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: aiam5080OpenMr. Fredd Scheys President S.C.C. CARAT Inc. 109 Maple Avenue Huntsville, AL 35801; Mr. Fredd Scheys President S.C.C. CARAT Inc. 109 Maple Avenue Huntsville AL 35801; "Dear Mr. Scheys: This responds to your letter of October 2, 1992 asking for an explanation of how this agency's regulations would affect two types of vehicle conversions your company plans to undertake. In the first situation, a customer in California wishes to send two 'U.S. spec' cars that he presently owns to Europe for a 39-inch stretch conversion. In the second situation, the customer would take delivery of a 'U.S. spec car' in Europe, use it for tourist purposes, and leave it at your factory for conversion, and subsequent shipment to the United States. You also ask for 'advice for the case where we have to convert a car into an armoured car.' I am pleased to have this opportunity to explain our laws and regulations for you. The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (the Safety Act) provides generally that no person shall manufacture, sell, or import into the United States any motor vehicle unless that vehicle is in conformity with all applicable U.S. motor vehicle safety standards and is covered by a manufacturer's certification to that effect. The certification requirements are set forth in 49 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 567. The certification requirements apply to persons and entities that perform some manufacturing or conversion activities to a vehicle before that vehicle's first sale for purposes other than resale. This means that the original manufacturer of a vehicle (Mercedes-Benz, for instance) must certify that each of its completed vehicles conforms to all applicable U.S. safety standard and permanently affix a label with that statement on each such vehicle. For the purposes of this letter, I am assuming that the cars you call 'U.S. spec' cars are cars to which the original manufacturer has affixed its certification label. If any party performs conversion operations on a certified vehicle before the initial purchase of the vehicle, the party would be an 'alterer' and required to affix its own label identifying itself and certifying that the converted vehicle continues to conform to all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. See 49 CFR 567.7. However, in the situations posited in your letter, the conversions to be performed in Europe by your company would be performed on vehicles after the first purchase of the vehicle for purposes other than resale. This agency does not require any certification to be made or certification label to be affixed by entities that perform conversions on vehicles after the first purchase of those vehicles. Thus, your company need not make its own certification nor affix its own label. Instead, your company must leave in place the original manufacturer's certification label. The only provision in U.S. law that applies to conversion operations performed on vehicles after the first purchase in good faith for purposes other than resale is set forth in Title 15, United States Code, section 1397(b)(2). That section of the law forbids any 'manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business' from 'knowingly rendering inoperative in whole or in part any device or element of design installed in accordance with a Federal motor vehicle safety standard.' This means that your company must ensure that your conversion operations do not cause the converted vehicle to no longer comply with the U.S. motor vehicle safety standards. Pursuant to this responsibility, the agency would, for example, expect that, if the vehicle's weight ratings and tire inflation pressures shown on its original certification labels were no longer valid after conversion, a converter would install new labels showing the correct weight ratings and tire inflation pressures. Assuming your company leaves the original manufacturer's certification label in place on the converted vehicles, the owner of the vehicles should not encounter any difficulties when the converted vehicles are imported into the United States. The importer would simply file a declaration stating that the vehicle conforms to the applicable safety standards and bears an original manufacturer's certification label to that effect, pursuant to 49 CFR 591.5(b). For your information, I have enclosed a copy of an information sheet for new manufacturers that briefly explains our regulations and tells how to obtain copies of those regulations. I hope this information is helpful. Sincerely, Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel Enclosure"; |
|
ID: aiam3750OpenMr. Philip H. Wong, Deltana Enterprises, Inc., 12871 S.W. 117 Street, Miami, Florida 33186; Mr. Philip H. Wong Deltana Enterprises Inc. 12871 S.W. 117 Street Miami Florida 33186; Dear Mr. Wong: This responds to your letter to this office asking for information o regulations applicable to the importation of new tires, retreaded tires, and used tire casings from Japan into this country. It is not clear from your letter whether you are interested in importing passenger car tires or tires for use on other motor vehicles. To ensure that you get the information of concern to you, I will discuss the three situations you asked about for both passenger car tires and tires for use on other motor vehicles.; Generally speaking, all tires which are subject to a Federal moto vehicle safety standard must have the symbol 'DOT molded into the sidewall by the manufacturer or retreader, if those tires are to be imported into the United States. This symbol represents a certification by the manufacturer or retreader that the tire complies with all requirements of the applicable safety standard. The importation of any item without the DOT certification symbol on the sidewall would be a violation of 15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(1)(A), and the importer would be subject to a civil penalty of $1000 for each tire he imported without a DOT symbol on the sidewall.; *New passenger car tires*. Section S4.3.1 of Safety Standard No. 10 (49 CFR S571.109) (copy enclosed) requires that all new passenger car tires have the DOT symbol molded into the sidewall by the manufacturer. Tires without this symbol may not legally be imported into this country.; *New tires for use on motor vehicles other than passenger cars* Section S6.5(a) of Standard No. 119 (49 CFR S571.119) (copy enclosed) requires that all new tires for use on motor vehicles other than passenger cars have the DOT symbol molded into the sidewall by the manufacturer. Tires without this symbol may not legally be imported into this country.; *Retreaded passenger car tires*. Sections S6.1 of Standard NO. 117 (4 CFR S571.117) (copy enclosed) requires that all retreaded passenger cars tires have the symbol DOT molded into the sidewall by the retreader. Retreaded passenger car tires without this symbol may not legally be imported into this country.; *Retreaded tires for use on motor vehicles other than passenger cars* No Federal safety standard is applicable to these tires. They may be imported without certification of compliance by the retreader. However, these tires must have a tire identification number marked on the sidewall, per the requirements of 49 CFR Part 574 (copy enclosed), if they are to be legally sold in the United States. It would be a violation of 15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(1)(E) to sell tires without an identification number.; *Used passenger car tires*. 15 U.S.C.d 1397(a)(1)(A) reads in part a follows: 'No person shall...import into the United States...any item of motor vehicle equipment manufactured on or after the date any applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard takes effect under this title unless it is in conformity with such standard...' The effect of this language is to require that passenger car tires manufactured on or after the date Standard No. 109 took effect (January 1, 1968) be certified as complying with that standard, whether the tire is now new or used. To be legally imported into the United States, used passenger car tires must either have a DOT symbol molded into the sidewall by the original manufacturer or be accompanied by proof that they were manufactured before January 1, 1968.; *Used tires for use on motor vehicles other than passenger cars*. Th same reasoning applied above in the case of used passenger car tires applies to these tires as well. Standard No. 119 took effect on March 1, 1975, so used tires to be imported into the United States must either have a DOT symbol on the sidewall or proof that they were manufactured before March 1, 1975.; Used tires for use on motor vehicles other than passenger cars whic have less than 2/32 inch of tread remaining and which are imported solely for the purpose of being retreaded in this country prior to resale may be imported without a DOT symbol on the sidewall. I have enclosed a copy of a letter to Mr. Roy Littlefield, which explains in detail the requirements of this narrow exception to the requirement that used tires have a DOT symbol on the sidewall to be legally imported.; You also asked for any other information which your supplier might nee to export tires to the United States. I have enclosed a copy of a letter to Mr. Yang Ru-tang, which sets forth the requirements which must be satisfied in order for a foreign manufacturer to export tires to this country.; If you need any further information on this subject, please feel fre to contact me.; Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam4166OpenMr. Takeshi Tanuma, Nissan Research & Development, Inc., 3995 Research Park Drive, P.O. Box 8650, Ann Arbor, MI 48104; Mr. Takeshi Tanuma Nissan Research & Development Inc. 3995 Research Park Drive P.O. Box 8650 Ann Arbor MI 48104; Dear Mr. Tanuma: This responds to your letter of December 19, 1985, asking whether a antitheft device installed in all but a few cars of a particular car line would be considered 'standard equipment' under Title VI of the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act. As explained below, the answer to your question is no.; You describe a situation in which 99.9 percent of 'A' model vehicle were equipped with an antitheft device in Model Year 1985. Specifically, your letter states that total sales in the United States for that model year were 101,854 vehicles. Of these, 101,758 vehicles were equipped with an antitheft device, the rest or 96 vehicles, which were shipped to Hawaii, Guam, and Saipan as rental cars, were not equipped with an antitheft device. You state that you expect 99.9 percent of 'A' model cars to be equipped with an antitheft device in Model Year 1987 and ask if, under these circumstances, the antitheft device can be considered standard equipment.; Under section 605(a) of the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Saving Act, any manufacturer may petition this agency for an exemption from the vehicle theft prevention standard for any 'line or lines of passenger motor vehicles which are equipped as standard equipment with an antitheft device' which the agency determines is likely to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance with the standard. This section also defines 'standard equipment' as that installed at the time the vehicle is delivered from the manufacturer and which is not an accessory or other item which the first purchaser customarily has the option to have installed.; As interpreted by this agency, 'standard equipment' refers to antithef devices that are provided without extra charge on all vehicles of a particular line which are introduced into the United States or imported and which are not intended solely for export and exported. Since the antitheft device in your example would not be installed in all model 'A' cars imported into the United States, the agency concludes that the device would not be standard equipment within the meaning of section 605.; Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam2084OpenMr. C.D. McCarthy, The B.F. Goodrich Company, 500 South Main Street, Akron, Ohio 44318; Mr. C.D. McCarthy The B.F. Goodrich Company 500 South Main Street Akron Ohio 44318; Dear Mr. McCarthy: This is in response to your August 30, 1975, letter concerning th Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards applicable to tires which the manufacturer expects to be used in both passenger cars and trailers.; >>>S2. of Standard No. 109 specifies: This standard applies to new pneumatic tires for use on passenger car manufactured after 1948...; Similarly, S3. of Standard No. 119 specifies: This standard applies to new pneumatic tires designed for highway us on multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, busses, *trailers* and motorcycles manufactured after 1948...(emphasis added)<<<; These standard are mutually exclusive. Therefore, dual marking indicating compliance with the performance requirements of each are not permitted. A tire whose predominant contemplated use is on passenger cars is subject to Standard No. 109, even if the manufacturer knows it will also be marketed as a trailer tire. The choice of standard to which the tire will be certified should be made by the manufacturer. The NHTSA will accept a manufacturer's good faith determination of the applicable standard. You should note that if the tire is certified as conforming with Standard No. 119, its use as original equipment on passenger cars is prohibited by Standard No. 110. (the proposed Standard No. 120, however, would permit the use of passenger car tires on vehicles other than passenger cars, subject to a 10 percent load rating correction factor.); Please note further that a tire which is subject to Standard No. 10 must be of a size designation listed in Appendix A of that standard. Conversely, any tire labeled with a size designation which is listed in that appendix is subject to Standard No. 109.; The final paragraph of your letter discussed 'certain types and classe of equipment [determined by the NHTSA to be] non-trailers by definition.' You appear to be referring to vehicles which are not 'trailers' because they are not 'motor vehicles' or items of 'motor vehicle equipment' as the latter terms are defined by the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, as amended. No Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards apply to units which are neither motor vehicles nor motor vehicle equipment. The manufacturers of such units may equip them with tires of their choice.; Sincerely, Frank A. Berndt. Acting Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam2085OpenMr. C.D. McCarty, the B.F. Goodrich Company, 500 South Main Street, Akron, Ohio 44318; Mr. C.D. McCarty the B.F. Goodrich Company 500 South Main Street Akron Ohio 44318; Dear Mr. McCarty: This is in response to your August 30, 1975, letter concerning th Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards applicable to tires which the manufacturer expects to be used on both passenger cars and trailers.; >>>S2. of Standard No. 109 specifies: This standard applies to new pneumatic tires for use on passenger car manufactured after 1948...; Similarly, S3. of Standard No. 119 specifies: This standard applies to new pneumatic tires designed for highway us on multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, buses, *trailers* and motorcycles manufactured after 1948... (emphasis added)<<<; These standards are mutually exclusive. Therefore, dual marking indicating compliance with the performance requirements of each are not permitted. A tire whose predominant contemplated use is in passenger cars is subject to Standard No. 109, even if the manufacturer knows it will also be marketed as a trailer tire. The choice of standard to which the tire will be certified should be made by the manufacturer. The NHTSA will accept a manufacturer's good faith determination of the applicable standard. You should note that if the tire is certified as conforming with Standard No. 119, its use as original equipment on passenger cars is prohibited by Standard No. 110. (The proposed Standard No. 120, however, would permit the use of passenger car tires on vehicles other than passenger cars, subject to a 10 percent load rating correction factor.); Please note further that a tire which is subject to Standard No. 10 must be of a size designation listed in Appendix A of that standard. Conversely, any tire labeled with a size designation which is listed in that appendix is subject to Standard No. 109.; The final paragraph of your letter discussed 'certain types and classe of equipment [determined by the NHTSA to be] non-trailers by definition.' You appear to be referring to vehicles which are not 'trailers' because they are not 'motor vehicles' or items of 'motor vehicle equipment' as the latter terms are defined by the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, as amended. No Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards apply to units which are neither motor vehicles nor motor vehicle equipment. The manufacturers of such unit may equip them with tires of their choice.; Sincerely, Frank A. Berndt, Acting Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam4795OpenRoger C. Fairchild, Esq. Shutler & Low 14500 Avion Parkway, Suite 300 Chantilly, VA 22021-1101; Roger C. Fairchild Esq. Shutler & Low 14500 Avion Parkway Suite 300 Chantilly VA 22021-1101; "Dear Mr. Fairchild: This responds to your inquiry about Federal Moto Vehicle Safety Standards 109, 110, 119, and 120 on tires and rim selection (49 CFR 571.109, 571.110, 571.119, and 571.120), asking about the applicability of certain provisions in the Tire and Rim Association (TRA) Year Book, which those Federal safety standards incorporate by reference. As explained below, we agree that the adjustment factors in the TRA Year Book for inflation pressures and load ratings at different speeds are not applicable in determining compliance with Federal safety standards. By way of background, the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, ('Vehicle Safety Act,' 15 USC 1381 et seq.) requires every new motor vehicle sold in the United States to be certified as complying with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. The Vehicle Safety Act specifies that the manufacturer must certify that each of its vehicles complies with all applicable safety standards in effect on the date of manufacture. Because of this statutory requirement, this agency does not approve any manufacturer's vehicles or offer assurances that the vehicles comply with the safety standards. Any person violating the Vehicle Safety Act by manufacturing or selling new noncomplying vehicles may be liable for potential penalties of $1,000 per violation up to $800,000. Section S4.3 of Standard 109 requires a new pneumatic tire for passenger cars to be labeled with certain information including one size designation, the maximum inflation pressure, and the maximum load rating. S6.5 of Standard 119 has similar marking requirements for tires on vehicles other than passenger cars. In particular, section 4.2.1(c) of Standard 109 and section 6.5(d) of Standard 119 require tires to be labeled with a maximum load rating not less than the lowest of any specified values in the manufacturer's submission or in a listed publication such as the TRA Yearbook, for tires of that size designation, type and each appropriate inflation pressure. For passenger car tires, these inflation pressures and load ratings are specified in tables in section one of the TRA Yearbook entitled, ''P' Type Tires Used on Passenger Cars and Station Wagons' and ''T' Type Spare Tires for Temporary Use on Passenger Cars and Station Wagons.' For tires on vehicles other than passenger cars, these inflation pressures and load ratings are specified in the tables in section 2 of the TRA Yearbook. Question One You first asked whether the Federal safety standards incorporate an independent vehicle speed adjustment factor in determining the 'vehicle normal load' and 'vehicle maximum load.' Your question was based on provisions in the TRA Year Book which apply such a vehicle load adjustment factor for certain tires rated for a maximum speed above 130 mph. As you are aware, S4.2 of Standard 110 provides that the vehicle maximum load on the tire shall not be greater than the applicable maximum load rating marked on the tire, and the vehicle normal load on the tire shall not be greater than the test load used in Standard 109's high speed performance test. You are correct that an adjustment factor based on the vehicle's maximum speed capacity is not required to be used in determining compliance with Standard 110 and 120. As you noted, Standard 110's requirement, as specified in S4.2.2, takes into account an adjustment for high speed use by requiring that the normal vehicle load on a tire must not exceed the test load used in Standard 109's high speed performance test in S5.5 (i.e. 88 percent of the tire's maximum load rating). Based on this provision and Standard No. 110's use of the terms 'vehicle maximum load' and 'maximum loaded vehicle weight,' we interpret S4.2 as applying to normal vehicle uses and not special high speed applications. In fact, incorporating a load adjustment factor based on speeds of 130 to 168 mph, as the TRA provision does, would be contrary to motor vehicle safety if it encouraged vehicle operation at speeds far exceeding safe operating speeds. Therefore, the general tables in the TRA Yearbook listing maximum inflation pressures and maximum load ratings, standing alone without applying any adjustment factor, are the applicable values in determining compliance with the Federal safety standards. Question Two You also asked about a vehicle speed adjustment factor for the inflation pressure with passenger cars. As you explained, the TRA Year Book requires that the 'speed category of the tire must match or exceed the theoretical maximum speed of the vehicle (i.e., actual maximum speed, as adjusted for tire inflation pressure using another factor specified by TRA). TRA sets forth two speed categories: speeds up to 210 km/h (130 mph) and speeds above 210 km/h (130 mph). As with the vehicle load adjustment factor which concerns normal vehicle applications, you are correct that an adjustment factor for inflation pressure based on the vehicle's maximum speed is not required to be used in determining compliance with Federal safety standards. Again, the general tables in the TRA Yearbook listing maximum inflation pressures and maximum load ratings, standing alone without applying any adjustment factor, are the applicable values in determining compliance with the Federal safety standards. Question Three You then asked about the applicability to the Federal standards of TRA's recommended adjustments for tire inflation pressure and 'service load' for tires used on trucks and buses, depending on the maximum speed capability of the vehicle. As with the adjustment factors for passenger car tires, these adjustment factors are not relevant for compliance with Standard 119 or 120. Again, the general tables in the TRA Yearbook listing maximum inflation pressures and maximum load ratings, standing alone without applying any adjustment factor, are the applicable values in determining compliance with the Federal safety standards. I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact Marvin Shaw of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel"; |
|
ID: aiam0232OpenDavid Sugarman, Esq., 119 West 57th Street, New York, NY 10019; David Sugarman Esq. 119 West 57th Street New York NY 10019; Dear Mr. Sugarman: In response to your letter of April 16 I enclose copies of Federa Motor Vehicle Safety Standards Nos. 107 (Reflecting Surfaces) and 108 (Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment). Copies of the ASTM and SAE standards cross-referenced in the Federal standards are available from the American Society for Testing and Materials and the Society of Automotive Engineers. You may find particularly helpful SAE Handbook Supplement 19, 'SAE Technical Reports Referenced in Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards'.; The answer to your first question is that Standard No. 108 require passenger cars manufactured on or after January 1, 1970, to be equipped with a total of 4 side marker lamps and 4 side marker reflectors, one marker and one reflector, amber in color, on each side of the vehicle 'as far forward as practicable', and one marker and one reflector, red in color, on each side of the vehicle, 'as far to the rear as practicable'(sic) Between January 1, 1969 and January 1, 1970 the option of reflectors or markers, or a combination of the two, was permitted. Prior to January 1, 1969 the Federal lighting standard did not apply to passenger cars. I will note in passing that the rear marker lamps on the Monteverdi displayed at the recent New York show were amber and must be changed to red before these vehicles are sold. There are no requirements as to size and shape of lamps and reflectors, but the SAE standards applicable to them and incorporated by reference in Standard No. 108 do set forth certain photometric requirements which must be met.; In answer to your second question, Table III of Standard No. 10 requires tail lamps to be red, but permits stop lamps and rear turn signals to be either red or amber. A proposal has been issued however (35 F.R. 106) that stop lamps be red only on passenger cars manufactured on or after January 1, 1971.; You have asked in your third question whether headlamps may be place in the grille. The answer to this is yes, provided that this location meets the lateral spacing and height above road surface requirements of Table IV of Standard No. 108. Also, headlamps must not be covered by a grille or plastic shield when in use.; Standard No. 107 does not specify a particular color for the horn rin and hub of the steering assembly but it does specify a maximum permissible value for specular glass.; Finally, other than Standard Nos. 205 (Glazing Materials) and 21 (Windshield Mounting) which all passenger cars must meet, there is no 'specific safety requirement as to the windshield' for convertibles, and there is no 'requirement as to a roll bar'.; Sincerely, Lawrence R. Schneider, Chief, Regulations Division |
|
ID: aiam3203OpenMr. Walter S. Felton, Jr., Hugh A. West, Inc., Suite 303 Professional Building, Suffolk, Virginia 23434; Mr. Walter S. Felton Jr. Hugh A. West Inc. Suite 303 Professional Building Suffolk Virginia 23434; Dear Mr. Felton: This is in response to your letter of October 22, 1979, addressed t Mr. Nelson Erickson. Please accept my apologies for the lateness of our letter. Your letter asked whether Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 114, *Theft Protection*, was intended to prevent a small child or animal left unattended in a parked automobile (model year 1973) from which the keys have been removed, from intentionally or accidentally moving the gear selection level from the 'Park' position. The answer to your question is no, for the reasons noted below. You also requested a copy of any technical analysis that may have been done in the development of Safety Standard 114. Although the public docket contains analyses pertinent to later versions of Safety Standard 114 it contains none pertinent to any version of the standard applicable to passenger cars manufactured in 1973. The only analyses pertinent to these earlier versions of the standard are contained in documents which contain internal agency opinion and recommendations and thus are not publicly available.; When Safety Standard 114 was adopted in 1968 its stated purpose was t 'reduce the incidence of accidents resulting from unauthorized use.' (33 FR 6471, April 27, 1968). This goal was based on evidence which shoed that: 'cars operated by unauthorized persons are far more likely to cause unreasonable risk of accident, personal injury and death than those which are driven by authorized individuals,' (33 FR 6471, preamble). Neither the rule nor the preamble states that the standard was intended to accomplish any other goal.; As adopted, the standard required that all passenger cars manufacture on or after January 1, 1970, be equipped with a key locking system that (upon removal of the key) would prevent 'activation of the car's engine or other main source of motive power, and either steering or self-mobility or both.' Safety Standard 114 in its current form also provides manufacturers with this option. The preamble to the standard simply stated that a steering or self-mobility lock was needed in order '...to defeat car thieves who start cars with so-called 'master keys' and devices which bypass the [ignition] lock ...' (33 FR 6471).; In light of the compliance option described above and the purpose o Safety Standard 114 as expressed both in the standard its self and in the preambles of various Federal Register notices, it appears that Safety Standard 114 was not intended to apply to the situation described in your letter.; If you have any further questions, please fell free to contact Ms Debra Weiner of my staff at 202-426-2992.; Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam0230OpenDavid Sugarman, Esq., 119 West 57th Street, New York, New York 10019; David Sugarman Esq. 119 West 57th Street New York New York 10019; Dear Mr. Sugarman: In response to your letter of April 16 I enclose copies of Federa Motor Vehicle Safety Standards Nos. 107 (Reflecting Surfaces) and 108 (Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment). Copies of the ASTM and SAE standards cross-referenced in the Federal standards are available from the American Society for Testing and Materials and the Society of Automotive Engineers. You may find particularly helpful SAE Handbook Supplement 19, 'SAE Technical Reports Referenced in Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards'.; The answer to your first question is that Standard No. 108 require passenger cars manufactured on or after January 1, 1970, to be equipped with a total of 4 side marker lamps and 4 side marker reflectors, one marker and one reflector, amber in color, on each side of the vehicle 'as far forward as practicable', and one marker and one reflector, red in color, on each side of the vehicle, 'as far to the rear as practicable'. Between January 1, 1969 and January 1, 1970 the option of reflectors or markers, or a combination of the two was permitted. Prior to January 1, 1969 the Federal lighting standard did not apply to passenger cars. I will note in passing that the rear marker lamps on the Monteverdi displayed at the recent New York show were amber and must be changed to red before these vehicles are sold. There are no requirements as to size and shape of lamps and reflectors, but the SAE standard applicable to them and incorporated by reference in Standard No. 108 do set forth certain photometric requirements which must be met.; In answer to your second question, Table III of Standard No. 10 requires tail lamps to be red, but permits stop lamps and rear turn signals to be either red or amber. A proposal has been issued however (35 F.R. 106) that stop lamps be red only on passenger cars manufactured on or after January 1, 1971.; You have asked in your third question whether headlamps may be place in the grille. The answer to this is yes, provided that this location meets the lateral spacing and height above road surface requirements of Table IV of Standard No. 108. Also, headlamps must not be covered by a grille or plastic shield when in use.; Standard No. 107 does not specify a particular color for the horn rin and hub of the steering assembly but it does specify a maximum permissible value for specular glass.; Finally, other than Standard Nos. 205 (Glazing Materials) and 21 (windshield Mounting which all passenger cars must meet, there is no 'specific safety requirement as to the windshield' for convertibles, and there is no 'requirement as to a roll bar'.; Sincerely, Lawrence R. Schneider, Chief, Regulations Division |
|
ID: aiam4548OpenMr. Gary M. Ceazan Vice President Riken-America, Inc. PO Box 3698 Terminal Annex Los Angeles, CA 90051; Mr. Gary M. Ceazan Vice President Riken-America Inc. PO Box 3698 Terminal Annex Los Angeles CA 90051; "Dear Mr. Ceazan: This is in response to your letter asking whethe tires marked with both an ETRTO (European Tyre and Rim Technical Organization) size designation and a different ISO (International Standardization Organization) size designation can legally be imported into the United States. As discussed below, such tires cannot be imported into the United States, because they do not comply with the applicable safety standards. I regret the delay in this response. All new pneumatic tires imported into the United States for use on passenger cars must be certified as complying with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 109, New Pneumatic Tires - Passenger Cars (49 CFR /571.109), and all new pneumatic tires imported for use on motor vehicles other than passenger vehicles must be certified as complying with Standard No. 119, New Pneumatic Tires for Vehicles Other Than Passenger Cars (49 CFR /571.119). Both of these standards prohibit 'dual-size markings,' or labeling two different size designations on one tire. In the case of passenger car tires, section S4.3(a) of Standard No. 109 specifies that each tire shall be labeled with 'one size designation, except that equivalent inch and metric size designations may be used.' (emphasis added). This agency expressly prohibited dual-size markings on passenger car tires in a preamble amending Standard No. 109, 36 FR 1195, January 26, 1971. This prohibition was expressly repeated in subsequent amendments that addressed the question of tire labeling under Standard No. 109, see 39 FR 10162, March 18, 1974, and 42 FR 12869, March 7, 1977. In the case of tires for use on vehicles other than passenger cars, there is no express prohibition in Standard No. 119 against dual size markings. However, section S6.5(c) of Standard No. 119 requires that each tire be marked on both sidewalls with 'the tire and size designation as listed in the documents and publications designated in S5.1.' NHTSA has interpreted the use of the singular in the phrase 'tire size designation,' rather than the plural 'tire size designations,' to be a prohibition against marking more than one tire size designation on these tires. See the enclosed copies of my January 7, 1988 letter to Mr. E.W. Dahl and my February 16, 1988 letter to Mr. Mike Kaizaki. Since tires marked with two size designations would not comply with our tire standards, they could not legally be imported into the United States, according to the requirement specified in section 108(a)(1)(A) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(1)(A)). If you have any further questions about our tire standards or need additional information on this subject, please feel free to contact Mr. Marvin Shaw of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel Enclosures /"; |
Request an Interpretation
You may email your request to Interpretations.NHTSA@dot.gov or send your request in hard copy to:
The Chief Counsel
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, W41-326
U.S. Department of Transportation
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE
Washington, DC 20590
If you want to talk to someone at NHTSA about what a request for interpretation should include, call the Office of the Chief Counsel at 202-366-2992.
Please note that NHTSA’s response will be made available in this online database, and that the incoming interpretation request may also be made publicly available.