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 13471 - 13480 of 16490
Interpretations Date

ID: nht94-3.68

Open

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: July 14, 1994

FROM: John Womack -- Acting Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TO: James H. Shuff -- President, Freedom Trailers

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 2/9/94 from James H. Shuff to NHTSA Chief Counsel (OCC-9666)

TEXT: This responds to your letter asking whether tires and wheel rims used with your "park model travel trailers" are subject to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 120, Tire selection and rims for motor vehicles other than passenger cars. As ex plained below, the answer is no, because your travel trailers are not motor vehicles.

Your letter provided the following information about your "trailers." The trailers are intended for recreational use, rather than for year round living. Each unit is a maximum of 400 sq. ft., and may be as wide as 12 feet. You state that after your trai lers are constructed, they "will be towed to their campsite and set up," where they may be used for "winter camping in the year round parks." Once your trailers are set up, you would reuse the tires and rims.

By way of background, 49 U.S.C. @ 30101 et seq. authorizes NHTSA to regulate new motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment, including tires and rims. Standard No. 120, and all of our safety standards, apply only to vehicles that are "motor vehicles," w ithin the meaning of the statute. The term "motor vehicle" is defined at 49 U.S.C. @ 30102(a)(6) as:

"motor, vehicle" means a vehicle driven or drawn by mechanical power and manufactured primarily for use on public streets, roads, and highways, but does not include a vehicle operated only on a rail line.

We have determined that your "trailers" are not motor vehicles based on two examinations. First, while the characteristics of your trailers are not entirely clear in your letter (our repeated attempts to reach you by telephone have been unsuccessful), i t appears that your trailers could be considered "mobile homes." Mobile homes are regulated by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and

2

are not "motor vehicles" subject to regulation by NHTSA. Accordingly, tire and rim selection for mobile homes is not subject to Standard No. 120 or any other NHTSA regulation. For information about mobile homes, you can contact the Assistant Secretary for Housing-Federal Housing Commissioner, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th St., SW, Washington, DC 20410.

Second, even if your "trailer" is not a mobile home, it does not meet the Safety Act definition of a "motor vehicle." We have interpreted the definition as follows. Vehicles designed and sold solely for off-road use are not considered motor vehicles, ev en though they may be operationally capable of highway travel. Vehicles, such as mobile construction equipment, that use the public roads only to travel between job sites and which typically spend extended periods of time at a single job site, are not c onsidered motor vehicles. In such cases, the use of the public roads is incidental, not the primary purpose for which the vehicle was manufactured.

On the other hand, if a vehicle is readily usable on the public roads and is in fact used on the public roads by a substantial number of owners, NHTSA has found the vehicle to be a motor vehicle. This finding was made with respect to dune buggies and re gardless of the manufacturer's stated intent regarding the terrain on which the vehicles were to be operated.

Based on your description, it appears that, analogous to mobile construction equipment, the on-road use of your travel trailers appears to be incidental and not the primary purpose for which they are manufactured. Therefore, your trailers are not subjec t to Standard No. 120's requirements for tire selection and rims. Please note that this conclusion is based solely on the facts presented in your letter. We may reexamine this conclusion if additional information becomes available that would warrant a reexamination.

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

ID: nht94-4.5

Open

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: August 18, 1994

FROM: H. Kristie Jones -- President, P.J.'s Fabrication Inc., Stanfield, OR

TO: John Womack -- Acting Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: Attached to 10/05/94 letter from Philip R. Recht to H. Kristie Jones (A42; std. 115)

TEXT: P.J.'s Fabrication Inc. is a trailer manufacturing business. We are a new company and need assistance with rules and regulations regarding VIN numbers.

We have contracted with Coulson Commander Trailers, Boise, Idaho to build trailers under Coulson's name. As the manufacturer, P.J.'s accepts responsibility for warranty work and quality control to meet DOT specifications. My question, who issues the VIN number and Certificate of Origin?

I called Dorothy Nacomma on 8-18-94, she has informed me that P.J.'s Fabrication will issue the VIN number, but suggested I write to you for written confirmation of such.

At your earliest convenience, could you possibly sent us this confirmation.

Your time and consideration in this matter is greatly appreciated.

ID: bennett

Open

Via Federal Express

Mr. Steven A. Bennett

General Counsel

United Services Automobile Association (USAA)

9800 Fredericksburg Road

San Antonio, TX 78288

Dear Mr. Bennett:

We have received reports that certain insurance companies may be engaging in transactions that violate Federal odometer disclosure law with respect to vehicles damaged in Hurricane Sandy. Although we are not asserting that your company is engaging in such practices, we are writing to a number of auto insurance companies to remind them of the Federal odometer disclosure law requirements and ask them to review their practices regarding odometer disclosures. These letters do not accuse your company, or any other company, of violating the law.

We understand that when a flood-damaged vehicle is declared a total loss, the insurance company pays the insured the value of the vehicle, becomes the owner, and acquires control over the vehicle from the insured. However the reports we have received indicate that instead of completing the required odometer disclosure, some companies ask the insured to complete the odometer disclosure statement without listing the insurance company as the transferee. According to these reports, the insurance company will not sign the title, make an odometer disclosure, or transfer title. The insurance company then sells the vehicle at auction, keeps the proceeds from the auction, and provides the title with the odometer disclosure statement as signed by the insured to the auction buyer. The next person in the chain of title of the vehicle will be the buyer at auction. The insurance company will essentially be omitted from the chain of title.

In the circumstance described above, an insurance company is considered a transferee when it pays the insureds claim (in return it obtains ownership of the vehicle), and a transferor when it sells the vehicle at auction. See 49 C.F.R. 580.3. As a transferor, the insurance company is required to make certain disclosures.

Under federal odometer disclosure law, 49 U.S.C. 32705, a person transferring ownership of a motor vehicle shall give the transferee written disclosure of the cumulative mileage registered on the odometer. More specifically, under 49 C.F.R. 580.5, each transferor shall disclose the mileage to the transferee in writing on the title or on the document being used to reassign the title [t]his written disclosure must be signed by the transferor, including the printed name. The transferee must sign the disclosure statement, print his name, and return a copy to his transferor.

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Marie Choi of my staff at (202) 366-1738 or via email at marie.choi@dot.gov.

Sincerely,

 

 

 

 

O. Kevin Vincent

Chief Counsel

d: 12/20/12

Identical letters sent to:

Mr. Dana Proulx

General Counsel

GEICO Corporation

One Geico Plaza

Washington, DC 20076

 

Mr. Charles E. Jarrett

Chief Legal Officer

The Progressive Corporation

300 North Commons Blvd., OHF 11

Mayfield Village, OH 44143

 

Mr. Christopher C. Mansfield

General Counsel

Liberty Mutual Group

175 Berkeley Street

Boston, MA 02117

Ms. Patricia R. Hatler

Chief Legal and Governance Officer

Nationwide

One Nationwide Plaza

Columbus, OH 43215

 

Ms. Susan L. Lees

General Counsel

Allstate Insurance Company

3075 Sanders Road

Northbrook, IL 60062

 

Mr. Garrett Paddor

General Counsel

Farmers New World Life Insurance Company

4680 Wilshire Blvd, 2nd Fl.

Los Angeles, CA 90010

 

Mr. Jeffrey W. Jackson

General Counsel

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company

One State Farm Plaza

Bloomington, IL 61710

ID: nht90-1.51

Open

TYPE: Interpretation-NHTSA

DATE: February 20, 1990

FROM: Louis F. Wilson -- Instant Traffic Lights

TO: NHTSA, Department of Transportation

TITLE: Re Letter dated September 1, 1989.

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 9-1-89 from Louis F. Wilson to NHTSA; Also attached to letter dated 3-8-91 from Paul Jackson Rice to Louis F. Wilson (A37; Std. 108); Also attached to letter dated 2-20-91 from Louis F. Wilson to NHTSA (OCC 5747)

TEXT:

We sent you a letter concerning the legality of our product, Instant Traffic Lights on September 1, 1989 and as of this date, there has been no reply. With the date of the availability approaching rapidly, we are left pondering about the situation. We would appreciated it if you would take a few moment of your time to review our product. Along with this letter, we will send you a copy of the letter we mailed to you on September 1, 1989. On the attached letter, there are few questions which we would like to know. We would be grateful if you could send us a reply in the near future. Thank you very much.

ID: 19396.drn

Open

Mr. Bob Webb
Access Industries, Inc
2509 Summer Avenue
Memphis, TN 38112-2627

Dear Mr. Webb:

This responds to your letter to Gayle Dalrymple, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) Safety Standards Engineer, regarding what type of new 15-passenger van, equipped to transport special needs children, must be sold to transport children in a parochial day care program. I regret the delay in responding.

Some background information would be helpful in answering your question. NHTSA is authorized to issue and enforce Federal motor vehicle safety standards applicable to new motor vehicles. Our statute at 49 U.S.C. 30112 requires any person selling or leasing a new vehicle to sell or lease a vehicle that meets all applicable standards. Accordingly, persons selling or leasing a new "school bus" must sell or lease a vehicle that meets the safety standards applicable to school buses.

Our statute defines a "schoolbus" as any vehicle that is designed for carrying a driver and more than 10 passengers and which, NHTSA decides, is likely to be "used significantly" to transport "preprimary, primary, and secondary" students to or from school or related events. 49 U.S.C. 30125. By regulation, the capacity threshold for school buses corresponds to that of buses -- vehicles designed for carrying more than ten (10) persons. For example, a 15-person van that is likely to be used significantly to transport students is a "school bus." Our statute does not differentiate between public and parochial schools.

The requirement described above to sell certified school buses does not apply to sales of buses to day care centers where the center provides solely custodial care and transports toddlers to and from the center. We do not generally consider such centers to be "schools" under our statute.

However, in recent interpretation letters to NHTSA, the agency was asked to address situations where non-educational institutions (such as day care centers) are procuring buses to transport children to or from schools. When a regular (non-occasional) use of the bus is to transport school children "to or from school" or school-related activities, the dealer who sells or leases a new vehicle with a capacity to carry more than ten persons to a day care center must sell or lease a school bus. There are van-based vehicles, completed by school bus manufacturers, that are certified to those standards. In contrast, if a day care center will not use the new bus to take children to or from school or school-related activities, the dealer is not required to sell or lease a school bus.

One of those letters involved a dealer selling a new 15-passenger van to a child care facility which planned to significantly use the van for school transportation. The letter is dated July 23, 1998, to Mr. Don Cote of Northside Ford in San Antonio, Texas (copy enclosed). In that letter, we explained that a dealer selling or leasing a new van for such use must sell or lease only buses that meet Federal motor vehicle safety standards for school buses, even when the purchaser is a child care facility.(1)

You should also check State law to see if there are regulations about how a day care center must transport children. In general, NHTSA's safety standards do not regulate the use of motor vehicles, but each State has the authority to set its own standards regarding the use of motor vehicles, including school buses.

In closing, we wish to emphasize that school buses are one of the safest forms of transportation in this country, and that we therefore strongly recommend that all buses that are used to transport school children be certified as meeting NHTSA's school bus safety standards. Further, using 15-person vans that do not meet NHTSA's school bus standards to transport students could result in increased liability in the event of a crash. Since such liability would be determined by State law, you may wish to consult with your attorney and insurance carrier for advice on this issue.

I hope this information is helpful. For more information about the safety features of a school bus, I am enclosing NHTSA's publication: "School Bus Safety: Safe Passage for America's Children." I am also enclosing NHTSA's February 1999 "Guideline for the Safe Transportation of Pre-school Age Children in School Buses." 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,
Frank Seales, Jr.
Chief Counsel
Enclosures
ref:VSA#571.3
d.5/20/99

1. Again, please note that NHTSA has never stated that day care facilities that provide only custodial care are "schools." NHTSA's laws do not affect new bus sales to child care facilities that are not significantly involved in transporting school aged children "to or from" school. The Cote letter could affect the facility if it is involved in transporting children to or from school.

1999

ID: 19914.drn

Open

Matt Boley, Executive Director
Mary J. Treglia Community House
900 Jennings St.
Sioux City, IA 51105

Dear Mr. Boley:

This responds to your request for information regarding transportation of school children from school to your facility and during the school day. You write that, in addition to providing services for school children, you offer adult programs such as English as a Second Language and Citizenship classes, as well as senior citizen and health outreach programs. In a telephone conversation with Dorothy Nakama of my staff, you stated that you regularly provide transportation from school for the school children and that you are using 15-person vans to transport both the adults in your program and the children.

Some background information would be helpful in answering your question. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ( NHTSA) is authorized to issue and enforce Federal motor vehicle safety standards applicable to new motor vehicles. Our statute at 49 U.S.C. 30112 requires any person selling or leasing a new vehicle to sell or lease a vehicle that meets all applicable standards. Accordingly, persons selling or leasing a new "school bus" must sell or lease a vehicle that meets the safety standards applicable to school buses.

Our statute defines a "schoolbus" as any vehicle that is designed for carrying a driver and more than 10 passengers and which, NHTSA decides, is likely to be "used significantly" to transport "preprimary, primary, and secondary" students to or from school or related events. 49 U.S.C. 30125. By regulation, the capacity threshold for school buses corresponds to that of buses -- vehicles designed for carrying more than ten (10) persons. For example, a 15-person van that is likely to be used significantly to transport students is a "school bus."

In recent interpretation letters to NHTSA, the agency was asked to address situations where non-educational institutions (such as day care centers) are procuring buses to transport children to or from schools. When a day care center will be using a bus to transport school children "to or from school" or school-related activities on a regular (non-occasional) basis, the dealer who sells or leases the new bus to the center must sell or lease a "school bus." These may include van-based vehicles, completed by school bus manufacturers, that are certified to those standards. In contrast, if a day care center will not use the new bus to take children to or from school or school-related activities, the dealer is not required to sell or lease a school bus.

One of those letters involved a dealer selling a new 15-passenger van to a child care facility which planned to significantly use the van for school transportation. The letter is dated July 23, 1998, to Mr. Don Cote of Northside Ford in San Antonio, Texas (copy enclosed). In that letter, we explained that a dealer selling or leasing a new van for such use must sell or lease only buses that meet Federal motor vehicle safety standards for school buses, even when the purchaser is a child care facility.(1)

Because our regulations apply only to the manufacture and sale of new motor vehicles, we do not prohibit centers from using their large vans to transport school children even when the vehicles do not meet Federal school bus safety standards. However, each State has the authority to set its own standards regarding the use of motor vehicles, including school buses, so you should also check Iowa law to see if there are regulations about how your center must transport school children.

Further, we wish to emphasize that school buses are one of the safest forms of transportation in this country, and that we therefore strongly recommend that all buses that are used to transport school children be certified as meeting NHTSA's school bus safety standards. In addition, using 15-person vans that do not meet NHTSA's school bus standards to transport students could result in increased liability in the event of a crash. Since such liability would be determined by State law, you may wish to consult with your attorney and insurance carrier for advice on this issue.

I hope this information is helpful. For more information about the safety features of a school bus, I am enclosing NHTSA's publication: "School Bus Safety: Safe Passage for America's Children." I am also enclosing NHTSA's February 1999 "Guideline for the Safe Transportation of Pre-school Age Children in School Buses." 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,
Frank Seales, Jr.
Chief Counsel
Enclosures
ref:VSA#571.3 "school bus only"
d.6/10/99

1. Again, please note that NHTSA has never stated that day care facilities that provide only custodial care are "schools." NHTSA's laws do not affect new bus sales to child care facilities that are not significantly involved in transporting school aged children "to or from" school. The Cote letter could affect the facility if it is involved in transporting children to or from school.

1999

ID: nht76-5.69

Open

DATE: 12/03/76

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; E.T. Driver; NHTSA

TO: Shughart; Thomson and Kilroy

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: Your October 20, 1976, letter to the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, has been referred to this office for reply.

You request data concerning the 10.00-02 "Inland Deep Drive 300," that was manufactured by the Mansfield Tire and Rubber Company, Mansfield, Ohio. Tire Identification Number WLZJAVN 503.

We have enclosed all the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards for:

* New Pneumatic Tires, Passenger Cars, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 109

* New Pneumatic Tires for Vehicles Other Than Passenger Cars, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 119

* Part 574 - Tire Identification and Recordkeeping

* Tire Code Numbers Assigned New Tire Manufacturers.

* Tire Size Codes

The tire identification number stated in your letter can be explained by the use of the above data.

"WL" - is the plant code for the Mansfield, Ohio plant.

"ZJ" - is the tire size code for the 10.00-20 tire size designation.

"AVN" - is an internal code for Mansfield.

"503" - means the tire was cured the 50th week of 1973.

You also request design and construction information. We do not have this type of information because it is proprietary. Also enclosed are copies of tire "Care and Service of Bias and Radial Ply Truck Tires."

We hope the above has been of some help to you.

SHUGHART, THOMSON & KUROY

October 20, 1976

U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Re: Commercial Truck Tires

Our office is investigating an accident involving the blowout of a commercial truck tire known as the "Inland Deep Drive 300" size 10.00 x 20 tube type 13 ply rating with serial No. WL2JAVN503 manufactured by the Mansfield Tire and Rubber Company, Mansfield, Ohio. Please advise us if this particular tire or series of tires has been assigned a Department of Transportation number and if so, please advise us of the number.

We would also appreciate copies of any documents, standards, regulations, and procedures which you have on this tire including its design, construction, and manufacture. We would also appreciate copies of any documents, standards, and regulations or procedures pertaining to the design, construction, and manufacture of commercial truck tires in general.

Naturally, we are willing to pay a reasonable charge for providing the copies requested. If there is such a charge, please forward your statement for services along with the requested information and we will arrange for the appropriate payment of same.

REX R. REDHAIR

ID: nht94-4.72

Open

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: November 1, 1994

FROM: Clay F. West -- Garvey, Schubert and Barer

TO: Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 11/15/94 (EST) FROM PHILIP R. RECHT TO CLAY F. WEST (REDBOOK 2; STD. 104)

TEXT: Last week I called the Research & Special Programs Administration, Rulemaking Department to inquire about the existence of any regulations or standards that might apply to a product which is termed a windshield cleaning device. The product is a clear st rip which is adhered to the windshield of an automobile. The action of the wiper blades passing over the device causes the wiper blades to function more effectively.

As I discussed the device with Rich Eiderstein (I have probably misspelled his name), he was reminded of another individual who brought in a similar device and also asked about the existence of any applicable regulations or standards. Mr. Eiderstein inf ormed me that, by writing to you, I could receive a copy of the written analysis prepared by his office with respect to applicable rules and standards.

I appreciate any assistance that you are able to provide.

ID: 1985-04.11

Open

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: OCTOBER 29, 1985

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Diane K. Steed; NHTSA

TO: The Honorable Malcolm Wallop

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: Thank you for letter to Secretary Dole requesting clarification of the regulations pertaining to school bus identification. Your letter has been referred to our agency for reply, since we administer the school bus regulations.

You explained that several of your constituents are concerned that our regulations prohibit identifying nine-passenger vehicles that carry children to and from school as school buses. You suggested that school bus identification should be allowed as an added safety measure to alert other drivers to the nature of the vehicle.

I appreciate this opportunity to respond to your concerns. In brief, our regulations do not prohibit States from identifying smaller school vehicles as "school buses." States have the discretion to choose to identify nine-passenger school vehicles as school buses if the States wish to include such a requirement in their highway safety programs.

We have two sets of regulations, issued under separate Acts of Congress, that apply to school buses. The first of these, issued under the authority of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, includes the motor vehicle safety standards applying to the manufacture and sale of new school buses. The second set of regulations, issued under the Highway Safety Act of 1966, provides guidelines to the States for their highway safety programs. One of these program standards provides recommended procedures for the identification of school vehicles.

Under the requirements of the Vehicle Safety Act, motor vehicle manufacturers must certify that their vehicles comply with all applicable motor vehicle safety standards. The applicability of our motor vehicle safety standards to a particular vehicle depends, in part, on the classification of that vehicle. Under Federal law, school vehicles carrying 10 or more passengers are "school buses" which must meet our school bus safety standards. The demarcation between school vehicles carrying 10 or more passengers and those carrying fewer than 10 is thus pertinent for the purpose of determining the classification of a vehicle, and the applicability of our school bus safety standards. Nine-passenger ven-type school vehicles are not considered "school buses" under our regulations, but are classified as "multipurpose passenger vehicles" (MPV's). While MPV's must be certified as meeting the safety standards for MPV's, they may also be voluntarily manufactured to meet the requirements for school buses as long as the vehicle continues to comply with our standards for MPV's.

I wish to emphasize that our safety standards for school buses are performance standards which apply only to the manufacture and sale of new school buses.

They do not govern the manner in which a school bus is identified or marked. Under the Highway Safety Act, we issued Highway Safety Program Standard No. 17, Pupil Transportation Safety (copy enclosed), which contains recommendations for the identification, operation, and maintenance of school vehicles. However, the implementation of Program Standard No. 17 is a matter for the States to decide, and State law would determine the operational requirements, such as those for school bus identification, that school vehicles must meet.

I hope this information is helpful. Please feel free to contact this agency if you have any further questions.

Sincerely,

Enclosure

ATTACH.

September 24, 1985

Elizabeth Dole -- Secretary, Department of Transportation

Dear Madame Secretary:

I recently received several letters from constituents who express concern about Department of Transportation regulations regarding minimum standards for school buses. These regulations prohibit the identification of 9 passenger vehicles from being classified as a "school bus." These vehicles, however, are used to transport children to and from school and should be identified as such as an adequate safety measure. The roads used by these vehicles are heavily traveled and if they are not appropriately marked as a vehicle transporting children, other vehicles may not drive respectfully.

I would appreciate it if you could look more closely at these regulations, keeping in mind the safety of school children in rural areas like Wyoming. Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to your reply.

Sincerely,

Malcolm Wallop -- United States Senator

ID: nht94-3.61

Open

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: July 7, 1994

FROM: John Womack -- Acting Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TO: Walter Lavis

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 6/6/94 from Walter Lavis to John Womack (OCC-10080)

TEXT: We have received your letter of June 6, 1994, with respect to your "Saf-T-Flec" reflectors.

You say that you have been informed by a NHTSA representative that "using the standard DOT approved reflector tape would allow the use of my reflector for the trucking industry." Judging from the red, white, and amber samples you have enclosed, your "ref lectors" appear to be retroreflective tape which adheres to a semicircular aluminum base and is intended for vertical mounting on the side and back of vehicles. Several potential customers have asked whether your concept was "DOT approved", and you have asked for a reply.

The Department of Transportation has no authority to "approve" items of motor vehicle equipment. We advise inquires whether manufacture or use of any particular item of equipment is prohibited or permitted under the Federal motor vehicle safety standard s and associated regulations. However, if an item is deemed permissible, this must not be represented as "approval" by DOT.

Your letter is somewhat unclear as to the intended use and market for Saf-T-Flec. The fact that you have enclosed a highlighted copy of S5.1.1.4 leads us to believe that one application you envision for Saf-T-Flec is as a substitute for original equipme nt side reflex reflectors. This substitution is permitted if the reflective material conforms to Federal Specification L-S- 300 (September 7, 1965) and, as used on the vehicle, meets the performance standards of SAE Standard J594f Reflex Reflectors, Jan uary 1977. Accordingly, if your red and amber samples meet these two requirements, they may be used as the side front, intermediate, and rear reflex reflectors that Tables I and III require on trucks and trailers. However, Standard No. 108 does not all ow sheeting material to be used on the rear of vehicles in lieu of reflex reflectors.

What if your reflectors do not meet the two specifications listed above? In this instance, they may be used as supplementary side reflectors to the reflectors that are

2

required by Standard No. 108, and you may employ amber devices for this use as well as red and white. As supplementary equipment, they are subject to the Federal restriction only that they not impair the effectiveness of the required reflex reflectors. We do not believe that additional reflectors would have this effect. Supplementary lighting equipment such as additional reflectors is subject to the laws of the individual states. We are not able to advise you as to their acceptability under state la ws. The American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA) provides opinions on state law. AAMVA's address is 4600 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, Va. 22203.

As you may know, S5.7 of Standard No. 108 requires red and white retroreflective material to be applied to the side and rear of large trailers that have been manufactured since November 30, 1993 (those whose overall width is 80 inches or more and whose G VWR is more than 10,000 pounds). This material may be retroreflective sheeting or reflectors. If sheeting is used, it must meet the photometric specifications of Figure 29. If reflectors are used, they must conform to SAE J594f, and provide specified minimum millicandela/lux at specified light entrance angles. Your initial question indicates that you may be interested in marketing Saf-T-Flec for use as a substitute for the conspicuity materials that conform to Standard No. 108. Manufacturers of con spicuity sheeting certify it with the material in a flat vertical plane (as evidenced by the DOT-C2 marking on your white sample). We have reservations whether the curved red and white Saf-T-Flec devices could meet the photometric specifications of Figu re 29, for sheeting, or J594f and the millicandela/lux specifications of S5.7.2.1(b) or (c) for reflectors. Amber is not one of the specified colors for conspicuity treatment, and could not be used as a substitute.

I hope that this answers your questions.

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