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: nht95-7.66OpenTYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA DATE: December 22, 1995 FROM: Samuel J. Dubbin -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA TO: David T. Zelis -- Marketing Manager, Buyers Products Company TITLE: NONE ATTACHMT: 11/13/95 letter from David T. Zelis to Office of Chief Counsel, NHTSA TEXT: This is in response to your letter of November 13, 1995, forwarding literature concerning The Pintle Mount Bumper, which you describe as a new product being offered by your company that is designed to take the place of a vehicle bumper and the receiver tube assembly on a light duty truck. In a telephone conversation with Coleman Sachs of my staff on November 22, 1995, you described this bumper as an aftermarket product that will not be supplied as original equipment on new motor vehicles. You have requested copies of any standards issued by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) that may apply to the use or manufacture of this product. NHTSA has issued Federal motor vehicle safety standards, found at 49 CFR Part 571, and a Bumper Standard, found at 49 CFR Part 581. None of these standards apply to the product that is the subject of your inquiry. The Bumper Standard applies only to vehicles and not to bumpers sold as items of replacement equipment. Moreover, as stated in 49 CFR 581.3, the only vehicles to which the Bumper Standard applies are "passenger motor vehicles other than multipurpose passenger vehicles." The term "passenger motor vehicle" is defined for purposes of the Bumper Standard at 49 U.S.C. @ 32101 (10) as a motor vehicle with motive power designed to carry not more than 12 individuals, but does not include- (A) a motorcycle; or (B) a truck not designed primarily to carry its operator or passengers. Because the light duty pickup trucks for which your product is designed do not fall within this definition, the Bumper Standard does not apply to those vehicles. The Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS) apply only to new motor vehicles and items of replacement equipment. Because your bumper is only being sold as aftermarket equipment, it could not affect the compliance of new motor vehicles with the FMVSS. Moreover, there are no FMVSS that would apply to your bumper as a replacement equipment item. Under 49 U.S.C. @ 30122(b), a motor vehicle manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or repair business is prohibited from "knowingly mak[ing] inoperative any part of a device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle . . . in compliance with an applicable motor vehicle safety standard . . ." This provision would be violated if any of the entities to which it refers installed your bumper on a vehicle and, as a result of that installation, the vehicle no longer complied with any applicable FMVSS. For example, the installation of an aftermarket bumper could affect a vehicle's compliance with FMVSS No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment, if the bumper obscured any lights or other equipment required by the standard. Because your bumper is sold as "an addition to a motor vehicle," it meets the definition of "motor vehicle equipment" in 49 U.S.C. @ 30102(a)(7)(c). As the manufacturer of such equipment, you are responsible under 49 U.S.C. @ 30118 for furnishing NHTSA and anyone purchasing your bumper with notification of, and a remedy for, any defect relating to motor vehicle safety that is determined to exist in the bumper. If you have any further questions regarding this matter, feel free to contact Coleman Sachs of my staff at the above address, or by telephone at (202) 366-5238. |
|
ID: 08-007784drn-2OpenMs. Melissa Van Gorkom Washington State Patrol Government and Media Relations P.O. Box 42600 Olympia, WA 98504-2600 Dear Ms. Van Gorkom: This responds to your questions regarding how the National Highway Traffic Safety Administrations (NHTSAs) regulations apply to kit cars. You indicated that your questions specifically focus on a vehicle called the Tango T600, which is offered for sale by a company called Commuter Cars Corporation in Spokane, Washington. The companys website is: www.commutercars.com. Our answers are provided below. By way of background information, NHTSA is authorized under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 to issue Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSSs) applicable to new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA has used this authority to issue FMVSSs that apply to passenger cars. This agency does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment, nor do we endorse any commercial products. Instead, manufacturers are required to certify that their vehicles and equipment meet applicable standards. Also, it is unlawful for dealers to sell motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment that do not meet applicable standards. At www.commutercars.com (as accessed on July 19, 2011) the following description of the Tango T600 is provided: In order to avoid the time and expense of certification, it is being sold as a mostly-assembled kit making completion by any customer, with or without mechanical skills, a quick and easy task. Based on the photographs provided, it appears the Tango T600 has four wheels, and is therefore considered a passenger car for purposes of NHTSAs regulations. Because the description does not state that the purchaser will provide a used chassis or other used parts, it appears that all new parts are used in the kit. The retail price listed is $108,000. In your e-mail message dated December 9, 2008, to Rebecca Yoon of my staff, you posed the following questions regarding NHTSA requirements for Commuter Cars Corporation (CCC) and its product. Your first question was whether the kit car manufacturer would be required to certify the compliance of the kit as meeting all applicable FMVSSs (pursuant to 49 CFR Part 567 Certification) and would have to apply a vehicle identification number (VIN) as specified in 49 CFR Part 565 Vehicle Identification Number Requirements. The manufacturer in the case of the Tango T600 is CCC. In a NHTSA interpretation letter of July 9, 1993 to Mr. Christopher Banner (copy enclosed) we stated the following: If you ship your kit cars with all parts needed to produce a complete motor vehicle, including the power source, the agency will treat the kit car as a motor vehicle, not an assemblage of motor vehicle equipment, regardless of the state of completion of the kit. You would be required to certify that the kit car conformed to all applicable safety standards if it were treated as a new vehicle under the rules set forth in 1.[1] and 2.[2] above, but not if it were treated as a used vehicle under those rules. (See also, NHTSAs letter of September 27, 1993 to Mr. Joel Trim (copy enclosed).) Since it is offering for sale a kit car that includes all parts necessary for assembly, CCC is the manufacturer of the Tango T600 and must certify it as meeting all applicable FMVSSs for passenger cars. As the manufacturer of the Tango T600, it must also provide a VIN for each kit car. In your submission, you have included a sample copy of a CCC Certification of Origin signed by Rick Woodbury, President/CEO of CCC. As part of the Certification of Origin, the following number is provided as the VIN: CCCT6000711000002. The first three digits of the VIN are known as the World Manufacturer Identifier (WMI), which is assigned to the manufacturer by the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) in Warrendale, Pennsylvania. (See 49 CFR Section 565.7(a)). We have checked with the SAE to ascertain whether SAE has assigned CCC to Commuter Cars Corporation as the WMI. We were advised that SAE has made no assignment of any WMI to Commuter Cars Corporation. Your second question was whether, if the manufacturer of the motor vehicle cannot certify the vehicle as meeting all applicable FMVSSs, the manufacturer would be able to apply for an exemption from certain requirements (such as the requirement for air bag installation) through NHTSA. The answer is yes, but NHTSA may deny the exemption request, based on its analysis of the manufacturers application. Finally, I am enclosing a copy of a NHTSA interpretation letter of October 29, 2003, to Mr. John Lovstedt of the Hawaii State Department of Transportation, discussing the relationship between Federal and State laws relating to kit cars. In that letter, we stated in part: I will note that the issue of whether a kit car is considered to be a new motor vehicle subject to the FMVSS in effect at the time of the assembly of the vehicle is a matter of Federal law, not State law. Thus, a person who manufactured a kit car that did not comply with the FMVSS and sold it, offered it for sale, or introduced it into interstate commerce would be in violation of Federal law, regardless of any State laws. I hope this information is helpful. If you have any questions, please contact Dorothy Nakama of my staff at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, O. Kevin Vincent Chief Counsel Enclosures ref: Part 567 7/29/2011 |
|
ID: nht95-5.3OpenTYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA DATE: December 12, 1995 FROM: Samuel J. Dubbin -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA TO: Tom Byrne -- Vice President, Goodridge (USA) Inc., TITLE: NONE ATTACHMT: 10/3/95 letter from Tom Byrne to John Womack TEXT: This responds to your letter requesting an interpretation of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 106; Brake hoses. According to your letter, you plan to sell a brake hose assembly for hydraulic brake systems that you refer to as "Stainless Steel Br aided Brakelines." n1 You then asked several questions about selling your product in this country. n1 The standard defines a "brake hose assembly" as a "brake hose, with or without armor, equipped with end fittings for use in a brake system . . ." By way of background information, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) administers Federal requirements for the manufacture and sale of new motor vehicles and certain items of motor vehicle equipment, including brake hose assemblies . Congress has established a "self-certification" process under which each manufacturer is responsible for certifying that its products meet all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSSs). This process requires each manufacturer to dete rmine that its products meet all applicable requirements. NHTSA tests vehicles and equipment sold to consumers for compliance with the FMVSS's and investigates defects relating to motor vehicle safety. If a manufacturer or NHTSA determines that a nonco mpliance or safety-related defect exists, the manufacturer must notify purchasers of its product and remedy the problem free of charge. A manufacturer of a noncomplying product is also subject to a civil penalty of up to $ 1,000 for each noncomplying it em it produces. I have enclosed an information sheet that highlights the responsibilities you must meet as a manufacturer of motor vehicle equipment. Standard No. 106 applies to new motor vehicles and to brake hoses, brake hose end fittings, and brake hose assemblies. The standard specifies labeling and performance requirements for these products to reduce the likelihood of brake system failure from ruptures in the brake hose or brake hose assembly. New brake hoses, end fittings, and assemblies must meet these requirements to be sold in or imported into this country. If the items do not comply, the manufacturer is subject to the civil penalties an d the recall responsibilities mentioned above. You first asked NHTSA to "confirm" that an independent laboratory certification is valid for the United States. As explained above, NHTSA does not approve manufacturers' products or conduct pre-sale testing of their products. In the United States, the individual manufacturer must certify that its product complies with all applicable FMVSS's. You then asked NHTSA to confirm that such a brake hose assembly can be used with an adapter into the master cylinder or caliper. Your brake hose assembly can be used at any place in a motor vehicle, provided that in installing it, a vehicle manufacturer , distributor, dealer or repair business does not knowingly make inoperative, in whole or in part, a vehicle or item of equipment which is in compliance with any applicable safety standard. Specifically, inclusion of your brake hose assembly could not m odify a hydraulic brake system subject to FMVSS No. 105, Hydraulic Brake Systems, to the extent that it no longer complies with the standard. Your next question asked whether there are any special marking requirements for brake hose assemblies manufactured for sale in the United States. Section S5.2.4 sets forth labeling requirements for brake hose assemblies. Section S5.2.4 states that Each hydraulic brake hose assembly, except those sold as part of a motor vehicle, shall be labeled by means of a band around the brake hose assembly as specified in this paragraph or at the option of the manufacturer, by means of labeling as specified in S5.2.4.1. The band may at the manufacturer's option be attached so as to move freely along the length of the assembly, as long as it is retained by the end fittings. The band shall be etched, embossed, or stamped in block capital letters, numerals or symbols at least one-eighth of an inch high, with the following information: (a) The symbol DOT constituting certification by the hose assembler that the hose assembly conforms to all applicable motor vehicle safety standards. (b) A designation that identifies the manufacturer of the hose assembly which shall be filed in writing with: Office of Vehicle Safety Standards, Crash Avoidance Division, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street SW., Washington DC 20590. The designation may consist of block capital letters, numerals or a symbol. In addition, section S5.2.4.1 provides as an option that at least one end fitting be etched, stamped or embossed with a designation at least one-sixteenth of an inch high that identifies the manufacturer of the hose assembly. I have also enclosed copies of two procedural requirements you must satisfy in order to sell your products in this country. The first requirement is NHTSA's regulation for manufacturer identification (49 CFR Part 566). This regulation requires a manufa cturer of equipment to which an FMVSS applies (e.g., brake hoses) to submit its name, address, and a brief description of the items of equipment it manufacturers to NHTSA within 30 days after it first imports its products into the United States. The second requirement is NHTSA's regulation for designations of agents (49 CFR Part 551, Procedural Rules, Subpart D). The regulation requires all manufacturers headquartered outside of the United States to designate a permanent resident of the United States as the manufacturer's agent for service of all process, notices, orders and decisions. This designation should be mailed to me at the following address: Chief Counsel, Room 5219, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh St., S. W., Washington, D.C., 20590. The designation must include the following information: 1. A certification that the designation of agent is valid in form and binding on the manufacturer under the laws, corporate-by-laws, or other requirements governing the making of the designation at the time and place where it is made; 2. The full legal name, principal place of business and mailing address of the manufacturer; 3. Marks, trade names, or other designations of origin of any of the manufacturer's products which do not bear its name; 4. A statement that the designation shall remain in effect until withdrawn or replaced by the manufacturer; 5. A declaration of acceptance duly signed by the agency appointed, which may be an individual, a firm or a United States corporation; and, 6. The full legal name and address of the designated agent. 7. In addition, the designation must be signed by a person with authority to appoint the agent. The signer's name and title should be clearly indicated beneath his or her signature. I hope this information is helpful. If you have further questions, please contact Mr. Marvin Shaw of this office at (202) 366-2992. |
|
ID: 1984-3.39OpenTYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA DATE: 11/14/84 FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank Berndt; NHTSA TO: Mr. Anthony Lauro, President, Vredusu TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION TEXT: Mr. Anthony Lauro President VREDUSA P.O. Box 766 South Plainfield, NJ 07080 This responds to your recent letter asking for an interpretation of the Uniform Tire quality Grading Standards (UTQGS). Specifically, you sought an interpretation of the term "limited production tire," as set forth in 49 CFR S 575.104(c). That section specifies that the UTQGS applies to all new pneumatic tires for use on passenger cars, but does not apply to certain types of tires . The tires excluded from the UTQGS include limited production tires, as defined in 49 CFR S575.104(c)(2). You noted that your company produces two different tread designs in fourteen different sizes, and asked if limited production tires are determined by the number of sizes, the number of tread designs, or both. The UTQGS specify that a tire may qualify as a limited production tire if the annual domestic production or importation of tires of both the same design and size as the tire in question does not exceed 15,000.
Subparagraph (c)(2) of 5575.104 specifies that a tire will be considered a limited production tire if the tire meets the four criteria set forth in that section. Two of those four criteria specify that no more than 15,000 tires of the same design and size may be manufactured in or imported into the United States. The tire design is defined as "the combination of general structural characteristics, materials, and tread pattern, but does not include cosmetic, identifying, or other minor variations among tires." Hence, if you wish to determine how to group these tires to see if they qualify as limited production tires, you must determine how many tires are imported with both the same size and tread pattern. Judging by the last paragraph in your letter, however, it is not necessary for you to determine if these tires qualify as limited production tires to exclude them from the requirements of the UTQGS. You stated that all of these tires have a nominal rim diameter of 10 to 12 inches. 49 CFR S575.104(c)(1) excludes all tires with a nominal rim diameter of 10 to 12 inches from the requirements of UTQGS, regardless of whether those tires would qualify as limited production tires.
Should you have any further questions or need more information on this subject, please contact Mr. Stephen Kratzke of my staff at this address, or by telephone at (202) 426-2992. Sincerely,
Frank Berndt Chief Counsel
October 10, 1984
Mr. Frank A. Berndt, Chief Councel Office of the Chief Councel National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Nassif Building, Room 5219 400 Seventh Street S.W. Washington, D.C. 20590
Re: section 575.104 of title 49 Transportation Chapter V of the Code of Federal Regulations Dear Mr. Berndt:
By way of correspondence with National Tire Dealers & Retreaders Association, manager of Regulatory affairs, Mr. K. Wayne Malbon, I am writing this letter to obtain your opinion to a specific area of concern-namely "limited production of tires".
Vredusa, Inc. is the U.S. Sales and Marketing office of Vredestein Banden B. V. Enschede, Holland, the Manufacturer of Vredestein tires. Our Dutch office has asked us to obtain a clearer understanding into the criteria of what is meant by "limited production tires". More specifically, if the manufacturer produces two different tread designs with fourteen difference sizes, how is the criteria detemined, is it per size, per design or a combination of both?
We raise this question with respect to tires we produce with nominal rim diameters of 10 to 12 inches, which the Dutch office is classifying as "limited production tires".
Your comments and early response would be greatly appreciated. Very truly yours,
Anthony Lauro President
AL/bf TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA DATE: 11/16/84 FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank Berndt; NHSTA TO: Mr. Noel M. Torres TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION TEXT:
Mr. Noel M. Torres 2521-C3 W. Sunflower Santa Ana, California 92704
Dear Mr. Torres:
This is in response to your letter of September 25, 1984 asking questions about the relationship of your "Panic-Stop Detection Brake-Lite System" Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108. The photographs you enclosed show a segmented lamp mounted on the centerline of a passenger car directly below the rear window. Another picture shows the lamp installed on the rear of a motorcycle above the license plate. These pictures contain the notation "The harder you brake the faster the lite sweeping motion." Your questions are:
"(1) If I install this as a retrofit on a 1986 car which will have a third brake lite, will it qualify legally as a tail/stop lite if it meets the photometric requirements of SAE-J186A and FMVSS 108?" Section 108(a)(2) ((A) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act forbids manufacturers, dealers, distributors, and motor vehicle repair businesses from rendering inoperative, in whole or in part, any device, or element of design installed in accordance with a Federal motor vehicle safety standard. This would appear to preclude removal of the mandated center high-mounted stop lamp on cars manufactured on or after September 1, 1985, and replacement of it with your lamp.
"(2) Is it legally all right to use it now on cars and motorcycles?" Standard No. 108 was recently amended to permit manufacturers to install the center high-mounted lamp on passenger cars manufactured on or after August 1, 1984, and General Motors is already equipping some of its 1985 models with it. Thus, a center high-mounted stoplamp already installed on a passenger car in accordance with Standard No. 108 would be subject to the prohibition in Section 108(a) (2) (A) discussed above.
As for other passenger cars, we assume that you wish to make your lamp available as an aftermarket device. In this circumstance, where it is installed on a vehicle in use, its permissibility is to be determined under local law; Federal law does not apply. Finally, as to motorcycles, your photograph, by depicting your lamp mounted above the license plate, indicates that it substitutes for the original equipment stop/taillamp. Inasmuch as the stop/taillamp was installed in accordance with Standard No. 108, the prohibitions of Section 108(a)(2)(A) apply to it as well.
We are returning your tape to you and appreciate your interest in safety.
Sincerely, Frank Berndt Chief Counsel Enclosure
2521-C3 W. Sunflower Santa Ana, Ca 92704 September 25, 1984
Madam Diane K. Steed NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMIN. 400 7th Street S.W. Washington D.C. 20590
Dear Madam Steed:
I hope you don't mind my taking the liberty of sending you this letter together with a 10-minute videotape of a brake-lite system for cars and motorcycles which I thought you might want to review and evaluate, if you have the time.
I have been thinking for a while now that it is amazing in this day and age of space shuttles, maze of freeways and fast driving, our cars are still equipped with the most out-dated brake-lite system that have been in use for hundreds of years, and when driving on the road, there's no way of telling if a car braking in front of you is trying to make a panic stop.
An idea came to mind which I developed. I call it "PANIC-STOP DETECTION BRAKE-LITE SYSTEM", applicable for cars and motorcycles. I honestly believe it is a very effective system that would reduce more than 90% of rear-end collisions. You'll see what I mean when you view the videotape enclosed.
I would appreciate it if you could clarify two things for me: 1) If I install this as a retrofit on a 1986 car which will have a third brake lite, will it qualify legally as a tail/stop lite if it meets the photometric requirements of SAE-J186A and FMVSS 108? 2) Is it legally alright to use it now on cars and motorcycles? Thank you so much for your kind consideration and I hope to hear from you.
Yours truly,
Noel M. Torres
P.S. If you think you might want to see the prototype samples, I'll be more than happy to ship them to you.
Encls./ 3-photos, 1-videotape |
|
ID: nht75-4.40OpenDATE: 06/03/75 FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; J. C. Schultz; NHTSA TO: Blue Bird Body Company TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION TEXT: This is in response to your letter of May 19, 1975, inquiring as to the effect of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 217, Bus Window Retention and Release, on a Connecticut law relating to school bus window emergency release. As you are aware, section 103(d) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 (15 U.S.C. 1392(d)) provides that no State or political subdivision of a State may promulgate or continue in effect standards applicable to an aspect of motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment performance which is covered by a Federal motor vehicle safety standard, unless the standards are identical. Standard No. 217 includes provisions relating to emergency exit force applications. A differing State specification for emergency release force applications is voided by @ 103(d) since the Federal standard is intended to cover all aspects of emergency window release performance. As explained in our November 29, 1974, letter to Mr. Donald L. Gibson (copy enclosed) a Federal standard will preempt any State law that relates to the same aspect of motor vehicle performance yet imposes different requirements. Your responsibility as a manufacturer is to comply with the Federal safety standard. You should note, however, that purchase specifications may be imposed by any person or organization, including a State or municipality, with respect to vehicles purchased for the person or organization's own use. Such specifications are not limited by Federal law, and in the case of governmental bodies are specifically allowed by S 103(d), although of course they cannot alter a manufacturer's duty to conform to Federal standards. SINCERELY, May 19, 1975 Richard Dyson Assistant Chief Counsel U. S. Department of Transportation NHTSA The State of Connecticut recently adopted new school bus specifications which will become effective on school buses manufactured after January 1, 1976. In two areas these specifications are more restrictive than FMVSS 217 Bus Window Retention and Release. In section 14-275B-16 (d) and 14-275B-17 (a), (see attached copies), the Connecticut specifications call for emergency exit release forces of between 5 and 15 pounds and 5 and 20 pounds respectively. Since these forces are different than those required by FMVSS 217, this imposes an additional constraint on school bus manufacturers for that state. Also, we are concerned that latch forces as low as 5 pounds could result in inadvertent opening of emergency exits. We are in receipt of a copy of a letter which you sent to Mr. Donald L. Gibson, dated November 27, 1974, with file reference N40-30 (KK). In that letter you state: "The federal requirements must be regarded as conclusive with regard to parking brake performance and emergency braking capability in order to maintain the uniformity necessary in a federal regulatory scheme. If states were permitted to impose additional requirements in an area regulated by a federal safety standard, manufacturers would be confronted with an impossible task of compliance. This reasoning formed the bais of the recent decision rendered in a case brought by the Motorcycle Industry Council, Inc., against the State of California in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California concerning the preemption of a California State requirement that motorcycle lamps be wired to operate when the engine is running. The court held that the California requirement is preempted by the Federal Motor Vehicle Standard 108 since the NHTSA intended to cover all aspects of performance directly involving motorcycle headlamps." It appears to us that this current conflict between the new Connecticut regulations and FMVSS 217 is similar to the matter which you addressed in your letter quoted above. In the light of such conflicting specifications, what is our responsibility as a school bus manufacturer. W. G. Milby Staff Engineer CC: JOHN O'CONNELL; DAVE PHELPS MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR TYPE I SCHOOL BUS CONSTRUCTION AND EQUIPMENT the release mechansism should be turned to open the emergency door shall be painted on the outside of the emergency door in black on the national school bus yellow background. The emergency door shall have a horizontal opening of at least 30 inches and a vertical opening of at least 48 inches measured from the floor level. No steps shall lead to the emergency door. The emergency door or exit shall be devised so as to be opened from the inside and the outside. (b) The passage to the emergency door shall be kept clear of obstructions. For rear doors the horizontal clearance of 30 inches shall be maintained for a distance of at least twelve inches inside the bus. When the emergency door is in the left side, a minimum horizontal clearance of 30 inches and a vertical clearance of 48 inches shall be maintained between it and the center aisle. (c) The upper and lower portion of the central rear emergency door shall be equipped with approved safety glass, the exposed area of which shall be not less than four hundred (400) square inches in the upper portion and not less than three hundred (300) square inches in the lower portion. The left side emergency door shall be equipped with safety glass in the upper portion and the lower portion shall be of at least the same gauge metal as the body outer panels. The emergency door shall be hinged on the right side if it is in the rear end of the bus and on the front side if it is in the left side and shall open only outward. Control from the driver's seat shall not be permitted. (d) The emergency door shall be equipped with a slide-bar, cam-operated latch which shall have a minimum stroke of one inch. The latch shall be equipped with a suitable electric plunger-type switch connected with a distinctive audible signal automatically operated and located in the driver's compartment which shall clearly indicate the unlatching of this door and no cutoff switch shall be installed in the circuit. The switch shall be enclosed in a metal case, and wires leading from the switch shall be concealed in the body. The switch shall be so installed that the plunger contacts the farthest edge of the slide bar in such a manner that any movement of the slide bar will immediately close the circuit and activate the signal. The door latch shall be equipped with an interior handle which shall be capable of quick release upon application of a force between 5 and 15 pounds but shall be protected agains accidental release. It shall lift up to release the latch. The outside handle shall be installed in a vertical position when latched so as to minimize hitching and shall be a non-detachable device. (e) An audio alarm shall indicate to the driver when any door is in the locked position while the ignition switch is in the "on" position. Sec. 14-275b-17. Emergency Windows. (a) A rear emergency window at least 16 inches in height and as wide as practicable shall be provided in any bus where the emergency door is not in the rear. The rear window shall be designed so as to be opened from either the inside or the outside. It shall be hinged at the top and be equipped with a linkage or mechanism that will automatically hold the opened window against the force of gravity at a hinge opening angle of 60 +/- 5 degrees measured from the closed window position. Such linkage or mechanism shall not prevent the window from opening a full 90 degrees due to gravitational forces should the bus be inverted. A positive latch on the inside shall provide for quick release upon application of a force between 5 and 20 pounds but offer protection against accidental release. The outside handle shall be non-detachable and designed to minimize hitching. (b) Labeling shall indicate in 1/2 inch letters on the inside how the window operates and in letters at least two inches in height the words "Emergency Exit" above on the inside and directly below on the outside. (c) A distinctive audible signal automatically operated shall clearly indicate to the driver the unlatching of the rear emergency window or the opening of any push-out emergency windows and no cutoff switch shall be installed in the circuit. (d) If there is a space between the top of the rear divan seat and the inside lower edge of the rear emergency window, such space shall be covered by a material of sufficient strength to sustain 600 pounds weight. Sec. 14-275b-18. Exhaust System and Muffler. The exhaust system shall include the exhaust manifold and gaskets, piping leading from the flange of the exhaust manifold to and including the muffler(s). The system shall not extend into the body and shall be attached to the chassis. The tail pipe(s) shall be non-flexible sixteen gauge steel or equivalent and shall extend beyond the rear end of the chassis frame but not beyond the rear limit of the bumper. The complete exhaust system shall be tight and free from leaks and shall be properly insulated from the electrical wiring or any combustible part of the bus. It shall not pass within twelve inches of the fuel tank or its connections except that the exhaust system may come within four inches of the fuel tank or its connections if a suitable heat baffle is installed between the exhaust system and such tank or connections. The size of the pipes in the exhaust system shall not be reduced below that at the engine manifold. $99(Illegible word) 1-28-75 |
|
ID: 008052_Kiser_flammability_preemptionOpenMr. Randy Kiser Dear Mr. Kiser: This responds to your letter asking whether Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 213, Child restraint systems, "preempts Californias ability to require an additional specification for manufacturers."You ask about both a flammability requirement for filling materials and a requirement that a tag must be attached to the product indicating its compliance with the State standard. We are authorized by 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 ("the Safety Act") to issue Federal motor vehicle safety standards that establish performance requirements for new motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment. We have used this authority to issue FMVSS No. 213 (49 CFR 571.213). Chapter 301 contains the following preemption provision (49 U.S.C. 30103(b)):
Flammability Resistance StandardFMVSS No. 213 sets forth flammability resistance requirements for child restraints. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30103(b), California could not establish a standard that applied to the manufacture or sale of new child restraints in California on the flammability resistance of the restraints unless the State standard is identical to the requirements of S5.7 of FMVSS No. 213. Additional TagYou also ask whether California may require child restraints to have a tag indicating compliance with the States flammability resistance requirement (assuming that the States flammability resistance standard is not preempted). We assume that since the State flammability requirement itself is preempted, the tag would not be required. Further, because the State flammability resistance requirement is preempted, a State could not indirectly require child restraints to meet the States flammability resistance requirement by way of requiring the tag. If you have further questions, please contact Ms. Deirdre Fujita of my staff at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, Jacqueline Glassman ref:213 |
2004 |
ID: nht87-1.65OpenTYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA DATE: 04/14/87 FROM: J. MIKE CALLAHAN -- PRECISION IMAGES TO: TAYLOR VINSON -- LEGAL COUNSEL TITLE: FMVSS 108 ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 08/11/88 TO J MIKE CALLAHAN FROM ERIKA Z. JONES, REDBOOK A32 (2), STANDARD 108; LETTER DATED 11/19/87 TO ROGER M. COX, FROM ERIKA Z. JONES, STANDARD 108; LETTER DATED 09/03/87 TO DAVID M. ROMANSKY, FROM ERIKA Z. JONES TEXT: Dear Mr. Vinson: Reference FMVSS108, I am representing a company that will be selling plastic name plates which would be installed behind the red lens of the third brake light. These are to be sold to new car dealerships. When the driver of the car steps on the brake t he dealer's name lights up. I need letters regarding the legality of the name plates for the following states: Washington Oregon California Arizona Montana Idaho Nevada North Dakota South Dakota Wyoming Colorado Kansas Oklahoma Iowa Illinois Utah New Mexico Louisiana Arkansas Missouri Wisconsin Minnesota Texas Nebraska I would appreciate any help you can offer. Thanking you in advance. Sincerely, DEALER ADS,INC DEALER ADS BRINGS YOU THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE YOUR NAME LIGHTED SEEN 50,000 TIMES PER YEAR 400,000 TIMES AVE. LIFE OF CAR FOR SO LITTLE YOU WON'T BELIEVE IT!!! INSTALL IN HIGH MOUNT STOP LIGHT 1. MEETS ALL FEDERAL D.O.T. FMVSS 108 (LOCATION IS CONSIDERED AN AUXILIARY LIGHT AND AS SUCH COMPLIES WITH STATE LAWS ALSO.) 2. INSTALLS IN MINUTES (PART OF DEALER PREP). 3. MORE CUSTOMER ACCEPTANCE THAN STANDARD DEALER ATTACHED ADVERTISING. NEW IMPROVED DEALER ADVERTISING! WILL BE SEEN DAY AND NIGHT! COST EFFECTIVE!!!! SEEN THOUSANDS TIME MORE THAN OTHER FORMS OF ADVERTISING YOUR LOCAL DISTRIBUTER IS Mike & Cindi Callahan PHONE BOX 5524 KENT, WA. 98064-5524 206-631-0693 |
|
ID: 22705.drnOpen Mr. Bob Douglas Dear Mr. Douglas: This responds to your request that we write a letter to the Government of Israel's Minister of Transportation. You wrote that you needed this letter because you are: working to secure a bid for commercial buses to be built here in Conway Arkansas and to be exported to Israel. They have requested that we provide them a letter that states that FMVSS 220 is an official regulation and that the regulation only pertains to school buses. They require that this letter come from NHTSA. The following provides the information you request. The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act was enacted on September 9, 1966, (P.L. 85-563), in order to reduce traffic accidents, deaths and injuries resulting from traffic accidents. This law, now codified as chapter 301 of title 49, United States Code, directs the U.S. Secretary of Transportation to establish Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSSs), to which motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment must conform and to which the manufacturers of such vehicles or equipment must certify compliance. The responsibility to establish FMVSSs has been delegated (by regulation) to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). It is my understanding that the Israeli Government wishes to procure buses that are not school buses. There are no Federal motor vehicle safety standards on rollover protection that apply to non-school buses. NHTSA has issued FMVSS 220 (49 CFR Section 571.220), School bus rollover protection to establish performance requirements for school bus rollover protection, but does not apply this standard to non-school buses. If you wish further information, please write to me at this address or contact Dorothy Nakama of my staff at: (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, John Womack |
2001 |
ID: GF000492OpenMr. Guy S. Edington Dear Mr. Edington: This is in response to your January 16, 2006, letter and subsequent phone conversation with George Feygin of my staff regarding certain requirements in Federal motor vehicle safety standard (FMVSS) No. 119, "New pneumatic tires for vehicles other than passenger cars."As Mr. Feygin explained to you, this letter is limited to the discussion of the current regulations and does not address suggestions you made concerning how you believe certain tires should be tested. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) issues FMVSSs applicable to new vehicles and equipment, including tires. NHTSA does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301, manufacturers are required to certify that their vehicles and equipment meet applicable requirements. Thus, the tire manufacturer is responsible for self-certifying its product. S6.2 of FMVSS No. 119 specifies certain tire strength requirements that tires must meet when tested according to the procedure specified in S7.3. As a part of this procedure, a cylindrical steel plunger is forced perpendicularly into a raised tread element as near as possible to the centerline of the tread, at a rate of 2 inches per minute, until the tire breaks or the plunger is stopped by the rim. The diameter of the plunger depends on the diameter of the rim and is specified in Table I. You ask what diameter plunger is used to test tubeless 17.5 diameter code "medium duty truck" tires. Table I of FMVSS No. 119 specifies that for tubeless tires with a diameter code of 17.5 or smaller, a plunger with a diameter of inches (19.05 mm) is used. Table I does not differentiate between different categories of 17.5 diameter code tires and does not provide for use of different plunger diameters for any 17.5 diameter code tires. I hope you find this information helpful. If you have further questions, you may contact Mr. George Feygin of my staff at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, Stephen P. Wood ref:119 |
2006 |
ID: GF004197OpenMr. Robert Babcock Dear Mr. Babcock: This responds to your letter regarding applicability of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 201, Occupant Protection in Interior Impact, to items attached to a floor-mounted console. You specifically ask about a foldable video monitor that is attached to the console. Our answer is the monitor you depict would be excluded. FMVSS No. 201 establishes performance requirements designed to reduce the risk of injury in the event an occupant strikes the interior of a vehicle during a crash. Specifically, certain areas within the vehicle must be properly padded or otherwise have energy absorbing properties to minimize head injury in the event of a crash. Head impact protection performance is determined, in part, by testing specific targets on the vehicle interior. S5.1.1(a) of FMVSS No. 201 excludes console assemblies from the head impact protection requirements of the standard. Although console assemblies are not defined in FMVSS No. 201, they commonly refer to low-lying structures mounted on the vehicle floor between the front seats. You ask if the exclusion in S5.1.1(a) would apply to a foldable video monitor attached to the console. The height of a console assembly is not limited by our standards. If the monitor were permanently incorporated into the console in the protruded position, it would be considered part of the console and excluded from the standard even though the height of the console would be unusually high. The fact that the monitor you are considering can fold to a "stored" position does not have a bearing on whether the monitor is part of the console. We consider a video monitor attached to the console to be part of the console even when it is foldable. If you need further assistance, please contact George Feygin of my staff at this address or at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, Jacqueline Glassman ref:201 |
2005 |
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.