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: aiam3673OpenMr. J. N. Uranga, Cummins Engine Company, Inc., Box 3005, Columbus, IN 47201; Mr. J. N. Uranga Cummins Engine Company Inc. Box 3005 Columbus IN 47201; Dear Mr. Uranga: This responds to your January 28, 1983, letter asking about th responsibilities of an original equipment manufacturer for compliance with Part 573, *Defect and Noncompliance Reports*, and other agency recall-related regulations. In particular, you ask questions concerning a hypothetically defective original equipment fan that is a component of an original equipment engine that you manufacture. You ask whether your company would be responsible for compliance with agency regulations if you notified the fan manufacturer of a defect in its product and if that manufacturer refused to report to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.; Part 579, *Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility*, states clearl that original equipment is the responsibility of the vehicle manufacturer. As such, the manufacturer(s) of the vehicles in which the equipment is installed would be responsible for recalling and remedying the defective fan. However, Part 573 states that in the case of original equipment, defect reports shall be submitted by either the equipment or the vehicle manufacturer when the defective equipment has been supplied to only one vehicle manufacturer. On the other hand, where such equipment is supplied to more than one manufacturer, both the vehicle manufacturers and the original equipment manufacturer must submit the required reports.; Your hypothetical situation further complicates the reports questio because the original equipment is a component of the original equipment that you manufacture. The agency concludes that in the situation that you posit, the manufacturer of the fan and the manufacturer of all of the vehicles in which the fan is installed would be required to supply the necessary defect reports. Failure to do so would subject all manufacturers to the penalties provided by law. If the fan manufacturer refuses to submit the required reports, it would be the responsibility of your company to issue the report to the agency, since you would also be considered an original equipment manufacturer and the defective component would be part of your equipment. The agency would not require both your company and the fan manufacturer to report. A report submitted by either company would be considered compliance by both companies. However, failure of both companies to report could result in the imposition of penalties on both.; I trust this fully answers your question. Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam2961OpenMr. Charles J. Calvin, President, Truck Trailer Manufacturers Association, 2430 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20037; Mr. Charles J. Calvin President Truck Trailer Manufacturers Association 2430 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W. Washington DC 20037; Dear Mr. Calvin: We regret the delay in responding to your April 18, 1978, lette criticizing the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's (NHTSA) interpretation concerning the responsibility of a manufacturer for ensuring that its vehicles will not be overloaded when transporting materials for which they are designed. In that interpretation, the agency indicated that a vehicle whose tank cargo volume is of such size that it misrepresents the assigned GVWR and GAWR values of that vehicle, thus, inviting overloading might be considered to have a safety related defect. Please permit me to qualify the interpretation in the light of your criticism.; The NHTSA realizes that overloading is a problem created for the mos part by the operator of a vehicle. Accordingly, it is not intended by the agency's interpretation or regulations to hold a vehicle manufacturer responsible for every situation in which a vehicle is overloaded. Most any type truck can be overloaded by the user. An operator should be aware of this possibility, however, given the amount of space on that vehicle on which cargo can be loaded and the broad range of cargo that can be transported by that vehicle. If a truck designed for the transportation of one specific cargo were misused by the operator to transport another type of cargo not intended by the vehicle manufacturer, then any resultant overloading would be the responsibility of the operator not of the manufacturer. However, when a vehicle designed to transport a specific cargo can be overloaded when filled to its capacity with that cargo, the NHTSA has determined this to be a problem created by the vehicle manufacturer and would consider taking action against a manufacturer to correct the problem. This agency's interpretation that a vehicle be able to safely transport its intended design cargo when fully loaded is an objective and unambiguous requirement and simply places the burden upon a manufacturer to ensure that the design cargo does not exceed the GAWR and GVWR.; Specifically we are concerned that a tank of fixed volumetric capacit could be loaded to exceed the vehicle's GAWR and GVWR values when filled with a commodity of design density simply because of the tank being too large.; When there is reason to believe that the density of a cargo likely t be transported could present a vehicle overloading problem, the manufacturer has a duty to provide a warning and information as a precaution in averting the potential hazard. The NHTSA does not object to the practice of partial loading of tankers and tank compartments for remaining within safe loading limits provided guidelines are furnished by manufacturers for performing approved loading operations. Prescribed precautions hopefully will counteract any tendency to perceive volume as the load limiting criterion. We would agree that loading information as contained in your enclosure would be a satisfactory means of conveying safety information and could be referenced on a conspicuous vehicle label.; Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Acting Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam3389OpenMr. John M. Klinger, Sales Manager, Medallion Instruments, Inc., 917 W. Savidge Street, Spring Lake, Michigan 49456; Mr. John M. Klinger Sales Manager Medallion Instruments Inc. 917 W. Savidge Street Spring Lake Michigan 49456; Dear Mr. Klinger: This responds to your letter of December 10, 1980, to Joan Griffin o my staff regarding Safety Standard No. 127, *Speedometers and Odometers*. In your letter, you state that you manufacture speedometers and odometers for replica car manufacturers. You ask whether you can be exempted from the requirements of Standard No. 127 in light of the small number of speedometers and odometers that you sell.; The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has n authority to exempt manufacturers of motor vehicle equipment from compliance with the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. Thus, your Speedometers and odometers must comply with the requirements of Standard No. 127 that are in effect at the time of manufacture.; We hope you find this information helpful. Please contact this offic if you have any questions.; Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam3223OpenMr. Albert P. Penter, President, American Mfg. & Equipment Inc., 145 Caldwell Drive, Cincinnati, Ohio 45216; Mr. Albert P. Penter President American Mfg. & Equipment Inc. 145 Caldwell Drive Cincinnati Ohio 45216; Dear Mr. Penter: Pursuant to the requires in your February 13, 1980, letter to thi office, I am enclosing an up-to-date copy of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 117 (49 CFR S571.117).; You asked about the agency's 'current position with respect to Standar No. 117 as to (1) passenger tires and (2) truck tires.' The requirements of this standard apply to all retreaded pneumatic passenger car tires sold in the United States. As of this date, however, neither Standard No. 117 nor any other standard applies to retreaded truck tires.; If you have any further questions regarding the requirements of th enclosed standard or any other regulations of the agency, please contact Steve Kratzke of my office (202-426-2992).; Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam4732OpenVirve Airola Oy Toppi Ab Toppi Plast. PL 25 P.O. Box SF-02321 ESPOO Finland; Virve Airola Oy Toppi Ab Toppi Plast. PL 25 P.O. Box SF-02321 ESPOO Finland; "Dear Mr. Airola: This responds to your letter concerning Federal Moto Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 106, Brake Hoses. We understand that you are interested in supplying your products to a vehicle manufacturer (Saab-Scania), who specifies that you must 'register' with this agency as a brake hose manufacturer. You request information that would enable you to meet this product specification. I regret the delay in responding. By way of background, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) administers Federal regulations for the manufacture and sale of new motor vehicles and certain items of motor vehicle equipment (including brake hoses) sold in or imported into this country. The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act establishes a 'self-certification' process under which each manufacturer is responsible for certifying that its products meet all applicable safety standards. This process requires each manufacturer to determine in the exercise of due care that its products meet all applicable requirements. NHTSA tests vehicles and equipment sold to consumers for compliance with the FMVSS's and investigates defects relating to motor vehicle safety. If a manufacturer or NHTSA determines that a noncompliance or safety-related defect exists, the manufacturer must notify purchasers of its product and remedy the problem free of charge. (Note that this responsibility is borne by the vehicle manufacturer in cases in which your hoses are installed on a new vehicle by or with the express authorization of that vehicle manufacturer.) Any manufacturer which fails to provide notification of or remedy for a noncompliance or defect may be subject to a civil penalty of up to $1,000 per violation. Saab-Scania's product specification appears to relate to the labeling requirements of Standard No. 106. Under S7.2.1(b) of Standard No. 106, air brake hose manufacturers must label their hose with a designation (consisting of block capital letters, numerals or a symbol) that identifies the manufacturer of the hose. The designation assists NHTSA in identifying the manufacturers of noncomplying or defective brakehoses. There is no NHTSA application form for the designation, instead, the manufacturer simply files the designation in writing with NHTSA's Crash Avoidance Division, at the address provided in S7.2.1(b) of the standard. From your letter, it appears that Saab-Scania also specifies that your brake hoses must meet all applicable FMVSS's. Standard No. 106 applies to new motor vehicles and to 'brake hoses' (which include plastic tubing), brake hose end fittings, and brake hose assemblies. The standard specifies labeling and performance requirements for these products to reduce the likelihood of brake system failure from ruptures in the brake hose or brake hose assembly. New brake hoses, end fittings and assemblies must meet these requirements to be sold in or imported into this country. If they don't comply, the manufacturers are subject to civil penalties of $1000 per violation, and the notification and remedy provisions of the Safety Act. I have enclosed a copy of the standard for your information, photocopied from the October 1, 1989 edition of Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations (49 CFR 571.106). In addition to the requirements described above, please note that your manufacture of brake hoses may also be affected by NHTSA's longstanding interpretation of our regulation on manufacturer identification (49 CFR Part 566, copy enclosed), if Saab-Scania sells vehicles equipped with your brake hoses in this country. This rule requires a manufacturer of equipment to which an FMVSS applies ('covered equipment'--e.g., brake hoses) to submit its name, address, and a brief description of the items of equipment it manufactures to NHTSA separately from the vehicle manufacturer to which the equipment manufacturer supplies its products. NHTSA has interpreted this regulation to require the information from foreign manufacturers of covered equipment supplying their products to a foreign vehicle manufacturer selling its vehicles in the United States. (Enclosed is a copy of the agency's January 26, 1972 letter to Mr. Nakajima of Toyota Motor Company on this issue.) Please note that Oy Toppi is not required to designate an agent for service of process under 49 CFR Part 551 (Subpart D), if Oy Toppi supplies its products only to a foreign vehicle manufacturer. This is the case even if the foreign vehicle manufacturer installs Oy Toppi's products on vehicles that will be sold in the United States. However, please keep in mind that Oy Toppi must designate an agent under Part 551 if Oy Toppi decides to offer its equipment for importation into the United States. I have enclosed a copy of this regulation for your information. I hope this information is helpful. Please contact us if you have further questions. Sincerely, Stephen P. Wood Acting Chief Counsel Enclosures"; |
|
ID: aiam1530OpenMr. K. Nakjima,Director/General Manager,Factory Representative Office,Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc.,1099 Wall Street,West Lyndhurst, New Jersey 07071; Mr. K. Nakjima Director/General Manager Factory Representative Office Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A. Inc. 1099 Wall Street West Lyndhurst New Jersey 07071; Dear Mr. Nakajima:#This responds to your June 11, 1974, request fo approval of Toyota's banding design to meet the requirements of Standard No. 106, *Brake hoses*, for labeling brake hose assemblies.#The NHTSA interprets a band as a label which encircles the hose completely and attaches to itself. To constitute labeling at all, of course, the band must be affixed to the hose in such a manner that it cannot be easily removed. You should be able to determinate the compliance of your labeling method with the standard. It does appear that the Toyota label does not encircle the assembly and attach to itself. The NHTSA does not approve specific designs in advance, in any case, because the material, installing method, and underlying material can significantly affect the quality of a specific design.#Yours truly,Richard B. Dyson,Assisting Chief Counsel; |
|
ID: aiam4362OpenThe Honorable John P. Murtha, Member of Congress, Post Office Box 780, Johnstown, PA 15907; The Honorable John P. Murtha Member of Congress Post Office Box 780 Johnstown PA 15907; Dear Mr. Murtha: Thank you for your letter to the Department of Transportation's Offic of Congressional Affairs, which has been referred to me for a response. In an addendum enclosed with your letter, you note that one of your constituents, Mr. Gene Bird, would like information on the Federal regulations addressing 'completing the finishing work on automobiles.' Apparently, another manufacturer would send small sports cars to Mr. Bird's business. Your addendum states that these sports cars 'will need the following type of work done: installation of the engine, components, radiators, interiors, and the cars will finally have to be tested.' I am pleased to have this opportunity to explain our statute and regulations to you.; By way of background, the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Ac (15 U.S.C. 1381 *et seq*.) requires *every* new motor vehicle sold in the United States to be certified as complying with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. The Safety Act also specifies that the manufacturer *itself* must certify that each of its vehicles complies with all applicable safety standards in effect on the date of manufacture. Because of this statutory requirement, this agency does not 'approve' any vehicles or offer assurances that the vehicles comply with the safety standards.; Further, the Safety Act does not require that a manufacturer' certification be based on a specified number of tests or any tests at all. The Safety Act only requires that the certification be made with the exercise of 'due care' on the part of the manufacturer. It is up to the individual manufacturer in the first instance to determine what data, test results, or other information it needs to enable it to certify that its vehicles comply with the safety standards. We would certainly recommend that a new manufacturer test some of its vehicles for compliance with the applicable safety standards.; It is not entirely clear from your addendum whether Mr. Bird would b classified as an 'alterer' or a 'final stage manufacturer' under our regulations. His company would be considered an 'alterer' of motor vehicles, if the second company referred to in your addendum furnishes completed and certified sports car to Mr. Bird's company, and Mr. Bird's company changes the engine and other components on those vehicles. If this is the contemplated action, Mr. Bird's company would be treated as an alterer under our regulations.; The certification requirements for alterers are set forth in 49 CF S567.7 (copy enclosed). Generally speaking, that section requires a person who alters a vehicle before its first purchase to supplement the certification label affixed by the original manufacturer with its own certification label. The alterer's certification label must include all of the information set forth in Part 567, including a statement that the altered vehicle complies will all applicable safety standards in effect on the date the vehicle was altered. In the case of sports cars, an alterer must certify that the altered car complies with all of the following:; >>>49 CFR S571.101 *Controls and Displays*, 49 CFR S571.102 *Transmission Shift Level Sequence*, 49 CFR S571.103 *Windshield Defrosting and Defogging Systems*, 49 CFR S571.104 *Windshield Wiping and Washing Systems*, 49 CFR S571.105 *Hydraulic Brake Systems*, 49 CFR S571.106 *Brake Hoses*, 49 CFR S571.107 *Reflecting Surfaces*, 49 CFR S571.108 *Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment*, 49 CFR S571.110 *Tire Selection and Rims*, 49 CFR S571.111 *Rearview Mirrors*, 49 CFR S571.112 *Headlamp Concealment Devices*, 49 CFR S571.113 *Hood Latch System*, 49 CFR S571.114 *Theft Protection*, 49 CFR S571.115 *Vehicle Identification Number*, 49 CFR S571.116 *Motor Vehicle Brake Fluids*, 49 CFR S571.118 *Power-operated Window Systems*, 49 CFR S571.124 *Accelerator Control Systems*, 49 CFR S571.201 *Occupant Protection in Interior Impacts*, 49 CFR S571.202 *Head Restraints*, 49 CFR S571.203 *Impact Protection for the Driver from the Steerin Column*,; 49 CFR S571.204 *Steering Control Rearward Displacement*, 49 CFR S571.205 *Glazing Materials*, 49 CFR S571.206 *Door Locks and Door Retention Components*, 49 CFR S571.207 *Seating Systems*, 49 CFR S571.208 *Occupant Crash Protection*, 49 CFR S571.209 *Seat Belt Assemblies*, 49 CFR S571.210 *Seat Belt Assembly Anchorages*, 49 CFR S571.211 *Wheel Nuts, Wheel Discs, and Hub Caps*, 49 CFR S571.212 *Windshield Mounting*, 49 CFR S571.214 *Side Door Strength*, 49 CFR S571.216 *Roof Crush Resistance*, 49 CFR S571.219 *Windshield Zone Intrusion*, 49 CFR S571.301 *Fuel System Integrity*, and 49 CFR S571.302 *Flammability of Interior Materials*.<<< Alternatively, Mr. Bird's company may be treated as a 'final stag manufacturer,' as that term is defined at 49 CFR S568.4. A final stage manufacturer means a person who finishes the manufacturing operations on an incomplete vehicle. Thus, if the second company referred to in your addendum is planning to furnish Mr. Bird's company with sports cars that have no engine, radiator, and so forth, the vehicles provided to Mr. Bird's company would be considered 'incomplete vehicles' and Mr. Bird's company would be considered a 'final stage manufacturer.'; If this is the case, Mr. Bird's certification responsibilities depen on the information he is provided by the manufacturer of the incomplete vehicle, i.e., the second company referred to in your addendum. Part 568 (copy enclosed) requires the manufacturer of the incomplete vehicle to furnish Mr. Bird's company with a document that states one of three things for the incomplete vehicle. These are:; >>>1. The vehicle when completed will conform to some or all of th applicable safety standards *if* no alterations are made to any identified components of the incomplete vehicle.<<<; If Mr. Bird receives such a document and does not make any of th specified alterations, his company could certify compliance with the standards listed in the previous manufacturer's document simply by stating that compliance has not been affected by the operations performed by Mr. Bird's company. See 49 CFR S567.5(C)(7). Mr. Bird's company would have to certify compliance with any applicable standards not listed in this document.; >>>2. The vehicle when completed will conform to some or all of th applicable safety standards if specific conditions are followed by the final stage manufacturer.<<<; If Mr. Bird receives this type of document, his situation will be ver similar to that described above. That is, if his company follows the specific conditions, it could certify compliance with the standards listed in the previous manufacturer's document simply by stating that compliance has not been affected by the operations performed by Mr. Bird's company. See 49 CFR S567.5(c)(7). Again, Mr. Bird's company would have to certify compliance with any applicable standards not listed in this document.; >>>3. Conformity with some or all of the standards is not substantiall affected by the design of the incomplete vehicle, so the incomplete vehicle manufacturer makes no representation as to conformity with the standards.<<<; If Mr. Bird receives this type of document, his company would b required to certify compliance with the standards identified in the document on its own. This type of document would put Mr. Bird's company in the same position as an alterer for the listed standards.; I have also enclosed a general information sheet for new manufacturer of motor vehicles. This sheet highlights the relevant Federal statutes and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration regulations that may apply and explains how to get copies of our regulations. I hope that this information is helpful. If you have any further questions about our regulations, please contact this office.; Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam1160OpenMr. J. T. Monk, Taylor Machine Works, Inc., P.O. Box 150, Louisville, MS 39339; Mr. J. T. Monk Taylor Machine Works Inc. P.O. Box 150 Louisville MS 39339; Dear Mr. Monk: This is in reply to your letter of May 25, 1973, to Michael Peskoe o this office, requesting clarification of the regulations regarding the certification of motor vehicles. You enclose an incomplete vehicle document concerning a particular tractor, a certification label you would affix to that tractor after its completion, a drawing of a trailer certification label, and a sample quarterly report of production figures for vehicles manufactured by your company.; Mr. Peskoe indicated to you over the phone that in meeting you certification responsibilities for these vehicles, they are certified independently of each other. It appears from your letter that this approach, which is the correct one, is the approach you are using.; With reference to your responsibilities for the certification of th tractor, if the truck does not have a certification label attached to it when you receive it, it is true that when you complete it by mounting a fifth wheel you must then attach a certification label. The label you enclose (exhibit 1) contains the necessary information in the appropriate order. You should obtain the information for the label primarily from the incomplete vehicle document, but may, as you state, rely on your own engineering judgment or contact the truck manufacturer. If, however, in relying on your own judgment you depart from the information contained in the incomplete vehicle document, you may be responsible for failures of the vehicle to conform to applicable standards and regulations.; The sample trailer certification label which you have submitted is no consistent with the certification regulations. We have taken the position that the information must be presented on the label in the form and in the order specified in the regulations. With respect to your sample label, the regulations do not presently call for a kingpin rating. Although we have just proposed to require a weight rating for the trailer coupling, this information should not now be included on the label. The regulations also do not permit ratings for tandem axles to be stated as tandem ratings. Each axle must be independently identified and a separate rating provided for it. Moreover, tire sizes are permitted to be specified only in conjunction with weight ratings. There are no provisions for the listing of plies, apart from their inclusion in a tire size designation, or for the listing of an inflation pressure. Again, information that is not specifically required cannot be inserted between items of required information, and your drawing of a trailer is not permitted unless it is placed after the required information. Finally, the regulations call for gross vehicle weight rating (the phrase 'gross trailer weight rating' is inappropriate) to follow the gross axle weight ratings, and the order in which you present this information must be reversed. I believe you should reexamine the Certification regulations in order to obtain specific guidance on the order and form of the required information.; The sample quarterly production report you submit conforms to th requirements of section 573.5(b) of the Defect Reports regulations. However, that section requires only the reporting of the number of vehicles, identified by make, model, and model year (if appropriate). While we are happy to receive the additional information you provide, you are not required to furnish it to us.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam4698OpenHerr T. Spingler Abt. K2/ELE2 Robert Bosch GmbH; Herr T. Spingler Abt. K2/ELE2 Robert Bosch GmbH; Dear Herr Spingler: This is in reply to your FAX of July l9, l990, t Richard Van Iderstine of this agency asking for confirmation of an oral interpretation provided you by Jere Medlin, Office of Rulemaking, with respect to replaceable bulb headlamps. Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment, defines (section S3) a replaceable bulb headlamp as 'a headlamp comprising a bonded lens and reflector assembly and one or two standardized replaceable light sources.' In Europe you fix the lens to the reflector assembly with a rubber seal and clips. For the U.S. market you propose to add 'silicone-glue at four places between lens and housing to prevent removal of the lens.' Mr. Medlin informed you that this would be a 'bonded lens and reflector assembly.' The standard does not define 'bonded', but the intent of the definition is that, once the lens is joined to the reflector assembly, it shall not be separable. Any method of adhesion that accomplishes this would be a sufficient bond for purposes of the definition. If the application of silicone glue at four places between the lens and the reflector assembly is sufficient to prevent manual separation of the lens from the assembly, then it would be a sufficient bond. I hope that this answers your question. Sincerely,, Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel; |
|
ID: aiam5123OpenMr. Patrick R. Smorra Group Vice President Chrysler Corporation 38111 Van Dyke Avenue Sterling Heights, MI 48312; Mr. Patrick R. Smorra Group Vice President Chrysler Corporation 38111 Van Dyke Avenue Sterling Heights MI 48312; Dear Mr. Smorra: This responds to your letter of November 12 to th Administrator asking for a variance from the Federal motor vehicle safety standards for vehicles that Chrysler Corporation would like to sell to foreign nationals for their use on vacation in the United States. You have inquired whether additional information is required. The agency would be willing to consider Chrysler's request through the medium of a petition for temporary exemption from one or more specific Federal motor vehicle safety standards. The temporary exemption, two years in duration, permits a manufacturer to sell up to 2,500 exempted vehicles in any 12-month period during the term of the exemption, subject to such terms and conditions as the agency deems appropriate. These exemptions are renewable. Indeed, NHTSA has already provided exemptions to General Motors for the same purpose as Chrysler's, pursuant to 49 CFR 555.5 and 555.6(d). For your guidance, I enclose a copy of the Federal Register notice that granted GM's original petition in 1988. Because of the necessity to afford the public an opportunity to comment, a petitioner should anticipate an elapsed time of approximately four months between the agency's receipt of its petition and a determination on it. Should you have questions on the exemption process, Taylor Vinson of this office will be pleased to answer them (202-366-5263). You have also asked ' i f, upon expiration of the variance, the vehicle has not left the U.S. who is responsible for the delinquency?' This is an interesting question. The exemption is not provided directly to the purchaser. Instead, it is provided to a manufacturer to allow it to sell nonconforming vehicles to foreign nationals without violating the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, subject to the purchaser's agreement to export the vehicle when (s)he leaves this country. Should a manufacturer sell an exempted vehicle to a foreign national knowing, or in the exercise of due care having reason to know, that the purchaser did not intend to export it, the manufacturer would have violated the Safety Act's prohibition against sale of nonconforming vehicles, notwithstanding the fact that the vehicle had been exempted. Moreover, if the manufacturer did not take appropriate steps to assure that the purchaser honored his or her commitment to export the vehicle, the agency could find that continuation of the exemption was no longer in the public interest, and cancel it. However, if the manufacturer did not know or in the exercise of due care have any reason to know that its exempted vehicles would not be exported, it would appear to have incurred no liability under the Act. As for a foreign national purchaser who fails to export a vehicle in conformity with the terms of the condition imposed by the manufacturer under the exemption, it appears that the purchaser could be deemed to have violated the Safety Act's prohibition against introduction into interstate commerce of a nonconforming vehicle, notwithstanding the fact that the manufacturer had received an exemption for the manufacture and sale of the vehicle. Finally, depending on the safety standards from which the vehicle had been excused, the owner of the vehicle might find it difficult to register it in a State without bringing it into full compliance with the safety standards. You have also asked, ' I n the unlikely event that this vehicle has an accident in which it is deemed undriveable, who is responsible for its disposition.' The answer to this question would appear to turn on the ownership of the vehicle. Since Chrysler does not intend to lease the exempted vehicles, we assume that it will transfer all right, title, and interest in them to the foreign national purchasers, and we assume that those owners will be responsible for the disposition of wrecked vehicles deemed undriveable. Sincerely, John Womack Acting Chief Counsel Enclosure; |
|
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.