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: nht87-3.50OpenTYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA DATE: DECEMBER 23, 1987 FROM: CHARLEY ERICKSON -- PRESIDENT - CHARLEY'S OFF ROAD CENTER, INC. TO: ERIKA JONES -- CHIEF COUNSEL, NHTSA TITLE: NONE ATTACHMT: MEMO DATED 6-24-88, FROM ERIKA Z. JONES, TO CHARLEY ERICKSON, STD 302 TEXT: Please accept this letter as our request for an interpretation of SAFETY STANDARD NO. 302. Our company wishes to manufacture a product know as a Bikini sun shade. This product has been on the market for many years by other manufacturers. We wish to use a material known as "Sunbrella", manufactured by Glen Raven (sample enclosed). As you can see, the material is non-fire retardent. We don't feel that this particular product would be applicable under S3A of Standard NO. 302. As you can imagine this product would only be used by the consumer during warm days on vehicles such as Jeeps, Suzuki and Toyota Landcrusiers. Its purpose is to give some shade, but yet allow the vehicle to have an "open" feeling. Our material comes in many different colors and patterns. We wish to market it under the name of CALIFORNIA STRIPER. I have enclosed a few pictures to help you understand the products application. Please respond as soon as possible as spring is just around the corner. |
|
ID: aiam5114OpenMr. Vasant Jinwala Consumer Testing Laboratories 480 Neponset Street Canton, MA 02021; Mr. Vasant Jinwala Consumer Testing Laboratories 480 Neponset Street Canton MA 02021; "Dear Mr. Jinwala: This responds to your inquiry about a product know as the 'Comfort Cushion' that your organization is testing for compliance with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 302, Flammability of Interior Materials, (49 CFR 571.302). According to the product's packaging that accompanied your letter, the Comfort Cushion is intended to be placed over seats in motor vehicles as well as in homes and offices. You stated that a Comfort Cushion you tested did not conform to Standard No. 302. You further stated that the product's manufacturer believes that Standard No. 302 only applies to a car's original equipment and does not apply to an aftermarket auto accessory. I am pleased to have this opportunity to explain our regulations to you. By way of background information, NHTSA is authorized to regulate the manufacture and sale of new motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment. Section 102(4) of the Safety Act defines, in relevant part, the term 'motor vehicle equipment' as: any system, part, or component of a motor vehicle as originally manufactured or any similar part or component manufactured or sold for replacement or improvement of such system, part, or component or as any accessory, or addition to the motor vehicle ... In determining whether an item of equipment is considered an accessory, NHTSA applies two criteria. The first criterion is whether a substantial portion of the expected use of the item is related to the operation or maintenance of motor vehicles. We determine a product's expected use by considering product advertising, product labeling, and the type of store that retails the product, as well as available information about the actual use of the product. The second criterion is whether the product is intended to be used principally by ordinary users of motor vehicles. If the product satisfies both criteria, then the product is considered to be an 'accessory' and thus is subject to the provisions of the Safety Act. Applying these criteria to the Comfort Cushion, it appears that this product would be an accessory and thus an item of motor vehicle equipment under the Safety Act. Based on our understanding of the product, it appears that a substantial portion of the expected use of the Comfort Cushion will be during motor vehicle operations. In addition, it appears that the product would typically be used by ordinary users of motor vehicles since it is intended to be placed over the vehicle's seats. While it appears that the Comfort Cushion is an item of motor vehicle equipment, NHTSA has not issued any standards setting forth performance requirements for such a device. Standard No. 302 would not apply to the device because that standard applies to new motor vehicles and not to aftermarket items of motor vehicle equipment. However, there are other Federal laws that indirectly affect the manufacture and sale of the Comfort Cushion. The manufacturer of the product is subject to the requirements in sections 151-159 of the Safety Act concerning the recall and remedy of products with defects related to motor vehicle safety. In the event that the manufacturer or NHTSA determines that the product contains a safety related defect, the manufacturer would be responsible for notifying purchasers of the defective equipment and for remedying the problem free of charge. A commercial business that installs the Comfort Cushion would be subject to provisions of the Safety Act that affect whether the business may install the product on a vehicle. Section 108(a)(2)(A) of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(2)(A)) provides that: No manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business shall knowingly render inoperative, in whole or in part, any device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle ... in compliance with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard. Any violation of this 'render inoperative' prohibition would subject the violator to a potential civil penalty of up to $1,000 for each violation. A manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business that installs an aftermarket item of rapidly burning material could vitiate the compliance of the materials that were present in the vehicle at the time of the vehicle's sale to the first consumer. Such an installation could constitute a possible violation of the render inoperative prohibition. Please note also that the render inoperative prohibition does not apply to modifications vehicle owners make to their own vehicles. Thus, Federal law would not apply in situations where individual vehicle owners install the Comfort Cushion in their own vehicles, even if the installation were to result in the vehicle no longer complying with the safety standards. However, individual States have the authority to regulate modifications that individual vehicle owners may make to their own vehicles. I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions about NHTSA's safety standards, please feel free to contact Marvin Shaw of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, John Womack Acting Chief Counsel"; |
|
ID: aiam2840OpenMr. Irving A. Cohen, Goulston & Storrs, One Federal Street, Boston, MA, 02110; Mr. Irving A. Cohen Goulston & Storrs One Federal Street Boston MA 02110; Dear Mr. Cohen: This is (sic) responds to your May 26, 1978, letter asking severa questions about the applicability of Standard No. 302, *Flammability of Interior Materials*, to your client, a fabric manufacturer.; In your first question, you ask whether the National Highway Traffi Safety Administration (NHTSA) alone regulates the flammability of seat covers or whether other agencies are involved. We know of no other agency involved in the regulation of motor vehicle seat covers.; Your second question asks whether the manufacturer of the fabric or th manufacturer of the vehicle or seat cover would be responsible for compliance with the standard. Since Standard No. 302 is a vehicle standard, the manufacturer of the vehicle would be responsible for ensuring compliance with it, not the manufacturer of the fabric. For replacement seat covers, the installer of those covers, if it is a repair business, manufacturer, or dealer, would be required to ensure that it was not rendering inoperative compliance of the original seat covers with Standard No. 302 and would be responsible for installing only complying seat covers.; Your final question asks who is responsible for recalls and othe agency requirements, the vehicle manufacturer or the fabric manufacturer. Once again, since this is a vehicle standard, the vehicle manufacturer must comply with our requirements, not the fabric manufacturer. In conclusion, your client as a manufacturer of fabric is not responsible for compliance with the agency's flammability standard or the recall and remedy regulations.; Sincerely, Joseph J. Levin, Jr., Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam0834OpenStanley D. Bynum, Esq., Bradley, Arant, Rose & White, 1500 Brown-Marx Building, Birmingham, AL, 35203; Stanley D. Bynum Esq. Bradley Arant Rose & White 1500 Brown-Marx Building Birmingham AL 35203; Dear Mr. Bynum: This is in reply to your letter of July 31, 1972, concerning Moto Vehicle Safety Standard No. 302, 'Flammability of Interior Materials'.; You ask whether your client is justified in assuring its customers tha the mattress ticking it manufactures complies with Standard No. 302 after a testing company has reported that it does. Whether a product must meet the requirements of a federal motor vehicle safety standard is determined by the 'application' section of each standard. Standard No. 302 is by its terms applicable to specific types of motor vehicles, and individual items of motor vehicle equipment are not included. Of course, components which are incorporated into motor vehicles covered by the Standard will normally be required by contract with the motor vehicle manufacturer to conform to all relevant standards before the first purchase by a user.; The basis upon which a manufacturer makes a determination that vehicle or component conforms to a standard is within his own discretion. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration does not provide approval of any item of motor vehicle equipment as conforming to any motor vehicle safety standards.; You ask further, 'to what extent, if any, will the manufacturer of product which in its original state complies with federal law be held responsible for noncompliance despite alteration of the product by the ultimate consumer'. Generally, a manufacturer is not liable for the noncompliance of its product resulting from the alterations of a consumer. However, if the manufacturer could reasonably expect consumers to perform the alteration, then the NHTSA might consider the resultant nonconformity to be a safety related defect under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act.; Finally, you are correct in assuming that the NHTSA views 15 U.S.C S1397(b)(2) to mean that a 'manufacturer may escape the penalties contained in S1398 of title 15 upon a showing that it 'did not have reason to know in the exercise of due care' that its product was substandard'.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam0828OpenMr. J. W. Kennebeck, Manager, Safety & Development, Volkswagen of America, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 07632; Mr. J. W. Kennebeck Manager Safety & Development Volkswagen of America Inc. Englewood Cliffs NJ 07632; Dear Mr. Kennebeck: This is in reply to your letter of July 27, 1972, requesting a interpretation of S4.3 of Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 302, 'Flammability of Interior Materials', and an opinion regarding the applicability of Standard No. 302 to your Model 15 convertible top cover.; You ask whether the basic burn rate of not more than 4 inches pe minute or the burn rate of 2 inches in less than 60 seconds should be applied to material which self-extinguishes after 55 seconds at a burn distance of 3 inches. The answer to this question is that the basic burn rate of not more than 4 inches per minute applies to this case. The basic burn rate requirement, calculated according to the formula given in S5.3(g), applies whenever the tested material burns more than 2 inches or more than 60 seconds. This 2-inch, 60-second burn rate provided in the second sentence of paragraph S4.3 is given to simplify the calculation of certain self-extinguishing materials, not for the purpose of imposing an additional requirement.; In regard to your graphic illustrations and you request for our opinio with respect to the validity of your Figure 3, you are correct in assuming that materials falling under the B-line are acceptable and that the portions of the shaded area under the B-line in Figure 2 represent an overlap that is in the acceptable area. The second burn rate was intended as a means for rapid qualification of test specimens that, because of their specified flammability limits, would be acceptable without further calculation to determine the burn rate. Any materials falling outside of the 2-inch or 60-second limits require calculation. It would, as you suggest, be a further simplification to say that material that self-extinguishes before burning 2 inches meets the performance requirement and is acceptable.; You ask further whether Standard No. 302 applies to your Model 1 convertible top cover. We consider for this purpose a convertible top cover, or boot, to be part of the convertible top itself and consequently subject to the standard.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam0541OpenMr. Howard E. Ballard, Ballard Manufacturing Company, 1063 E. Third Street, Pomona, CA, 91766; Mr. Howard E. Ballard Ballard Manufacturing Company 1063 E. Third Street Pomona CA 91766; Dear Mr. Ballard: This is in reply to your letter of July 17, 1972, concerning th application of Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 302, 'Flammability of Interior Materials.' You raise several questions in your letter which are restated below.; >>>1. 'What is the 'grace' period after the law comes into effect. .?'; Standard No. 302 was issued on December 9, 1970, and became effectiv with respect to vehicles manufactured on or after September 1, 1972.; 2. 'Are we correct in assuming that slide-in campers and trave trailers are not affected by this law. . .?'; The Standard applies to passenger cars, multipurpose passenge vehicles, trucks, and buses. It does not apply to trailers (including 'fifth-wheel trailers') or slide-in (including 'cab over') campers.; 3. 'Does the foam in quilted plastic material need to b flame-retardant if the plastic itself (non-quilted) is already flame-proofed?'; 4. 'If the 1/4 inch foam used in quilted material is flame-proofed must a 5 inch core of foam used in a fabricated cushion be flame-proofed, also?'; The Standard provides a detailed description of the components require to meet its requirements, and of the depth of the materials in those components that are required to be tested. Generally, the answer to both of these questions is yes, material within 1/2 inch of the surface of an item is subject to the requirements.; 5. 'On recover jobs, must we replace customer's old foam wit flame-retardant foam?'; Standard No. 302 does not apply to replacement parts of aftermarke materials.; 6. 'Must the plywoods used for backs in dinettes be flame-proofed i the plastic or cloth used to upholster them is already flame-proofed?'; You should note that the Standard does not require 'flame-proofing, rather that the specimens must not burn at more than 4 inches per minute. The test specimens are determined by depth, as stated in our preceding answer, not by the nature of the material. The answer would therefore depend on whether the plywood is within 1/2 inch of the surface.<<<; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel |
|
ID: 6949Open Mr. Carl J. Clement Dear Mr. Clement: This responds to your letter of January 28, 1992 requesting information on any Federal regulations that may affect a new product you are developing. The product is an electronically-operated automotive sun visor that would automatically detect the direction of sunlight or glare and reposition itself to shield the driver. I am pleased to have this opportunity to explain our regulations to you. By way of background information, 103 of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (Safety Act, 15 U.S.C. 1392) authorizes the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to issue safety standards for new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA does not, however, approve or certify any vehicles or items of equipment. Instead, the Safety Act establishes a "self-certification" process under which each manufacturer is responsible for certifying that its products meet all applicable safety standards. The agency periodically tests vehicles and items of equipment for compliance with the standards. In addition, the Safety Act requires manufacturers to recall and remedy any motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment that contains a safety-related defect. NHTSA has issued two safety standards that apply to sun visors: Standard No. 201, Occupant protection in interior impact, and Standard No. 302, Flammability of interior materials. These standards are called vehicle standards, because they apply to new vehicles, not to individual pieces of equipment. The Safety Act specifies that vehicles must conform with all applicable safety standards up until the first purchase for purposes other than resale. Therefore, if your sun visor were installed as original equipment by a manufacturer of a new motor vehicle, the visor would have to comply with the requirements of these two standards. Standard No. 201 requires that the visor be "constructed of or covered with energy-absorbing material" and that the visor's mounting must "present no material edge radius of less than 0.125 inch that is statically contactable by a spherical 6.5-inch diameter head form." The purpose of that requirement is to reduce the injuries that occur when unrestrained occupants strike the visor or its mounting with their heads. Standard No. 302 requires sun visors to meet the flammability resistance requirements of the standard. The standard specifies that the material used on the visor must not burn at a rate of more than four inches per minute. If a new vehicle is altered by the installation of your product prior to the vehicle's first sale to a consumer, the person making the installation is considered an "alterer" and is required by 49 CFR Part 567, Certification, to certify that the vehicle complies with all applicable safety standards affected by the alteration. In addition to Standards No. 201 and 302, the installation of your product might affect the compliance of a vehicle with a number of other safety standards, including Standard No. 111, Rearview mirrors, and Standard No. 208, Occupant crash protection. After the first sale to a consumer, a vehicle is no longer required by Federal law to conform to all safety standards. However, 108(a)(2)(A) of the Safety Act provides as follows: No manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business shall knowingly render inoperative, in whole or part, any device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment in compliance with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard... In order to avoid violating this provision, a manufacturer, dealer, distributor, or repair business which installed your sun visor would have to ensure that such installation enables the vehicle to continue to comply with all applicable safety standards. Violations of 108(a)(2)(A) are punishable by civil fines of up to $1,000 per violation. I note that 108(a)(2)(A) does not affect modifications made by vehicle owners to their own vehicles. Finally, under the Safety Act, your sun visor would be considered an item of motor vehicle equipment. If your sun visor will be sold as an item of equipment to be installed by the vehicle owner, there is currently no Federal motor vehicle safety standard that applies. However, even if there is no safety standard applicable to the item of motor vehicle equipment, the manufacturer is subject to the requirements in 151-159 of the Safety Act concerning the recall and remedy of products with safety defects. In the event that NHTSA or a manufacturer determines that a manufacturer's product contains a safety-related defect, the manufacturer is responsible for notifying purchasers of the defective equipment and remedying the problem free of charge. Additionally, a company making your product would be considered a manufacturer. A manufacturer is required by 49 CFR Part 566, Manufacturer Identification, to submit information identifying itself and its products to NHTSA not later than 30 days after it begins manufacture. I have enclosed an information sheet for new manufacturers which summarizes NHTSA's regulations and explains where to obtain copies of Federal motor vehicle safety standards. I hope you find this information helpful. If you have any other questions, please contact Mary Versailles of my staff at this address or by phone at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely,
Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel Enclosure ref:201#302 d:3/30/92 |
1992 |
ID: 77-1.49OpenTYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA DATE: 03/21/77 FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank Berndt; NHTSA TO: Bohmer-Reed Inc. TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION TEXT: This responds to your February 25, 1977, letter asking whether your motor home conversions make you a manufacturer or an alterer for purposes of compliance with the regulations of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). In your conversion of motor homes, you install used bodies on new chassis. The NHTSA considers the mounting of a used body on a new chassis to be the manufacture of a new motor vehicle that requires certification. This makes you a manufacturer rather than an alterer. The rules for certification are found in Part 567, Certification, and Part 568, Vehicles Manufactured in Two or More Stages. I have enclosed copies of these regulations for your information. Your second question asks whether the converted vehicle must comply with Standard No. 302, Flammability of Interior Materials, even though the original body was manufactured prior to the effective date of the standard. Vehicles must comply with all standards in effect on the date of their manufacture. For vehicles that you complete by mounting a body on a new chassis, you are permitted to treat as the date of manufacture, the date of manufacture of the incomplete vehicle (as defined in Part 568), the date of final completion of the vehicle, or a date between those two dates. Therefore, it appears that the vehicle you manufacture would be required to comply with Standard No. 302. SINCERELY, February 25, 1977 Chief Counsel NHTSA Our's is a new company which was formed for the purpose of going into business converting customers 31' Airstream Trailers, from 1968 to present models, into Motorhomes. We build the chassis and do the conversion. We do not use any of the airstream chassis or suspension. Our chassis components have been designed by Bendix for rear suspension and brakes; Spicer Dana for the front axle; Firestone for the air suspension; Saginaw Gears for the steering system; and Ford Motors for the engine, transmission and cooling systems. We are attempting to comply with the Federal Docket in all respects. My first question is, are we to be considered a manufacturer or an alterer? Second, on Airstream Trailers, 1968 through September 1, 1972, must 302 be complied with if it does not already comply? I would appreciate any information you could furnish me on this matter. John O. Bohmer President Bohmer - Reed, Inc. Motorhome Conversions |
|
ID: aiam3834OpenJohn R. Bailen, Esq., Bane, Allison, Saint & Ehlers, P.C., 200 West Front Street, Fifth Floor, Bloomington, IL 61701; John R. Bailen Esq. Bane Allison Saint & Ehlers P.C. 200 West Front Street Fifth Floor Bloomington IL 61701; Dear Mr. Bailen: This responds to your letter to this office asking about th requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 213, *Child Restraint Systems* (49 CFR S571.213). Specifically, you represent a client who will be manufacturing seat covers which would be attached to the seat of the child restraint system. You stated that you had spoken with Mr. Radovich of our Rulemaking Division, and he had indicated his opinion that the only requirements to which these seat covers might be subject would be the flammability requirements. You asked if this is correct, and if any other requirements were applicable, noting a particular interest in whether any labeling requirements might apply to these seat covers. There are no labeling requirements promulgated by this agency applicable to those seat covers. Further, the flammability requirements incorporated in Standard No. 213 are applicable only if your client wishes to have those covers installed on child restraint systems by manufacturers, dealers, distributors, or repair shops.; Standard No. 213 specifies information which must appear on a labe affixed to each child restraint system. However, none of that information relates to the materials used in the seat covers. Hence, Standard No. 213 does not impose any labeling requirements which might be applicable to seat covers for child restraint systems.; Further, Standard No. 213 applies to child restraint systems prior t their first purchase in good faith for purposes other than resale, and not to aftermarket accessories for use with or on the child restraint system. Generally those aftermarket accessories may be added to the child restraint system, even if the addition of those accessories causes the child restraint to no longer comply with Standard No. 213, without violating the requirements of the standard.; This general rule is, however, limited by the application of th provisions of section 108(a)(2)(A) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, as amended (hereinafter 'the Safety Act', 15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(2)(A)). That section specifies: 'No manufacturer, distributor, dealer or motor vehicle repair business shall knowingly render inoperative...any device or element of design installed on or in...an item of motor vehicle equipment in compliance with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard,....' Section S5.7 of Standard No. 213 requires that each material used in a child restraint system conform to the requirements of section S4 of Standard No. 302, *Flammability of Interior Materials* (49 CFR S571.302). If a party were to add a seat cover which did not meet the flammability requirements of Standard No. 302 to a child restraint which was previously certified as meeting those flammability requirements, that act would be interpreted by this agency as rendering inoperative the flammability resistance installed on the child restraint in compliance with an applicable Federal safety standard. If such an act were performed by a manufacturer, dealer, distributor, or repair business, it would be a violation of section 108(a)(2)(A) of the Safety Act, and such a violation would subject the offender to a civil penalty of $1,000 for each violation, as specified in section 109 of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1398).; You should note that the prohibitions in section 108(a)(2)(A) of th Safety Act do not apply to a consumer who renders inoperative some element of design of the child restraint system, and therefore your client's seat cover need not satisfy the flammability requirements for child restraint systems if it is intended to be sold to and installed by consumers. You might wish to inform your client about potential liability under State and common law if the seat covers do not comply with those flammability requirements, in the event those seat covers catch fire.; You may also wish to inform your client about the potentia consequences of an item of motor vehicle equipment which is determined to contain a safety-related defect. Should these seat covers catch fire in situations where seat covers which comply with Standard No. 302 would not catch fire, the non-complying seat covers might well be found to contain a safety-related defect. Sections 151-154 of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1411-1414) require that, when an item of motor vehicle equipment contains a safety-related defect, the manufacturer of the item must recall and repair or replace the defective equipment without charge to the purchaser.; If you have any further questions or need more information on thi subject, please feel free to contact me.; Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: nht88-3.43OpenTYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA DATE: 09/12/88 FROM: ERIKA Z. JONES -- NHTSA CHIEF COUNSEL TO: DALLAS MCCLAIN -- PRO TOUR, INC. TITLE: NONE ATTACHMT: LETTER DATED 09/21/87 FROM DALLAS MCCLAIN TO OFFICE OF CHIEF COUNSEL, NHTSA, RE CLARIFICATION/INTERPRETATION OF SEATING STANDARDS; OCC-1055 TEXT: Dear Mr. McClain: This responds to your letter to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) asking four questions about the applicability of Safety Standard No. 207, Seating Systems, to buses other than school buses. I regret the delay in responding. Your first question asks about the agency's definition of a "bus" and a "multipurpose passenger vehicle." You ask how the two definitions differ, and whether the definitions are based on passenger capacity or the gross vehicle weight rating of a vehicle. A vehicle is classified as either a bus or a multipurpose passenger vehicle based in part on its passenger capacity. Our definitions for the motor vehicle safety standards are set forth in Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 571.3 (copy en closed). In that regulation, we define a "bus" as "a motor vehicle ... designed for carrying more than 10 persons." A "multipurpose passenger vehicle" is defined as "a motor vehicle ... designed to carry 10 persons or less which is constructed either on a truck chassis or with special features for occasional off-road operation." For your information, the agency is presently reviewing its classification of motor vehicles, in response to a petition for rulemaking from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. In October, 1987, NHTSA published an advance notice of proposed rulem aking which discussed various issues raised by the petition. I have enclosed a copy of the notice for your information. Your second question asks about the requirements of Standard No. 207 applying to side-facing seats and bus passenger seats. You ask whether these seats are exempt from the standard's performance requirements. You also ask whether these seats are "cover ed under another safety standard." Section S2 of Standard No. 207 provides that the standard applies to buses (among other vehicle types). Section S4.2, General performance requirements, provides that "(w)hen tested in accordance with S5., each occupant seat other than a side-facing seat or a passenger seat on a bus, shall withstand" specified forces. Passenger seats on a bus are thus excluded from the requirements of section S4.2. However, the driver's seat on a bus is not excluded from the requirements of that section. The testing procedures of section S5 are only relevant to seats which are subject to the general performance requirements of section S4.2. Similarly, section S4.3, Restraining device for hinged or folding seats or seat backs, provides that "(e)xcept for a passenger seat in a bus or a seat having a back that is adjustable only for the comfort of its occupants, a hinged or folding occupant se at or occupant seat back shall" meet specified requirements. Passenger seats on a bus are thus excluded from the requirements of section S4.3. Assuming that a hinged or folding occupant seat or occupant seat back were provided for the driver, it would n ot be excluded from the requirements of that section unless it had a back that was adjustable only for the comfort of its occupant. Safety Standard No. 222, School Bus Passenger Seating and Crash Protection, specifies criteria for testing school bus passenger seats. That standard is not applicable to buses other than school buses. The agency does not have any other standards which provide criteria for testing the strength of seating systems of buses. Bus seat cushions and seat backs are, however, subject to the flammability resistance requirements of Safety Standard No. 302, Flammability of Interior Materials. We answered the first part of your third question, which asks whether "perimeter seating" on a bus is excluded from some Standard No. 207 requirements, in our response to your second question. A passenger seat on a bus is excluded from the standard's ge neral performance requirements (S4.2) and the requirements for a restraining device for the seat back (S4.3). With the exception of Standard 302, there are no performance requirements for seat cushions for passenger seats on a bus other than a school bu s. With respect to your question whether "perimeter seating" is considered "side-facing," generally seats installed along the vehicle's sides which face the longitudinal centerline of the vehicle are considered side-facing. Seats that face toward the front of rear of the vehicle are not considered side-facing. Your fourth and final question asks, "While seats not designated for use while the vehicle is moving (MVSS 207, S4.4) must be labeled, must other occupant seating subject to MVSS 207 and MVSS 302 be labeled with a 'law label' indicating the seat has met these standards?" You are correct that S4.4 of Standard No. 207 requires that seats not designated for occupancy while the vehicle is in motion must be conspicuously labeled to that effect. However, we do not require the extensive labeling you suggest, i.e., we do not re quire that each seat bear a label indicating that the seat complies with applicable requirements of the Federal safety standards. Instead, under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act and NHTSA's regulations, the new vehicle manufacturer cert ifies that a vehicle complies with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards, including Standards No. 207 and No. 302, by affixing a single label of the type and in the manner set forth in the agency's certification regulation, 49 CFR Part 567. For your convenience, I have en closed a copy of Part 567 and information on how you can obtain copies of other NHTSA regulations and standards. I hope this letter is helpful. Please contact us if you have further questions. ENCLOSURES |
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.