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: aiam1108OpenCharles E. Smith, Purchasing Manager, Young Windows, Inc., Brook and Colwell Roads, Conshohocken, PA 19428; Charles E. Smith Purchasing Manager Young Windows Inc. Brook and Colwell Roads Conshohocken PA 19428; Dear Mr. Smith: This is in reply to your letter of March 27, 1973, requestin information on requirements for marking glazing materials for use in motor vehicles, and whether you must furnish cleaning instructions for glazing you manufacture.; Your questions regarding marking requirements are similar to thos raised by Mrs. Lewis Cook of your company, in a letter of February 20, 1973. We responded to that letter on April 4, 1973 (a copy is enclosed), and you should have received our response by this time. In that letter we stated that your responsibilities as a manufacturer who cuts glazing materials are to mark that material in conformity with section 6 of ANS Z26.1-1966. We should amplify our response in that letter by stating that if the glazing material as you receive it already contains the required markings, you may use those markings in meeting the requirements.; You indicate your question concerning requirements for cleanin instructions arises from a customer to whom you furnished Rohm and Haas Plexiglas. Paragraph S5.2.1.3 of Standard No. 205 provides that glazing materials designated AS-12 or AS-13 must be labeled (using a label that is removable by hand) with cleaning instructions. If the Rohm and Haas Plexiglas is of either of these glazing designations, it must be so labeled. If it is not, there are no requirements that cleaning instructions be furnished.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam3135OpenMr. Hisakazu Murakami, Technical Representative - Safety, Engineering Office of North America, Nissan Motor Co., Ltd., 1919 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Suite 707, P.O. Box 57105, Washington, DC 20037; Mr. Hisakazu Murakami Technical Representative - Safety Engineering Office of North America Nissan Motor Co. Ltd. 1919 Pennsylvania Ave. N.W. Suite 707 P.O. Box 57105 Washington DC 20037; Dear Mr. Murakami:#This is in response to your letter of September 14 1979, in which you asked about the applicability of the variable intensity illumination requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 101-80, *Controls and Displays*, to various components in your company's automobiles. You listed and identified these parts in Figure 1 of your letter which I will refer to in answering your questions.#The variable intensity illumination requirements of section 5.3.3 of Safety Standard 101-80 are applicable to (1) 'controls, gauges, and their identification,' and to (2) 'any illumination that is provided in the passenger compartment when and only when the headlights are activated.' As noted in section 5 of Safety Standard 101-80, the location, identification, and illumination requirements are applicable only to passenger cars and other vehicles equipped with any control listed in section 5.1 or in column 1 of Table 1. The term 'gauge' is defined in Section 4 as a 'display that is listed in section 5.1 or in Table 2 and is not a telltale.'#Applying these criteria to the list of automobile components in your letter, I have concluded that none of the listed components, except the ordinary clock and the automatic gear position illumination lamp, are subject to the requirements of Section 5.3.3 of Safety Standard 101-80. Since this result resolves the issues raised in Questions Q2.1 - Q2.5 of your letter, I have not addressed them in this response.#The components identified in your diagram by letters a - h (the room lamp, spot lamp, luggage room lamp, personal lamp, radio, foot lamp, step lamp, and the luggage room lamp for hatchback vehicles) are not subject to the requirements of section 5.3.3. This is because they are not controls listed in section 5.1 or in column 1 of Table 1 of Safety Standard 101-80 and because they do not illuminate the passenger compartment when and only when the headlights are activated. Similarly the glove box lamp and the console box lamp (items i and j) are not subject to section 5.3.3. They are not controls listed in Safety Standard 101-80 and they are not activated when and only when the headlights are activated since their activation requires both opening the box lids and switching on the headlights.#The ignition key illumination lamp (item k), which is not a control listed in Safety Standard 101-80, is activated when the light control switch is turned to the 'small lights only' position (this activates the clearance clamps (sic), identification lamps, and other exterior lamps other than the headlights.) When the switch is turned to the position that activates both, the small lights and the headlights, the key illumination lamp is deactivated. Consequently, the lamp is not activated when and only when the headlights are activated and is, therefore, not subject to the variable intensity illumination requirements.#You noted in conversation with Ms. Debra Weiner of my office that your company uses two types of clocks (item 1 in your letter) in its automobiles. One is an ordinary clock whose face is illuminated when and only when the headlights are activated. The requirements of section 5.3.5 would apply to the illumination of this type of clock.#The other clock used in your company's automobiles is a digital clock with a flourescent (sic) readout which shines with greater intensity during the day and with a lower intensity at night when the headlights are activated. Since this clock is not a control or a display listed in Safety Standard 101-80 and its illumination is not activated when and only when the headlamps are activated, the requirements of section 5.3.3 for continuously variable illumination are not applicable. Section 5.3.3 also provides that light intensity for informational readout systems shall have at least two values. The term 'informational readout systems' which is not defined in Safety Standard 101-80 refers to the term 'informational readout display,' which is defined as 'a display using light-emitting diodes, liquid crystals, or other electro illuminating devices where one or more than one type of information or message may be displayed.' The term 'display' includes only those displays listed in section 5.1 or in column 1 of Table 2 of the standard and these listings do not include a digital clock. Therefore, the digital clock would not be subject to the light intensity requirements for informational readout systems.#The automatic gear position illumination lamp (item m in your letter) is subject to the variable intensity illumination requirements of section 5.3.3. Although it is not a control (see preamble to Safety Standard 101-80, 43 FR 27541, June 26, 1978) this lamp is activated when and only when the headlights are activated.#In Question 2 of your letter, you asked for the definition of the terms 'continuously variable' and 'variable.' The term 'continuously variable' is defined in section 5.3.3(a) and (b) of Safety Standard 101-80. It is followed by a description of the two light intensities which must be provided for informational readout systems. The term 'variable' appears in the next sentence in section 5.3.3 which states that:#>>>'The intensity of any illumination that is provided in the passenger compartment when and only when the headlights are activated *shall also be variable in a manner that complies with this paragraph*. (sic)<<<#The underlined words in the quoted sentence refer to the definition of 'continuously variable' except in the case of informational readout displays where the words refer to illumination of two intensities.#If you have any further questions, I will be happy to answer them.#Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel; |
|
ID: aiam1558OpenMr. Steve A. Spretnjak, Excel Industries, 1003 Industrial Parkway, Elkhart, IN 46514; Mr. Steve A. Spretnjak Excel Industries 1003 Industrial Parkway Elkhart IN 46514; Dear Mr. Spretnjak: This is in reply to your letter of June 28, 1974, requesting the statu of a proposed amendment published January 9, 1971 (36 F.R. 327), to Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 205, 'Glazing Materials,' that would have required markings specified for windshields to appear in each windshield's lower left-hand corner.; This proposed requirement was not adopted. Other requirements propose by this notice, however, were adopted by a subsequent notice published June 21, 1972 (37 F.R. 12237), which amended Standard No. 205. The preamble of this notice referred to the agency's action on the proposed requirements for marking location. A further notice was issued on November 11, 1972 (37 F.R. 24035), which responded to petitions for reconsideration of the amendments of June 21, 1972. Copies of the notices of June 21 and November 11, 1972, are enclosed.; There are presently no requirements regarding the location of marking for motor vehicle glazing materials.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Acting Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam3565OpenMrs. James J. Mitchell, Jr., 20 Lexington Avenue, Suffern, NY 10901; Mrs. James J. Mitchell Jr. 20 Lexington Avenue Suffern NY 10901; Dear Mrs. Mitchell: The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is pleased to lear that you want to install a high-mounted stop lamp on your 1978 Buick LaSabre. The two studies that the Administration funded, one with the Essex Corporation and the other with the Allen Corporation, indicated that rear end collisions could possibly be reduced by 50 percent with the use of a single high-mounted stop lamp. We do not know whether the States of New York or New Jersey will allow the use of these lamps. Our Office of Rulemaking contacted the American Association of Motor Vehicle Manufacturers (AAMVA) but the information we received was indefinite, and I would suggest that you contact your local State Police for a definitive answer. The agency has proposed that passenger cars be equipped with this system, and if the proposal is adopted, the lamps would be legal in all States.; As to where to locate these lamps on the car, our research showed tha a single lamp, placed on the rear vertical centerline of the vehicle and within the back window (either inside or outside) was the most effective position. Our research also included a system of two high-mounted lamps, mounted on either side of the rear window, apparently similar to the one you observed in upstate New York, however, this was not nearly as effective as the single lamp system in reducing rear end collisions.; Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam3070OpenMr. Hisakazu Murakami, Nissan Motor Co., Ltd., Suite No. 1012, 1028 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20036; Mr. Hisakazu Murakami Nissan Motor Co. Ltd. Suite No. 1012 1028 Connecticut Avenue N.W. Washington DC 20036; Dear Mr. Murakami: This responds to your letter of July 3, 1979, asking several question concerning the definition of 'designated seating position' (49 CFR 571.3), as that term was recently amended (44 FR 23229, April 19, 1979).; In your first question, you ask for confirmation that any bench o split-bench seat with less than 50 inches of hip room may never be required to have three or more than three designated seating positions, notwithstanding the capability of accommodating a person at least as large as a fifth percentile adult female. Your assumption is incorrect. As noted in the preamble to the recent amendment, 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 (44 FR 23232). 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. The 50-inch caveat was included in the definition to simplify determinations of proper seating capacity by both manufacturers and the agency.; Your second question involves technical aspects of the amende definition of 'designated seating position'. The definition specifies that 'hip room' is to be measured in accordance with SAE J1100(a). That standard defines 'hip room' as,; >>>'the minimum dimension measured laterally between the trimme surfaces on the 'x' plane through the SgRP-front within 1.0 in. (25mm) below and 3.0 in. (76mm) above the SgRP-front and 3.0 in. (76mm) fore and aft of the SgRP-front.' (Area A in your diagrams.)<<<; Your question includes diagrams and asks whether various portions o vehicle seats or other components would be considered 'trimmed surfaces' within SAE Standard J1100(a).; Specifically, you ask whether slightly soft surfaces such as arm rests seat back contours or other raised portions of the seat cushion would be considered 'trimmed surfaces', for purposes of determining the minimum hip room dimension. The answer to your question is yes. The agency would probably consider all of the surfaces illustrated in your letter 'trimmed surfaces' and, strictly speaking, within the meaning of the SAE procedure. This interpretation must be qualified, however. The procedure specifies that 'hip room' is the minimum dimension 'between trimmed surfaces'. If a particular bench seat has distinct sections, the total dimension must be determined by adding the minimum dimensions of each section. For example, your Figure 5 illustrates a bench seat that includes a slightly raised center surface on the tunnel (in the center of the seat over the driveshaft). The lowest portion of Area A as defined in SAE J1100(a) would strike the side of this elevated center section, even though the top portion of Area A would be above the elevation. In such a case, there would be three distinct portions of the seat (the driver's seat, the passenger seat, and the center seat position) that should be measured separately and then added together to get the total dimension. Otherwise, only the portion of the seat on the driver's side of the center elevation would be measured under the strict wording of the SAE procedure--an absurd result.; Regarding these questions about the measurement procedure, I must mak several candid remarks. The agency will not allow manufacturers to avoid the obvious intent of the definition of 'designated seating position' by finding loopholes in the measurement procedure. Further, as noted above, even if the hip room as measured in accordance with SAE J1100(a) is less than 50 inches, a manufacturer may still be required to designate three seating positions. If the measured dimension is less than 50 inches only because of slight elevations or contours on the outside seat cushion, a manufacturer must designate at least three positions if these elevations or contours are not real impediments to three persons occupying the seat.; Determinations of designated seating capacity under the amende definition should not cause manufacturers any real problems. If a manufacturer truly only intends to market a particular bench or split-bench seat for two occupants, he can and should make this obvious by the seat design, regardless of whether the total seat dimension is more than 50 inches or less than 50 inches. One simple way to do this is to install a permanent arm rest or console in the center portion of the seat.; I hope this response has clarified our position and will alleviate an problems you might have in making future determinations of proper designated seating capacity.; Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam3420OpenAlden Lee, Gelco Fleet & Management Services Company, Three Gelco Drive, Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344; Alden Lee Gelco Fleet & Management Services Company Three Gelco Drive Eden Prairie Minnesota 55344; Dear Mr. Lee: This is in response to your letter of April 13, 1981, requesting listing of those states whose certificates of title have been approved by the agency foruse in lieu of the separate Federal odometer form.; The Odometer Disclosure Requirements (49 CFR Part 580) provide that th transferor of a vehicle may make the disclosure required by the Federal odometer laws on the state certificate of title, if the state title document contains essentially the same information required on the Federal odometer disclosure statement. If the information contained on the state certificate of title varies from that required by the Federal form, the state must obtain the approval of this agency before its certificate of title can be used as a substitute for the Federal form.; In order to spare states the burden of an approval process the agenc has indicated that certain variations from the Federal form are acceptable. In the *Federal Register* notice of August 1, 1977, which amended the disclosure regulation, we gave examples of shortened forms that would be acceptable. A state title can be considered to be approved for use as a full disclosure statement if it varies from the Federal form in only those aspects noted in the August 1, 1977, notice, a copy of which is enclosed.; The following states have odometer statements on their motor vehicl title forms that are consistent with the requirements of the Federal law:; >>>Maryland, Pennsylvania Massachusetts, Hawaii Michigan, New York Minnesota, North Dakota Ohio>>> In addition, the following states submitted title forms to the agenc asking for approval but had unacceptable statements. Each state was advised that before its form could be approved certain additional information was required on its certificate of title. We do not know whether that information has been included on the titles.; >>>North Carolina, Virginia Delaware, Washington South Dakota, Utah South Carolina, Wisconsin Indiana If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to write. Sincerely, Shirley Ransom, Trial Attorney |
|
ID: aiam3973OpenMr. Lee Comeau, Associate, Bureau of Educational Management Services, New York State Education Department, Cultural Education Center, Room 3059, Albany, NY 12230; Mr. Lee Comeau Associate Bureau of Educational Management Services New York State Education Department Cultural Education Center Room 3059 Albany NY 12230; Dear Mr. Comeau: This responds to your April 12, 1985 letter concerning the January 198 school bus safety study prepared for the Canadian government (Transport Canada). You were particularly interested in the results of the study relating to safety belts in school buses.; The Transport Canada study found that 'The use of a type I seat bel system in any current design of school bus may result in more severe head and neck injuries for a belted occupant than an unbelted one, in a severe frontal collision.' You asked for our opinion as to the reliability of the findings, and whether they would be admissible in a court of law. You also asked whether a school district or bus manufacturer can be liable for negligency if a seat belt causes injury to a belted occupant.; I must explain that we are unable to issue an opinion regarding eithe the admissibility or effect of the Canadian study's findings in a court of law. This agency is responsible for establishing Federal motor vehicle safety standards and investigating alleged safety-related defects. We are not authorized to participate in or render advisory opinions on private litigation. The issues you raised would depend on the type of legal proceeding and the evidentiary rules of the particular court system, as well as other evidence that might be introduced in a lawsuit. Questions concerning negligence and private liability would also have to be answered according to the law of the particular jurisdiction. Since these matters are usually governed by state law, I suggest that you consult with your attorney to discuss how New York law would apply.; As to whether the Canadian study is reliable, this agency is in th process of reviewing the study's findings. Thus far, we have no reason to dispute its conclusions, given the nature of the test conducted. The results of the study appear to be in agreement with some laboratory tests conducted within the United States, including sled tests conducted by the agency in 1978. Although the Canadian test results appear to be accurate, we would like to emphasize that the study involved only a severe (48 km/h) frontal barrier crash test. Questions concerning how safety belts would provide benefits in other types of crashes, such as side impacts or rollovers, were not addressed. In addition, it must be noted that the study was based on a test, not on real-world statistics. We believe that these factors should be taken into consideration when evaluating the results of the Canadian study and its implications for safety belts on school buses.; As you may know, our Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS's do not require the installation of safety belts on new large school buses, but any school district that wishes to have such belts installed is free to do so. We do require safety belts on smaller school buses, because we believe belts are particularly effective in protecting occupants in such vehicles. For larger school buses (those with gross vehicle weight ratings over 10,000 pounds), we require 'compartmentalization'--i.e., high seat backs with extra padding--to provide occupant protection, and we believe the concept works well.; In that regard, I note the Canadian study found that the requirement for compartmentalization required by Canadian safety Standard 222 (CMVSS No. 222) 'functions as intended during frontal impacts and provides excellent protection for occupants.' FMVSS No. 222, our safety standard mandating compartmentalization in school buses, has requirements similar to CMVSS 222. We believe that the Canadian study further supports the effectiveness of the compartmentalization concept required by FMVSS No. 222.; I hope this information is helpful. Sincerely, Jeffrey R. Miller, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam2661OpenMr. Robert H. J. Loftus, McCandlish, Lillard, Bauknight, Church & Best, 4069 Chain Bridge Road, Fairfax, VA 22030; Mr. Robert H. J. Loftus McCandlish Lillard Bauknight Church & Best 4069 Chain Bridge Road Fairfax VA 22030; Dear Mr. Loftus: This responds to your August 4, 1977, letter asking whether th remanufacture of a school bus using a new chassis and an old school bus body constitutes the manufacture of a new school bus subject to the new Federal school bus safety standards.; The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has determined tha the manufacture of a vehicle using a new chassis and an old body is the manufacture of a new vehicle. (Part 571.7, Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations.) In this regulation the agency indicated that the only time that the remanufacture of a vehicle would be exempted from compliance with the new safety standards is when an old chassis is combined with a new body. In those situations, the vehicle is considered a used vehicle not subject to the standards.; In the case to which you refer, the combination of a new chassis and a old school bus body would require that you modify the bus body to comply with all of the Federal school bus safety standards in effect on the date of your manufacture of the new bus.; Sincerely, Joseph J. Levin, Jr., Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam2231OpenMr. Mori Nakashima, Inoue Rubber International Co., Ltd., 301 Mill Rd., P.O. Box 396, Hewlett, NY 11557; Mr. Mori Nakashima Inoue Rubber International Co. Ltd. 301 Mill Rd. P.O. Box 396 Hewlett NY 11557; Dear Mr. Nakashima: I am writing to confirm your telephone conversation with Mark Schwimme of this office on February 25, 1976, concerning tires that you export to the United States and to the Soviet Union.; I understand that you export tires from Japan to the Soviet Union, t be mounted on motorcycles that are in turn exported to the United States. Representatives of the motorcycle manufacturer have requested a certification that the tires comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 119, *New Pneumatic Tires for Vehicles Other Than Passenger Cars*. You asked Mr. Schwimmer how to obtain such a certification from the Department of Transportation.; This Department does not certify or otherwise issue advance approval of motor vehicles, tires, or other motor vehicle equipment. Certification, under the applicable law and regulations, must be done by the manufacturer. The symbol 'DOT', molded in the tire sidewall by you, pursuant to S6.5(a), constitutes your certification that your product complies with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards (i.e., in this case, Standard No. 119). If it is subsequently determined that your product does not comply with the standard, then the tires are subject to the notification and remedy provisions of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, as amended. The 'DOT' symbol on the sidewall may very well be the certification that your Soviet customer has in mind.; Please note that section 110(e) of the National Traffic and Moto Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. S 1399(e)) requires every manufacturer who offers a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment for importation into the United States to designate a permanent resident of the United States as his agent, upon whom service of all processes, orders, notices, decisions, and requirements may be made. Our records indicate that Inoue Rubber International Co., Ltd. has not complied with this requirement.; The procedural regulations (49 CFR 551.45) for designation of agen pursuant to the Act require:; >>>1. A certification by its maker that the designation is binding o Inoue Rubber International Co., Ltd. under the laws, corporate by-laws, or other requirements governing the making of the designation at the time and place where it is made,; 2. The full legal name, principal place of business and mailing addres of Inoue Rubber International Co., Ltd.,; 3. Trade names, or other designation of origin of the products of Inou Rubber International Co., Ltd. that do not bear its legal name,; 4. A provision that the designation shall remain in effect unti withdrawn or replaced by Inoue Rubber International Co., Ltd.,; 5. A declaration of acceptance duly signed by the agent appointed which may be an individual, a firm or a U.S. corporation, and; 6. The full legal name and address of the designated agent. In addition, the designation must be signed by one with authority t appoint the agent, the signer's name and title should be clearly indicated beneath his signature.; Copies of these regulations and of Standard No. 119 are enclosed fo your information and guidance.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam3709OpenMr. C. J. Johnson, Manager, Product Reliability, The BF Goodrich Company, Tire Group, 500 South Main Street, Akron, OH 44318; Mr. C. J. Johnson Manager Product Reliability The BF Goodrich Company Tire Group 500 South Main Street Akron OH 44318; Dear Mr. Johnson: This is in response to your May 12, 1983 letter regarding the tir sidewall molding requirements of the Uniform Tire Quality Grading Standards. In that letter you indicated that, acting in reliance on statements by a NHTSA employee, your company modified certain new tire molds by deleting the numerical treadwear grade from the sidewall label, but leaving the word 'TREADWEAR' in place. NHTSA subsequently stated, in a letter to Toyo Tire Company, that if the sidewall molded label is modified, both the numerical grade and the word 'TREADWEAR' should be deleted. You also indicated that BF Goodrich is now in the process of modifying the molds again to delete the word 'TREADWEAR'.; In light of your good faith reliance on agency statements and you current efforts to conform to the policy stated in our letter to Toyo Tire Company, NHTSA will take no enforcement action regarding sidewall molding requirements for tires produced through the completion of the mold modification process.; For future reference, please be aware formal interpretations of lega requirements are issued only by this office and only in writing. To obtain an interpretation upon which reliance can be placed for purposes of making business decisions, you should direct a letter of inquiry to the Chief Counsel's Office.; 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.