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: nht94-3.2OpenTYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA DATE: May 18, 1994 FROM: John Womack -- Acting Chief Counsel, NHTSA TO: Len R. Thies -- C&C Creations TITLE: None ATTACHMT: Attached To Letter Dated 11/30/93 From Len R. Thies To John Womack (OCC - 9401) TEXT: Dear Mr. Thies: This responds to your letter asking about Federal rules, particularly those for flammability resistance, applicable to your aftermarket product. I apologize for the delay in responding. You state that your product is a sheet of clear vinyl that inhibit s the air flow in a van, thus reducing the amount of air to be heated or cooled. You further state that your product does not impair visibility and that it is easily detached and removed by the vehicle owner. This response is based on our understanding of the facts presented in your letter. By way of background information, NHTSA is authorized to issue Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards that set performance requirements for new motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA does not, however, approve or certify any vehicles or items of equipment. Instead, the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act establishes a "self-certification" process under which each manufacturer is responsible for certifying that its products meet all applicable safety standards. The agency periodically tests new vehicles and items of equipment for compliance with the standards. In response to your question, you are required to certify that your device complies with Standard No. 205, Glazing Materials (49 CFR @ 571.205), based on our understanding of your letter. Standard No. 205 applies to new, completed vehicles as well as to glazing sold in the aftermarket. The standard establishes performance requirements for various types of glazing (called "items") and specifies the locations in vehicles in which each item of glazing may be used. The standard also incorporates by refer ence "ANSI Z26," the American National Standards Institute's "Safety Code for Safety Glazing Materials for Motor Vehicles Operating on Land Highways." It appears that your device may be considered an "interior partition," which is considered under ANSI Z 26 to be item 6 glazing. In addition, if your product were manufactured for a new vehicle, the vehicle would have to be certified as complying 2 with Standard No. 111, Rearview Mirrors and Standard No. 302, Flammability of Interior Materials, in addition to Standard No. 205. However, Standards No. 111 and No. 302 apply only to new vehicles, and not to items of aftermarket motor vehicle equipment . Thus, they do not apply to your product. I note, however, that there are other Federal requirements that indirectly affect the manufacture and sale of your product. Under the Safety Act, your product is considered to be an item of motor vehicle equipment. As a manufacturer of motor vehicle eq uipment, you are subject to the requirements in @@ 151-159 of the Safety Act concerning the recall and remedy of products with safety related defects. I have enclosed an information sheet that briefly describes those responsibilities. In the event that you or NHTSA determines that your product contains a safety-related defect, you would be responsible for notifying purchasers of the defective equipment and remedying the problem free of charge. Manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and motor vehicle repair businesses are subject to @ 108(a)(2)(A) of the Safety Act, which states: "No manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business shall knowingly render inoperative . . . 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 . . . ." Your vinyl sheet could render inoperative the rearward visibility requiremen ts set forth in Standard No. 111, or the light transmittance requirements set forth in Standard No. 205. In addition, your product could have elements of design that could render inoperative a vehicle's compliance with Standard No. 302, the FMVSS for fl ammability resistance for materials used in the occupant compartment of motor vehicles. While it appears unlikely that persons in the aforementioned categories would be installing your product, if they were to install it, they not compromise the rearwar d visibility or flammability resistance provided by the motor vehicle. The "render inoperative" prohibition of @ 108(a)(2)(A) does not apply to the actions of vehicle owners in adding to or otherwise modifying their vehicles or items of motor vehicle equipment. Thus, if your products were placed in vehicles by the vehicle owners, they would not need to meet any FMVSSs. Nevertheless, NHTSA urges vehicle owners not to tamper with or degrade the safety of their vehicles. 3 I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions about NHTSA's safety standards, please feel free to contact Marvin Shaw of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, Enclosure |
|
ID: nht94-5.23OpenDATE: May 18, 1994 FROM: John Womack -- Acting Chief Counsel, NHTSA TO: Len R. Thies -- C&C Creations TITLE: None ATTACHMT: Attached To Letter Dated 11/30/93 From Len R. Thies To John Womack (OCC - 9401) TEXT: Dear Mr. Thies: This responds to your letter asking about Federal rules, particularly those for flammability resistance, applicable to your aftermarket product. I apologize for the delay in responding. You state that your product is a sheet of clear vinyl that inhibits the air flow in a van, thus reducing the amount of air to be heated or cooled. You further state that your product does not impair visibility and that it is easily detached and removed by the vehicle owner. This response is based on our understanding of the facts presented in your letter. By way of background information, NHTSA is authorized to issue Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards that set performance requirements for new motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA does not, however, approve or certify any vehicles or items of equipment. Instead, the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act establishes a "self-certification" process under which each manufacturer is responsible for certifying that its products meet all applicable safety standards. The agency periodically tests new vehicles and items of equipment for compliance with the standards. In response to your question, you are required to certify that your device complies with Standard No. 205, Glazing Materials (49 CFR @ 571.205), based on our understanding of your letter. Standard No. 205 applies to new, completed vehicles as well as to glazing sold in the aftermarket. The standard establishes performance requirements for various types of glazing (called "items") and specifies the locations in vehicles in which each item of glazing may be used. The standard also incorporates by reference "ANSI Z26," the American National Standards Institute's "Safety Code for Safety Glazing Materials for Motor Vehicles Operating on Land Highways." It appears that your device may be considered an "interior partition," which is considered under ANSI Z26 to be item 6 glazing. In addition, if your product were manufactured for a new vehicle, the vehicle would have to be certified as complying 2 with Standard No. 111, Rearview Mirrors and Standard No. 302, Flammability of Interior Materials, in addition to Standard No. 205. However, Standards No. 111 and No. 302 apply only to new vehicles, and not to items of aftermarket motor vehicle equipment. Thus, they do not apply to your product. I note, however, that there are other Federal requirements that indirectly affect the manufacture and sale of your product. Under the Safety Act, your product is considered to be an item of motor vehicle equipment. As a manufacturer of motor vehicle equipment, you are subject to the requirements in @@ 151-159 of the Safety Act concerning the recall and remedy of products with safety related defects. I have enclosed an information sheet that briefly describes those responsibilities. In the event that you or NHTSA determines that your product contains a safety-related defect, you would be responsible for notifying purchasers of the defective equipment and remedying the problem free of charge. Manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and motor vehicle repair businesses are subject to @ 108(a)(2)(A) of the Safety Act, which states: "No manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business shall knowingly render inoperative . . . 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 . . . ." Your vinyl sheet could render inoperative the rearward visibility requirements set forth in Standard No. 111, or the light transmittance requirements set forth in Standard No. 205. In addition, your product could have elements of design that could render inoperative a vehicle's compliance with Standard No. 302, the FMVSS for flammability resistance for materials used in the occupant compartment of motor vehicles. While it appears unlikely that persons in the aforementioned categories would be installing your product, if they were to install it, they not compromise the rearward visibility or flammability resistance provided by the motor vehicle. The "render inoperative" prohibition of @ 108(a)(2)(A) does not apply to the actions of vehicle owners in adding to or otherwise modifying their vehicles or items of motor vehicle equipment. Thus, if your products were placed in vehicles by the vehicle owners, they would not need to meet any FMVSSs. Nevertheless, NHTSA urges vehicle owners not to tamper with or degrade the safety of their vehicles. 3 I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions about NHTSA's safety standards, please feel free to contact Marvin Shaw of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, Enclosure |
|
ID: 9401Open Mr. Len R. Thies Dear Mr. Thies: This responds to your letter asking about Federal rules, particularly those for flammability resistance, applicable to your aftermarket product. I apologize for the delay in responding. You state that your product is a sheet of clear vinyl that inhibits the air flow in a van, thus reducing the amount of air to be heated or cooled. You further state that your product does not impair visibility and that it is easily detached and removed by the vehicle owner. This response is based on our understanding of the facts presented in your letter. By way of background information, NHTSA is authorized to issue Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards that set performance requirements for new motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA does not, however, approve or certify any vehicles or items of equipment. Instead, the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act establishes a "self-certification" process under which each manufacturer is responsible for certifying that its products meet all applicable safety standards. The agency periodically tests new vehicles and items of equipment for compliance with the standards. In response to your question, you are required to certify that your device complies with Standard No. 205, Glazing Materials (49 CFR ' 571.205), based on our understanding of your letter. Standard No. 205 applies to new, completed vehicles as well as to glazing sold in the aftermarket. The standard establishes performance requirements for various types of glazing (called "items") and specifies the locations in vehicles in which each item of glazing may be used. The standard also incorporates by reference "ANSI Z26," the American National Standards Institute's "Safety Code for Safety Glazing Materials for Motor Vehicles Operating on Land Highways." It appears that your device may be considered an "interior partition," which is considered under ANSI Z26 to be item 6 glazing. In addition, if your product were manufactured for a new vehicle, the vehicle would have to be certified as complying with Standard No. 111, Rearview Mirrors and Standard No. 302, Flammability of Interior Materials, in addition to Standard No. 205. However, Standards No. 111 and No. 302 apply only to new vehicles, and not to items of aftermarket motor vehicle equipment. Thus, they do not apply to your product. I note, however, that there are other Federal requirements that indirectly affect the manufacture and sale of your product. Under the Safety Act, your product is considered to be an item of motor vehicle equipment. As a manufacturer of motor vehicle equipment, you are subject to the requirements in ''151-159 of the Safety Act concerning the recall and remedy of products with safety related defects. I have enclosed an information sheet that briefly describes those responsibilities. In the event that you or NHTSA determines that your product contains a safety-related defect, you would be responsible for notifying purchasers of the defective equipment and remedying the problem free of charge. Manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and motor vehicle repair businesses are subject to '108(a)(2)(A) of the Safety Act, which states: "No manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business shall knowingly render inoperative ... 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 ...." Your vinyl sheet could render inoperative the rearward visibility requirements set forth in Standard No. 111, or the light transmittance requirements set forth in Standard No. 205. In addition, your product could have elements of design that could render inoperative a vehicle's compliance with Standard No. 302, the FMVSS for flammability resistance for materials used in the occupant compartment of motor vehicles. While it appears unlikely that persons in the aforementioned categories would be installing your product, if they were to install it, they must not compromise the rearward visibility or flammability resistance provided by the motor vehicle. The "render inoperative" prohibition of '108(a)(2)(A) does not apply to the actions of vehicle owners in adding to or otherwise modifying their vehicles or items of motor vehicle equipment. Thus, if your products were placed in vehicles by the vehicle owners, they would not need to meet any FMVSSs. Nevertheless, NHTSA urges vehicle owners not to tamper with or degrade the safety of their vehicles. I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions about NHTSA's safety standards, please feel free to contact Marvin Shaw of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely,
John Womack Acting Chief Counsel Enclosure ref:111#205#302 d:5/18/94
|
1994 |
ID: nht93-6.9OpenDATE: August 12, 1993 FROM: Joe de Sousa -- President, Safety Pro's International, Inc. TO: Richard Van Iderstine -- NHTSA TITLE: None ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 3/10/94 from John Womack to Joe de Sousa (A42; Std. 108) and letter dated 8/12/93 from Joe de Sousa to NHTSA Office of Chief Counsel (OCC-8998) TEXT: It was a pleasure speaking with you yesterday and we really appreciate the time you devoted in answering our questions and concerns on Regulation 108. As we discussed in our conversation, the systems we market operate strictly on low beam headlamps. They are connected in parallel to the existing vehicle's lighting and no wires are required to be cut. This preserves the full integrity of the vehicle's system and keeps it fully operational. The manufacturer of these products believes there is no compromise when dealing with safety and has designed our units for dependability and to eliminate any possibility of malfunction which might cause a safety hazard. Available is a basic Daytime Running Lights unit which provides for intensity reduction down to 77% of full low beam. It turns on and off with the ignition and is deactivated when all vehicle lights are turned on by the vehicle light switch. A four second delay is featured when turning the engine on to provide maximum energy to the starter. A parking brake cut off can be connected, if desired, to deactivate daytime running lights when the vehicle is idle at night with the engine running and lights are not needed. Our completely automated system utilizes all the features of our basic unit. Additionally, it incorporates a light sensor and interlocks with the vehicle's windshield wipers to provide complete automatic operation of all vehicle lights with no driver intervention. Like our other unit, the vehicle's original system remains fully operational as a back-up and overrides our unit when activated. As you will notice in the enclosed information, we've tried to provide a quality line of products designed for safety, durability and convenience. The installation can be done by anyone with mechanical aptitude or any technician. The average installation time for the basic unit is about 20 minutes while our fully automated system requires about one hour to install. Currently, we are forming a national network of dealers to facilitate installations. If you would like to see a demonstration on these units, we would be glad to schedule our representative in the Washington D.C. area to stop by and show you how they actually work on a vehicle. Again, thank you for all your help. If we can ever be of service to your administration, please do not hesitate to call us. |
|
ID: 06-005825drnOpenAdam Schumann, Engineer Thoroughbred Motorsports P. O. Box 369 22661 FM15 Troup, TX 75789 Dear Mr. Schumann: This responds to your request for an interpretation of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 122, Motorcycle Brake Systems. You wish to know whether a prototype brake system design for a three-wheeled motorcycle would meet FMVSS No. 122. Based on the information you provided to the agency and the analysis below, Ive concluded that because the product would not meet the requirement at S5.1.2.1 that each reservoir filler opening have its own cover, seal, and cover retention device, it would fail to meet FMVSS No. 122. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is authorized to issue FMVSSs that set performance requirements for new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment (See 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301). NHTSA does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Instead, manufacturers are required to self-certify that their vehicles and equipment conform to all applicable safety standards that are in effect on the date of manufacture. FMVSS No. 122 specifies performance requirements for motorcycle brake systems. In your letter you describe your product as a three-wheeled motorcycle with approximately 143 horsepower. Unlike many motorcycles, your product will have a steering wheel instead of handle bars, a foot throttle operated by the drivers right foot, and a brake pedal operated by the drivers left foot. You state that the brake system will use a standard Ford Ranger dual master cylinder with a split reservoir with a single cap. The brake system and the brake foot pedal will actuate both front and rear systems simultaneously. You note that FMVSS No. 122 states at S5.1.2.1: S5.1.2.1 Each master cylinder will have a separate reservoir for each brake circuit, with each reservoir filler opening having its own cover, seal, and cover retention device. You asked whether NHTSA will accept the use of this standard passenger vehicle master cylinder on the motorcycle if it does not have two individual caps for each of the reservoirs. Since your product would be classified as a motorcycle, it must meet the FMVSSs that apply to motorcycles, including FMVSS No. 122. As you are aware, although it would have a master cylinder with split reservoirs, front/rear, your design would have only one filler cover and seal. Each reservoir filler opening would not have its own cover, seal and cover retention device, as specified in S5.1.2.1. Your motorcycle would therefore not meet S5.1.2.1 of FMVSS No. 122. You also seek confirmation that your product need not meet FMVSS No.123, Motorcycle controls and displays. The application section (S3.) of FMVSS No. 123 states: This standard applies to motorcycles equipped with handlebars As indicated above, you state in your letter that your motorcycle will incorporate a steering wheel instead of handle bars. Therefore, FMVSS No. 123 would not apply to your motorcycle. * * * With respect to FMVSS No. 122 above, our research on this issue revealed that the requirement for a separate reservoir for each brake circuit, with each reservoir filler opening having its own cover, seal and cover retention device, was proposed in a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) of March 24, 1971 (57 FR 5516), to establish the safety standard on motorcycle brake systems. The NPRM did not discuss the reason for the requirement that each reservoir filler opening have its own cover, seal and cover retention device. The proposed language was made final (see 47 FR 5033, March 9, 1972), took effect on September 1, 1973, and has not been changed since. In light of the design of your product, and history of the relevant rule, I would like to indicate in closing that this agency provides a procedure through which parties may petition to change regulations where safe and functional alternatives to existing rules are identified and can be demonstrated. In the event you believe your design can be supported in this way, please consider the procedure that is explained at NHTSAs regulation at 49 CFR Part 552, Petitions for rulemaking, defect, and noncompliance orders. I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact Dorothy Nakama of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, Anthony M. Cooke Chief Counsel ref:122 NCC-112:DNakama:62992:mar:dec/08/06:OCC#06-005825 Final 1/18/07; Dot rewrote per TC 2/2/07 [U:\NCC20\INTERP\122\06-005825drn.doc] cc:NCC-112, subj/chron, Docket Std. 122, DN, NVS-100, NVS-200 |
|
ID: 2832oOpen Jerry Swisher, Esq. Dear Mr. Swisher: This responds to your letter of May 20, 1988, in which you sought an interpretation of Standard No. 109, New Pneumatic Tires - Passenger Cars (49 CFR 571.109). Specifically, you asked if either of three proposed courses of action would comply with the labeling requirements specified in S4.3.2 of Standard No. 109. That section reads as follows: "Each tire shall be labeled with the name of the manufacturer, or the brand name and number assigned to the manufacturer in the manner specified in Part 574." None of your proposed courses of action would satisfy this requirement, as explained below. You first asked if it is permissible to have no identification on the sidewall as to the name of the manufacturer or the brand name owner, but to simply use the identification numbers assigned to Cooper Tire under Part 574. Section S4.3.2 of Standard No. 109 explicitly requires each tire to be labeled with the manufacturer's name or a brand name and the identification number assigned to the manufacturer. Tires that are identified solely by an identification number would not comply with this requirement. Second, you asked if a tire could be labeled with three different brand names. Section S4.3.2 uses the singular tense to identify the name that must appear on the sidewall (name of the manufacturer or the brand name) and connects the alternative with the disjunctive "or." This grammatical structure indicates that only one name, either that of the actual manufacturer or the brand name owner, shall be labeled on the tire. The agency chose this grammatical structure to ensure that consumers would not be confused about the identity of the brand name or manufacturer of the tire. Accordingly, S4.3.2 prohibits Cooper from selling passenger car tires labeled with the names of three different brand name owners. Third, you asked if a generic term such as "All Season" or "Performance" would satisfy the requirement of S4.3.2 that either the name of the manufacturer or a brand name be labeled on the tires. Clearly, a generic term like "Performance" is not the "name of the manufacturer," Cooper in this case. The "brand name" refers to the name under which a tire is sold at retail, whether it is identical to the manufacturer's name (e.g., Firestone), a name owned by the manufacturer and used in place of its corporate name (i.e., a house brand, such as Falls that is manufactured by Cooper), or a name owned by someone other than the manufacturer (i.e., a private brand such as Atlas that is made by several manufacturers). My understanding of this proposed course of action is that the tires would be advertised and sold at retail as tires made by one of the three brand name owners, presumably using its brand name, not under the name "All Season" or "Performance." Therefore, these generic terms would not be considered brand names for the purposes of section S4.3.2. 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,
Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel ref:109 d:8/26/88 |
1988 |
ID: nht94-3.60OpenTYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA DATE: July 6, 1994 FROM: John Womack -- Acting Chief Counsel, NHTSA TO: Larry Wessels -- President, Rocky Mountain Technology Engineering Corporation TITLE: NONE ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 5/24/94 from Larry L. Wessels to John Womack (OCC-10032) TEXT: This responds to your letter requesting an interpretation about the use of your product, the "Handi-Slide." You state that your invention is a locking system for securing and releasing a sliding semitrailer undercarriage. You further state that the syst em is tied into the trailer's air brake system. I am pleased to have this opportunity to explain our regulations to you. By way of background, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) administers Federal requirements for the manufacture and sale of new motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Instead, the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act establishes a "self-certification" process under which each manufacturer is responsible for certifying that its products meet all applicable Federal motor vehicle sa fety standards (FMVSS's). This process requires each manufacturer to determine in the exercise of due care that its products meet all applicable requirements. NHTSA tests vehicles and equipment sold to consumers for compliance with the FMVSS's and investigates defects relating to motor vehicle safety. If a manufacturer or NHTSA determines that a noncompliance or safety-related defect exists, the manufacturer must notify purchasers of its product and remedy the problem free of charge. (This responsibility is borne by the vehicle manufacturer in cases in which your product is installed on a new vehicle by the vehicle manufacturer.) A manufacturer of a noncomp lying product that is subject to an FMVSS is also subject to a civil penalty of up to $ 1,000 for each noncomplying item it produces. I have enclosed an information sheet that highlights the responsibilities of motor vehicle equipment manufacturers. NHTSA does not have any specific FMVSS for semitrailer undercarriages. However, since the Handi-Slide is tied to a 2 vehicle's air brake system, your product could affect a vehicle's compliance with Standard No. 121, Air Brake Systems. That standard applies to new trucks, buses, and trailers equipped with air brake systems, and specifies performance and equipment requi rements for the braking systems on these vehicles. Your product could also affect the vehicle's compliance with Standard No. 106, Brake Hoses, which specifies requirements for the air brake hoses, fittings and assemblies on the vehicle. If the Handi-Slide 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 Standards No. 12 1 and 106. If the device were added to a previously certified new motor vehicle prior to its first consumer purchase, then the person who modifies the vehicle would be an alterer of a previously certified motor vehicle and would be required to certify t hat, as altered, the vehicle continues to comply with all of the safety standards affected by the alteration. If the Handi-Slide were installed on a used vehicle by a manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business, then the installer would not be required to attach a certification label. However, S108(a)(2)(A) of the Safety Act requires the installer not to 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 FMVSS. Section 108(a)(2)(A) does not apply to vehi cle owners modifying their own vehicles. I note that you provide an attachment titled "Current NHTSA Locking Pin Safety Concerns" that references several Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations. Please note that these regulations are administered by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), n ot NHTSA. If you are interested in the FHWA requirements, you can write to that agency at the address provided in the enclosed information sheet. I hope this information is helpful. If you have any questions about NHTSA's safety standards, please feel free to contact Marvin Shaw at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992. Enclosure |
|
ID: 10032Open Mr. Larry Wessels Dear Mr. Wessels: This responds to your letter requesting an interpretation about the use of your product, the "Handi-Slide." You state that your invention is a locking system for securing and releasing a sliding semitrailer undercarriage. You further state that the system is tied into the trailer's air brake system. I am pleased to have this opportunity to explain our regulations to you. By way of background, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) administers Federal requirements for the manufacture and sale of new motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Instead, the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act establishes a "self- certification" process under which each manufacturer is responsible for certifying that its products meet all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS's). This process requires each manufacturer to determine in the exercise of due care that its products meet all applicable requirements. NHTSA tests vehicles and equipment sold to consumers for compliance with the FMVSS's and investigates defects relating to motor vehicle safety. If a manufacturer or NHTSA determines that a noncompliance or safety-related defect exists, the manufacturer must notify purchasers of its product and remedy the problem free of charge. (This responsibility is borne by the vehicle manufacturer in cases in which your product is installed on a new vehicle by the vehicle manufacturer.) A manufacturer of a noncomplying product that is subject to an FMVSS is also subject to a civil penalty of up to $1,000 for each noncomplying item it produces. I have enclosed an information sheet that highlights the responsibilities of motor vehicle equipment manufacturers. NHTSA does not have any specific FMVSS for semitrailer undercarriages. However, since the Handi-Slide is tied to a vehicle's air brake system, your product could affect a vehicle's compliance with Standard No. 121, Air Brake Systems. That standard applies to new trucks, buses, and trailers equipped with air brake systems, and specifies performance and equipment requirements for the braking systems on these vehicles. Your product could also affect the vehicle's compliance with Standard No. 106, Brake Hoses, which specifies requirements for the air brake hoses, fittings and assemblies on the vehicle. If the Handi-Slide 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 Standards No. 121 and 106. If the device were added to a previously certified new motor vehicle prior to its first consumer purchase, then 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. If the Handi-Slide were installed on a used vehicle by a manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business, then the installer would not be required to attach a certification label. However, '108(a)(2)(A) of the Safety Act requires the installer not to 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 FMVSS. Section 108(a)(2)(A) does not apply to vehicle owners modifying their own vehicles. I note that you provide an attachment titled "Current NHTSA Locking Pin Safety Concerns" that references several Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations. Please note that these regulations are administered by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), not NHTSA. If you are interested in the FHWA requirements, you can write to that agency at the address provided in the enclosed information sheet. I hope this information is helpful. If you have any questions about NHTSA's safety standards, please feel free to contact Marvin Shaw at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely,
John Womack Acting Chief Counsel Enclosure ref:121#106 d:7/6/94
|
1994 |
ID: nht89-2.96OpenTYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA DATE: 09/07/89 FROM: STEPHEN P. WOOD -- NHTSA ACTING CHIEF COUNSEL TO: BOB BERGMAN -- COMMANDER U.S. ARMY MISSILE COMMAND AMCPM-FM-TM ALABAMA TITLE: NONE ATTACHMT: LETTER DATED 08/07/89 FROM JERRY L. DOOLEY -- US ARMY TO NHTSA; OCC 3833 TEXT: Dear Commander: This is in reply to a letter of August 7, 1989, from Jerry L. Dooley, Deputy Project Manager, Non-Line of Sight, with respect to "safety standards of the military nature", in particular those that would apply to the M1037 High Mobility Multipurpose Wheel Vehicle (HMMWV), as well as the M993 Bradley Fighting Vehicle System (BFVS). This agency has jurisdiction over all motor vehicles, defined as vehicles driven or drawn by mechanical power which are manufactured primarily for use on the public roads. Our principal role is the issuance of the Federal motor vehicle safety standards, and the monitoring of the notification and remedial campaigns of manufacturers upon the occurrence of noncompliances with the standards, or safety related defects in vehicles. We have never issued safety standards for military vehicles. Quite the oppo site; although we interpret our authority as covering military vehicles, the agency has always specifically exempted from compliance with the standards any motor vehicles manufactured for, and sold directly to, the Armed Forces of the United States in ac cordance with contractual specifications. Frequently, military contracts for procurement of vehicles will call for their conformance with the Federal safety standards, when the nature of the vehicle is such (e.g. passenger car, bus) that conformance with the standards is not inconsistent with th e configuration required to accomplish their mission. None of our safety standards for civilian vehicles cover driver field of view, basic visibility requirements, or ingress/egress. Our glazing standard does specify minimum levels of light transmittance, and our rearview mirror standard covers rear view mirror placement and rearward field of view. I am enclosing copies of these standards for your information. If you have further questions, we will be pleased to answer them. Sincerely, Enclosures - Standards Nos. 111, 205 |
|
ID: nht94-7.39OpenDATE: March 16, 1994 FROM: John Womack -- Acting Chief Counsel, NHTSA TO: John M. Tolliday -- President, Dayman USA Inc. (Bedford, VA) TITLE: None ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 8/7/89 from Stephen P. Wood to Clifford Anglewicz (Sec 102); Also attached to letter dated 9/2/93 from John M. Tolliday to John Womack (OCC 9063) TEXT: We have received your letter of September 2, 1993, with respect to your wish to import "British Army Ferret Armored Cars." The armaments have been removed. You would be selling these vehicles "on the basis they would only be used for off road purposes." You ask whether the vehicles would be exempt from the Federal motor vehicle safety standards. You have enclosed two photos of the machine. By way of background, I would like to discuss how military vehicles manufactured in the United States are treated under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, the authority for the Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS). The first question to be answered is whether any particular vehicle is a "motor vehicle" as defined by the Safety Act, that is to say, whether it is a vehicle that has been manufactured primarily for use on the public roads. If we conclude that a vehicle is manufactured primarily for on road use, it is a "motor vehicle," notwithstanding the fact that it may be sold "on the basis they would only be used for off road purposes." We see no way in which a seller can bind a purchaser to such use, and, certainly, such a restriction would not be binding on subsequent owners of the vehicle. As for individual vehicle types, to state the obvious, a tracked motor vehicle such as a tank intended for cross-country off-road terrains is not a "motor vehicle." If a vehicle, such as a military bus, has been manufactured primarily for on- road use, it is a "motor vehicle." However, NHTSA excuses vehicles from compliance with the FMVSS if they have been manufactured in accordance with contractual specifications of the armed forces of the United States (49 CFR 571.7(a)). Furthermore, because the Safety Act does not regulate sales of vehicles to owners subsequent to the original one, the U.S. armed forces may sell military vehicles to the public at the end of their useful military life without having to bring them into conformity with the FMVSS (however, because of safety policy considerations they have not done so with respect to M-151 jeeps and HMMV vehicles). The importation of used military vehicles manufactured abroad is governed differently. Under the Safety Act, any "motor vehicle," whether new or used, that is imported into the United States must be brought into conformity with all FMVSS that applied at the time of its manufacture. The question that must be answered is whether a Ferret, at the time of importation, would be considered a "motor vehicle." In an interpretation concerning an "armored security vehicle" then being used by the U.S. armed forces, we informed the manufacturer, Verne Corporation on August 7, 1989, that the vehicle would have to conform to the FMVSS if sold for civilian use. I enclose a copy of that interpretation. We believe that this interpretation applies to the Ferret as well, and, therefore, the vehicle is not exempt from the FMVSS. Because of the overall configuration of the Ferret with its high approach and departure angles and its suitability for use on rough terrain, the FMVSS that would apply are those that must be met by a "multipurpose passenger vehicle." Assuming you are still interested in importing the Ferret's for resale, the Imported Vehicle Safety Compliance Act requires that the agency determine that the vehicles are capable of conversion to meet the FMVSS, and that the Ferrets be imported by a "registered importer." The agency makes determinations upon the basis of a petition by the manufacturer or registered importer (or upon its own volition). A "registered importer" is one whom NHTSA has recognized as capable of converting vehicles to meet the FMVSS. If you would like further details on eligibility determinations and import procedures, please let us know and we shall be pleased to provide them. |
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.