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 |
|---|---|
| search results table | |
ID: aiam0781OpenMr. Thomas S. Pieratt, Jr., Executive Secretary, Truck Equipment & Body Distributors Association, 602 Main Street, Cincinnati, OH 45202; Mr. Thomas S. Pieratt Jr. Executive Secretary Truck Equipment & Body Distributors Association 602 Main Street Cincinnati OH 45202; Dear Mr. Pieratt: This is in reply to your letter of June 16, 1972, requestin information on steps to be taken under the Certification regulations when a manufacturer considers a fifth wheel to be a 'readily attachable component,' and certifies the vehicle as a complete vehicle before the attachment of the fifth wheel. You ask what responsibilities apply to the person who ultimately attaches the fifth wheel when that person also affixes other components to the vehicle. You list as other components a third axle, the substitution of an air ride suspension for the regular suspension, and the addition of a 'drum' unit (we assume that this is a dromedary unit).; The situations you have listed appear to resemble situations similar t those involving the possible use of the 'altering distributor label' which we discussed in our letter to you of June 20. We said in that letter that if a person altering a completed vehicle does not make changes significant enough to make him a remanufacturer, he may satisfy the requirements by allowing the existing label to remain in place. If he does make significant changes, however, he must recertify the vehicle, but he may rely on the previous manufacturer's certification for those aspects of performance that are not affected by his alterations.; We would consider the addition of a third axle to be remanufacturing and you were correct in advising your member to recertify the vehicle, utilizing the information on the existing label except as to the third axle. Strictly speaking, however, your member as the remanufacturer is responsible for the conformity of the entire vehicle. While he may rely on the information on the original label, if a noncompliance were discovered the burden in the first instance would be on him to show that his alterations were not responsible.; We cannot determine from the information you provide whether th 'substitution of an air ride suspension' would constitute remanufacturing. You can probably infer the answer based on your own knowledge of what is involved.; With reference to the drum unit, we advised you by letter of March 24 1972, that we consider the addition of a dromedary unit to be remanufacturing. A person who installs such a component on a new vehicle would be required to recertify the entire vehicle as a final-stage manufacturer. He may also rely on the previous certification for those aspects of performance which he does not affect.; You also ask whether, if the installation of the fifth wheel alters component covered by a safety standard, the installer should recertify the vehicle. As you are assuming that the fifth wheel is a 'readily attachable component,' no further certification is necessary. However, the person installing the fifth wheel must ensure that the vehicle conforms to all standards when the work is completed.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam5079OpenMichael J. Vacanti 7533 W. 112th Street Bloomington, MN 55438; Michael J. Vacanti 7533 W. 112th Street Bloomington MN 55438; "Dear Mr. Vacanti: This responds to your letter seeking information o how the laws and regulations administered by this agency would apply to a device you have designed. According to your letter, this device is an aftermarket accessory. The accessory is a polyurethane device that latches onto the lap/shoulder belt and changes the angle at which the shoulder belt crosses a child's torso. The device is intended to improve shoulder belt fit for children that have outgrown child safety seats. I am pleased to have this chance to explain our laws and regulations to you. The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1381 et seq., the Safety Act) authorizes this agency to issue motor vehicle safety standards for new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. We have exercised this authority to establish Standard No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection (49 CFR 571.208). This standard requires new motor vehicles to be equipped with safety belts and requires that those belts meet specified fit and comfort requirements, as set forth in S7 of the standard. However, Standard No. 208 does not apply to aftermarket items that seek to alter belt fit and/or comfort. Hence, you are not required to certify that this device complies with Standard No. 208 before offering the device for sale. In addition, you are not required to get some sort of 'approval' from this agency before offering this device for sale. NHTSA has no authority to 'approve' motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment, nor do we endorse any commercial products. Instead, the Safety Act establishes a 'self- certification' process under which each manufacturer is responsible for certifying that its products meet all applicable safety standards. As stated above, this device is not subject to any safety standard, so you do not have to make any certification. Although none of our safety standards directly apply to this device, there are several provisions in the Safety Act that are relevant. Manufacturers of motor vehicle equipment such as your belt positioning device are subject to the requirements in sections 151-159 of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1411-1419) concerning the recall and remedy of products with defects related to motor vehicle safety. In addition, use of your product could be affected by section 108(a)(2)(A) of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(2)(A)). That section prohibits manufacturer, distributors, dealers, and repair shops from knowingly 'rendering inoperative,' in whole or in part, any device or element of design installed on or in a vehicle in compliance with an applicable safety standard. There are two elements of design in a vehicle that might be 'rendered inoperative' by the use of your belt positioning device. One is the occupant protection afforded by belts that meet the specified fit and comfort requirements. The other element of design that could be rendered inoperative by the use of your belt positioning device is the burn resistance required by Standard No. 302, Flammability of Interior Materials (49 CFR 571.302). The materials used in the interior of vehicles, including the seat belts, seat backs and cushions, trim panels, and headliner must comply with the burn resistance requirements of Standard No. 302 to reduce deaths and injuries in the event of a fire in the vehicle's interior. If your belt positioning device renders inoperative the belt fit and comfort requirements specified in Standard No. 208 or does not comply with burn resistance requirements, it could not be installed in a vehicle by any manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or repair shop. I have enclosed a general information sheet for new manufacturers that gives a thumbnail sketch of NHTSA's regulations and provides information on how to obtain copies of those regulations. I hope that this information is helpful. If you have any further questions or need some additional information, please feel free to contact Steve Kratzke of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel Enclosure "; |
|
ID: aiam5583OpenMr. Douglas Helbig Vice President Spencer Testing Services P.O. Box 429 Spencer, WV 25276; Mr. Douglas Helbig Vice President Spencer Testing Services P.O. Box 429 Spencer WV 25276; Dear Mr. Helbig: It has come to my attention that Spencer Testin Services is advertising its inspection procedure as 'NHTSA approved.' This representation is incorrect. NHTSA has not approved this or any other inspection procedure. Therefore, I must insist that this language be immediately removed from the advertisement and that you refrain from making such representations in any other format. Please send me a copy of the corrected advertisement without reference to the inspection procedure being NHTSA approved. Thank you for your immediate attention to this matter. Sincerely, John Womack Acting Chief Counsel; |
|
ID: aiam2246OpenMr. Thomas A. Kirwan III, 611 South Congress, Suite 400, Austin, TX 78704; Mr. Thomas A. Kirwan III 611 South Congress Suite 400 Austin TX 78704; Dear Mr. Kirwan: This is in response to your letter of February 25, 1976, requestin information concerning the Federal motor vehicle safety standards and regulations applicable to transit vehicles, specifically, Dodge vans that will be used in a rural transportation system.; The answers to your questions are as follows: >>>(1) 'Which FMVSS apply to vans used in transit service?'<<< If your Dodge vans are designed to carry 10 persons or less they woul qualify as 'multipurpose passenger vehicles', as defined in 49 CFR Part 571.3. As multipurpose passenger vehicles, the Dodge vans would be subject to the requirements of the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards listed below. The standards marked with an asterisk (*) are equipment standards and do not apply to the vehicles themselves. Rather, these standards set forth requirements for manufacturers of motor vehicle equipment for use in multipurpose passenger vehicles.; >>>No. 101 - *Control Location, Identification, and Illumination.* No. 102 - *Transmission Shift Lever Sequence, Starter Interlock, an Transmission Braking Effect*.; No. 103 - *Windshield Defrosting and Defogging Systems*. No. 104 - *Windshield Wiping and Washing Systems*. *No. 106-74 - *Brake Hoses*. No. 107 - *Reflecting Surfaces*. No. 108 - *Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment.* No. 111 - *Rearview Mirrors.* No. 112 - *Headlamp Concealment Devices*. No. 113 - *Hood Latch System.* *No. 116 - *Motor Vehicle Brake Fluids.* No. 118 - *Power Operated Window Systems*. *No. 119 - *New Pneumatic Tires for Vehicles Other Than Passenge Cars.*; No. 120 - *Tire Selection and Rims for Vehicles Other than(sic Passenger Cars*.; No. 124 - *Accelerator Control Systems*. *No. 125 - *Warning Devices*. *No. 205 - *Glazing Materials*. No. 206 - *Door Locks and Door Retention Components.* No. 207 - *Seating Systems*. No. 208 - *Occupant Crash Protection.* *No. 209 - *Seat Belt Assemblies*. No. 210 - *Seat Belt Assembly Anchorages*. No. 211 - *Wheel Nuts, Wheel Discs and Hub Caps*. No. 213 - *Child Seating Systems*. No. 219 - *Windshield Zone Intrusion*. No. 301-75 - *Fuel System Integrity*. No. 302 - *Flammability of Interior Materials*.<<< The manufacturer of the Dodge vans must affix a label to each vehicl certifying that the vehicle is in compliance with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards and regulations, as required by 49 CFR Part 567, *Certification.* This certification label should be affixed to the door or door post of each vehicle, and you should check to make certain that it is present.; Please note that if the Dodge vans are designed to carry more than 1 persons, they would be classified as 'buses' under 49 CFR Part 567.3, and the list of applicable safety standards would differ.; >>>(2) 'Does NHTSA recommend a set of vehicle specifications for van used in transit?'<<<; No. The NHTSA has issued only the requirements found in the moto vehicle safety standards and regulations.; >>>(3) 'Do any FMVSS apply specifically to modified vans (e.g. thos filled with hydraulic lift for wheelchairs and a raised roof)?'<<<; No. Such vehicles must meet the same standards as other MPV's. >>>(4) 'Are there any regulations which apply to fiberglass bubbletop on vans in transit service?'<<<; Yes. Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 205, *Glazing Materials,* 49 CF 571.205, specifies requirements for glazing materials for use in motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment. Rigid plastic materials that are to be used as covers for openings in the roof of a vehicle must conform to the requirements specified in paragraph S5.1.2.1 of Standard No. 205.; >>>(5) 'Are there any regulations, perhaps within the Federal Highwa Safety Act, which apply to driver qualifications?'<<<; Yes. Driver qualifications for transit vehicles are governed by Federa Motor Carrier Safety Regulations, 49 CFR Part 391, *Qualifications of Drivers*.; >>>(6) 'Could you provide any further information which you feel woul contribute to the safe operation of our transit system?'<<<; At the present time the NHTSA has not issued any general guideline concerning the organization or operation of transit systems. You may, however, wish to contact the Urban Mass Transportation Administration of this Department for information on this subject.; I hope this letter has been responsive to your questions. Pleas contact us if we can (sic) of any further assistance.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam5429OpenMr. Gene Byrd Anderson Technology 17 Ross St. Jamestown, NY 14702-0759; Mr. Gene Byrd Anderson Technology 17 Ross St. Jamestown NY 14702-0759; Dear Mr. Byrd: This responds to your letter to former Chief Counse Paul Jackson Rice asking about the requirements of FMVSS 106, Brake Hoses, for reusable air brake hose end fittings. You indicate that you intend to produce these end fittings for use with SAE J844 plastic tubing. You also state that you have filed a manufacturer's designation with NHTSA, in accordance with S7.2.2(b) of Standard 106. You asked for confirmation that seven requirements in FMVSS 106 apply to reusable end fittings. The requirements you listed were: S7.2.2 (labeling), 7.3.1 (constriction), 7.3.8 (air pressure), 7.3.9 (burst strength), 7.3.10 (tensile strength), 7.3.11 (water absorption and tensile strength), and 7.3.13 (end fitting corrosion). Your understanding is essentially correct, with the following clarification. You are correct that each of these sections specifies a level of performance which is dependent on the performance of the end fitting. However, other than for S7.2.2 and 7.3.13, these requirements apply to air brake hose assemblies, and not to end fittings. This is relevant for purposes of determining the requirements for which an end fitting manufacturer would have to certify compliance. If you were only manufacturing and selling the end fitting, you would be responsible for certifying only to S7.2.2 and 7.3.13, since these requirements apply to end fittings (and not to 'assemblies'). As a practical matter, however, the assembly manufacturer would probably seek assurances from you that your end fitting will perform in a manner that will enable the manufacturer's assembly to meet the air brake hose assembly requirements of the standard. For your information, I am enclosing a copy of NHTSA's regulation for 'Manufacturer Identification' (49 CFR Part 566). This regulation requires a manufacturer of equipment to which an FMVSS applies (e.g., brake hose end fittings) to submit its name, address, and a brief description of the items of equipment it manufacturers to NHTSA within 30 days after it begins manufacture. I have also enclosed an information sheet that briefly describes other responsibilities for manufacturers of new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. I hope this answers your question. If you need other assistance, please feel free to contact Ms. Deirdre Fujita of my staff at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, John Womack Acting Chief Counsel Enclosure; |
|
ID: aiam3904OpenStephen T. Waimey, Esq., Dean Hansell, Esq., Donovan Leisure Newton & Irvine, 333 South Grand Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90071; Stephen T. Waimey Esq. Dean Hansell Esq. Donovan Leisure Newton & Irvine 333 South Grand Avenue Los Angeles CA 90071; Dear Messrs. Waimey and Hansell: I am responding to your correspondence regarding the definitions o 'convertible' and 'open-body type vehicle' under National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) safety regulations.; Your first question concerns the definition of 'open-body typ vehicle.' Our regulations provide a definition at 49 CFR S571.3: '...a vehicle having no occupant compartment top or an occupant compartment top that can be installed or removed by the user at his convenience.' The common usage of that term in our interpretations is that this term is intended to apply to multipurpose passenger vehicles, such as Jeep-type vehicles. Thus, neither of the automobiles in the pictures you included with your letter (Porsche 911 Carrera Cabriolet and Porsche 911 Carrera Targa) are considered to be open-body vehicles.; You also ask whether the Porsche 911 Targa is considered a convertible You state that there is no fixed, rigid structural member joining the 'A' pillar with the 'B' pillar. Despite this absence, the Targa roof, beginning behind the 'B' pillar, apparently is a fixed, rigid structural member that meets Federal roof-crush standards.; You are correct in stating that our regulations do not expressly defin 'convertible.' NHTSA interpretations, however, have consistently defined 'convertible' as a vehicle whose 'A' pillar or windshield peripheral support is not joined with the 'B' pillar (or rear roof support rearward of the 'B' pillar position) by a fixed, rigid structural member. Thus, the Porsche 911 Targa is considered a convertible because it meets this definition. While the vehicle is therefore not required to meet the roof-crush standards, it is commendable that Porsche has designed it to do so.; If you have any further questions, please let me know. Sincerely, Jeffrey R. Miller, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam1939OpenMr. Bernard R. Weber, Executive Vice President, Wesbar Corporation, P. O. Box 577, West Bend, WI 53095; Mr. Bernard R. Weber Executive Vice President Wesbar Corporation P. O. Box 577 West Bend WI 53095; Dear Mr. Weber: This is in reply to your letter of May 13, 1975, requesting a interpretation of paragraph S4.4.1 of Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 as it applies to a described lamp design.; In pertinent part, S4.4.1 states that 'no clearance lamp may b combined optically with any taillamp.' The lamp design that interests you has separate compartments for the taillamp and for the clearance lamp. You are concerned that at a distance it will be difficult to distinguish the two lamps, and you feel that this violates the spirit of S4.4.1.; We have no objection to the design of this lamp. Since the clearanc lamp and taillamp are in separate compartments and not optically combined, and since Standard No. 108 does not specify a minimum separation distance between the two lamps, the lamp design foes not violate S4.4.1.; Sincerely, James C. Schultz, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam2616OpenMr. Jerry W. McNeil, Director of Engineering, American Trailers, Inc., Box 26568, Oklahoma City, OK 73126; Mr. Jerry W. McNeil Director of Engineering American Trailers Inc. Box 26568 Oklahoma City OK 73126; Dear Mr. McNeil: This is in response to your letter of June 10, 1977, concerning vehicle manufacturer's responsibilities with regard to overloading.; You make a reference to a November 10, 1976, letter from the Nationa Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) which stated that manufacturers must take reasonable steps to ensure that the vehicles they produce will not be overloaded by their users. Although we acknowledge that a manufacturer does not have direct control over the actual use of its vehicles, it does exercise indirect control over use through the vehicle's design.; The NHTSA has stated in the past that a vehicle's gross vehicle weigh rating (GVWR) is determined by the sum of its unloaded vehicle weight, 150 pounds for each designated seating position, and its rated cargo load. It is the cargo load rating that is most relevant to the problem of overloading. The rated cargo load should represent the manufacturer's assessment of the vehicle's cargo-carrying capacity and the maximum load at which the vehicle may be safely operated. A manufacturer must consider the maximum load capacity of the vehicle when it designs its cargo-carrying portion. If this is not done, the rated cargo load, and thus the GVWR, may be meaningless since the vehicle may have a cargo-carrying chamber which, if filled, would cause the vehicle to exceed its stated weight ratings. An illustration of such a situation would be a tanker truck which exceeds its GVWR when the tank is filled with a type of material appropriate for carrying in that cargo area. If the manufacturer could reasonably have anticipated that such cargo would be carried in the tanker, yet rated the vehicle with a GVWR which was less than the vehicle's weight when fully loaded with that cargo, a safety-related defect for which the manufacturer is responsible may be considered to exist.; The NHTSA does not expect manufacturers to be omniscient when it come to the use of the vehicles they produce. It does, however, expect the stated weight ratings to reflect the design of the vehicles and the uses to which they can reasonably be anticipated to be put. Where the manufacturer has reason to know the specific commodity intended to be carried in its vehicles and those vehicles have a totally enclosed cargo area, as with a tanker, the rated cargo load is relatively easy to determine.; In your particular case, your responsibility for any subsequen overloading of the vehicles it manufactures would be determined by the reasonableness of your GVWR's and gross axle weight ratings (GAWR), given the size and configuration of your vehicles and the types of loads which they could reasonably be expected to carry. In the case of flat beds (no enclosed cargo area) a manufacturer would obviously not be able to provide weight ratings sufficiently high to prevent overloading in all instances. The design of flat beds necessarily permits overloading since the cargo area is unrestricted. Thus if the weight ratings specified appear to have been arrived at by a good faith determination based upon the types of loads the manufacturer anticipates will be carried, its responsibility with regard to weight rating specifications will have been satisfied and no safety-related defect will be attributable to it.; Sincerely, Joseph J. Levin, Jr., Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam1190OpenMr. William J. Henrick, The General Tire & Rubber Company,1 General Street, Akron, Ohio 44329; Mr. William J. Henrick The General Tire & Rubber Company 1 General Street Akron Ohio 44329; Dear Mr. Henrick: #By your telegram of July 16, 1973, you requested a interpretation of the passenger car tire standard-- No. 109, which would allow the branding of the information required to be on the sidewall. #As we understand the situation in this case, the tires in question are certified by the manufacturer as complying and have all the required information but the 'DOT' certification is in the wrong location. #In this instance, we have no objection to branding the 'DOT' in the proper location. #We are notifying the Baltimore Customs officials that the tires that do not comply with the standard can be brought into this country by making a box 3 declaration that the merchandise does not conform but will be brought to conformance within 90 days by branding 'DOT' in the proper location. Under the Customs regulations, 19 CFR 12.80, this requires the posting of a bond equal to the value of the merchandise. #Sincerely, Lawrence R. Schneider, Chief Counsel; |
|
ID: aiam4668OpenMs. C. D. Black Manager, Product Legislation and Compliance Jaguar Cars Inc. 555 MacArthur Blvd. Mahwah, New Jersey 07430-2327; Ms. C. D. Black Manager Product Legislation and Compliance Jaguar Cars Inc. 555 MacArthur Blvd. Mahwah New Jersey 07430-2327; "Dear Ms. Black: This concerns your July 23, 1990 petition requestin 'reconsideration of an interpretation' of Standard No. 114, Theft Protection (49 CFR 571.114), as amended by a May 30, 1990 final rule (55 FR 21868). You requested that the agency consider interpreting the amendment to permit a mechanical override device that would allow shifting the transmission lever through the use of a separate tool, other than the key. We note that while your petition requests an 'interpretation,' it appears to be seeking an amendment to the standard. Moreover, it appears that you consider your submission to be a petition for reconsideration. However, your petition was submitted to the agency after the June 30, 1990 deadline for submitting petitions for reconsideration. Under 49 CFR 553.35, NHTSA considers a late-filed petition for reconsideration as a petition filed under Part 552, i.e., as a petition for rulemaking. In the case of your petition, the agency received timely petitions for reconsideration which addressed the same issues. NHTSA therefore plans to address the issues raised by your petition at the same as we respond to those petitions. In addition, in this letter, we will address your questions in the context of Standard No. ll4's current requirements, as amended in the May 30, l990 final rule. As discussed below, your proposed system would not appear to comply with the requirements of section S4.2, as amended. 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. Under the revised requirements, section S4.2 provides that: 'Each vehicle shall have a key-locking system that, whenever the key is removed, prevents: (a) the normal activation of the vehicle's engine or motor, and (b) either steering or forward self-mobility of the vehicle or both. For a vehicle equipped with an automatic transmission with a 'park' position, the key-locking system shall prevent removal of the key unless the transmission or transmission shift lever is locked in 'park' or becomes locked in 'park' as the direct result of removing the key.' You explained that you plan to equip your vehicles with an electrical interlock that allows the transmission shift lever to be moved by producing an electrical signal to disengage the interlock. In case of battery or electrical failure, the electrical interlock does not work and thus the transmission shift lever cannot be moved. Therefore, you plan to install a spring-activated mechanical emergency release that is activated by using a tool in one hand and simultaneously moving the transmission shift with the other hand. You believe that your system would adequately prevent against theft through the steering lock and 'rollaway' accidents though the device just described, and there is no need to require the vehicle's key to activate the override. We do not believe your suggested device would comply with Standard No. ll4, as amended. Under S4.2(b), the key-locking system must prevent removal of the key unless the transmission or transmission shift lever is locked in 'park' or becomes locked in 'park' as the direct result of removing the key. Assuming that the mechanical emergency release operates independent of the ignition key, it does not appear that the transmission or transmission shift lever would ever be 'locked' in park, since it could be released without regard to the key used to operate the vehicle's key-locking system. It is irrelevant that your emergency release could only be operable by using a tool and both hands, because this requirement would not affect one's ability to release the transmission shift lever without regard to the key used to operate the vehicle's key-locking system. I hope this information is helpful. Please contact Mr. Marvin Shaw of my staff at (202) 366-2992 if you have any further questions. Sincerely, Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel Enclosure"; |
|
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.