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: aiam0840OpenMr. Richard Stevens, Cody Chevrolet, Inc. Barre-Montpelier Road, Montpelier, VT 05602; Mr. Richard Stevens Cody Chevrolet Inc. Barre-Montpelier Road Montpelier VT 05602; Dear Mr. Stevens: This is in reply to your letter of August 1, 1972, to the attention o Mr. Jerome Palisi of our White Plains, New York Office, concerning certification requirements for a vehicle which you describe and indicate will be used by a college to transport ball teams and school personnel, but will not be equipped with flashing lights or other special school bus equipment. You apparently wish to know whether you must consider this vehicle as a school bus for purposes of certification to Federal requirements.; 'School bus' is defined in the motor vehicle safety standards to mean bus 'designed primarily to carry children to and from school, but not including buses operated by common carriers in urban transportation of school children' (49 CFR 571.3). Based upon the description you provide, the NHTSA would not consider the vehicle you describe to be a school bus. For purposes of certification to Federal requirements (49 CFR Parts 567 and 568), there, 'gross vehicle weight rating' should not be computer under the minimum values specified for school buses. In addition, the requirement that vehicle type be inserted on the certification label should be met in inserting, 'BUS.'; This letter should not be construed to mean that the NHTSA takes position as to whether this vehicle need, under State law, conform to requirements for school buses. The State must determine the scope and application of its own laws.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam1752OpenMr. John C. Bennett, Chairman of the Board, Utility Trailer Manufacturing Co., City of Industry, CA 91749; Mr. John C. Bennett Chairman of the Board Utility Trailer Manufacturing Co. City of Industry CA 91749; Dear Mr. Bennett: This responds to your January 8, 1975, request for reconsideration o our determination, in a January 3, 1975, letter to Mr. J. B. Markovich, that a bulk transport trailer designed for transporting farm commodities from the field to processing plants over private and public roads does not qualify for exemption from Standard No. 121, *Air brake systems*, as an agricultural vehicle.; There is no specific exemption for agricultural machinery in th language of the 'National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966' (15 U.S.C. 1391 et seq.), and there is little legislative history on the subject. We have concluded that Congress only intended to exclude agricultural machinery that is designed for working on the fields--implements of husbandry--and whose on-road use is strictly limited, at low speeds, and only incidental to its main function.; The NHTSA has interpreted the definition of 'motor vehicle' to agre with this Congressional intent. Our criteria for a 'non-motor vehicle' have been (1) a maximum speed not exceeding 20 mph, and (2) an abnormal configuration which distinguishes it from the traffic flow. These criteria separate 'agricultural machinery' from those vehicles which are related to agriculture but use the highways as a primary purpose.; The NHTSA does not interpret 'motor vehicle' to exempt a vehicle whic has a highway speed capability, even if it uses the highway infrequently. For example, house trailers are subject to safety standards although they sometimes use the highways only once to be moved to a permanent homesite. Mobile cranes and drill rigs which use the highways between job sites are another vehicle type which has also been determined to be a motor vehicle. The important consideration is that their configuration permits unlimited use of the highways.; From your description, your bulk transport trailers are capable o highway speed and use the highway in the same way as other air-braked full trailers. Accordingly, your request for reclassification is denied.; You mentioned difficulty in meeting Standard No. 121's parking brak requirements. I enclose a copy of correspondence on this same matter with a railroad company that finds it necessary to manually release parking brakes under some circumstances.; Sincerely, |
|
ID: aiam4100OpenRobert R. Clark, Esq., Tabbert & Capehart, One Indiana Square, Suite 1500, Indianapolis, IN 46204; Robert R. Clark Esq. Tabbert & Capehart One Indiana Square Suite 1500 Indianapolis IN 46204; Dear Mr. Clark: This responds to your letter dated October 21, 1985, inquiring abou the certification responsibilities under federal law of your client, a new car dealer. You stated in your letter that your client plans to convert new automobiles into limousines. These limousines would then be sold wholesale to dealers.; The relevant federal statute is the National Traffic and Motor Vehicl Safety Act of 1966, as amended (15 U.S.C. 1391 *et seq*.). Under section 103 of the Act, this agency issues Federal motor vehicle safety standards and regulations applying to motor vehicles and their equipment.; As we understand the facts stated in your letter, the automobiles wil be completed by the original manufacturer who will certify that they meet all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. Your client plans to alter the automobiles prior to their first purchase for purposes other than resale.; Your client's plan to convert automobiles would make him an alterer subject to the requirements of 49 CFR Part 567.7, *Certification*. An alterer is a person who alters a previously certified vehicle by means other than the addition, substitution, or removal of readily attachable components or minor finishing operations, or in such a manner that the vehicle's stated weight ratings are no longer valid. If the alteration is performed before the first purchase of the vehicle for purposes other than resale, the alterer must supplement the certification label by affixing an additional label stating that the vehicle as altered conforms to all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards and containing the firm or individual name of the alterer.; An alterer is also considered a manufacturer for the purposes o notification and recall for defects or noncompliance under the Act and is subject to the requirements of 49 CFR Part 573, *Defect and Noncompliance Reports*.; In addition, please note that your client should take care in makin the conversions not harm the vehicles' safety features. Under section 108 of the Act, a manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business must not knowingly render inoperative, in whole or in part, any device or element of design which is installed on or in a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment in compliance with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard. Your client would be subject to this prohibition which applies both before and after the first purchase of a motor vehicle for purposes other than resale.; I hope this information is helpful to you. Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam1302OpenMr. Charles Leeds, Bankers Trust Company, 1775 Broadway, New York, NY 10019; Mr. Charles Leeds Bankers Trust Company 1775 Broadway New York NY 10019; Dear Mr. Leeds: This is in reply to your letter of September 17, 1973, which ask whether a bank must make an odometer disclosure statement upon transfer to an auctioneer of a repossessed vehicle in which the bank has only a security interest.; To the extent that the bank is acting in the place of the repossesse owner, and in the absence of any other party available to make a statement, it is our opinion that the bank is acting as transferor and should make the disclosure specified in Part 580. Normally the bank does not know that the odometer is inaccurate and should only fill in the blank with the recorded mileage. The bank could authorize its collection agency to actually make the disclosure.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam3411OpenMr. Thomas W. Elkins, Secretary, North American Classics Corporation, 1851 Austin, Troy, MI 48084; Mr. Thomas W. Elkins Secretary North American Classics Corporation 1851 Austin Troy MI 48084; Dear Mr. Elkins: This is in reply to your letter of April 15, 1981, asking two question with respect to the temporary exemption provisions of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1410) and implementing regulations (49 CFR Part 555).; Your first question is: >>>(1) Assuming North American Classics designs the total engineerin of the Thunderbird reproduction, selects all components to be incorporated therein, retains primary control over quality control, testing, FMVSS compliance in design, and manufacturing assembly sequence, and markets the produced vehicles on its behalf to its customers, does North American Classics remain eligible to apply for exemption from meeting certain FMVSS requirements for this vehicle in the event that the actual responsibility for the assembly of the vehicles is contracted by North American Classics to a manufacturer which produces more than 10,000 motor vehicles per year?<<<; Although you have not said so I understand from Taylor Vinson that th manufacturer with whom you would contract is a foreign corporation which has never produced motor vehicles for the American market. We also understand that it may be less expensive to have your car built abroad than at home.; Under the circumstances you describe, the foreign corporation appear to be nothing more than your agent in fabricating the vehicles and returning them for sale. This would not affect your eligibility for exemption. You would retain the responsibility for certification, as we understand it, even though the name of the foreign manufacturer would also appear on the certification label, as required by 49 CFR 567.4(g)(1).; Your second question is: >>>(2) In the event that North American Classics enters into a agreement to have such vehicles produced or assembled by a major automotive manufacturer, who would not be so eligible, and if such agreement provides for the sharing of profits derived from the sales of the finished product between North American Classics and such manufacturer, as a means of providing North American Classics assurance that projected costs of such manufacturer do not increase beyond North American Classics' ability to survive financially, in such event would North American Classics retain its eligibility status, assuming North American Classics retains control of the functions outlined in paragraph?<<<; We do not believe that a profit-sharing agreement *per se* would affec your eligibility for exemption. Were the foreign company to receive a majority share of the profits or to purchase sufficient stock in your company to give it effective control, however, we would have substantial questions about which party actually exercises primary control.; I hope this answers your questions. Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam3041OpenMr. J. C. Eckhold Ford Motor Company The American Road Dearborn, Michigan 48121; Mr. J. C. Eckhold Ford Motor Company The American Road Dearborn Michigan 48121; Dear Mr. Eckhold: This is in response to your letter of May 23, 1979 requesting an interpretation of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 101-80, Controls and Displays. Specifically, you requested a clarification of Section 5.3.3 which states that each tell-tale and its identification must be 'visible to the driver under all daytime and nighttime conditions.' You indicated that under certain conditions the intensity and color characteristics of sun lighting could cause transitory reflections that obscure either the intensity or color, or both, of the tell-tale. It is the interpretation of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration that the manufacturer must manufacture a tell-tale with a light intensity that ensures visibility under the most adverse general lighting conditions. This means that the tell-tales and their identification need not be visible to the river when the tell-tales are struck by direct sunlight. Since conditions such as these are typically short-lived, the NHTSA does not believe that the length of time the driver may be unable to view the tell-tales is significant enough to warrant requiring the manufacturer to prevent their occurrence. Sincerely Frank Berndt Chief Counsel; |
|
ID: aiam4784OpenMr. William T. Mullen Undersheriff of McHenry County, Illinois 2200 N. Seminary Ave. Woodstock, IL 60098; Mr. William T. Mullen Undersheriff of McHenry County Illinois 2200 N. Seminary Ave. Woodstock IL 60098; "Dear Mr. Mullen: This responds to your letter asking about Federa requirements for safety belts in police cars. Specifically, you asked if your police department could legally remove the automatic belts that are installed and replace them with manual lap/shoulder safety belts. You stated that the reasons for making such a substitution would be to alleviate two problems your police officers have experienced with the automatic belts that were not present in older models that had manual lap/shoulder belts at the front seating positions. First, you said that the automatic belts result in a blind spot on the driver's left side. Second, you said that the automatic belts 'prevent left arm movements' of your taller officers. I appreciate this opportunity to respond to your concerns. I have enclosed copies of two previous letters we have written on the subject of removing or replacing occupant protection features from police cars. The first of these is a July 29, 1985 letter to Corporal Frank Browne and the other is a May 25, 1989 letter to Senator Harry Reid. These letters explain that new vehicles purchased by police departments must be certified as complying with the occupant crash protection standard (Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 208). All cars manufactured on or after September 1, 1989 must provide automatic crash protection for front seat occupants. To date, manufacturers have provided automatic crash protection either by installing air bags or automatic safety belts. General Motors, the manufacturer of the police cars in question, has chosen to comply with the requirement for automatic crash protection by installing automatic safety belts in these cars. Federal law prohibits any manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business from replacing the automatic belts in these police cars with manual lap/shoulder belts. Thus, none of these commercial entities could make such a replacement on behalf of the County without violating Federal law. However, Federal law does not prohibit individual vehicle owners from removing safety features from their own vehicles. Thus, McHenry County itself can replace the automatic belts in its own cars without violating any Federal law, just as any resident of McHenry County can remove any safety equipment they like from their own vehicles without violating any Federal laws. Such actions may, however, violate the laws of the State of Illinois. I recommend that you carefully consider the effects of replacing the automatic belts in your police cars, even though Federal law does not prohibit the County itself from making these modifications to its own vehicles. The automatic belts in these cars help to assure safety belt use by police officers on the job. Particularly since the McHenry County police officers face the possibility of becoming involved in high speed pursuit situations, we believe it is important that they use safety belts for effective protection in case of a crash. If you decide to replace the automatic belts in these vehicles with manual lap/shoulder belts, we would urge you to take some actions to assure that the police officers will use the manual lap/shoulder belts every time they ride in the police cars. I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions or need some additional information on this subject, please let me know. Sincerely, Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel Enclosures"; |
|
ID: aiam1586OpenMr. R.W. Cheetham, Director of Quality Assurance, Armstrong Rubber Company, 500 Sargent Drive, New Haven, CT 06507; Mr. R.W. Cheetham Director of Quality Assurance Armstrong Rubber Company 500 Sargent Drive New Haven CT 06507; Dear Mr. Cheetham: This will confirm that the suggested defect notification letter enclosed in your letter of August 14, 1974, meets the requirements of 49 CFR Part 577.; We appreciate your taking this action with respect to the Steel Belte Surveyor 78 tire.; Yours truly, Frank Berndt, Acting Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam2200OpenMs. Mary Harding, Director--Outreach Program, 615 Texas Street, Ft. Worth, TX 76102; Ms. Mary Harding Director--Outreach Program 615 Texas Street Ft. Worth TX 76102; Dear Ms. Harding: The Fort Worth Regional Office of the National Highway Traffic Safet Administration (NHTSA) has forwarded to us your February 2, 1976, letter asking whether 16- passenger van-type school buses that presently serve to transport children to and from a day care center fall within the new definition of 'School bus' recently issued by the NHTSA (40 FR 60033, December 31, 1975).; The answer to your question is no. The definition is based on th regulatory authority found in the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (the Act) (15 U.S.C. S 1381 *et seq*.). This Act authorizes the regulation of motor vehicle construction in accordance with standards in effect on the date of the vehicle's manufacture.; In the case of this amendment of the definition, the NHTSA chose t make the new definition effective on October 27, 1976, to correspond with the effective date of the new school bus standards. This means that the existing definition of 'School bus' applied at the time of the construction of the vehicles operated by your library. The existing definition applies only to vehicles designed primarily to carry children to and from school, and would not include van- type vehicles.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam5195OpenMr. Christopher Banner 618 Osage Street Manhattan, KS 66402; Mr. Christopher Banner 618 Osage Street Manhattan KS 66402; "Dear Mr. Banner: This responds to your request for an interpretatio of how NHTSA's regulations would apply to some manufacturing operations you are contemplating. I apologize for the delay in this response. In a telephone conversation with Dorothy Nakama of my staff, you explained that you would like to start producing vehicles based on Ford pickup truck chassis. Some of these Ford chassis would come from wrecked vehicles that you would strip down to the frame, and others would be new chassis that you would purchase directly from Ford. You would then install new bodies on top of some of these chassis and offer them for sale as completed vehicles. You also would like to offer some of these bodies and chassis for sale as 'kit cars.' In the 'kit car' version, you would sell the body and chassis to the purchaser of the kit, and the purchaser of the kit would have to furnish some other parts in order to complete the vehicle. This agency's Federal motor vehicle safety standards apply to new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. Federal law does not require motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment to continue to comply with the safety standards after the first purchase of the vehicle or equipment item in good faith for purposes other than resale. However, Federal law does prohibit any manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or repair business from knowingly 'rendering inoperative' compliance with a safety standard for a vehicle or item of equipment. See 15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(1)(A), (a)(2)(A), and (b)(1). 1. New Body on New Chassis. All vehicles you produce by installing a new body on a new chassis would be considered new vehicles. You would have to certify that each of those vehicles conformed to all applicable safety standards. You would be considered a 'final stage manufacturer' of the vehicles, as that term is used in 49 CFR Parts 567 and 568. 2. New Body on Used Chassis. We cannot say from the information you have provided whether the vehicles you produce by installing a new body on a stripped, wrecked Ford pickup would be treated as a new vehicle, and have to be certified as complying with the applicable safety standards. The answer depends on how extensively you modify the Ford pickup chassis. To allow vehicle modifiers to determine when the modifications to a used chassis are so extensive that the resulting vehicle will be considered new for the purposes of the Federal safety standards, NHTSA has established specific criteria at 49 CFR 571.7(e), Combining new and used components. That section reads as follows: When a new cab is used in the assembly of a truck, the truck will be considered newly manufactured . . . unless the engine, transmission, and drive axle(s) (as a minimum) of the assembled vehicle are not new, and at least two of these components were taken from the same vehicle. This provision means that if you leave the frame, engine, transmission, and drive axle in place from the wrecked vehicle, and place a new body on top of it, we would consider that vehicle to be a used vehicle, which would not have to be certified by you as complying with applicable safety standards. On the other hand, if you were to remove all the drive components from the frame of the Ford pickup chassis, and add new drive components or rebuilt drive components from different vehicles, the vehicle would be a new vehicle and would have to be certified by you as complying with all applicable safety standards. 3. Kit cars. Under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, a 'motor vehicle' is defined, in part, as one that is 'driven by mechanical power.' See 15 U.S.C. 1391(3). We have interpreted this provision to mean that a unit would be considered only an assemblage of motor vehicle equipment, and not a motor vehicle, until such time as a power source is added. None of the Federal motor vehicle safety standards apply to assemblages of motor vehicle equipment, or to used equipment items in the assemblage (items used on a vehicle previously in service on the public roads). However, certain of the safety standards would apply to new equipment items included in the assemblage. It would be a violation of Federal law if your kit car includes any new brake hoses, brake fluid, lighting equipment, tires, glazing, or seat belt assemblies that do not comply with the applicable safety standards. If you ship your kit cars with all parts needed to produce a completed motor vehicle, including the power source, this agency will treat the kit car as a motor vehicle, not an assemblage of motor vehicle equipment, regardless of the state of completion of the kit. You would be required to certify that the kit car conformed to all applicable safety standards if it were treated as a new vehicle under the rules set forth in 1. and 2. above, but not if it were treated as a used vehicle under those rules. I have enclosed for your information a general information sheet for manufacturers of new vehicles. This sheet highlights the relevant Federal statutes and regulations and explains how to obtain copies of them. I have also enclosed a brochure titled 'Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards' that briefly describes each of the safety standards. I hope this information is useful. If you have any further questions or need further information, please contact Dorothy Nakama of my staff at (202) 366- 2992. Sincerely, John Womack Acting Chief Counsel Enclosure"; |
|
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.