Skip to main content

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



Displaying 661 - 670 of 1010
Interpretations Date

ID: nht90-3.35

Open

TYPE: Interpretation-NHTSA

DATE: July 30, 1990

FROM: Kathleen Demeter -- Assistant Chief Counsel for General Law

TO: J.P. Ravier -- R & D Director, Valeo Lighting Company

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 12-13-90 to M.J.P. Ravier from Paul Jackson Rice (A36; Std. 108); Also attached to letter dated 7-13-90 to P.J. Rice from J.P. Ravier and Guy Dorleans (OCC 5304)

TEXT:

This is in answer to your letter to Mr. Rice dated July 13, 1990, in which you solicit a response from the agency concerning the acceptability of your headlamp aiming device under existing Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards and claim confidentiality for certain drawings submitted with your letter. Your request for an interpretation will be handled in separate correspondence.

When confidential protection is claimed for material submitted to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), our confidential regulation, 49 C.F.R. S512, requires the submission of a certification stating that the submitter has made dili gent inquiry to ascertain that the information submitted has not been disclosed, or otherwise made public (49 C.F.R. S512.4(e)) and other supporting information. In the absence of such a certification, I am deprived of proper and sufficient justificatio n by which to review your request to protect any of this information from public disclosure.

Although you have not submitted this certification, I will waive the requirement for the limited purpose of expediting the review process. I have examined the two drawings you have submitted and decided that they should be treated confidentially because their release to the public could cause substantial competitive harm to your company. I will protect these drawings for an indefinite period of time. Compliance with our confidentiality regulation will be expected for all future submissions of informa tion claimed to be confidential.

Please inform NHTSA of any changed circumstances which may affect the protection of the information (49 C.F.R. S512.4(i)).

ID: nht90-3.81

Open

TYPE: Interpretation-NHTSA

DATE: September 4, 1990

FROM: Hiroshi Kato -- Vice President, Mitsubishi Motors America, Inc.

TO: Jack Rice -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to drawing of proposed illumination on rear panel garnish and photo of 1988 Pontiac Fiero (graphics omitted); Also attached to letter dated 9-26-90 from P.J. Rice to H. Kato (A36; Std. 108)

TEXT:

This letter serves to request an interpretation of FMVSS 108, Lights and Relectors. S.5.1.3 of Standard 108 states that "no additional lamp, reflective device, or other motor vehicle equipment shall be installed that impairs the effectiveness of lightin g equipment required by this standard."

We are considering lighting the rear panel garnish of a vehicle to illuminate the word "MITSUBISHI" at 0.1 cd (0.02 cd/in) when the vehicle headlamp system is turned on. This illumination would not be lighting required by FMVSS 108. The enclosed page s hows the proposed illumination and specifications. A similar illumination on the 1988 model year Pontiac Fiero is also shown.

We would like your determination as to whether the illumination described above would be considered impairment of the effectiveness of required lighting as described in S.5.1.3.

If the described illumination is considered an impairment due to the candela power, we would like to know what candela would be acceptable.

Also, we would like to confirm that if the center of the rear panel garnish was illuminated as a supplemental tail lamp and the word "MITSUBISHI" was not illuminated, this type of lighting would be allowed under FMVSS 108.

Your prompt response would be appreciated.

Enclosure

Drawing of proposed illumination on rear panel garnish and photo of 1988 Pontiac Fiero (graphics omitted).

ID: nht93-7.4

Open

DATE: October 1, 1993 (EST)

FROM: John Womack -- Acting Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TO: Richard Horian -- President, Woodleaf Corporation

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter (fax) dated 8/12/93 from Richard Horian to Michael Perel (OCC 9016)

TEXT:

This is in response to your FAX of August 12, 1993, to Michael Perel of this agency regarding your "sudden brake indicator hazard light."

You were informed on December 7, 1992, by Paul Jackson Rice, then the Chief Counsel, that this auxiliary item of lighting equipment would be permissible as original equipment since it did not appear that it would impair the effectiveness of any of the lighting equipment required by Standard No. 108. You now ask "(w)hat is the fastest flash rate or range of flash rates expressed in 'flashes per minute' that are allowed by Federal law."

Standard No. 108 does not specify any range of flash rates for items of supplementary lighting equipment, thus, the choice is that of the manufacturer. The standard does specify a flash rate for turn sign and hazard warning signal lamps which are required by the standard. The flash rate for these lamps is 60 to 120 flashes per minute. In addition, S5.6 of the standard specifies a motorcycle headlamp modulation rate of 240 cycles per minute, plus or minus 40 cycles per minute.

The cycling and modulation rates of lighting systems are very important to motor vehicle safety because of a phenomenon known as "photic driving." This issue concerns potential adverse reactions in some people similar to epileptic seizures. The condition is brought on by certain regularly flashing lights, even in some persons not otherwise susceptible to epilepsy. From available studies, it appears that people are most likely to be affected if the flash rate is about ten flashes per second (600 flashes per minute) and/or when the background is very dark.

ID: 9016a

Open

Mr. Richard Horian
President
Woodleaf Corporation

FAX 310-326-6965

Dear Mr. Horian:

This is in response to your FAX of August 12, 1993, to Michael Perel of this agency regarding your "sudden brake indicator hazard light."

You were informed on December 7, 1992, by Paul Jackson Rice, then the Chief Counsel, that this auxiliary item of lighting equipment would be permissible as original equipment since it did not appear that it would impair the effectiveness of any of the lighting equipment required by Standard No. 108. You now ask "[w]hat is the fastest flash rate or range of flash rates expressed in 'flashes per minute' that are allowed by Federal law."

Standard No. 108 does not specify any range of flash rates for items of supplementary lighting equipment, thus, the choice is that of the manufacturer. The standard does specify a flash rate for turn sign and hazard warning signal lamps which are required by the standard. The flash rate for these lamps is 60 to 120 flashes per minute. In addition, S5.6 of the standard specifies a motorcycle headlamp modulation rate of 240 cycles per minute, plus or minus 40 cycles per minute.

The cycling and modulation rates of lighting systems are very important to motor vehicle safety because of a phenomenon known as "photic driving." This issue concerns potential adverse reactions in some people similar to epileptic seizures. The condition is brought on by certain regularly flashing lights, even in some persons not otherwise susceptible to epilepsy. From available studies, it appears that people are most likely to be affected if the flash rate is about ten flashes per second (600 flashes per minute) and/or when the background is very dark.

Sincerely,

John Womack Acting Chief Counsel

ref:108 d:9/28/93

1993

ID: nht72-2.22

Open

DATE: 02/18/72

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; R. B. Dyson; NHTSA

TO: FMC Corporation

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in reply to the questions you ask in your letter of January 7 concerning the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards.

In your first question you ask whether a vehicular hazard warning signal operating unit must conform to SAE Recommended Practice J910 specified in Table 1 of Standard No. 106, or to the newer SAE J910s. The answer is J910; the revision J910a cannot become a requirement of Standard No. 103 without ruleasking action by this agency. As of (Illegible Words) has issued no proposal that (Illegible Word) be adopted. You also ask whether hazard lamps at both ends of the vehicle must flash simultaneously. The operating unit is defined in (Illegible Word) as a device "which causes all turn signal lamps to flash simultaneously . . ." This means that all turn signal lamps must flash on the same cycle, and that separate cycles for froat and rear turn signal lamps are not permissible.

In answer to your second question, Standard No. 108 does not yet specify requirements for side turn signal lamps, and thus does not prohibit their use on your motor home. As indicated in our "Program Plan for Motor Vehicle Safety Standards," October 1971, this agency intends to issue a notice in the near future proposing to incorporate requirements for side turn signal lamps in Standard No. 108

Finally you ask whether Standard No. 101 requires illumination (Illegible Words) handlamp switch with park ponition to operate clearance, I.D., and the marker lamps. Standard No. 101 does not require illumination of the headlamp switch, even if the switch does (Illegible Word) is the operation of other lamps whose controls, if separate, would have to be illuminated.

ID: nht71-3.45

Open

DATE: 07/21/71

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; E. T. Driver; NHTSA

TO: Rueck and Company

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in reply to your letter of July 7, 1971, to the National Highway Safety Bureau (now the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) concerning the requirements for sealed beam headlamp units.

The answers to your specific questions are as follows:

1. Sealed beam units must meet the photometric specifications in SAE J579 at the design voltage at or below the maximum amperes specified in SAE J573.

2. Tolerances are as follows:

Electrical power - the maximum electrical power is the product, in watts, of the design voltage multiplied by the maximum amperes at design volts. There is no specified minimum electrical power.

Maximum amperes - There is no tolerance. Maximum amperes is the maximum specified in SAE J573.

Design watts - There is no tolerance. There is, however, a tolerance on the actual watts or electrical power as described above.

3.4.4. The filament types and positions are illustrative of current practice only. Any type or position may be used to meet the specification of J579 and J573.

5. All glass sealed beam units are not mandatory. There are no restriction in Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 or the SAE Standards on the number of pieces or the materials which are used to complete the assembled sealed beam unit as long as the specifications, including those in SAE J571, are met. Caution should be used, however, to ensure that a good and durable seal is obtained between the metal back, if used, and the other parts to optimize the useful service life of the sealed beam unit.

ID: nht95-2.50

Open

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: April 24, 1995

FROM: Scott E. Mack -- Sr Product Manager, Philips Lighting Company

TO: Chief Counsel Office, NHTSA

TITLE: "Request for Interpretation: FMVSS-108" Color Clear TM Halogen Headlights

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO 5/11/95 LETTER FROM JOHN WOMACK TO SCOTT E. MACK (A43; STD. 108)

TEXT: Dear Sir/Madam:

Please review the attached ETL test report regarding Philips Color Clear TM Halogen Headlights and confirm your agreement that they are incompliance with FMVSS-108. While this product appears to be colored when not in use when lighted it produces white light as defined by J579C. The test report indicates that the color of the light is identical to that of a standard halogen headlight.

Please forward your confirmation to:

Scott Mack Sr. Product Manager Philips Lighting Co. 200 Franklin Square Driv Somerset, NJ 08875

Thank you for your attention to this request.

Attachment

REPORT

ETL TESTING LABORATORIES, INC.

INDUSTRIAL PARK CORTLAND, NEW YORK 13045

Order No. 97540-215

Date: April 11, 1995

REPORT NO. 550319

"PHILIPS H6054 DOT H" 142mm X 200mm TYPE 2B1 COLOR CLEAR SEALED BEAM HEADLAMP UNIT

RENDERED TO

PHILIPS LIGHTING COMPANY 300 FRANKLIN SQUARE DRIVE SOMERSET, NJ 08875-6800 INTRODUCTION

This report contains the results of examination and test of the above device to demonstrate compliance with the applicable test requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108, effective as of the date of this report and indicated S AE Standards as requested by the client.

Summary

The following is a summary of the results of tests of the device performed in accordance with FMVSS 108 and subreferenced SAE Standards.

Tests Standards Remarks Color J578c Complies

AUTHORIZATION

Purchase Order No. HQ 133175K.

(Remainder of report is omitted.)

ID: 86-5.34

Open

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 10/24/86

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Mr. H. Tsujishita

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This responds to your letter of July 15, 1986, asking three interpretation questions concerning Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards Nos. 101, Controls and Displays, and 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment. The answers to your questions are provided below.

By way of background information, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, it is the responsibility of the manufacturer to ensure that its motor vehicles or equipment comply with applicable standards. The following represents our opinion based on the information provided in your letter.

Your first question concerns the visibility requirements for the upper beam telltale (indicator). As noted by your letter, section S5.3.3 of Standard No. 101 provides that the light intensity of each telltale shall be such that, when activated, that telltale and its identification are visible to the driver under all daytime and nighttime conditions. The upper beam telltale is one of the telltales subject to that requirement. You note, however, that section S4.5.2 of Standard No. 108 requires a high beam indicator that conforms to SAE Recommended Practice J564a (except that the signal color need not be red). J564a provides that the upper beam indicator should be "plainly visible to drivers of all heights under normal driving conditions when headlights are required." Based on this provision, you suggest that the upper beam telltale is not required to be visible to the driver under the daytime conditions when headlamps are not needed. As discussed below, your understanding is incorrect.

The difference between these two requirements is not so great as you suggest. The reference to "normal driving conditions" in J564a includes a variety of non-nighttime conditions (e.g., driving at dusk or dawn, and driving in daytime rainstorms) when headlamp use may be required by the States. To the extent that Standard No. 101 requires the telltale to be visible under daylight driving conditions not covered by Standard No. 108, manufacturers must meet the broader requirement. Manufacturers are required to meet all applicable safety standards. We note that while Standards Nos. 101 and 108 each cover upper beam telltales and specify different requirements, it is possible to meet the requirements of both standards simultaneously.

You stated that under daylight conditions the upper beam cannot dazzle oncoming drivers and that there is therefore no need to inform the driver that the upper beam is on. While there may be less need for this telltale during daylight than at night, Standard No. 101 reflects our belief that there is still a need and requires that the telltale be visible under all daytime and nighttime conditions (if the upper beams are actually on).

Your second question concerns the upper beam telltale minimum area requirement. SAE Recommended Practice J564a, which, as noted above, is referenced by section S4.5.2 of Standard No. 108, provides that the upper beam indicator should consist of a "light, with a minimum area equivalent to that of a 3/16 in. diameter circle." You asked how this requirement would apply to two designs.

In the first design, the outline of the telltale symbol would lighten while the area within and around the telltale symbol would not. You suggested that the framed area, i.e., the area within the telltale that is framed by the outline but not lighted itself, can be counted into the minimum area requirement. As discussed below, that is incorrect. In the second design, the telltale symbol would be superimposed on a rectangle. In this case, the entire area within the rectangle would lighten, except for that covered by the symbol itself. You suggested that the lighted area other than that covered by the symbol can be counted toward the minimum area requirement. As discussed below, that is correct.

In referencing SAE Recommended Practice J564a, Standard No. 108 requires that the upper beam indicator must consist of a light, and also specifies the minimum area for that light. It does not specify the shape of the light. If the light is a simple circle which is lighted in its entirety (with the identification required by Standard No. 101 placed adjacent to the circle), that lighted circle must be at least 3/16 inch in diameter. If the light is some other shape, such as the shape of the upper beam symbol or a rectangle in which only part of the area is lighted, the total area which is lighted must be at least as large as the area of a 3/16 inch circle. Thus, in the case of the first design discussed above, only the outline area (i.e., the blue lighted area) of the upper beam symbol can be counted toward the minimum area requirement. The unlighted interior part (i.e., the black area) of the symbol cannot be counted toward the minimum area requirement. In the case of the second design discussed above, the entire (blue) area within the rectangle that lightens can be counted toward the minimum area requirement. However, that part of the rectangle which does not lighten, i.e., the (white) part covered by the symbol, cannot be counted.

Your third question concerns Standard No. 101's illumination requirements for a side marker lamp control that is incorporated into the master lighting switch. As suggested by your letter and as discussed below, illumination is not required if the identifying symbol for the side marker lamps is marked on the master lighting switch.

While Table 1 of Standard No. 101 requires that side marker lamp controls be identified with the side marker lamp control symbol and that such identification be illuminated, it also provides that separate identification is not required if controlled by the master lighting switch. Thus, for side marker lamp controls that are incorporated into the master lighting switch, use of the side maker lamp control symbol is voluntary. Since such identification is not required by Standard No. 101, it is our opinion that the standard does not require manufacturers to illuminate such identification if they choose to provide it voluntarily.

SINCERELY,

AGENDA 4-b DAIHATSU MOTOR CO., LTD.

Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel Office of the Chief Counsel National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Dear Ms. Jones:

Additionally to the questions which we sent by letter date Feb. 18, 1986, would you please kindly answer the questions with regard to the interpretation of FMVSS Nos. 101 and 108 as described on the following pages?

H. Tsujishita Chief Co-ordinator of Technical Administration Dept. Head Office

ENC.

1. FMVSS Nos. 108 & 101; Highbeam Indicator Visibility requirement

Paragraph S5.3.3 of FMVSS No. 101 provides that each tell-tale and its identification shall be visible to the driver under all daytime and night time conditions. According to this provision, highbeam tell-tale shall be visible even under daytime condition.

On the other hand, paragraph S4.5.2. of FMVSS No. 108 requires a highbeam indicator which conforms to SAE J564a on each vehicle, and SAE J564a provides that the highbeam indicator shall be plainly visible to the driver under normal driving conditions when head lights are required. That means, under daytime conditions whenhead lights are not required, the highbeam indicator is not needed to be plainly visible.

We believe that the purpose of the highbeam indicator is essentially to indicate the driver that the upper beam of the head lamps are on to prevent the opposite driver from being dazzled by passing each other with the upper beam on. Under the daytime condition, as the upper beam can not dazzle the opposite driver any longer, and there is no need to indicate the driver trat the upper beam is on.

Therefore we believe that the high beam indicator (tell-tale) is not required to be visible to the driver under the daytime conditions when head lights are not needed.

Is our understanding right?

2. FMVSS No. 108; Highbeam Indicator Minimum Area Requirement

As stated above, S4.5.2 of FMVSS No. 108 requires a highbeam indicator which conforms to SAE J564a on each vehicle, and SAE J564a provides that the highbeam indicator shall have a minimum area equivalent to that of a 3/16 in. diameter circle.

A. In case that only the frame of the tell-tale will be lighten

We believe the framed area can be counted into the minimum area requirement.

B. In case that the background of the tell-tale will be lighten

We believe the entire shaded area can be counted into the minimum area requirement.

If our understanding is wrong, please explain in the above requirement in detail.

(Graphics omitted)

3. FMVSS No. 101; Side Marker Lamp Control Illumination

Table 1 of FMVSS No. 101 requires that the identification of side marker lamp control shall be illuminated when the head lamps are on, and it also provides in its footnote that separate identification (for the side marker lamp control) are not required if the side marker lamp are controlled by the master lighting switch. In case that the side marker lamps are are controlled by the master lighting switch and the identifing symbol for the side marker lamps is marked on the switch voluntarily by the manufacturer, we believe that the illumination for the side marker lamp control is not required, because the side marker lamp control which is combined into the master lighting switch is easily identifiable.

Is our understanding right?

ID: 86-6.17

Open

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 12/20/86

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: H. Tsujishita

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This responds to your letter dated October 30, 1986, seeking an interpretation of 49 CFR Part 581, Bumper Standard and seeking our comments on sample reports required under several of our regulations. This letter addresses your question about our bumper standard first, and then comments on your sample reports.

You asked about one of the protective criteria specified in section 581.5(c) of Part 581. Part 581 requires vehicles to meet the damage criteria of that section after specified test impacts.

Section 581.5(c)(8) states:

The exterior surfaces shall have no separations of surface materials, paint, polymeric coatings, or other covering materials from the surface to which they are bonded, and no permanent deviations from their original contours 30 minutes after completion of each pendulum and barrier impact, except where such damage occurs to the bumper face bar and the components and associated fasteners that directly attach the bumper face bar to the chassis frame. (Emphasis added.)

You stated that you understand "exterior surfaces" to refer to the exterior body surface which can be observed without the removal of any components, and that it does not mean the body surface which cannot be observed unless components are removed. Based on this understanding, you stated that you believe that two areas of a car, identified in an attached drawing as Area A and Area B, need not conform to the no damage requirement. Both Area A, a radiator support panel located directly under the headlamp, and Area, B, a fender apron located below the headlamp but along the side of the car, cannot be observed unless the bumper assembly is removed.

Your understanding of "exterior surface," with respect to Areas A and B of your drawing, is correct. Those areas are not exterior surfaces, because they are located behind the bumper assembly and cannot be observed unless that assembly is removed.

Sample Reports

1. 49 CFR Part 565, Vehicle Identification Number - Content Requirements

Assuming that the Daihatsu is the only make and type of vehicle you will sell in the United States, the submission of the unique identifier would comply with @ 565.5(b). If you are planning to sell other makes, you would also have to include information on those makes in this submission.

The deciphering information would be sufficient under @ 565.5(d) except for the information about the engine type. The information you suggest providing describes the engine only as a "CB". The term "engine type" is defined at @ 565.3(d) as "a power source with defined characteristics such as fuel utilized, number of cylinders, displacement, and net brake horsepower." None of these factors can be deciphered from your "CB" marking. The deciphering information should indicate whether this is a gasoline or diesel engine, the number of cylinders, engine displacement, and net brake horsepower. With this modification, the sample report would comply with the requirements of Part 565.

2. 49 CFR Part 566, Manufacturer Identification

The sample identifying information from Daihatsu is sufficient for the purposes of Part 566.

You also asked how accurate this identification must be with respect to the GVWR ranges of the vehicles. As you noted, @ 566.5 (c) requires manufacturers to submit the "approximate ranges" of GVWR for each type of motor vehicle produced by the manufacturer. The agency explained in the notice of proposed rulemaking for this rule that it was seeking only basic information on the vehicles produced by the manufacturer. See 36 FR 7970, at 7971; April 28, 1971. Thus, if you wish to state that you produce passenger cars with a GVWR between 2300 and 2500 pounds, as suggested in your letter, that information would satisfy the requirements of Part 566.

You also asked the purpose of requiring the Part 566 report. The purpose was explained as follows in the notice of proposed rulemaking:

In order to carry out the provisions of the Act, it is often necessary to have certain basic information about the manufacturers of motor vehicles or vehicle equipment subject to the Act. This is particularly so in the area of enforcement and in carrying out the several requirements for communication, inspection, and reporting. It is necessary to have centrally organized and collected information regarding the manufacturer's corporate status, mailing address, items manufactured, and manufacturing location. Moreover, it is necessary to assemble this information so as to make it readily accessible to those having enforcement responsibility under the Act, and provide a means for identifying and classifying manufacturers according to the types of motor vehicles or equipment which they manufacture. A system is also needed whereby NHTSA can provide information to manufacturers of various types of vehicles or equipment. 36 FR 7971; April 28, 1971.

3. 49 CFR @ 551.45 Designation of Agent

You first asked whether your sample designation of agent conforms with the requirements of 49 CFR @ 551.45. It does not. Section 551.45 specifies that a designation of agent must include the following six items of information:

1. A certification by the person or persons signing the designation that it is valid in form and binding on the manufacturer under the laws, corporate by-laws, or other requirements governing the making of the designation at the time and place where it is made.

Your sample contains no such certification.

2. The full legal name, principal place of business, and mailing address of the manufacturer.

This information is set forth only on the letterhead of your stationery. If the corporate name set forth on your stationery is the full legal name, it would satisfy this requirement. If that is not the full legal name, however, the full legal name must be separately shown. The same principle applies to the requirements to submit your principal place of business and mailing address.

3. Marks, trade names, or other designations of origins of any of the manufacturer's products which do not bear its legal name.

It is impossible for us to determine whether there are no such marks, if the Daihatsu symbol on your letterhead is the only such mark, or if you have not satisfied this requirement.

4. A statement that the designation shall remain in effect until withdrawn or replaced by the manufacturer.

There is no such statement in your sample.

5. A declaration of acceptance duly signed by the agent appointed by the manufacturer.

Your sample would satisfy this requirement.

6. The full legal name and address of the designated agent. Your sample would satisfy this requirement. Your sample would satisfy this requirment.

You then asked what the designated agent does, and whether all reports had to be submitted to this agency via the designated agent. The designated agent acts as the agent for foreign manufacturers upon whom service of process, notices, orders, and decisions may be made for and on behalf of the manufacturer. Please note that both your designation of agent and acceptance erroneously state that such service may be made by or on behalf of the agent. Under the due process clause of our Constitution, a party cannot be bound by the outcome of a legal proceeding unless he or she has been given notice of such proceeding and an opportunity to be heard. Since we cannot go into a Japanese court, the U.S. government must have some device by which it can ensure that a foreign manufacturer is given proper notice of any proceedings affecting it in the United States. Thus, the designation of an agent by Daihatsu helps to ensure that the company will be fully and promptly apprised of any governmental action involving the company.

Hence, foreign manufacturers are not required to submit reports through their designated agents - the designated agent is only a means for this agency to serve process and so forth on the foreign manufacturer. In fact, we recommend that foreign manufacturers submit reports and other correspondence directly to NHTSA, so as to facilitate the exchange of information.

4. 49 CFR Part 575.104, Uniform Tire Quality Grading Standards

The sample report you submitted is exactly that which is specified in Figure 2 of @ 575.104. It would therefore comply with @ 575.6(a) and @ 575.104(d)(1)(iii). Please note that there are typographical errors for the words "treadwear" and "passenger" in the sample you submitted.

5. 49 CFR @ 575.101, Vehicle Stopping Distance

Your stopping distance sample report is in the format specified in Figure 1 of @ 575.101. Accordingly, it would satisfy the requirements of @ 575.101((c).

6. 49 CFR Part 537, Automotive Fuel Economy Reports

Your sample fuel economy report, including the statement as to representativeness, satisfies the requirements of Part 537. Please note that the timing for submitting the reports is set forth in @ 537.5(b), and that your 1988 pre-model year report is due in December 1987, while your 1988 mid-model year report is due in July 1988.

7. 49 CFR Part 542, Procedures for Selecting Lines to be Covered by the Theft Prevention Standard

Your sample Part 542 submission would satisfy the requirements of that Part.

Please feel free to contact us if you need any further information on our regulatory requirements.

ID: nht67-1.31

Open

DATE: 09/21/67

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; SIGNATURE UNAVAILABLE; NHTSA

TO: Busby and Rivkin

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: In your letter of July 13, 1967, you requested clarification of several issues relating to the location and size of turn signals as specified in the Initial Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards.

Initial Standard No. 108, entitled, "Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment - Multipurpose Passenger Vehicles, Trucks, Trailers, and Buses, 80 or More Inches Wide Overall," specifies that turn signal lamps shall conform to Class A of SAE Standard J588d. As stated in the enclosures to your letter, SAE Standard J588d specifies that the optical axis (filament center) of the front turn signal lamp shall be at least 4 inches from the inside diameter of the retaining ring of the headlamp unit providing the lower beam. This requirement of the SAE Standard is addressed to a single lamp with only one bulb. For a combination of lamps, such as that shown on the sketch enclosed with your letter, the intent of this requirement could be part if the optical center produced by the two bulbs is outside the 4-inch limit. The location of this optical center must be determined from laboratory test data, which was not presented in your letter.

Proposed Initial Standard No. 112, entitled, "Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment - Passenger Cars; Motorcycles; and Multipurpose Passenger Vehicles, Trucks, Trailers and Buses of Less than 80 Inches Wide Overall," would permit the use of Class A (SAE J588d) turn signal lamps until January 1, 1969. Under this provision, lamp No. 1 on your sketch would conform to the 4-inch spacing requirement. Combining lamp No. 1 and No. 2 to obtain a Class A area would again result in the situation previously described with respect to location of the optical center.

Since your letter makes frequent reference to "cars," we assume that you are primarily interested in the requirements of Standard No. 112. In this respect, we would caution you that the requirements specifies therein are presently only proposed requirements, and are subject to change prior to issuance of the final standard.

Thank you for your interest in the motor vehicle safety standards.

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.

Go to top of page