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: 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 "; |
|
ID: aiam0076OpenChester G. Parsons, President, Elgin Sweeper Company, 1300 West Bartlett Road, Elgin, IL 60120; Chester G. Parsons President Elgin Sweeper Company 1300 West Bartlett Road Elgin IL 60120; Dear Mr. Parsons: This is in response to your letter of April 17 requesting eithe confirmation of your opinion that it was 'not the intent of the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards to apply to' the three wheeled motor street sweeper manufactured by Elgin, or, in the alternative, consideration by the Federal Highway Administration of the establishment of a separate classification for these vehicles.; Three wheeled motor street sweepers are 'motor vehicles' within th meaning of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966. However, they do not fall into any of the vehicle types defined thus far, to which standards are applicable, and consequently there are no standards applicable to it at this time.; Sincerely, William Hadden, Jr., M.D. |
|
ID: aiam5274OpenMr. J. C. DeLaney Manager, Technical Programs Motorcycle Industry Council, Inc. 2 Jenner Street, Suite 150 Irvine, CA 92718-3812; Mr. J. C. DeLaney Manager Technical Programs Motorcycle Industry Council Inc. 2 Jenner Street Suite 150 Irvine CA 92718-3812; Dear Mr. DeLaney: This responds to your request for an interpretatio of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 123, Motorcycle controls and displays. You asked whether a motorcycle side stand complies with Standard No. 123 if the stand passes SAE J1587 Motorcycle Side Stand Retraction Test Procedure. Standard No. 123 specifies at S5.2.4 Stands that: 'A stand shall fold rearward and upward if it contacts the ground when the motorcycle is moving forward.' Neither S5.2.4 nor any other provision of Standard No. 123 incorporates by reference, SAE J1587. Thus, if a motorcycle side stand passes the SAE J1587 test procedure, it does not automatically follow that the side stand complies with Standard No. 123. I hope that this information is useful. If you have any further questions, please contact Dorothy Nakama of my staff at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, John Womack Acting Chief Counsel; |
|
ID: aiam0758OpenMr. Chester R. Ely, President, Mercury Fabricators, 8335 Atlantic Boulevard, Cudahy, CA, 90201; Mr. Chester R. Ely President Mercury Fabricators 8335 Atlantic Boulevard Cudahy CA 90201; Dear Mr. Ely: This is in reply to your letter of June 20, 1972, in which you as whether Motor Vehicle Safety Standards Nos. 206 (Door Locks and Door Retention Components) and 302 (Flammability of Interior Materials) apply to aluminum sleeper cabs which you manufacture for what appears to be installation on truck tractors.; Each motor vehicle safety standard is by its terms applicable t specific types of motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment. Each vehicle or item of equipment to which a standard applies must conform to the standard until its first purchase by a user. Components which are incorporated into vehicles before their first purchase are considered to be part of the vehicle, and as a practical matter must conform to all standards applicable to it.; Standard No. 302 becomes effective September 1, 1972, and applies t trucks, which includes truck tractors. If a sleeper cab you manufacture is incorporated into a truck before its first purchase by a user, then it must conform to the standard. Moreover, the components to which the standard applies (paragraph S4.1) include mattress covers, and if you determine the standard applies under the criteria we have provided, mattress covers which you furnish must conform to the standard. You indicate you have tested the flammability of the cab utilizing a torch. While you may test for conformity to the standard in any way you choose, whether or not your product conforms to the standard will be determined by NHTSA utilizing the test procedures specified in the standard. Manufacturers who utilize procedures different from those in the standard should take care to correlate the results they obtained to those that would be obtained using the standard's procedures.; Standard No. 206 also applies to trucks, and will become effective fo all side doors leading to passenger compartments on September 1, 1972. Consequently, if the sleeper cabs you manufacture are incorporated into trucks before their first purchase the sleeper cabs must conform to Standard No. 206.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam2765OpenMr. Garry Williams, Body Designer, Telsta Group, General Cable Corporation, P.O. Box 666, Westminster, CO 80030; Mr. Garry Williams Body Designer Telsta Group General Cable Corporation P.O. Box 666 Westminster CO 80030; Dear Mr. Williams: This is in reply to your letter of February 3, 1978, concernin placement of the rear identification lamps on a truck. Because the truck has a mast assembly located on the longitudinal axis of the vehicle and center of the rear axle, you have asked whether the lamps should be mounted 'on the mast as high as possible or on the rear face of the rear floor decking.'; Table II of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 requires rea identification lamps to be mounted 'as close as practicable to the top of the vehicle....' If placement on the mast interferes with the operation of the lift, or if the lamp would be easily damaged in that location, that location would not appear to be 'practicable' within the meaning of Standard No. 108, and the deck location would fulfill the practicability requirements.; You have also asked which is more important in locating identificatio lamps: '(1) ...as high as possible on a stationary surface and face the lights toward the rear, or (2) to locate to the most rearward surface and then as high as possible on that surface'. Your first choice is the correct one. The purpose of the three lamp cluster is to identify large and frequently slow moving vehicles under conditions of reduced visibility. Therefore, it is more important for the lamps to be located high than it is for them to be at the rear end of the vehicle, for example, on the cab rather than at the deck end. However, the decision as to what is 'practicable' is initially that of the manufacturer and we have generally found those decisions to be correct.; Sincerely, Joseph J. Levin, Jr., Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam3877OpenMr. Jerry D. Williams, Senior Vice President, American Transportation Committee, Highway 65 South, Conway, AR 72032; Mr. Jerry D. Williams Senior Vice President American Transportation Committee Highway 65 South Conway AR 72032; Dear Mr. Williams: This is in further response to your December 12, 1984 letter to th National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) concerning our definition of a school bus. Your specific question asked, 'Are vehicles which are built to carry ten school aged passengers or less, and which are used for school or related functions, considered by NHTSA to be school buses or multipurpose passenger vehicles?' As explained below, a vehicle carrying 11 or more persons (i.e., 10 children and a driver) to and from school or related events would be considered a school bus. A vehicle carrying 10 or less persons would be a multipurpose passenger vehicle.; Under the definitions section of our Federal Motor Vehicle Safet Standards (49 CFR Part 571.3), vehicles carrying 11 or more persons which are sold for purposes that include carrying students to and from school or related events are 'school buses.' Under our regulations, a vehicle which is designed to carry less than 11 persons would be considered a multipurpose passenger vehicle. Such a vehicle would be certified as complying with the safety standards applicable to multipurpose passenger vehicles.; Ms. Deirdre Hom of my staff informed your associate, Mr. Joe Clark, o the above in a telephone call on December 14, 1985. This letter confirms the information given to Mr. Clark in that conversation.; If you have any further questions, do not hesitate to contact m 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.