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: aiam4296OpenCharles Schamblin, Flag-It Fluorescent Signaling Device Co., Post Office Box 1709, Bakersfield, CA 93302; Charles Schamblin Flag-It Fluorescent Signaling Device Co. Post Office Box 1709 Bakersfield CA 93302; Dear Mr. Schamblin: Your letter of December 29, 1986, to Michael M. Finkelstein has bee referred to my Office for reply. You also addressed a letter of January 9, 1987, to my Office. Because these letter concern the same matter, this response addresses them both. In the December 29 letter, you asked about the appropriate color for your product, the Flag-It Fluorescent Signaling Device. The device, which you enclosed with your correspondence, is a rectangular green fluorescent strip, designed to be permanently attached to and hang vertically from the license plate frame on the front of a motor vehicle.; You state that you designed this device 'especially to meet th requirements for fluorescent material in the front of motor vehicles.' You ask for a 'letter of certification' that your device can be used and sold in the Unites States.; The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) ha authority to issue safety standards applicable to new motor vehicle and certain items of motor vehicle equipment. However, NHTSA does not approve nor certify motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment, or endorse any commercial product. Instead, the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act establishes a 'self-certification' process under which each manufacturer must certify that its product meets agency safety standards, or other applicable standards. Periodically, NHTSA tests whether vehicles or equipment comply with these standards, and may investigate alleged safety-related product defects.; Your product is an item of motor vehicle equipment under S102(4) of th National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, and as such, falls under NHTSA's jurisdiction. However, none of our Federal motor vehicle safety standards applies to your product.; Standard 125, *Warning Devices*, sets uniform design specifications o reflective warning devices used to warn approaching traffic of the presence of a stopped vehicle. As is apparent from the provisions regarding the scope and applications of the standard, Standard 125 applies to devices designed to be carried in motor vehicles and erected when needed to warn approaching traffic. It does not apply to warning devices designed to be permanently attached to a motor vehicle. Nevertheless, you may wish to use the colors specified in paragraph S5.3. They are the ones which the agency believes most appropriate for warning devices subject to the standard.; Standard 108, *Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment* applies to reflective devices. While the agency notes that your product includes reflective material, Standard 108 covers aftermarket reflective devices only to the extent that the aftermarket device replaces required original reflective equipment. Because the kind of device you described is not subject to any Standard 108 requirement as original reflective equipment, it is likewise not subject to any such requirement as aftermarket equipment.; Finally, please be aware that if you or the agency finds your produc to contain a safety-related defect after you market the product, you are responsible for conducting a notice and recall campaign under S154 of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1414).; Further, you should be aware that State law may apply to equipment suc as your signaling device. You may wish to consult the state and local transportation authorities in the areas where you intend to market your product.; Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam1094OpenMr. Lowell Liebenstein, President, Gil-Mar Welding Corp., 2142 Maple Road, Grafton, WI 53024; Mr. Lowell Liebenstein President Gil-Mar Welding Corp. 2142 Maple Road Grafton WI 53024; Dear Mr. Liebenstein: This is in reply to your letter of March 14, 1973, asking how to compl with NHTSA Certification regulations in cases where you supply a trailer chassis or frame only, and another manufacturer installs the body. In another example, you supply the vehicle without an axle assembly, which is, we assume, also installed by another party.; Based on your letter, the procedures to be foloowed in certifyin vehicles such as these are those contained in NHTSA regulations for 'Vehicles Manufactured in Two or More Stages' (49 CFR Part 568, copy enclosed). Briefly, these regulations require the incomplete vehicle manufacturer, who would be you in these cases, to furnish with the incomplete vehicle a document indicating the extent that the incomplete vehicle a document indicating the extent that the incomplete vehicle conforms to Federal standards, and what the final stage manufacturer must do in order that the completed vehicle will conform to all applicable standards.; If upon your review of these regualtions you have further questions, w will be pleased to respond to them.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam3103OpenMr. Mark K. McDonald, PACCAR, Inc., Business Center Building, P.O. Box 1518, Bellevue, Washington 98009; Mr. Mark K. McDonald PACCAR Inc. Business Center Building P.O. Box 1518 Bellevue Washington 98009; Dear Mr. McDonald: This is in response to your letter of May 22, 1979, concerning Federa Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 115, and in confirmation of your telephone conversation with Mr. Schwartz of my office.; You have asked whether a manufacturer must designate a vehicle a 'incomplete vehicle' if, although it is shipped in an incomplete form, its completed type is known. The 'incomplete vehicle' type was established to deal with situations where the manufacturer did not know what the vehicle's final type would be when it assigned the VIN. If the final form the vehicle will take is known to the manufacturer, it may identify that type in the VIN, or it may designate it as an incomplete vehicle. The agency would prefer, however, that the final type be indicated.; There is no requirement that use of a particular vehicle typ designation for VIN purposes be consistent with any other documentation regarding shipment or sale of vehicles manufactured in more than one stage, except that the actual VIN must be used where it appears on the documentation. For example, a vehicle may be designated an incomplete vehicle for the purposes of the NHTSA certification requirements and a truck for the purposes of the VIN requirements.; You have also asked the agency to confirm that engine horsepower nee not be directly or indirectly decipherable from the VIN. This is essentially correct. 'Engine type' is defined in S3 of the standard to mean a power source with defined characteristics such as fuel utilized, number of cylinders, displacement and net brake horsepower. Thus, encoding an engine manufacturer's basic model number would be sufficient. There remains, however, a question as to the point at which two engines with the same characteristics except for horsepower become two different engines. The agency intends to resolve this question in a notice in the Federal Register.; Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam5487Open"Mr. Gary Blous V.P. Engineering Fitting Image 2075 Adams Avenue San Leandro, CA 94577"; "Mr. Gary Blous V.P. Engineering Fitting Image 2075 Adams Avenue San Leandro CA 94577"; "Dear Mr. Blous: This responds to your letter asking about how thi agency's regulations might apply to your product. I apologize for the delay in sending this letter. In your letter, you described your product as a bag holder for the interior of vehicles, designed to attach to the head restraint and hang on the back side of the front seats. Based on the illustration you provided, the bag holder appears to be a 12 inch flexible strap that attaches to the head restraint, with a 'rigid plastic' hook at the end from which plastic grocery bags are suspended. The short answer to your question is that, while there are no regulations that apply directly to your product, there are Federal requirements that may affect the sale of this product. I am enclosing a copy of a fact sheet titled 'Information for New Manufacturers of Motor Vehicles and Motor Vehicle Equipment.' By way of background information, NHTSA is authorized to issue Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS's) for new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA's authority to issue these regulations is based on title 49, section 30102(7) of the U.S. Code (formerly the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act), the relevant part of which defines the term 'motor vehicle equipment' as: (A) any system, part, or component of a motor vehicle as originally manufactured, (B) any similar part or component manufactured or sold for replacement or improvement of a system, part, or component or as any accessory, or addition to a motor vehicle . . . (emphasis added). Although you appear to recognize the applicability of our regulations, based on your characterization of your product as 'after market equipment,' allow me to explain how NHTSA determines whether an item of equipment is considered an accessory under the U.S. Code. The agency applies two criteria. The first criterion is whether a substantial portion of its expected uses are related to the operation or maintenance of motor vehicles. We determine a product's expected use by considering product advertising, product labeling, and the type of store that retails the product, as well as available information about the actual use of the product. The second criterion is whether the product is purchased or otherwise acquired, and principally used, by ordinary users of motor vehicles. If the product satisfies both criteria, then the product is considered to be an 'accessory' and thus subject to the provisions of the U.S. Code. Your bag holder appears to be an accessory and thus an item of motor vehicle equipment under our regulations. It appears to be designed specifically to fit in motor vehicles using the head restraints, meaning that a substantial portion of its expected use relates to motor vehicle operation. The bag holder would typically be purchased and used by ordinary users of motor vehicles (i.e., anyone using the vehicle). While your bag holder is an item of motor vehicle equipment, NHTSA has not issued any standards for such an item. However, you as a manufacturer of motor vehicle equipment are subject to the requirements in sections 30118-30122 of Title 49 of the U.S. Code concerning the recall and remedy of products with defects related to motor vehicle safety. In the event that the manufacturer or NHTSA determines that the product contains a safety related defect, the manufacturer would be responsible for notifying purchasers of the defective equipment and remedying the problem free of charge. Although no standards apply directly to the bag holder, there are other provisions of law that may affect the manufacture and sale of your product. NHTSA has issued a safety standard (Standard No. 201, Occupant protection in interior impact) that requires, among other things, that seat backs have a certain amount of cushioning to provide protection when struck by the head of rear seat passengers during a crash. Installation of your product on the back of front seats could have an impact on compliance with that standard. If your bag holder were installed so that a hard object (e.g., the rigid plastic hook) were to be struck by the occupant's head, the requisite amount of cushioning might not be achieved. We do not know how big or how 'rigid' the hook is, but it is something of which you should be aware. Other legal requirements could apply depending on how your product is marketed. If your product were installed by a vehicle manufacturer as original equipment, the vehicle manufacturer would have to certify that the vehicle with the bag holder installed complies with all FMVSS's, including Standard No. 201. In addition, although we recognize it would be unlikely that your product would be installed by a motor vehicle manufacturer, distributor, dealer or repair business, section 30122(b) of title 49 prohibits those commercial businesses from 'knowingly mak ing inoperative any part of a device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle ... in compliance with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard . . .' For instance, compliance with Standard No. 201 might be degraded if the bag holder were mounted in front of rear seat passengers. Any violation of this 'make inoperative' prohibition would subject the violator to a potential civil penalty of up to $1,000 for each violation. The 'make inoperative' prohibition does not apply to modifications that vehicle owners make to their own vehicles. Thus, Federal law would not apply in situations where individual vehicle owners install your bag holder in their own vehicles, even if the installation were to result in the vehicle no longer complying with the safety standards. However, NHTSA encourages vehicle owners not to degrade any safety device or system installed in their vehicles. In addition, individual States have the authority to regulate modifications that individual vehicle owners may make to their vehicles, so you might wish to consult State regulations to see whether your device would be permitted. I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions about NHTSA's safety standards, please feel free to contact Mr. Atelsek of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, Philip R. Recht Chief Counsel Enclosure"; |
|
ID: aiam2342OpenHonorable Guy Vander Jagt, House of Representatives, Washington, DC 20515; Honorable Guy Vander Jagt House of Representatives Washington DC 20515; Dear Mr. Vander Jagt: This is in response to your letter of June 14, 1976, forwarding petition from Gulf + Western Manufacturing Company for reconsideration of the bumper standard recently issued as Part 581 of Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations.; A number of requests for our view on the Gulf + Western petition hav been forwarded by members of Congress who have received copies of the Gulf + Western petition accompanied by a letter from Mr. James A. Graham.; It is the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's policy t issue a notice of action taken on petitions for reconsideration within 120 days after publication of the final rule, unless action within that time is impracticable. Since the agency is currently in the process of considering the petitions received, it would not be appropriate for us to comment at this time on the remarks made by Gulf + Western.; I assure you that Gulf + Western's comments and the informatio contained in all of the petitions for reconsideration will receive thorough consideration. The agency's response to the petitions will be published in the *Federal Register*.; Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Acting Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam0685OpenMr. W.G. Milby, Project Engineer, Blue Bird Body Company, Fort Valley, GA 31030; Mr. W.G. Milby Project Engineer Blue Bird Body Company Fort Valley GA 31030; Dear Mr. Milby:#This is in reply to your letter of April 19 to Mr Schneider asking for interpretations of the motor vehicle controls safety standard, Standard No. 101.#You have asked that we reconsider our earlier opinion that your heater gate valve is a 'heating and air conditioning system control' for purposes of Standard No. 101. We see no reason to modify our earlier view. A control, as you have described it, that allows hot engine water to flow through the heater cores is clearly a heating system control, requiring identification as such. Table I of Standard No. 101 allows you the option of choosing your own form of identification. Perhaps a legend such as 'Water Control' and a designation of 'Winter' and 'Summer' positions would clarify your intent that the valve not be used as a temperature control device. However, pursuant to paragraph S4.3 this control need not be illuminated, if, as appears likely, it does not direct air directly upon the windshield.#You have also asked if the cable- operated fresh air door whose function is to control the air that passes through the heater cores is also a 'heating and air conditioning control.' It appears that this control serves a function similar to that of the heater valve, and that identification is also required, with words or abbreviation at the manufacturer's option.#Finally, you ask if the defroster identification may be preceded by 'RH' and 'LH' to identify the right hand and left hand defroster systems respectively. The answer is yes, we have no objection to this form of identification.#Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel; |
|
ID: aiam1997OpenMr. Carl Morton, County of Los Angeles Road Department, 5530 West 83rd Street, Los Angeles, California 90045; Mr. Carl Morton County of Los Angeles Road Department 5530 West 83rd Street Los Angeles California 90045; Dear Mr. Morton: Please forgive the delay in responding to your letter of April 28 1975, concerning tires used on pull brooms.; Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 119, *New pneumatic tires fo vehicles other than passenger cars*, (copy enclosed), specifies labeling and performance requirements for all tires designated for use on pull brooms. This standard applies to all such tires manufactured on or after March 1, 1975. There is presently no requirement, however, that vehicles be equipped with tires conforming to the standard. the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has proposed and is considering the issuance of a new Standard No. 120, *Tire Selection and Rims for motor vehicles other than passenger cars*, which would require all new pull brooms manufactured after its effective date to be equipped with tires conforming to Standard No. 119.; Yours truly, Frank Berndt, Acting Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam2712OpenDirector, Office of Standards Enforcement; Director Office of Standards Enforcement; I have received your November 8, 1977, memorandum questioning th applicability of the performance requirements in Section S5.4 of Standard No. 217 to knock-out rear windows. You suggest that these requirements may apply only to push-out windows, not knock- out windows.; It is our interpretation that the requirements of the standard apply t both push-out and knock-out windows. We realize that this may create some difficulty for purposes of conducting compliance testing since knock-out windows must be reinstalled in order to conduct subsequent tests upon them. Nonetheless, the window should be required to comply with the standard.; Joseph J. Levin, Jr. |
|
ID: aiam3800OpenMr. Ben Barbie, Stapleton Public Schools, P.O. Box 125, Stapleton, NE 69163; Mr. Ben Barbie Stapleton Public Schools P.O. Box 125 Stapleton NE 69163; Dear Mr. Barbie: This is in further reply to your phone call of February 13, 1984, t the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, regarding the remanufacture of school buses using older model bus bodies on new chassis. You asked whether the school bus safety standards apply to a school bus manufactured with a 1976 model year body mounted on a new chassis.; The applicability of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards i determined by the date of manufacture of the motor vehicle. For vehicles that are completed in several stages, the manufacturer can treat as the date of manufacture the date of the incomplete vehicle, the date of final completion of the vehicle, or a date between those two dates. An 'incomplete vehicle' is defined in 49 CFR Part 568, *Vehicles Manufactured in Two or More Stages*, as:; >>>an assemblage consisting, as a minimum, of frame and chassi structure, power train, steering system, suspension system, and braking system, to the extent that those systems are to be part of the completed vehicle, that requires further manufacturing operations, other than the addition of readily attachable components, such as mirrors or tire and rim assemblies, or minor finishing operations such as painting, to become a completed vehicle.<<<; The effective date of the school bus safety standards was April 1 1977. Since the date of manufacture of the school bus chassis is after April 1, 1977, and the date of completion of the vehicle is after April 1, 1977, the completed school bus must meet the requirements of the school bus safety standards. It is extremely unlikely that the 1976 model year body will comply with the school bus standards since the body was manufactured before the effective date of the school bus standards. If your completed vehicle does not comply with the safety standards, your manufacturer, distributor, or dealer cannot certify it as conforming to such standards.; Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam5203OpenMr. Bob Davis Quality Control Manager Horton Emergency Vehicles 500 Industrial Mile Road Columbus, OH 43228; Mr. Bob Davis Quality Control Manager Horton Emergency Vehicles 500 Industrial Mile Road Columbus OH 43228; Dear Mr. Davis: This is in response to your letter of April 13, 1993 requesting an interpretation of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 206 as it affects the rear doors of ambulances that your company manufactures. I apologize for the delay in responding. You state that your ambulances have two rear doors, and that each has locking mechanisms that can be operated both from the outside and inside of the doors. Your specific question is whether you can eliminate the inside locking mechanism on one of the rear doors without violating Standard No. 206. The language in S4.1.3 of Standard No. 206 that you noted in your letter (i.e., 'Each door shall be equipped with a locking mechanism with an operating means in the interior of the vehicle.') refers to side doors, but not to rear doors. Thus, your company's ambulances need not be equipped with locking mechanisms on each rear door. I hope this information has been helpful. If you have any further questions feel free to contact David Elias of my office at the above address or by phone at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, John Womack Acting 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.