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: aiam1426OpenMr. Jim Lang, President, L and R Enterprises, P.O. Box 2201, Wichita Falls, TX 76307; Mr. Jim Lang President L and R Enterprises P.O. Box 2201 Wichita Falls TX 76307; Dear Mr. Lang: This responds to your February 15, 1974, letter asking whether you installation of spotlights through the left A-pillar of passenger cars is subject to Standards 201 and 216.; Standard 201 does not apply to the instrument panel area on th driver's side from the left door to a longitudinal plane 3- 1/4 inches to the right of the steering wheel. The left A pillar is within this excluded area.; Your drilling operation may affect roof strength and I have enclosed copy of Standard 216, our standard on roof crush resistance. Under the National traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, it is the responsibility of the person who manufacturers or alters a vehicle to determine whether his vehicle meets the requirements.; Your business is subject to these requirements, however, only if yo qualify as an alterer of motor vehicles under 49 CFR 567.7, which is enclosed. The mounting of a spotlight by drilling the A-pillar is a 'non- readily attachable' alteration. Such an alteration would be subject to the S567.7 requirement only if you mount it 'before the first purchase of the vehicle in good faith for purposes other than resale.'; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam1425OpenMr. Jim Lang, L and R Enterprises, P.O. Box 2201, Wichita Falls, Texas 76307; Mr. Jim Lang L and R Enterprises P.O. Box 2201 Wichita Falls Texas 76307; Dear Mr. Lang: This responds to your February 15, 1974, letter asking whether you installation of spotlights through the left A-pillar of passenger cars is subject to Standards 201 and 216.; Standard 201 does not apply to the instrument panel area on th driver's side from the left door to a longitudinal plane 3-1/4 inches to the right of the steering wheel. The left A pillar is within this excluded area.; Your drilling operation may effect roof strength an I have enclosed copy of Standard 216, our standard on roof crush resistance. Under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, it is the responsibility of the person who manufactures or alters a vehicle to determine whether his vehicle meets the requirements.; Your business is subject to these requirements, however, only if yo qualify as an alterer of motor vehicles under 49 CFR 567.7, which is enclosed. The mounting of a spotlight by drilling the A-pillar is a 'non-readily attachable' alteration. Such an alteration would be subject to the S567.7 requirement only if you mount it 'before the first purchase of the vehicle in good faith for purposes other than resale.'; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam4379OpenMr. Walter Mayr, The Austrian Trade Commission, 1875 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Suite 1114, Washington, DC 20009; Mr. Walter Mayr The Austrian Trade Commission 1875 Connecticut Avenue N.W. Suite 1114 Washington DC 20009; Dear Mr. Mayr: This responds to your August 5, 1987 letter to my office and August 1 telephone conversation between Ms. Schott of your staff and Ms. Hom of mine, concerning our regulations for motor vehicles. You enclosed a brochure from the Austrian firm, Reformwerke Wels, describing a 'public utility vehicle.' Subsequently, Ms. Schott indicated in her telephone call that Reformwerke Wels has informed her that the vehicles in question have a top speed of 15.53 miles per hour (mph). Based on this information, you asked whether the vehicle is a 'motor vehicle' for the purposes of our regulations. The answer is no.; Under a longstanding policy, the National Highway Traffic Safet Administration has regarded vehicles *not* to be 'motor vehicles' within the meaning of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, and therefore not subject to our motor vehicle safety standards, if they (1) have an unusual body configuration which sets the vehicles apart form typical highway traffic, and (2) have a maximum attainable speed of 20 mph or less. The utility vehicles manufactured by Reformwerke Wels meet these criteria. Thus, the vehicles are not 'motor vehicles' under our regulations and the manufacture of those vehicles is not regulated by this agency.; You might wish to contact the Consumer Product Safety Commission t learn if they have any Federal safety regulations applicable to the type of utility vehicle manufactured by Reformwerke Wels. Their address is: Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 1111 18th Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20207. Telephone: (202) 492-6980.; Please contact us if we can be of further assistance. Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam2791OpenMr. P. Arquin, 33 Garland Way, Lyndhurst, NJ 07071; Mr. P. Arquin 33 Garland Way Lyndhurst NJ 07071; Dear Mr. Arquin: This responds to your recent letter asking what loading conditions ar applicable for purposes of measuring the wheelbase of passenger cars, under the new phased-in passive requirements of Standard No. 208, *Occupant Crash Protection*. Apparently, the wheelbase of one of Peugeot's vehicles having an independent rear suspension varies as a function of the vehicle loading.; The phased-in passive requirements of Standard No. 208 were based on determination of the lead time necessary to engineer passive restraints into each size class of automobile. Wheelbase was chosen as a measure to delineate the phasing requirements because it is directly related to vehicle size and because it is a well-defined quantity that does not vary significantly within a given car line.; For purposes of measuring wheelbase, the vehicle is loaded according t the general test conditions of Standard No. 208. These test specifications, including loading, are meant to approximate the likely condition of the vehicle under normal driving circumstances. Since a vehicle having a variable wheelbase will generally carry the same weight as the average automobile of its size, it is appropriate that the wheelbase on such a vehicle be determined under the loading conditions specified under Standard No. 208. Therefore, Peugeot should measure the wheelbase of its vehicle under the loading conditions specified in paragraph S8.1.1(a) of the standard.; Sincerely, Joseph J. Levin, Jr., Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam2706OpenMr. Howard Gould, Gould, Reichert & Strauss, 2613-20 Carew Tower, Cincinnati, OH 45202; Mr. Howard Gould Gould Reichert & Strauss 2613-20 Carew Tower Cincinnati OH 45202; Dear Mr. Gould: This confirms the substance of your November 2, 1977, meeting wit Roger Tilton of my staff concerning the applicability of the new Federal school bus safety standards to common carriers used in urban and rural transportation.; You indicated in that meeting that you thought that the effect of th Urban Mass Transportation Administration's grant program to rural transit authorities would be to phase out the standard yellow school bus in favor of transporting children on rural transit buses. This situation would result in the avoidance of the Federal school bus regulations.; It is the opinion of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administratio (NHTSA) that buses used by rural transportation districts to transport school children do not qualify for the limited exception from the school bus safety standards accorded to urban transportation common carriers.; The agency has traditionally excluded urban common carrier buses fro the school bus requirements to allow transportation of school children on existing urban transportation facilities. The agency has never extended this exclusion to rural common carrier buses. In our notice on the redefinition of school bus (40 FR 60033) the NHTSA indicated that only urban transit buses would fall within the ambit of this limited exception. By that action, the agency intended to avoid the artificial development of rural transportation authorities that would result in the avoidance of the Federal school bus regulations.; In another comment you criticized the agency's adoption of a 'us definition' for the applicability of the school bus regulations since the application of such definition depends upon the sales transaction to establish the intended use of the vehicle. You allege that enforcement of regulations dependent upon the sales transaction cannot be achieved.; The agency adopted the 'use definition' for the regulation of schoo buses as a result of a Congressional directive in the Motor Vehicle and School Bus Safety Amendments of 1974 (Pub. L. 93-492). Congress defined school bus in a manner that requires the use of a vehicle to be considered. Accordingly, the agency must employ the 'use definition' in regulating school buses. The NHTSA does not agree that the new regulations are unenforceable as a result of this regulatory approach. Enforcement of these regulations will be as vigorous as the enforcement of any other NHTSA regulation.; Sincerely, Joseph J. Levin, Jr., Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam3991OpenMr. John A. Pachuta, Director, Bureau of Motor Vehicles, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Transportation, Harrisburg, PA 17122; Mr. John A. Pachuta Director Bureau of Motor Vehicles Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Harrisburg PA 17122; Dear Mr. Pachuta: Thank you for your letter of July 16, 1985, concerning Federal odomete disclosure requirements. You enclosed sample copies of the revised Pennsylvania Certification of Title (form MV-4 9-84 ) and the Dealer Assignment Covering a Vehicle Acquired and Held for Resale (form MV 9-82 ), to demonstrate that the signature of a purchaser is required in such transactions.; We appreciate Pennsylvania's efforts to assure purchasers' signature on title documents bearing odometer disclosures, as required by the Federal odometer statute (Title IV of the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act) and the implementing regulations (49 CFR Part 580). Because the Bureau of Motor Vehicles requires the 'Dealer Assignment' form as an attachment to the Certificate of Title, no additional odometer disclosure statement is necessary if the vehicle is transferred within Pennsylvania.; However, if a vehicle is either retailed or wholesaled to a out-of-state purchaser, a separate odometer statement must still be executed, to assure that the purchaser acknowledges the odometer reading at the time of transfer, as required by 49 CFR S 580.4(e).; For your reference, I have enclosed copies of documents concerning a actual vehicle transfer from Pennsylvania to an out-of-state dealer which did not provide for a purchaser's signature. In that case, the seller (We Try Harder, Inc.) sold the vehicle to a Massachusetts dealer (J&R Whlsle), which in turned assigned the vehicle on a Massachusetts reassignment form. A later odometer reading was disclosed and acknowledged by a subsequent dealer-purchaser in New Jersey, but neither the Pennsylvania title nor the Massachusetts from provided for a signature to demonstrate that the intervening dealer-purchaser was aware of the odometer reading, as required by our regulations.; If it is not practical at this time to revise the Pennsylvania title t include the purchaser's signature prior to assignment or reassignment to an out-of-state party, I urge you to remind such transferors to issue a separate odometer disclosure statement.; Please feel free to contact Ms. Judith Kaleta of this offic (202/426-1834) if you have any questions concerning applicable Federal odometer disclosure requirements.; Sincerely, Jeffrey R. Miller, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam5099OpenHerr O. Schmidt Hella KG Hueck & Co Postfach 28 40 4780 Lippstadt Germany; Herr O. Schmidt Hella KG Hueck & Co Postfach 28 40 4780 Lippstadt Germany; Dear Herr Schmidt: This responds to your letter of November 20, 1992 to Richard L. Van Iderstine of this agency asking for an interpretation of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108. Please address your future requests for interpretation to the Chief Counsel. You have asked for confirmation that the requirement that a center highmounted stop lamp 'provide access for convenient replacement of the bulb without the use of special tools' does not exclude sealed lamps 'where long life light sources like long life bulbs, LED's and neon tubes are provided.' We are pleased to provide the confirmation you request. Although the agency has used the term 'the bulb', the term is not meant to exclude more than one bulb, or a light source other than a bulb, for the center lamp. Sealed units (entire lamps) are permissible as long as such a lamp is replaceable without the use of special tools. Sincerely, Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel; |
|
ID: aiam1889OpenMr. David M. Holden, Frigiking, Inc., 10858 Harry Hines Boulevard, Dallas, TX 75220; Mr. David M. Holden Frigiking Inc. 10858 Harry Hines Boulevard Dallas TX 75220; Dear Mr. Holden: Your letter of March 7, 1975 to Mr. Alex Calaluca, Motor Vehicl Programs Director of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's Region 6, has been referred to this office. You wish to be informed of Frigiking's responsibilities under the NHTSA's rules and regulations as a manufacturer of automotive air conditioners for sale to domestic and foreign auto manufacturers, automobile dealers and automobile supply retail outlets.; Mr. Calaluca correctly indicated that there is currently no Federa Motor Vehicle Safety Standard which regulates automobile air conditioners. He also correctly informed you that your firm is not deemed a manufacturer by the NHTSA when your product is installed as original equipment. Where the Frigiking air conditioner is installed in a vehicle prior the first sale of the vehicle the manufacturer of the vehicle is also deemed to be manufacturer of your product. However, you should understand that in all other cases your company is considered a manufacturer under the NHTSA's rules and regulations. For example, where units are sold under private label to mass merchandising firms for sale and installation to individual automobile owners, or where units are sold through Frigiking's distributor/dealer organization for individual unit retail sales where the sale is other than to a franchised auto dealer for installation prior to the sale of the new car, Frigiking has certain responsibilities under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, as amended, notwithstanding the absence of any Safety Standard regulating air conditioners.; In the event that the NHTSA determined through its own investigatio that an air conditioner produced by your firm contained a defect related to motor vehicle safety, you would be required to give notice of the defect to every person who had purchased the produce manufactured during the period when a defect was known to exist. This manufacturing period could extend up to 8 years preceding the notification. In addition you would be required to repair or replace without charge every such defective air conditioner presented to you, and repurchase defective air conditioners from distributors and dealers.; Finally, it would be wise for Frigiking to remind manufacturers an dealers who install its air conditioners in motor vehicles prior to first sale that they must account for the addition of an air conditioning unit in certifying that the vehicle conforms to Federal standards and in certifying the Gross Vehicle Weight Rating and Gross Axle Weight Rating as required by the NHTSA regulations contained in 49 CFR Part 567.; Please do not hesitate to contact us if we can be of furthe assistance.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam3331OpenHonorable Raphael Musto, House of Representatives, Washington, DC 20515; Honorable Raphael Musto House of Representatives Washington DC 20515; Dear Mr. Musto: This responds to your letter of August 22, 1980, concerning an inquir regarding regulations for off-road vehicles, which was referred to us by Kenneth S. Birnbaum, Director, Office of Congressional Affairs, Department of Transportation. Your constituent, Mr. Steve Schwika, asked about regulations for off-road vehicles (terrane vehicles - 6 wheel).; The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issues both fue economy standards and Federal motor vehicle safety standards. As explained below, six-wheel terrane vehicles are not subject to fuel economy standards. However, without more detailed information concerning the vehicles, we cannot give a definitive answer as to whether Federal motor vehicle safety standards would be applicable. Nonetheless, we can provide guidelines for use in determining the status of these vehicles.; Pursuant to Title V of the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost saving Act (15 U.S.C. S2001), this agency has promulgated regulations which establish the categories of motor vehicles that are subject to fuel economy standards. The regulations (49 CFR Part 523) state that fuel economy standards are applicable only to automobiles, light trucks, and automobiles capable of off-highway travel. Under the definitions set forth at 15 U.S.C. S2001 and in the regulations, fuel economy standards are only issued for four-wheeled vehicles. A six-wheel terrane vehicle would not, therefore, be subject to fuel economy standards.; Our safety standards apply to a vehicle and its manufacturer only i the vehicle qualifies as a 'motor vehicle' under the provisions of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966. Section 102(3) of the Act (15 U.S.C. S1391(3)) defines 'motor vehicle' as:; >>>any vehicle driven or drawn by mechanical power manufacture primarily for use on the public streets, roads, and highways, except any vehicle operated exclusively on a rail or rails.<<<; Thus, a motor vehicle is a vehicle which the manufacturer has reason t expect will use public highways at least part of the time. We are enclosing an information sheet which gives further guidelines on which vehicles are subject to Federal motor vehicle safety standards, as well as an information sheet explaining where copies of the regulations may be obtained.; Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam5578OpenMr. David A. Lowell Engineering Manager Bankhead Enterprises, Inc. 25 Kincannon Road, SW Cartersville, GA 30120; Mr. David A. Lowell Engineering Manager Bankhead Enterprises Inc. 25 Kincannon Road SW Cartersville GA 30120; Dear Mr. Lowell: This responds to your letter of June 8, 1995, askin for an interpretation of Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108. Specifically, your company manufactures 'stinger steered automobile transport trailers' as defined by 23 CFR 658.5, paragraphs (k) Tractor or Truck Tractor, (m) Automobile Transporters, and (n) Single-steered combination. Your company currently mounts taillamps, turn signal lamps, and clearance lamps on the back of the truck tractor. It is your understanding of paragraphs S5.1.1.1 and S5.1.1.2 of Standard No. 108 that 'these items do not seem to be necessary.' For purposes of Standard No. 108, types of motor vehicles are defined by 49 CFR 571.3(b), a regulation of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, rather than 23 CFR 658.5, a regulation of the Federal Highway Administration. Under 571.3(b), the towing portion of your combination vehicle is a 'truck', rather than a 'truck tractor.' A 'truck' is defined, in pertinent part, as a motor vehicle 'designed primarily for the transportation of property.' A 'truck tractor' is a 'truck designed primarily for drawing other motor vehicles and not so constructed as to carry a load other than a part of the weight of the vehicle and the load so drawn.' The photographs you enclosed show that the towing portion of Bankhead's combination vehicle is designed to carry motor vehicles, and may do so without the attachment of the trailer, hence it is a 'truck.' It is constructed to carry a load other than a part of the trailer, hence it is not a 'truck tractor.' Accordingly, Bankhead's towing vehicle may not avail itself of the truck tractor lighting options of paragraphs S5.1.1.1 and S5.1.1.2 of Standard No. 108. Your understanding of these sections as they relate to truck tractors meeting the definition of 571.3(b) is generally accurate. However, no provision of Standard No. 108 permits either the elimination or the relocation of taillamps from truck tractors. Because Bankhead's product is operated in interstate commerce, it must also conform to the safety regulations of the Federal Highway Administration (49 CFR part 393). This is to advise you that the Office of Motor Carrier Standards has reviewed this letter and concurs in it. If you have any further questions, you may refer them to Taylor Vinson of this office (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, John Womack Acting Chief Counsel; |
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.