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: aiam1789OpenMr. George R. Semark, Manager, Vehicle Safety Activities, Sheller-Globe Corporation, 2885 St. Johns Avenue, Lima, OH 45804; Mr. George R. Semark Manager Vehicle Safety Activities Sheller-Globe Corporation 2885 St. Johns Avenue Lima OH 45804; Dear Mr. Semark: This is in reply to your letter of January 16, 1975, asking whether yo must install clearance lamps on a vehicle's rear fenders, rather than its body, in order to conform to Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108.; Table II of Standard No. 108 requires red clearance lamps to be 'on th rear, to indicate the overall width of the vehicle . . . and as near the top as practicable.' Paragraph S4.3.1.1 requires clearance lamps to be located so as to meet the visibility requirements of SAE Standard J592e, which includes test points at 45 degrees inboard. Therefore, the location of clearance lamps as shown on the TBEA sheet you enclosed conforms to the intent of the standard. Clearance lamps mounted near the top and outer extremities of a body, as in your diagrams, do sufficiently indicate overall width for purposes of safety, even though the actual vehicle width at the fender may be somewhat greater.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Asst. Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam1273OpenMr. Virgil V. Stanciu, Executive Vice President, Falcon Enterprises, Inc., 3960 South Marginal Road, Cleveland, OH 44114; Mr. Virgil V. Stanciu Executive Vice President Falcon Enterprises Inc. 3960 South Marginal Road Cleveland OH 44114; Dear Mr. Stanciu: This is in reply to your letter of September 6, 1973, concerning Moto Vehicle Safety Standard No. 218, 'Motorcycle Helmets.' You raise several questions in your letter which are restated below.; >>>1. 'It is our understanding that we are not required to seek o secure prior DOT approval to market helmets manufactured after March 1, 1974, but that we must satisfy ourselves that our product meets this specification. Is this correct?'; Yes. 2. 'It is also our understanding the DOT does not issue any approval o certification even if we present documents of compliance. Is this correct?'; Yes. 3. 'We are interested in your comments as far as the disposition o existing inventory of helmets manufactured prior to March 1, 1974, but available for retail sale following March 1, 1974.'; The standard will apply only to helmets manufactured on or after it effective date, it will not apply to helmets manufactured before its effective date but sold to the public after that date. Accordingly, you will be free to sell after the standard's effective date any helmets you have in stock which were manufactured before the standard's effective date.; 4. 'What mechanism do you foresee being set up to police our industr to assure the public of continued compliance?'; 5. 'In the event that a helmet is tested by DOT and found to b deficient with respect to the DOT requirements, we would like to know what action would be taken by DOT?'; Once any Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard becomes effective violations of such regulations are federally enforced. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) purchases items covered by the standard in the open market, and tests them for compliance. Under section 109(a) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, whoever violates any regulation issued under the Act, including selling nonconforming equipment, shall be subject to a civil penalty of not more than $1,000 for each violation to a maximum of not more than $400,000 for any related series of such violations.; 6. 'Presently our helmets are marketed as universal size with sizin bands included. Per section 5.6.1 (labeling), we are required to show the size of the helmet. We are somewhat at a loss as to which size we would show, since the helmet can be either small, medium, or large at the selection of the purchaser. Would you please comment?'; If the size of a helmet is adjustable, then the range of sizes withi which it can be adjusted must be given.; 7. 'Would you please furnish us with the method and the name of th person or persons whom we would communicate with for specific interpretation of the individual sections of this standard?'; Lawrence R. Schneider, Chief Counsel, National Highway Traffic Safet Administration, 400 Seventh Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20590.; 8. 'Could you provide us with a list of DOT approved testing agencies?' Neither the DOT nor the NHTSA certify or approve testing agencies. Th basis upon which a manufacturer determines whether his product conforms to a standard is a matter within his own discretion.; 9. 'Does this standard supersede and set aside the current Stat regulations pertaining to motorcycle helmets?'; The motorcycle helmet standard is a comprehensive regulation coverin all relevant aspects of safety performance. Any State or local requirements for the design or performance of motorcycle helmets must be identical to the requirements of the Federal standard when that standard becomes effective. Any differing requirements will be void.<<<; A copy of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 which includes the referenced sections you are concerned about, and a copy of the delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.51 are enclosed in accordance with your request.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam4421OpenLawrence C. Bourbeau, Jr., Esq., Assistant General Counsel, Fruehauf Corporation, Law Department, 10900 Harper Avenue, P.O. Box 238, Detroit, MI 48232; Lawrence C. Bourbeau Jr. Esq. Assistant General Counsel Fruehauf Corporation Law Department 10900 Harper Avenue P.O. Box 238 Detroit MI 48232; Dear Mr. Bourbeau: This letter responds to your earlier inquiry where you ask whethe NHTSA would object to your Company's changing 'its model year designation from September 1 to July 1.' I apologize for the delay in responding.; Standard 115, *Vehicle Identification Number-Basic Requirements* directs vehicle manufacturers to place a discrete identifying number (VIN) on each vehicle. Title 49 CFR Part 565, *VIN-Content Requirements*, states that a VIN must include a character indicating the manufacturer's designated model year. Neither Standard 115 nor Part 565 prohibits your company from changing the model year in the manner you suggest. Therefore, such a change does not violate our regulations.; We note that this change apparently concerns model year as a marketin concept. The Federal Trade Commission has published guidelines concerning model year as a commercial concept, and you may wish to contact the Commission for whatever assistance it may provide. I hope you find this information helpful.; Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam0931OpenJerome Palisi, Highway Safety Management Specialist, Region II; Jerome Palisi Highway Safety Management Specialist Region II; Subject: Your memorandum of November 9, 1972, regarding th Certification regulation.; In your memorandum of November 9 you discuss a statement in a TBE Bulletin, brought to your attention by Mr. Edward Bristol of the Bristol=Donald Company, Newark, New Jersey, which Mr. Bristol interprets as holding a manufacturer responsible for a safety defect if an operator overloads a vehicle, exceeding its GVWR and GAWR's. You ask us to forward you copies of any correspondence with Mr. Bristol or TBEA regarding this matter.; We have attached a recent letter to TBEA, dated November 22, 1972 which clarifies our position, and should alleviate Mr. Bristol's concern. Our position on this issue has been that a manufacturer who properly derives his GVWR and GAWR cannot be held responsible for noncompliance with the certification regulations or a safety defect.; From: Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam1623OpenMr. J. W. Boyd, Manager, Government & Industry, Tech. Relations, Dunlop Tire & Rubber Corporation, P. O. Box 1109, Buffalo, NY 14240; Mr. J. W. Boyd Manager Government & Industry Tech. Relations Dunlop Tire & Rubber Corporation P. O. Box 1109 Buffalo NY 14240; Dear Mr. Boyd: This is in response to your letter of September 11, 1974, askin several questions relating to our tire identification regulation as it applies to Dunlop Tire and Rubber Corporation (England).; When tires are manufactured for a brand name owner, as they will be i your case, you are correct in saying the first grouping in the identification number must contain the manufacturer's identification (DD, in your case) and the third grouping must contain up to four letters designating the brand name owner. Pursuant to section 574.5(c) you must maintain a detailed record of the brand name owner code used.; Pursuant to section 574.7(c), the brand name owner must maintain th information required by section 574.7 of the regulation. Therefore, no agreement between Dunlop and Armstrong is necessary.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Acting Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam4972OpenD. E. Dawkins, Acting Director Automotive Safety Planning and Compliance Product Strategy and Regulatory Affairs Office Chrysler Corporation CIMS 414-01-22 12000 Chrysler Drive Highland Park, MI 48288-0857; D. E. Dawkins Acting Director Automotive Safety Planning and Compliance Product Strategy and Regulatory Affairs Office Chrysler Corporation CIMS 414-01-22 12000 Chrysler Drive Highland Park MI 48288-0857; "Dear Mr. Dawkins: This responds to the petition dated September 30 1991, that Mr. Kittle submitted on behalf of Chrysler Corporation seeking temporary exemption for the TEVan from several Federal motor vehicle safety standards on the basis that the exemption would facilitate the development and field evaluation of low emission motor vehicles. The petition indicates (page 4) that exemption is sought for four l989 Dodge Caravans, converted to electric power, that 'were manufactured for test and evaluation'. We understand that this conversion occurred after completion of the manufacture of the vans, and that the conversion was performed by a subsidiary of Chrysler. If an exemption is granted, the petition states that 'one or more of the vehicles will be titled and sold for ongoing endurance evaluation.' Finally, we understand that the TEvans are currently in the possession of the Electric Power Research Institute in California for evaluation, and that presumably they are being driven on the public roads. We regret the delay in responding to Mr. Kittle's letter. The petition represents a rare instance in which a manufacturer has petitioned for an exemption for a vehicle whose manufacture has been completed, and which has been in use. The purpose of an exemption is to allow a manufacturer to engage in conduct that would otherwise be prohibited by the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, specifically, the manufacture for sale, sale, offer for sale, or introduction or delivery for introduction, or importation into the United States of a motor vehicle that does not conform to all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards, and which does not bear a certification of compliance with those standards. With respect to the four TEVans for which petition has been made, it appears that they have already been introduced into interstate commerce without a certification of compliance (or, if bearing the certification of the original vehicle, a certification that is false and misleading in a material respect, a further violation of the Act). Any exemption by the Administrator could not cover conduct violative of the Act that has already occurred. However, we have concluded that the Administrator may grant an exemption to vehicles, which would apply to conduct that would violate the Act, but which has not occurred. As Chrysler seeks an exemption in order to sell the TEVans, or to offer them for sale, the Administrator's exemption authority may be exercised to permit Chrysler to do so, after the procedural requirements have been followed. The petition meets our requirements for form and content, and a notice requesting public comment is being prepared for publication in the Federal Register. We shall notify you when the Administrator has reached a decision. If you have any questions, you may discuss them with Taylor Vinson of this Office (202-366-5263). Sincerely, Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel"; |
|
ID: aiam5660OpenErika Z. Jones, Esq. Mayer, Brown & Platt 2000 Pennsylvania Ave. NW Washington, DC 20006-1882; Erika Z. Jones Esq. Mayer Brown & Platt 2000 Pennsylvania Ave. NW Washington DC 20006-1882; Dear Ms. Jones: This responds to your letter of November 27, 199 concerning the requirement in S4.4 of Standard No. 207, Seating Systems. That section provides that: Seats not designated for occupancy while the vehicle is in motion shall be conspicuously labeled to that effect. You requested confirmation that this requirement would not apply to a seat that was equipped with a folding seat back to convert the seat to a bed. You are correct. NHTSA interprets this requirement as applying only to positions that do not qualify as designated seating positions under 49 CFR 571.3. Therefore, 'designated seating positions' that convert to a non-seating use do not have to comply with the labeling requirement of S4.4. I hope this information has been helpful. If you have other questions or need some additional information, please contact Mary Versailles of my staff at this address or by phone at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, Samuel J. Dubbin Chief Counsel; |
|
ID: aiam0198OpenMr. Yoshio Horii, Manager, Lighting Engineering Department, Ichikoh Industries, Ltd., 5-10-18, Higashi-Gotanda, Shinagawa-Ku, Tokyo 141, Japan; Mr. Yoshio Horii Manager Lighting Engineering Department Ichikoh Industries Ltd. 5-10-18 Higashi-Gotanda Shinagawa-Ku Tokyo 141 Japan; Dear Mr. Horii: Thank you for your letter of December 16, 1969, concerning th relationship between performance requirements of Standard No. 108 and the referenced and subreferenced SAE standards in Standard No. 108.; Public Law 89- 563 requires that the motor vehicle safety standards b stated in terms of what is to be accomplished rather than in terms of specific designs, and that they be objective, reasonable, practicable, and meet the need for motor vehicle safety. In addition, the law required that the initial safety standards be based on *existing* standards.; Initial Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 was based on th *existing* SAE standards as specified in Tables I and III of Standard No. 108. In some instances, these specified SAE standards in turn subreference other SAE standards that are design oriented, particularly the subreferenced standards on bulbs, bulb sockets and sealed beam headlamp units.; As provided by an interpretation (copy enclosed) issued on August 12 1968, entitled, 'Bulbs and Bulb Sockets,' bulbs conforming to Table I of subreferenced SAE J573 and bulb sockets conforming to subreferenced SAE J567 *need not* be used in lamp assemblies meeting the requirements of Standard No. 108. Therefore, as an example, tail lamps need meet only the requirements of SAE J585c (including color test in accordance with SAE J578a) when tested in accordance with the specified Sections of subreferenced SAE J575c.; The above interpretation does not apply to sealed beam headlamps Paragraph S3.1.1 and Tables I and III of Standard No. 108 specify that headlamps shall be designed to conform to SAE J579a and J580a. These specified standards in turn subreference SAE J573b and J571b. The dimensional requirements of SAE J571b serve a need for safety in that replacement sealed beam units are readily available, and standardization of inspection equipment and procedures is possible.; In summary, the referenced and subreferenced SAE standards ar applicable except as specifically provided by the enclosed interpretation.; With reference to the last paragraph in your letter, it is recognize that a manufacturer of motor vehicles may, as part of his contractual relationship with a supplier, require that the supplier certify conformance of the items provided by the supplier. Currently Public Law 89-563 does not require Ichikoh to certify conformance to Standard No. 108 of the lighting equipment it provides. However, an amendment to the standard has been proposed which would make the standard directly applicable to certain items of lighting equipment. This proposal would require Ichikoh to certify conformance, but only if Ichokoh (sic) were shipping such items directly to distributors and dealers in the United States. I enclose a copy of this proposal for your information.; Sincerely, Charles A. Baker, Office of Standards on Accident Avoidance Motor Vehicle Safety Performance Service; |
|
ID: aiam0462OpenMr. K. Krueger, Technical Development, Liason (sic) Engineer, Volkswagen of America, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632; Mr. K. Krueger Technical Development Liason (sic) Engineer Volkswagen of America Inc. Englewood Cliffs NJ 07632; Dear Mr. Krueger: This will serve to confirm your understanding that a retractor capabl of meeting the requirements for a vehicle-sensitive emergency-locking retractor under Standard No. 209 conforms to the Standard even though it is provided with a back-up webbing-sensitive retractor that locks only at webbing accelerations greater than those specified in Standard No. 209.; Sincerely, Lawrence R. Schneider, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam5230OpenMr. Reuven Koter Director Baran Advanced Technologies Ltd. P.O. Box 3153 Beer Sheva 84131 Israel; Mr. Reuven Koter Director Baran Advanced Technologies Ltd. P.O. Box 3153 Beer Sheva 84131 Israel; "Dear Mr. Koter: We are replying to your FAX of July 21, 1993, to Mr Van Iderstine of this agency, and are enclosing a copy of SAE J590b as you requested. You have asked us to identify the U.S. regulations pertaining to turn signal and hazard warning signal lights including tell-tales. The applicable regulation is Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment. Standard No. 108 incorporates by reference many SAE materials, including those regarding flashers. In addition to SAE J590b (turn signal flasher, with the exceptions noted in S5.1.1.19 and S5.1.1.20 of Standard No. 108) Standard No. 108 incorporates SAE J589 (turn signal operating unit, with the exception noted in S5.1.1.13), SAE J588 (turn signal lamps for vehicles less than 2032 mm in overall width and J1395 for wider vehicles), J910 (vehicular hazard warning signal operating unit) and J945 (vehicular hazard warning signal flasher). The turn signal pilot indicator specifications are at paragraph 5.4.3 in SAE J588 and J1395. NHTSA is not contemplating rulemaking concerning any of these requirements. We understand from Mr. Van Iderstine that you are contemplating manufacturing a device that senses the sudden release of the accelerator pedal and activates the hazard warning lamp system. Under Standard No. 108, this device is permissible as original vehicle equipment (i.e. installed at the factory, or by the dealer before sale) if it does not impair the effectiveness of any of the lighting equipment that is required by Standard No. 108. We assume that the device would be automatically deactivated when the brake pedal is applied and that manual deactivation is not required. We further assume that the device is not activated under normal stopping conditions. Finally, we assume that manual activation of the turn signals will override the device should it be operating at the time the turn signal control is activated. Under these assumptions, we do not believe that the device would impair the effectiveness of the stop, tail, and turn signal lamps required by Standard No. 108. However, the judgment of impairment is one made by the person installing the device who must certify (or ensure that the certification remains valid) that the vehicle incorporating the device complies with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. Unless that judgment is clearly erroneous, NHTSA will not question it. Mr. Van Iderstine advises that no further details are currently available on ECE agenda item 'Regulation No. 48.' 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.