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: aiam0599OpenMr. Satoshi Nishibori, Engineering Representative, Nissan Motor Company, Ltd., 560 Sylvan Avenue, Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632; Mr. Satoshi Nishibori Engineering Representative Nissan Motor Company Ltd. 560 Sylvan Avenue Englewood Cliffs NJ 07632; Dear Mr. Nishibori: This is in reply to your letter of February 7, 1972, in which yo stated your understanding of how Standard 210 applies to two shoulder belt assembly configurations.; In Figure 1, you show a shoulder belt that passes through a slotte plate (A) bolted to the roof rail. Contrary to the impression you have received, the plate is not a part of the anchorage, but is rather a part of the seatbelt assembly. The anchorage consists of the reinforced roof rail structure, including the bolt hole and any retaining ridges or projections on the roof rail. Plates such as Hardware (A) that bolt onto the roof rail are similar in function to the floor mounted attachment plates that have always been considered as part of the seatbelt assembly, and are similarly treated.; The same remarks apply to the plate shown as (B) in Figure 2. This i also a part of the seatbelt assembly, and not part of the anchorage.; The anchorage strength test should be conducted as you show in Figure 3 and 4, using the complete Type 2 assembly provided with the vehicle.; We regret the misunderstanding about the classification of th attachment hardware and hope that it has not caused you inconvenience.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam4889OpenMr. Richard E. Wright Richard E. Wright Associates 151 Fenwick Court Delran, NJ 08075; Mr. Richard E. Wright Richard E. Wright Associates 151 Fenwick Court Delran NJ 08075; "Dear Mr. Wright: This responds to your letter of May 3, 199 concerning the possible applicability of the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards to tempered glass products in travel trailers and motor homes. I am pleased to have this opportunity to explain the situation to you. Some background information may be useful. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has authority under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(2)(A), the Safety Act) to issue safety standards applicable to new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. Glazing, as an 'addition to the motor vehicle,' is considered to be an item of motor vehicle equipment (Section 102(4) of the Safety Act). New glazing material for use in motor vehicles is subject to the requirements of Standard No. 205, Glazing Materials (49 CFR 571.205). Standard No. 205 incorporates by reference 'ANS Z26,' the American National Standards Institute's Safety Code for Safety Glazing Materials for Glazing Motor Vehicles Operating on Land Highways. The agency has previously stated that Standard No. 205 does not apply to trailers, which our regulations define as 'a motor vehicle with or without motive power, designed for carrying persons or property and for being drawn by another motor vehicle.' Thus, the standard would not apply to travel trailers. NHTSA covers motor homes under Standard No. 205. Standard No. 205 specifies performance requirements for glazing material for use in specified locations in motor vehicles, including motor homes. The agency has previously stated that the standard establishes requirements for glazing used in windows and interior partitions in motor vehicles. Glazing used in locations other than windows and interior partitions would not be subject to the requirements of the standard. I hope that this information is useful to you. If you have further questions, please contact John Rigby of this office at 202-366-2992. Sincerely, Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel"; |
|
ID: aiam0063OpenMr. Warren M. Heath, Commander, Engineering Section, Department of California Highway Patrol, P. O. Box 898, Sacramento, CA 95804; Mr. Warren M. Heath Commander Engineering Section Department of California Highway Patrol P. O. Box 898 Sacramento CA 95804; Dear Mr. Heath: Thank you for your letter of March 1, 1968, to Mr. Edwin L. Slagle requesting a clarification of the location requirements for identification lamps on reel trailers.; The brochures attached to your letter describe two types of ree trailers as manufactured by the Standard Trailer Company and designated as the 'Reelmaster' and 'Cable Winder/Stringer.' These trailers are completely open in the rear with no permanently attached crossbar for mounting rear identification lamps. On these trailers, identification lamps mounted on permanently attached swinging arms which are located near the wheels of the trailers would appear to conform to the requirements of Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108.; With respect to the requirements of Standard No. 108, I must point ou that this Bureau does not issue approvals on items of lighting equipment or on vehicle designs incorporating this equipment. Therefore, the above comments are for your information only and in no way relieve the vehicle manufacturer from his responsibility for certifying that the assembled vehicle meets the requirements of the standard.; Thank you for writing. Sincerely, David A. Fay, Office of Standards on Accident Avoidance Motor vehicle Safety Performance Service; |
|
ID: aiam4923OpenHerbert J. Lushan Regalite Plastics Corporation 300 Needham Street Newton Upper Falls, MA 02164; Herbert J. Lushan Regalite Plastics Corporation 300 Needham Street Newton Upper Falls MA 02164; "Dear Mr. Lushan: This responds to your letter concerning the use o tinted flexible plastic glazing in certain jeep-type vehicles. You explained that a customer has asked you to manufacture a bronze-tinted clear plastic flexible window for installation in the rear side and rear windows of its vehicles. You indicated that this glazing material would not satisfy the minimum light transmittance requirement of Standard No. 205 and requested confirmation of your understanding that Standard No. 205 permits the use of such glazing for rear and side windows in these vehicles. Further, during two telephone conversations on October 29, 1991 and October 30, 1991, you informed Elizabeth Barbour of my staff that your question specifically refers to the use of this glazing on the two-door Suzuki Sidekick and the two-door Geo Tracker. You also confirmed to Ms. Barbour that the glazing materials to which your letter refers would be installed as original equipment, but added that your company is also involved with after-market products. I am pleased to have this opportunity to answer your question. By way of background information, 103 of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (Safety Act, 15 U.S.C. 1392) authorizes the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to issue safety standards for new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA does not, however, approve or certify any vehicles or items of equipment, nor do we endorse any commercial products or processes. Instead, the Safety Act establishes a 'self-certification' process under which each manufacturer is responsible for certifying that its products meet all applicable safety standards. The agency periodically tests vehicles and items of equipment for compliance with the standards, and also investigates alleged safety-related defects. Pursuant to NHTSA's authority, the agency has established Standard No. 205, which specifies performance requirements for various types of glazing (called 'items'), and specifies the locations in vehicles in which each item of glazing may be used. The standard also incorporates by reference 'ANSI Z26,' the American National Standards Institute's Safety Code for Safety Glazing Materials for Glazing Motor Vehicles Operating on Land Highways. Among Standard No. 205's requirements are specifications for minimum levels of light transmittance, measured by Test 2 in ANSI Z26. A minimum of 70% light transmittance is required in glazing areas requisite for driving visibility, which includes all windows in passenger cars. In trucks, buses and multipurpose passenger vehicles, only the windshield and the windows to the immediate left and right of the driver are considered requisite for driving visibility (if they are equipped with dual outside mirrors satisfying sections S6.1(b) of FMVSS No. 111) and thus, subject to the minimum light transmittance requirement. The windows to the rear of the driver in trucks, buses and multipurpose passenger vehicles, including the rear side and rear windows, are not required to meet the light transmittance requirement. Thus, Standard No. 205 permits the use of tinted glazing materials (i.e. items of glazing that are not subject to Test 2) for windows to the rear of the driver in such vehicles when they are equipped with dual outside mirrors larger than those usually used on passenger cars. As stated above, you described the product you wish to manufacture as tinted flexible plastic, Item 7 glazing, which would be installed in the rear side and rear windows of the two-door Suzuki Sidekick and Geo Tracker. According to the agency's information about these vehicles, the rear side and rear windows are part of a removable soft-top. Standard No. 205 permits glazing used for readily removable windows in these locations to be manufactured out of flexible plastic glazing (Items 6, 7 and 13), among other types of glazing. Thus, since these specific window locations on the two-door Suzuki Sidekick and Geo Tracker are not subject to the light transmittance requirement, and since Standard No. 205 permits use of flexible plastic glazing for readily removable windows, the Standard would permit you to manufacture the bronze-tinted flexible plastic glazing for the use your customer requested. You also stated that your company is involved with after-market glazing materials. After a vehicle is first sold to a consumer, 108 (a)(2)(A) of the Safety Act prohibits any manufacturer, dealer, distributor, or repair business from 'rendering inoperative' any device or element of design installed in a vehicle in compliance with any safety standard. According to this provision, your company, for example, could install the Item 7 glazing in the rear side and rear windows of a Suzuki Sidekick or Geo Tracker after that vehicle is first sold to a consumer. This provision would, however, prohibit the after-market installation of tinted flexible plastic glazing in the front side windows of that vehicle because such installation would cause the glazing of the front side windows to no longer comply with the requirements of Standard No. 205. The 'render inoperative' provision of the Safety Act does not apply to the actions of vehicle owners themselves. No section of the Safety Act prevents vehicle owners themselves from installing any product on their vehicles, regardless of whether the installation causes the vehicle to no longer comply with Standard No. 205. The actions of individual vehicle owners may be regulated or precluded by individual States, which have the authority to regulate owner modifications and the operational use of vehicles. I hope this information is helpful. Please contact Elizabeth Barbour of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992 if you have further questions. Sincerely, Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel"; |
|
ID: aiam5631OpenHugh J. Bode, Esq. Reminger & Reminger The 113 St. Clair Building Cleveland, OH 44114; Hugh J. Bode Esq. Reminger & Reminger The 113 St. Clair Building Cleveland OH 44114; "Dear Mr. Bode: This responds to your letter concerning whether 4 U.S.C. 30101 et seq. (formerly the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act) requires a motor vehicle manufacturer to ensure that its vehicle continues to comply with applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSSs) after the first retail purchase of the vehicle. You specifically ask about FMVSS No. 124, 'Accelerator Control Systems,' and its application to a 1988 Dodge Ram 50 pickup truck. It appears from the questions you ask that corrosion developed inside the carburetor of the pickup truck at some point during the life of the vehicle, such that the carburetor would not return to idle in accordance with the requirements of Standard No. 124. You asked us to 'confirm the accuracy' of a number of statements. Your first statement, concerning the application of the FMVSSs generally, is as follows: As we understand it, former 108(a)(1)(A) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, 49 U.S.C. 30112(a), prohibits any person from manufacturing, selling or introducing into commerce any new motor vehicle unless the vehicle is in conformity with all applicable FMVSS. However, the Safety Act further provides that the requirement that a vehicle comply with all applicable FMVSS does not apply after the first purchase for purposes other than resale, i.e., the first retail sale of the vehicle. Safety Act former 108(b)(1), 49 U.S.C. 30112(b)(1). After the first retail sale, the only provision in the Safety Act that affects a vehicle's continuing compliance with an applicable FMVSS is set forth in former 108(a)(2)(A), 49 U.S.C. 30122(b), which prohibits certain persons from knowingly rendering inoperative a device installed in a motor vehicle in compliance with an applicable FMVSS. Your general understanding is correct. However, a manufacturer has responsibilities in addition to those in 30112, that may bear upon on 'continuing compliance' of its vehicle. Under 30118-30122 of our statute, each motor vehicle manufacturer must ensure that its vehicles are free of safety-related defects. If NHTSA or the manufacturer of a vehicle determines that the vehicle contains a safety-related defect, the manufacturer must notify purchasers of the defective vehicle and remedy the problem free of charge. This is not to say that the development of the corrosion in the carburetor necessarily constitutes a safety-related defect. Rather, we acknowledge the possibility of such a finding in certain circumstances, such as where the corrosion developed unreasonably quickly in the vehicle and the problem was such that it could lead to crashes involving injuries or fatalities. State law could also be relevant to this issue. For example, as part of its vehicle inspection requirements, a State could require that the accelerator control systems on vehicles 'continue to comply' with the requirements of Standard No. 124. With the above discussion in mind, I will now address your other four questions on Standard No. 124. Question 1. We ask that NHTSA confirm that FMVSS 124 is a standard that a given vehicle must comply with only at the time of the first retail sale of the vehicle. As explained in our answer above, your understanding is correct with regard to our requirements (49 U.S.C. 30112). There may be State requirements that apply. Question 2. We ask NHTSA to confirm that if a carburetor installed in a 1988 Dodge Ram 50 pickup truck met all the requirements of FMVSS 124 at the time of the truck's first retail sale, but, after the sale, due to in-service conditions, corrosion developed inside the carburetor so the carburetor would not return to idle in accordance with the requirements of S5.1, S5.2, and S5.3 of FMVSS 124, that circumstance would not render the vehicle in violation of FMVSS 124. Your understanding is essentially correct. As permitted by Federal law, Chrysler sold the truck based upon its own certification of compliance with FMVSS No. 124. That corrosion developed in the system may or may not be relevant with respect to the existence of a safety-related defect. Question 3. We ask NHTSA to confirm that all of the performance standards imposed by FMVSS 124 are contained in S5.1, S5.2 and S5.3 of FMVSS 124 and that S2 headed PURPOSE does not impose any separate regulatory obligation beyond those contained in S5. While your understanding is essentially correct, note that Standard No. 124 and other motor vehicle safety standards are minimum performance standards. Question 4. We ask you to confirm that the performance standard set forth in FMVSS 124 does not contain any requirement relating to durability or corrosion resistance. Standard No. 124 does not specify a test for corrosion resistance. It is unclear what you mean by 'durability.' The requirements of the standard must be met when the engine 'is running under any load condition, and at any ambient temperature between -40 F. and +125 F. ....' (S5) In addition to the performance regulated by Standard No. 124, each manufacturer must ensure that its motor vehicle does not have a safety-related defect. If you have any questions about the information provided above, please contact Dorothy Nakama of my staff at this address or at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, John Womack Acting Chief Counsel"; |
|
ID: aiam0433OpenMr. Earl R. Buske, President, E. R. Buske Mfg. Co., Inc., Pocahontas, IA, 50574; Mr. Earl R. Buske President E. R. Buske Mfg. Co. Inc. Pocahontas IA 50574; Dear Mr. Buske: Your letter of September 3, 1971, to the Bureau of Motor Carrier Safet concerning the mounting of lamps on a body backplate has been referred to this Office for consideration and reply.; Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 requires that lamps mee the applicable SAE Standards (including the photometric specifications) when tested as mounted on the vehicle. (See SAE J575c, Paragraph J.) The maximum angle from a line perpendicular to the longitudinal centerline of the vehicle that a lamp can be mounted and meet the applicable requirements depends upon the design and configuration of the lamp. We therefore recommend that you contact the manufacturer of your lamps for this maximum angle information.; Sincerely, E. T. Driver, Office of Operating Systems, Motor Vehicl Programs; |
|
ID: aiam0126OpenMr. Jim Tydings, Chief Engineer, Perley A. Thomas Car Works, Incorporated, High Point, NC 27261; Mr. Jim Tydings Chief Engineer Perley A. Thomas Car Works Incorporated High Point NC 27261; Dear Mr. Tydings: Thank you for your letter of November 19, 1968, to Mr. E. Leysath o this Bureau, concerning a clarification of the requirements of paragraph S3.4.3 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108.; As you indicated, paragraph S3.4.3 of initial Standard No. 108, whic was published in the *Federal Register* on February 3, 1967, required that tail lamps, license plate lamps, and side marker lamps be illuminated when the headlamps are illuminated. The effective date of the initial standard was January 1, 1968. However, on December 16, 1967, an amendment to the initial standard was published in the *Federal Register*. This amendment delayed the effective date of paragraph S3.4.3 until May 1, 1968, and in addition revised that paragraph to require, as a minimum, that the fail (sic) lamps be illuminated when the headlamps are illuminated. Therefore, the requirements of paragraph S3.4.3 were not applicable to vehicles manufactured during the period of January 1, 1968 through April 30, 1968. During that period, selection of the lamp switching arrangement was at the option of the vehicle manufacturer.; Thank you for writing. Sincerely, Charles A. Baker, Office of Standards on Accident Avoidance Motor Vehicle Safety Performance Service; |
|
ID: aiam5324OpenMr. Ulrich Metz Automotive Division Robert Bosch GmbH K4/ERW3 Postfach 1163 77813 Buel Germany; Mr. Ulrich Metz Automotive Division Robert Bosch GmbH K4/ERW3 Postfach 1163 77813 Buel Germany; "Dear Mr. Metz: This responds to your letter to this agency regarding new windshield wiper system you intend to develop for front windshields. I apologize for the delay in responding. The drawing you enclosed with your letter shows a wiper system consisting of one wiper arm and blade, as distinguished from the conventional systems consisting of two wiper arms and blades. Your wiper system takes different paths on the forward and the return strokes of the wiper cycle. Thus, as you stated in your letter, 'the vision areas are fulfilled only in the sum of forward and return movement.' You asked whether that is permissible under Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 104, Windshield Wiping and Washing Systems (copy enclosed), and if so, whether the minimum frequencies specified by FMVSS 104 apply to this wiper system. As explained below, the answer to both questions is yes. The essential feature of a windshield wiper system, from a safety standpoint, is its ability to clear a specific portion of the windshield. The number of wipers necessary to provide the driver with a sufficient field of view is not specified in FMVSS 104. Therefore, the number of wipers is immaterial so long as the minimum percentages of critical areas are cleared. The areas to be wiped are specified in paragraphs S4.1.2 and S4.1.2.1 of the standard. S4.1.2 establishes three windshield areas for passenger car windshields, designated as areas 'A', 'B', and 'C.' Each area is required to have a certain percentage of the glazing area wiped as shown in Figures 1 and 2 of SAE Recommended Practice J903a, May 1966 (copy enclosed), using the angles specified in Tables I, II, III, and IV of FMVSS 104, as applicable. Those tables apply to passenger cars of varying overall widths, namely, from less than 60 inches to more than 68 inches. The angles set forth in the tables vary according to the overall width of the vehicle. Finally, paragraph S4.1.2 provides that the percentage of each area required to be cleared must also be within the area bounded by a perimeter line on the glazing surface one inch from the edge of the daylight opening. With that background in mind, I will address your first question. FMVSS 104 does not specify whether the wiper needs to clear a windshield on either or both strokes. SAE Recommended Practice J903a, at paragraph 2.5, however, defines an effective wipe pattern as 'that portion of the windshield glazing surface which is cleaned when the wiper blade travels through a cycle) (emphasis added). A 'cycle' is defined in paragraph 2.14 of SAE Recommended Practice J903a as consisting of 'wiper blade movement during system operation from one extreme of the windshield wipe pattern to the other extreme and return' (emphasis added). It is NHTSA's opinion, therefore, that so long as the required windshield area is cleared by your wiper in a complete cycle, the requirements of paragraphs S4.1.2 and S4.1.2.1, FMVSS 104, have been met. As indicated above, your wiper system must comply with the minimum frequencies specified in section S4.1.1, Frequency, of FMVSS 104. That section requires that each windshield wiping system must have at least two frequencies or speeds. One must be at least 45 cycles per minute (cpm), regardless of engine load and speed. The other must be at least 20 cpm, also regardless of engine load and speed. In addition, the difference between the higher and lower speeds must be at least 15 cpm, regardless of engine load and speed. There are no exceptions to these frequency requirements, regardless of the number or design of the wiper arms comprising the system. Your letter did not indicate whether your wiper system is designed to be used on passenger cars or motor vehicles other than passenger cars, or both. Please note that section S2 of FMVSS 104, Application, provides that the standard applies to multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, and buses in addition to passenger cars. All those vehicles are required to have power-driven windshield wiping systems that meet the frequency requirements of section S4.1.1. The wiped area requirements of S4.1.2, however, apply only to passenger cars. I hope this information will be helpful to you. Should you have any further questions or need any additional information, please feel free to contact Walter Myers of my staff at this address or at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, John Womack Acting Chief Counsel Enclosures"; |
|
ID: aiam0576OpenMr. F. S. Murley, Administrative Engineer, Oshkosh Truck Corporation, P.O. Box 560, Oshkosh, WI 54901; Mr. F. S. Murley Administrative Engineer Oshkosh Truck Corporation P.O. Box 560 Oshkosh WI 54901; Dear Mr. Murley: This is in reply to your letter of December 16, 1971, concerning th responsibility for compliance with Standard No. 108 and with the Certification regulations for vehicles you manufacture to which snow plows are added. You present four hypothetical situations, listed below.; >>>1. 'Complete - the plow equipment is mounted at OTC and a complet truck is delivered to the dealer or customer.' Your interpretation that 'OTC must conform on all counts as the manufacturer of a complete vehicle sold to the first purchaser and certify a complete vehicle' is correct.; 2. 'Chassis only to OTC dealer - the dealer mounts the plow equipment The dealer may also be a dealer for the plow equipment or he may purchase same.'<<<; The answer depends on whether the chassis is a complete or incomplet vehicle under Parts 567 and 568. If the vehicle as you manufacture it is a complete vehicle, OTC must build the truck so that it conforms with Standard No. 108, and certify the vehicle in accordance with section 567.5. If the mounting of the snow plow by the dealer adversely affects conformity, and the dealer does not bring the vehicle back into conformity before sale, he will be violating Section 108(a)(1) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, and be subject to civil penalties and other sanctions as prescribed in sections 109 and 110 of the Act. He need not, however, certify the vehicle. Your certification will be sufficient.; If the vehicle as you manufacture it is an incomplete vehicle, OTC mus either forward to the dealer the appropriate documents specified in section 568.4, or assume legal responsibility for conformity and certification under the provisions of S 567.5(b) and S 568.7(a). In the first case, the dealer would be the final-stage manufacturer, and would be responsible for compliance with Standard No. 108 and the certification regulations. In the second, OTC would have the responsibility for the completed vehicle, and would not have to furnish the Part 568 document. Your own answer on page 2 of your letter is incorrect. The reference to 'purchasers' in S 108(b)(1) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act is to purchases for the express reason of resale.; >>>3. 'Chassis only to OTC dealer - the plow manufacturer mounts th plow for the dealer. The dealer buys the plow equipment from the plow manufacturer. OTC may ship a chassis (incomplete) direct to the plow manufacturer or to the dealer who in turn ships to the plow dealer or manufacturer.'<<<; In this case the plow manufacturer would be in the same position as th dealer in question 2, and the answer would otherwise be similar.; >>>4. 'Complete - the plow equipment is mounted by the plo manufacturer. OTC sends an incomplete vehicle chassis to the plow manufacturer who mounts the plow equipment and ships the complete vehicle to the customer, usually an OTC dealer.'<<<; The answer to this question is also similar to the answer to questio 2. OTC is the incomplete manufacturer, and the plow manufacturer the final-stage manufacturer, and their responsibilities are as outlined above.; We regret that it was impossible for us to have this response for yo within the time you requested.; Sincerely, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam4866OpenMr. Howard 'Mac' Dashney Pupil Transportation Consultant Michigan Department of Education P.O. Box 30008 Lansing, Michigan 48909; Mr. Howard 'Mac' Dashney Pupil Transportation Consultant Michigan Department of Education P.O. Box 30008 Lansing Michigan 48909; "Dear Mr. Dashney: This responds to your letter of February 19, 1991 In your letter you asked several questions regarding the purchase, sale, and use of motor vehicles used to transport students to and from school and related events. Where two or more questions concern a common issue, they are addressed by a single response. Question 1: Do Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) apply to multi-purpose vehicles with seating positions for more than 10 passengers, passenger vans, used to transport students to and from school and related events? Question 5: Are there FMVSS's in effect for occupants of sedans, station wagons, or mini-vans with seating positions for fewer than 10 passengers used to transport students to and from school and related events? The answer to both questions is yes. NHTSA has issued FMVSS covering all of the types of motor vehicles mentioned in your questions. The application section of each FMVSS indicates which types of motor vehicles are required to comply with its provisions. The motor vehicles you refer to in Question 1 are considered 'schoolbuses' by this agency. A 'school bus' is a motor vehicle designed to carry 11 or more persons, including a driver, and sold for transporting students to and from school and school-related events (49 CFR 571.3). New school buses must comply with the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) for 'buses' and also those for 'school buses.' The following is a list of the FMVSS that include requirements for school buses: Standards No. 101 through No. 104, Standard No. 105 (school buses with hydraulic service brake systems), Standards No. 106 through No. 108, Standards No. 111 through 113, Standard No. 115, Standard No. 116 (school buses with hydraulic service brake systems), Standard No. 119, Standard No. 120, Standard No. 121 (school buses with air brake systems), Standard No. 124, Standards No. 201 through No. 204 (school buses with a GVWR of 10,000 pounds or less), Standard No. 205, Standards No. 207 through No. 210, Standard No. 212 (school buses with a GVWR of 10,000 pounds or less), Standard No. 217, Standard No. 219 (school buses with a GVWR of 10,000 pounds or less), Standard No. 220, Standard No. 221 (school buses with a GVWR greater than 10,000 pounds), and Standards No. 222, 301, and 302. These standards are part of 49 CFR 571. I have enclosed information on how you can obtain copies of the FMVSS. Regarding the motor vehicles mentioned in Question 5, definitions of other motor vehicle types are also found in 49 CFR 571.3. For instance, 'multipurpose passenger vehicle' is defined as 'a motor vehicle with motive power, except a trailer, designed to carry 10 persons or less which is constructed either on a truck chassis or with special features for occasional off-road operation' (49 CFR 571.3(b)). 'Passenger car' is defined as ' a motor vehicle with motive power, except a multipurpose passenger vehicle, motorcycle, or trailer, designed for carrying 10 persons or less' (49 CFR 571.3(b)). Question 2: Is it legal for automobile manufacturers or dealers to lease or sell passenger vans to school districts or private fleet operators when the purpose of those vehicles is to transport students to and from school and related events? Question 6: Is it legal for automobile manufacturers or dealers to lease or sell sedans, station wagons, and mini-vans to school districts or private fleet operators for the purpose of transporting students to and from school and related events? Assuming that the particular vehicle manufactured or sold complies with all FMVSS that apply to that type of vehicle, the answer to your question is yes. Note however, that unlike other motor vehicle types, a school bus is defined by both the vehicle's seating capacity and its intended use. If a manufacturer or dealer is aware that the intended use of a vehicle is to transport students to and from school and related events, it is a violation of Federal law to sell a vehicle with a capacity of 11 or more persons, including the driver, unless the vehicle complies with all FMVSS applicable to school buses. Question 3: Does a school district or private fleet operator increase its liability risk if it purchases passenger vans to transport students to and from school and related events? Question 4: Does a school district or private fleet operator increase its liability risk if it uses passenger vans to transport students to and from school and related events? Question 7: Does a school district or private fleet operator increase its liability risk if it purchases sedans, station wagons, or mini-vans to transport students to and from school and related events? Question 8: Does a school district or private fleet operator increase its liability risk if it uses sedans, station wagons, or mini-vans to transport students to and from school and related events? Liability risk is a question of state, not Federal law. I am not qualified to offer an opinion on how these issues would be resolved under Michigan law. I suggest that you contact the Attorney General for the State of Michigan for an opinion on the application of Michigan law to these situations. You may also wish to consult your agency's attorney and insurance company for more information. I must emphasize, however, NHTSA's position that a vehicle meeting Federal school bus regulations is the safest way to transport students. In addition, I encourage your school districts to give their most careful consideration to the possible consequences of transporting students in vehicles other than school buses. I hope that you find this information helpful. If you have further questions, please contact Mary Versailles of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, Paul Jackson Rice 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.