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: aiam3104OpenMr. Phillip L. Whitehorn, Messrs. Cannady & Whitehorn, 2150 Franklin Street, Suite 571, Oakland, California 94612; Mr. Phillip L. Whitehorn Messrs. Cannady & Whitehorn 2150 Franklin Street Suite 571 Oakland California 94612; Dear Mr. Whitehorn: This is in reply to your letter of August 31, 1979, following you discussion with Mr. Vinson of this office.; Your client, ZEMCO Inc., has developed a fuel saving device for th automobile aftermarket the operation of which you have described as follows:; >>>'...if a vehicle approached a read light requiring the driver t stop ... several seconds after the accelerator was released and the automobile stopped the device would automatically shut off the engine. To restart, the driver would press the accelerator pedal and the device would automatically trigger the ignition to start the engine.'<<<; "In your opinion two Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards appear t conflict with the ZEMCO device, Standards Nos. 102 and 124. Paragraph S3.1.3 of 49 CFR 571.102, Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 102 imposes a starter interlock requirements under which 'the engine starter shall be inoperative when the transmission shift lever is in a forward or reverse drive position.' You point out that ZEMCO's device 'has been designed to automatically restart the engine with the transmission in either forward or reverse.' Paragraph S5.1 of 49 CFR 571.124, Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 124 requires the throttle to return to the idle position within a specified time j period 'whenever the driver removes the opposing actuating force.' The ZEMCO device shuts off the engine several seconds after the(sic) driver's foot is removed from the accelerator."; You have cited Section 108(a)(1)(A) of the National Traffic and Moto Vehicle Safety Act which prohibits the manufacture of any item of motor vehicle equipment that does not conform to Federal motor vehicle safety standards, and Section 108(a)(1)(A) which forbids manufacturers, distributors, dealers and motor vehicle repair businesses from 'knowingly rendering inoperative ... any device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle ... in compliance with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard.; You have asked whether the ZEMCO device is in conflict with the Act. The ZEMCO device does not violate Section 108(a)(1)(A) of the Act Although it is an item of 'motor vehicle equipment' as defined by Section 102(a) of the Act, there is no Federal motor vehicle safety standard applicable to a device of this nature, so that its manufacture and sale would not be a violation of Section 108(a)(1)(A).; With respect to Section 108(a)(2)(A) we do not see that the devic conflicts with Standard No. 124 as long as the device does not prevent the accelerator from returning to idle in the standard's specified time period before the engine is shut off. The ZEMCO device appears to come into play after the accelerator has returned to idle, a period of time outside the coverage of the standard.; You are correct, however, in your concern with Standard No. 102 as th activation of the starter in forward or reverse gear is diametrically opposed to the standard's requirement. Its installation would appear to 'render inoperative' the starter interlock that is required by Standard No. 102. Although ZEMCO's manufacture of the device would not violate Section 108(a)(2)(A), its installation by a person other than the vehicle owner would appear to.; You are also correct that this agency has not issued the regulatio authorized by Section 108(a)(2)(B) under which any person may be exempted from Section 108(a)(2)(A) upon a determination that the exemption is consistent with motor vehicle safety and the purposes of the Act.; If you wish to petition the agency to issue such a regulation or t amend Standard No. 102 in an appropriate manner you have, of course, the right to do so, and I enclose a copy of our petition procedures, 49 CFR Part 552, for your information.; I return your patent materials herewith. Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam4911OpenMr. Kenneth M. Bush Regulations Manager, Government Relations American Suzuki Motor Corporation 3251 E. Imperial Hwy. P.O. Box 1100 Brea, CA 92622-1100; Mr. Kenneth M. Bush Regulations Manager Government Relations American Suzuki Motor Corporation 3251 E. Imperial Hwy. P.O. Box 1100 Brea CA 92622-1100; "Dear Mr. Bush: This responds to your letter of September 6, 1991, t Mr. Vinson, asking whether a vehicle you are developing would be classified as a multipurpose passenger vehicle for the purposes of the Federal motor vehicle safety standards. I am pleased to be able to explain our law and regulations for you. At the outset, I would like to make clear that the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1381 et seq.) places the responsibility for classifying a particular vehicle in the first instance on the vehicle's manufacturer. For this reason, NHTSA does not approve or endorse any vehicle classification before the manufacturer itself has classified a particular vehicle. NHTSA may reexamine the manufacturer's classification during the course of any enforcement actions. We will, however, tentatively state how we believe we would classify this vehicle for the purposes of our safety standards. It is important that you understand that these tentative statements of classification are based entirely on our understanding of the information presented in your letter to us. These tentative statements about the vehicle's classification may change after NHTSA has had an opportunity to examine the vehicle itself or otherwise acquire additional information about the vehicle. With those caveats, we believe that the vehicle referenced in your letter could be classified as a multipurpose passenger vehicle for the purposes of our safety standards. The term 'multipurpose passenger vehicle' is defined in 49 CFR 571.3 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.' In your letter, you state that the vehicle's chassis should be considered a truck chassis because it 'was originally designed to provide cargo-carrying capability as well as to permit rough road and off the road vehicle operation.' Additionally, you state that the approach and departure angles and the running clearance dimensions for this vehicle are more similar to other vehicles which have been classified by their manufacturers as multipurpose passenger vehicles than vehicles that have been classified as passenger cars. Based upon this description, it appears to us that this vehicle could be classified as a multipurpose passenger vehicle. I hope you find this information helpful. The version of your letter that has been placed in the public docket has all the information for which you requested confidential treatment deleted from it. 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"; |
|
ID: aiam5603OpenPaul Jackson Rice, Esquire Arent Fox 1050 Connecticut Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20036-5339; Paul Jackson Rice Esquire Arent Fox 1050 Connecticut Avenue NW Washington DC 20036-5339; Dear Mr. Rice: This responds to your letter of August 30, 1995 concerning a June 6, 1995 letter from this office to C. Rufus Pennington, III. You asked us to confirm that the agency did not take a position as to whether there are 'designated seating positions' in the rear of the 1979 911 SC Porsche. You are correct. As the letter clearly states, 'NHTSA cannot make a determination as to whether a vehicle complied with applicable safety standards outside a compliance proceeding.' I hope this information has been helpful. Sincerely, John Womack Acting Chief Counsel; |
|
ID: aiam0401OpenMr. Keitaro Nakajima, General Manager, Toyota Motor Company, Ltd., Factory Representative Office, Lyndhurst Office Park, 1099 Wall Street West, Lyndhurst, NJ 07071; Mr. Keitaro Nakajima General Manager Toyota Motor Company Ltd. Factory Representative Office Lyndhurst Office Park 1099 Wall Street West Lyndhurst NJ 07071; Dear Mr. Nakajima: Thank you for your letter of May 20, 1971, to Administrator Douglas W Toms, requesting an interpretation of paragraph S5.2(h) of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 209, and particularly of the sentence containing the phrase ...the retractor and webbing shall be suspended vertically...'; Of the two interpretations you submitted, your interpretation 2 i correct. The retractor-webbing combination is suspended vertically--there is no restriction on the attitude of the retractor with respect to the webbing. Thus, the retractor may be suspended in the position it will be mounted in the vehicle relative to the webbing when the webbing is in use.; Please let us know if we can be of further assistance. Sincerely, Lawrence R. Schneider, Acting Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam2596OpenMr. Eric E. Gough, Staff Assistant (Technical), Lucas Industries North America, Inc., Two Northfield Plaza, Troy, MI 48084; Mr. Eric E. Gough Staff Assistant (Technical) Lucas Industries North America Inc. Two Northfield Plaza Troy MI 48084; Dear Mr. Gough: This is in reply to your letter of May 13, 1977, to the Administrato asking whether the circuitry diagram that you enclosed would allow compliance with S4.5.2 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108.; Paragraph S4.5.2 requires that 'each vehicle shall have a means fo indicating to the driver when the upper beams of the headlamps are on that conforms to SAE Recommended Practice J564a, April 1964 ....' Your diagram appears to meet the specifications of J564a allowing compliance of the system with S4.5.2 when installed in a motor vehicle. The entity legally responsible for compliance with S4.5.2, of course, is the vehicle manufacturer who must certify that its products meet all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards.; Yours truly, Joseph J. Levin, Jr., Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam5253OpenMr. Milford R. Bennett, Head Safety Affairs and Operations NAO Engineering Safety Center General Motors Corporation 30200 Mound Road/S3-N27 Warren, MI 48090-9010; Mr. Milford R. Bennett Head Safety Affairs and Operations NAO Engineering Safety Center General Motors Corporation 30200 Mound Road/S3-N27 Warren MI 48090-9010; "Dear Mr. Bennett: This is in reply to your letter of October 7, 1993 to Howard Smolkin concerning information labels for vehicles covered by NHTSA temporary exemptions (49 CFR Part 555). Paragraph 555.9(b) requires that a windshield or side window label containing an advisory statement be affixed securely to each exempted vehicle. You have concluded that this label is intended to notify prospective purchasers that the vehicle has been exempted from compliance with certain Federal motor vehicle safety standards. Because General Motors (GM) does not intend to sell its recently exempted GMEV, it believes that it is not required to place the label on its vehicles. Section 123(b) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (the Act) (15 U.S.C. 1410(b)) specifies that ' t he Secretary may require that written notification of an exemption be delivered to the dealer and first purchaser for purposes other than the resale of such exempted motor vehicle in such manner as he deems appropriate.' NHTSA chose to exercise this discretionary power through promulgating paragraph 555.9(b) requiring windshield and side window labels on exempted vehicles, commenting that ' t he window label appears to be the most appropriate way of providing written notification of exemptions to dealers and first purchasers' (37 FR 25534). We read in The New York Times on October 14, 1993, that GM will build 50 Impacts (presumably the exempted GMEVs) 'and lend them for two to four weeks to 1,000 drivers around the country over the next two years, with the help of 14 utilities.' If these cars are made available through GM's dealer network, then we believe that the label should nevertheless be provided even if the vehicle is not sold, and that it should remain affixed until the vehicle is first lent or leased through the dealer. Although subsequent users of the GMEV will not have access to the temporary label in order to evaluate the risk they assume by accepting temporary use of a nonconforming motor vehicle, the permanently affixed exemption certification label will furnish this information should they care to consult it. Sincerely, John Womack Acting Chief Counsel"; |
|
ID: aiam0051OpenMr. O. Weinreich, Staff Engineer, Bayerische Motoren Werke, c/o Hoffman Motors Corporation, 50 Louis Street, South Hackensack, NJ 07606; Mr. O. Weinreich Staff Engineer Bayerische Motoren Werke c/o Hoffman Motors Corporation 50 Louis Street South Hackensack NJ 07606; Dear Mr. Weinreich: Thank you for your letter of February 21, 1968, to Mr. J. E. Leysath o this Bureau, concerning the use of tubular type bulbs in license plate lamps.; Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 requires that license plate lamp conform to Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) Standard J587b. SAE J587b in turn requires that bulbs and bulb sockets conform to SAE Standards J573b and J567b, respectively. Since tubular type bulbs and sockets for these bulbs do not conform to these SAE Standards, their use in license plate lamps would not be permitted under the requirements of Standard No. 108.; Thank you for writing. Sincerely, David A. Fay, Office of Standards on Accident Avoidance Motor Vehicle Safety Performance Service; |
|
ID: aiam4012OpenMr. W.S. Deason, Development Manager, IMI Norgren Enots Ltd., Enots Works, P.O. Box 22, Eastern Avenue, Lichfield, Staffordshire WS 13 6SB, ENGLAND; Mr. W.S. Deason Development Manager IMI Norgren Enots Ltd. Enots Works P.O. Box 22 Eastern Avenue Lichfield Staffordshire WS 13 6SB ENGLAND; Dear Mr. Deason: This responds to your June 14, 1985 letter to the National Highwa Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Office of Vehicle Safety Standards, regarding Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 106, *Brake Hoses*. Your letter has been referred to my office for reply.; You asked about 'DOT Certification' of your air brake hose and fittin assemblies. Our agency does not certify or approve in advance motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Instead, under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 (copy enclosed), each manufacturer of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment is responsible for certifying that its products meet all applicable safety standards. This 'self-certification' process requires each manufacturer to determine in the exercise of due care that its products meet all applicable requirements. This determination can be made by product testing. The tests in Standard No. 106 are performance requirements that your products must meet when tested by the agency for compliance.; The data forming the basis for your certification is retained by you and does not have to be submitted to NHTSA for approval. Our agency investigates safety-related defects and noncompliances with safety standards in motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment. If a question should arise as to the compliance of your product with NHTSA requirements, you will be requested to produce records to show how you determined compliance. If you or the agency determines that a safety-related defect or noncompliance exists, you are obligated to notify purchasers of your product and remedy the problem without charge.; Paragraph S4 of Standard No. 106 defines 'brake hose' as: >>>a flexible conduit, other than a vacuum tubing connector manufactured for use in a brake system to transmit or contain the fluid pressure or vacuum used to apply force to a vehicle's brakes.<<<; We wish to emphasize that the definition of 'brake hose' include flexible conduits manufactured out of nylon tubing that transmit or contain the pressure or vacuum used to apply force to a vehicle's brakes. To be sold in the United States, your brake hose assemblies consisting of nylon tubing and 'push-in' type tube fittings must be certified as meeting all applicable requirements of Standard No. 106.; Under Standard No. 106, certification is accomplished when you mark on component of each of your reusable fittings with the 'DOT' symbol, pursuant to paragraph S7.2.2. The DOT symbol is your representation that your products were manufactured in compliance with applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. You are also required by the standard to mark your products with a designation, identifying you as the manufacturer, that is filed in writing with the Office of Vehicle Safety Standards. The designation is intended to identify the manufacturer or assembler of brake hoses in the event of a safety-related defect or noncompliance necessitated recall.; You asked whether there are standard forms for manufacturers t register their designation. The answer is no. Standard No. 106 describes the procedures for designation registration. NHTSA will accept any designation consisting of letters, numerals, or a symbol, or a combination of these. If your chosen designation has not been selected previously by another manufacturer, it is accepted and recorded by NHTSA.; I am enclosing copies of two procedural rules which apply to al manufacturers subject to the regulations of this agency. The first is 49 CFR Part 566, *Manufacturer Identification*. This rule requires your company to submit your name, address, and a brief description of the items of equipment you manufacture to the agency within 30 days after you import your products into the United States.; The other rule is 49 CFR Part 551, *Procedural Rules*. Subpart D o this regulation requires all manufacturers headquartered outside of the United States to designate a permanent resident of the United States as the manufacturer's agent for service of all process, notices, orders and decisions. This designation should be mailed to the Chief Counsel, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20590, and must include the following information:; 1. A certification that the designation of agent is valid in form an binding on the manufacturer under the laws, corporate by-laws, or other requirements governing the making of the designation at the time and place where it is made,; 2. The full legal name, principal place of business and mailing addres of the manufacturer,; 3. Marks, trade names, or other designations of origin of any of th manufacturer's products which do not bear its name,; 4. A statement that the designation shall remain in effect unti withdrawn or replaced by the manufacturer,; 5. A declaration of acceptance duly signed by the agent appointed which may be an individual, a firm or a U.S. corporation, and; 6. The full legal name and address of the designated agent. In addition, the designation must be signed by a person with authorit to appoint the agent. The signer's name and title should be clearly indicated beneath his or her signature.; In addition to the copies of the materials described above, I have als enclosed a copy of Standard No. 106 with amendments to the standard. You will also find an information sheet describing Federal statutes and regulations affecting manufacturers of motor vehicle equipment, and information on how you can obtain copies of NHTSA's standards and regulations.; I hope this information is of assistance to you. Sincerely, Jeffrey R. Miller, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam1210OpenMr. A. R. Woodroof, Assistant Attorney General, Supreme Court Building, 1101 East Broad Street, Richmond, VA 23219; Mr. A. R. Woodroof Assistant Attorney General Supreme Court Building 1101 East Broad Street Richmond VA 23219; Dear Mr. Woodroof: This is in response to your letter of July 31, 1973, concerning th effect of our Standard 208 on State laws requiring vehicles to be equipped with sear belts.; Section 103(d) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, 1 U.S.C. 1392(d), reads:; >>>Whenever a Federal motor vehicle safety standard established unde this title is in effect, no State or political subdivision of a State shall have any authority either to establish, or to continue in effect, with respect to any motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment any safety standard applicable to the same aspect of performance of such vehicles or item of equipment which is not identical to the Federal standard. . . .<<<; Standard 208 (49 CFR 571.208) permits passenger cars to be manufacture under any one of several options for occupant crash protection. One of these options is 'complete passive protection', under which the vehicle must undergo a series of rigorous crash tests in which instrumented dummies without belt restraints show force levels that would not create serious injury to a human occupant in most cases. Manufacturers are not required by the standard to have seat belts at any position that meets the requirements of this option.; The NHTSA considers that Section 103(d), quoted above, clearly render void any State laws or regulations to the extent that they would require a vehicle to be equipped with seat belts at seating positions that comply with the complete passive protection option. Any State requirements that are not 'identical' to those of an applicable standard are preempted by that section, under basic Constitutional principles of the supremacy of Federal law.; I am enclosing some information on the efficacy of air cushio restraints, as you requested. We are pleased to be of assistance.; Sincerely, Lawrence R. Schneider, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam4442OpenThe Honorable Harris W. Fawell House of Representatives Washington DC 20515; The Honorable Harris W. Fawell House of Representatives Washington DC 20515; "Dear Mr. Fawell: I have been asked to respond to your recent lette asking the Department of Transportation to provide you with information concerning the use of safety belts on school buses. You ask for this information on behalf of your constituent, Mr. Wayne Mann, in the Illinois Palos Community Consolidated Schools. Mr. Mann specifically seeks 'factual information relative to seat (lap) belts on school buses,' and information on funding for traffic safety programs involving hazardous conditions outside the school bus. I would like to begin with some background information on our school bus regulations. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is responsible for developing safety standards applicable to all new motor vehicles, including school buses. In 1977, we issued a set of motor vehicle safety standards regulating various aspects of school bus performance. Among those standards is Standard 222, School Bus Passenger Seating and Crash Protection. Standard 222 requires large school buses (those with a gross vehicle weight rating over 10,000 pounds) to have passenger crash protection through a concept called 'compartmentalization.' Compartmentalization requires large school buses to incorporate certain protective elements into the vehicles' interior construction, thereby reducing the risk of injury to school bus passengers without the need for safety belts. These elements include high seats with heavily padded backs and improved seat spacing and performance. (Our regulations require a safety belt for the school bus driver because the driver's position is not compartmentalized. Further, because small school buses experience greater force levels in a crash, passengers on these vehicles need the added safety benefits of the belts.) School buses continue to have one of the lowest fatality rates for any class of motor vehicle. Large school buses are among the safest motor vehicles because of their size and weight (which generally reduce an occupant's exposure to injury-threatening crash forces), the drivers' training and experience, and the extra care other motorists take when they are near a school bus. For these reasons, NHTSA has not required safety belts in large school buses. I enclose a copy of a June 1985 NHTSA publication titled 'Safety Belts in School Buses,' which discusses many of the issues relative to this subject. I think your constituent may find this information helpful. With respect to hazardous conditions outside the school bus, the agency realizes that there are special problems of driver visibility associated with transporting students. NHTSA has addressed these problems in Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 111, Rearview mirrors, paragraph S9. In 1975, NHTSA established special mirror requirements for school buses 'to reduce the danger of death or injury to school children (by giving) the school bus driver the fullest possible view of all sides of the vehicle...' (The proposed rule, including this preamble quotation, appears at 40 FR 33828, 33829, August 12, 1975. The final rule was published originally at 41 FR 36023, August 26, 1976.) One of these special requirements is that manufacturers equip a school bus with a crossview mirror that permits the driver to see the area in front of the bus. These special school bus mirror requirements help contribute to the low number of fatalities associated with school bus travel. Your constituent also mentions funding to implement a program to address hazardous conditions outside the school bus. The agency believes that its school bus regulations effectively address the safety of school bus design and performance, and contribute to occupant safety. We note, however, that /402 of the Highway Safety Act, provides funds to each State for its use in conducting a highway safety program. Some of these funds are distributed by the State to local governments or organizations within the State. To get information on Illinois' /402 funds, I suggest that your constituent contact the Illinois Governor's Representative for Highway Safety, Mr. Melvin H. Smith, Director, Division of Traffic Safety, 319 Administration Bldg., 2300 South Dirksen Pkwy., Springfield, IL 62764. If you or Mr. Mann have further questions, I encourage you to contact our agency. Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones 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.