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: nht89-2.17OpenTYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA DATE: 06/21/89 FROM: WAYNE KRAUSE -- WALTCO TRUCK EQUIPMENT COMPANY TO: STEVEN T. WOOD -- ACTING CHIEF COUNSEL NHTSA TITLE: NONE ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 07/24/89 FROM STEPHEN P. WOOD -- NHTSA TO WAYNE KRAUSE -- WALTCO; REDBOOK A33; STANDARD 108 TEXT: Dear Mr. Wood, We are asking for comments on whether or not our proposed tail light arrangement complies with FMVSS-108. The enclosed drawings show our RGL-Series tail gate lift with the platform stored below floor level of a truck or trailer for transmit. The platform in this position, would of course, block from view any normal tail light arrangement. In order to comply with the 45 degree visibility requirements of FMVSS-108, we propose to use two sets of tail lights (tail, stop and turn lights) as show n on drawings. Light Set 1 is installed above floor level (not to exceed 72" for ground) and inside of tail gate rails. Light Set 2 will be installed under the vehicle body, slightly forward of the rear of the body and approximately flush with the side of the vehicle. Both lights of Set 1 would be visible from the rear of the vehicle and would act as the primary tail lights. Light Set 2 would act as auxiliary tail lights that would be visible from the side of the vehicle as shown in drawings. We feel this is permissible under FMVSS-108; 49 CFR 571.108 (section 4.3.1.1.1) and SAE J585e. While we feel this light arrangement meets all of the requirements set forth in FMVSS-108 with respect to location of tail lights, we would like your comments. We would also appreciate a speedy reply if at all possible. Sincerely, Enc.: Drawing 80100693 Drawing 80100694 |
|||
ID: nht94-1.83OpenTYPE: Interpretation-NHTSA DATE: March 17, 1994 FROM: John Womack -- Acting Chief Counsel, NHTSA TO: Andrew Tweddle -- AV Technology Corp. (Troy, MI) TITLE: None ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 11/8/93 from Andrew Tweddle to Walter K. Myers (OCC 9352) TEXT: This responds to your request for an interpretation whether AV Technology's armored vehicle is subject to the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSSs). As explained below, a vehicle manufactured to U.S. Army contract specifications, and sold to t he Army, is not subject to the FMVSS. In your letter, you explained that AV Technology is in the process of responding to a Department of the Army draft specification for an armored security vehicle. AV Technology proposes to offer its Dragoon ASV, an armored security vehicle, with a weapon carrying capability. Your letter states that the Dragoon ASV would be built to U.S. Army specification MIL-STD-1180. In a telephone conversation with Dorothy Nakama of my staff, you stated that the Dragoon ASV would also be built to other applicable m ilitary specifications. The FMVSSs' applicability to vehicles manufactured for and sold to the U.S. military, is addressed at 49 CFR 571.7(c): (c) Military vehicles. No standard applies to a vehicle or item of equipment manufactured for, and sold directly to, the Armed Forces of the United States in conformity with contractual specifications. You stated the Dragoon ASV would be manufactured to all applicable military specifications, specified by the Army. The Army is part of the "Armed Forces." Thus, when manufactured to Army contractual specifications, and sold to the Army, the Dragoon ASV is not subject to the FMVSSs. If you have any questions, please contact Dorothy Nakama of my staff at this address or at (202) 366-2992. |
|||
ID: 18571-a.wkmOpenGeffrey W. Anderson, Esq. Dear Mr. Anderson: Your letter and its enclosed product addressed to Mr. James Jones of this agency was forwarded to this office for response. Your letter enclosed a product called the Air Blow Gun (ABG), manufactured by Barjan Products of East Moline, IL. The ABG is described as a length of 11.5-foot coiled 1/4 inch vinyl tubing with brass fittings on either end and a lever-type blow gun. The ABG attaches to the vehicle's compressed air system which supplies compressed air for its air brake system. When attached to the air system, it can be used to clean various surfaces with air pressure. The ABG's container carries the notation "D.O.T. approved." You stated that your client is concerned about this product's claim that it is "D.O.T. approved," and asked whether it is in fact approved by the US Department of Transportation and whether or not such representation constitutes false advertisement. By way of background information, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), by delegation from the Secretary of Transportation, has the statutory authority to issue Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS) applicable to new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment (49 U.S.C. Chapter 301). That statutory scheme establishes a self-certification system under which motor vehicle and equipment manufacturers themselves certify that their products comply with all applicable FMVSSs. Most of the FMVSSs that apply to motor vehicle equipment require such equipment to be certified by the manufacturer. That certification is often shown by marking the product itself with the letters "DOT." NHTSA enforces compliance with the standards by purchasing and testing motor vehicles and equipment. The agency also investigates safety-related defects. If NHTSA or the manufacturer finds that a vehicle or item of equipment does not comply with applicable standards or is found to have a safety-related defect, the manufacturer is responsible for remedying the defect or noncompliance at no charge to the customer. Thus, NHTSA neither approves, disapproves, endorses, tests, nor grants clearances for products prior to their introduction into the retail market. Turning now to the ABG, we would classify it as an item of motor vehicle equipment, which is defined in 49 U.S.C. 30102(a)(7)(B) as any "part or component manufactured or sold for replacement or improvement of a system, part, or component, or as an accessory or addition to a motor vehicle." The ABG would be classified as an accessory if it meets the following two tests:
After reviewing the product and the information on its container, we conclude that the ABG is an accessory. While the ABG is a motor vehicle accessory, NHTSA has not issued any FMVSSs establishing performance standards applicable to this particular product. Thus, it is not required to be certified or marked with the "DOT" symbol. The notation "D.O.T. approved" appears in four places on the ABG's container. As pointed out above, NHTSA does not approve motor vehicle equipment or accessories, nor can the phrase "D.O.T. approved" be interpreted as the manufacturer's certification of compliance with applicable FMVSSs. We appreciate your advising us of this matter. We will contact Barjan Products, the manufacturer of the ABG, with a view to resolving the situation. I hope this information is helpful to you. Should you have any further questions or need additional information, feel free to contact Walter Myers of my staff at this address or at (202) 366-2992, or by fax at (202) 366-3820. Sincerely, |
1999 | ||
ID: nht92-8.34OpenDATE: March 5, 1992 FROM: J. W. Lawrence -- Manager, Compliance and Technical Legislation, Volvo GM Heavy Truck Corporation TO: Administrator -- NHTSA TITLE: Petition for Rulemaking - FMVSS-108 Turn Signal Installation Requirements ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 10/5/92 from Paul Jackson Rice to J. W. Lawrence (A-40; Std. 108) TEXT: The Administration established a new requirement for FMVSS-108 turn signals in Federal Register Vol. 56, No. 239, pp 64733 dated December 12, 1991 constituting an act of rulemaking without opportunity for comment and therefore in violation of 49 CFR Part 553. Volvo GM Heavy Truck Corporation respectfully petitions for the revocation of the "Figure 2" requirements published in the December 12, 1991 Register and restore the Standard to its prior status as amended May 15, 1990 in FR 55, No. 94. This petition is filed in accordance with the requirements of 49 CFR Part 552, by Volvo GM Heavy Truck Corporation of 7900 National Service Rd., Greensboro, N. C. 27409. Volvo GM Heavy Truck Corporation manufacturers heavy duty trucks. TECHNICAL DISCUSSION SUPPORTING THE PETITION 1. Docket 88-17 Notice 2 (FR 55, No. 94; May 15, 1990) upgraded the safety standard's SAE referenced requirements from "J588e September 1970" to "J1395, April 1985". The substantive portion of this change in FMVSS-108 is an increase in the lens luminous area from 8 sq. inches to 12 sq. inches. SAE J1395, April 1985 was therefore incorporated as-is into 49 CFR Part 571.108 applicable to both front and rear turn signal lamps for vehicles over 80 inches wide. 2. "SAE J1395, April 1985" Installation Requirements are as follows: "Signals from lamps on both sides of the vehicle shall be visible through a horizontal angle from 45 deg. to the left for the left lamp to 45 deg. to the right for the right lamp." (emphasis added) 3. Federal Register notice Vol. 56, No. 239, December 12, 1991 contains technically inaccurate information upon which the Administration has presumably based its interpretation and resulting rulemaking. The FR notice states in part as follows: "Thus, the turn signals on both sides of the vehicle must be simultaneously visible through a horizontal angle from 45 degrees originating at the left lamp, to the left to 45 degrees to the right originating at the right lamp measured at a radius of 3 meters." (emphasis added) The requirement for "simultaneously visible" does not appear in SAE J585e, SAE J1395 Apr. 85, SAE J1398 May 85 or in the May 1990 amendment to FMVSS-108. The Administration should also be advised that the 3 meter requirement in SAE J1395 is for photometric measurement and has no connection to the 45 installation visibility which is the ability to observe 13cm2 (2 sq. inches) of outer lens surface at the 450 viewing angle. 4. FMVSS-108 Table I for vehicles over 80 inches wide requires 2 red or amber and 2 amber turn signal lamps. Table II "location of required equipment" for Truck, Bus and MPV over 80 inches wide does not require the turn signals be located on the rear except for trailers. Turn signals are intended to signal pending maneuvers not mark the end of the vehicles. In summary we wish to reaffirm that our petition is necessary to correct an unfortunate circumstance created by an inaccurate reference which has now become a requirement. Encl. FR Vol. 56, No. 239; December 12, 1991; pp 64733-64737 |
|||
ID: nht94-4.43OpenTYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA DATE: October 4, 1994 FROM: Philip R. Recht -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA TO: Ashpy Lowrimore -- Senior Vice President, Southern National Bank, Florence, SC TITLE: NONE ATTACHMT: Attached to 8/11/94 letter from Ashpy Lowrimore to NHTSA Office of Chief Counsel (OCC 10267) TEXT: This responds to your August 11, 1994 letter regarding our requirements for school vehicles. You explain that your church owns a "commercial bus" and a 15-passenger van and would like to use these vehicles to transport children attending a kindergarten and after school care program that the church operates. You ask to be advised of any requirements applicable to those two vehicles, and have three questions, which I will answer below. I would like to begin with background information about our requirements. Our agency has two sets of regulations, issued under different Acts of Congress, that affect school vehicles. The first of these, the Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVS S's) issued under 49 U.S.C. 30101, et seq., apply to the manufacture and sale of new motor vehicles. Our agency was directed by Congress in 1974 to issue standards on specific aspects of school bus safety, including floor strength, seating systems, and crashworthiness. The standards we issued apply to all new vehicles designed to carry 11 or more persons and sold for pupil transportation purposes. Under our requirements, such a vehicle is a "school bus," and any person selling such a vehicle must ens ure that the new vehicle is certified as meeting the FMVSS's for school buses. The second set of regulations issued by this agency was promulgated under the Highway Safety Act of 1966. These "regulations" are actually recommendations from NHTSA to the States for use in developing their highway safety programs. Highway Safety Progr am Guideline No. 17, Pupil Transportation Safety (copy enclosed), applies to school vehicles, and contains recommendations for the design, identification and operation of school vehicles. Individual States have chosen to adopt some or all of Guideline N o. 17 as their own policies governing their highway safety programs. With that background in mind, I turn now to your specific questions: 1. Can we transport children who are related with our various schools by utilizing the van? ANSWER: The answer depends on State law, because the States regulate the use of motor vehicles, not NHTSA. NHTSA regulates the manufacture and sale of new vehicles. Any person selling a new bus or a new 15-passenger van to your church for purposes that include transporting kindergarten students to and from school or related events must sell buses that meet our FMVSS's for school buses, or face substantial civil fines and injunctive sanctions. NHTSA does not have the authority to regulate vehicle user s, and thus does not mandate what vehicle can be used to transport school children. Thus, our regulations impose no requirement on schools that require them to transport students in complying school buses. While NHTSA does not require the use of any particular type of vehicle to transport students, we believe that school buses are the safest motor vehicle transportation currently available. We have included in Guideline No. 17 a recommendation that States require any bus (or van carrying 11 or more persons) used to carry school children to comply with all FMVSS's applicable to school buses at the time of their manufacture (see, recommendation number IV.B.1.h). However, since Guideline No. 17 will affect your church's school vehicles only if South Carolina has adopted it, you should check to see what State requirements are set for the operation of the school vehicles in question. Mr. Perry Brown, Deputy Director of South Carolina's Office of a Highway Safety Programs, would be able to provide information about your State's requirements. He can be contacted at the following address: Mr. Perry Brown Edgar A. Brown State Office Building 1205 Pendleton St., Rm. 453 Columbia, SC 29201 2. Are there restrictions associated with the use of the bus in the transportation of children, young adults or senior adults? As explained above, NHTSA has no restriction on the use of motor vehicles. Restrictions on the use of a vehicle are matters of State law. Among other things, the State could require a special driver's license for persons operating buses as you described . A South Carolina official would be able to provide the information you need. 3. If there are special restrictions, can you elaborate on the type of equipment that we must obtain in order to meet any regulations or requirements that are in place? ANSWER: Again, NHTSA has no restrictions on the use of the vehicles by the church. Further, NHTSA does not require schools operating their vehicles to ensure that the vehicles are specially identified or equipped as school vehicles. However, Guideline No. 17 contains recommendations for identifying school buses and equipping them with safety equipment, including school bus lamps and mirrors and emergency equipment. South Carolina may have adopted some of these recommendations in its highway safety pr ogram for school vehicles. In summary, NHTSA does not have the authority to regulate the use of school vehicles owned and operated by your church. You should check with South Carolina officials to find out which, if any, State requirements apply to your church's activities. We hope this information is helpful to you. Should you have any further questions regarding this matter, please feel free to contact Walter Myers of my staff at this address or at (202) 366-2992. |
|||
ID: nht93-6.19OpenDATE: August 18, 1993 FROM: Tom DeLapp -- Executive Coach Builders, Inc. TO: Chief Council -- NHTSA TITLE: F.M.V.S.S. #207 ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 10/1/93 Est. from John Womack to Tom DeLapp (A41; Std. 207) TEXT: As a manufacturer of quality limousines we expect to meet or exceed any safety regulation which would affect our vehicles. To this end, we request an interpretation to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (F.M.V.S.S.) = 207, specifically the section addressing folding or hinged seats. During and after production of 1993 Ford/Lincoln Town Cars, access to the area rearward of the front seat is limited due to the inclusion of a privacy panel installed to separate the passenger compartment from the drivers compartment. To allow ourselves and our customers access to the area between the front of the panel and the back of the front seat (containing auxiliary fuse panels and relays), we wish to modify the hinge assembly controlling forward and reclining movement of the seat. As constructed by Ford/Lincoln, the seat hinge is limited in it's forward movement by a metal pin in the hinge assembly. By removal of the pin, the seat would articulate forward to a greater degree, thereby providing access to the area in question. This modification is as provided on two door vehicles to allow passengers access to the rear seating. No change or modification of the O.E.M. recliner latch is performed by our company. The recliner latch provides for a self locking mechanism (and release) for the articulation of the seat back. Research by myself of the F.M.V.S.S. standards does not reveal a prohibition to removal of the limiting pin or a forward travel limit to the seat back. Additionally, a phone conversation with Clark Harper of the F.M.V.S.S. staff on 8-17-93 failed to locate a prohibition to this modification. Please address this matter at your earliest convenience. Should you require further information or engineer drawings, please contact me by phone or FAX. Phone (417) 831 3535 FAX (417) 831 0834 |
|||
ID: nht89-1.48OpenTYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA DATE: 03/22/89 FROM: SAMUEL KIMMELMAN -- PRODUCT ENGINEERING MANAGER PARKER HANNIFIN CORP TO: TAYLOR VINSON -- LEGAL COUNCIL FMVSS-108 NHTSA U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TITLE: NONE ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 11/01/89 FROM STEPHEN P. WOOD -- NHTSA TO SAMUAL KIMMELMAN -- PARKER HANNAFIN; REDBOOK A34; STANDARD 108 TEXT: Dear Mr. Vinson: It is our understanding that FMVSS-108 allows vehicles with combined function rear stop and turn signal/hazard lamps to operate in either of two modes when both the hazard switch and brake switch have been actuated. 1. The hazard switch is the major control for operation of the combined rear stop and turn signal/hazard lamps. a. Actuating the hazard switch some period of time after actuation of the brake switch will cause the rear lamps to change from steady on, stop signal, to flashing, hazard signal. b. Actuating the brake switch some period of time after actuation of the hazard switch will not change the flashing lamps, hazard signal, to steady on, stop signal. 2. The brake switch is the major control for operation of the combined rear stop and turn signal/hazard lamps. a. Actuating the brake switch some period of time after actuation of the hazard switch will cause the rear lamps to change from flashing, hazard signal, to steady on, stop signal. The front flashing hazard lamps will also become steady on. b. Actuating the hazard switch some period of time after actuation of the brake switch will not change the rear steady on lamps, stop signal, to flashing, hazard, while the front hazard lamps go from off to steady on. Is our interpretation of what is allowed by FMVSS-108 regarding the operation of vehicles with combined function rear stop and turn signal/hazard lamps upon actuation of both the hazard and brake switces correct? If our interpretation of FMVSS-108 is correct, is NHTSA presently considering a NPRM to specify a specific signal from the combined function rear stop and turn signal/hazard lamps when both the hazard and brake switches are actuated? Sincerely, |
|||
ID: GF004887OpenMr. Palmer Robeson Dear Mr. Robeson: This is in response to your e-mail of June 14, 2004, and subsequent phone conversations with George Feygin of my staff regarding a "tire traction device" you have invented. You also provided a CD-ROM with additional information on the device and its intended use. You ask whether your invention is subject to any Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) and other regulations. In short, there are no FMVSSs applicable to your device. By way of background, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) issues FMVSSs applicable to the manufacture and sale of new motor vehicles and certain items of motor vehicle equipment. However, NHTSA does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301, manufacturers are required to certify that their vehicles and equipment meet applicable requirements. 49 U.S.C. 30102(a)(7)(B) defines motor vehicle equipment as:
According to your letter, the tire traction device is akin to "snow chains" that are attached to wheels in order to provide better traction. This device attaches to wheels in a similar fashion and is designed for the same purpose. Your traction device would be considered an item of motor vehicle equipment as defined in 49 U.S.C. 30102(a)(7)(B), because it is an accessory or addition to a motor vehicle. There are no FMVSSs applicable to the traction device described in your letter. Nevertheless, as an item of motor vehicle equipment, it is subject to the notification and remedy (recall) provisions of 49 U.S.C. 30118-30120. If a manufacturer of your device or NHTSA determine that the product contains a safety-related defect, the manufacturer would be responsible for notifying purchasers of the defective item of motor vehicle equipment and remedying the problem free of charge. Please be advised that some states regulate the use of snow chains and similar equipment. You may wish to contact appropriate state authorities to ascertain state regulations pertaining to your device. Enclosed please find an information sheet for new manufacturers of motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment. I hope you find this information helpful. If you have further questions, you may contact Mr. George Feygin of my staff at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, Jacqueline Glassman Enclosure |
2004 | ||
ID: 22054.drnOpen
Vincent P. Schulze, Chief Dear Mr. Schulze: This responds to your letter of May 18, 2000, to Mr. Chris Rotondo, of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) concerning test procedures for bus windows. Because you had questions about Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 217, Bus emergency exits and window retention and release, which is administered by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), I have been asked to respond. In your letter, you state that New Jersey State bus investigators are issuing summonses for safety violations during roadside bus safety inspections. The summonses are issued under the guidelines of a New Jersey statute, the "Bus Safety Compliance Act." One serious violation for which bus operators may be cited is "inoperable emergency exit windows." In your letter, you write: Apparently, a bus company attorney has successfully argued in a New Jersey state court that the New Jersey Department of Transportation did not meet the test conditions specified in Standard No. 217 because it inspected the bus when the outside temperature was below 70 degrees. You are writing for clarification of S6 "Test conditions" in Standard No. 217. Some background information about NHTSA's statutory authority may be helpful. NHTSA is authorized to issue and enforce FMVSSs applicable to new motor vehicles. Our statute at 49 U.S.C. 30112(a) requires any person selling a new motor vehicle to sell a vehicle that meets all applicable standards. Each manufacturer of a new bus must assure that the bus meets all applicable FMVSSs, including Standard No. 217. Section 30112 does not apply to the sale, offer for sale, or introduction or delivery for introduction in interstate commerce of a motor vehicle "after the first purchase of the vehicle ... in good faith other than for resale." 49 U.S.C. 30112(b). Nor does it govern operational requirements for vehicles, which are generally established by the States and, for certain trucks, buses, and commercial vehicles, by the FMCSA. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30111(a), all FMVSSs must "be stated in objective terms." For this reason, NHTSA includes test procedures in each of its FMVSSs so that manufacturers will be aware of the manner in which NHTSA will conduct its compliance tests. The provision of S6.2 quoted in your letter simply specifies the range of temperatures at which our compliance tests will be conducted, to ensure that the tests are conducted as uniformly and objectively as possible. The specification of test temperatures does not mean that emergency exits are only required to open when the ambient temperature is between 70 and 85 degrees. We agree with you that the emergency exits should be operable under all the driving conditions to which a bus could be subjected. However, as stated above, this is a matter governed by State law, not by the NHTSA standard. Unless New Jersey has specifically incorporated Standard No. 217 in its entirety, including its test procedures, into its operational requirements, we see no reason why law enforcement officials in New Jersey would only be able to issue citations for inoperable emergency exit windows if they showed that the windows did not function properly within the temperature range specified in the NHTSA standard. I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions, please contact Dorothy Nakama of my staff at this address or at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, Frank Seales, Jr.
ref:217 |
2000 | ||
ID: 05-008512drnOpenMr. Drake Earnest Mid-South Bus Center 3590 Manson Pike Murfreesboro, TN 37129 Dear Mr. Earnest: This responds to your letter asking whether a bus distributorship may sell new buses to private high schools that want sleeker vehicles than conventional school buses. You state that you do not sell non-conforming buses (buses that do not meet Federal school bus standards) to these schools, while your competitors will sell them what they want. You ask for documentation that addresses the sale of non-conforming buses to transport school age children. As explained below, you are correct that, when selling new buses to a school (private or public) for pupil transportation, bus dealers and distributorships must ensure that the buses are certified as meeting the Federal school bus standards of this agency. In addition, in some instances, schools themselves are required by Federal law to ensure that they buy buses that meet those standards. By way of background, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is authorized to issue and enforce Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSSs) applicable to new motor vehicles. Our statute at 49 U.S.C. 30112 requires any person selling a new vehicle to sell a vehicle that meets all applicable FMVSSs. Accordingly, persons selling a new school bus must sell a vehicle that meets the FMVSSs applying to school buses. A bus is a vehicle designed for carrying more than 10 persons. Our statute defines a school bus as any vehicle that is designed to carry 11 or more persons and which is likely to be used significantly to transport preprimary, primary, and secondary students to or from school or related events. Thus, when selling a new bus that will be used significantly to transport preprimary, primary, or secondary students to or from school or related events, a dealer or distributorship must sell the school a bus that meets NHTSAs school bus FMVSSs. If a new bus is to be sold for school-related events that do not involve school bus route transportation, i.e., do not involve transporting students between home and school, the bus can be a multifunction school activity bus, which meets all the school bus FMVSSs except those requiring the installation of traffic control devices. Persons manufacturing or selling vehicles or equipment that do not comply with all applicable FMVSSs are subject to a maximum penalty of $10,000 for each violation of Section 30112(a)(2) and a maximum penalty of $15,000,000 for a related series of violations. As to schools that purchase buses, I would like to take this opportunity to bring to your attention and through you, to the attention of your clients, a change last year in Federal law regarding the purchase of small nonconforming buses. On August 10, 2005, P.L. 109-59, the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) was enacted. Section 10309 states in part:
a school or school system may not purchase or lease a new 15-passenger van if it will be used significantly by, or on behalf of, the school or school system to transport preprimary, primary, or secondary school students to or from school or an event related to school, unless the 15-passenger van complies with the motor vehicle standards prescribed for school buses and multifunction school activity buses under this title.
For purposes of Section 10309, 15-passenger van is defined as: a vehicle that seats 10 to 14 passengers, not including the driver. The civil penalty for a violation of Section 10309 is $10,000, with a maximum penalty of $15,000,000 for a related series of violations. Because of this possible exposure to the new statutory civil penalty provision for purchases of new, noncompliant 15-passenger vans (which, by definition, includes vehicles seating 10 to 14 passengers), we recommend that schools considering the purchase of a bus that does not meet the Federal school bus safety standards consult a private attorney about the implications associated with that purchase. In addition, before any school makes a decision about buying a bus of any size, we wish to emphasize that school buses are one of the safest forms of transportation in this country. We therefore strongly recommend that all buses that are used to transport school children be certified as meeting NHTSAs school bus safety standards. For a full explanation of NHTSAs school bus regulations, I am enclosing our publication, School Bus Safety: Safe Passage for Americas Children. You also posed a question about requirements for the use of school vehicles. State law determines the requirements that apply to the use of school vehicles. Thus, whether schools can use non-school buses to transport children in Tennessee is determined by Tennessee law. Keep in mind, however, that even if State law permits a nonconforming bus to be used for school transportation, this does not alter the requirements and prohibitions of Federal law. If the sale of that bus to a school is impermissible under Federal law, the seller is subject to civil penalties. For information on Tennessees requirements, you may contact Tennessees State Director of Pupil Transportation: Mr. James Swain Tennessee Department of Education Old TPS High School 1120 Menzler Road Nashville, TN 37243 Phone: 615-253-6025 e-mail: james.swain@state.tn.us If you have any further questions about NHTSAs school bus requirements, please feel free to contact Dorothy Nakama of my staff at this address, or at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, Stephen P. Wood Acting Chief Counsel Enclosure ref:VSA#571.3 d.6/19/06 |
2006 |
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.