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: aiam4922OpenSgt. Danny Wilkinson Texas Department of Public Safety Motor Vehicle Inspection Service 350 West IH-30 Garland, TX 75043; Sgt. Danny Wilkinson Texas Department of Public Safety Motor Vehicle Inspection Service 350 West IH-30 Garland TX 75043; "Dear Sgt. Wilkinson: This responds to your letter of October 17, 1991 informing us that Texas has adopted Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 for State safety inspections. You report that motorists wish to repair rear lighting devices with patch kits, rather than replacing them with new equipment, and ask whether Standard No. 108 affords a basis for making use of repair kits illegal. You mention in particular the following sections of Standard No. 108: S5.1.3 ('additional equipment,' with attention to impairment of effectiveness), S5.3.1.1 ('location of required and other equipment'), and S5.7 ('replacement equipment.') I am afraid that Standard No. l08 does not contain a completely satisfactory answer to your question, primarily because the standard deals with the performance of new vehicle equipment, and not the maintenance of that performance after the vehicle is in use, which is the thrust of the Texas requirement. Under the regulatory scheme of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, a motor vehicle is not required to remain in compliance with Standard No. l08 (or any Federal safety standard) after the vehicle is sold to its first purchaser for purposes other than resale. It is possible, of course, that a vehicle could suffer damage to its rear lighting assemblies before its first sale, requiring repair by the dealer. Assuming, for the sake of argument, the not-very likely scenario that the new car dealer selling the car chose to use a patch kit rather than to replace a damaged lens or lamp, the legal question is not whether the patch is additional lighting equipment that could impair the effectiveness of the required lighting equipment (paragraph S5.1.3). The legal question is whether the repaired vehicle meets Standard No. l08: for example, would the repaired lamp meet the photometric requirements with the patch in place, would it meet the environmental tests (moisture, dust, corrosion) that the lamp and vehicle originally met in order to be certified as conforming to Standard No. l08? If the answer to these questions is affirmative, the patch would be acceptable under Federal law, if negative, then the patch would not be acceptable under Standard No. l08. The Safety Act does not directly address repair of damage after a vehicle has been sold. Although paragraph S5.7 of Standard No. l08 requires replacement lighting equipment to meet the same standards as original equipment, neither it nor the Safety Act specify how a vehicle is to be repaired. The Safety Act does prohibit motor vehicle repair businesses (and dealers, distributors, and manufacturers) from creating a noncompliance after a vehicle has been sold, but if that noncompliance is already in existence, such as could occur with a broken lens, there is no statutory obligation to repair the vehicle so that it once again complies with Standard No. 108. Under the Safety Act, a State is preempted from establishing or continuing in effect a motor vehicle safety standard that is not identical to a Federal motor vehicle safety standard covering the same aspect of performance. The purpose of this requirement is to remove the burden on interstate commerce that would be created if the standards to be met by a vehicle or equipment manufacturer varied from State to State. However, the preemption clause does not preclude a State from regulation of modifications to vehicles after sale. Thus, the State of Texas may prohibit the use of patch kits to repair any lighting devices without violating the Safety Act. Furthermore, if Texas laws for the operation of vehicles in use are identical to Standard No. l08, the State could prohibit any original equipment which impairs the effectiveness of the performance of any original equipment lamp or reflective device required by Standard No. l08, or replacement lighting equipment that is not certified to the same requirements as the original lighting equipment. I hope that this information has been helpful to you. Sincerely, Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel"; |
|
ID: aiam3828OpenMr. Steven D. Herringshaw, Coordinator of Technical Services, National Truck Equipment Association, 25900 Greenfield Road, Oak Park, MI 48237; Mr. Steven D. Herringshaw Coordinator of Technical Services National Truck Equipment Association 25900 Greenfield Road Oak Park MI 48237; Dear Mr. Herringshaw: This is in reply to your letter of February 24, 1984, with respect t mounting requirements for clearance and identification lamps under Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108.; Your Exhibit A depicts a body mounted on a chassis-cab, with clearanc lamps mounted both on the body and chassis-cab, but identification lamps mounted on only the chassis-cab. You have asked whether the truck body must have a set of identification lamps in order to meet Standard No. 108. The answer is yes. In order to comply with the requirements that identification lamps be located as closely as practicable to the top of the vehicle, a set of identification lamps must be provided for the truck body. You may be interested to know that there is a pending proposal which was published on February 22, 1982, a vehicle such as shown in Exhibit A would comply with a single set of identification lamps mounted on the cab. I enclose a copy of the proposal. The agency has taken no further action with respect to it.; In comparing the vehicles in Exhibit A and Exhibit B you have aske whether the one in Exhibit A is 'compliant with the intentions of FMVSS 108.' As I have just explained, this vehicle is currently noncompliant with the standard, but would comply if the proposal were adopted. The vehicle in Exhibit B meets the standard.; I hope that this answers your questions. Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam5653OpenMr. Tom Byrne Vice President Goodridge (USA) Inc., 20309 Gramercy Torrance, CA 90501; Mr. Tom Byrne Vice President Goodridge (USA) Inc. 20309 Gramercy Torrance CA 90501; Dear Mr. Byrne: This responds to your letter requesting a interpretation of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 106, Brake hoses. According to your letter, you plan to sell a brake hose assembly for hydraulic brake systems that you refer to as 'Stainless Steel Braided Brakelines.' You then asked several questions about selling your product in this country. By way of background information, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) administers Federal requirements for the manufacture and sale of new motor vehicles and certain items of motor vehicle equipment, including brake hose assemblies. Congress has established a 'self-certification' process under which each manufacturer is responsible for certifying that its products meet all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSSs). This process requires each manufacturer to determine that its products meet all applicable requirements. NHTSA tests vehicles and equipment sold to consumers for compliance with the FMVSS's and investigates defects relating to motor vehicle safety. If a manufacturer or NHTSA determines that a noncompliance or safety-related defect exists, the manufacturer must notify purchasers of its product and remedy the problem free of charge. A manufacturer of a noncomplying product is also subject to a civil penalty of up to $1,000 for each noncomplying item it produces. I have enclosed an information sheet that highlights the responsibilities you must meet as a manufacturer of motor vehicle equipment. Standard No. 106 applies to new motor vehicles and to brake hoses, brake hose end fittings, and brake hose assemblies. The standard specifies labeling and performance requirements for these products to reduce the likelihood of brake system failure from ruptures in the brake hose or brake hose assembly. New brake hoses, end fittings, and assemblies must meet these requirements to be sold in or imported into this country. If the items do not comply, the manufacturer is subject to the civil penalties and the recall responsibilities mentioned above. You first asked NHTSA to 'confirm' that an independent laboratory certification is valid for the United States. As explained above, NHTSA does not approve manufacturers' products or conduct pre-sale testing of their products. In the United States, the individual manufacturer must certify that its product complies with all applicable FMVSS's. You then asked NHTSA to confirm that such a brake hose assembly can be used with an adapter into the master cylinder or caliper. Your brake hose assembly can be used at any place in a motor vehicle, provided that in installing it, a vehicle manufacturer, distributor, dealer or repair business does not knowingly make inoperative, in whole or in part, a vehicle or item of equipment which is in compliance with any applicable safety standard. Specifically, inclusion of your brake hose assembly could not modify a hydraulic brake system subject to FMVSS No. 105, Hydraulic Brake Systems, to the extent that it no longer complies with the standard. Your next question asked whether there are any special marking requirements for brake hose assemblies manufactured for sale in the United States. Section S5.2.4 sets forth labeling requirements for brake hose assemblies. Section S5.2.4 states that Each hydraulic brake hose assembly, except those sold as part of a motor vehicle, shall be labeled by means of a band around the brake hose assembly as specified in this paragraph or at the option of the manufacturer, by means of labeling as specified in S5.2.4.1. The band may at the manufacturer's option be attached so as to move freely along the length of the assembly, as long as it is retained by the end fittings. The band shall be etched, embossed, or stamped in block capital letters, numerals or symbols at least one-eighth of an inch high, with the following information: (a) The symbol DOT constituting certification by the hose assembler that the hose assembly conforms to all applicable motor vehicle safety standards. (b) A designation that identifies the manufacturer of the hose assembly which shall be filed in writing with: Office of Vehicle Safety Standards, Crash Avoidance Division, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street SW., Washington DC 20590. The designation may consist of block capital letters, numerals or a symbol. In addition, section S5.2.4.1 provides as an option that at least one end fitting be etched, stamped or embossed with a designation at least one-sixteenth of an inch high that identifies the manufacturer of the hose assembly. I have also enclosed copies of two procedural requirements you must satisfy in order to sell your products in this country. The first requirement is 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 hoses) to submit its name, address, and a brief description of the items of equipment it manufacturers to NHTSA within 30 days after it first imports its products into the United States. The second requirement is NHTSA's regulation for designations of agents (49 CFR Part 551, Procedural Rules, Subpart D). The regulation requires all manufacturers headquartered outside of the United States to designate a permanent resident of the United States as the manufacturer's agent for service of all process, notices, orders and decisions. This designation should be mailed to me at the following address: Chief Counsel, Room 5219, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh St., S.W., Washington, D.C., 20590. The designation must include the following information: 1. A certification that the designation of agent 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, 2. The full legal name, principal place of business and mailing address of the manufacturer, 3. Marks, trade names, or other designations of origin of any of the manufacturer's products which do not bear its name, 4. A statement that the designation shall remain in effect until withdrawn or replaced by the manufacturer, 5. A declaration of acceptance duly signed by the agency appointed, which may be an individual, a firm or a United States corporation, and, 6. The full legal name and address of the designated agent. 7. In addition, the designation must be signed by a person with authority to appoint the agent. The signer's name and title should be clearly indicated beneath his or her signature. I hope this information is helpful. If you have further questions, please contact Mr. Marvin Shaw of this office at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, Samuel J. Dubbin Chief Counsel Enclosure; |
|
ID: aiam3416OpenMr. Richard J. Izzo, Vice President, Superior Pontiac, Inc., 5201 Camp Road, Hamburg, NY 14075; Mr. Richard J. Izzo Vice President Superior Pontiac Inc. 5201 Camp Road Hamburg NY 14075; Dear Mr. Izzo: This responds to your letter of March 25, 1981, regarding Safet Standard No. 127, *Speedometers and Odometers*. You ask whether paragraph S4.1.4 of the rule, the 'highlighting' requirement, would be satisfied by placing a sticker bearing the number '55' in the appropriate location on the outside of the glass covering the speedometer. You were previously informed by agency staff that it is necessary to put the sticker inside the glass in order to comply with the standard. In a subsequent phone conversation with Joan Griffin of my office, you stated that you are importing new and used vehicles from Canada.; The information you received earlier is incorrect. As the term is use in paragraph S4.1.4 of Standard No. 127, 'highlighting' refers to any method of placing emphasis on the numeral '55' so that it stands out from the other numerals on the mph scale. The standard does not specify how this is to be accomplished. Thus, it is not necessary for you to place the '55' sticker on the inside of the speedometer glass to comply with the standard. It will suffice if you put the sticker on the outside of the glass. However, we would prefer it if you put the sticker inside the glass, since it then would be more difficult to remove the sticker from the vehicle.; In your conversation with Ms. Griffin, you asked whether the use vehicles that you import from Canada must be brought into compliance with the Federal motor vehicle safety standards before they can be brought into the country. Used vehicles that are imported into the United States must be brought into compliance with all Federal safety standards in effect at the time of manufacture. However, the vehicles do not have to be brought into compliance *before* they are imported. Nonconforming vehicles may be imported if the importer executes a bond for the value of the vehicles and brings the vehicles into compliance with all applicable standards within 120 days of the date of importation.; We hope you find this information helpful. Please contact this offic if you have any questions.; Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam4522OpenMr. Kent B. Robinson 18230 Kingsdale Ave., Apt. D Redondo Beach, CA 90278; Mr. Kent B. Robinson 18230 Kingsdale Ave. Apt. D Redondo Beach CA 90278; Dear Mr. Robinson: This is in reply to your letters of December 3 l987, January 19, 1988, and April 4, l988 (to Taylor Vinson of this Office), asking whether a device of your invention complies with all applicable Federal regulations. You have also requested information on how to petition for adoption of this device as mandated equipment on new motor vehicles. We regret the delay in responding to your letter. You have requested confidentiality of this matter to the extent permissible. As Mr. Donaldson of this Office explained to you by phone on January 14, our practice is to make available for public perusal copies of all agency interpretations, but not necessarily the correspondence that occasioned the interpretation, and, upon request, to delete from the interpretation the name and address and other data that might identify the person requesting the interpretation. You have assented to the withholding of your name and address in your letter of January 19. In that letter you requested withholding the drawings you enclosed on December 3. We shall not attach them to the copy of this letter made publicly available (although they will be subject to review by agency personnel who review this letter before I have signed it, and may be subject to eventual disclosure under a Freedom of Information Act request). However, the device must be described to the extent necessary to allow a reader to understand just what the opinion covers. Your device is a horizontal bar of lamps mounted inside the rear window of a passenger car consisting of the center highmounted stop lamp in the center, flanked by back up lamps, which are themselves flanked by left and right turn signal lamps. Each of the five lamps would have a lens area approximately 6' wide and 1 1/2 inches high. The applicable Federal law and regulation is the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act and Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment. With respect to acceptability of your device as an item of original equipment, for purposes of this interpretation we assume that the device is intended to replace the standard center highmounted stoplamp, but only to supplement the backup and turn signal lamps. Your device appears permissible as an item of original equipment under Standard No. 108 provided that all requirements for the center highmounted stoplamp continue to be met. We call your specific attention to the fact that means must be provided to minimize reflections from the center lamp upon the rear window glazing that might be visible to the driver, either directly or indirectly in the rearview mirror. Supplementary original lighting equipment is permissible under Standard No. 108 as long as it does not impair the effectiveness of lighting equipment required by the standard. The certification by a manufacturer that its vehicle complies with Standard No. 108 would encompass a certification that there is no impairment by any supplemental lighting equipment. The vehicle manufacturer must also consider whether any device installed in a rear window affects compliance with the interior rearview mirror field of view requirements specified by Standard No. lll Rearview Mirrors, and if affirmative to provide a passenger side exterior mirror. The Vehicle Safety Act covers safety related defects as well as motor vehicle safety standards, requiring notification of purchasers and remedy of safety related defects when they occur. Spillage of light upon the rear glazing could be considered as a safety related defect, and, for this reason, means should be provided to minimize reflections upon the rear glazing from all lamps in the array, and not just the center lamp. The applicable Federal law for aftermarket equipment is also the Vehicle Safety Act. It prohibits modifications by manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and motor vehicle repair businesses to vehicles if those modifications render inoperative in whole or in part equipment installed in accordance with a safety standard. Center highmounted lamps have been required as original equipment on new cars manufactured on or after September l, l985. Because of the potential for interfering with the effectiveness of the center lamp, we would regard removal of an original equipment center lamp and substitution of your device including its center lamp as rendering the center lamp partially inoperative within the meaning of the prohibition. However, if the modification is such that it can be done by the vehicle owner, the Act does not prohibit an owner from it. Further, the Act would not prohibit in any way the installation of your device on passenger cars manufactured before September l, 1985. However, supplementary lighting devices sold in the aftermarket are regulated by each State in which the device would be sold and used. Although we are not conversant with those laws, you may consult the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, 4600 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Va. 22203 for an opinion. You have also asked how this device could be mandated as original equipment on new passenger cars. Any interested person may petition the Administrator for an amendment of Standard No. 108. However, the Vehicle Safety Act requires the safety standards to be standards for motor vehicle performance, and, to the extent possible, the agency attempts to minimize standards expressed in terms of design. For the same reason, the agency does not normally propose adoption of proprietary designs. As one of the requirements of a petition for rulemaking is that it contain the name and address of the petitioner, it might not be possible to afford the same degree of confidentiality to a petition that it is to a request for an interpretation. Your letter of April 4 asks a slightly different question on the subject of what is allowed to be viewed by other motorists in or around the rear window, with specific reference to turn signals, backup lamps, and hazard warning signals. The relevant portions of Standard No. 108 are those relating to mounting height. The maximum mounting height of 83 inches allowed for turn signals (which commonly also serve as hazard warning signals) is unlikely to be exceeded by turn signals mounted in the rear window area. There is no maximum restriction on the mounting height of backup lamps but we do have performance criteria which must be met in order to ensure that they can satisfy their intended function of providing illumination behind the vehicle. Finally, you should realize that it is incorrect to refer to your device as a 'third tail light assembly.' A taillamp is a specific rear lamp required by Standard No. 108, and one which you have not incorporated into your assembly. I hope that this answers your questions. As you requested in a phone call to Taylor Vinson the other day, we are returning the originals of your correspondence. Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel Enclosures; |
|
ID: aiam4760OpenDelbert N. Pier Legislation and Compliance Coordinator Hyundai America Technical Center, Inc. 5075 Venture Drive Ann Arbor, MI 48108; Delbert N. Pier Legislation and Compliance Coordinator Hyundai America Technical Center Inc. 5075 Venture Drive Ann Arbor MI 48108; "Dear Mr. Pier: This responds to your letter requesting a interpretation of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 107, Reflecting Surfaces. (49 CFR 571.107). I apologize for the delay in our response. You explained that Hyundai is planning to test the surface of a windshield wiper blade rail spring by using several rail springs gathered together because one spring would have a limited amount of area to reflect the light source. You asked the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to confirm your view that this method of compliance testing is a satisfactory method of complying with section S4 of Standard No. 107. By way of background information, NHTSA has no authority to approve, endorse or offer assurances of compliance for any motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment. Instead, the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 ('Vehicle Safety Act') makes manufacturers of motor vehicles or items of motor vehicle equipment responsible for certifying that each of its products conforms with all applicable safety standards. The following represents our opinion based on the facts provided in your letter. Each safety standard specifies performance requirements and test procedures used by the agency in its compliance testing to evaluate a vehicle or item of equipment. For instance, section S4 of Standard No. 107 specifies specular gloss requirements for certain vehicle components, including windshield wiper arms and blades. That provision requires that the specular gloss of the specified components must not exceed 40 units when measured by the 20 degree method of ASTM Standard D523-62T. While the agency would follow ASTM Standard D523-62T for purposes of compliance testing, the Vehicle Safety Act does not require a manufacturer to test its products in the manner specified in a motor vehicle safety standard or even to test the product at all. A manufacturer may choose any means of evaluating its products to determine whether the vehicle or item of equipment complies with the requirements of that standard, provided, however, that the manufacturer exercises due care in ensuring that the vehicle or equipment will comply with Federal requirements when tested by the agency according to the procedures specified in the standard. In other words, the manufacturer must show that its chosen means of evaluating compliance is a reasonable surrogate for the test procedure specified by the standard. In the event that the agency determines an apparent noncompliance exists with a vehicle or item of equipment tested in the agency's compliance program, the manufacturer must show the basis for its certification that the vehicle or equipment complies. The manufacturer may be subject to civil penalties unless it can establish that it exercised due care in its designing and manufacturing of the product and in its checking (through actual testing, computer simulation or otherwise) to ensure compliance, but nevertheless did not have reason to know that the vehicle or item of equipment did not in fact comply. Of course, notwithstanding the exercise of due care, the manufacturer would still be subject to the recall responsibilities of the Vehicle Safety Act for any noncomplying vehicles or equipment. With these considerations in mind, you appear, based on the statements in your letter, merely to be testing a group of identical components with identical specular gloss levels at one time rather than separately. If this is the case, it appears that your intended method of testing is consistent with the testing procedures in Standard No. 107. I hope this information answers your questions. Please contact Mr. Marvin Shaw of my staff at (202) 366-2992, if you have further questions. Sincerely, Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel"; |
|
ID: aiam3956OpenMr. Pat Reese, Mannesmann Pipe & Steel Corp., 1900 Post Oak Blvd., 18th Floor, Houston, TX 77056; Mr. Pat Reese Mannesmann Pipe & Steel Corp. 1900 Post Oak Blvd. 18th Floor Houston TX 77056; Dear Mr. Reese: This responds to your letter to Steve Kratzke of my staff, asking fo an interpretation of the requirements of Standard No. 120, *Tire Selection and Rims for Motor Vehicles Other Than Passenger Cars* (49 CFR S571.120). Specifically, you indicated you were writing on behalf of Mannesmann Kronprinz, a German branch of your company which manufactures wheels. You noted that section S5.2(d) of Standard No. 120 requires rims for use on motor vehicles other than passenger cars to be marked with the name, trademark or symbol identifying the rim manufacturer, and asked if this requirement meant that the German branch of your company had to register its logo or trademark with this agency. Standard No. 120 does not require manufacturers to register trademarks or symbols with the agency. However, 49 CFR S551.45 requires *all* manufacturers whose vehicles or items of motor vehicle equipment are imported into the United States to file a designation of agent with NHTSA, and this designation must include a listing of the marks, trade names or other designations of origin used by the manufacturer on its products. A check of our files shows that no such designation has ever been filed by Mannesmann Kronprinz.; Section S5.2 of Standard No. 120 sets forth rim marking requirement applicable to all rims for use on motor vehicles other than passenger cars. One of the items of information required to be marked on such rims is 'a designation that identifies the manufacturer of the rim by name, trademark, or symbol', S5.2(d). This information allows the agency and the public to identify the manufacturer of the rim if there is some problem with it.; The use of a trademark or symbol is allowed, instead of th manufacturer's name, because the agency can easily determine the identify of the manufacturer from the trademark or symbol. In the case of domestic manufacturers, their trademarks or symbols would be registered with the United States Patent and Trademark Office. In the case of foreign manufacturers, 49 CFR S551.45 requires them to file a designation of agent with this agency. One of the items of information required to be included in the designation of agent is a listing of 'the marks, trade names, or other designations of origin' which appear on any of the manufacturer's products in lieu of its legal name.; Both 49 CFR S551.45 and 15 U.S.C. 1399(e) require all foreig manufacturers to file a designation of agent with NHTSA *before* importing motor vehicles or items of motor vehicle equipment, including wheels into the United States. I have enclosed copies of the regulation and the statute for your reference. As you will see, Part 551 specifies that the designation of agent must contain the following six items of information:; >>>1. A certification that the designation is valid in form and bindin on Mannesmann Kronprinz under the laws, corporate by-laws, or other requirements governing the making of the designation at the time and place where it is made,; 2. The full legal name, principal place of business, and mailin address for Mannesmann Kronprinz,; 3. Marks, trade names, or other designations of origin for any o Mannesmann Kronprinz's products which do not bear its name,; 4. A statement that the designation shall remain in effect unti withdrawn or replaced by Mannesmann Kronprinz,; 5. A declaration of acceptance duly signed by the agent appointed b the Mannesmann Kronprinz, and that agent may be an individual, firm, or U.S. corporation, and; 6. The full legal name and address of the designated agent.<<< Further, 49 CFR Part 566, *Manufacturer Identification (copy enclosed requires manufacturers of motor vehicle equipment covered by our standards to provide certain information to NHTSA. The required information is simply the manufacturer's full name, address, and a brief description of the motor vehicle equipment it manufactures.; Should you have any further questions in this area, please contact Mr Kratzke at this address or by telephone at (202) 426-2992.; Sincerely, Jeffrey R. Miller, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam4495OpenMr. Derek Nash Artech Corporation 2901 Telestar Court Falls Church, VA 22042; Mr. Derek Nash Artech Corporation 2901 Telestar Court Falls Church VA 22042; "Dear Mr. Nash: This responds to your letter to the National Highwa Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and follows up on the April 1, 1988 telephone conversation with Ms. Hom of my staff in which additional information augmenting your letter was provided. I apologize for the delay in responding. In your letter, you said that you are refurbishing a type of passenger vehicle that was first produced 20 years ago. Your letter raises questions about Federal requirements for persons modifying used vehicles which I will address in the latter part of this letter and about Federal requirements for the design of the vehicle's chassis. Before I address your specific questions, I would like to provide some background information on our regulations and safety standards. NHTSA has the authority under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (copy enclosed) to issue motor vehicle safety standards for new motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment. Manufacturers of new vehicles or equipment must certify that their products conform to all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. NHTSA also has the authority to investigate safety-related defects in motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment. If a manufacturer or the agency determines that the manufacturer's product contains a safety-related defect, the manufacturer must notify purchasers of the product and remedy the defect free of charge. It is not clear from the information which you have provided us whether the vehicle you are refurbishing would be treated as a new or used vehicle under the Safety Act. A vehicle with a new body and new chassis would be a new vehicle required to meet the standards in effect on the day that manufacture of the vehicle is completed. A vehicle with a new body and old chassis would be a used vehicle. Section 108(a)(2)(A) of the Safety Act prohibits manufacturers, dealers, distributors and motor vehicle repair businesses (i.e., persons holding themselves out to the public as in the business of repairing motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment for compensation) from knowingly rendering inoperative any device or element of design installed on or in a new or used motor vehicle in compliance with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard. This means that any person in the above categories modifying a new or used vehicle must do so in a manner that ensures the continued compliance of the vehicle with applicable safety standards. This prohibition affects vehicles manufactured on or after January 1, l968, the date on which the first Federal safety standards became effective. For instance, a commercial business that installs a new fuel system in a passenger car manufactured on or after January 1, 1968 (the effective date of Standard No. 301) must ensure that the new system at least meets the level of safety performance required of the fuel system originally installed on the vehicle. Persons violating section 108 are subject to potential civil penalties of $1,000 per violation. In instances in which a new vehicle body is installed on an old chassis, section 108(a)(2)(A) requires that the reassembled vehicle meet the Federal safety standards that had been in effect on the date of manufacture of the vehicle. I have enclosed a copy of a January 14, 1976 letter to Mr. Tom Welland that describes generally the applicability of Federal motor vehicle safety standards to refurbished motor vehicles. Please note that the first situation referred to in the Welland letter addresses the modification of a vehicle by its owner. The prohibition in section 108(a)(2)(A) does not apply to the modifications made by vehicle owners to their own vehicles. I will now address the questions you expressly posed in your letter. Your first three questions asked: What relationship between allowable stresses in chassis members and the strength of the material is required (or customary) in the design of a passenger-carrying motor vehicle? What relationship between static and dynamic load is required (or customary) in design assumptions for a passenger-carrying motor vehicle chassis? What form or test or measurement is required (or customary) to confirm the results of the calculations? As Ms. Hom informed you, our safety standards apply to new vehicles and are performance-oriented. NHTSA has not issued any design specifications that directly establish minimum static or dynamic loads for vehicle chassis. These design parameters are established by the manufacturer independently of specific criteria set by the agency and might be available from the original manufacturer of the vehicle you are refurbishing. However, manufacturers of new vehicles are required by NHTSA to determine and specify the gross vehicle and axle weight ratings of their vehicles in the manner set forth in Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 567 of our regulations. I have enclosed a copy of Part 567 for your information. Chassis manufacturers must be aware, however, of the following two considerations relating to the static and dynamic load capacities of vehicles and NHTSA's regulations. First, because manufacturers of new vehicles must certify that their vehicles will perform to the requirements of all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards, manufacturers must ensure that chassis design is compatible with the vehicle's ability to comply. Some of our safety standards specify that the performance of requisite vehicle safety systems will be evaluated in dynamic (i.e., crash) tests which enable the agency to evaluate the synergistic effect of a range of variables on a vehicle's compliance therewith. Manufacturers of new vehicles would therefore have to ensure that the design of the chassis will have no negative effect on their vehicle's compliance with applicable safety standards. Second, as mentioned above, NHTSA has the authority to investigate safety-related defects in motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment and to require manufacturers to recall and remedy such defects free of charge. Chassis manufacturers must therefore ensure that their products contain no safety related defects, which might well include a chassis member that is incapable of carrying loads for which it is intended. Further, the vehicle manufacturer who provides the GVWR and GAWR information required by Part 567 must ensure that the information relating to the chassis static loads is correct. On a separate matter, your letter also asked about the requirements manufacturers must meet when installing a plastic fuel tank in a motor vehicle. The standard we issued for vehicle fuel system integrity (No. 301) sets performance requirements for fuel systems in new motor vehicles. As with all our safety standards, Standard No. 301 (copy enclosed) specifies the test that the agency will use to evaluate the performance of the requisite safety system (e.g., the fuel system) on new vehicles selected for inclusion in its compliance test program. Manufacturers are not bound, however, to use the tests specified in the safety standards for evaluating the compliance of their vehicles or equipment with our standards. Instead, a manufacturer may test in any manner it chooses, so long as it can show that it has exercised due care in ensuring that its vehicles or items of equipment comply with the applicable Federal requirements. In addition to the materials described above, I have also enclosed information that provides an overview of Federal requirements applying to manufacturers of new motor vehicles and instructions on how you can obtain copies of NHTSA regulations. I hope this information is helpful. Please contact my office if you have further questions. Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel Enclosures"; |
|
ID: aiam5450OpenMr. C.H. Je Doosan Corporation Pusan Branch 5KA-50 Chungang-dong Chungku, Pusan KOREA; Mr. C.H. Je Doosan Corporation Pusan Branch 5KA-50 Chungang-dong Chungku Pusan KOREA; "Dear Mr. Je: This responds to your letter identifying your company a a 'trading company' and asking for permission from the U.S. Department of Transportation to sell air bags in the United States. As I explain below, no such permission is necessary, but there are some requirements you should be aware of before you begin importing air bags. I am pleased to have this opportunity to explain our laws and regulations to you. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is authorized under Title 49, Chapter 301 of the U.S. Code to issue Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards for new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA, however, does not approve motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment, nor do we endorse any commercial products or conduct pre-sale testing of any commercial products. Instead, Chapter 301 establishes a 'self-certification' process under which each manufacturer is responsible for certifying that its products meet all applicable safety standards. I note that the term 'manufacturer' is defined in 49 U.S.C. 30102(5)(B) as 'a person . . . manufacturing or assembling motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment or importing motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment for resale.' (Emphasis added.) NHTSA has exercised its authority under Chapter 301 to establish Standard No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection (49 CFR 571.208). Standard No. 208 requires, among other things, that passenger cars provide automatic crash protection. Also, a phase-in of automatic crash protection requirements for light trucks is in progress. Vehicles equipped with automatic crash protection protect their occupants by means that require no action by vehicle occupants. Compliance with the automatic crash protection requirements of Standard No. 208 is determined in a dynamic crash test. That is, a vehicle must comply with specified injury criteria, as measured on a test dummy, when tested by this agency in a 30 mph barrier crash test. At this time, manufacturers are not required to use a specific method of automatic crash protection to meet the requirements of Standard No. 208. Instead, each automobile manufacturer is allowed to select the particular method for the automatic crash protection installed in its vehicles. The two types of automatic crash protection currently offered on new passenger cars are automatic safety belts (which help to assure belt use) and air bags (which supplement safety belts and offer some protection even when safety belts are not used). However, a recent amendment of Standard No. 208 makes air bags mandatory in all passenger cars and light trucks by the late 1990's. Please note that the automatic crash protection requirement applies to the performance of the vehicle as a whole, instead of setting requirements for the air bag as an individual item of equipment. This approach permits vehicle manufacturers to 'tune' the performance of the air bag to the crash pulse and other specific attributes of each of their vehicle models. However, this approach also means that the Federal standards do not specify specific performance attributes for air bags such as inflated dimensions, actuation time, and the like. It is unclear from your letter if the air bags you wish to import will be sold to manufacturers for installation in new vehicles or if the air bags will be sold as replacement air bags or retrofit air bags for vehicles which do not have air bags as original equipment. If the air bags are sold to manufacturers for installation in new vehicles, the vehicle manufacturer is required to certify that the vehicle complies with all applicable safety standards, including Standard No. 208. If the air bag is added to a previously certified new motor vehicle prior to its first sale, the person who modifies the vehicle would be an alterer of a previously certified motor vehicle and would be required to certify that, as altered, the vehicle continues to comply with all of the safety standards affected by the installation of the air bag. (See 49 CFR Part 567.7.) While most of Standard No. 208's requirements are expressed in terms of the performance of the vehicle as a whole and apply only to new vehicles and not to aftermarket equipment, there is one exception to this. Pressure vessels and explosive devices for use in air bag systems must comply with section S9 of Standard No. 208 whether they are part of a new motor vehicle or are aftermarket equipment. Therefore, the manufacturer of these items must certify that they comply with the requirements of S9 of Standard No. 208. Another Federal requirement that would affect the device if it were installed in a used vehicle, either as a replacement or retrofit air bag, is the 'make inoperative' prohibition in U.S. Code Section 30122(b), which provides that: A manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business may not knowingly make inoperative any part of a device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle ... in compliance with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard . . . The 'make inoperative' provision would prohibit a commercial business from installing an aftermarket air bag in a manner that would negatively affect the vehicle's compliance with Standard No. 208. You should also note that a replacement or retrofit air bag would be considered 'motor vehicle equipment' within the meaning of the U.S. Code. Therefore, if the air bag contained a defect (either in manufacture, design, or performance) that relates to motor vehicle safety, the manufacturer would be required to conduct a recall campaign to notify owners and to remedy the defect free of charge. You should be aware that recently the manufacturer of an aftermarket air bag that did not provide crash protection benefits to vehicle occupants ceased offering its air bags following a NHTSA investigation. In addition, NHTSA provided information to the Federal Trade Commission concerning the claims made by the manufacturer in its advertising. We suggest you carefully review the manufacturer's test data on the devices you are considering importing to assure yourself that the air bag would afford adequate protection to vehicle occupants in crashes and that the claims made in the company's advertising are true. I have enclosed an information sheet that identifies relevant Federal statutes and NHTSA standards and regulations affecting motor vehicle and motor vehicle equipment manufacturers, and explains how to obtain copies of these materials. Please note the regulations concerning manufacturer identification and designation of agent. I hope you find this information helpful. If you have any other questions, please contact Mary Versailles of my staff at this address or by phone at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, Philip R. Recht Chief Counsel Enclosure"; |
|
ID: aiam4589OpenMr. Les Schreiner Fresia Engineering Inc. 700 E. Main Street Suite 1618 Richmond, VA 23219; Mr. Les Schreiner Fresia Engineering Inc. 700 E. Main Street Suite 1618 Richmond VA 23219; "Dear Mr. Schreiner: This responds to your letter asking whether som vehicles you plan to import into the United States are subject to the Federal motor vehicle safety standards set forth in 49 CFR Part 571. These vehicles consist of snow removal vehicles and aircraft towing vehicles. I am pleased to have this opportunity to explain our statute 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 safety standards for new 'motor vehicles' and new items of 'motor vehicle equipment.' Accordingly, Fresia's vehicles are subject to the safety standards only if those vehicles are 'motor vehicles' within the meaning of the Safety Act. Section 102(3) of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1391(3)) defines a 'motor vehicle' as any vehicle driven or drawn by mechanical power manufactured primarily for use on the public streets, roads, and highways, except any vehicle operated exclusively on a rail or rails. We have interpreted this language as follows. Vehicles that are equipped with tracks or are otherwise incapable of highway travel are plainly not motor vehicles. Tractors and other agricultural equipment are not motor vehicles. Further, vehicles designed and sold solely for off-road use (e.g., airport runway vehicles and underground mining vehicles) are not considered motor vehicles, even though they may be operationally capable of highway travel. On the other hand, vehicles that use the public roads on a necessary and recurring basis are motor vehicles. For instance, utility vehicles like the Jeep are plainly motor vehicles, even though they are equipped with special features to permit off-road operation. If a vehicle's greatest use will be off-road, but it will spend a substantial amount of time on-road, NHTSA has treated it as a motor vehicle. Further, if a vehicle is readily usable on the public roads and is in fact used on the public roads by a substantial number of owners, NHTSA has treated the vehicle as a motor vehicle. This finding was made with respect to dune buggies, notwithstanding the manufacturers' statements that the vehicles were not intended to be used on the public roads. NHTSA has also stated in many prior interpretation that even vehicles that will regularly be used on the public roads will not be considered 'motor vehicles' for the purposes of the Safety Act, if the vehicles have a maximum attainable speed of 20 miles per hour (mph) or less and have an abnormal configuration that readily distinguishes them from other vehicles on the road. Applying these principles to the vehicles shown in the brochures enclosed with your letter yields the following tentative conclusions. 1. The vehicles identified as 'aircraft towing tractors' would not appear to be motor vehicles, assuming that these vehicles are designed and sold solely for use off the public roads. 2. The vehicles identified as 'snow removal equipment' appear to fall into two categories. a. One of the categories consists of the models identified as the 'F10 NF' and the 'Vomero TO-TB-TA-TR,' 'Fresa Laterale,' and 'Fresa Integrale HP 200-170' models. These vehicles would not appear to be motor vehicles, because their maximum speed appears to be 20 mph or less and they have a configuration that readily distinguishes them from other vehicles on the road. b. The second category consists of all the other vehicles identified as 'snow removal equipment.' All the vehicles in this category look like conventional trucks with either snowplow blades or snowblowers attached to the front of the truck and appear capable of speeds greater than 20 mph. We have consistently stated that trucks with snow blowers or snowplow blades on the front end are motor vehicles, and are subject to all of our safety standards applicable to trucks. For your information, I have enclosed an April 7, 1983 letter to Mr. Takeo Shimizu on this subject. I have identified our conclusions as tentative for several reasons. The Safety Act places the responsibility for classifying any particular vehicle in the first instance on the vehicle manufacturer. Accordingly, NHTSA does not approve or endorse any vehicle classifications before the manufacturer itself has classified the vehicle. NHTSA may reexamine the manufacturer's classifications in the course of any enforcement actions. The agency does, however, tentatively state how it believes vehicles should be classified for the purposes of the safety standards. Additionally, the tentative opinions expressed in this letter are based on the literature enclosed with your letter. We may change the tentative opinions expressed in this letter if we have occasion to examine the vehicles themselves or otherwise acquire additional information about the vehicles. Since you are considering importing some vehicles that would appear to be 'motor vehicles' into the United States, I have enclosed some additional materials for your information. One is an information sheet for new manufacturers of motor vehicles, which highlights the relevant statutes and regulations that apply to such manufacturers and explains how the manufacturer can get copies of the relevant statutes and regulations. The other item is a booklet entitled 'Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards and Procedures.' This booklet summarizes the basic requirements of our safety standards and shows which standards apply to trucks. Your letter also indicated that your company would be interested in any 'approval procedure or testing process NHTSA would administer' to get your company's vehicles on a qualified products list. NHTSA has no authority to approve or endorse any motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Instead, the Safety Act establishes a 'self-certification' process under which each manufacturer is itself responsible for certifying that each of its products complies with all applicable safety standards. NHTSA periodically tests vehicles and items of equipment to ensure their compliance with the safety standards, and also investigates other alleged defects related to motor vehicle safety. I hope this information is helpful. Please let me know if you need any additional information. Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel Enclosures /"; |
Request an Interpretation
You may email your request to Interpretations.NHTSA@dot.gov or send your request in hard copy to:
The Chief Counsel
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, W41-326
U.S. Department of Transportation
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE
Washington, DC 20590
If you want to talk to someone at NHTSA about what a request for interpretation should include, call the Office of the Chief Counsel at 202-366-2992.
Please note that NHTSA’s response will be made available in this online database, and that the incoming interpretation request may also be made publicly available.