Pasar al contenido principal

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



Displaying 2291 - 2300 of 16508
Interpretations Date
 

ID: aiam3879

Open
Mr. Eddie Cole, Answer Products, Inc., 27967 Beale Court, Valencia, CA 91355; Mr. Eddie Cole
Answer Products
Inc.
27967 Beale Court
Valencia
CA 91355;

Dear Mr. Cole: This responds to your letter regarding the importation of motorcycl helmets by your company from Italy.; Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 218, *Motorcycle Helmets* applies to helmets designed for use by motorcyclists and other motor vehicle users. You stated in your letter that there is a DOT *approval sticker* on the helmet and that your company's name is clearly displayed on the helmet. Standard No. 218 requires that each helmet be permanently and legibly labeled with the manufacturer's name or identification, model designation, size, month and year of manufacture, and the symbol DOT. The DOT symbol does not indicate approval of any helmet by the Department of Transportation. Instead, the DOT symbol represents the manufacturer's certification that the helmet meets all the requirements of Standard No. 218. A copy of this standard is enclosed for your information.; As an importer, your company is also considered a manufacturer unde the provisions of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act which is administered by this agency. Therefore, either your company's name or the Italian manufacturer's name should be affixed to each helmet. Your company and the Italian manufacturer are both responsible for any defect in the helmet or failure to comply with the standard's requirements.; You asked about other regulations of which you should be aware. Copie of these are enclosed:; >>>49 CFR Part 551--*Procedural Rules* (Subpart D-- Service of proces on foreign manufacturers and importers).; 49 CFR Part 566--*Manufacturer Identification*.<<< If you need additional information, please contact this office. Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel

ID: aiam1844

Open
Honorable Garner E. Shriver, House of Representatives, Washington, DC 20515; Honorable Garner E. Shriver
House of Representatives
Washington
DC 20515;

Dear Mr. Shriver: This is in response to your letter of March 6, 1975, forwardin correspondence from one of your constituents, Mr. Dick Robbins, Jr., commenting on a proposed weakening of the bumper standard.; On January 2, 1975, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administratio (NHTSA) issued a *Federal Register* notice (copy enclosed) proposing to reduce the current 5 mph bumper impact requirements to 2.5 mph until the 1979 model year. The impact requirements would then be increased to 4 mph for 1979 and later model year cars.; The proposal was based primarily on the results of two agency-sponsore studies which indicated that the cost and weight of many current production bumpers, in light of inflation and fuel shortages, made the bumpers no longer cost beneficial. Information presented at public hearings on the bumper notice and comments submitted to the docket in response to the proposal have brought to light additional data. The NHTSA has carefully examined all of this evidence and reviewed its studies in light of the new information. As a result, the agency has concluded that the 5 mph protection level should not be reduced. This decision is contained in a *Federal Register* notice that was published on March 12, 1975 (Docket No. 74-11, Notice 7, Docket No. 73-19, Notice 6).; Your interest and that of Mr. Robbins in this matter is appreciated. Sincerely, James C. Schultz, Chief Counsel

ID: aiam1360

Open
Mr. George H. Jones, Manager, Louisiana Independent Tire Dealers Association, 4500 5th Avenue So. No. 307, Birmingham, AL 35212; Mr. George H. Jones
Manager
Louisiana Independent Tire Dealers Association
4500 5th Avenue So. No. 307
Birmingham
AL 35212;

Dear Mr. Jones: This is in reply to your letter of November 14, 1973, to Michael Pesko of our Chief Counsel's Office, asking whether dealers must record the name and address of the tire purchaser on the appropriate form at the same time the tire is sold. You indicate that most dealers record the information on their sales tickets and put it on registration forms at some later time, as the press of business allows.; The Tire Identification and Recordkeeping regulations (49 CFR Part 574 do not require dealers to record the information on the registration form at any specific time. The 'scare stories' to which you refer are not true at all. A recent NHTSA investigation of dealer recording practices was intended only to discover whether dealers were writing down the tire ID number and the purchaser's name, and not whether they were recording the information on particular forms.; The Tire Identification regulation (S 574.8(b)) requires th information to be supplied to the manufacturer (or person maintaining the information) every 30 days, unless less than 40 tires are sold (your letter to us incorrectly stated less than 60 tires), in which case the information must be reported when 40 tires are sold or 6 months elapses, whichever occurs first.; I hope this clarifies the situation. Sincerely, Lawrence R. Schneider, Chief Counsel

ID: aiam4498

Open
Mrs. Patricia Bicking 1132 Chestnut Avenue Woodbury Heights, NJ 08097; Mrs. Patricia Bicking 1132 Chestnut Avenue Woodbury Heights
NJ 08097;

"Dear Mrs. Bicking: This is a response to your letter of last fall i which you asked a number of questions concerning seat-belts and large school buses. I apologize for the delay in responding. In your correspondence, you enclosed a letter of January 19, 1984, from this Office to Thomas Built Buses, Inc., (Thomas), and the incoming letter from Thomas that was the basis of our interpretation. Your first question references the January 1984 letter, and asks why the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) decided that when school bus manufacturers install seat-belts or seat-belt anchorages on large school buses (over 10,000 lbs. gross vehicle weight rating GVWR ), the manufacturers do not have to certify that the belts or anchorages meet Federal motor vehicle safety standards 208, 209, and 210. The answer to this question is that NHTSA does not require a school bus manufacturer to install seat-belts on large school buses. Our regulations require a motor vehicle manufacturer to certify compliance to all applicable standards. You ask whether this decision still stands. The answer to that question is 'yes' for the reason just stated. The agency does not require large buses to have seat-belts because the 'compartmentalization' concept (to which you allude in your letter) supplies adequate protection for passengers in large school buses. Let me give you some background information on our school bus regulations that I think will help address your questions. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is responsible for developing safety standards applicable to all new motor vehicles, including school buses. In 1977, we issued a set of motor vehicle safety standards regulating various aspects of school bus performance. Among those standards is Standard 222, School Bus Passenger Seating and Crash Protection. Standard 222 requires large school buses to have passenger crash protection through 'compartmentalization.' Compartmentalization requires large school buses to incorporate certain protective elements into the vehicles' interior construction, thereby reducing the risk of injury to school bus passengers without the need for safety belts. These elements include high seats with heavily padded backs and improved seat spacing and performance. (Our regulations require a safety belt for the school bus driver because the driver's position is not compartmentalized. Further, because small school buses experience greater force levels in a crash, passengers on these vehicles need the added safety benefits of the belts.) You also asked whether there have been any improvements in school bus seating compartments since 1977, and whether the improvements are mandatory. The answer to your question is that there have been no major changes in the school bus safety standards since they became effective in April, 1977. However, the agency continuously reviews school bus safety standards to assess whether it is appropriate to add or amend a requirement. You may be interested to know that school buses continue to have one of the lowest fatality rates for any class of motor vehicle. Large school buses are among the safest motor vehicles because of their size and weight (which generally reduce an occupant's exposure to injury-threatening crash forces), the drivers' training and experience, and the extra care other motorists take when they are near a school bus. For these reasons, NHTSA has not required safety belts in large school buses. I hope you find this information helpful. If you have further questions, please contace Joan Tilghman, of my staff, at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel";

ID: aiam5323

Open
Mr. Scott Slaughter Pitts Enterprises, Inc. 5734 Highway 431 P.O. Box 155 Pittsview, AL 36871; Mr. Scott Slaughter Pitts Enterprises
Inc. 5734 Highway 431 P.O. Box 155 Pittsview
AL 36871;

"Dear Mr. Slaughter: This responds to your inquiry about whether logging trailer known as the 'knuckle boom loader trailer' that you manufacture is a motor vehicle that would have to comply with the applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. You explained that your trailer stays in the woods the majority of its life and is infrequently transported over public roads between job sites. I am pleased to have this opportunity to explain our regulations to you. This agency interprets and enforces the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act ('Safety Act' 13 U.S.C. 1392 et seq.) under which the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards are promulgated. The Act defines the term 'motor vehicle' as follows: 'any vehicle driven or drawn by mechanical power manufactured primarily for use on the public streets, roads, and highways, except any vehicle operated exclusively on a rail or rails.' Whether the agency considers your trailer to be a motor vehicle depends on its use. It is the agency's position that this statutory definition does not encompass mobile construction equipment, such as cranes and scrapers, which use the highway only to move between job sites and which typically spend extended periods of time at a single job site. In such cases, the on-highway use of the vehicle is merely incidental and is not the primary purpose for which the vehicle was manufactured. In contrast are instances where vehicles, such as dump trucks, frequently use the highway going to and from job sites, and stay at a job site for only a limited time. Such vehicles are considered motor vehicles for purposes of the Safety Act, since the on-highway use is more than 'incidental.' Based on the available information, it appears that your trailer is not a 'motor vehicle' within the meaning of the Safety Act. This conclusion is based on statements in your letter and brochures that this equipment spends extended periods of time at a single construction site and only uses the public roads infrequently to move between job sites. Thus, the agency would consider the use of your device on the public roads to be incidental and not its primary purpose. Since your trailer is not a motor vehicle, it would not be subject to our Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. If the agency were to receive additional information indicating that your trailer used the roads more than on an incidental basis, then the agency would reassess this interpretation. If the agency were to determine that your trailer is a motor vehicle, then the trailer would have to comply with the applicable Standards, including Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment, which addresses conspicuity, Standard No. 115, Vehicle Identification Numbers, Standard No. 120, Tire Selection and Rims for Motor Vehicles Other Than Passenger Cars, and Standard No. 121 Air Brake Systems which requires automatic slack adjusters and brakes to act on all wheels. 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";

ID: aiam0121

Open
Mr. R. Hoffman, Service Department, Rockford Motors, Incorporated, 1911 Harrison Avenue, Rockford, Illinois 61101; Mr. R. Hoffman
Service Department
Rockford Motors
Incorporated
1911 Harrison Avenue
Rockford
Illinois 61101;

Dear Mr. Hoffman: Thank you for your letter of July 30, 1968, in which you reques additional information in regard to certification requirements.; The statement in your letter to the effect that because detailed labe requirements are now being prepared, you are not required to affix a certification label on your motorcycles currently being manufactured is not exactly correct. The 'Certification Requirement Notice,' published in the Federal Register, Volume 32, Number 215, dated November 4, 1967, a copy of which is enclosed, states that a certification label or tag should be affixed to each applicable motor vehicle if manufactured on or after January 1, 1968. In your case the only safety standard that currently involves motorcycles is Number 205, 'Glazing Materials,' pertaining to windshields. On January 1, 1969, another safety standard, Number 108, 'Lamps, reflecting Devices, and Associated Equipment,' will involve motorcycles manufactured on or after that date.; For your immediate information, a copy of the Federal Motor Vehicl Safety Standards with Amendments is enclosed, with particular attention called to Table III, page MVSS 108-18 (1969) and Table IV, page MVSS 108-20 and 21 (1969).; In regard to your question as to whether you have to add the year o manufacture to your serial numbers, this is not a specific requirement, but would be an aid to clarifying the serial numbering system that identifies applicable vehicles as manufactured on or after January 1, 1968.; The study involving the possibility of specific changes t certification requirements is currently in the proposed rule making category and if changes do become finalized they will be published in the Federal Register.; Please furnish this office with the requirements shown in paragraph in the enclosed Certification Requirement Notice at your earliest convenience.; I trust this information will be of assistance to you in regard to you inquiries.; Sincerely, Francis Armstrong, Director, Office of Performance Analysis Motor Vehicle Safety Performance Service;

ID: aiam4861

Open
Mr. H. Hurley Haywood Vice President Brumos Motor Cars, Inc. 10231 Atlantic Boulevard Jacksonville, FL 32225; Mr. H. Hurley Haywood Vice President Brumos Motor Cars
Inc. 10231 Atlantic Boulevard Jacksonville
FL 32225;

"Dear Mr. Haywood: This responds to your letter of March 20, 1991 wit respect to 'the sale of a very limited number of specially built cars in the U.S.' Components would be manufactured by Porsche. The chassis would be 'a carbon fiber 962 racing tub' with a hand built body. The car could be imported either as an assembled vehicle or as a kit and assembled here. You have asked for information regarding 'low volume manufacturers exemptions from certain DOT regulations, emissions, passive restraints, bumper height, and all other pertinent information regarding manufacturing and sale of vehicles in the U.S.' You have not enclosed a photo of the car but your remark that the chassis is a 'racing tub' raises the possibility that the vehicle may be intended for racing purposes. Single-seat vehicles imported for competition on closed circuit courses and not used on the public roads are generally not 'motor vehicles' under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, and no regulations apply to them. If you wish to pursue this possibility further, please send us more information on the vehicle. Assuming that the car is subject to the Safety Act, its manufacturer is eligible to apply for a temporary exemption from one or more of the Federal motor vehicle safety standards on several grounds. Exemptions of up to three years may be provided a manufacturer whose total motor vehicle production was 10,000 units or less in the year preceding the filing of its petition. Alternatively, exemptions of up to two years may be provided covering up to 2,500 vehicles per year if the manufacturer-petitioner can demonstrate that the exemption would facilitate the field evaluation of innovative safety features or low-emission vehicles, or if, in the absence of an exemption, the manufacturer would be prevented from selling a motor vehicle whose overall level of safety is at least equivalent to that of a vehicle complying with all the safety standards. However, the exemption authority extends only to the safety standards. The bumper height standard was issued under the authority of the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act which contains no exemption provisions. The emission standards are issued by the Environmental Protection Agency, which is not part of the Department of Transportation, and you will have to contact them as to their requirements. If the intent is to import a fully assembled motor vehicle into the United States, at the time of entry it will have to bear the certification of its manufacturer that it complies with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety, bumper, and theft prevention standards (the certification label must also list the standards from which exemptions may have been provided). If the intent is to ship the vehicle in a disassembled state for assembly by the purchaser or manufacturer's agent in the United States, and if the kit contains l00% of the parts necessary for assembly, we regard the foreign supplier as the 'manufacturer', responsible for ensuring compliance with all Federal requirements, including provision of certification. I enclose an information sheet with respect to the regulations that we administer, and will be pleased to answer any further questions you may have. If you prefer to telephone, Taylor Vinson of this Office will be able to help you (202-366-5263). Sincerely, Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel";

ID: aiam0571

Open
Mr. Gerald A. Schlegel, Transportation Manufactured Housing, P.O. Box 198, Mason, MI 48854; Mr. Gerald A. Schlegel
Transportation Manufactured Housing
P.O. Box 198
Mason
MI 48854;

Dear Mr. Schlegel: This is in reply to your letter of December 13, 1971, concerning you conversation with Michael Peskoe regarding 'the provisions of Section 566.5, Manufacturer Identification.' You ask two questions which concern that regulation, the Certification regulations, and regulations concerning 'Vehicles Manufactured in Two or More Stages' (49 CFR Parts 567, 568).; Your first question is whether, 'as a manufacturer of Modular Homes which are built in a factory and then transported on a low-bed type trailer to the job site, are we required to label our units the same as a mobile home?' The requirements for labeling are found in Parts 567 and 568, and are part of the requirement that manufacturers certify compliance with all motor vehicle safety standards applicable to the particular vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment they manufacture. Modular homes are not motor vehicles under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. S1381 *et seq*.) and accordingly there are no requirements that they be certified or labeled.; Your second question is as follows: ' . . . we do manufacture some o these low-bed trailers, they are strictly for our own use in transporting our modular homes, and in this case are we required to submit this report and also label any trailers we would build in the future?' Trailers are motor vehicles under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act and are required to comply with applicable standards. They are also required to be certified by the manufacturer in accordance with the Certification regulations (Part 567), and as a manufacturer of trailers you are required to submit the information specified in Part 566.; A copy of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, and Part 566, 567, and 568 are enclosed, as is a notice describing how to obtain a copy of the motor vehicle safety standards.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel

ID: aiam5289

Open
Ms. Kathy Rose Account Directive FitzGerald Corporation 8341 Artesia Boulevard, Suite P Buena Park, CA 90621; Ms. Kathy Rose Account Directive FitzGerald Corporation 8341 Artesia Boulevard
Suite P Buena Park
CA 90621;

Dear Ms. Rose: Your letter of October 12, 1993, to the Office of Moto Carriers in Sacramento, has reached us for reply. Your company produces a 'trailer skirting' for van trailers, and some of your customers have asked 'whether it is legal to have the retroreflective tape which is required by Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 to be applied to the length of the trailer be placed below the trailer, on the trailer skirting.' The letter does not indicate whether the skirting is intended as original or aftermarket equipment. If the skirting is original equipment that is added to the trailer at the time of its manufacture and intended to remain there for the life of the trailer, the conspicuity treatment required by the standard may be affixed to it, provided that it is mounted as near as practicable within a range that is not less than 375mm and not more than 1525mm (approximately 15 to 60 inches) above the road surface. Under that condition, the portion of the trailer side that is above the skirting need not be equipped with the conspicuity treatment. If the skirting is aftermarket equipment, there is no requirement or restriction relating to conspicuity treatment of the skirting. We assume that the trailer to which it will be attached, if manufactured on or after December 1, 1993, will bear conspicuity markings in accordance with the standard. Sincerely, John Womack Acting Chief Counsel;

ID: aiam1049

Open
Mr. Elmer Morgan, Mapother and Morgan, 521 West Market Street, Louisville, KY 40202; Mr. Elmer Morgan
Mapother and Morgan
521 West Market Street
Louisville
KY 40202;

Dear Mr. Morgan: This is in response to your question concerning the status o repossessing banks and finance companies as transferors under the odometer disclosure requirements of the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act.; Banks and finance companies are obliged to make a disclosure upo resale of a repossessed vehicle. It is advisable to provide a disclosure form to be filled out by the defaulting transferor upon repossession. Should the defaulting transferor refuse to complete the form and the odometer is later found to be in error he may be subject to civil action under the Act.; In any case, if the bank or finance company does not know that th mileage is wrong, they should not state that the mileage is in error. If the repossessor wishes to add a statement that the vehicle has been repossessed or otherwise outside his control, he may do so.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant 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.