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: aiam2292OpenMr. John Eckhold, Automotive Safety Director, Ford Motor Company, The American Road, Dearborn, MI 48121; Mr. John Eckhold Automotive Safety Director Ford Motor Company The American Road Dearborn MI 48121; Dear Mr. Eckhold: I am writing to inform you that the National Highway Traffic Safet Administration (NHTSA) will, for a limited time, refrain from enforcing one portion of 49 CFR Part 575, *Consumer Information Regulations*.; Subpart B of Part 575 specifies certain items of consumer informatio that apply to motor vehicles and their tires. Section 575.6 in Subpart A requires this information to be delivered to first purchasers (paragraphs (a) and (b)), made available to prospective purchasers (paragraph (c)) and submitted to the NHTSA (paragraph (d)). In particular, S 575.6(d) requires that:; >>>Each manufacturer of motor vehicles...shall submit to th Administrator 10 copies of the information specified in Part B of this part that is applicable to the vehicles or tires offered for sale, at least 30 days before that information is first provided for examination by prospective purchasers pursuant to paragraph (c) of this section.<<<; I understand that the strike by the United Rubber Workers has, b cutting off the supply of new tires, created an emergency situation within the motor vehicle industry, making it difficult for a manufacturer to know more than several days before it completes a vehicle which tires will be available for installation on the vehicle. I understand further that the provision of such information to the NHTSA 30 days before it is made available to prospective purchasers has become virtually impossible.; In view of the impracticability under the current circumstances of th 30-day-notice requirement, the NHTSA has concluded that enforcement of the requirement at this time is inappropriate. Accordingly, with respect to vehicles offered for sale during the strike and the 60-day period following its settlement, the NHTSA will refrain from enforcing the 30-day-notice requirement in S 575.6(d). Submittals of information to the agency must continue to be made, however, not later than the time the information is made available to prospective purchasers. With respect to vehicles that will be offered for sale at the expiration of the 60-day period, the NHTSA expects to begin receiving submittals after the thirtieth day following settlement of the strike.; Please note that the requirements of paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) of 575.6, as well as Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 110, *Tire Selection and Rims--Passenger Cars*, are not affected by this letter.; Sincerely, James B. Gregory, Administrator |
|
ID: aiam3705OpenMr. Chuck Howard, President, Safety Alert Co., Inc., 1667 9th Street, Santa Monica, CA 90404; Mr. Chuck Howard President Safety Alert Co. Inc. 1667 9th Street Santa Monica CA 90404; Dear Mr. Howard: We have received your petition for rulemaking of April 25, 1983, you letter of May 6 withdrawing it, and your letter of May 5 to Mr. Vinson of my staff asking for an interpretation. All this concerns the applicability of Standard No. 108 to your 'Vehicle Deceleration Warning System.'; As we understand it, this system was originally designed to provide flashing light through the back-up lamp system, in which yellow bulbs were used as substitutes for the white ones required by Standard No. 108. You were informally advised by agency staff that such a system would render the vehicle noncompliant with the requirement that a back-up lamp be white, and that it be steady burning in use.; You asked Mr. Vinson if there were another alternative for flashing re lights that would comply with Standard No. 108, and, in your letter of the 6th, whether use of the hazard warning system was acceptable. You also inquired about retrofitting vehicles manufactured before hazard warning signals were required, so that your system would work through the rear turn signals.; In the context of Federal regulations an optional system such as your is acceptable as original equipment, or equipment added before initial sale of the vehicle, if it does not impair the effectiveness of lighting equipment required by Standard No. 108. In our view, it is permissible to use any rear lighting system Standard No. 108 allows to flash for signalling purposes. Thus, your system could operate through the rear hazard warning system, or the rear turn signal system (red or amber) as long as the color of light or photometrics required by the standard was not changed.; As an aftermarket device intended for installation on vehicles in use it must not render inoperative in whole or in part Federally- mandated lighting equipment. Subject to the restrictions noted above, your system would not violate this prohibition were it installed to work through the hazard warning or turn signal systems. However, since your system involves an aspect of performance not covered by Standard No. 108, each State may regulate its use as it sees fit.; Passenger cars built since January 1, 1969, have been required to hav hazard warning signal systems. Use of the turn signal system of a vehicle built before that date is not prohibited under Federal regulations but is also a matter to be determined by local law.; I hope that this is responsive to your questions. Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam3703OpenMr. Chuck Howard, President, Safety Alert Co., Inc., 1667 9th Street, Santa Monica, CA 90404; Mr. Chuck Howard President Safety Alert Co. Inc. 1667 9th Street Santa Monica CA 90404; Dear Mr. Howard: We have received your petition for rulemaking of April 25, 1983, you letter of May 6 withdrawing it, and your letter of May 5 to Mr. Vinson of my staff asking for an interpretation. All this concerns the applicability of Standard No. 108 to your 'Vehicle Deceleration Warning System.'; As we understand it, this system was originally designed to provide flashing light through the back-up lamp system, in which yellow bulbs were used as substitutes for the white ones required by Standard No. 108. You were informally advised by agency staff that such a system would render the vehicle noncompliant with the requirement that a back-up lamp be white, and that it be steady burning in use.; You asked Mr. Vinson if there were another alternative for flashing re lights that would comply with Standard No. 108, and in your letter of the 6th, whether use of the hazard warning system was acceptable. You also inquired about retrofitting vehicles manufactured before hazard warning signals were required, so that your system would work through the rear turn signals.; In the context of Federal regulations an optional system such as your is acceptable as original equipment, or equipment added before initial sale of the vehicle, if it does not impair the effectiveness of lighting equipment required by Standard No. 108. In our view, it is permissible to use any rear lighting system Standard No. 108 allows to flash for signalling purposes. Thus, your system could operate through the rear hazard warning system, or the rear turn signal system (red or amber) as long as the color of light or photometrics required by the standard was not changed.; As an aftermarket device intended for installation on vehicles in use it must not render inoperative in whole or in part Federally- mandated lighting equipment. Subject to the restrictions noted above, your system would not violate this prohibition were it installed to work through the hazard warning or turn signal systems. However, since your system involves an aspect of performance not covered by Standard No. 108, each State may regulate its use as it sees fit.; Passenger cars built since January 1, 1969, have been required to hav hazard warning signal systems. Use of the turn signal system of a vehicle built before that date is not prohibited under Federal regulations but is also a matter to be determined by local law.; I hope that this is responsive to your questions. Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam1638OpenMr. Albert L. Luce, President, Blue Bird Body Company, North Macon Street, Fort Valley GA 31030; Mr. Albert L. Luce President Blue Bird Body Company North Macon Street Fort Valley GA 31030; Dear Mr. Luce: The Office of Standards Enforcement (OSE) is in possession of a repor of a test conducted for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) which indicates that a Model CV-2901 bus manufactured by your company failed to meet the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 217, Bus Window Retention and Release.' A copy of the Final Report is enclosed.; The potential noncompliance is summarized as follows: The bus did not comply with the window retention requirement (paragraph S5.1).; Pursuant to sections 112 and 108 (a)(2) of the National Traffic an Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, Blue Bird Body Company is required to provide OSE, NHTSA, with the following information:; 1. The bus models and quantities manufactured by your company on an after September 1, 1973, that utilize the same window configuration as Model CV- 2901.; 2. The data used to certify your buses and the data obtained durin surveillance testing of the buses. This data should include actual test reports of testing done by or for your company.; 3. Information and data pertaining to investigations ad correctiv action you may have initiated as a result of the noncompliance indicated by this compliance test.; 4. Any other pertinent information you may wish to introduce. The Office of Standards Enforcement has received your defec notification dated October 1, 1974.; The requested information shall be submitted, in duplicate, to th National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Motor Vehicle Programs, Office of Standards Enforcement, 2100 Second Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20590, within 20 days from the receipt of this letter.; Should there be any questions concerning this letter, please refer the to Mr. Alfred Kazmierczak, a member of my staff, telephone number 202-426- 0826.; Sincerely, Francis Armstrong, Director, Office of Standard Enforcement, Motor Vehicle Programs; |
|
ID: aiam1450OpenMr. David R. Glaessner, Service Manager, Harley-Davidson Motor Company, Inc., 3700 Juneau Avenue, Milwaukee, WI 53201; Mr. David R. Glaessner Service Manager Harley-Davidson Motor Company Inc. 3700 Juneau Avenue Milwaukee WI 53201; Dear Mr. Glaessner: This is in reference to your defect notification campaigns NHTSA No 73-0094, concerning fork lower brackets, and NHTSA No. 73-0215, concerning frame reinforcement and tail lamp wiring.; It has been brought to our attention that some dealers have not bee able to obtain all the parts required for campaign 73-0094, and to a lesser degree, campaign 73-0215. Although it appears that Harley Davidson is attempting to provide parts as rapidly as production permits, this parts shortage has the unfortunate effect of tending to discourage owners from having their vehicles corrected. It is reasonable to assume that some owners may have abandoned their attempts to get their vehicles corrected after having been repeatedly told for several months that parts are not available.; Part 577.4(49 CFR) of the Defect Reports Regulation requires that whe the manufacturer offers to repair the defect through his dealers without charge to the purchaser, the notification letter shall include the manufacturer's estimate of the day by which his dealers will be supplied with parts and instructions for correcting the defect. The letters which you have sent to the first purchasers did not contain a firm date for parts availability as required by Part 577, although they did imply that the necessary parts were available when ordered by a dealer. Since, in actuality, parts were not always available, it becomes necessary to inform owners of the date by which the necessary parts will be available.; It is therefore necessary that you revise the owner notificatio letters for both campaigns and include in each letter your estimate of the day by which dealers will be supplied with the necessary parts, as required by Part 577. Copies of both letters must be sent to this office and a copy of the applicable letter shall be sent to each owner who has not yet had his vehicle corrected.; If you desire further information, please contact Messrs. W. J Reinhart or James Murray at this office (202) 426- 2840.; Sincerely, Andrew G. Detrick, Acting Director, Office of Defect Investigation, Motor Vehicle Programs; |
|
ID: aiam2343OpenMr. D. Poncelet, Carideng, B3760 Lanaken, le, Belgium; Mr. D. Poncelet Carideng B3760 Lanaken le Belgium; Dear Mr. Poncelet: This is in response to your telex of June 18, 1976, requestin information concerning the designation of an agent for service of process and the assignment of a tire identification number.; Section 110(e) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Ac (Pub. L. 89-563) requires every manufacturer who offers a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment for importation into the United States to designate a permanent resident of the United States as his agent upon whom service of all processes, orders, decisions, and requirements may be made. Such designation should be filed with the Office of Chief Counsel of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.; In order for the designation to be effective, it is necessary that th procedural requirements of 49 CFR 551.45 (enclosed) be fulfilled by the submission of the following information:; >>>1. A certification that the designation is valid in form and bindin 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 any o the manufacturer's products which do not bear his 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 one with authority t appoint the agent, the signer's name and title should be clearly indicated beneath his signature.; Part 574, *Tire Identification and Recordkeeping*, does not require th designation of an agent for service of process prior to the assignment of a tire identification number. We are, therefore, forwarding your code number. Your tire identification number is T4.; Although you have been assigned an identification number, you are no permitted by Federal law to offer tires for importation into the United States until you have properly designated an agent for service of process. If you decide for any reason not to offer your tires for importation, we request that you notify the agency so that your tire code number can be placed in our inactive file.; If you have any questions concerning these requirements, please do no hesitate to contact me.; Sincerely, John Womack, Assistant Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam1900OpenMr. J. C. Carruth, President, Canadian Trucking Association, 130 Albert Street, Suite 300, Ottawa, Canada K1P5G4; Mr. J. C. Carruth President Canadian Trucking Association 130 Albert Street Suite 300 Ottawa Canada K1P5G4; Dear Mr. Carruth: The Secretary has asked me to respond to your letter of March 1 (F-50-A) requesting from a provision of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1391 et seq.) that prevents operation in the United States of Canadian vehicles which were not manufactured in conformity with Standard No. 121, *Air brake systems*. You request a temporary exclusion from the standard for Canadian-based commercial vehicles operating in the United States, whether or not they are manufactured in Canada.; The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act provides that n person shall import into the United States a motor vehicle manufactured on or after the date any applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard takes effect unless it is in conformity with the standard (S 1397(a)(1)(A)). Sections 1397(b)(3) and (b)(4) specifically address importation:; >>>S 1397 (3) A motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment offered fo importation in violation of paragraph (1)(A) of subsection (a) of this section shall be refused admission into the United States under joint regulations issued by the Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary; (4) The Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary may, by join regulations, permit the temporary importation of any motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment after the first purchase of it in good faith for purposes other than resale.<<<; The only exception to these laws is promulgated in Part 12 of th customs regulations (19 CFR S 12.80). One exception permits temporary importation for personal use, but it does not apply to commercial use of U.S. highways.; Section 1392(g) of the Act also mandates that the Bureau of Moto Carrier Safety (referred to in the section as the Interstate Commerce Commission) 'not adopt or continue in effect any safety standard which differs from' our standards unless it is a higher standard of safety. The Bureau has indicated its intent to adopt Standard No. 121 as its performance standard in the regulation of U.S. and foreign motor carriers on U.S. highways.; I conclude that any exclusion of Canadian vehicles from Standard No 121 would be an evasion of the Act's prohibition on importation of noncomplying vehicles. Such an exclusion would reduce the expected benefits of Standard No. 121 and would discriminate against U.S. manufacturers and carriers. For these reasons, your request is denied.; For clarification, I note that the standard applies (with limite exceptions) to air-braked trailers manufactured after January 1, 1975, and air-braked trucks and buses manufactured after March 1, 1975. I am unaware of the significance of the March 31, 1975, date to which you refer.; Sincerely, James B. Gregory, Administrator |
|
ID: aiam1634OpenMr. F.S. Vukan, B.F. Goodrich Tire Company, 500 South Main Street, Akron, Ohio 44318; Mr. F.S. Vukan B.F. Goodrich Tire Company 500 South Main Street Akron Ohio 44318; Dear Mr. Vukan: This is in further reply to your letter of August 21, 1974, askin whether tires manufactured by B.F. Goodrich that are filled with 'Tyrfil' will be subject to the requirements of Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 119.; On the basis of the information you have provided,we have determine that tires filled with Tyrfil are not 'pneumatic' tires, and are therefore subject neither to the requirements of Standards Nos. 109 nor 119. We find that Tyrfil, which is a solid polyurethane, differs significantly as a tire-filling medium from cellular foam, whose use has been determined to be within the scope of Standards Nos. 109 and 119 (37 FR 24908, November 23, 1972).; Sincerely, Robert L. Carter, Associate Administrator, Motor Vehicl Programs; |
|
ID: aiam1633OpenMr. F.S. Vukan, B.F. Goodrich Tire Company, 500 South Main Street, Akron, Ohio 44318; Mr. F.S. Vukan B.F. Goodrich Tire Company 500 South Main Street Akron Ohio 44318; Dear Mr. Vukan: #This is in further reply to your letter of August 21 1974, asking whether tires manufactured by B.F. Goodrich that are filled with 'Tyrfil' will be subject to the requirements of Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 119. #On the basis of the information you have provided, we have determined that tires filled with Tyrfil are not 'pneumatic' tires, and are therefore subject neither to the requirements of Standards Nos. 109 nor 119. We find that Tyrfil, which is a solid polyurethane, differs significantly as a tire-filling medium from cellular foam, whose use has been determined to be within the scope of Standards Nos. 109 and 119 (37 FR 24908, November 23, 1972). #Sincerely, Robert L. Carter, Associate Administrator, Motor Vehicle Programs; |
|
ID: aiam1852OpenMr. J. M. Dabrowski, Vice President-Engineering, The Flxible Co., Loudonville, OH 44842; Mr. J. M. Dabrowski Vice President-Engineering The Flxible Co. Loudonville OH 44842; Dear Mr. Dabrowski: This is in response to your letter of February 10, 1975, inquiring a to the effect of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 121 on State laws relating to air brake performance.; Section 103(d) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act o 1966 (15 U.S.C. 1392(d)) provides that no State or political subdivision of a State may promulgate or continue in effect standards applicable to an aspect of motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment performance which is covered by a Federal motor vehicle safety standard, unless the standards are identical.; Standard No. 121 includes provisions relating to truck and bus brak performance, including requirements for stopping distances. A more restrictive State brake requirement than that specified in Standard 121 is voided by S 103(d) since the Federal standard is intended to cover all aspects of air brake performance.; The Federal requirements must be regarded as conclusive with regard t emergency braking capabilities in order to maintain the uniformity necessary in a Federal regulatory scheme. This was affirmed in a recent decision rendered in a case brought by the Motorcycle Industry Council, Inc. against the State of California in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California concerning the preemption of a California State requirement that motorcycle headlamps be wired to operate when the engine is running. The Court held that the California requirement is preempted by the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 since the NHTSA intended to cover all aspects of performance directly involving motorcycle headlamps.; Therefore, requirements such as those described in your letter would b preempted by Standard 121 since the aspects of performance that would be affected are covered by the Federal standard. You should note that this discussion of State 'requirements' only refers to rules of general applicability within a State or municipality. It does not refer to purchase specifications that may be imposed by any person or organization, including a State or municipality, with respect to vehicles purchased for the person or organization's own use. Such specifications are not limited by Federal law, although of course they cannot alter a manufacturer's duty to conform to Federal standards.; I would note that your statement that neither S5.7.2 nor S5.7.2. 'requires anything other than an application capability' is overbroad. Section S5.7.2 requires modulation of the emergency braking capability, that is, application and release. We have interpreted the S5.7.2.2 requirement that emergency brake system failure 'shall not cause the parking brake to be inoperable' to mean that the parking brake must be capable of application but not release. Under S5.6 the parking brake's normal operation must include both application and release.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant 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.