vehicle as altered complies with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. If you have any further questions, please contact Taylor Vinson at (202) 366- 5263. Sincerely, John Womack Acting Chief Counsel"; |
|
ID: aiam0334OpenMr. Thomas S. Pieratt, Executive Secretary, Distributors Association, P.O. Box 11088, Cincinnati, OH, 45211; Mr. Thomas S. Pieratt Executive Secretary Distributors Association P.O. Box 11088 Cincinnati OH 45211; Dear Mr. Pieratt: This is in response to your letter of May 4, 1971, in which you aske several interpretive questions concerning the recent issuance of regulations on Vehicles Manufactured in Two or More Stages (49 CFR Part 568) and corresponding amendments to the Certification Regulations (36 F.R. 7054, April 14, 1971, corrected 36 F.R. 7855, April 27,1 1971). I will rephrase your questions slightly in order to answer them.; 1. If a person delivers an incomplete vehicle to a truck body assemble for completion, but insists that the vehicle not contain all the lighting required by Standard No. 108, may the assembler carry out the person's wishes as an 'intermediate manufacturer, under the regulations? Would identification, clearance, and side-marker lamps required by Standard 108 be considered 'readily attachable accessories' under the regulations, so that the assembler would necessarily be considered a final-stage manufacturer?; The assembler would be permitted under the regulations to put a truc body on an incomplete vehicle, without all the required lighting, and consider himself an intermediate manufacturer. As you suggest, he would be obliged to specify, in the document furnished with the vehicle according to Part 568, that the vehicle does not conform to the standards, and describe the remaining work necessary to make it conform. The lamp assemblies you mention would not necessarily be considered 'readily attachable accessories', in general this agency will leave the determination of such categorical questions up to the parties directly concerned, as long as they act consistently with the regulations.; 2. We interpret the new regulation to mean that every vehicle which i sold to the first purchaser for use must be certified. Will this do away with the truck dealer selling an incomplete vehicle direct to the user without a body or other structure on it?; Every *completed* vehicle must be certified. But an incomplete vehicl is not certified under our regulations, and there is certainly no restriction on the sale of an incomplete vehicle 'direct to the user' or to anyone else, except for the requirement for the standards information document. One of the main purposes of the new regulation is to remove artificial restrictions on the production and marketing of incomplete vehicles.; 3. If an incomplete vehicle may be sold direct to the user without final Certification, does this mean that there is no need to certify the vehicle further--even if the vehicle is completed after the sale?; To the contrary--each manufacturer of a vehicle (or a final-stag manufacturer in the case of multistage vehicles) must affix a certification label in accordance with 49 CFR Part 567, this includes persons who manufacture or complete the manufacture of vehicles for their own use. The label contains information concerning weight ratings, date of manufacture, and identity of manufacturers that is important for enforcement purposes regardless of how the vehicle is marketed.; 4. At what point after the sale of a vehicle to the first user does th vehicle become classified as 'Used', and therefore not subject to the provisions of the Safety Standards or the Certification requirements?; The answer is, 'immediately after sale of a vehicle to a user', but couple of distinctions should be noted in this connection. Section 108(b)(1) of the Act predicates the cutoff of standards application on the 'first purchase of [the motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment] in good faith for purposes other than resale.' Thus, there must be a bona fide sale, and the standards continue to apply to a vehicle where a person has manufactured or completed the manufacture of it for his own use, until *after* he sells the vehicle to another person. Also, the 'vehicle' in question is the completed vehicle, and the above does not apply in any way to incomplete vehicles.; 5. What recourse, other than to refuse to do the work, does th final-stage manufacturer have if the customer or user of the vehicle (1) no longer has the document provided by the incomplete vehicle manufacturer or (2) does not wish to have the work done in accordance with the provisions of the existing Safety Standards or the Certification requirements? If under (1) above the document is not available from the user of the vehicle, is it reasonable for the final-stage manufacturer to assume that all work has been done in conformance with the Safety Standards and that he 'has no reason to know, otherwise for the purpose of the final certification (if required)?; If the incomplete vehicle furnished to the final-stage manufacture does not contain the information document, as it should under the multistage vehicle regulation, then the final-stage manufacturer should obtain a copy of the document from the incomplete vehicle manufacturer. The document does much more than assure 'that all work has been done in conformance with the Safety Standards', most importantly, it describes what must be done by subsequent manufacturers to conform with the standards, and may in the future contain required consumer information.; 6. Was the vehicle identification number inadvertently omitted from th requirements for the Certification label for multistage vehicles?; The need for a vehicle identification number on multistage vehicles wa not apparent when the regulation was promulgated. Since that time several interested parties have suggested that the VIN would be useful for identification of information documents that go with particular vehicles, and for other purposes related to identification of the vehicles in communications with the manufacturer. This agency is considering the possibility of adding such a requirement to Part 567.; Sincerely, Lawrence R. Schneider, Acting Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam2309OpenMr. Byron A. Crampton, Manager of Engineering Services, Truck Body and Equipment Association, Inc., 5530 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 1220, Washington, D.C. 20015; Mr. Byron A. Crampton Manager of Engineering Services Truck Body and Equipment Association Inc. 5530 Wisconsin Avenue Suite 1220 Washington D.C. 20015; Dear Mr. Crampton: This responds to the Truck Body Equipment Association's May 7, 1976 question whether S5.2.3.2 of Standard No.217, *Bus Window Retention and Release*, requires that the engine starting system of a school bus not operate if an emergency exit other than an emergency door is locked. Section S5.2.3.2 applies to school buses manufactured on or after October 26, 1976.; Section S5.2.3.2 only specifies requirements for the relationship o the engine-starting system to the operation of emergency doors. Reference to any emergency exit' in the first sentence of the section is in error, as the correct reference to emergency door' in the second sentence of the section demonstrates. A correction of this error will be made in the text of the standard shortly.; Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Acting Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam5136OpenMr. William R. Willen Managing Counsel Product Legal Group American Honda Motor Co., Inc. 1919 Torrance Boulevard Torrance, CA 90501-2746; Mr. William R. Willen Managing Counsel Product Legal Group American Honda Motor Co. Inc. 1919 Torrance Boulevard Torrance CA 90501-2746; "Dear Mr. Willen: This responds to your letter of December 7, 199 requesting an interpretation of the definition of 'designated seating position' in 49 CFR Section 571.3. You request confirmation of your belief that a proposed Honda seat design would have two designated seating positions. For the proposed design, '(t)he hip room is 44.2 inches over the length of the seat, and the seat width is only 39 inches. The seat is flat and does not have stiff inboard seat belt receptacles.' The term 'designated seating position' is defined at 49 CFR 571.3 as: any plan view location capable of accommodating a person at least as large as a 5th percentile adult female, if the overall seat configuration and design is such that the position is likely to be used as a seating position while the vehicle is in motion, except for auxiliary seating accommodations such as temporary or folding jump seats. Any bench or split-bench seat in a passenger car, truck or multipurpose passenger vehicle with a GVWR less than 10,000 pounds, having greater than 50 inches of hip room (measured in accordance with SAE Standard J1100(a)) shall have not less than three designated seating positions, unless the seat design or vehicle design is such that the center position cannot be used for seating. If the seat has only 44.2 inches of hip room, the seat would probably qualify as having only two seating positions, since this value is below the 50-inch specification in the definition of 'designated seating position.' Please note, however, that the 50-inch specification does not mean that some vehicle seats with less than 50 inches of hip room should not also have more than two designated seating positions if the vehicle and seat design is such that three positions would likely be used. The specification is merely the amount of space the agency will consider as conclusive evidence that there should be at least three designated seating positions. You ask if our answer would be different if fixed or movable armrests were provided. A fixed armrest does affect the measurement of designated seating position, since a fixed armrest would impede a person from sitting in the center position. NHTSA has stated in the preamble to the rule adopting the definition of designated seating position that the space occupied by a fixed, stationary armrest 'would not be considered hip room and would not be included in the measurement of the 50-inch limitation.' 44 FR 23229, April 19, 1979. A fixed armrest on your seat would show your intent that the position is not intended to be used as a seat. Your letter also asked if the interpretation would be different if the seat width was greater than 39 inches. The number of designated seating positions is determined by the hip room, therefore, if the hip room remained the same, the seat would have the same number of designated seating positions even if the seat width was increased. Finally, you asked if the interpretation would be different if the seat were installed in a wider vehicle or positioned differently in the vehicle. Again, those modifications would only require an increase in the number of designated seating positions if the hip room were increased by these changes. Finally, I emphasize that this letter only represents the agency's opinion based on the information supplied in your letter. NHTSA does not pass approval on any vehicle design, prior to the actual events that underlie certification. It is up to the manufacturer to determine whether its vehicles comply with all applicable safety standards and regulations, and to certify its vehicles in accordance with that determination. I hope you find this information helpful. If you have any other questions, please contact Mary Versailles of my staff at this address or by phone at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, John Womack Acting Chief Counsel"; |
|
ID: aiam3631OpenMr. M. B. Mathieson, Director of Engineering, Thomas Built Buses Inc., 1408 Courtesy Road, P.O. Box 2450, High Point, NC 27261; Mr. M. B. Mathieson Director of Engineering Thomas Built Buses Inc. 1408 Courtesy Road P.O. Box 2450 High Point NC 27261; Dear Mr. Mathieson: This responds to your September 13, 1982, letter concerning you 'vandalock' system and Standard No. 217, *Bus Window Retention and Release*.; Section S5.2.3.2 states that 'the engine starting system of a schoo bus shall not operate if any emergency exit is locked from either inside or outside the bus. For purpose of this requirement, 'locked' means that the release mechanism cannot be activated by a person at the door without a special device such as a key or special information such as a combination.' You state that your locking mechanism, which is a bolt device, doesn't meet the definition of 'locked' since it requires neither a key nor special instructions. You further indicate that the engine will not start until the bolt is withdrawn.; We disagree that your bolt when in the closed position would not mee the definition of locked. The door would not be capable of opening from the outside without the use of special devices when the bolt was closed. Accordingly, the door would be considered locked.; However, nothing in Standard No. 217 prohibits the installation o locking doors as long as the vehicle cannot be started with the door in the locked position. As you noted, your vandalock system is designed to prevent the starting of a vehicle in such circumstances.; Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam2923OpenMr. Donald W. Vescio, Sr., Director of Engineering, R. E. Dietz Company, 225 Wilkinson Street, Box 1214, Syracuse, NY 13201; Mr. Donald W. Vescio Sr. Director of Engineering R. E. Dietz Company 225 Wilkinson Street Box 1214 Syracuse NY 13201; Dear Mr. Vescio:#This responds to your letter of September 21, 1978 requesting interpretation of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 101-80, *Controls and Displays*.#In your first set of questions, you ask about the application of the display requirements to trucks with GVWR of 10,000 pounds or more. Those requirements do not apply to such trucks. Under S5 of the standard, the only trucks required by the standard to comply with the display requirements are those with a GVWR less than 10,000 pounds.#In your second set of questions, you pose various questions about the identification and illumination of controls. In the first question, you ask whether the turn signal control symbol must be placed on the control itself. The answer is 'no.' S5.2.1 provides that the symbol shall be placed on *or* adjacent to the control. You also ask if there is any size requirement. The answer is again 'no.' There are no size requirements for any of the control symbols.#In your second question, you ask about the size requirements for the hazard warning signal control. As indicated above, there are no size requirements. As to illumination, S5.3.1 provides that hand-operated controls mounted on the steering column are not required to be illuminated. Thus, neither the turn signal control symbol nor the hazard warning control symbol need be illuminated. With regard to the non-mandatory red lens between the turn signal control symbol, if that lens is intended to call attention to the location of the hazard warning control, we urge that it be triangular. If it is intended to call attention to the turn signal control, we urge that the shape be made less similar to the hazard warning symbol to avoid confusion.#In your third question, you asked about the relationship between the control and display requirements in FMVSS 101 and those in FMVSS 108. The agency will soon issue a notice dealing with this issue.#Sincerely, Joseph J. Levin, Jr., Chief Counsel; |
|
ID: aiam3261OpenMr. Karl-Heinz Ziwica, Manager, Safety & Emission Control Engineering, BMW of North America, Inc., Montvale, New Jersey 07645; Mr. Karl-Heinz Ziwica Manager Safety & Emission Control Engineering BMW of North America Inc. Montvale New Jersey 07645; Dear Mr. Ziwica: This responds to your letter of March 12, 1980. You asked whether, i the case of motorcycles, the appearance of the vehicle identification number (VIN) on the certification label required by 49 CFR Part 567 satisfies the requirements of S4.3 of Safety Standard No. 115 (49 CFR 571.115). The answer is yes. The Part 567 certification label meets the requirements of S4.3 regarding the use of labels. Please note that, in order to satisfy Safety Standard No. 115, the VIN on the certification label must meet the style requirements of S4.3.1.; Sincerely, Frank Berndt, 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.