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: 16281-1.pjaOpenMr. Craig Heider Dear Mr. Heider: This responds to your letter requesting an interpretation of whether three different trailers your company manufactures would be excluded from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's (NHTSA's) rear impact protection (underride guard) regulations. You ask if a grain trailer with fixed rear axles and a rearmost surface of the rearmost tires within 305 mm of the rear extremity of the trailer is excluded as a wheels back vehicle. You also ask if a flatbed/dropdeck trailer with a beavertail and a composite dropdeck trailer are excluded as a low chassis vehicle. On the basis of the information you supplied and certain assumptions discussed below, it appears that all three of these vehicles are excluded. Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 224, Rear impact protection, requires most trailers and semitrailers weighing over 10,000 pounds to be fitted at the rear with a rear impact (underride) guard meeting the requirements of Standard No. 223, Rear impact guards (49 CFR 571.223 and 571.224, published on January 24, 1996 at 61 FR 2004). However, certain kinds of vehicles are excluded. The only excluded categories that are relevant for the purposes of this letter are wheels back vehicles and low chassis vehicles. Wheels-back vehicles, excluded by S3 of FMVSS No. 224, are defined in S4 as a "trailer or semitrailer whose rearmost axle is permanently fixed and is located such that the rearmost surface of [the tire] on that axle is not more than 305 mm forward of the transverse vertical plane tangent to the rear extremity of the vehicle." You state in your letter that the rear axles of your grain trailer meet both of these criteria. The copy of a photograph you enclosed of the trailer appears consistent with your description, although no dimensions are given. Accepting your assertion that the rear surface of the tires on the fixed axle are within 305 mm of the rear extremity, NHTSA concludes that the vehicle is excluded. Your flatbed/dropdeck trailer, labeled "53' X 102" Steel Dropdeck" in the literature you enclosed with the letter, is essentially a flatbed design, with a five foot dropdeck (also called a "beavertail") extension angling downward from the rear of the flat portion of the bed. There are two loading ramps that bridge the distance from the lower rear of the beavertail to the ground during loading, allowing vehicles to be driven onto the flatbed. During transit, the loading ramps, which are located on the left and right sides of the beavertail section, pivot on a hinge at the rear of the beavertail and flip over and lie on top of the beavertail section. The literature you enclosed states "ramps make the beavertail flat for more loading area." By this, we assume you mean that the bottom surface of the loading ramps, when sitting on top of the beavertail, forms an extension of the flat portion of the trailer during transit, and that the extension can support cargo load. In a conversation with Mr. Paul Atelsek of my staff, you clarified that the rear surface of the beavertail extends from one side of the trailer to the other and its lower surface is less than 22 inches above the ground. Low chassis vehicles are defined in S4 of Standard No. 224 as "a trailer or semitrailer having a chassis that extends behind the rearmost point of the rearmost tires and a lower rear surface that meets the configuration requirements of S5.1.1 through 5.1.3 of this section." In other words, the chassis itself must satisfy the configuration requirements applicable to a guard when the vehicle is outfitted for transit. The only part of your vehicle that may meet these configuration requirements is the rear edge of the beavertail itself, so the question becomes whether the beavertail is considered to be part of the "chassis" of the vehicle. Chassis is defined in S4 as "the load supporting frame structure of a motor vehicle." There are two elements to this definition that must be satisfied: "load supporting" and "frame structure." To be considered "load supporting," the frame structure has to support load when the trailer is performing its function. Generally, this means that the structure would have to contribute to supporting the cargo load when the trailer is in transit. To be considered part of the frame structure, a structural member must be either an integral part of the overall frame structure, or be connected with other frame structural members in a way that is necessary to the structural integrity of the trailer. One factor the agency considers in deciding whether a structural member is part of the frame is its size and strength. Frame structural components often are the major structures defining the shape of the trailer. Although frame structure is not limited to the largest frame components (i.e., the frame rails for most trailers), generally frame components are substantial and have strength similar to other frame components. Moveable components may "lock" into the frame structure sufficiently that they are integral with other frame members-in this situation NHTSA may consider the combined components to be one frame unit. However, the agency also looks at the purpose and function of the structural member in supporting the trailer and its load. Applying these principles to your beavertail, the agency concludes that it is part of the chassis. The beavertail helps to define the shape of the trailer. It is of a similar size and strength to the other frame components. Your beavertail is attached to the rest of your chassis sufficiently that it is considered integral with it, as one unit, a part of the frame structure. In addition, the beavertail meets the "load supporting" aspect of the chassis definition because it can support cargo load. Therefore, the beavertail is part of the chassis, and the trailer is a low chassis vehicle, excluded from the underride guard requirements.. Your third trailer type, labeled "53' X 102" Composite Dropdeck" is a straight flatbed trailer with the frame rails in the rear of the trailer extending 10 feet behind the rear wheels. The vertical face of the chassis at the rear is 13 inches from top to bottom, and although it is not apparent from your line drawing, we assume that this depth dimension is constant across the back of the trailer. The distance from the ground to the bottom of the chassis is 21 inches when the trailer is unloaded. Because the rear face is at least 4 inches high, extends outward to within 4 inches of the trailer side extremities, and is no more than 22 inches from the ground when the trailer is unloaded, it meets the configurational requirements of S5.1.1 to S5.1.3. The rear face of the trailer connecting to the frame rails is considered to be frame structure. Assuming that the rear of the bed can support load, this structure is part of the chassis. Since this structure meets the configurational requirements of the rule, this vehicle is an excluded low chassis vehicle. You also asked about the labeling requirements if a vehicle falls in an excluded category. There are no requirements for excluded vehicles in our regulations. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact Paul Atelsek of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, |
1998 | |
ID: nht73-3.17OpenDATE: 01/29/73 FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Richard B. Dyson; NHTSA TO: Nissan Motor Company Ltd. TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION TEXT: This is in reply to your letter of January 2, 1973, concerning Truck-Camper loading consumer information requirements. You have asked whether you have correctly indicated the "rear end of truck bed" in a drawing of the short body pick-up truck that you attached. The answer is yes. As Mr. Vinson of our staff indicated to Mr. Nishibori when he telephoned on January 9, 1973, "rear end of truck bed" does not refer to a particular point with the tailgate in either a raised or lowered position. It means, in the words of the preamble of the reissued standard (37 F.R. 26605) "the point where the identified surface of the camper abuts the rearmost edge surface of the cargo area of the truck, presumably the tailgate in most configurations." You also ask if you must meet the requirements of @ 575.6 on or after March 1, 1973. As a manufacturer of a truck that is capable of accommodating a slide-in camper, you must pursuant to 575.6(a) furnish consumer information with each truck manufactured on or after March 1, 1973, at the time the vehicle is offered for sale. Material for examination by prospective purchasers, pursuant to 575.6(b) should be made available at dealer showrooms no later than the date that trucks manufactured on or after March 1, 1973, are first offered for sale by such dealers. The NHTSA has been petitioned to delay the effective date by 60 days and this request is under consideration. |
||
ID: aiam4454OpenRoderick A. Boutin, Esq. 960 One Main Place 101 S.W. Main Street Portland, Oregon 97204; Roderick A. Boutin Esq. 960 One Main Place 101 S.W. Main Street Portland Oregon 97204; "Dear Mr. Boutin: This responds to your letter to Steve Kratzke, of m staff, asking for a statement of the legal requirements that would apply to a new product one of your clients plans to introduce. You provided no description of this product in your letter, other than to state that it 'alters the alignment of an upper torso restraint to the increased comfort of the wearer.' You also stated in the letter that the product would initially be sold as an aftermarket accessory to be installed by consumers, but that it might eventually be sold to manufacturers to be installed in new vehicles. In a telephone conversation with Mr. Kratzke on November 20, 1987, you stated that this product would clip the shoulder belt to the lap belt near the middle of wearer's abdomen. Although we understand your concern that safety belts be comfortable for the wearer, we have significant reservations about this product. I hope the following discussion explains those reservations and the effect of our regulations on the product. The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (the Safety Act, 15 U.S.C. 1381 et seq.) gives this agency the authority to issue safety standards applicable to new motor vehicles and certain new items of motor vehicle equipment. We have exercised this authority to establish Standards No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection, and No. 210, Seat Belt Assembly Anchorages (49 CFR /571.208 and /571.210, respectively), applicable to new vehicles, and to establish Standard No. 209, Seat Belt Assemblies (49 CFR /571.209), applicable to new seat belt assemblies. It does not appear that any of these regulations would apply to your client's product, however. Additionally, you are not required to get some 'approval' from this agency before selling the product. NHTSA has no authority to approve or endorse motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Instead, the 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 vehicles and items of equipment to ensure their compliance with the safety standards, and also investigates other alleged safety-related defects. While none of our safety standards appear to apply directly to your client's product, there are several statutory responsibilities your client must assume when it manufactures the product. All manufacturers of motor vehicle equipment are subject to the requirements in sections 151-159 of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1411-1419) concerning the recall and remedy of products with defects related to motor vehicle safety. The agency does not determine the existence of defects except in the context of a defect proceeding, so we are unable to say at this time whether this product might or might not contain such a defect. However, this product raises a host of safety concerns that we would advise your client to carefully consider. Section S7.1.2 of Standard No. 208 specifies that the intersection of the shoulder belt with the lap belt shall be at least 6 inches from the front vertical centerline of a 50th percentile adult male occupant with the seat in its rearmost and lowest adjustable position. Attaching the shoulder belt to the lap belt in the middle of the abdomen, instead of joining the belts at the latchplate off to the side of the occupant, would cause the belts to no longer comply with this requirement of Standard No. 208 and would significantly alter the distribution of crash forces on the occupant. The lap and shoulder belts as currently installed distribute the crash forces over the skeletal structure of the occupant. The proposed device to attach the shoulder belt to the lap belt near the middle of the abdomen would significantly increase the loading on the occupant's abdomen, a part of the body that cannot withstand the same loading levels as the skeletal structure. This increase in abdominal loading could have serious safety implications for the wearer of the belt. Additionally, by realigning the shoulder belt, the device would seem to increase the likelihood that a wearer of the belt would twist toward the middle of the vehicle, so that the person could be partially or completely unrestrained by the shoulder belt. Further, it is possible that the device attaching the shoulder belt to the lap belt near the middle of the wearer's abdomen could not withstand the forces of the crash, and would allow the shoulder belt to detach. Since the shoulder belt could have an excessive amount of slack in it, the occupant's head would be likely to contact the vehicle interior. All of these possibilities raise serious safety concerns with respect to this proposed device. In addition, use of this product could be affected by section 108(a)(2)(A) of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(2)(A)). That section prohibits commercial businesses from knowingly tampering with devices or elements of design installed in a motor vehicle in compliance with a Federal motor vehicle safety standard. Shoulder belts are installed in the front seating positions of most vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating of 10,000 pounds or less in compliance with Standard No. 208. If the installation of this product causes the shoulder belts to offer less effective occupant protection, commercial establishments could not legally install the product on customers' vehicles. The prohibition in section 108(a)(2)(A) does not apply to individual vehicle owners who may install or remove any items on safety belt systems regardless of the effect on compliance with Standard No. 208. However, our policy is to encourage consumers not to tamper with the safety belts installed in their vehicles. Installation of this product by any person would be inconsistent with that policy. If you have any further questions, please contact Mr. Kratzke at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel"; |
||
ID: label on booster seatOpenRichard A. Wilhelm, Esq. Dickinson Wright 500 Woodward Avenue, Suite 4000 Detroit, MI 48226-3425 Dear Mr. Wilhelm: This responds to your letter asking about the labeling requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 213, Child restraint systems, as applied to a belt-positioning backless booster seat. You ask whether the label required by the standard may be located on the front edge of the booster seat cushion. Our answer is yes. By way of background information, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (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 (49 U.S.C. 30101 et seq.) establishes a "self-certification" process under which each manufacturer is responsible for certifying that its products meet all applicable safety standards. The following represents our opinion about the location of the label based on the information in your letter. S5.5.3 of FMVSS No. 213 specifies, in relevant part, that certain safety information shall be located on the add-on child restraint system so that it is visible when the system is installed as specified in S5.6.1 S5.6.1 requires the restraint system to be accompanied by printed installation instructions in English that provide a step-by-step procedure, and includes other requirements for the content of the installation instructions. The agency stated in the preamble to a final rule revising S5.5.3 that [t]he specified information must be visible from either side when the child restraint is installed as specified on the standard bench seat. (67 FR 61523, 61525, October 1, 2002, Docket 10916, Notice 2.). According to your letter, your client would like to place the required warning label centered on the front edge (forward-facing portion) of the booster seat cushion. You state that the forward-facing surface is 303 millimeters (mm) by 100 mm (approximately 12 by 4 inches), while the dimensions of the label are 267 mm by 73 mm (~10.5 by 3 inches). You explain that your client selected this location for the label because the label would be prominently visible when the booster seat is installed in the vehicle and because the limited space on one of the two sides of the booster seat would make it more difficult to place the labels on the sides of the child restraint. We have determined that the label location you suggest is permitted. The label is visible when the system is installed as specified in S5.6.1 on the standard seat assembly (bench seat). The label is visible from either side when installed on the bench seat. You ask whether we require the label to be fully visible when the restraint is occupied by a secured child, which would be problematic for your label since it would be partly covered by a seated childs leg. The answer is no, FMVSS No. 213 does not specify that the visibility of the label will be evaluated when a child or child test dummy is placed in the restraint. Moreover, we agree with your assessment that, at most, placing the label in the front of the restraint might result in a childs leg having to be momentarily moved should it obscure a portion of the label. I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions, please contact Deirdre Fujita of my staff at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, Anthony M. Cooke Chief Counsel ref:213 d.10/4/06 |
2006 | |
ID: 24338OpenMr. Dale Dierks Dear Mr. Dierks: This responds to your letter in which you asked whether the tilt bed trailers manufactured by Dakota Manufacturing are excluded from Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 224, "Rear Impact Protection." As explained below, the answer is no. According to your letter, your tilt bed trailers are flatbed trailers with bed heights ranging from 35.4 to 39.1 inches off the ground. At the rear of the bed is an approach plate that extends across the entire rear of the trailer. When the trailer bed is tilted for loading purposes, the approach plate is extended outward and bridges the gap between the trailer bed and the ground. When the trailer is in transit, the approach plate is locked in a downward position. The height of the approach plate, when it is locked in a downward position, ranges from 15.6 to 19.4 inches off the ground. Standard No. 224 requires most trailers and semitrailers with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) over 10,000 pounds to be fitted at the rear with a rear impact guard meeting the requirements of Standard No. 223, "Rear Impact Guards." However, certain kinds of vehicles are excluded. The only excluded categories that are relevant for the purposes of this letter are the low chassis vehicle and special purpose vehicle categories. Low Chassis Vehicle A "low chassis vehicle" is defined in S4 of Standard No. 224 as "a trailer or semitrailer having a chassis that extends behind the rearmost point of the rearmost tires and a lower rear surface that meets the configuration requirements of S5.1.1 through S5.1.3 of this section." In other words, the chassis itself must satisfy the configuration requirements applicable to a rear impact guard when the vehicle is outfitted for transit. S5.1.1 through S5.1.3 require the guard to extend to within four inches of the side extremities of the vehicle, be no higher than 22 inches across the full width of the guard, and be located within 12 inches of the rear extremity of the vehicle. The only part of your trailer that meets these configuration requirements is the approach plate. As noted above, the approach plate is located at the rear extremity of your trailer, extends the full width of your trailer, and is 15.6 to 19.4 inches above the ground. Therefore, the question becomes whether the approach plate is considered to be part of the chassis of your trailer. "Chassis" is defined in S4 as "the load supporting frame structure of a motor vehicle." There are two elements to this definition that must be satisfied: "frame structure" and "load supporting." To be considered part of the frame structure, a structural member must be either an integral part of the overall frame structure, or be connected with other frame structural members in a way that is necessary to the structural integrity of the trailer. One factor we consider in deciding whether a structural member is part of the frame is its size and strength. Frame structural components often are the major structures defining the shape of the trailer. Although frame structure is not limited to the largest frame components (i.e., the frame rails for most trailers), generally frame components are substantial and have strength similar to other frame components. We also consider the purpose and function of the structural member in supporting the trailer and its load. To be considered load supporting, the frame structure must support a load when the trailer is performing its function. Generally, this means that the structure would have to contribute to supporting the cargo load when the trailer is in transit. Applying these principles to your tilt bed trailer, we find that the approach plate is not part of the chassis. The approach plate does not meet the "load supporting" aspect of the chassis definition because the approach plate does not contribute to supporting cargo load. The approach plate also is not part of the frame structure of the trailer. The approach plate does not define the shape of the trailer. Instead, it hangs down from the rear end of the trailer, forming a protrusion from the outline of the trailer bed. Finally, the size and strength of the approach plate are not similar to the other frame components, and it is not considered integral with another frame member. In consideration of these factors, we believe that the approach plate is not part of the frame structure, but an attachment. Thus, the approach plate is not part of the chassis, and your tilt bed trailers are not excluded from Standard No. 224 as low chassis vehicles. Special Purpose Vehicle We turn now to the question of whether your tilt bed trailers are excluded as special purpose vehicles. A "special purpose vehicle" is defined in S4 of Standard No. 224 as "a trailer or semitrailer having work-performing equipment that, while the vehicle is in transit, resides in or moves through the area that could be occupied by the horizontal member of the rear impact guard, as defined by S5.1.1 through S5.1.3." Again, the approach plate is the only part of your tilt bed trailer that, while the vehicle is in transit, resides in the area that could be occupied by the rear impact guard. Therefore, the approach plate would have to be considered work-performing equipment for your tilt bed trailer to be excluded. There is no definition of "work-performing equipment" in Standard No. 224. The Agency has historically interpreted the words "work-performing" to mean that the equipment must actively perform its function, and that the function must involve exerting force or moving something else. Approach plates do not perform work in this sense because they merely form a ramp between the ground and the vehicle or equipment driving onto the tilt bed. Therefore, the approach plate is not work-performing equipment, and your tilt bed trailer does not meet the definition of a special purpose vehicle. Since your trailer does not meet the definition of an excluded category, and it has a GVWR over 10,000 pounds, it must be equipped with a rear impact guard meeting our standards. In your letter, you stated that you currently install rear impact guards on your tilt bed trailers, but that the guards have added "significant cost" to your trailers. Another option you might consider is whether your approach plate could "be" the rear impact guard. The approach plate already appears to meet the configurational requirements for a rear impact guard. If it does not currently meet the strength and energy absorption requirements of Standard No. 223, you might be able to reinforce or otherwise modify the approach plate sufficiently so that it would pass these requirements. If you can do this, the approach plate itself could be labeled and certified as a guard under Standard No. 223. I hope you find this information useful. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact Dion Casey of my staff at (202) 366-2992.
ref:224 d.8/1/02 |
2002 | |
ID: 08-003470 Recaro movable seat back heightOpenMs. Amy Sanford Recaro North America, Inc. 4120 Luella Lane Auburn Hills, MI 48326 Dear Ms. Sanford: This responds to your letter requesting an interpretation of S5.2.1.1 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 213, Child Restraint Systems, with regard to an infant carrier that you would like to bring to the U.S. market. We regret to inform you that we cannot interpret the standard in the manner you suggest. According to your letter, your infant seat incorporates an adjustable back rest with an integral harness. The child restraint enables the consumer to adjust (raise) the restraints shoulder harness by a lever mechanism to adjust to a growing child without having to remove the harness from the seat back. When the shoulder harness is raised by the lever, the infant seat back is also raised. When the seat back is adjusted to the lowest position, it has a height of 410 millimeters (mm). You state that when it is raised to the full up position, the seat back is at least 500 mm. S5.2.1 of FMVSS No. 213 specifies requirements for the minimum head support surface for child restraints other than car beds. S5.2.1.1 requires each child restraint to provide restraint against rearward movement of the head of the child (rearward in relation to the child) by means of a continuous seat back of a specified height. For child restraints recommended by their manufacturer for use by children of not more than 18 kilograms (40 pounds), S5.2.1.1(a) specifies that the height of the portion of the seat back providing head restraint must not be less than 500 mm. From the information you provided, it appears your restraint does not meet S5.2.1.1(a) of the standard. In the lowest adjustment position, the seat back height is 410 mm, which is less than the minimum height requirement of 500 mm. The requirement does not provide for adjustable seat backs. We note that your restraint requires action on the part of the consumer to raise the seat back height. There is a risk that consumers who neglect to raise the harness straps (and thus raise the seat back) or who attempt to raise the straps but do so incorrectly could use the child restraint with the seat back at the 410 mm height with older infants. In short, we cannot interpret S5.2.1 as permitting a seat back height of less than 500 mm. I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions, please contact Deirdre Fujita of my staff at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely yours, Anthony M. Cooke Chief Counsel ref:213 d.11/20/08 |
2008 | |
ID: aiam2999OpenMr. R. M. Premo, Vehicle Safety Activities, Sheller-Globe Corporation, 3555 St. Johns Road, Lima, OH 45804; Mr. R. M. Premo Vehicle Safety Activities Sheller-Globe Corporation 3555 St. Johns Road Lima OH 45804; Dear Mr. Premo: This is in response to your letter of February 15, 1979, concerning th definition of 'forward control' vehicle contained in 49 CFR 571.3. Your specific concern is how to measure a vehicle's length to determine if 'the steering wheel hub is in the forward quarter of the vehicle length.'; Overall vehicle length should be determined by measuring the maximu longitudinal distance between the foremost point on the front bumper face bar and the rearmost point on the rear bumper face bar. In the context of the Part 581 Bumper Standard (49 CFR 581), the agency considers bumper guards to be part of the bumper face bar if they are contacted by the impact ridge of the pendulum test device used in compliance testing (43 F.R. 20804, May, (sic) 15, 1978). For the purposes of determining vehicle length, the agency will consider bumper guards as a part of the vehicle bumper face bar and thus included in the measurement of vehicle length. Components such as a permanent or fold-down step which are not associated with the bumper system's function are not considered part of the bumper face far for the purposes of Part 581 Bumper Standard (43 F.R. 40230, Sept. 11, 1978). Therefore, the agency will not consider a permanent or fold-down step as a part of the bumper face bar for the purposes of determining vehicle length.; I have enclosed for your information a notice of proposed rulemakin which would extend Standards No. 201, 203 and 204 to forward control vehicles. The notice also states the agency's intention to eliminate the forward control exemption found in other Federal motor vehicle safety standards.; If you have any further questions, please let me know. Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Acting Chief Counsel |
||
ID: aiam3000OpenMr. R. M. Premo, Vehicle Safety Activities, Sheller-Globe Corporation, 3555 St. Johns Road, Lima, OH 45804; Mr. R. M. Premo Vehicle Safety Activities Sheller-Globe Corporation 3555 St. Johns Road Lima OH 45804; Dear Mr. Premo: This is in response to your letter of February 15, 1979, concerning th definition of 'forward control' vehicle contained in 49 CFR 571.3. Your specific concern is how to measure a vehicle's length to determine if 'the steering wheel hub is in the forward quarter of the vehicle length.'; Overall vehicle length should be determined by measuring the maximu longitudinal distance between the foremost point on the front bumper face bar and the rearmost point on the rear bumper face bar. In the context of the Part 581 Bumper Standard (49 CFR 581), the agency considers bumper guards to be part of the bumper face bar if they are contacted by the impact ridge of the pendulum test device used in compliance testing (43 F.R. 20804, May, (sic) 15, 1978). For the purposes of determining vehicle length, the agency will consider bumper guards as a part of the vehicle bumper face bar and thus included in the measurement of vehicle length. Components such as a permanent or fold-down step which are not associated with the bumper system's function are not considered part of the bumper face far for the purposes of Part 581 Bumper Standard (43 F.R. 40230, Sept. 11, 1978). Therefore, the agency will not consider a permanent or fold-down step as a part of the bumper face bar for the purposes of determining vehicle length.; I have enclosed for your information a notice of proposed rulemakin which would extend Standards No. 201, 203 and 204 to forward control vehicles. The notice also states the agency's intention to eliminate the forward control exemption found in other Federal motor vehicle safety standards.; If you have any further questions, please let me know. Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Acting Chief Counsel |
||
ID: aiam0713OpenMr. Satoshi Nishibori, Nissan Motor Company, Ltd., 560 Sylvan Avenue, Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632; Mr. Satoshi Nishibori Nissan Motor Company Ltd. 560 Sylvan Avenue Englewood Cliffs NJ 07632; Dear Mr. Nishibori: This is in reply to your letter of May 9, 1972, in which you agai raise the problem of where to place the seat in tests for which Standard 208 specifies that the seat is to be at the midway position but the seat track has no adjustment position that coincides with the midway point.; Our reply of March 2, 1972, stated that when the midway point i exactly halfway between two adjustment notches, the seat should be placed in the rear notch. You are correct in pointing out that if the notches were on the upper seat rail the seat would be moved forward if these instructions were followed. It was our intent to specify rearward seat movement in each case in which the midway point on the track fell exactly between two notches. In Case (2) of your letter, therefore, it will be our practise (sic) to move the seat rearward from the position shown in red until the next notch is reached.; Sincerely, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel |
||
ID: aiam4955OpenWilliam F. Russo, Esquire Margolis, Sakayan & Holtz 915 Fifteenth St., N.W. Tenth Floor Washington, D.C. 20005-2302; William F. Russo Esquire Margolis Sakayan & Holtz 915 Fifteenth St. N.W. Tenth Floor Washington D.C. 20005-2302; "Dear Mr. Russo: This responds to your letter seeking an interpretatio of Standard No. 210, Seat Belt Assembly Anchorages (49 CFR 571.210). Specifically, you were interested in the requirement in S4.1 that 'seat belt anchorages' for particular types of seat belts shall be installed at particular seating positions. You asked for an explanation of precisely what this requirement obliges a vehicle manufacturer to do. The term 'seat belt anchorage' is defined in S3 of Standard No. 210 as 'the provision for transferring seat belt assembly loads to the vehicle structure.' When S4.1 of Standard No. 210 requires a 'seat belt anchorage' for a seat belt to be installed at a given seating position, the manufacturer must provide a point or points for that seating position that comply with the strength requirements of S4.2 applicable to that type of anchorage and with the location requirements of S4.3 applicable to that type of anchorage. The designated point may simply be a point on the vehicle structure (floor, sides, or roof), or a point on the seat itself, for instance. The point designated by the vehicle manufacturer in response to the requirement in S4.1 need not be a prepunched or prethreaded hole, it need not be visible, and it need not include the anchorage hardware. If the agency were seeking to impose these additional conditions on anchorages, it would have included specific language to that effect in the standard. See, for example, the proposal to amend Standard No. 210 at 45 FR 81625, December 11, 1980. When these additional conditions are not expressly set forth in the text of the standard, they are not required to be included as part of the anchorage at that seating position. I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions or need some additional information on this subject, feel free to contact Steve Kratzke of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel Enclosure"; |
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.