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: nht78-1.21OpenDATE: 10/02/78 FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; J. J. Levin, Jr.; NHTSA TO: Dunlop Tire Company TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION TEXT: This responds to your July 10, 1978, letter asking whether it is permissible to label motorcycle tires with alternate speeds and load ratings appropriate for those speeds. You suggest that your tires be labeled with maximum speeds of 131, 137, and 143 miles per hour with the corresponding load ratings. The labeling of motor cycle tires is regulated by Standard No. 119, New Pneumatic Tires for Vehicles Other (Illegible word) Passenger Cars. Standard No. 119 requires that tires be marked with, among other things, the maximum inflation pressure of the tire and the load rating applicable to that inflation pressure. Speed qualifications are permitted on tires when, for example, the tires are speed restricted. Otherwise, tires are not marked with speed criteria although they may be marked with the symbols S, H, or V as part of the tire identification number. These symbols, established by the European Tyre and Rim Technical Organisation (ETRTO), indicate that the tire is an acceptable high-speed tire. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration considers it appropriate to permit the symbols S, H, or V to be marked on tires to indicate that such tires are appropriate for high-speed use. This permits, for example, a sophisticated purchaser of tires for emergency vehicles to know that the tires are suitable for the higher operational speeds necessary for those vehicles. The NHTSA, however, considers it inappropriate to mark motorcycle tires with maximum speeds of 131, 137, and 143 miles per hour with the corresponding safe load ratings. Such markings would appear to sanction the use of the tires at these speeds which far exceed the national speed limit. Since Standard No. 119 regulates the permissible uses of speed designations on nonpassenger car tires, the agency interprets the standard to prohibit the marking of any other speed designations on a tire. The NHTSA considers the only appropriate speed designation on tires to be one that reflects a speed restricted tire or one that uses the symbols established by the ETRTO for tires that have been tested and can be operated at higher speeds. Sincerely, ATTACH. July 10, 1978 J. Levin -- Chief Counsel, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Dear Mr. Levin: Dunlop Tire and Rubber Corporation has been asked to manufacture tires for new Honda motorcycles with several load designations appearing on the tire sidewall. The loads vary according to the speed imposed on the vehicle as follows: (These are all V rated tires). Front Tire Rear Tire Inflation Pressure Max. MPH 3.50V19 4.25V18 Maximum 131 515 Lbs. 655 Lbs. 42 psi 137 490 Lbs. 620 Lbs. 42 psi 143 465 Lbs. 585 Lbs. 42 psi I have discussed this subject briefly by telephone with Mr. A. (Illegible Word) who urged me to write for your legal interpretation of FMVSS 119 and how to identify these supplementary loads on a tire sidewall. As I will be out of the office until July 24, please contact Mr. A. M. Mills if additional information is required. His direct phone is (716) 879-8397. Very truly yours, DUNLOP TIRE & RUBBER CORPORATION; Richard H. Attenhofer -- Manager - Tire Technical Relations cc: A. M. Mills |
|
ID: nht87-1.71OpenTYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA DATE: 04/27/87 FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA TO: Charles Schamblin -- Flag-It Fluorescent Signaling Device Co. TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION TEXT: Charles Schamblin Flag-It Fluorescent Signaling Device Co. Post Office Box 1709 Bakersfield, CA 93302 Your letter of December 29, 1986, to Michael M. Finkelstein has been referred to my Office for reply. You also addressed a letter of January 9, 1987, to my Office. Because these letters concern the same matter, this response addresses them both. In the D ecember 29 letter, you asked about the appropriate color for your product, the Flag-it Fluorescent Signaling Device. The device, which you enclosed with your correspondence, is a rectangular green fluorescent strip, designed to be permanently attached to and hang vertically from the license plate frame on the front of a motor vehicle. You state that you designed this device "especially to meet the requirements for fluorescent material in the front of motor vehicles." You ask for a "letter of certification" that your device can be used and sold in the United States. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has authority to issue safety standards applicable to new motor vehicles and certain items of motor vehicle equipment. However, NHTSA does not approve nor certify motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment, or endorse any commercial product. Instead, the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act establishes a "self-certification" process under which each manufacturer must certify that its product meets agency safety standards, or other applic able standards. Periodically, NHTSA tests whether vehicles or equipment comply with there standards, and may investigate alleged safety-related product defects. Your product is an item of motor vehicle equipment under S102(4) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, and as such, falls under NHTSA's jurisdiction. However, none of our federal motor vehicle safety standards applies to your product.
Standard 125, Warning Devices, sets uniform design specifications for reflective warning devices used to warn approaching traffic of the presence of a stopped vehicle. As is apparent from the provisions regarding the scope and application of the Standard , Standard 125 applies to devices designed to be carried in motor vehicles and erected when needed to warn approaching traffic. It does not apply to warning devices designed to be permanently attached to a motor vehicle. Nevertheless, you may wish to use the colors specified in paragraph S5.3. They are the ones which the agency believes most appropriate for warning devices subject to the standard. Standard 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment, applies to reflective devices. While the agency notes that your product includes reflective material, Standard 108 covers aftermarket reflective devices only to the extent that the afterm arket device replaces required original reflective equipment. Because the kind of device you described is not subject to any Standard 108 requirement as original reflective equipment, it is likewise not subject to any such requirement as aftermarket equi pment. Finally, please be aware that if you or the agency finds your product to contain a safety-related defect after you market the product, you are responsible for conducting a notice and recall campaign under S154 of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Sa fety Act (15 U.S.C. 1414). Further, you should be aware that State law may apply to equipment such as your signalling device You may wish to consult the State and local transportation authorities in the areas where you intend to market your product. Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel December 29, 1986 Mr. Michel M. Finkelstein Associate Administrate for Research and Development National Highway Safety Administration 400 Seventh Street S. W. Washington, D. C. 20590 Dear Mr. Finkelstein: I received your letter of December 22, 1986 concerning the Flag-It Fluorescent Signalling Device. Thanks very much for your interest and informing me concerning the device. It is my understanding that reflecterized material can be used on motor vehicles through out the USA. The color red can be used only to reflect and be seen from the rear only.
Since the Flag-It device is designed especially to meet the requirement for fluorescent material in the front of motor vehicles. Using the color green on the device I presume no doubt be legal. If you could send me a letter of certification that the Flag-It Fluorescent Safety Device can be used and sold in the USA I would appreciate concerning this matter. Sincerely yours, Charles Schamblin SEE HARD COPY FOR ADDITONAL INFORMATION AND GRAPHIC ILLUSTRATIONS |
|
ID: 11275Open M. Guy Dorleans Dear M. Dorleans: This responds to your letter of September 29, 1995, with respect to the use of light-emitting diodes (LEDs) to fulfill the lighting requirements of Standard No. 108. You have enclosed a design for a lamp incorporating tail, stop, and rear turn signal functions, the illumination for which will be provided by red LEDs. At night, the LEDs will provide sufficient illumination to meet taillamp photometrics, with increased illumination when the brake pedal is applied, "so that the sum of the photometrics of the stoplamp and the tail lamp is fulfilled." When the turn signal is activated, "all the diodes are energized at full intensity during the on-period of the turn signal [and] [t]he sum of the photometrics of the rear turn signal lamp and the tail lamp is then fulfilled . . . ." You ask for "confirmation that this new lighting combination is correct." We consider this lamp, as you have more fully described it in your letter, to be an acceptable design for meeting the requirements of Standard No. 108. If you have any questions, you may refer them to Taylor Vinson of this Office (phone: 202-366-5263). Sincerely,
Samuel J. Dubbin Chief Counsel ref:108 d:11/9/95 |
1995 |
ID: nht93-5.18OpenTYPE: Interpretation-NHTSA DATE: July 9, 1993 FROM: James Z. Peepas -- Selecto-Flash, Inc. TO: Taylor Vinson -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA TITLE: None ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 7/26/93 from John Womack to James Z. Peepas (A41; Std. 108) TEXT: We are suppliers of conspicuity systems to the container industry. I respectfully request an interpretation as to how much reflective 2" striping is required when a load is placed on the chassis. Please note the following pictures enclosed. A) shows a 48 foot chassis with conspicuity striping and no load B) shows gooseneck area C) shows closeup with gooseneck area hidden by load D) loaded chassis. The question is on a 48 foot chassis, if the gooseneck is 8 feet and only 40 feet of the chassis frame is visible, should the reflective striping that is visible when loaded by 50% of 48 ft. or 24 ft or 50% of 40 ft. or 20 ft? Also enclosed is standard chassis print. I have also enclosed a Maersk loaded chassis. Please note that because of space limitations, the striping may not be 4 foot from the road surface. Has there been a change in height allowance to compensate for space adjustments? I will be calling you next week to discuss this further. |
|
ID: nht88-1.63OpenTYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA DATE: 03/02/88 FROM: RONALD R. MITCHELL -- MORAN TOWNSHIP SCHOOLS SUPERINTENDENT TO: VAN STRATEN HEATED TAIL LIGHT LENS CO. TITLE: NONE ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 05/16/89 FROM STEPHEN P. WOOD -- NHTSA TO THOMAS C. GRAVENGOOD; REDBOOK A33; STANDARD 108; LETTER DATED 04/03/89 FROM THOMAS C. GRAVENGOOD TO NHTSA; REF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO 108 - HEATED SAFETY LIGHT S FOR VEHICLES DRIVEN IN WINTER WEATHER; OCC 3348; LETTER DATED 01/28/87 FROM GLENN M. MAKI -- COUNTY OF BARAGA MICHIGAN; LETTER DATED 04/02/87 FROM ARVON TOWNSHIP SCHOOL SKANNE MICHIGAN; UNDATED LETTER FROM KENNETH R. HAMMERBERG; BROCHURE OF VAN STRATEN HEATED TAIL LIGHT CO FOR HEATED SAFETY LIGHT; BROCHURE FROM 3M ON DUO PACK ADHESIVES; DYMAX UV CURING ADHESIVES PRODUCT DATA SHEET; SPECIFICATION OF GENERAL PURPOSE WIRE AND CABLE FROM CONSOLIDATED ELECTRONIC WIRE AND CABLE TEXT: Gentlemen: We are just finishing our first winter with your heated lens on the flashing hazard lights on one of our buses. The snow that accumulates on these lights has always posed a problem that required our drivers to stop the bus and clean them off periodically during adverse conditions. The use of your heated lens has alleviated this problem and we will definitely be replacing the regular lens, with yours, on our entire fleet. Sincerely, |
|
ID: nht95-4.47OpenTYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA DATE: October 9, 1995 FROM: Samuel J. Dubbin -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA TO: Guy Dorleans -- International Regulatory Affairs Manager Valeo TITLE: NONE ATTACHMT: Attached to 9/29/95 letter from Guy Dorleans to NHTSA Chief Counsel TEXT: Dear M. Dorleans: This responds to your letter of September 29, 1995, with respect to the use of light-emitting diodes (LEDs) to fulfill the lighting requirements of Standard No. 108. You have enclosed a design for a lamp incorporating tail, stop, and rear turn signal functions, the illumination for which will be provided by red LEDs. At night, the LEDs will provide sufficient illumination to meet taillamp photometrics, with increase d illumination when the brake pedal is applied, "so that the sum of the photometrics of the stoplamp and the tail lamp is fulfilled." When the turn signal is activated, "all the diodes are energized at full intensity during the on-period of the turn sign al (and) the sum of the photometrics of the rear turn signal lamp and the tail lamp is then fulfilled. . . ." You ask for "confirmation that this new lighting combination is correct." We consider this lamp, as you have more fully described it in your letter, to be an acceptable design for meeting the requirements of Standard No. 108. If you have any questions, you may refer them to Taylor Vinson of this Office (phone: 202-366-5263). |
|
ID: nht95-7.13OpenTYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA DATE: October 9, 1995 FROM: Samuel J. Dubbin -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA TO: Guy Dorleans -- International Regulatory Affairs Manager Valeo TITLE: NONE ATTACHMT: Attached to 9/29/95 letter from Guy Dorleans to NHTSA Chief Counsel TEXT: Dear M. Dorleans: This responds to your letter of September 29, 1995, with respect to the use of light-emitting diodes (LEDs) to fulfill the lighting requirements of Standard No. 108. You have enclosed a design for a lamp incorporating tail, stop, and rear turn signal functions, the illumination for which will be provided by red LEDs. At night, the LEDs will provide sufficient illumination to meet taillamp photometrics, with increased illumination when the brake pedal is applied, "so that the sum of the photometrics of the stoplamp and the tail lamp is fulfilled." When the turn signal is activated, "all the diodes are energized at full intensity during the on-period of the turn signal (and) the sum of the photometrics of the rear turn signal lamp and the tail lamp is then fulfilled. . . ." You ask for "confirmation that this new lighting combination is correct." We consider this lamp, as you have more fully described it in your letter, to be an acceptable design for meeting the requirements of Standard No. 108. If you have any questions, you may refer them to Taylor Vinson of this Office (phone: 202-366-5263). |
|
ID: nht91-2.50OpenDATE: March 26, 1991 FROM: Eric G. Hoffman -- Russell & Hoffman Incorporated TO: Harry Thompson -- NHTSA TITLE: Re: NEF 32; National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, 49CFR, Chapter V, Subpart A-571 (the "Act") ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 4-29-91 from Paul Jackson Rice to Eric G. Hoffman (A37; Part 571.3) TEXT: This firm represents a private school which operates and/or rents mini-vans which are designed to carry more than 10 passengers. The school has become aware of the Act and is concerned whether the operation of the vans is in compliance with the applicable regulations under the Act. We would appreciate your providing us: (1) guidance as to the continuing effect of this Act; (2) the procedures for obtaining a variance from the regulations of the Act under certain circumstances; (3) the procedures regarding modification of any non-complying vehicles; (4) the federal guidelines for the estimated cost of such modifications; (5) the terms of any grace period for modification of vehicles to bring them into compliance; (6) the applicable administrative entity charged with enforcement of the Act; and (7) any certification process for vehicles having been modified. To the extent any of the above are non-existent, please so advise us. After your review of this letter, I would appreciate your contacting me at your earliest convenience to further discuss this matter. Thank you for your attention and cooperation. |
|
ID: jarrettOpen
Via Federal Express Mr. Charles E. Jarrett Chief Legal Officer The Progressive Corporation 300 North Commons Blvd., OHF 11 Mayfield Village, OH 44143 Dear Mr. Jarrett: 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. 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. Steven A. Bennett General Counsel United Services Automobile Association (USAA) 9800 Fredericksburg Road San Antonio, TX 78288
Mr. Jeffrey W. Jackson General Counsel State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company One State Farm Plaza Bloomington, IL 61710 |
|
ID: nht93-7.26OpenDATE: October 18, 1993 FROM: J. C. DeLaney -- Manager, Technical Programs, Motorcycle Industry Council, Inc. TO: John Womack -- Acting Chief Council, NHTSA TITLE: Re: Request for FMVSS 123 Interpretation ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 11/23/93 from John Womack to J. C. DeLaney (A41; Std. 123) TEXT: The Motorcycle Industry Council (MIC) is a nonprofit national trade association representing manufacturers and distributors of motorcycles, motorcycle parts and accessories, and members of allied trades. On behalf of its membership, MIC requests an interpretation of FMVSS 123 as it relates to motorcycle side stand retraction. FMVSS 123, S5.2.4, states that "a stand shall fold rearward and upward if it contacts the ground when the motorcycle is moving forward.", but makes no reference to any compliance test criteria or procedure. The Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) has published two recommended procedures related to side stand retraction testing - SAE J1578 "Motorcycle Side Stand Retraction Test Procedure"; and SAE J1579 "Motorcycle Side Stand Retraction Performance Requirements." A third SAE Recommended Practice, J1846, establishes characteristics for the test surface used for testing in accordance with J1578 and J1579. Copies of these SAE documents are enclosed. MIC's question is: Does a motorcycle side stand comply with FMVSS 123 if it passes the SAE J1578 test procedure? MIC would appreciate your earliest possible response to the above request. Please contact me if there are any questions or if additional information is required. |
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.