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: aiam5399OpenMr. Saburo Inui Vice President Toyota Motor Corporate Services of North America, Inc. 1850 M Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20036; Mr. Saburo Inui Vice President Toyota Motor Corporate Services of North America Inc. 1850 M Street N.W. Washington D.C. 20036; "Dear Mr. Inui: This responds to your letter asking about the tes conditions for the dynamic side impact test of Standard No. 214, 'Side Impact Protection.' I apologize for the delay in responding. The test conditions are set forth in S6 of the standard. S6.1 explains how to achieve 'test weight:' Test weight. Each passenger car is loaded to its unloaded vehicle weight, plus its rated cargo and luggage capacity, secured in the luggage area, plus the weight of the necessary anthropomorphic test dummies. Any added test equipment is located away from the impact areas in secured places in the vehicle. * * * You first ask whether the weight of the added test equipment inside the vehicle is added to the test weight, or whether parts of the vehicle (weighing the same as the 'added test equipment') are removed to keep the vehicle weight at the 'test weight.' The answer is that parts of the vehicle may be removed, but only as a last resort. A brief explanation of how NHTSA calculates test weight follows. Under S6.1, 'test weight' is comprised of the combined weight of the vehicle with all fluids, the cargo and luggage weight, the test dummies, and nothing more. The cargo and luggage weight is derived by subtracting from the gross vehicle weight rating specified by the manufacturer the combined weight of the vehicle, fluids, and 150 pounds for each seating position. There are subtractions and additions to the vehicle weight in preparation for the test. The fuel is replaced with Stoddard solvent, but only to approximately 93 percent of capacity, and all other fluids (oil, washer fluid, etc.) are drained. Thus, the vehicle is lightened by the weight of 7 percent of the fuel and all of the other fluids. However, the added weight of cameras and any other necessary (non-dummy) test equipment usually more than compensates for the fluid weight loss, and the vehicle generally is slightly heavier than the test weight. Therefore, other weight must be removed until the test weight is reestablished. Please note that NHTSA will remove parts of the vehicle to compensate for the weight of the test equipment only as a last resort. The agency will first remove cargo or luggage ballast. If still more weight must be removed (i.e., in the unlikely event that the weight of the test equipment exceeds the weight of the removable cargo and luggage) the agency will remove parts of the vehicle. This is only likely to occur in vehicles with very small cargo capacities, such as sports cars. In this event, NHTSA would remove only parts of the car that play no part in the side impact test (e.g. bumpers). You next ask about the 'vehicle test attitude' specifications of S6.2. By way of background, NHTSA determines the attitude of the vehicle in its 'as delivered' condition (i.e., the vehicle as received at the test site, filled to 100 percent of all fluid capacities and with all tires inflated to the manufacturer's specifications) and in its 'fully loaded condition,' under the vehicle test attitude specification of S6.2. Under S6.2, the vehicle's pretest attitude is equal to either the as delivered or the 'fully loaded attitude' or between the as delivered and the fully loaded attitude. You ask whether the term 'fully loaded attitude' means the attitude of the vehicle in the 'fully loaded condition.' The answer is yes. Moreover, S6.2 specifies that ' t he `fully loaded condition' is the test vehicle loaded in accordance with S6.1.' As mentioned in our response to your first question, S6.1 explains how to load the vehicle to achieve the test weight. You also ask whether the 'as delivered' left-to-right attitude must be maintained when adding test equipment. The answer is also found in S6.2's specification that ' t he pretest vehicle attitude is equal to either the as delivered or fully loaded attitude, or between the as delivered attitude and the fully loaded attitude.' This language describes a range of attitudes, including the left-to-right attitude, which the vehicle may be in at the time of the test. The vehicle must be capable of passing the test anywhere within the prescribed range. Therefore, when NHTSA tests a vehicle, the agency has leeway in maintaining the as delivered left-to-right attitude when adding test equipment. As long as the left-to-right attitude after adding equipment is somewhere between the attitude in the as delivered condition and the fully loaded condition, an acceptable pretest vehicle attitude will be achieved. Finally, I would like to note that NHTSA's Enforcement Office prepares updates to its laboratory test procedures on an as-required basis. The updates include rule changes and maintenance revisions. We project a maintenance update to the side impact test procedures (TP-214D-03) will be published within the next six months. During this update, issues addressed in this letter will be considered. I hope you find this information helpful. If you have any other questions, please contact Ms. Deirdre Fujita of my staff at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, John G. Womack Acting Chief Counsel"; |
|
ID: aiam0461OpenMr. Paul F. Bennett, Utility Trailer Manufacturing Company, P. O. Box 1299, City of Industry, CA, 91747; Mr. Paul F. Bennett Utility Trailer Manufacturing Company P. O. Box 1299 City of Industry CA 91747; Dear Mr. Bennett: Thank you for your letter of September 22 asking for clarification o the requirement for spacing of rear identification lamps on trailers, as applicable to your 'change number 21-23.'; Until January 1, 1972, Table II of Federal Motor Vehicle Safet Standard No. 108 requires that the three-lamp cluster be mounted 'as close as practicable to the vertical center line.' However, beginning January 1, 1972, the center lamp of the three-lamp cluster must be mounted on the vertical center line, and the offset arrangement in change number 21-23 will no longer meet the requirements of Standard No. 108.; Sincerely, Lawrence R. Schneider, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam5233OpenMs. Carolyn H. McDaniel 2614 Briar Ridge Suite 493 Houston, TX 77057; Ms. Carolyn H. McDaniel 2614 Briar Ridge Suite 493 Houston TX 77057; "Dear Ms. McDaniel: This responds to your September 1, 1993, letter t Mary Versailles of my staff. You are concerned with vehicles used by a company called Extradition Services, Inc. (ESI), to transport prisoners, one of which was involved in an accident in Texas. You describe the vehicle involved in the accident as follows: ...an extended Dodge van, bars over the windows, handles off the doors, one bench in a wire cage, two more bench seats and a bench seat across the back of the van. The aisle ran along the passenger side of the van. The seats appeared to be the original seats and seat belts apparently had been removed because none were present. You also expressed concerns related to the way these vehicles were operated. By way of background information, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is authorized under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1381 et seq., Safety Act) to issue Federal motor vehicle safety standards that apply to the manufacture and sale of new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. Section 108(a)(1)(A) of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(1)(A)) prohibits any person from manufacturing, introducing into commerce, selling, or importing any new motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment unless the vehicle or equipment item is in conformity with all applicable safety standards. The regulations administered by this agency only address the way in which the vehicle is manufactured, not the use of the vehicle. Based on your description of the vehicle, there may be a question as to whether the vehicle was required to have seat belts. NHTSA has exercised its authority to establish Standard No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection (49 CFR 571.208), which requires seat belts to be installed at all designated seating positions in many, but not all, vehicles. In addition, different belt installation requirements apply depending on the vehicle type, seating position within the vehicle, and the gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of the vehicle. Accordingly, I cannot identify the specific belt installation requirements for the vehicle in which the prisoners were transported without knowing the date of the vehicle's manufacture, the vehicle's seating capacity, and GVWR of the vehicle. Your letter states that you believe the seat belts were removed from the vehicle after manufacture. After a vehicle's first purchase for purposes other than resale, i.e., the first retail sale of the vehicle, a provision in Federal law that affects a vehicle's continuing compliance with an applicable safety standard is set forth in section 108(a)(2)(A) of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(2)(A)). That section provides that: No manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business shall knowingly render inoperative, in whole or in part, any device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle ... in compliance with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard. Any violation of this 'render inoperative' prohibition would subject the violator to a potential civil penalty of up to $1,000 for each violation. The 'render inoperative' provision would prohibit a commercial business from removing seat belts from a vehicle. Please note, however, that the 'render inoperative' prohibition does not apply to modifications owners make to their own vehicles. Your concerns about ESI's use of the vehicle are not addressed by the Federal law administered by this agency, which addresses only the manufacture and sale of motor vehicles, not their use. It is possible that there may be an issue associated with commercial driver regulations, and we have forwarded a copy of your letter to the Federal Highway Administration. In addition, because your questions concern the safety of vehicles used to transport prisoners and an accident in Texas, you may wish to contact the Governor's Office, the head of the Texas prison system, or your state representative. I hope you find this information helpful. If you have any other questions, please contact Mary Versailles of my staff at this address or by phone at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, John Womack Acting Chief Counsel cc: Federal Highway Administration"; |
|
ID: aiam0031OpenMr. E. L. McKinsey, McKinsey's Tire Service, 245 North Street, Meadville, PA 16335; Mr. E. L. McKinsey McKinsey's Tire Service 245 North Street Meadville PA 16335; Dear Mr. McKinsey: This is in response to your recent letter to me which asked whether th National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 makes it 'unlawful to regroove, sell or offer for sale any tire that has been regrooved, in all states of the union.'; Section 204 of the Act reads as follows: >>>Sec. 204. (a) No person shall sell, offer for sale, or introduce fo sale or deliver for introduction in interstate commerce, any tire or motor vehicle equipped with any tire which has been regrooved, except that the Secretary may by order permit the sale of regrooved tires and motor vehicles equipped with regrooved tires which he finds are designed and constructed in a manner consistent with the purposes of this Act.; (b) Violations of this Section shall be subject to civil penalties an injunction in accordance with sections 109 and 110 of this Act.; (c) For the purposes of this section the term 'regrooved tire' means tire on which a new tread has been produced by cutting into the tread of a worn tire.<<<; Therefore, while regrooving is not itself unlawful, the Act doe prohibit sale, offering for sale, or introducing or delivering for introduction in interstate commerce any tire or motor vehicle equipped with any tire which has been regrooved.; For your information I enclose a copy of a notice published in th Federal Register (32 F. R. 11579, August 10, 1967, 32 F. R. 12501, August 29, 1967) under which the Secretary of Transportation will receive information and data which could form the basis for a request to permit the sale of regrooved tires.; Sincerely, Robert M. O'Mahoney, Assistant Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam4072OpenMr. Lewis Quetel, PMI Inc., 1391 Wright Blvd., Schaumburg, IL 60193; Mr. Lewis Quetel PMI Inc. 1391 Wright Blvd. Schaumburg IL 60193; Dear Mr. Quetel: This is in response to your telephone call on October 22, 1985, t Robert Nelson of this agency asking how our regulations would affect a product you intend to sell. The product, which you call a 'Kumfi-Klip' safety belt comfort device, consists of a plastic device which attaches to the upper torso belt anchorage. A belt user can then pull the webbing through the open wedge and close the wedge to introduce slack into the shoulder portion of the belt.; As background information, let me explain that the agency does not hav the authority to approve or endorse items of motor vehicle equipment, such as your device. We do have the authority to issue Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards that set performance requirements for motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment. Manufacturers of vehicles or equipment covered by our standards must certify that their product complies with all of the applicable standards.; Your particular aftermarket product is not covered by any of our safet belt or other standards. However, as a manufacturer of an item of motor vehicle equipment, you do have certain responsibilities concerning possible safety-related defects you or the agency discover in your product. Those responsibilities are set out in sections 151-160 of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act. I have enclosed an information sheet on our defect and other regulations for your review.; The agency is concerned that a belted occupant could inadvertently us your product to introduce excessive slack in the upper torso belt and thereby reduce the effectiveness of that belt. The instructions you provide with the 'Kumfi-Klip' do warn users not to introduce excessive slack, but the instructions provide no information to guide a user on what is an excessive amount of slack. We encourage you to provide more detailed guidance.; If you have any further questions, please let me know. Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam0898OpenMr. Donald P. Koch, Insurance Rate Analyst, Division of Insurance, Department of Commerce, State of Alaska, Pouch D - Juneau 99801; Mr. Donald P. Koch Insurance Rate Analyst Division of Insurance Department of Commerce State of Alaska Pouch D - Juneau 99801; Dear Mr. Koch: This is in reply to your letter of October 4, 1972, concerning th possible misuse by automobile insurers of vehicle identification numbers (VIN's) which would be available to them under a proposed amendment to NHTSA 'Defect Reports' regulations (49 CFR Part 573). You believe that the availability of such numbers could be the basis for some companies to refuse to write or to cancel insurance, and suggest that we notify state insurance commissioners of that possibility.; We appreciate your concern over the possible misuse of informatio obtained as a result of NHTSA regulations. However, we have no evidence at this time that such practices are occurring, and we believe it inappropriate, without evidence, to take action which raises the implication of impropriety on the part of the insurance industry. Of course, if we find evidence of misuse of information obtained as a result of NHTSA regulations, we will take steps to remedy the situation.; Your letter and our response have been placed in Docket 69-31, whic concerns the reporting of VIN's. We appreciate your writing to us regarding this matter.; Sincerely, Robert L. Carter, Associate Administrator, Motor Vehicl Programs; |
|
ID: aiam4588OpenMr. Richard L. Story, Sr. 34855 Annapolis Ave. Wayne, MI 48184-2133; Mr. Richard L. Story Sr. 34855 Annapolis Ave. Wayne MI 48184-2133; "Dear Mr. Story: This responds to your letter asking whethe manufacturers are required to install rear seat lap/shoulder belts in cars originally equipped with rear seat lap belts at no additional cost to the consumer. The answer to this question is no. The lap belts that are installed in the rear seat of your car are effective in reducing the risk of death and injury in a crash. Based on this agency's analysis of a number of crash data files, we estimate that rear seat lap belts saved about 100 lives and prevented over 1500 serious injuries in 1987 alone. These figures would have been substantially higher if more rear seat occupants used their lap belts. In fact, if everyone had worn their rear seat lap belts each time they rode, those belts would have saved about 660 lives and prevented more than 10,000 serious injuries in 1987 alone. Even though lap belts have been proven to be effective in reducing the risk of death and injury in a crash, we agree that properly designed lap and shoulder belts have the potential to offer even greater crash protection than lap belts alone. For this reason, we have proposed to require that all new passenger cars sold in the United States be equipped with rear seat lap and shoulder belts beginning in the 1990 model year. For cars made in earlier model years, we have actively sought the car manufacturers' cooperation in providing retrofit kits to interested consumers. You indicated in your letter that Ford offers a rear seat lap and shoulder belt retrofit kit for your car, the 1988 Thunderbird. We encourage consumers to consider having rear seat lap and shoulder belts fitted into their cars when manufacturers have made a retrofit kit available for the car, because of the additional crash protection afforded to rear seat passengers. However, NHTSA has no authority to require manufacturers to provide these retrofit kits and installation free of charge to the consumer. Thus, the individual consumer who desires the added protection of lap and shoulder belts in the rear seat will have to pay for that additional protection. I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions or need additional information on this subject, please let me know. Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel"; |
|
ID: aiam1270OpenMr. R.A.C. Dandy, British Standards Institution, Hemel Hempstead Centre, Maylands Avenue, Hemel Hempstead, Herts HP2 4SQ; Mr. R.A.C. Dandy British Standards Institution Hemel Hempstead Centre Maylands Avenue Hemel Hempstead Herts HP2 4SQ; Dear Mr. Dandy: This is in reply to your letter of August 20, 1973, which we receive September 17, 1973, concerning the application of Standard No. 302, 'Flammability of Interior Materials,' to seat belt assemblies.; You ask whether components of the seat belt assembly such as plasti buckle covers must meet the requirements of the standard as well as the belt itself. Standard No. 302 applies to all enumerated interior materials, not just 'textile materials or sheet materials.' Since plastic buckle covers are considered part of the seat belt, they must meet the standard's requirements.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam4422OpenLawrence 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 wher you ask whether NHTSA would object to your Company's changing 'its model year designation from September 1 to July 1.' I apoligize 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 marketing 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: aiam1620OpenMr. Francois Louis, Manager, Technical Standards Dept., Renault, Inc., 100 Sylvan Avenue, Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632; Mr. Francois Louis Manager Technical Standards Dept. Renault Inc. 100 Sylvan Avenue Englewood Cliffs NJ 07632; Dear Mr. Louis:#This is in response to your letter of September 13 1974, requesting an interpretation of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 101.#You ask confirmation that your proposed vertically lettered identification for windshield wiper and hazard warning switches will meet the requirement of Standard No. 101, S4.2.1, that the identification 'shall appear to the operator in an upright position.'#Both horizontally and vertically lettered identifications are acceptable, as long as their appearance is upright. We have no objection to your use of the proposed designations.#Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, 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.