Skip to main content

NHTSA's Interpretation Files Search



Displaying 151 - 160 of 2915
Interpretations Date

ID: aiam5187

Open
Ms. Laura J. Platter 6662 Mohawk Court Columbia, MD 21046; Ms. Laura J. Platter 6662 Mohawk Court Columbia
MD 21046;

"Dear Ms. Platter: This responds to your letter to Senator Barbar Mikulski about the Federal government's classification of minivans for safety purposes. You were concerned that classifying minivans as trucks rather than passenger vehicles would permit these vehicles to be equipped with fewer safety features. Congress has authorized this agency, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), to issue Federal motor vehicle safety standards that are applicable to new motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment. In the last few years, NHTSA has extended nearly all the passenger car safety standards to cover light trucks and multipurpose passenger vehicles (MPVs). (Minivans are typically considered to be MPVs under our safety standards.) The only significant safety requirement for passenger cars that the agency has not extended to light trucks and MPVs is dynamic side impact protection. This is a new requirement that is being phased in for passenger cars beginning this September. NHTSA is currently in rulemaking to consider whether the dynamic side impact protection requirements should be extended to light trucks and MPV's, and published an advance notice of proposed rulemaking on this subject in June 1992. I hope this information is helpful to you. Sincerely, Howard M. Smolkin Acting Administrator cc: The Honorable Barbara A. Mikulski";

ID: aiam0069

Open
Mr. R.R. McLain,Sales Manager,Royal Brass, Inc.,442 Arlington Avenue,Fond Du Lac, Wisconsin 54935; Mr. R.R. McLain
Sales Manager
Royal Brass
Inc.
442 Arlington Avenue
Fond Du Lac
Wisconsin 54935;

Dear Mr. McLain:#Thank you for your letter of April 26, 1968 concerning certification of brake hoses. Hydraulic brake hoses for use in passenger cars and multipurpose passenger vehicles manufactured after January 1, 1968 must comply with Federal Motor Vehicles Safety Standard No. 106, Hydraulic Brake Hoses - Passenger Cars and Multipurpose Passenger Vehicles.#At the time of delivery of the completed brake hose assembly to a distributer or dealer the manufacturer of the completed brake hose assembly must certify that it complies with the applicable standard. In the case of equipment such as the brake hose assembly the certification may be in the form of a label or tag on the completed brake hose assembly delivered.#For your information I have enclosed a copy of the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, the notice published in the *Federal Register* concerning certification and a copy of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966. Particular attention should be paid to the sections 108 and 114 of the Act.#I hope this letter and the enclosures are adequately responsive to your questions. #Sincerely,Robert M O'Mahoney,Assistant Chief Counsel;

ID: aiam0024

Open
Mr. John Hollyfield, Inspector, Motor Vehicle Inspection, Texas Department of Public Safety, 5205 N. Lamar Boulevard, Box 4067, North Austin Station, Austin, TX, 78751; Mr. John Hollyfield
Inspector
Motor Vehicle Inspection
Texas Department of Public Safety
5205 N. Lamar Boulevard
Box 4067
North Austin Station
Austin
TX
78751;

Dear Mr. Hollyfield: Mr. Arnold Wise has asked that I answer your letter of April 14, 1967 concerning a clarification of several requirements of Motor Vehicle Safety Standards 207, 208, and 209.; I am enclosing copies of the *Federal Register* of August 31, 1966, an February 3, 1967, which provide all of the information which you require. You will note that Standard No. 207 is concerned with the anchorage of the seats - not seat belts. Standard No. 208 requires seat belts in all passenger cars manufactured after January 1, 1968. In a regular size, four door, sedan-type vehicle with regular undivided seats, six lap belts would be required and, in addition, upper torso restraints would be required in the front outboard seats if the windshield header is in the head impact area.; The installation of seat belts in other than passenger cars is no required by the initial standards. However, any seat belts that are manufactured after March 1, 1967, must conform to the requirements of Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 209.; Your interest in the traffic safety program of this Bureau i appreciated.; Sincerely, George C. Nield, Acting Director, Motor Vehicle Safet Performance Service;

ID: aiam4253

Open
Mr. Donald J. Audia, 11843 Braesview No. 2412, San Antonio, TX 78213; Mr. Donald J. Audia
11843 Braesview No. 2412
San Antonio
TX 78213;

Dear Mr. Audia: This is in reply to your letter of December 12, 1986, to Taylor Vinso of this Office asking about the permissibility of manufacturing an aftermarket center highmounted stop lamp utilizing the colors yellow and orange, in addition to red, to signify 'the varying stages of a stopping car.'; Under Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 *Lamps, Reflectiv Devices, and Associated Equipment* only the color red is permitted for original equipment center highmounted stop lamps, and for those aftermarket lamps manufactured to replace them. These lamps are generally found on passenger cars manufactured on and after September 1, 1985. Your planned device could not be manufactured and sold for this segment of the aftermarket since it does not conform to Standard No. 108. Further, a dealer, distributor, or motor vehicle repair business could not legally remove an original equipment center highmounted stop lamp and install your device. However, there is no Federal restriction on sale and installation of your device on passenger cars manufactured before September 1, 1985. The device would then be subject to the laws of any State where it would be sold or used. We regret that we are unable to advise you on these laws.; If you have any further questions we would be happy to answer them. Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones, Chief Counsel

ID: aiam0498

Open
Mr. A. C. Rudd, Director, Engineering, Lotus Cars Ltd., Norwich NOR 92W, England; Mr. A. C. Rudd
Director
Engineering
Lotus Cars Ltd.
Norwich NOR 92W
England;

Dear Mr. Rudd: This is in reply to your letter of November 16, 1971, in which yo asked whether Standard No. 208 would require seat belt retractors to be installed after January 1, 1972, for the rear occasional seats of the Lotus Elan Plus Two. Our answer is that retractors will be required if the rear seats are 'designated seating positions' as defined in our regulations at 49 CFR 571.3(b). The definition provides, among other things, that to be a designated seating position a seat must accomodate (sic) a 5th percentile adult female. To define an occupant of this size, the regulations incorporate a U.S. Public Health Service publication that includes the following specifications: weight, 104 pounds, standing height, 59 inches, sitting height, 30.9 inches, knee height, 17.9 inches, buttock-knee length, 20.4 inches. If the Elan Plus Two cannot accomodate (sic) a person of this size in the rear seat, it need not have a seat belt retractor for that seat. If such a person can be accomodated (sic), then retractors will be required unless the seat is otherwise exempt by the definition as an 'auxiliary seating accomodation (sic) such as [a (sic) temporary or folding jump seat.' We do not have the information necessary to judge whether the seat is exempt as an auxiliary seating accomodation (sic).; Sincerely, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel

ID: aiam5167

Open
Mr. John B. White Industry Standards & Government Regulations Michelin Post Office Box 2501 Greenville, SC 29602; Mr. John B. White Industry Standards & Government Regulations Michelin Post Office Box 2501 Greenville
SC 29602;

"Dear Mr. White: This responds to your letter asking the Nationa Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to clarify our certification procedures for the information of some of your customers. Specifically, you stated that some customers believe that you are required to test your tires for compliance with the Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS) and the Uniform Tire Quality Grading Standards (UTQGS), and that this agency then certifies your tires after reviewing and evaluating your test results. Those impressions are incorrect. All new tires sold in the United States for use on passenger cars must be certified by the manufacturer as complying with FMVSS 109, New pneumatic tires, found at 49 CFR 571.109, while all new tires sold for use on motor vehicles other than passenger cars must be certified as complying with FMVSS 119, New pneumatic tires for vehicles other than passenger cars, found at 49 CFR 571.119. The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, 15 U.S.C. 1381, et seq. (Safety Act) establishes a self-certification procedure applicable to new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment, which includes tires. This means that the tire manufacturer, and not a governmental agency such as NHTSA, certifies that its tires comply with applicable FMVSSs. Each new tire must be certified as meeting the applicable FMVSSs regardless of whether the tire meets an equal or higher standard in another country. The UTQGS are set forth in 49 CFR 575.104. Those standards do not require certification in the same manner as the FMVSSs. The UTQGS require that manufacturers mold onto or into the sidewalls of their tires the comparative ratings of those tires for treadwear, traction, and temperature resistance for the use and benefit of consumers. Again, that is the manufacturers' responsibility and NHTSA neither reviews nor approves the ratings prior to their assignments by the manufacturers. Neither the Safety Act nor NHTSA standards and regulations require that a manufacturer base its certifications on any specific tests, any number of specified tests or, for that matter, any tests at all. A manufacturer is only required to exercise due care in certifying its tires. It is the responsibility of each tire manufacturer to determine initially what test results, computer simulations, engineering analyses, or other information it needs to enable it to certify that its tires comply with applicable Federal safety standards. Once a manufacturer has determined that its tires meet all applicable Federal safety standards, it certifies such compliance by molding the letters 'DOT' onto at least one sidewall of each certified tire. If manufacturers conduct any tests, they are not required by Federal law or regulation to release their test results to the public. This agency does not perform any pre-sale testing, approval, or certification of tires, whether of foreign or domestic manufacture, before introduction into the U. S. retail market. Similarly, NHTSA does not approve or certify manufacturers' test results. Rather, NHTSA randomly tests certified tires to determine whether the tires do, in fact, comply with applicable standards. For such enforcement checks, NHTSA purchases tires 'off the shelf' from retail tire dealers and tests those tires according to the procedures specified in the standards. If the tires pass the tests, no further action is taken. If they fail the tests and are determined not to comply with any applicable standard or standards, the manufacturer is responsible for recalling the tires and remedying the noncompliance without charge to the consumer. Government compliance test results are available to the public upon request from the NHTSA Technical Reference Division (NAD 52), 400 Seventh Street SW, Room 5108, Washington, D.C. 20590, (202) 366-2768. I hope this information will assist you in clarifying tire certification requirements to the satisfaction of your customers. If you have any further questions or desire further clarification, please feel free to contact Walter Myers of my staff at this address or at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, John Womack Acting Chief Counsel";

ID: aiam5168

Open
Mr. John B. White Industry Standards & Government Regulations Michelin Post Office Box 2501 Greenville, SC 29602; Mr. John B. White Industry Standards & Government Regulations Michelin Post Office Box 2501 Greenville
SC 29602;

"Dear Mr. White: This responds to your letter asking the Nationa Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to clarify our certification procedures for the information of some of your customers. Specifically, you stated that some customers believe that you are required to test your tires for compliance with the Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS) and the Uniform Tire Quality Grading Standards (UTQGS), and that this agency then certifies your tires after reviewing and evaluating your test results. Those impressions are incorrect. All new tires sold in the United States for use on passenger cars must be certified by the manufacturer as complying with FMVSS 109, New pneumatic tires, found at 49 CFR 571.109, while all new tires sold for use on motor vehicles other than passenger cars must be certified as complying with FMVSS 119, New pneumatic tires for vehicles other than passenger cars, found at 49 CFR 571.119. The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, 15 U.S.C. 1381, et seq. (Safety Act) establishes a self-certification procedure applicable to new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment, which includes tires. This means that the tire manufacturer, and not a governmental agency such as NHTSA, certifies that its tires comply with applicable FMVSSs. Each new tire must be certified as meeting the applicable FMVSSs regardless of whether the tire meets an equal or higher standard in another country. The UTQGS are set forth in 49 CFR 575.104. Those standards do not require certification in the same manner as the FMVSSs. The UTQGS require that manufacturers mold onto or into the sidewalls of their tires the comparative ratings of those tires for treadwear, traction, and temperature resistance for the use and benefit of consumers. Again, that is the manufacturers' responsibility and NHTSA neither reviews nor approves the ratings prior to their assignments by the manufacturers. Neither the Safety Act nor NHTSA standards and regulations require that a manufacturer base its certifications on any specific tests, any number of specified tests or, for that matter, any tests at all. A manufacturer is only required to exercise due care in certifying its tires. It is the responsibility of each tire manufacturer to determine initially what test results, computer simulations, engineering analyses, or other information it needs to enable it to certify that its tires comply with applicable Federal safety standards. Once a manufacturer has determined that its tires meet all applicable Federal safety standards, it certifies such compliance by molding the letters 'DOT' onto at least one sidewall of each certified tire. If manufacturers conduct any tests, they are not required by Federal law or regulation to release their test results to the public. This agency does not perform any pre-sale testing, approval, or certification of tires, whether of foreign or domestic manufacture, before introduction into the U. S. retail market. Similarly, NHTSA does not approve or certify manufacturers' test results. Rather, NHTSA randomly tests certified tires to determine whether the tires do, in fact, comply with applicable standards. For such enforcement checks, NHTSA purchases tires 'off the shelf' from retail tire dealers and tests those tires according to the procedures specified in the standards. If the tires pass the tests, no further action is taken. If they fail the tests and are determined not to comply with any applicable standard or standards, the manufacturer is responsible for recalling the tires and remedying the noncompliance without charge to the consumer. Government compliance test results are available to the public upon request from the NHTSA Technical Reference Division (NAD 52), 400 Seventh Street SW, Room 5108, Washington, D.C. 20590, (202) 366-2768. I hope this information will assist you in clarifying tire certification requirements to the satisfaction of your customers. If you have any further questions or desire further clarification, please feel free to contact Walter Myers of my staff at this address or at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, John Womack Acting Chief Counsel";

ID: aiam0770

Open
Mr. G. Doe, Vehicle Safety Manager, Lotus Cars Ltd., Norwich NOR 92W, Wymondham 3411, England; Mr. G. Doe
Vehicle Safety Manager
Lotus Cars Ltd.
Norwich NOR 92W
Wymondham 3411
England;

Dear Mr. Doe: This is in reply to your letter of June 12, 1972, asking certai questions concerning Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 302, 'Flammability of Interior Materials.'; You ask if the standard applies to small components that have a maximu dimension of less than 4 inches, such as control knobs, and if so, how such components are to be tested. The standard applies to those components enumerated in S4.1. Control knobs and switches would not be subject to the standard unless they are 'designed to absorb energy on contact by occupants in the event of a crash.' Such components may be tested using the heat resistant wires that are inserted in the U-shaped frame, as described in paragraph S5.1.3 of the standard. The NHTSA is currently considering an amendment to the standard, however, which would modify the requirements as they apply to small components.; In response to your second question, electrical wiring is not subjec to the standard.; Your third question is, if a headliner is glued to the roof, would th test specimen be taken from a finished vehicle in such a way as to include the exterior paintwork. The answer to this question is no. The application of the standard to headlining (S4.1) does not include the roof to which it is attached, as the roof is not part of the component.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel

ID: aiam2476

Open
Mr. W. Bailey Watson, P. O. Box 4307, North Charleston, SC 29405; Mr. W. Bailey Watson
P. O. Box 4307
North Charleston
SC 29405;

Dear Mr. Watson: Your letter of August 16, 1976, asking whether the 1972 Pontia Bonneville was equipped with a safety bumper has been forwarded to this office by the Federal Trade Commission for reply.; The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), which i responsible for developing motor vehicle safety standards, promulgated Standard No. 215, *Exterior Protection*, to protect certain safety components when a vehicle is involved in low-speed front and rear collisions. The standard, in its initial form, became effective on September 1, 1972, and provided that passenger cars be capable of sustaining 5 mph front and 2 1/2 mph rear barrier impacts with no damage resulting to lighting, cooling, fuel, or exhaust systems, or to doors and other closures. In order to comply with the required performance level, manufacturers had to strengthen their vehicle bumper systems.; The standard only affects cars manufactured after September 1, 1972 and the start of the 1973 model year. It is therefore unlikely that any 1972 model vehicles would have been produced under its authority. Before September 1, 1972, the Federal government imposed no safety requirements affecting motor vehicle bumpers. Thus, vehicle manufacturers were free to equip their automobiles with any type of bumpers they chose. The NHTSA cannot comment on the safety qualities of the 1972 Pontiac Bonneville bumper since it was not at that time involved in regulating that aspect of vehicle performance.; Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Acting Chief Counsel

ID: aiam4102

Open
William Shapiro, P.E., Manager, Regulatory Affairs, Volvo Cars of North America, Rockleigh, NJ 07647; William Shapiro
P.E.
Manager
Regulatory Affairs
Volvo Cars of North America
Rockleigh
NJ 07647;

Dear Mr. Shapiro: Thank you for your letter of November 14, 1985, requesting a interpretation of Standard No. 210, *Seat Belt Assembly Anchorages*. You explained that Volvo is planning to voluntarily add an extra anchorage for a Type 2 safety belt in the middle rear designated seating position, which is already equipped with two anchorages for a Type 1 safety belt. You asked whether the third anchorage point would have to meet the anchorage location requirements set forth in S4.3.2 of the standard. As explained below, the additional anchorage would not have to comply with the location requirements of the standard.; As you correctly pointed out, S4.1.2 allows manufacturers the option o installing anchorages for either a Type 1 or Type 2 safety belt at the center rear designated seating position. Thus, by providing anchorages for a Type 1 belt at that seating position, Volvo has met the installation requirement of S4.1.2. The agency has stated in past interpretations, such as in a March 1, 1979 letter to Ford, that systems or components installed in addition to required safety systems are not required to meet Federal safety standards, provided the additional components or systems do not destroy the ability of required systems to comply with the standards. Thus, you may install a third anchorage if it does not affect the ability of the required anchorages to meet the standard.; Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones, Chief Counsel

Go to top of page