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: aiam1573OpenMr. John B. White, Michelin Tire Corporation, Technical Division, P.O. Box 3467, New Hyde Park Post Office, New York 11040; Mr. John B. White Michelin Tire Corporation Technical Division P.O. Box 3467 New Hyde Park Post Office New York 11040; Dear Mr. White: This is in reply to your letter of April 16, 1974, asking for ou interpretation of paragraph 4 of the abbreviated rule making procedures for the addition of tire size designations to the Appendix of Standard No. 109. That paragraph presently states that requests for additional sizes must include a 'statement that the tire size designation and load inflation schedule has been coordinated with the Tire and Rim Association, the European Tyre and Rim Technical Organisation..., etc.' You point out that if coordination with a tire nd rim association is a prerequisite to the approval of a tire size designation, the procedure is inconsistent with the NHTSA policy as expressed in Standard No. 119 that avoids placing final regulatory power in a private organisation.; The abbreviated procedure for adding new tire size designations to th Appendix of Standard No. 109 was initially published on October 5, 1968 (33 FR 14964), and in that issuance, paragraph (4) stated:; >>>A statement *as to whether* the tire size designation and loa inflation schedule has been coordinated with an organisation such as the Tire and Rim Association, The European Tyre and Rim Technical Organisation...,etc. (emphasis added)<<<; This language was consistent with agency policy of cooperation with th association in setting up the tables, but assumed that manufacturer adherence to association decisions was voluntary. The change to the existing language, which admittedly calls for association coordination, was made in a notice published May $, 1971 (36 FR 8298).; While the issue in Standard No. 109 differs from that in Standard No 119 (in the former it is adding new tire size designations, while in the latter it is matching tires and rims), we agree that the problem of placing regulatory authority in a private organisation is the same in both cases. We have not been able to find an explanation for the change in language made on May 4, 1971. Moreover, the new language was not included in the guidelines for the addition of new tire and rim matching information in Standard No. 110, even though those guidelines were also amended on May 4, 1971 (36 FR 8298). Based on these factors, we have taken steps to amend the guidelines for the addition of new tire size designations to Appendix A of Standard No. 109 to read as originally published. A copy of this amendment, which is effective on publication in the *Federal Register*, is enclosed.; Sincerely, James B. Gregory, Administrator |
|
ID: aiam4321OpenMs. Pam Vanderberg, State Auditor's Office, P.O. Box 956, Jackson, MS 39205-0956; Ms. Pam Vanderberg State Auditor's Office P.O. Box 956 Jackson MS 39205-0956; Dear Ms. Vanderberg: This responds to your March 11, 1987 telephone call to our offic asking about the regulations we administer for school buses. You ask for background information about our school bus safety standards and request a listing of the Federal motor vehicle safety standards applicable to school buses.; I am pleased to respond to your concerns. I would like to begin b explaining that we administer two Federal laws that affect school buses. The first of these is the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 (copy enclosed), under which our agency issues safety standards applicable to new motor vehicles. In 1974, Congress amended the Vehicle Safety Act to direct us to issue standards on specific aspects of school bus safety, such as emergency exits, seating systems, windows and windshields, fuel systems and school bus body strength. The standards we issued became effective April 1, 1977, and apply to each school bus manufactured on or after that date.; Under the Vehicle Safety Act, any person selling a new school bus mus ensure that the vehicle complies with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards, including our school bus safety standards. Under the definitions section of our motor vehicle safety standards (49 CFR Part 571.3), a 'school bus' is a motor vehicle designed for carrying 11 or more persons (driver included) that is sold for purposes that include carrying students to and from school or related events (excluding buses sold for use as common carriers in urban transportation). A dealer or distributor who sells a new noncomplying bus to a school or school district is subject to substantial penalties for violating Safety Act provisions. For your information, I have enclosed a December 31, 1975 Federal Register notice (40 FR 60033) which discusses the responsibility of manufacturers and dealers to sell complying school buses.; New school buses must comply with the Federal motor vehicle safet standards we issued for 'buses' and also those for 'school buses.' The following is a list of the Federal motor vehicle safety standards 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. 113, Standards No. 115 through No. 120, Standard No. 121 (School buses with air brake systems), Standard No. 124, Standards No. 201 through No. 204 (school buses with GVWR of 10,000 pounds or less), Standard No. 205, Standards No. 207 through No. 210, Standard No. 212 (school buses with GVWR of 10,000 pounds or less), Standard No. 217, Standard No. 219 (School buses with GVWR of 10,000 pounds or less), Standard No. 220, Standard No. 221 (school buses with GVWR greater than 10,000 pounds), and Standards Nos. 222, 301, and 302. School bus manufacturers must certify their vehicles to all applicable requirements of each of these safety standards. I have enclosed information on how you can obtain copies of the standards.; The second Federal law administered by this agency having a bearing o school buses is the Highway Safety Act of 1966. NHTSA issued Highway Safety Program Standard No. 17, *Pupil Transportation Safety* (copy enclosed), under the Highway Safety Act as a guideline for the pupil transportation aspect of state highway safety programs. This 'standard,' or guidelines, includes recommendations for school bus operational requirements, such as school bus identification and maintenance and driver training programs. Individual states have chosen to adopt some or all of Standard No. 17's recommendations as their own policies governing their pupil transportation programs.; I hope this information is helpful. Please contact us if you hav further questions.; Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam1123OpenInternational Harvester Company, Motor Truck Division, 211 Meyer Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46801, Attention: Mr. D. E. Schmidt; International Harvester Company Motor Truck Division 211 Meyer Road Fort Wayne IN 46801 Attention: Mr. D. E. Schmidt; Dear Mr. Schmidt: By letter of February 26, 1973, International Harvester requested th National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to postpone the effective date of Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 121, *Air brake systems*, with respect to vehicles having front axles with GAWR's of more than 12,000 pounds, rear axles with GAWR's of more than 23,000 pounds, or tandem rear axles with total GAWR's of more than 44,000 pounds.; After considering the request, which asks relief from all provisions o the standard, the agency has concluded that an exception of such magnitude is not warranted and therefore denies the request. The agency makes no finding as to whether more limited relief may be appropriate, and does not consider the denial of the February 26 request to preclude the company from submitting petitions for relief from specific aspects of the standard.; Sincerely, James E. Wilson, Associate Administrator, Traffic Safet Programs; |
|
ID: aiam3630OpenMr. Gene Wright, Vice-President, Manufacturing, CAPACITY OF TEXAS, INC., P.O. Box 7848, Longview, TX 75607; Mr. Gene Wright Vice-President Manufacturing CAPACITY OF TEXAS INC. P.O. Box 7848 Longview TX 75607; Dear Mr. Wright: This responds to your letter of October 11, 1982, concernin regulations specifying the type of steering system required in vehicles. In particular, you asked if a mechanical link is required in the steering system or whether a hydraulic system is acceptable. As explained below, a manufacturer can use either a mechanical or hydraulic system to meet the requirements of the applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards.; There are two Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards that apply t vehicle steering systems: Standard No. 203, *Impact Protection for the Driver Steering Control System*, and Standard No. 204, *Steering Column Rearward Displacement*. Both standards, copies of which are enclosed, establish performance requirements to protect the driver from steering column-related injuries in a crash. Any type of steering system, either mechanical or hydraulic, can be used as long as it meets the applicable requirements of those standards.; If you have any further questions please let me know. Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam2922OpenMr. Dominic S. Piacenza, Franklin Pierce Law Center, 2 White Street, Concord, NH 03301; Mr. Dominic S. Piacenza Franklin Pierce Law Center 2 White Street Concord NH 03301; Dear Mr. Piacenza: This is in response to your letter of November 9, 1978, asking whethe a memorandum of understanding exists between the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) concerning the apparent overlapping jurisdiction regarding tire marketing practices created by Section 203 of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 (Safety Act)(15 U.S.C. 1423). You ask whether NHTSA's jurisdiction extends solely to safety- related issues.; NHTSA's authority is not confined solely to the area of motor vehicl and traffic safety. For example, under the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act (15 U.S.C. 1901) the agency has been given authority over the areas of fuel economy and economic losses to consumers as they relate to automobiles. While the Safety Act is primarily concerned with safety issues, Section 203 of that law does provide NHTSA with limited authority over tire marketing practices. The Uniform Tire Quality Grading Standards (49 CFR 575.104), issued by NHTSA under the authority of Section 203, provide information to consumers in tire performance areas relating to both safety and economic issues.; While the FTC is aware of and supports NHTSA's efforts in the field o tire grading, no memorandum of understanding exists with regard to the scope of NHTSA's activities. Section 205 of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1425) does state that, in the event of conflict between orders or regulations issued under the Safety Act concerning motor vehicle tires and FTC orders or interpretations, the orders or regulations issued under the Safety Act shall prevail.; Sincerely, Joseph J. Levin, Jr., Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam3260OpenMr. James W. Lawrence, White Motor Corporation, 35129 Curtis Boulevard, Eastlake, Ohio 44094; Mr. James W. Lawrence White Motor Corporation 35129 Curtis Boulevard Eastlake Ohio 44094; Dear Mr. Lawrence: This responds to your letters dated March 11, 1980, and March 21 1980,asking several questions about Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 115, *Vehicle identification number*.; Your first question relates to the number sequentially assigned to th vehicle by the manufacturer as required by S4.5.3.3 of the standard. You wish to know whether after assigning a number to a vehicle prior to its manufacture, the number may be cancelled if the vehicle is not actually manufactured. The answer is yes. This is permissible under the standard so long as the number is not reassigned to another vehicle, thereby destroying the sequence.; You also wish to know if White may assign a vehicle identificatio number to glider kits which it manufactures. Section 571.7(e) and (f) of Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations set forth the criteria for determining whether the vehicle created from a glider kit is to be considered a new vehicle or the original vehicle. If the vehicle is considered new, it must comply with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard, including the requirement the a new vehicle identification number be assigned (Standard No. 115). If, however, the vehicle is not considered new, the vehicle identification number originally issued for the vehicle must be the one that is assigned. (See section 109(a)(2)(A) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, as amended.); Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam2888OpenMr. Michael Pinto, Burke & Burke, 30 Rockefeller Plaza, New York, NY 10020; Mr. Michael Pinto Burke & Burke 30 Rockefeller Plaza New York NY 10020; Dear Mr. Pinto: This is in response to your letter of October 25, 1978, requestin approval of the tread labels Atlas Supply Company proposes to use in satisfaction of the labeling requirements of the Uniform Tire Quality Grading Standards (UTQGS) (49 CFR 575.104(d)(1)(i)(B)). You propose to include the applicable UTQGS grades for a particular tire on a tread label identifying the tire brand, type and size. All possible traction and temperature grades would be depicted with the grades applicable to the specific tire indelibly circled. A separate label would contain the general grading information from Figure 2 of the rule.; Part 575.104(d)(1)(i)(B) requires that each passenger car replacemen tire, other than a snow tire or temporary use spare tire, have affixed a tread label containing both the specific UTQGS grades for the tire and an explanation of the grades in the form illustrated in Figure 2. While the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has no objection to the inclusion of the required UTQGS information on the same label with other data such as tire size and brand name, failure to provide the required explanations on the same label with the applicable tire grades is not permitted by the regulation.; While Atlas' proposed tread labels do not meet the present requirement of Part 575.104(d)(1)(i)(B), NHTSA now has under consideration a petition for rulemaking requesting amendment of the UTQG regulation to permit greater flexibility in tread labeling.; Sincerely, Joseph J. Levin, Jr., Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam2021OpenMr. Wade H. Barrineau, III, Compact Van Equipment Co., Inc., 5159 E. Shore Drive, Conyers, GA 30207; Mr. Wade H. Barrineau III Compact Van Equipment Co. Inc. 5159 E. Shore Drive Conyers GA 30207; Dear Mr. Barrineau: This is in response to your letter of July 17, 1975, inquiring as t the regulations to which you may be subject by manufacturing and selling interior shelving, interior safety bulkheads, and roof mounted ladder carriers for Ford Econoline vans.; The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has issue regulations covering the alteration of completed, certified motor vehicles before their sale to a purchaser for purposes other than resale. (49 CFR SS 567.7 and 567.8, copy enclosed). Under these regulations, an alteration which either (1) invalidates a vehicle's existing weight ratings or (2) involves installation of other than 'readily attachable' components gives rise to a responsibility for affixing an alterer label, which identifies the alterer and contains some additional information.; From the description of your products, it appears that no specia expertise or tools are required for their installation. They would also seemingly not affect a vehicle's weight ratings. If this assessment is correct, we would accept as reasonable a manufacturer's determination that they are 'readily attachable', and that an alterer label is therefore not required when these products are installed.; The only Safety Standard that might apply to your products is Standar No. 302, *Flammability of Interior Materials* (copy enclosed).; In addition, as items of motor vehicle equipment, your products ar subject to the requirements of the National Motor Vehicle and Traffic Safety Act of 1966, as amended, and must therefore be free from safety-related defects.; If you have any further questions, feel free to write again. Sincerely, Frank A. Berndt, Acting Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam2471OpenMr. Jack D. Cooper, President, Jack's Tire Company, Inc., U.S. Route 11, Edinburg, Virginia 22824; Mr. Jack D. Cooper President Jack's Tire Company Inc. U.S. Route 11 Edinburg Virginia 22824; Dear Mr. Cooper: This is in response to your November 23, 1976, letter concernin retreaded tires and Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 117.; Your understanding that you are required to retain for three year certain records described in your letter is mistaken. While such a requirements was proposed in a Federal Register notice published on march 5, 1970 (35 FR 4136), if was never adopted. The NHTSA strongly recommends, however, that retreaders retain information on the materials and processes that they use, so that in the event of a defect or noncompliance they will be able to determine which tires are involved.; To assign you a retreader's identification mark, we need mor information from you. 49 CFR Part 574.6 specifies that:; >>>To obtain the identification mark required by S574.5(a), eac manufacturer of new or retreaded motor vehicle tires shall apply after November 30, 1970, in writing, to 'Tire Identification and Recordkeeping,' National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, S.W., Washington, D.C., 20590, identify himself as a manufacturer of new tires or retreaded tires, and furnish the following information:; (a) The name, or other designation identifying the applicant, and hi main office address.; (b) The name, or other identifying designation, of each individua plant operated by the manufacturer and the address of each plant, if applicable.; (c) The type of tires manufactured at each plant, e.g., passenger ca tires, bus tires, truck tires, motorcycle tires, or retreaded tires.<<<; Enclosed for your convenience is an information sheet entitled 'Wher to Obtain Motor Vehicle Safety Standards and Regulations.'; Sincerely, Frank A. Berndt, Acting Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam0159OpenRichard Hoffman, President, Cony America, 16216 S. Broadway, Gardena, CA 90247; Richard Hoffman President Cony America 16216 S. Broadway Gardena CA 90247; Dear Mr. Hoffman: This responds to your letter of May 2, 1969 in which you asked whethe the Cony vehicle, model AF11SFC, which you import, must be equipped with a windshield defrosting and defogging system in compliance with Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 103.; You describe the vehicle as a multipurpose passenger vehicle having a open cab configuration, and your letter states that defrosting and defogging of its windshield is accomplished by natural air currents while the vehicle is operating. You also indicate that the vehicle will be operated on the public highways.; On the basis of the information contained in your letter and study o the two photographs of the Cony that accompanied it, it is our view that, subject to the exceptions noted below, models of this vehicle that have windshield or are fitted for installation of windshields must also have windshield defrosting and defogging systems.; Vehicles which are operated in the continental United States ma encounter icy or snowy conditions in which the absence of a windshield defrosting system may pose an unreasonable safety hazard. The fact that the vehicle lacks an enclosed cab does not appreciably reduce that hazard. However, we do not interpret Standard No. 103 as requiring a defrosting and defogging system in a vehicle that has no windshield and on which a windshield cannot be installed without such major modifications as would make the installer himself a motor vehicle manufacturer. One of the photographs you submitted shows your vehicle without a windshield, but it does not contain enough detail to enable us to determine whether the vehicle falls into the latter category I have described.; You should be aware of two exceptions to the requirements of Standar No. 103, either of which may apply to the Cony. First, section 371.7 of our regulations provides that the standards apply only to vehicles which have a curb weight of more than 1,000 pounds. Hence, the Cony need not conform to the requirements of the standard if its curb weight is 1,000 pounds or less. Second, Standard No. 103 applies only to vehicles manufactured for sale in the continental United States. Therefore, your vehicle could be imported into jurisdictions such as Hawaii and the Virgin Islands even though it fails to conform to the requirements of that standard. The contents of your letter do not furnish enough information to permit us to ascertain whether either exception would apply.; If I can be of further assistance, please do not hesistate (sic) t call upon me for it.; Very truly yours,Lawrence R. Schneider, Acting Assistant Chief Counse for Regulations; |
|
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.