Skip to main content

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



Displaying 10511 - 10520 of 16490
Interpretations Date

ID: 19566.drn

Open

Mr. Encarnacion H. Gonzalez
P. O. Box 1321
Alice, TX 78332

Dear Mr. Gonzalez:

This responds to your letter asking about the applicability of Federal requirements to an invention you are developing, a "windshield airstream deflector system that forces a fast moving blanket of air over the windshield of vehicles to prevent rain, insects, and other small airborne objects from impacting the windshield." I am pleased to provide the information you requested.

At the outset, let me note that you have obviously spent a great amount of time and effort thinking about how to improve driving visibility. We appreciate your efforts in this area and the contributions that inventors such as you make to motor vehicle safety. Unfortunately, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) does not have any funds to assist you in manufacturing, evaluating, or certifying or otherwise further developing your product for sale to the public.

By way of background information, NHTSA is authorized to issue Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSSs) for new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. This agency does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Instead, manufacturers are required to certify that their vehicles and equipment meet applicable standards. Also, it is unlawful for dealers to sell motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment that do not meet applicable standards.

Vehicle manufacturers wishing to install your device in a new vehicle (before first sale of the vehicle to the customer) would be required to certify that their vehicles meet all applicable safety standards with the device installed. Two FMVSSs that might be relevant to your device are Standard No. 103, Windshield Defrosting and Defogging Systems, which specifies requirements for windshield defrosting and defogging systems, and Standard No. 104, Windshield Wiping and Washing Systems, which specifies a number of requirements for windshield wiping and washing systems. It is my understanding that you have informed Dorothy Nakama of my staff that as your device is presently designed, it is not intended to be used instead of a vehicle's windshield defrosting and defogging or wiping and washing system, but would be placed in addition to these systems.

Neither Standard No. 103 nor 104 would preclude the inclusion of your windshield airstream deflector device on a motor vehicle. However, a vehicle manufacturer would need to ensure that if a vehicle had your device, the vehicle's windshield defrosting and defogging system and windshield wiping and washing system met all the requirements of Standards Nos. 103 and 104.

No standards would apply to your device to the extent that it is sold as aftermarket equipment. However, Federal law prohibits a manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business from "making inoperative" a vehicle's compliance with any safety standard. If your device affects the compliance of a motor vehicle with Standard No.103 or Standard No. 104, it could not be installed by the above named businesses. Similarly, your device could not be installed by such businesses if the installation adversely affected a vehicle's compliance with any safety standard.

The "make inoperative" provision does not apply to modifications made by owners to their own vehicles. However, NHTSA encourages vehicle owners not to degrade the safety of their vehicles. Also, individual States have authority to regulate modifications that a vehicle owner may make to his or her vehicle. We are not able to provide you with information on State laws.

You should contact the individual States in which you intend to sell your products.

For further information about State laws, you may also wish to contact the following: American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA), 4301 Wilson Blvd., Suite 400, Arlington, VA 22203. Their telephone number is: (703) 522-4200, and their FAX number is: (703) 522-1553. The AAMVA promotes cooperation among the states with motor vehicle safety, administrative matters, and other issues of importance to motor vehicle use.

Another source of information about State laws is the Automotive Manufacturers Equipment Compliance Agency, Inc. (AMECA), 1101 15th St., N.W., Suite 607, Washington, DC 20005. Their telephone number is: (202) 898-0145, and their FAX number is: (202) 898-0148. The AMECA is a centralized voluntary agency that notifies government, industry and the public about items of motor vehicle safety equipment that have been tested by accredited laboratories and found to be in compliance with applicable United States industry, state and federal standards.

Finally, your device is considered to be "motor vehicle equipment" under Federal law. This means that you or whoever manufactures your device would be subject to Title 49 of the U.S. Code, sections 30118-30121, concerning the recall and remedy of products with defects related to motor vehicle safety. If the manufacturer or NHTSA determined that the product contains a safety related defect, the manufacturer would be responsible for notifying purchasers of the defective equipment and remedying the problem free of charge.

I hope this information is helpful. As you requested, I am enclosing a copy of Standards Nos. 103 and 104. If you have any further questions, please contact Ms. Dorothy Nakama this address or at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,
Frank Seales, Jr.
Chief Counsel
Enclosures
ref:103#104#VSA
d.3/29/99

1999

ID: 3166yy

Open

Mr. Wayne Trueman
BX-100 International
2550 Appian Way, Suite 211
Pinole, CA 94564

Dear Mr. Trueman:

This responds to your recent inquiry about installing your brake equalizer on new school buses and retrofitting this device on used school buses. A brake equalizer is a valve system that proportions the brake pressure between front and rear brakes. After explaining that California law provides that school bus brake systems may be modified only with the written approval of the school bus chassis manufacturer, you asked whether other states have similar requirements about written authorization. You also asked whether there are any special regulations pertaining to school buses that need to be considered prior to installing or retrofitting your product into school bus air brake systems.

I regret that we are unable to provide information concerning state requirements in this area. However, you may be able to obtain the information you desire by contacting individual state directors of pupil transportation. I have enclosed a list of those state officials, as published in School Bus Fleet magazine in January 199l.

I can, however, explain Federal requirements that are relevant to installing your product in new and used school buses. By way of background information, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Under the National Highway Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (Safety Act), it is the responsibility of the manufacturer to ensure that its vehicles or equipment comply with all applicable standards. The following represents our opinion based on the facts provided in your letter.

NHTSA does not have any specific regulations about brake equalizers. However, since this device is tied into a vehicle's air brake system, it could affect a vehicle's compliance with FMVSS No. 121, Air Brake Systems. That standard applies to almost all new trucks, buses (including school buses), and trailers equipped with air brake systems.

If your brake equalizer is installed as original equipment on a new vehicle, the vehicle manufacturer is required to certify that, with the device installed, the vehicle satisfies the requirements of all applicable safety standards, including FMVSS No. 121. (see 15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(1) and 49 CFR Part 567) If the device is added to a previously certified new motor vehicle prior to its first consumer sale, the person who modifies the vehicle would be an alterer of a previously certified motor vehicle and would be required to certify that, as altered, the vehicle continues to comply with all of the safety standards affected by the alteration. (49 CFR 567.7)

If the device is installed on a used vehicle (i.e., retrofitted) by a manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business, the installer would not be required to attach a certification label. However, it would have to make sure that it did not knowingly render inoperative, in whole or in part, any device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment in compliance with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard. (15 U.S.C 1397(a)(2)(A))

You may wish to review the Federal Highway Administration's Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations, which sets forth inspection and maintenance requirements for commercial motor vehicles, including some school buses. (49 CFR Parts 393 and 396.)

I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact Marvin Shaw of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel Enclosure /Ref: 121 d:9/l6/9l

1970

ID: nht91-5.49

Open

DATE: September 16, 1991

FROM: Paul Jackson Rice -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TO: Wayne Trueman -- BX-100 International

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 7-31-91 from Wayne Trueman to Barry Felrice (OCC 6314); Also attached to letter dated September 24, 1991 from Wayne Trueman to Marvin Shaw

TEXT:

This responds to your recent inquiry about installing your brake equalizer on new school buses and retrofitting this device on used school buses. A brake equalizer is a valve system that proportions the brake pressure between front and rear brakes. After explaining that California law provides that school bus brake systems may be modified only with the written approval of the school bus chassis manufacturer, you asked whether other states have similar requirements about written authorization. You also asked whether there are any special regulations pertaining to school buses that need to be considered prior to installing or retrofitting your product into school bus air brake systems.

I regret that we are unable to provide information concerning state requirements in this area. However, you may be able to obtain the information you desire by contacting individual state directors of pupil transportation. I have enclosed a list of those state officials, as published in School Bus Fleet magazine in January 1991.

I can, however, explain Federal requirements that are relevant to installing your product in new and used school buses. By way of background information, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Under the National Highway Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (Safety Act), it is the responsibility of the manufacturer to ensure that its vehicles or equipment comply with all applicable standards. The following represents our opinion based on the facts provided in your letter.

NHTSA does not have any specific regulations about brake equalizers. However, since this device is tied into a vehicle's air brake system, it could affect a vehicle's compliance with FMVSS No. 121, Air Brake Systems. That standard applies to almost all new truck, buses (including school buses), and trailers equipped with air brake systems.

If your brake equalizer is installed as original equipment on a new vehicle, the vehicle manufacturer is required to certify that, with the device installed, the vehicle satisfies the requirements of all applicable safety standards, including FMVSS No. 121. (see 15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(1) and 49 CFR Part 567) If the device is added to a previously certified new motor vehicle prior to its first consumer sale, the person who modifies the vehicle would be an alterer of a previously certified motor vehicle and would be required to certify that, as altered, the vehicle continues to comply with all of the safety standards affected by the alteration.

(49 CFR 567.7)

If the device is installed on a used vehicle (i.e., retrofitted) by a manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business, the installer would not be required to attach a certification label. However, it would have to make sure that it did not knowingly render inoperative, in whole or in part, any device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment in compliance with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard. (15 U.S.C 1397(a)(2)(A))

You may wish to review the Federal Highway Administration's Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations, which sets forth inspection and maintenance requirements for commercial motor vehicles, including some school buses. (49 CFR Parts 393 and 396.)

I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact Marvin Shaw of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992.

Attachment

List of State Directors of Pupil Transportation. (Text omitted)

ID: GF007509

Open

    Mr. Roger J. Davenport
    General Highway Products, Inc.
    PO Box 596
    878 Sussex Blvd.
    Broomall, PA 19008


    Dear Mr. Davenport:

    This responds to your August 26, 2005, letter asking for our analysis of an auxiliary electrical connection to a vehicles braking system, and the potential ramifications associated with the addition of a foreign electrical circuit to a braking system.

    By way of background, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301, manufacturers are required to certify that their vehicles and equipment meet applicable requirements.

    While we are unable to provide you with a technical analysis of your question, we will discuss the Federal laws that can affect your situation.

    Your letter describes an electrical device designed for emergency vehicles called 3M Emergency Vehicle Preemption System ("3M device"). The 3M device is installed on emergency vehicles and is used to send a coded infrared signal to the traffic light directly ahead of the emergency vehicle. Upon receiving the signal from the 3M device, the traffic light turns red, except in the direction facing the emergency vehicle. This assists emergency vehicles in safer passage through intersections. Your letter indicates that your customers request that the 3M device be automatically disabled when the parking brake is applied. However, this automatic deactivation feature would require an auxiliary electrical connection to the vehicle braking system.

    The auxiliary electrical connection described in your letter is not specifically addressed by the applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. However, if an auxiliary device such as the 3M device is installed as original equipment on a new vehicle, the vehicle manufacturer is required to certify that, with the device installed, the vehicle satisfies the requirements of all applicable Federal safety standards. If the device is added to a previously certified new motor vehicle prior to its first sale, the person who modifies the vehicle would be an alterer of a previously certified motor vehicle and would be required to certify that, as altered, the vehicle continues to comply with all of the safety standards affected by the alteration.

    Further, Federal law also limits the modifications that can be made by certain businesses to used vehicles. Specifically, if the 3M device is installed after the first retail sale of the vehicle, 49 U.S.C. 30122 prohibits a manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business from "making inoperative, in whole or in part" any part of a device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle in compliance with an applicable safety standard. Thus, despite an absence of an express prohibition of auxiliary electrical connections to the braking systems, it is your responsibility to ensure that the installation of the 3M device would not adversely affect the vehicles compliance with any of our safety standards.

    We note that because the 3M device described in your letter is designed to be used on a motor vehicle, it is an item of "motor vehicle equipment" as defined in 49 U.S.C. 30102(a)(7)(B), and is subject the recall and remedy provisions of 49 U.S.C. 30120. If a manufacturer or NHTSA determines that the product contains a safety-related defect, the manufacturer is responsible for notifying purchasers of the defective vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment and remedying the problem free of charge.

    Finally, we note that you may wish to contact a private attorney to ascertain any potential State tort law liabilities you may incur as consequence of tampering with the vehicle braking system.

    For your convenience we are attaching information materials for vehicle manufacturers. If you have any further questions about NHTSA's safety standards, please feel free to contact George Feygin of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992.

    Sincerely,

    Stephen P. Wood
    Acting Chief Counsel

    ref:121
    d.12/21/05

2005

ID: 1983-3.18

Open

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 11/03/83

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank Berndt; NHTSA

TO: Mr. Steve Lampeas

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

Mr. Steve Lampeas: 117 Aldershot Lane Manhasset, New York 11030

Dear Mr. Lampeas:

This is in reply to your letter of October 13, 1983, concerning the legality under Federal laws of your patented device, the "Trunk Truck." It appears from the material you enclosed that the device extends in twin booms from the rear of the car, and that a stop lamp or taillamp is mounted at the end of each boom (you refer to it as a "natural extension" of these lamps).

Under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, no person (except the vehicle owner) may modify a vehicle so that equipment that is on the vehicle pursuant to a Federal motor vehicle safety standard is "rendered inoperative in whole or in part." Therefore, you must assure yourself that all requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 continue to be met with respect to rear lighting. This would include not only the lamps at the end of the booms, but those remaining on the car. In addition to stop lamps and taillamps, rear lighting includes, turn signal lamps, back up lamps, and license plate lamps. As on other load-bearing vehicles, such as boat trailers, these lamps should continue to be visible even with a load installed.

You should also ask the States whether such a device is legal. States have jurisdiction over the use of motor vehicles within their borders.

Sincerely,

Frank Berndt Chief Counsel

October 13, 1983

Mr.Frank Berndt Chief Council of National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 400 7th Street South West Washington D.C. 20590

RE: Trunk Truck

Dear Mr. Frank Berndt:

As per my telephone conversation today with Roger Fairchild, I am enclosing in this letter and sending to you a description and illustration of the Trunk Truck, which is a new patented devise that I have invented.

Before I go into production of this item I want to check with your legal department to be sure that there are no laws that the federal level that my be violated or any safety test that may be required, when this item is attached to a motor vehicle and is in use.

I believe your office has jurisdiction in this matter and would very much appreciate an early opinion and response.

Sincerely,

Steve Lampeas

TRUNK TRUCK

Need to move something quickly? It can be done with a Trunk Truck.

With this new patented device, you can transform your family car in minutes into a van, truck, or trailer and after you have moved your items you can change it back to your family car.

The Trunk truck is a telescoping, self adjusting, precision designed, light weight, high tensile aluminum alloy device, ready for instant use. It is a natural extension of the tail lights and breaking lights of your car. It is road worthy, stable and safe to use.

The Trunk Truck is an inexpensive way to move almost anything. It can be used by merchants, campers, outdoor vendors, house owners, and many others.

This patented device is highly versatile, proving stretch space not thought possible before, to take and carry a variety of items for the occasional or frequent moving job you map have.

The Trunk Truck will free the active man, from the dependency of a second car, van, truck, or trailer.

There will be no further need for additional garage space, license plates, insurances or inspection stickers and registration fees.

Its user are limitless. For example: Taxi Cab Fleet owners can use the Trunk Truck as the start of a new line of moving services.

With a medium sized car, you can expect to have a loading area of 30 square feet, a loading volume of 90 cubic ft. and an approximate weight load of 600 lbs.

The Trunk Truck can be installed easily and at a moderate price in your foreign or domestic car, out of the way inside your trunk.

For further information on the Trunk Truck, contact Lampeas Assoc. at 117 Aldershot Lane Manhasset L.I. N.Y. 11030

Trunk Truck Transform your car into a Van, Truck or Trailer in minutes

* Graph Inserted Here

ID: 11-005316A Buley drn (Std. 111)

Open

Ms. Gloria M. Buley

President

Woodstock Safety Mirror Co., Inc.

40 Industrial Drive

Saugerties, NY  12477     

Dear Ms. Buley:

This responds to your letter of August 8, 2011 to this office and subsequent telephone conversations of September 21 and 22, 2011 with my staff, concerning a stop arm/mirror unit you manufacture.  Your letter and telephone conversations follow up on your previous correspondence in 2006 and 2007 to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), and also follows on an inquiry we received earlier this year from Congressman Maurice Hinchey on your behalf. 

Background

The previous correspondence with NHTSA concerned a stop arm/mirror unit you designed to mount on the right side of a school bus.  In our interpretation letters of July 10, 2006 and March 26, 2007 from this office, we explained that your device would be considered a stop arm and mirror system subject to both Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS)

No. 131, School bus pedestrian safety devices, and FMVSS No. 111, Rearview mirrors.  Our previous correspondence with you focused on whether your stop arm/mirror unit could be installed on new school buses with only one stop arm on the left side. 

We explained in the 2007 letter that new school buses equipped with your product must be certified as meeting all applicable FMVSSs, including FMVSS No. 131.  Your product would be considered a supplemental school bus stop arm.  Under FMVSS No. 131, a supplemental stop signal arm on the right side of a school bus is permissible under Federal law provided:  (1) two compliant stop signal arms are already present on the left side of the bus; and (2) the additional, supplemental stop signal arm does not take the vehicle out of compliance with any applicable safety standards (with FMVSS No. 111 being the most relevant).

Regarding compliance of your product with FMVSS No. 111, we explained in the 2006 letter that:



Based on our analysis of the materials you submitted, we believe that your system would provide supplemental mirrors.  Supplemental mirrors are permissible, provided that they do not interfere with the performance of the mirrors required under FMVSS No. 111.  Your letter states that your companys mirror system would neither make inoperative nor diminish the performance of any other mirrors or safety devices currently required on school buses.  [A]ssuming that the statement is correct, your supplemental mirror would not be prohibited by Standard No. 111.

Question

 

            In your telephone call, you asked about the possibility of your device not having features of a stop arm, i.e., you would reconfigure the device to be only a supplemental mirror system, meeting FMVSS No. 111, and not as a stop arm.  You are interested in this modification because you believe some States may be unwilling to specify a second stop arm on the left side of the school bus, which they would have to do before they could specify a stop arm on the right side.  You ask:  if your device were a supplemental mirror system and not a stop arm, could your device be installed on the right side of school buses that had only one stop arm on the left side.

Response

            Based on our understanding of the information you provided, our answer is yes.  If your device were not a stop arm, it could be installed on the right side of the bus as a supplemental mirror system.  This assumes that the device met FMVSS No. 111 and did not make inoperative or diminish the performance of any other mirrors or safety devices currently required on school buses.  Requirements for your product as only a supplemental mirror system were discussed in the July 10, 2006 letter, see in particular in the quotation provided above applicable to supplemental mirrors.

            You asked whether the back of the mirror system may be hexagonal[1] and painted red.  The answer is yes.  Nothing in FMVSS No. 111 specifies color requirements or shapes for the backs of school bus mirror systems.  Therefore, FMVSS No. 111 does not prohibit the back of the mirror on your supplemental mirror system from being hexagonal or painted red.

            I hope this information is helpful.  If you have any further questions, please contact

Ms. Deirdre Fujita of my staff at (202) 366-2992.                 

                                                                                    Sincerely yours,

            

                                                                                    O. Kevin Vincent

                                                                                    Chief Counsel

1/18/2012

Std. 111




[1] You state that the hexagonal shape is needed because it serves as the backing for the mirror system.  You advised my staff that cutting off the corners of the backing for a more rounded look could result in as much as $250,000 in machining costs to your small business. 

ID: nht89-2.73

Open

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 08/17/89

FROM: STEPHEN P. WOOD -- NHTSA ACTING CHIEF COUNSEL

TO: RUSSELL STORMS

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: LETTER DATED 09/23/88 FROM HARRY B. SKINNER -- DOT TO RUSSELL A. STORMS; LETTER DATED 09/12/88 FROM RUSSELL A STORMS TO FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

TEXT: Dear Mr. Storms:

This responds to your letter asking that this Department "approve" or otherwise "recognize" your newly invented warning device. I apologize for the delay in this response. In your letter, you described your invention as a seven inch high, tetrahedral r eflective traffic marker that is non-flammable and easily stored. I am pleased to have this opportunity to explain our law and regulations to you.

The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1381 et seq.; the Safety Act) gives this agency the authority to issue safety standards applicable to new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. We have exercised this author ity to establish Standard No. 125, Warning Devices (49 CFR @571.125; copy enclosed). This standard specifies performance requirements and test procedures for warning devices that are designed to be carried in motor vehicles and used to warn approaching traffic of a stopped vehicle. Based on the description in your letter, your newly invented product appears to be a warning device subject to Standard No. 125.

When the agency has issued an applicable safety standard, section 108(a)(1)(A) of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(1)(A)) provides that no person shall "manufacture for sale, sell, offer for sale, or introduce or deliver for introduction in interstate c ommerce, or import into the United States" any new motor vehicle or new item of equipment unless the vehicles or equipment are in conformity with the applicable standard. Assuming your product is subject to Standard No. 125, it must conform to all the r equirements of that standard.

You are not required to get some "approval" or "recognition" from this agency before selling this product. In fact, NHTSA has no authority under the Safety Act to approve, certify, or otherwise endorse any commercial product. Instead, section 114 of th e Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1403) establishes a self-certification process under which every manufacturer is required to certify that each of its products meet all applicable Federal safety standards. Therefore, the manufacturer of this new product must cer tify that it conforms to all applicable standards.

Section 108(b)(2) of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1397(b)(2)) requires the manufacturer of this new warning device to exercise "due care" in certifying that it conforms to Standard No. 125. To comply with these legal obligations, I suggest that you careful ly examine the requirements of Standard No. 125 and determine if this new product conforms with those requirements. As you will see, Standard No. 125 contains specific requirements related to a warning device's material, container, labeling, configurati on, color, reflectivity, luminance, stability, and durability. In particular, you should be aware that section S5.2.2 of the standard requires that:

each of the three sides of the triangular portion of the warning device shall not be less than 17 and not more than 22 inches long, and not less than 2 inches and not more than 3 inches wide.

Your letter states that your new warning device is seven inches in height. If that is the case, the new warning device would not comply with the requirements of Standard No. 125. You should further compare your proposed design with the other requiremen ts in Standard No. 125 to determine if your new warning device complies with all of the other provisions.

You should be aware that the Vehicle Safety Act establishes a civil penalty of $ 1,000 for each violation of a safety standard and a maximum penalty of $ 800,000 for a series of violations. In addition, the Act requires manufacturers to remedy their pro ducts if they fail to comply with any applicable safety standards.

If you have aay further questions or need additional information on this subject, please feel free to contact Marvin Shaw of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

ENCLOSURE

ID: 1982y

Open

Mr. Russell Storms
Luke Grimm
2140 SW Pallatwe Street
Portland, Oregon 97219

Dear Mr. Storms:

This responds to your letter asking that this Department "approve" or otherwise "recognize" your newly invented warning device. I apologize for the delay in this response. In your letter, you described your invention as a seven inch high, tetrahedral reflective traffic marker that is non-flammable and easily stored. I am pleased to have this opportunity to explain our law and regulations to you.

The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1381 et seq.; the Safety Act) gives this agency the authority to issue safety standards applicable to new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. We have exercised this authority to establish Standard No. 125, Warning Devices (49 CFR 571.125; copy enclosed). This standard specifies performance requirements and test procedures for warning devices that are designed to be carried in motor vehicles and used to warn approaching traffic of a stopped vehicle. Based on the description in your letter, your newly invented product appears to be a warning device subject to Standard No. 125.

When the agency has issued an applicable safety standard, section 108(a)(1)(A) of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(1)(A)) provides that no person shall "manufacture for sale, sell, offer for sale, or introduce or deliver for introduction in interstate commerce, or import into the United States" any new motor vehicle or new item of equipment unless the vehicles or equipment are in conformity with the applicable standard. Assuming your product is subject to Standard No. 125, it must conform to all the requirements of that standard.

You are not required to get some "approval" or "recognition" from this agency before selling this product. In fact, NHTSA has no authority under the Safety Act to approve, certify, or otherwise endorse any commercial product. Instead, section 114 of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1403) establishes a self-certification process under which every manufacturer is required to certify that each of its products meet all applicable Federal safety standards. Therefore, the manufacturer of this new product must certify that it conforms to all applicable standards. Section 108(b)(2) of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1397(b)(2)) requires the manufacturer of this new warning device to exercise "due care" in certifying that it conforms to Standard No. 125. To comply with these legal obligations, I suggest that you carefully examine the requirements of Standard No. 125 and determine if this new product conforms with those requirements. As you will see, Standard No. 125 contains specific requirements related to a warning device's material, container, labeling, configuration, color, reflectivity, luminance, stability, and durability. In particular, you should be aware that section S5.2.2 of the standard requires that:

each of the three sides of the triangular portion of the warning device shall not be less than 17 and not more than 22 inches long, and not less than 2 inches and not more than 3 inches wide.

Your letter states that your new warning device is seven inches in height. If that is the case, the new warning device would not comply with the requirements of Standard No. 125. You should further compare your proposed design with the other requirements in Standard No. 125 to determine if your new warning device complies with all of the other provisions.

You should be aware that the Vehicle Safety Act establishes a civil penalty of $1,000 for each violation of a safety standard and a maximum penalty of $800,000 for a series of violations. In addition, the Act requires manufacturers to remedy their products if they fail to comply with any applicable safety standards.

If you have any further questions or need additional information on this subject, please feel free to contact Marvin Shaw of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Wood Acting Chief Counsel

Enclosure

/ref:125#VSA d:8/l7/89

1970

ID: nht94-7.35

Open

DATE: April 10, 1992

FROM: Larry Nunn -- President, Automotive Lighting Technologies, Inc. (ALTECH)

TO: Office of Chief Council, NHTSA

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 5/22/92 from Paul Jackson Rice to Larry Nunn (A39; Std. 108; Std. 218; VSA 108 (a)(2)(A); VSA 102(4))

TEXT:

LeGrand Systems Inc. of Grand Rapids, Michigan has contracted Automotive Lighting Technologies Inc. of Southfield, Michigan, to design and develop a helmet lighting system for use by motorcyclists, snowmobilers, moped operators, and other recreational vehicles. LeGrand applied for patent on the lighting system on February 13, 1990.

LeLite, the products assumed name, is intended to improve safety in the industry by increasing rider visibility. Many motorcycle accidents result from poor visibility or failure of other motorists to see motorcyclists in time to react.

The idea is consistent with reasoning for the Center High Mounted Stop Lamp introduced in 1986 to decrease rear end collisions. However, LeLite includes a wrap around rear stop/running lamp with two amber turn signals. (Enclosure)

The electrical system of the unit is accomplished via a three (3) wire cord which snaps into the base of the unit and connects to a simple harness unit mounted at a location of the operator's choosing on the handlebars, fairing, or rear portion of the motorcycle. This supply harness attaches directly into the associated brake/running lamp wires feeding from the battery terminal. Since it is wired directly in the motorcycle's existing wiring harness, the LeLite works in perfect harmony with the brake/running lamps on the vehicle.

Automotive Lighting Technologies is dedicated to excellence in vehicle lighting design and development and to any role it can play in the improvement of vehicle safety. We believe this product has merit and could prove effective in reducing accidents.

ALTech realize that there are no SAE or FMVSS requirements for this lighting system. However, it is our opinion that this system will not interfere with the function of any other lighting component on the vehicle but rather augment their purpose.

Due to size, weight, and heat limitations of mounting such a system on a helmet, it is not practical that the system can be design to meet vehicle standards. Therefore, ALTech will take every precaution insure the integrity of the product. During product development, we will keep you informed of test results on vibration, moisture, dust, heat, corrosion, photometry and any other area determined to be prudent.

ALTech is asking for your comments on any legalities which we should consider and your support in bringing this product to market in a manner that does not conflict any state or federal requirements. But more important, we ask for any comments or ideas that wiless of responding to a Department of the Army draft specification for an armored security vehicle. AV Technology proposes to offer its Dragoon ASV, an armored security vehicle, with a weapon carrying capability. Your letter states that the Dragoon ASV would be built to U.S. Army specification MIL-STD-1180. In a telephone conversation with Dorothy Nakama of my staff, you stated that the Dragoon ASV would also be built to other applicable military specifications.

The FMVSSs' applicability to vehicles manufactured for and sold to the U.S. military, is addressed at 49 CFR 571.7(c):

(c) Military vehicles. No standard applies to a vehicle or item of equipment manufactured for, and sold directly to, the Armed Forces of the United States in conformity with contractual specifications.

You stated the Dragoon ASV would be manufactured to all applicable military specifications, specified by the Army. The Army is part of the "Armed Forces." Thus, when manufactured to Army contractual specifications, and sold to the Army, the Dragoon ASV is not subject to the FMVSSs.

If you have any questions, please contact Dorothy Nakama of my staff at this address or at (202) 366-2992.

ID: 24259.rbm

Open

Mr. Ron Thompson
Fedex Express
2007 Corporate Avenue, 4th Floor
Memphis, TN 38132-5612

Dear Mr. Thompson:

This responds to your recent correspondence asking if your company, Fedex, may have the door locks on its airport vehicles disabled. In a subsequent conversation with Rebecca MacPherson, a Senior Counsel on my staff, you indicated that the vehicles are originally ordered as an incomplete chassis cab and are subject to final manufacturing customized to Fedex specifications. It would be part of this final manufacturing process to disable the existing door locks. You also reiterated that the vehicles, as manufactured, will not be operated anywhere other than airport property, and will not be licensed for street or highway use.

By way of background, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) administers a statute requiring that motor vehicles manufactured for sale in the United States or imported into the United States be manufactured so as to reduce the likelihood of motor vehicle crashes and of deaths and injuries when crashes do occur. We refer to that statute as the Vehicle Safety Act. It is codified at 49 U.S.C. 30101, et seq.

The Vehicle Safety Act defines the term "motor vehicle" as "any vehicle driven or drawn by mechanical power manufactured primarily for use on the public streets, roads, and highways, except any vehicle operated exclusively on a rail or rails." If a vehicle is a motor vehicle under the definition, it must comply with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSSs). These standards specify safety performance requirements for motor vehicles and/or items of motor vehicle equipment. Manufacturers of motor vehicles must certify compliance with all applicable safety standards and permanently apply a label to each vehicle stating that the vehicle complies with all applicable FMVSSs and providing the GVWR.

FMVSS No. 206, Door locks and door retention components, is one of these standards. S4.1.3 of the standard specifies that "[e]ach door shall be equipped with a locking mechanism with an operating means in the interior of the vehicle." However, if the vehicles for which Fedex wishes to have the door locks disabled are not motor vehicles, there is no requirement that they meet the requirements of FMVSS No. 206, or any other Federal motor vehicle safety standard.

Whether we consider those vehicles to be motor vehicles depends on their use. We have long stated that vehicles such as airport runway vehicles, that are designed and sold solely for off-road use, are not considered motor vehicles under the Vehicle Safety Act, even if they are operationally capable of highway travel.

As noted in your letter and in the subsequent conversation with Ms. MacPherson, the Fedex vehicles in question will be customized by the final stage manufacturer for airport use, will remain on airport property, and will be used solely for transporting cargo to and from airplanes. Accordingly, we have determined that these vehicles would not be motor vehicles as defined in the Vehicle Safety Act, and you are not prohibited from having the final stage manufacturer disable the door locks on those vehicles.

Should you require any additional information or assistance, please contact Rebecca MacPherson, of my staff, (202) 366-2992 or at the address given above.

Sincerely,
Jacqueline Glassman
Chief Counsel
ref:595
d.7/16/02

2002

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.

Go to top of page