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: nht93-4.8OpenDATE: May 21, 1993 FROM: Carl W. Vogt -- Chairman, National Transportation Safety Board TO: Howard Smolkin -- Acting Administrator, NHTSA TITLE: None ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 6-11-93 from Howard M. Smolkin to Laura J. Platter (A41; Part 571) TEXT: Enclosed is correspondence received from Honorable Barbara Mikulski on behalf of Mrs. Laura J. Platter regarding the classification of minivans. We have advised Senator Mikulski that her correspondence would be forwarded to you for your review. Thank you for your time and attention.
May 11, 1993
Mr. Brent Bahler Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs 490 L'Enfant Plaza East, S.W. 6th Floor Washington, DC 20594 Dear Mr. Bahler: Because of the desire of this office to be responsive to all inquiries and communications, your consideration of the attached correspondence from Laura J. Platter is requested. Please respond directly to Ms. Platter and send a copy to Chip Paucek of my staff. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely,
Barbara A. Mikulski United States Senator BAM:cjp Enclosure
6662 Mohawk Court Columbia, MD 21046 January 29, 1993 Dear Senator Mikulski: In reference to minivans: rather than impose a tariff on imported minivans, I think all such vehicles should be reclassified as passenger vehicles so that they come under the same safety regulations as passenger cars. We have driven vans since 1970, and we continue to be angry at Congress for catering to the auto manufacturers, and at the manufacturers for using the "truck" classification to get away with providing less in the way of safety features for their passengers. This is becoming even more of a potential scandal as more and more young families use minivans. Please take the lead in moving to classify minivans as passenger cars. And please don't let us get into the vicious circle of punitive tariffs. Times are changing, and industry has to make painful changes too. Sincerely,
Laura J. Platter (Mrs. John Platter) |
|
ID: nht67-1.31OpenDATE: 09/21/67 FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; SIGNATURE UNAVAILABLE; NHTSA TO: Busby and Rivkin TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION TEXT: In your letter of July 13, 1967, you requested clarification of several issues relating to the location and size of turn signals as specified in the Initial Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. Initial Standard No. 108, entitled, "Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment - Multipurpose Passenger Vehicles, Trucks, Trailers, and Buses, 80 or More Inches Wide Overall," specifies that turn signal lamps shall conform to Class A of SAE Standard J588d. As stated in the enclosures to your letter, SAE Standard J588d specifies that the optical axis (filament center) of the front turn signal lamp shall be at least 4 inches from the inside diameter of the retaining ring of the headlamp unit providing the lower beam. This requirement of the SAE Standard is addressed to a single lamp with only one bulb. For a combination of lamps, such as that shown on the sketch enclosed with your letter, the intent of this requirement could be part if the optical center produced by the two bulbs is outside the 4-inch limit. The location of this optical center must be determined from laboratory test data, which was not presented in your letter. Proposed Initial Standard No. 112, entitled, "Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment - Passenger Cars; Motorcycles; and Multipurpose Passenger Vehicles, Trucks, Trailers and Buses of Less than 80 Inches Wide Overall," would permit the use of Class A (SAE J588d) turn signal lamps until January 1, 1969. Under this provision, lamp No. 1 on your sketch would conform to the 4-inch spacing requirement. Combining lamp No. 1 and No. 2 to obtain a Class A area would again result in the situation previously described with respect to location of the optical center. Since your letter makes frequent reference to "cars," we assume that you are primarily interested in the requirements of Standard No. 112. In this respect, we would caution you that the requirements specifies therein are presently only proposed requirements, and are subject to change prior to issuance of the final standard. Thank you for your interest in the motor vehicle safety standards. |
|
ID: aiam5256OpenThe Honorable Phil Gramm United States Senate 2323 Bryan Street, #1500 Dallas, TX 75201; The Honorable Phil Gramm United States Senate 2323 Bryan Street #1500 Dallas TX 75201; "Dear Senator Gramm: Thank you for your inquiry on behalf of you constituent, Mr. Thomas J. Devon of Longview, Texas. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) referred your inquiry to this office, since the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) administers Federal safety standards for tires. In his communication with you, Mr. Devon expressed concern about separated treads from retreaded large truck tires. He referred to the deaths of two young women reportedly caused when they lost control of their vehicle after striking a separated tread in the road. Mr. Devon is concerned that retreaded tires do not meet the same standards as new tires and requested data on accidents caused by separated tire tread sections on the roadway. By way of background information, the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, 15 U.S.C. 1381, et seq. (Safety Act) authorizes NHTSA to issue safety standards applicable to new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. Pursuant to that authority, NHTSA has issued various Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) applicable to tires: FMVSS Nos. 109 and 110 for new pneumatic passenger car tires, FMVSS Nos. 119 and 120 for new pneumatic tires for other than passenger cars, and FMVSS No. 117 for retreaded passenger car tires. There is currently no standard applicable to retreaded tires for vehicles other than passenger cars. This is because the agency is not aware of any data suggesting a safety need for such a standard. With respect to tire tread separation, examination of actual tire scraps from the nation's highways have indicated that about 60 percent came from retreaded tires and 40 percent from original tires. Because of the many complaints about heavy truck tire tread scraps on and around the highways, the University of Michigan conducted a study in the mid-1980s entitled 'Large Truck Accidents Involving Tire Failure.' That study concluded that most large truck tire failures are caused by vehicle overload and/or tire underinflation. Underinflation causes excessive flexing of the tire. The friction resulting from that flexing causes excessive heat buildup which can, in turn, result in tread separation or other tire failure. Indeed, the heat buildup has been known to be so extreme as to cause the tire to burst into flame. The findings from the Michigan study led the FHWA to prohibit the operation of commercial motor vehicles with overloaded and underinflated tires, unless the vehicle is operated pursuant to a special permit issued by a state. That permit, however, requires a reduced speed to compensate for the increased tire loading. In addition, the vehicle and the tires must be maintained in a safe operating condition at all times. FHWA conducts roadside inspection programs to ensure that such requirements are being met. While scraps of tires on the roadway could pose a safety hazard to motorists, this agency has no real world crash data to indicate what percentage of motor vehicle crashes could be attributed to separated tire treads. Our crash data are limited to the general category of tire failure. Please be assured that NHTSA and FHWA, as well as the tire industry itself, are engaged in ongoing efforts to alleviate this problem by appropriate publicity to large truck owners and operators regarding proper tire care and maintenance and by vigorous vehicle inspection programs. I hope this information is helpful. If your constituent has any further questions, he may contact Walter Myers of this office at this address or at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, John Womack Acting Chief Counsel Enclosure Constituent's Correspondence"; |
|
ID: aiam3671OpenMr. David E. Williams, Marketing Manager, Smithers Scientific Services, Inc., 1150 N. Freedom Street, P.O. Box 351, Ravenna, OH 44266; Mr. David E. Williams Marketing Manager Smithers Scientific Services Inc. 1150 N. Freedom Street P.O. Box 351 Ravenna OH 44266; Dear Mr. Williams: This responds to your letter to Mr. Kratzke of my staff, asking abou the requirements of Safety Standard No. 119, *New Pneumatic Tires for Motor Vehicles Other Than Passenger Cars* (49 CFR 571.119) (copy enclosed). Specifically, you are representing a towing trailer manufacturer which would like to mount aircraft tires on its trailers as original equipment.; Paragraph S5.1.1 of Standard No. 120, *Tire Selection and Rims fo Motor Vehicles Other Than Passenger Cars*, 49 CFR 571.120) specifies that new trailers shall be equipped with tires that meet the requirements of either Safety Standard No. 109, which applies to passenger car tires, or Safety Standard No. 119. Your client intends to meet this requirement by equipping the trailers with tires which comply with Standard No. 119. However, your tests showed that the aircraft tires which the trailer manufacturer wants to use on the trailers could not pass the high speed test in Standard No. 119. You asked if the high speed test requirement could be avoided if those tires were speed-restricted to 55 miles per hour (mph) or less.; The answer is yes. Speed restrictions may only be placed on a tire b the tire manufacturer, and may only be specified at 35, 50, or 55 mph. To create a speed-restriction, paragraph S6.5(e) of Standard No. 119 requires the tire manufacturer to mark the notation 'max speed 55 mph' on both sidewalls. When a tire is so marked, it is speed-restricted for purposes of Standard No. 119. Paragraph S6.3 of Standard No. 119 states that the high speed test requirement 'applies only to motorcycle tires and non- speed-restricted tires.' Accordingly, no high speed tests are conducted on tires which are speed-restricted.; You should, however, be aware of the requirements of 49 CFR Part 567 *Certification* (copy enclosed). Specifically, section 567.4(g)(3) and (4) requires a vehicle manufacturer to show a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) and gross axle weight rating (GAWR) for each axle on the certification label required to appear on all new vehicles. The NHTSA requires that the GVWR and GAWR placed on the certification label be unqualified by any speed restrictions and be based on the 60 mph capabilities assigned to the tires and rims by the Tire & Rim Association. Other GVWR and GAWR values may be assigned by the manufacturer, but they must be listed after the information required on the certification label, and they do not form the basis for testing a vehicle's compliance with safety standards, such as Standard No. 120.; Finally, I wish to emphasize that if these towing trailers are likel to be used at speeds in excess of 55 mph, the use of tires which are speed-restricted to 55 mph might well be determined to constitute a safety-related defect in the vehicle, under the terms of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, as amended (15 U.S.C. 1381 *et seq*.). When a determination is made that a vehicle or item of equipment contains a safety-related defect, section 154 of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1414) requires the manufacturer to repair or replace the defective vehicle or item without charge to the purchaser.; Should you need any further information on this matter, please contac Mr. Kratzke at (202) 426-2992.; Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: 1982-1.19OpenTYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA DATE: 02/26/82 FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; F. Berndt; NHTSA TO: Malcolm J. McCalmon -- International Sales Manager, CENTRA Leichtmetall - Rader GmbH TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION TEXT: This responds to your letter to Mr. Kratzke of my staff concerning the Federal requirements for vehicle wheels that are to be imported into the United States. You noted in your letter that the wheels would be for "original equipment on passenger vehicles and non-passenger vehicles (recreation vehicles)." There are two Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards which apply to wheel rims. There are no standards applicable to the rest of the wheel assembly, however. The two applicable standards are No. 110, Tire selection and rims - passenger cars, and No. 120, Tire selection and rims for motor vehicles other than passenger cars. I have enclosed copies of both standards, along with Standards Nos. 109 and No. 119, which are applicable to tires. For those passenger car rims you manufacture there are two requirements, specified in section S4.4 of Standard No. 110. First, the rim must be constructed to the dimensions of one of the rims that is listed under the definition of a test rim in Standard No. 109. This means that the rim must comply with the dimensional specifications shown for that rim size in the current publications of specified standardization organizations, such as the Tire & Rim Association, the European Tyre and Rim Technical Organization, or the Deutsches Institut fur Normung. Second, in the event of a rapid loss of inflation pressure with the vehicle travelling in a straight line at 60 miles per hour, the rim must retain the deflated tire until the vehicle can be stopped with a controlled braking application. For those rims you manufacture for use on vehicles other than passenger cars, Standard No. 120 also specifies two requirements. The first requirement, set forth in section S5.1.1, is that the rims on a vehicle must correspond with the size tire on the vehicle, i.e., be listed as suitable by the tire manufacturer, pursuant to either Standard No. 109 or No. 119. This would be done in the publications of the standardization organizations, as explainted above. This requirement is the responsibility of the vehicle manufacturer, since only it knows what size tires will actually be on the vehicle. The second requirement, set forth in section S5.2, is that the rim must be marked with certain specified information. When a rim manufacturer determines that its rims comply with the requirements outlined above, it may certify the rims and sell them in the United States. In your letter, you inaccurately stated that there is no a specific DOT certification for rims. While there is no specific DOT certification number, as required by some other standards for items of equipment other than rims, a manufacturer must always certify that each item of motor vehicle equipment complies with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards, pursuant to section 114 of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, as amended (15 U.S.C. 1403) (copy enclosed). That section specifies that the certification for items of motor vehicle safety equipment, including rims, may be in the form of a label or tag on the item, or on the outside of a container in which the item is delivered. All of your rims to be sold in this country must contain such a certification. The United States does not use a certification process similar to the EEC, in which the manufacturer delivers the item to be certified to the governmental entity, and that entity tests the item to determine if it can be certified. Instead, in the United States, the individual manufacturer must certify that the product complies with all applicable standards. Further, this agency does not require that a certification be based on actual tests of the equipment; we only require that the certification be made with the exercise of due care on the part of the manufacturer. It is up to the individual manufacturer to determine in the first instance exactly what data or information it needs to allow it to certify that the equipment meets all applicable Federal standards. Obviously, with respect to the requirements for rims, a manufacturer is not expected to test if the rims have the necessary markings or if the rim size is listed in one of the publications of a standardization organization. Should you have any further questions about these standards, feel free to contact me. If you need further information about the actual process of importing the rims into the United States or the form for the certification, you can contact the U.S. Customs Service Duty Assessment Division at 1301 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20229. SINCERELY, ATTACH. STEVEN KRATZKE -- Office of Chief Counsel, National Highway Safety Adm JANUARY 25, 1982 Dear Mr. Kratzke, We are a wheel manufacturing corporation in West Germany and we wish to insure that our wheels also comply with the U.S. D.O.T. requirements, specifically for original equipment on passenger vehicles and non-passenger vehicles (recreation vehicles). In a phone conversation with Mr. Art Casanova from the N.H.S.A. I found out that there is not a specific D.O.T. certification, there is only a specific marking requirement, as written in Article No. 571-120. Mr. Casanova stated that as long as we marked our wheels as required, we comply with D.O.T. standards, he suggested that I write to you to get an official letter stating the same. If there are more rigid requirements please let me know exactly what is required and send me instructions on how to accomplish what ever needs to be done. Thanking you in advance I remain Sincerely Yours, Malcolm J. Mc Calmon -- Intern Sales Manager, CENTRA GMBH |
|
ID: 11361RWKMOpen Ms. Linda Stroud Dear Ms. Stroud: This responds to your letter addressed to Walter Myers of my staff in which, referring to previous telephone conversations with Mr. Myers, you asked for written confirmation of several statements. I apologize for the delay in responding. You requested confirmation that a dealer can sell new trailers either with new tires or no tires, but not with used tires. You also sought confirmation that if a manufacturer ships trailers with used tires to dealers, the dealer would have to remove the used tires prior to retail sale and the purchaser would be responsible for installing his/her own tires. You also asked certain other questions which I will discuss below. Pursuant to your telephone conversation with Mr. Myers on October 5, 1995, Mr. Myers sent you a copy of Federal motor vehicle safety standard (FMVSS) No. 120, Tire selection and rims for motor vehicles other than passenger cars, and copies of the interpretative letters previously issued by this office that are listed and synopsized in the Appendix to this letter. By way of background, in general, paragraph S5.1.1 of FMVSS No. 120 requires that tires installed on new vehicles other than passenger cars, which includes trailers, must meet the requirements of either FMVSS No. 109, New pneumatic tires, or FMVSS No. 119, New pneumatic tires for vehicles other than passenger cars. As an exception, however, paragraph S5.1.3 of FMVSS No. 120 provides that instead of tires that meet the requirements of FMVSS No. 119, new trucks, buses, and trailers may be equipped with used or retreaded tires owned or leased by the vehicle purchaser and installed at the place of manufacture of the vehicle. Paragraph S5.1.3 also requires that the sum of the maximum load ratings meets the requirements of paragraph S5.1.2 and further requires that the tires were originally manufactured to comply with FMVSS No. 119 as evidenced by the DOT symbol. There is no requirement, however, that a vehicle subject to FMVSS No. 120 must be equipped with tires and wheels at the time of sale (see letter to Mr. Steve Thomas, dated April 14, 1993, listed in Appendix). Your letter stated that your main problem seems to be manufacturers who ship new trailers equipped with used tires. Assuming the conditions of S5.1.3 of FMVSS No. 120 are not met, that act is prohibited by 49 U.S. Code '30112 (copy enclosed), which provides in pertinent part: [With certain exceptions] a person may not manufacture for sale, sell, offer for sale, introduce or deliver for introduction in interstate commerce, or import into the United States, any motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment manufactured on or after the date an applicable motor vehicle safety standard prescribed under this chapter takes effect unless the vehicle or equipment complies with the standard and is covered by a certification issued under section 30115 of this title. Thus, manufacturers cannot ship and distributors and dealers cannot sell vehicles or equipment that do not comply with all applicable FMVSSs. As provided in paragraph S5.1.3 of FMVSS No. 120, used or retreaded tires can only be installed at the place of manufacture of the vehicle and only if owned or leased by the vehicle purchaser. With respect to used or retreaded tires, distributors and dealers cannot install such tires whether or not the tires are owned or leased by the vehicle purchaser. If a distributor or dealer receives a trailer from the manufacturer equipped with used or retreaded tires that were installed not in accordance with paragraph S5.1.3, the distributor or dealer must either replace those tires with new tires or sell the trailer without tires, leaving tire installation to the vehicle purchaser. Turning now to your specific questions, I will answer them in turn: 1. What is the definition of a trailer manufacturer? A "manufacturer" is defined in 49 U.S. Code '30102(a)(5) as a person: (A) manufacturing or assembling motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment; or (B) importing motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment for resale. We define a "trailer" in 49 CFR 571.3 as: [A] motor vehicle with or without motive power, designed for carrying persons or property and for being drawn by another vehicle. Under these definitions, a trailer manufacturer is one who manufactures or assembles trailers, as distinguished from a distributor who primarily sells and distributes motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment for resale (in other words, a wholesaler), or a dealer, who primarily sells and distributes motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment at retail. 2. Is a Utility Trailer included in this safety standard [FMVSS No. 120] or does it relate only to certain size trailers? Paragraph S3, Application, of FMVSS No. 120 provides that the standard applies to "multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, buses, trailers, and motorcycles, . . ." (emphasis added). Neither the standard nor the trailer definition limits its application to trailers. Accordingly, all new trailers of any size, use, weight, or configuration, including new utility trailers, are subject to the requirements of the standard. 3. Could you indicate those trailers which are governed by this regulation? As indicated in the answer to question 2 above, all new trailers, including utility trailers, are included in the requirements of FMVSS No. 120. 4. Is there a specific length or width that falls under this safety standard? The answer is no. As indicated above, trailers are subject to the requirements of FMVSS No. 120 without limitation. I hope this information is helpful. Should you have further questions or require additional information, please feel free to contact Mr. Myers at this address or at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely,
Samuel J. Dubbin Chief Counsel Enclosure Ref:120 d:2/8/96
|
1996 |
ID: 77-3.21OpenTYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA DATE: 07/08/77 FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; J. K. Hofferberth for R. L. Carter; NHTSA TO: Volkswagen of America, Inc. TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION TEXT: This responds to Volkswagen's March 9, 1977, petition for reconsideration of Standard No. 120, Tire Selection and Rims for Motor Vehicles Other Than Passenger Cars. Procedures for processing petitions for reconsideration are contained in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 49, Part 553. Part 553.35(c) states that "[the] Administrator does not consider repetitious petitions." Your March 9 petition raises two issues that were also discussed in your February 20, 1976, petition for reconsideration. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) carefully considered those issues in our February 7, 1977 (42 FR 7140) response to petitions for reconsideration. Since the agency has considered these issues previously, the NHTSA declines to consider them again as you suggest. SINCERELY, Volkswagon of America, Inc. March 9, 1977 Docket Section National Highway Traffic Safety Administration SUBJECT: Docket 71-19, Notice 06; Docket 75-32, Notice 02 -- Tire Selection and Rims for Vehicles Other Than Passenger Cars, FMVSS 120, Petition for Reconsideration We respectfully submit enclosed the petition of Volkswagen-werk Aktiengesellschaft and Audi NSU Auto Union AG with respect to "Tire Selection and Rims for Vehicles Other Than Passenger Cars," as called for by the above docket. Joseph W. Kennebeck Manager, Emissions, Safety and Development VOLKSWAGEN PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION, FMVSS 120, DOCKET 71-19, NOTICE 06; DOCKET 75-32, NOTICE 02 In our Petition for Reconsideration of February 20, 1976, Volkswagen requested, among other things, that the Administration reconsider those parts of FMVSS 120 that required rims be marked: 1. With the letter "D" for DIN, and, 2. With a rim size designation having the diameter preceding the width. Docket 71-19, Notice 06; Docket 75-32, Notice 02 (42FR7140) denied our requests for amendment. In the following, we present new facts and ask that the administration reconsider its decision not to amend the standard. Specifically, we request that S 5.2 be amended so that the full letter abbreviation of the source organization be required to designate the organization, and that in the rim size designation, the width be required to proceed the diameter. Attachment "A" shows a wheel we marked to comply with German law and our suggested changes to S 5.2 of FMVSS 120. As can be seen there is extremely little flat space on the disc to accept additional markings. Marking the other side of the wheel would require new tooling, and might interfere with the wheel/drum interface. In our previous petition, we explained the reasons for not being able to mark the rims. In spite of the fact that ISO is considering a standard that would recommend specifying rims by diameter x width, which may or may not become part of the final standard, the DIN still specifies that one-piece, single-manufacturer wheels have their discs marked with the rim size and type, with the width preceding the diameter, (Ref. attachment 4 of our petition of February 20, 1976). This is in addition to the other DIN information. In its response to Volkswagen's petition of February 20, the NHTSA stated, "This order of information is being considered as the uniform practice to be adopted by the International Standards Organization. For reason of uniformity, the requests are denied." According to our information, the draft proposal submitted by the U.S. delegation to ISO has not been voted upon, and there are other proposals from European delegates which would specify the designation order as width x diameter. This uniformity argument, then, does not apply. In its denial of permission to use the letters "DIN" to designate the source organization, the Administration stated that ". . . they are undesirable in the interests of maintaining uniformity and comprehension." We submit that the addition of a new letter, e.g., "D", would upset the current uniformity achieved by accepted practice of using the letters "DIN," and interfere with comprehension since the "DIN" letters are well known in automotive circles around the world, while the letter "D" would not be understood, and, in fact, might be confused with load ratings. We note that under Notice 2, which proposed the use of "a designation to indicate the source of the published dimensions to which the rim conforms . . .," the "DIN" letters would have been acceptable. If the full letters of the abbreviation for the source organization were now required by the NHTSA, a greater uniformity would be achieved. We suggest that it is contrary to logic for a standard to require that the acronym for an organization recognized by that standard be abbreviated when that acronym is already in use on subject equipment. Regarding the rim designation, in 41FR3478, it is stated, "The tires must be fitted to rims which have been designated by the tire manufacturer, in accordance with S 4.4 of Standard No. 109 or S 5.1 of Standard No. 119, as suitable for use with those tires. The designations are made by listing the tire-rim matching information in one of seven industry-maintained publications . . ." In the case of the DIN maintained publications, the rim size is designated width x diameter. Further, S 5.1.1, states, ". . . each vehicle . . . shall be equipped . . . with rims that are listed by the manufacturer of the tires as suitable for use with those tires . . ." In the case of German tire manufacturers, the subject listing will be width x diameter. We ask for your answer to this petition for reconsideration as early as possible because production lead time in wheel manufacturing is such that if retooling is required, it must be started no later than April 1 in order to comply with this standard's deadline of September 1, 1977. Attachment (Graphics omitted) |
|
ID: nht80-4.5OpenDATE: 09/29/80 FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; F. Berndt; NHTSA TO: Elgene Tire Company TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION TEXT: This responds to your August 15, 1980 letter to this office requesting an interpretation of the requirements of Standard 120 (49 CFR @ 571.120). Specifically, you were concerned about paragraph S5.1.3, which permits the use of used tires on new vehicles other than passenger cars. The interpretations set forth below follow the same order used in your letter. (1) New motor vehicles subject to Standard 120, which includes all motor vehicles other than passenger cars, may be equipped with used tires, pursuant to the provisions of paragraph S5.1.3 of the standard; provided, that the used tires are owned or leased by the vehicle purchaser and that they are installed on the vehicle at the request of the purchaser. This means that a vehicle manufacturer may not itself purchase used tires to install on new vehicles, nor may a vehicle purchaser authorize the manufacturer to install used tires not owned or leased by the purchaser of the vehicle. (2) There is no limitation as to the axles on which used tires may be used. It would be permissible for a vehicle purchaser to ask a vehicle manufacturer to install the purchaser's used tires on each axle of the vehicle. The only requirement for axles in section S5.1.3 is that each axle must be equipped with tires, new or used, the sum of whose load ratings is at least equal to the gross axle weight rating for that axle. (3) The used tires installed pursuant to paragraph S5.1.3 must be marked with the DOT number to indicate that the tires were originally manufactured in compliance with Standard 119. The January 1, 1978 date to which you referred means that all vehicles manufactured after that date and equipped with used tires under S5.1.3, must be equipped with used tires that originally complied with Standard 119 and have the DOT marking. The requirement does not mean that the used tires must have been originally manufactured on or after January 1, 1978, as you stated in your letter. (4) For purposes of this section of Standard 120, used tires have been interpreted to include retreaded tires. To repeat what I stated under answer number "1" above, your statement that the vehicle purchaser may use retreaded tires on his vehicle if he requests the manufacturer to install retreaded tires is not entirely accurate. The retreaded tires may only be used if they are owned or leased by the vehicle purchaser. The penalties for failure to comply with Standard 120 could be up to $ 1,000 for each violation, pursuant to the authority of sections 108 and 109 of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, as amended (15 U.S.C. 1397 and 1398). Since Standard 120 applies to vehicles, the vehicle manufacturer would be responsible for any violation. This agency considers each separate use of an unauthorized tire on a vehicle to be a separate violation. For example, if a vehicle had six tires and each failed to comply with the requirements of Standard 120, the vehicle would have six violations, and civil penalties of up to $ 6,000 could be assessed against the vehicle manufacturer. Enforcement of Standard No. 120 is under the general provisions of the Vehicle Safety Act. There are no special enforcement procedures. The agency has investigators who check vehicles to ensure that they comply with the applicable standards. If there is a noncompliance, the agency has the authority to sue the violator in a Federal court to collect the civil penalties, pursuant to section 105 of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1394). If the new vehicles were shipped without tires, as you suggested in the last question in your letter, Standard 120 would not apply to the vehicles. Section S5.1.1 specifies that the requirements of this standard apply to "each vehicle equipped with pneumatic tires for highway service." Only vehicles so equipped are subject to Standard 120. You should be aware of the fact that this agency will soon publish a notice proposing changes in the requirements of section S5.1.3 of Standard 120. If you would like a copy of that proposal after it is published, or have any further questions on this matter, please contact Stephen Kratzke of my staff at this address. SINCERELY, August 15, 1980 Chief Counsel National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Dear Sir: In reference to U.S. Department of Transportation 571.120 standard no. 120: Tire Selection for motor vehicles other than passenger cars. Section S5.1.3 specifically. It is my interpretation that: 1. New trailers, trailer/container chassis, trucks and buses, may be equipped with retread tires utilizing salvaged, used, worn tire bodies. 2. These retreads may not be used on steering axles. 3. The worn, used tire bodies (casings) must have been manufactured on and after January 1, 1978, as evidenced by the DOT symbol marked on one sidewall. 4. The purchaser of the equipment may use retread tires on these new vehicles when he requests the chassis manufacturer to install same. Would you please give me your interpretation of the above. I have great difficulty in competitively securing new chassis O.E.M. retread business with the opposition ignoring the requirements as I interpret them to be. This is a very viable segment of the retread industry since retreads salvage worn tires by consuming far less energy and oil than do new tires. Are there penalties for non-conforming? Are there any enforcement procedures? If the new chassis, trailers, etc. were shipped without tires at all -- would the D.O.T. 120/119 casing (used) tire requirement be applicable? If further personal discussions are necessary please feel free to call upon me. I urge you to respond quickly. Gene S. Rosenfeld, President |
|
ID: nht76-1.50OpenDATE: 06/12/76 FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; T. W. Herlihy for S. P. Wood; NHTSA TO: Toyota Motors Sales, U.S.A., Inc. TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION TEXT: This is in response to your February 23, 1976, letter concerning the rim marking requirements of S5.2 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 120, Tire Selection and Rims for Motor Vehicles Other Than Passenger Cars. In its present form, S5.2 requires a rim to which the standard applies to be marked with its size designation and, if it is a multi-piece rim, its type designation as well. There is no prohibition on the marking of additional information beyond that which is required. Therefore, the marking of single piece rims with a type designation is permitted. Please note that, in a notice published on May 6, 1976 (41 FR 18659, Docket No. 71-19, Notice 4), the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration delayed the effective dates of several of the standard's requirements. In particular, the effective date of S5.2, Rim Marking, was delayed until August 1, 1977. A copy of this notice is enclosed for your convenience. Yours truly, Enclosure ATTACH. TOYOTA MOTOR SALES, U.S.A., INC. FACTORY REPRESENTATIVE OFFICE February 23, 1976 Frank A. Berndt -- Office of the Chief Counsel, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation Re: Interpretation of FMVSS No. 120, S5.2 Dear Mr. Berndt: This is to request interpretation of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 120, 'Tire Selection and Rims for Vehicles other than Passenger Cars," which was published in the Federal Register of January 23, 1976 as Docket No. 71-19; Notice 3. In S5.2, it lists the information required to be marked on each rim on and after August 1, 1976. As we understand it, this requirement does not prohibit marking of additional information on rims. For example, although S5.2(6) requires that each rim be marked with information of the rim size designation, and, in the case of multipiece rims, the rim type designation, we believe that single piece rims should also be marked with the rim type designation, such as the type of flange denoted as J, JJ, etc., for reasons of vehicle safety. We would appreciate your informing us of the correct interpretation at your earliest convenience. Very truly yours, D. KIWANO FOR K. Nakajima -- Director/General Manager, Factory Representative Office |
|
ID: 77-3.12OpenTYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA DATE: 06/27/77 FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Joseph J. Levin Jr.; NHTSA TO: Truck Body and Equipment Association Inc. TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION TEXT: This responds to your April 6, 1977, letter asking whether two proposed labels satisfy the requirements for certification and information labels found in 49 CFR Part 567, Certification, and Standard No. 120, Tire Selection and Rims for Motor Vehicles Other Than Passenger Cars. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) does not issue advance approval of compliance by manufacturers with motor vehicle safety standards or regulations. The agency, however, will give an informal opinion as to whether your sample labels appear to comply with NHTSA regulations. From the illustrations you present, it appears that you have closely followed the format suggested in our regulations, and therefore, the labels seem to comply with the agency's requirements. Section S5.3(b) of Standard No. 120 permits the use of both labels when affixed in accordance with Part 567.4(b)-(f). SINCERELY, TRUCK BODY AND EQUIPMENT ASSOCIATION, INC. April 6, 1977 Frank Berndt Acting Chief Counsel National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Dockets 71-19; Notice 06 and No. 75-32; Notice 02 amend FMVSS 120 "Tire Selection and Rims for Motor Vehicles other than Passenger Cars" and Part 567 "Certification" by requiring tire and rim information on or adjacent to a vehicle's certification label. Effective September 1, 1977, FMVSS 120, S5.3 (b) will allow a final stage manufacturer to use at his option, a "Tire Information Label" in conjunction with his present certification label. The enclosed sheet depicts Truck Body and Equipment Association's proposed Tire and Rim Information Label for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's evaluation. Are we correct in assuming that our proposed Tire-Rim Information Label when used with, and affixed adjacent to our present certification label (attachment 2) meets the new requirements of FMVSS 120 and Part 567? Byron A. Crampton Manager of Engineering Services PROPOSED "TIRE-RIM INFORMATION" LABEL TIRE-RIM INFORMATION GVWR GAWR FRONT with tires, rims, at psi cold GAWR INTERMEDIATE with tires, rims, at psi cold GAWR REAR with tires, rims, at psi cold VIN Notes: 1. Yellow foil with black lettering 2. Label shall meet 567.4(b) through (f) (Illegible Text) |
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.