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: aiam4566OpenMr. David W. Raney Environmental Activities Manager Saab-Scania of America, Inc. Saab Drive P. O. Box 697 Orange, CT 06477; Mr. David W. Raney Environmental Activities Manager Saab-Scania of America Inc. Saab Drive P. O. Box 697 Orange CT 06477; "Dear Mr. Raney: Thank you for your letter requesting ou interpretation of 49 CFR Parts 541, Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard, and 543, Exemption from Theft Prevention Standard. I apologize for the delay in this response. You asked two questions. Your first question concerned the scope of the exemptions granted under Part 543. You noted that the Saab 9000 car line has been determined to be a high theft car line. Accordingly, Part 541 requires that both the original equipment and the replacement major parts for the Saab 9000 be marked with certain information. Your letter states that your company marked both the original equipment and replacement major parts for the Saab 9000 in the 1987 and 1988 model years. For the 1989 model year, the Saab 9000 was granted an exemption from the parts marking requirements of Part 541, pursuant to the provisions of Part 543. Your company understands that this exemption means that the original equipment parts on the Saab 9000 are no longer required to be marked. However, the replacement parts for the Saab 9000 that are produced in 1989 and thereafter pose a more difficult problem. On the one hand, Saab could consider these parts as replacement parts for the 1989 models, which would mean these parts are exempted from the parts marking requirement. On the other hand, these parts could also be considered as replacement parts for the 1987 and 1988 Saab 9000 line, which would mean the parts have to be marked because no exemption applies for such parts. The answer to your question is that once a high theft line is granted a Part 543 exemption in whole from the parts marking requirements of Part 541, as the Saab 9000 was, the replacement parts for that line are also exempted from the parts marking requirements even if those parts can be used as replacement parts for the high theft line during model years for which no exemption applies. NHTSA addressed this issue in the preamble to the September 8, 1987 final rule establishing Part 543 (52 FR 33821), as follows: Section 602(d)(2)(A) of Title VI (of the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act) states that the vehicle theft prevention standard can not require 'identification of any part which is not designed as a replacement for a major part required to be identified under such standard.' (Emphasis added.) As long as a manufacturer is producing a car line under an exemption granted in whole, there is no requirement to identify major parts otherwise subject to the theft standard, therefore, NHTSA can not require marking replacement parts. 52 FR 33828. Applying this reasoning to your company's situation, Saab was free to discontinue marking both the original equipment and replacement major parts for the Saab 9000 as soon as the Part 543 exemption took effect, provided that Saab actually installed the antitheft device described in its petition as original equipment on 1989 Saab 9000 vehicles. Your second question asked whether the manufacturer of a high theft car lines that has been granted an exemption from the parts marking requirements, pursuant to Part 543, may discontinue the installation of the antitheft device and resume parts marking in some future model year. We addressed this issue in detail in a May 4, 1988 letter to Ms. Deborah Bakker, a copy of which is enclosed for your information. A manufacturer of a high theft line that has received an exemption under Part 543 is required to either install the antitheft device as standard equipment on every vehicle in that line produced during a model year or to mark all original equipment and replacement major parts for that line produced during the model year. As long as Saab marked all of the original equipment and replacement parts produced in a model year for the Saab 9000, your company is free to stop installing the antitheft device on those cars. If you have any further questions or need additional information on this subject, please feel free to contact Dorothy Nakama of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, Stephen P. Wood Acting Chief Counsel Enclosure"; |
|
ID: aiam5455OpenMs. Debra Platt 2289 Southeast Madison Street Stuart, FL 34997; Ms. Debra Platt 2289 Southeast Madison Street Stuart FL 34997; Dear Ms. Platt: This responds to your letter of August 29, 1994, i which you inquire whether a child 'partially sitting on a bus seat is provided crash protection of Standard 222.' You explain that you were referring to a third child sitting on the edge of a bus seat nearest the aisle. The child can only face the seat across the aisle, rather than face forward, because the bench seat is overcrowded. Some background information would be helpful in responding to your question. 49 U.S.C. 30101, et seq. (formerly known as the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966) provides this agency the authority to issue Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSSs) applicable to new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. Each new vehicle or item of equipment that is sold to the consumer must comply with all applicable FMVSSs in effect on its date of manufacture. However, once the vehicle or equipment is sold, the use of that product becomes a matter of State jurisdiction. NHTSA has no authority to regulate the operation of used vehicles or items of equipment. With respect to school buses, it has been shown that school bus transportation is one of the safest forms of transportation in America (see enclosed School Bus Safety Report, May 1993). Every year, approximately 380,000 public school buses travel approximately 3.8 billion miles to transport 22 million children to and from school and school related activities. Occupant deaths per vehicle mile travelled in school buses are about one-fourth those in passenger cars. Crash protection in large school buses, those with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of over 10,000 pounds and which typically seat 16 or more, is provided by 'compartmentalization.' That concept requires strong, well- padded, well-anchored, high-backed and evenly-spaced seats for school bus occupant protection. Compartmentalization has been shown to be effective by independent studies of the National Transportation Safety Board and the National Academy of Sciences. Small school buses, on the other hand, those with a GVWR of 10,000 pounds or less and which typically seat fewer than 16 occupants, must be equipped with lap or lap/shoulder belts at all designated seating positions. Turning to your inquiry, this agency agrees it is far less safe for children to sit on the edge of school bus seats, facing the seat across the aisle, rather than face forward. To get the full benefit of compartmentalization, the child occupant should face forward to be cushioned and contained between the strong, well-padded seat backs on the school bus. Thus, Standard 222 requires school bus passenger seats to be forward-facing (paragraph S5.1). When a child is sitting on the edge of the bus seat, as you described, it would seem that either the school bus is overloaded or the passengers are seating themselves improperly, indicating a possible lack of adequate supervision. This agency is seriously concerned about such conditions, but as pointed out above, once a vehicle is sold to the first retail customer, the use of that vehicle becomes the responsibility of the State. Since the States regulate the use of school buses, we recommend that you contact your State and/or local pupil transportation or school officials to inform them of your concerns. The Governor's highway safety representative for Florida is: Mr. Frank Carlile Assistant Secretary for Transportation Policy 605 Suwanne St., MS-57 Tallahassee, FL 32399-0450 Telephone: (904) 922-5820 I am also enclosing for your information a copy of Highway Safety Program Guideline No. 17, Pupil Transportation Safety. This publication was issued jointly by this agency and the Federal Highway Administration and provides recommendations to the states on the operational aspects of their school bus and pupil transportation safety programs. Although these recommendations are not mandatory, they might be helpful in your discussions with school officials. I hope this information is helpful to you. Should you have any further questions or need additional information, please feel free to contact Walter Myers of my staff at this address or at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, Philip R. Recht Chief Counsel Enclosures; |
|
ID: aiam0154OpenMr. John I. Tolson, IFFISA, Mariposa No. 1050, Mexico 13, D.F.; Mr. John I. Tolson IFFISA Mariposa No. 1050 Mexico 13 D.F.; Dear Mr. Tolson: We regret the delay in replying to your letter of January 15, 1969, t Dr. William Haddon, Jr., concerning regulations applicable to replicas of antique automobiles which you manufacture.; As a general rule, motor vehicles manufactured on or after January 1 1968, must comply with all applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards in order to be imported into the United States. Section 114 of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 (the Act) requires that manufacturers permanently affix a tag or label to the motor vehicle certifying that the motor vehicle conforms to all applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) established under authority of Section 103 of the Act. Your vehicles would properly be classified as passenger cars. Thus the FMVSS applicable to this classification would apply. The above standards are currently applicable only to motor vehicles over 1,000 pounds curb weight. Curb weight includes a full load of engine fuel, oil, and coolant as defined in 49 CFR 371.3. In accordance with a proposed rule making published in 32 FR, page 14282, October 14, 1967, the Administrator is considering adding new standards applicable to motor vehicles of 1,000 pounds or less curb weight, and revising certain of the initial standards to extend their applicability to these motor vehicles. Comments have been received from industry and a discussion paper on the subject prepared. This discussion paper will be mailed to industry in the near future, together with a notice of a meeting to be held on the subject. Your name is being added to the mailing list for this information.; 19 CFR 12.80, Importation of Motor Vehicles and Items of Motor Vehicl Equipment, was jointly issued and published by the Secretary of Transportation and the Secretary of Treasury in implementation of Section 108(b)(3) of the Act. This regulation makes provision for importation of certain motor vehicles not conforming to the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, subject to specific conditions.; An amendment to the Act has granted authority to the Secretary o Transportation, based upon certain specified findings, to exempt temporarily, a limited production motor vehicle from any Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard. A limited production motor vehicle is a defined as a motor vehicle produced by a manufacturer whose total motor vehicle production, as determined by the Secretary, does not exceed 500 annually. It is to be noted, however, that exemptions are granted to the person actually producing the motor vehicle, not to the importer or distributor of such motor vehicle. Regulations for petitioning for an exemption are contained in 49 CFR 355.5.; In the United States, motor vehicles are licensed for operation by eac of the states and the District of Columbia. A letter addressed to the State Department of Motor Vehicles in the capitol city of the states in which you intend marketing your product, should reach an individual who can provide you with information regarding state licensing requirements.; While you did not inquire about Federal regulations concerning contro of anti-pollution emission devices, this is another area of possible effect in your situation. These regulations are not the responsibility of the Department of Transportation, but of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare. By copy of this letter, Mr. William H. Megonnell, Associate Commissioner for Standards and Compliance, Department of Health, Education and Welfare, National Air Pollution Control Administration, BCT, 801 North Randolph Street, Arlington, Virginia, 22203, is being requested to forward such information as he deems appropriate.; Publications of the Socity (sic) of Automotive Engineers (SAE) including copies of SAE Standards, may be obtained by writing to: Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc., 2 Pennsylvania Plaza, New York, New York, 1001 (sic).; For your information and guidance, enclosed are copies of the Act, a amended, the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, (49 CFR 351, 353, 355 and 371), 19 CFR 122.80, Importation of Motor Vehicles and Items of Motor Vehicle Equipment, Declaration Form HS-7, Importation of Motor Vehicles and Motor Vehicle Equipment Subject to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards and the proposed rule making, Docket 5-1.; Sincerely, Robert Brenner, Acting Director |
|
ID: aiam4823OpenThe Honorable John D. Dingell Chairman, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Committee on Energy and Commerce House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515; The Honorable John D. Dingell Chairman Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Committee on Energy and Commerce House of Representatives Washington DC 20515; "Dear Mr. Chairman: Your letter of July 10, 1990 about th applicability of NHTSA's safety standards to replacement parts was misplaced. This is indeed unfortunate, embarrassing, and I can assure you extraordinary. You asked me to review an April 9, 1990 interpretation letter from our Office of Chief Counsel to Mr. Rowghani, which indicated that Standard No. 214, Side Door Strength, applies only to new vehicles, and not to doors sold as replacement parts. In view of your concern about replacement parts, we have reviewed that interpretation, and our authority regarding replacement parts. Many of our safety standards apply only to complete vehicles, while others apply only to the individual components (whether original or replacement equipment). Some apply both to vehicles and to the components involved. Each of our standards includes an 'Application' section, which clearly defines the scope of coverage, based on the nature of the safety issue and the vehicle/equipment items involved. NHTSA's standards which apply to equipment (both original and replacement equipment) generally cover those types of items which can be used in many different vehicle lines, which are frequently replaced or sold separately, and which can be independently tested. These include such items as brake hoses (Standard 106), lamps and reflectors (Standard 108), tires (Standards 109, 117 and 119), windows and windshields (Standard 205), safety belt assemblies (Standard 209), child safety seats (Standard 213), and motorcycle safety helmets (Standard 218). Other safety systems require testing in a full-vehicle context, and our safety standards are applied to the vehicle rather than the component. Examples include brake performance (Standards 105 and 121), occupant crash protection (Standard 208), head restraints (Standard 202) and roof-crush resistance (Standard 216), as well as side-door strength. As noted in the April 9 letter, Standard 214 applies only to whole cars, not to replacement parts, as stated in the application section (see S2 of Standard 214, copy enclosed). While most manufacturers have chosen to meet the Standard by adding reinforcement beams, we are aware of at least one vehicle (a gray-market imported Mercedes-Benz) which passed the standard's compliance test without such a beam. Further, while intuitively it seems that doors without a reinforcement beam are not as safe as ones with a beam, efforts to document a safety problem have been unsuccessful. The current compliance procedures specify testing a door as part of a new vehicle (see S4 of Standard 214), since it does not appear feasible to specify an appropriate procedure for testing an individual new door (whether original or replacement) by itself. The reason for this is that a door's performance in resisting intrusion is dependent not only on the structure of the door itself, but also other factors such as the vehicle frame into which the door fits, and the hinges and latches which hold the door in place within the frame. In addition, vehicle seats may help resist intrusion and protect occupants. The current standard reflects these factors. While the current standard does not apply to replacement doors, NHTSA has full authority to pursue any alleged safety problems with doors or any other vehicle components under the 'defects' provision of the Safety Act. If evidence demonstrated that certain replacement doors presented an unreasonable risk to motor vehicle safety, the agency could order the manufacturer of such doors to repair or replace such doors. At the present time, however, we are not aware of a safety problem with replacement doors that would warrant the commencement of a defects investigation. I appreciate your interest in the safety of vehicle parts and hope this information is helpful. For further discussion of the legal issues regarding the applicability of standards, your staff should feel free to contact our Chief Counsel, Mr. Paul Jackson Rice, at 366-9511. Sincerely, Jerry Ralph Curry Enclosure"; |
|
ID: 05-009466drnOpenMs. Phyllis Mason 2613 Sunny Meadow McKinney, TX 75070 Dear Ms. Mason: This responds to your letter about window screens. You state that you own a vehicle that has a rear window screen that raises and lowers with the touch of a button, and that you find the screen to be very useful. You ask whether a window screen that would operate with a switch built into the car to raise and lower a screen for the front window or windshield would be permitted by the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS). The short answer is that our regulations do not prohibit a vehicle from having such a screen, but we have some safety concerns about such a device. By way of background, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is authorized under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 to issue safety standards applicable to new motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA does not approve motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment, nor do we endorse any commercial products. Instead, our statute 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 equipment items for compliance with the standards, and also investigates reports of safety-related defects. FMVSS No. 205, Glazing materials, includes specifications for minimum levels of light transmittance (70 percent in areas requisite for driving visibility, which includes all windows in passenger cars). Under the standard, no manufacturer or dealer is permitted to install solar films and other sun screen devices in a new vehicle, without certifying that the vehicle continues to be in compliance with the light transmittance and other requirements of the standard. We have interpreted FMVSS No. 205 not to prohibit a retractable built-in screen for the rear window of vehicles (September 19, 1995 letter to General Motors Corporation). The agency determined in the 1995 letter that the screen is neither glazing in itself nor in combination with the glazing in the vehicle (because it is not attached to the glazing). Similarly, we interpret the standard as not prohibiting a retractable built-in front window screen. However, we have some safety concerns about in-vehicle front windshield shades. Driving with a lowered shade would be unsafe, as the view through the windshield could be substantially impeded. We are also concerned that these devices could be purposefully or unintentionally deployed while the vehicle is in motion.[1] From this perspective, non-mechanical front windshield shade products that protect the interior while the vehicle is parked do not convey such risk. Note that States have the authority to regulate the operation and use of vehicles. If you wish to know whether State law permits the installation of front windshield screens in a vehicle, you should contact State officials with your question. I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions, please contact Ms. Dorothy Nakama at this address or at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, Stephen P. Wood Acting Chief Counsel ref:205#302 d.6/19/06 [1] Our statute limits the types of modifications that manufacturers, dealers, distributors and repair businesses can make to used vehicles (49 U.S.C. 30122). These entities cannot install a built-in sun screen if doing so would make inoperative any device or design installed in compliance with an applicable FMVSS. |
2006 |
ID: 07-000135asOpenEric Bentzen, Manager Revenue Compliance Policy California Department of Motor Vehicles Administration Operations Division PO Box 825393, Mail Station D148 EB Sacramento, CA 94232-5393 Dear Mr. Bentzen: This responds to your letter in which you asked whether the State of California is restricted to limiting the safety requirements of three-wheeled motorcycle type vehicles, weighing 1,500 pounds or more, to be no more stringent than those Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSSs) applicable to motorcycles. Your question is addressed below. By way of background, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is authorized to issue FMVSSs that set performance requirements for new motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment. A manufacturer must certify compliance of the product with all applicable FMVSSs. Because NHTSA has no special knowledge or expertise with respect to individual State laws, this opinion is based upon your representations concerning the nature and scope of the relevant California State statute, on which NHTSA does not state an opinion. Different FMVSSs apply to a vehicle depending on how it is classified, i.e., its vehicle type. Pursuant to the definition of "motorcycle" set forth in 49 CFR 571.3, all three-wheeled motor vehicles with motive power and a seat or saddle are classified as motorcycles, regardless of their weight. The pertinent portion of that section reads as follows: Motorcycle means a motor vehicle with motive power having a seat or saddle for the use of the rider and designed to travel on not more than three wheels in contact with the ground. Based on information you provided, it would be possible for certain three-wheeled vehicles to be classified as a motorcycle under the FMVSSs, but not be classified as a motorcycle under the California Vehicle Code; e.g., if they have three wheels and weigh 1,500 pounds or more. Under 49 U.S.C. 30103(b), when an FMVSS is in effect, a State or political subdivision of a State may prescribe or continue in effect a standard applicable to the same aspect of performance of a motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment only if the standard is identical to the Federal standard. Preemption is unaffected by whether a State classifies a vehicle in the same manner as the FMVSSs. The relevant issue is what standards apply to the vehicle under Federal and State law. A California safety standard would be preempted by 49 U.S.C. 30103(b) if: (1) it applied to the same aspect of performance of a vehicle as an applicable FMVSS; and (2) it was not identical to the FMVSS. A California safety standard would not be preempted under that section if it applied to an aspect of performance not regulated by an FMVSS. You ask specifically whether California may apply standards which are more stringent than the FMVSSs that apply to motorcycles to certain vehicles that are considered motorcycles under Federal regulations, but which would be categorized as automobiles or commercial vehicles under California law. As stated above, any State standard that applies to an aspect of performance covered by the FMVSSs applicable to motorcycles would be preempted unless it was identical to the FMVSS. We note, however, that many possible aspects of vehicle performance are not covered by the FMVSSs that are applicable to motorcycles. For example, there are no FMVSSs applicable to occupant protection, seat belts, or roof crush that cover motorcycles. Yet some three-wheeled vehicles may have a roof and seating configurations similar to cars. A State may have its own standards applicable to those uncovered aspects of performance of vehicles that are considered motorcycles under the FMVSS. If you have any additional questions, please contact Ari Scott at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely yours, Anthony M. Cooke Chief Counsel ref:571 d.2/21/08 |
2008 |
ID: 06-007783rlsOpenWestport Power Inc. 1691 West 75th Avenue Vancouver, B.C. V6P 6P2 Dear Mr. Houle: This responds to your email requesting our interpretation of whether an accumulator vessel is regulated under Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 304, Compressed Natural Gas Fuel Container Integrity (FMVSS No. 304). Specifically, you ask if S3 (Application) of Standard No. 304 covered your implementation of [a] small accumulator vessel as a pressure damping device and not a storage device. Based on the information you have provided, we conclude that this tank is subject to FMVSS No. 304. By way of background, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is authorized to issue FMVSSs that set performance requirements for new motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment (see 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301). NHTSA does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Instead, manufacturers are required to self-certify that their products conform to all applicable safety standards that are in effect on the date of manufacture. NHTSA selects a sampling of new vehicles and equipment each year to determine their compliance with applicable FMVSSs. If our testing or examination reveals an apparent noncompliance, we may require the manufacturer to remedy the noncompliance, and may initiate an enforcement proceeding if necessary to ensure that the manufacturer takes appropriate action. In your email, you described a fuel system consisting of one or more liquefied natural gas (LNG) storage vessels with internally mounted pumps and vaporizers. You said that the LNG system compresses and vaporizes the LNG and delivers compressed natural gas (CNG) to another system that delivers CNG to the engine-mounted fuel system. Your question was whether a 9-liter Type 3 vessel would be subject to the requirements of Standard No. 304 if its purpose was as an accumulator to provide additional system volume to compensate for pump pressure fluctuations. Standard No. 304 specifies requirements for the integrity of CNG motor vehicle fuel containers. As defined in S4 of Standard No. 304, CNG fuel container means a container designed to store CNG as motor fuel on-board a motor vehicle. You state that The accumulator is not intended to provide storage capacity but is purely there to dampen pressure pulsations. Despite your assertion, it appears from your description and schematics of the accumulator vessel that the container in question could and most likely does store CNG. Based on your schematics, NHTSA believes that the tank falls within the category of vessels that FMVSS No. 304 is meant to regulate. Your email explained that the accumulator tank maintains pressure to the engine for combustion: that suggests to NHTSA that the tank is never empty of CNG, and may contain a considerable amount of CNG at any given time depending on how the fuel system is running. Simply because you assert that the additional system volume provided by the tank is only for dampening pressure fluctuations does not remove the tank from being subject to FMVSS No. 304s requirements. The tank still would contain CNG as motor fuel, and the test requirements of FMVSS No. 304 are designed to ensure a basic level of safety for such tanks. For your additional information, we also note that the vehicle in which your vessel is installed could be subject to Standard No. 303, Fuel system integrity of compressed natural gas vehicles, if it is a school bus or has a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of 10,000 pounds or less. FMVSS No. 303 applies to new passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks and buses with a GVWR of 10,000 pounds or less and to all school buses that use CNG as a motor fuel. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact Rebecca Schade of my staff at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely yours, Anthony M. Cooke Chief Counsel ref:304 d.4/25/07 |
2007 |
ID: 16055.ogmOpenMr. Freeman Chen Dear Mr. Chen: This responds to your letter regarding your company's intention to produce a small flat screen LCD television receiver which would be suitable for use in passenger cars. Specifically, you ask if there are any guidelines or regulations regarding the size of the television, special feature requirements, or any restrictions on where these televisions may be installed in a vehicle. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) does not have any safety standards specifically covering television receivers. However, it is possible that the installation of a television receiver could affect the compliance of a vehicle with some safety standards. All new vehicles manufactured for sale in the United States must be certified by their manufacturer as complying with the Federal motor vehicle safety standards. If your television receivers are installed in a new vehicle prior to its first sale to a consumer, the manufacturer or dealer would be required to certify that the vehicle as altered continues to comply with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. After a vehicle is sold at retail, Federal law limits the modifications made to it by manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and repair businesses. These entities are prohibited under 49 U.S.C. section 30122 from "knowingly making inoperative" any device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle in compliance with an applicable safety standard. In general, the "make inoperative" prohibition would require a business which modifies motor vehicles to ensure that they do not remove, disconnect, or degrade the performance of safety equipment installed in compliance with an applicable safety standard. Violations of this prohibition are punishable by civil fines up to $1,100 per violation. Depending on where and how the device is mounted, the installation of a television receiver could affect the compliance of a vehicle with some safety standards. For example, standard No. 201, Occupant protection in interior impact, establishes requirements for the performance of certain interior areas of a vehicle in protecting occupants from injury if they contact these areas in a crash. The requirements of standard 201 apply to dashboards, seat backs, visors, and other interior sections where a flat panel TV screen might be mounted. Beginning September 1, 1998, new head impact protection requirements will apply to pillars, side rails, roof headers and the roof itself. Standard No. l0l, Controls and Displays, contains requirements relating to the location, illumination, and labeling of controls and displays. One section of this standard, section S5.3.5, imposes certain requirements on illuminated devices in the vicinity of the driver. This section provides:
The purpose of this requirement is to prevent glare visible to the driver. If a television receiver installed in view of the driver is capable of operation while the vehicle is in motion, it would be subject to this requirement. While NHTSA does not have any safety standards specifically covering television receivers, the installation of a television receiver in view of the driver which is capable of operation while the vehicle is in motion would raise obvious safety concerns related to possible driver distraction. Finally, I note that state laws may cover the installation of television receivers in motor vehicles. You should contact the Department of Motor Vehicles in any state in which the equipment will be sold or used for information on state laws. I hope that this is information is helpful. If you have any questions, please contact Otto Matheke of my staff at (202) 366-5253. Sincerely, |
1998 |
ID: 15753.ogmOpenJ.F. Brownholtz, Ph.D. Dear Dr. Brownholtz: This responds to your letter to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), in which you request that NHTSA test and endorse your product. You have developed an aftermarket supplemental head restraint, the "Neck Saver," which is designed to be installed on existing head restraints in automobiles and other vehicles. By way of background information, Chapter 301 of Title 49, U.S. Code gives this agency the authority to issue safety standards applicable to new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. Chapter 301 provides that no person shall "manufacture for sale, sell, offer for sale, or introduce or deliver for introduction in interstate commerce, or import into the United States" any new motor vehicle or new item of motor vehicle equipment unless the vehicles or equipment comply with the applicable standard. (See 49 U.S.C. 30112.) NHTSA has no authority under Chapter 301 to approve, certify, or otherwise endorse any commercial product. Instead, Chapter 301 establishes a self-certification process under which each manufacturer is required to certify that each of its products meets all applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. Moreover, NHTSA does not endorse any products. There is currently no Federal motor vehicle safety standard that is directly applicable to the product you wish to manufacture and sell. Our standard for head restraints (Standard No. 202) applies only to new passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks and buses with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of 10,000 pounds or less. However, there are other Federal requirements that indirectly affect your manufacture and sale of the "Neck Saver." Under Chapter 301, your device is considered to be an item of motor vehicle equipment. As a manufacturer of motor vehicle equipment, you are subject to the requirements in sections 30118-30120 of Chapter 301 concerning the recall and remedy of products with defects relating to motor vehicle safety. In the event that you or NHTSA determines that the "Neck Saver" contains a safety related defect, you would be responsible for notifying purchasers of the defective equipment and remedying the problem free of charge. It appears that the "Neck Saver" would be installed by the vehicle owner. However, if it were to be professionally installed, Section 30122 of Title 49, U.S. Code provides that a manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business may not knowingly make inoperative any device or element of design installed on or in a vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment in accordance with a safety standard. For example, a commercial entity must ensure that the addition of the device does not degrade from the safety provided by flammable-resistant materials in the vehicle's interior compartment which have been installed in accordance with Standard No. 302. Installation of rapidly burning materials could vitiate the compliance of the materials which were present in the vehicle at the time of its sale to the first consumer and were certified as meeting FMVSS No. 302. Similarly, a commercial entity must ensure that installation of the device does not affect compliance with Standard No. 202. However, the prohibitions of Section 30122 do not apply to the actions of a vehicle owner in adding to or otherwise modifying his or her vehicle. Thus, a vehicle owner would not violate Chapter 301 by installing the head restraint, even if doing so would negatively affect some safety feature in his or her vehicle. NHTSA is currently studying the possibility of proposing changes to Standard No. 202. I am enclosing a copy of a December 19, 1996 request for comments (61 FR 66992) in which the agency requested interested parties to submit their views on a NHTSA Technical Report titled, "Head Restraints-Identification of Issues Relevant to Regulation, Design, and Effectiveness." While the comment period outlined in this notice has closed, I am providing a copy of the report in light of your interest in this subject. We are also returning herewith the samples of the "Neck Saver" you enclosed with your letter. Please feel free to contact Otto Matheke of my staff at (202) 366-5253 if you have further questions. Sincerely, John Womack |
1997 |
ID: 1985-02.41OpenTYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA DATE: 06/10/85 FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Jeffrey R. Miller; NHTSA TO: Russ L. Bomhoff TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION TEXT: Thank you for your letter of April 18, 1985, concerning the applicability of our safety standards to a passenger van you are designing. Specifically, you asked whether you can install a stationary, side-facing passenger seat with lap safety belts. As discussed below, you can use such a seat with a lap safety belt, but its use would be affected by Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard Nos. 207, Seating Systems, 208, Occupant Crash Protection, 209, Seat Belt Assemblies, and 210, Seat Belt Assembly Anchorages. A copy of each of those standards is enclosed. Standard No. 207 specifies performance requirements for seats, their attachment assemblies, and their installation, to minimize the possibility of seat failure resulting from crash forces. This standard is applicable to seats installed in vehicles including vans, but section 4.2 of Standard No. 207 excludes side-facing seats from the general seat strength requirements of the standard. However, there are other requirements in the standard which may apply to side-facing seats. For example, paragraph S4.3 requires a restraining device if the seat has a hinged or folding seat or seat back. Standard No. 208 sets requirements for the installation of safety belts in motor vehicles. You stated that the vehicle you are designing is a passenger van that carries under 10 passengers. If your vehicle carries a total of 10 persons (9 passengers and a driver) it would be considered either a multipurpose passenger vehicle (MPV), if it is manufactured on a truck chassis or has special features for occasional off-road use, or a passenger car. If your vehicle is a passenger car, section 4.1.2.3(c) of the standard provides that each designated seating position for rear passengers can have a Type 1 (lap) or Type 2 (lap/shoulder safety belt) that conforms with Standard 209 and the adjustment and latch mechanism requirements of S7.1 and S7.2 of Standard No. 208. If your vehicle is a MPV, then S4.2.2, for MPV's with a GVWR greater than 10,000 pounds or less, or S4.3, for MPV's with a GVWR greater than 10,000 pounds, provides that each designated seating position for rear passengers can have a Type 1 or Type 2 safety belt that conforms to Standard No. 209. Standard No. 210 sets performance requirements for safety belts anchorages in passenger cars, MPV's, trucks, and buses. The standard exempts side-facing seats from its strength requirements specified in S4.2, but all other requirements of the standard apply to side-facing seats. We strongly recommend that belt anchorages for side-facing seats be of at least equivalent strength to the anchorages for forward and rearward facing seats, since the strength specifications are only minimum performance requirements. ENCLS.
PRECISION PATTERN INC. April 18, 1985 Office of Chief Counsel NHTSA Dear Sir: This letter is a request for a ruling concerning a safety standard as applicable to passenger van seating. Specifically, I need to know if putting a stationary side facing seat, with lap seat belts is legal and acceptable. This side facing seat would be equipped with lap seat belts if necessary. It would be located at the rear of the vehicle, behind the drivers seat. The vehicles in question are for under 10 passengers, and are of 15', 17', and 20' lengths. We are in the middle of a design project on this and your prompt attention to this matter would be greatly appreciated. Please call 316/ 942-0905 if you have any questions. Thank you. Mr. William Smith in your engineering dept. requested that I consult you for a permanent ruling. His interpretation of the rules would allow the use of this side facing seat. Russ L. Bomhoff (Graphics omitted) |
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.