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: aiam1722OpenMr. Frank L. Wigand Jr., Engineering Department, Todco Division, 2195 Alpine Way, Hayward, CA 94545; Mr. Frank L. Wigand Jr. Engineering Department Todco Division 2195 Alpine Way Hayward CA 94545; Dear Mr. Wigand: This responds to your November 17, 1974, letter asking whether trailer converter dolly which may also be coupled to a two-axle truck-tractor as a 'third axle attachment' (the Jifflox) must be equipped with a spring brake parking system to conform to the requirements of Standard No. 121, *Air brake systems.*; Our November 4, 1974, response (copy enclosed) to your September 27 1974, questions on the same subject states that the Jifflox would be exempt from parking brake requirements if it is manufactured and sold for use as a trailer converter dolly. A trailer converter dolly is defined in 49 CFR 571.3 as a trailer equipped with one or more axles, a lower half of a fifth wheel, and a drawbar.; You questioned our conclusion of November 4, 1974, that a truck-tracto which is manufactured to accept the Jifflox must be certified by its manufacturer as complying with the standard with the Jifflox in place. You argue that the Jifflox is simply another towed vehicle which meets the requirements applicable to trailer converter dollies.; The NHTSA has established that a vehicle which is designed to accept a optional component must be capable of meeting all applicable standards with that component installed. Specifically, in response to inquiries from Volkswagen, the NHTSA stated that a vehicle designed to accept an air conditioner, must be capable of meeting barrier crash requirements with the weight of an air conditioner installed.; Similarly, a vehicle designed to accept certain components must b capable of meeting Standard No. 121 with those components attached. For example, a truck-tractor designed to accept a cargo box forward of the fifth wheel must be capable of meeting all requirements of Standard No. 121 with that cargo box in place.; It is even more important that a vehicle design which involve modification of the air lines to accept the Jifflox must be capable of meeting all requirements of the standard with the Jifflox attached. The Jifflox connections, for example, can affect the actuation and release times of the truck air brake system. Also, the added GAWR capabilities of two rear axles would affect the stopping capabilities of the truck-tractor loaded to GVWR. Other standards (e.g., Standard No. 108, *Lamps, reflective devices, and associated equipment*) could be affected by the addition of Jifflox.; Thus we would require manufacturers of truck-tractors that are designe to accept the Jiffloox to certify compliance with Jifflox attached. We noted in our November 4, 1974, letter that, if the truck manufacturer determines that parking brakes are required on the Jifflox axle to meet S5.6.1 or S5.6.2, those parking brakes would have to be applied by an energy source that is not affected by loss of air pressure or brake fluid pressure in the service brake system.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Acting Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam1237OpenMr. Wesley Wells, 6879 Sayler Avenue, Cincinnati, OH 45233; Mr. Wesley Wells 6879 Sayler Avenue Cincinnati OH 45233; Dear Mr. Wells: This is in response to your letter of May 10, 1973, concerning you purchase of a 1973 truck from Haag Motors which was sold as new but had an odometer reading of 1,125 miles at the time of sale. I apologize for our delay in replying.; The sale of a vehicle as new with an odometer reading of 1,125 mile does not violate Federal law, although it may violate a consumer protection statute in your state or the state of purchase. There is, however, a Federal law which requires sellers of motor vehicles to make an odometer disclosure statement at the time of sale. If you purchased the truck after March 1, 1973, and its gross vehicle weight rating does not exceed 16,000 pounds, you may have a private civil action against the dealer for $1,500 or treble damages, if he failed to execute the written statement.; You may wish to consult an attorney with regards to your rights in thi matter. A copy of the Act and implementing regulations are enclosed for your information.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam4035OpenMr. Daniel J. Wacek, Quality Control Supervisor, Viracon, Inc., 800 Park Drive, Owatonna, MN 55060; Mr. Daniel J. Wacek Quality Control Supervisor Viracon Inc. 800 Park Drive Owatonna MN 55060; Dear Mr. Wacek: Thank you for your letter of September 30, 1985, to Stephen Oesch of m staff concerning the application of Standard No. 205, Glazing Materials, to a street sweeper.; As with all of our safety standards, Standard No. 205 applies only t vehicles classified as motor vehicles by the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act. Section 102(3) of the Vehicle Safety Act defines the term 'motor vehicle' as '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.'; There are some vehicles which are excepted from this classificatio despite their use on the highway. Vehicles such as highway lane strippers, self-propelled asphalt pavers, and other vehicles which have a low maximum speed capability and whose unusual configuration distinguishes them from the traffic flow are not considered motor vehicles. Enclosed is a copy of an information sheet prepared by the agency which discusses additional factors we consider in determining whether a vehicle meets the statutory definition of 'motor vehicle.' In your phone conversation of October 25, 1985, with Mr. Oesch you explained that you currently do not have definite information on the configuration, speed capability and other design characteristics of the street sweeper. We cannot provide you with an answer about whether we would consider the sweeper to be a motor vehicle without that information.; I hope this background information is of assistance to you. We would b glad to provide you with a specific interpretation concerning your vehicle after we receive more information about its design characteristics.; Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam2948OpenMr. Leon Conner, P.O. Box 1671, San Angelo, TX 76902; Mr. Leon Conner P.O. Box 1671 San Angelo TX 76902; Dear Mr. Conner: We understand that a question has arisen concerning the testing o 'P-type' tires under the traction grading procedures of the Uniform Tire Quality Grading (UTQG) Standards (49 CFR 575.104(f)(2)). Under the terms of the regulation, candidate tires are to be inflated to 24 psi prior to the traction test (49 CFR 575.104(f)(2)(i)(B) and (D), and (f)(2)(viii)), and are to be loaded to 85 percent of the load specified in Appendix A of FMVSS No. 109 (49 CFR 571.109), for the tires' size designation, at a cold inflation pressure of 24 psi (49 CFR 575.104(f)(2)(viii)). However, Appendix A lists cold inflation pressures for 'P-type' tires in kilopascals, with no stated inflation pressure corresponding precisely to 24 psi.; NHTSA chose 24 psi as the stated inflation pressure for UTQG tractio testing since it represents the recommended tire inflation pressure for most passenger cars. In the situation where no cold inflation pressure exactly equivalent to the specified pressure of 24 psi is stated in Appendix A of FMVSS No. 109 for a tire size designation, the tires to be tested are inflated to the pressure, listed for the tire size designation in Appendix A, which is nearest to 24 psi, *i.e.*, 180 kPa for tires with inflation pressures measured in kilopascals. The tires are then loaded to 85 percent of the load specified in Appendix A for the inflation pressure thus determined. The agency plans to issue an interpretive amendment to the regulation clarifying this point.; Sincerely, Joseph J. Levin, Jr., Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam0975OpenMr. F. S. Murley, Administrative Engineer, Oshkosh Truck Corporation, Post Office Box 560, Oshkosh, WI 54901; Mr. F. S. Murley Administrative Engineer Oshkosh Truck Corporation Post Office Box 560 Oshkosh WI 54901; Dear Mr. Murley: This is in reply to your letter of January 4, 1973, in which you as for our confirmation of your interpretation of Part 567 and Part 568 of Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations that would place the responsibility for certification on the user in those instances where he is the final-stage manufacturer.; Paragraph 567.5 of Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations Requirements for Manufacturers of Vehicles Manufactured in Two or More Stages, specifies that '. . . each final-stage manufacturer, . . . of a vehicle manufactured in two or more stages shall affix to each vehicle a label . . . .' Therefore, end users who are also manufacturers would be required to affix the label.; If you have further questions, we will be pleased to answer them. Sincerely, Francis Armstrong, Director, Office of Standard Enforcement, Motor Vehicle Programs; |
|
ID: aiam1667OpenStephen J. Pollak, Esq., Messrs. Shea & Gardner, 734 Fifteenth Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20005; Stephen J. Pollak Esq. Messrs. Shea & Gardner 734 Fifteenth Street N.W. Washington DC 20005; Dear Mr. Pollak: This is in reply to your letter of November 11, 1974 enclosing a draf of a defect notification letter to be sent on behalf of SINFAC, S.A., to known purchasers of the Solex motor-driven cycle.; These letters meet our requirements and will fulfill SINFAC' obligation under Section 113. Item 1 in the notification letter would read more accurately 'Absence of front and rear turn signals required on vehicles manufactured on or after January 1, 1973.'; Thank you for your cooperation. Upon receipt of a check for $10,000 w shall close our files in this matter.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Acting Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam4465OpenMr. Richard L. Hutchison Hutchison, Anders & Associates, P.C. 16860 S. Oak Park Av. Tinley Park, IL 60477; Mr. Richard L. Hutchison Hutchison Anders & Associates P.C. 16860 S. Oak Park Av. Tinley Park IL 60477; Dear Mr. Hutchison: This responds to your October 14, 1987, lette asking about the applicability of Safety Standard No. 301, Fuel System Integrity, to 'replacement gas caps' that your client intends to market. I apologize for the delay in responding. You said that several of your client's customers have requested this agency's approval of your client's product. You asked for confirmation of your understanding that the gas caps do not have to be approved by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) in order to be sold. Your understanding is correct. NHTSA is not authorized to certify or approve motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment for compliance with our Federal motor vehicle safety standards. Instead, under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (copy enclosed), each manufacturer of a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment is responsible for certifying that its products meet all applicable safety standards. There is currently no Federal motor vehicle safety standard that is directly applicable to replacement gas caps. Safety Standard No. 301 applies only to completed new motor vehicles and specifies performance requirements that must be met by the fuel system as a whole following a barrier crash test. The standard does not apply to individual components of a fuel system or to aftermarket equipment for use on fuel systems. Although Standard No. 301 would not directly apply to your client's replacement gas caps, there are responsibilities under Federal law of which your client should be aware. Manufacturers of motor vehicle equipment, which includes aftermarket gas caps, are subject to the requirements in sections 151-159 of the Vehicle Safety Act concerning the recall and remedy of products with defects relating to motor vehicle safety. I have enclosed an information sheet that briefly describes those responsibilities. In addition, there are prohibitions against certain modifications of new and used vehicles. Section 108(a)(2)(A) of the Safety Act specifies that no manufacturer, distributor, dealer or motor vehicle repair business shall knowingly render inoperative any device or element of design installed on or in a new or used motor vehicle in compliance with any applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard. Therefore, no person in any of the aforementioned categories may place your client's gas cap on a motor vehicle if by so doing the vehicle's compliance with Standard No. 301 were negatively affected. Whether or not your client's replacement gas cap could be installed by a person in one of those categories on a vehicle without destroying the vehicle's compliance with Standard No. 30l or any other Federal safety standard is a determination that must be made by any commercial business in the aforementioned categories of /108(a)(2)(A) making the installation. NHTSA does not pass advance approval on motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment prior to the actual events that underlie a modification and we are unable to offer any opinion on whether your client's gas cap would negatively affect a vehicle's fuel system performance. The prohibition of /108(a)(2)(A) does not apply to individual vehicle owners who alter their own vehicles. Thus, under Federal law, they may install or remove any items of motor vehicle equipment regardless of its effect on compliance with Federal motor vehicle safety standards. However, the agency encourages vehicle owners not to remove or otherwise tamper with vehicle safety equipment if the modification would degrade the safety of the vehicle. We suggest that you contact the Environmental Protection Agency to see whether the EPA has any type of emissions standard that might affect your client's manufacture of his gas caps. The general telephone number for the EPA is (202) 382-2090. I hope this information has been helpful. Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel Enclosures; |
|
ID: aiam0426OpenJames F. Latham, Esq., Latham, Pickard and Ennis, Suite A Executive Building, 2534 South Church Street, Burlington, NC 27215; James F. Latham Esq. Latham Pickard and Ennis Suite A Executive Building 2534 South Church Street Burlington NC 27215; Dear Mr. Latham: This is in reply to your letter of July 30, 1971, inquiring whethe your client, American Jenbach Corporation, is required to comply with the Tire Identification and Recordkeeping regulations (49 CFR Part 574). In your letter you state that American Jenbach is engaged in the distribution of portable air compressors and pneumatic tools, the former being purchased in Europe and delivered to the plant in Burlington where tires are added to the wheels and other modifications are made. You state further that American Jenbach also reconditions compressors, and may replace tires as part of this process.; The Tire Identification and Recordkeeping regulations apply t manufacturers, brand name owners, retreaders, distributors, and dealers of new and retreaded tires for use on motor vehicles manufactured after 1948, and to manufacturers and dealers or motor vehicles manufactured after that date (49 CFR S 574.4). Whether the regulations apply to American Jenbach depends on (1) whether the portable air compressors are motor vehicles under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1381 *et seq*., hereinafter the Act) and (2) whether American Jenbach is a manufacturer, brand name owner, retreader, distributor, or dealer of new or retreaded tires, or a manufacturer or dealer of motor vehicles.; Section 102 of the Act (15 U.S.C. 1391) defines motor vehicle to mea '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.' Without additional information, such as pictures of the vehicles in question, we cannot give you a precise determination as to whether they are motor vehicles under the Act. However, the agency has determined that portable compressors of the type that are mounted on tires for purposes of being towed on public highways are motor vehicles under the Act, and has classified them as trailers under the motor vehicle safety standards and regulations issued pursuant to the Act. As such, they are subject to the Tire Identification and Recordkeeping regulations.; Based upon your letter, it appears that American Jenbach Corporation i an importer of new portable compressors (trailers) and must meet the Tire Identification and Recordkeeping requirements applicable to motor vehicle manufacturers (section 574.10). In addition, under the Act American Jenbach may also be a distributor or dealer of these trailers and, if so, must also comply with the Tire Identification and Recordkeeping requirements applicable to dealers (section 574.9). Finally, American Jenbach would appear to be a tire dealer as to those tires that it replaces on reconditioned compressors and would be required to comply with the requirements applicable to tire dealers (section 574.7) with respect to those tires.; If the vehicles in question are motor vehicles, American Jenbach i required to comply with certain requirements in addition to the Tire Identification and Recordkeeping regulations. Trailers must conform to the requirements of Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108, which deals with lighting requirements, and must be certified as conforming to all applicable standards in accordance with section 114 of the Act, and the Certification regulations. As of October 1, 1971, American Jenbach must also comply with the Defect Reports regulations (49 CFR Part 573). Copies of these requirements and a copy of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act are enclosed for your guidance.; If you have additional questions, please write to us. Sincerely, E. T. Driver, Director, Office of Operating Systems, Moto Vehicle Programs; |
|
ID: aiam4936OpenMr. Tadoru Yamamoto Technical Administration Div. Hino Motors, Ltd. 1-1, Hino-dai 3-chome Hino-shi, Tokyo 191, Japan; Mr. Tadoru Yamamoto Technical Administration Div. Hino Motors Ltd. 1-1 Hino-dai 3-chome Hino-shi Tokyo 191 Japan; "Dear Mr. Yamamoto: This responds to your letter concerning Federa Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 113, Hood Latch System. You ask two questions about the applicability of the standard's requirements to your vehicle. As explained below, the vehicle must have a hood latch system, but need not have a second latch position on the system or a second hood latch system. By way of background information, NHTSA does not provide approvals of any vehicle or equipment. Under the Vehicle Safety Act, it is your responsibility as a manufacturer to determine whether your vehicles and equipment comply with all applicable safety standards and regulations, and to certify your products in accordance with that determination. The following interpretation represents the agency's opinion based on the information provided in your letter. Standard 113 requires that a vehicle's hood must have a hood latch system (S4.1). The standard also requires a front opening hood to have a second latch position on the latch system or a second hood latch system, if the hood has any open position that partially or completely obstructs a driver's forward view through the windshield (S4.2). The standard defines 'hood' as 'any exterior movable body panel forward of the windshield that is used to cover an engine, luggage, storage, or battery compartment' (S3). Your first question asks about the general applicability of Standard 113's requirements to your vehicle. You believe your vehicle is not subject to any of the standard's requirements because the front panel of the vehicle is not forward of the windshield, and is therefore not a 'hood' as defined by Standard 113. We disagree. According to the drawing you provided with your letter, the body panel appears to be forward of the windshield. We would consider the panel to be a hood, and subject to S4.1's requirement for a hood latch system. Whether the hood must have a secondary latch for the hood (either a second latch position on the hood latch system or a second latch system) is the subject of your second question. The answer is that the hood need not have the secondary latch. The secondary latch is required by S4.2 only for a front opening hood. According to the drawing you provided, your hood is essentially vertical, with the opening on the bottom of the hood. We consider a hood such as yours that is essentially vertical not to be a front opening hood. We note that a secondary latch for front opening hoods is required because such a hood is particularly hazardous if it were to unlatch during vehicle operation. The front opening design of the hood lends itself to flying open while the vehicle is moving, obstructing the driver's view through the windshield. However, an essentially vertical hood such as yours does not lend itself to such openings if it were to become unlatched. The secondary latch is therefore not required by the standard. I hope this information is helpful. If you have further questions, please contact Deirdre Fujita of my staff at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel"; |
|
ID: aiam5624OpenMr. Curt Stiede BICS Manufacturing P.O. Box 2424 Columbia Falls, MT 59912; Mr. Curt Stiede BICS Manufacturing P.O. Box 2424 Columbia Falls MT 59912; "Dear Mr. Stiede: This responds to your letter to Walter Myers of m staff, and to subsequent telephone conversations with Mr. Myers, about this agency's standards for the product you manufacture. At Mr. Myers' request, you provided detailed schematics of your product and several pictures of it connected to various types of towed vehicles. It appears from these that the product is a trailer converter dolly. You stated that your product is intended as a towing device for a variety of trailers, such as 'gooseneck flatbed, equipment, utility, farm equipment, horse trailers, along with 5th wheel recreational vehicles.' You further stated that it has a combined load range of 3,500 to 15,000 pounds, depending on the trailer weight and engine power of the towing vehicle. You stated that there may be some state restrictions applicable to your trailer dolly, and suggested that some Federal regulations may have to be amended to address such a vehicle. By way of background information, this agency has the authority under Federal law to issue Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS) and related regulations applicable to new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. Vehicle and equipment manufacturers are responsible for 'self- certifying' that their products comply with all applicable FMVSSs. They must also ensure that their products are free of safety-related defects. Once the vehicle or equipment is sold to the first retail customer, the product is no longer subject to the FMVSSs. The first question you raise is whether your trailer dolly is a 'motor vehicle.' The answer is yes. 'Motor vehicle' is defined in 49 U.S. Code (U.S.C.) 30102 as: A vehicle driven or drawn by mechanical power and manufactured primarily for use on public streets, roads, and highways, but does not include a vehicle operated only on a rail line. Your trailer dolly clearly meets the definition of a motor vehicle since the dolly is designed to be drawn by mechanical power on the streets, roads, and highways. It is referred to in NHTSA regulations (49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), section 571.3) as a 'trailer converter dolly,' which is defined as 'a trailer chassis equipped with one or more axles, a lower half of a fifth wheel and a drawbar.' We note that a trailer converter dolly, although fabricated on a trailer chassis, is not a trailer. It is a motor vehicle designed to tow another vehicle rather than carry persons or property itself. The following standards and regulations apply to your manufacture of the trailer converter dolly. As a manufacturer of a motor vehicle, you must submit certain identifying information to NHTSA in accordance with 49 CFR Part 566, Manufacturer Identification (copy enclosed). You must also ensure that a dolly with a hydraulic braking system must meet FMVSS No. 116, Motor vehicle brake fluids (49 CFR 571.116). You must also comply with the requirements of 49 CFR Parts 567, Certification. In addition, in the event that you or NHTSA determines that your product contains a safety-related defect, you would be responsible for notifying purchasers of the defective equipment and remedying the problem free of charge. The enclosed information sheet briefly describes those responsibilities. As Mr. Myers discussed with you, since your trailer dolly is designed and intended for interstate marketing and transport, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) may have requirements applicable to your product. Accordingly, I will forward a copy of your letter to Mr. James Scapellato, Director, Office of Motor Carrier Research and Standards, FHWA, this address, for further response. In the alternative, you may contact Mr. Larry Minor of Mr. Scapellato's staff at this address or at (202) 366-4012 to discuss pertinent FHWA regulations. Finally, you mentioned in your letter that some states may have certain restrictions or requirements for your trailer dolly. NHTSA does not have information on those state requirements. However, you may be able to obtain such information from: American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators 4200 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 1000 Arlington, VA 22203 (703) 522-4200 I hope this information is helpful to you. Should you have any further questions or seek additional information, please feel free to contact Mr. Myers at this address or at (202) 366-2992, or by fax at (202) 366-3820. Sincerely, John Womack Acting Chief Counsel Enclosures "; |
|
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.