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: aiam1566OpenMr. Frank Schoen, 8022 Cabot Street, Houston, TX 77028; Mr. Frank Schoen 8022 Cabot Street Houston TX 77028; Dear Mr. Schoen: This is in response to your letter of June 19, 1974, inquiring as t what information must be included in a bill of sale upon the transfer of a motorcycle.; The Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act requires that written disclosure of a vehicle's recorded mileage be provided by the seller to the purchaser at the time ownership of a vehicle is transferred. If the correct mileage is unknown, the Act requires a statement to that effect to be furnished in written form to the buyer. The disclosure statement need not, however, be included as part of the bill of sale and may be executed to the buyer as a separate document. If Northline Honda failed to comply with this disclosure requirement, a civil remedy in the amount of $1,500 or treble damages, whichever is greater, may be available to you under section 409 of the Act, if the violation was committed with the intent to defraud.; Section 403 of the Act makes it unlawful for any person to disconnect reset, or alter the odometer of a vehicle with the intent to change the number of miles indicated thereon. If Northline Honda violated this section with the intent to defraud, section 409 of the Act would provide you with the same civil remedy as noted above.; One way to determine if such an alteration has occurred is to compar the current mileage with that indicated on the disclosure statement provided to Northline Honda by the motorcycle's prior owner. If Northline has no such document you might attempt to find out who the prior owner was and contact him about the mileage. A mechanic might also check out the motorcycle to see if there is any evidence indicating that the odometer has been tampered with or that the cycle has travelled more miles than the odometer registers.; On the basis of the information you have supplied, I suggest that yo contact an attorney about the possibility of bringing an action against Northline Honda. I am enclosing relevant portions of the Act and the odometer disclosure requirements for your use.; If you are in need of any further information, please do not hesitat to let us know.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Acting Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam4166OpenMr. Takeshi Tanuma, Nissan Research & Development, Inc., 3995 Research Park Drive, P.O. Box 8650, Ann Arbor, MI 48104; Mr. Takeshi Tanuma Nissan Research & Development Inc. 3995 Research Park Drive P.O. Box 8650 Ann Arbor MI 48104; Dear Mr. Tanuma: This responds to your letter of December 19, 1985, asking whether a antitheft device installed in all but a few cars of a particular car line would be considered 'standard equipment' under Title VI of the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act. As explained below, the answer to your question is no.; You describe a situation in which 99.9 percent of 'A' model vehicle were equipped with an antitheft device in Model Year 1985. Specifically, your letter states that total sales in the United States for that model year were 101,854 vehicles. Of these, 101,758 vehicles were equipped with an antitheft device, the rest or 96 vehicles, which were shipped to Hawaii, Guam, and Saipan as rental cars, were not equipped with an antitheft device. You state that you expect 99.9 percent of 'A' model cars to be equipped with an antitheft device in Model Year 1987 and ask if, under these circumstances, the antitheft device can be considered standard equipment.; Under section 605(a) of the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Saving Act, any manufacturer may petition this agency for an exemption from the vehicle theft prevention standard for any 'line or lines of passenger motor vehicles which are equipped as standard equipment with an antitheft device' which the agency determines is likely to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance with the standard. This section also defines 'standard equipment' as that installed at the time the vehicle is delivered from the manufacturer and which is not an accessory or other item which the first purchaser customarily has the option to have installed.; As interpreted by this agency, 'standard equipment' refers to antithef devices that are provided without extra charge on all vehicles of a particular line which are introduced into the United States or imported and which are not intended solely for export and exported. Since the antitheft device in your example would not be installed in all model 'A' cars imported into the United States, the agency concludes that the device would not be standard equipment within the meaning of section 605.; Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam4373OpenMs. Laurie J. Schonauer, Bethell Company, P.O. Box 191, Colton, CA 92324-0087; Ms. Laurie J. Schonauer Bethell Company P.O. Box 191 Colton CA 92324-0087; Dear Ms. Schonauer: Your letter of May 14, 1987, addressed to the office of Vehicle Safet Standards, was referred to me for reply. Along with your letter, you sent marketing literature, and samples of your product, a device you are marketing under the name 'Insta-cone.' Your literature indicates your intention to market this device principally as an emergency traffic warning device.; The product is made of bright orange corrugated paper and has thre connected triangular faces. You shipped your product folded along the legs of the triangles, and packaged in a clear paper wrapper. A user unfolds your device, and connects tabs and slots along the legs of the triangles to form a pyramid. At the base of two triangles that form the pyramid is a long tab with covered adhesive strips. According to your literature, a user assembles your product, uncovers the adhesive, and secures it to the ground with these adhesive tabs. Buried in one leg of the triangle is a small nail for securing the product in ground where the adhesive will not take hold.; You ask two questions. The first is whether this agency will send you letter stating that your product may be used to indicate the presence of a disable passenger vehicle. The second question is whether this agency will send you a 'statement...that it is a good idea for passenger vehicles to have a first aid kit, (your product), or even flares in the trunk in case of an accident or breakdown.'; The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is an agenc of the Department of Transportation, and has authority to issue safety standards applicable to new motor vehicles and certain items of motor vehicle equipment. However, NHTSA does not approve nor certify motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment, or endorse any commercial product. Instead, the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act establishes a 'self-certification' process under which each manufacturer must certify that its product meets agency safety standards, or other applicable standards. Periodically, NHTSA tests whether vehicles or equipment comply with these standards, and may investigate alleged safety-related product defects.; Standard 125, *Warning Devices* sets uniform design specifications fo devices used to warn approaching traffic of the presence of a disabled vehicle. The Standard applies to any such device without a self-contained energy source that it designed to be carried in motor vehicles and erected when needed to warn approaching traffic. Your product is an item of motor vehicle equipment, and falls under this Standard. Thus, the 'Insta-Cone' must meet the requirements of Standard 125, such as those on configuration, color, and reflectivity. The Vehicle Safety Act provides for a civil penalty of $1,000 for each violation of a safety standard and a maximum penalty of $800,000 for a series of violations. In addition, the Vehicle Safety Act requires manufacturers to remedy their products if they fail to comply with all applicable safety standards.; In answer to your first question, you do not need a letter from thi agency to market your device as a motor vehicle equipment for use to warn approaching traffic of the presence of a stopped vehicle, so long as your device meets FMVSS 125 requirements. However, NHTSA's preliminary review of your product indicates that the 'Insta- cone' may not comply with the color, reflectivity, luminance, stability, and durability requirements of Standard 125. If your product fails to meet these or other Standard 125 requirements, you cannot legally market and sell it as a warning device.; As I stated earlier in this letter, this agency does not endors commercial products. In answer to your second question, NHTSA must decline to supply you with the kind of statement you suggest.; Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam3430OpenH. A. Kendall, Ph.D, Executive Secretary, United Sidecar Association, Inc., 1621 Palomino Lane, Kingwood, Texas 77339; H. A. Kendall Ph.D Executive Secretary United Sidecar Association Inc. 1621 Palomino Lane Kingwood Texas 77339; Dear Dr. Kendall: This responds to you letter of May 4, 1981, requesting information o the applicability of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard to motorcycles and sidecars.; You should note that this agency's current definition of the ter 'motorcycle' (which is relevant to determination of the applicability of safety standards) includes motorcycle-sidecar combinations. The current definition, as set forth in Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 571.3, is as follows:; >>>'Motorcycle' means a motor vehicle with motive power having a sea or saddle for the use of the rider and designed to travel on not more than three wheels in contact with the ground.<<<; Thus, unlike the definition you cite in your letter, the curren definition does not exclude vehicles with full or partial passenger enclosures. Therefore, new motorcycle-sidecar combinations sold as a unit must comply with all safety standards applicable to motorcycles. The same standards apply to both domestically produced and imported motorcycles. The definition to which you refer was once proposed by the agency, but the agency has no plans to adopt that definition for the foreseeable future.; On the other hand, sidecars sold independently are treated as 'moto vehicle equipment' by this agency. As such, and since the sidecars will ultimately be used as part of a motorcycle, certain components of the sidecar must meet safety standards.; These components (to the extent they are in fact used) are: brak hoses, which must comply with Standard 106, pneumatic tires, which must comply with Standard 120, and glazing materials, which must comply with Standard 205.; I have enclosed an information sheet which indicates where you ma obtain copies of safety standards. This agency is not responsible for emission or noise standards, however. We have forwarded a copy of you letter to the Environmental Protection Agency so that agency can provide you information on those standards.; Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam4465OpenMr. Richard L. Hutchison Hutchison, Anders & Associates, P.C. 16860 S. Oak Park Av. Tinley Park, IL 60477; Mr. Richard L. Hutchison Hutchison Anders & Associates P.C. 16860 S. Oak Park Av. Tinley Park IL 60477; Dear Mr. Hutchison: This responds to your October 14, 1987, lette asking about the applicability of Safety Standard No. 301, Fuel System Integrity, to 'replacement gas caps' that your client intends to market. I apologize for the delay in responding. You said that several of your client's customers have requested this agency's approval of your client's product. You asked for confirmation of your understanding that the gas caps do not have to be approved by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) in order to be sold. Your understanding is correct. NHTSA is not authorized to certify or approve motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment for compliance with our Federal motor vehicle safety standards. Instead, under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (copy enclosed), each manufacturer of a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment is responsible for certifying that its products meet all applicable safety standards. There is currently no Federal motor vehicle safety standard that is directly applicable to replacement gas caps. Safety Standard No. 301 applies only to completed new motor vehicles and specifies performance requirements that must be met by the fuel system as a whole following a barrier crash test. The standard does not apply to individual components of a fuel system or to aftermarket equipment for use on fuel systems. Although Standard No. 301 would not directly apply to your client's replacement gas caps, there are responsibilities under Federal law of which your client should be aware. Manufacturers of motor vehicle equipment, which includes aftermarket gas caps, are subject to the requirements in sections 151-159 of the Vehicle Safety Act concerning the recall and remedy of products with defects relating to motor vehicle safety. I have enclosed an information sheet that briefly describes those responsibilities. In addition, there are prohibitions against certain modifications of new and used vehicles. Section 108(a)(2)(A) of the Safety Act specifies that no manufacturer, distributor, dealer or motor vehicle repair business shall knowingly render inoperative any device or element of design installed on or in a new or used motor vehicle in compliance with any applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standard. Therefore, no person in any of the aforementioned categories may place your client's gas cap on a motor vehicle if by so doing the vehicle's compliance with Standard No. 301 were negatively affected. Whether or not your client's replacement gas cap could be installed by a person in one of those categories on a vehicle without destroying the vehicle's compliance with Standard No. 30l or any other Federal safety standard is a determination that must be made by any commercial business in the aforementioned categories of /108(a)(2)(A) making the installation. NHTSA does not pass advance approval on motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment prior to the actual events that underlie a modification and we are unable to offer any opinion on whether your client's gas cap would negatively affect a vehicle's fuel system performance. The prohibition of /108(a)(2)(A) does not apply to individual vehicle owners who alter their own vehicles. Thus, under Federal law, they may install or remove any items of motor vehicle equipment regardless of its effect on compliance with Federal motor vehicle safety standards. However, the agency encourages vehicle owners not to remove or otherwise tamper with vehicle safety equipment if the modification would degrade the safety of the vehicle. We suggest that you contact the Environmental Protection Agency to see whether the EPA has any type of emissions standard that might affect your client's manufacture of his gas caps. The general telephone number for the EPA is (202) 382-2090. I hope this information has been helpful. Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel Enclosures; |
|
ID: aiam4218OpenMr. Edward T. Fennell, Jr., Amilite Corporate, 666 Old Country Road, Garden City, NY 11530; Mr. Edward T. Fennell Jr. Amilite Corporate 666 Old Country Road Garden City NY 11530; Dear Mr. Fennell: Thank you for your letter of July 30, 1986, concerning the markin requirements of Standard No. 205, *Glazing Materials*. You explained that your company represents several glazing manufacturers that make windshields. You said that your company sometimes receives orders from other companies asking to have a windshield made for them with their own corporate logo marked on the windshield. You asked if a company can, with the permission of the other company, mark a windshield with the other company's logo and its own DOT identification number. As discussed below, such a practice is permissible.; Section 6 of Standard No. 205 sets forth the certification and markin requirements for glazing materials. Section 6.1 requires a prime glazing manufacturer to mark each item of glazing material in accordance with section 6 of American National Standard 'Safety Code for Safety Glazing Materials for Glazing Motor Vehicles Operating on Land Highways,' Z-26.1-1977, January 26, 1977, as supplemented by Z26.1a, July 3, 1980 (ANS Z-26). One of the requirements of S6 of ANS Z-26 is that a manufacturer mark its glazing with its own 'distinctive designation or trademark.' In addition to those requirements, S6.2 of Standard No. 205 requires a prime glazing manufacturer to mark each item of glazing material designed to be used in a specific vehicle with the symbol 'DOT' and a manufacturer code mark assigned by this agency. The standard defines a prime glazing manufacturer as 'one who fabricates, laminates, or tempers the glazing material.'; One reason for the marking requirements of Standard No. 205 is to ai the agency in identifying the actual manufacturer of the glazing for the purpose of defect and noncompliance recall campaigns. Since, in the situation you described, the prime glazing manufacturer will be placing its own DOT code mark on the glazing, the agency's ability to identify easily and accurately the manufacturer of the glazing will not be impaired. Therefore, we would not consider the use of another manufacturer's logo on the glazing to be a violation of the standard as long as the prime glazing manufacturer has marked the glazing with its own DOT code mark.; If you have any further questions, please let me know. Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam1790OpenMr. Berkley C. Sweet, Executive Vice President, Truck Body and Equipment Association, 5530 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 1220, Washington, DC 20015; Mr. Berkley C. Sweet Executive Vice President Truck Body and Equipment Association 5530 Wisconsin Avenue Suite 1220 Washington DC 20015; Dear Mr. Sweet: This is in response to your petition of January 31, 1975, in which yo requested relief from the requirements of Standard No. 121 as it applies to final-stage manufacturers. Your petition stated that the incomplete vehicle manufacturers have not furnished advance information on the limits of the final body configurations imposed by Standard 121, in time for final-stage manufacturers to design and prepare to manufacture conforming bodies after the standard goes into effect on March 1.; The NHTSA recognizes the difficulties posed by this lack of informatio for final-stage manufacturers. Of course, completed vehicles are required to conform only to standards in effect on the date of completion of the chassis, so that the problem does not materialize until chassis completed on or after March 1 begin to be received and worked on by the final-stage manufacturers. On the other hand, Standard 121 probably will require redesign of some body configurations in order to remain within the limits set by the chassis manufacturers.; We do not believe that a delay in the application of Standard 121 t multistage vehicles would be advisable. As you know, the agency did consider postponing the standard in December, and decided against it based partly on information indicating that such a last-minute delay would be disruptive and wasteful. The conclusion would be even more valid today. Since the standard applies only to completed vehicles, it could not be suspended with respect to completed vehicles with the chassis still required to comply. Even if this were possible, it might cause anomalous and even hazardous results, since the final-stage manufacturers could disregard any design cautions of the chassis manufacturers, and could remove or disable portions of the chassis brake systems. Furthermore, even a complete delay in the standard with respect to the classes of vehicles with which you are concerned would probably not accomplish your purposes, since the chassis manufacturers could not be expected to produce chassis conforming to the standard, with accompanying documentation, during the period of delay.; For these reasons, your petition for delay of Standard 121 is denied You and your members may be assured that, within the limits of the law, this agency will be understanding in its approach to problems experienced by final-stage manufacturers as they bring their vehicles into conformity with the new standard.; Sincerely, Robert L. Carter, Associate Administrator, Motor Vehicl Programs; |
|
ID: aiam5556OpenK. Howard Sharp, Esq. Arnason Law Office P.O. Box 5296 Grand Forks, ND 58206-5296; K. Howard Sharp Esq. Arnason Law Office P.O. Box 5296 Grand Forks ND 58206-5296; "Dear Mr. Sharp: We have received your letter of May 12, 1995 requesting an interpretation of Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 on behalf of your client, NYTAF Industries. You are concerned that installation of a NYTAF lighting system on the rear of trailers might be considered to impair the effectiveness of the required rear lighting equipment within the meaning of paragraph S5.1.3. The NYTAF Auxiliary Rear Lighting System NYTAF has developed 'an auxiliary signaling system for heavy duty vehicles' which 'displays a verbal message appropriate to the particular potential hazard.' According to Exhibit A of your letter, a draft information brochure, the specific words displayed are: 'Wide Turn', 'Braking', 'Wide Load', 'Caution', 'Help', 'Backing', and 'Long Load'. In addition, right and left facing arrowheads indicate the direction of turning. Drivers cannot alter these messages or program the system to accept personal messages. The brochure depicts the message unit 'on the rear of the trailer frame directly below the trailer body in the center putting the display panel on approximately the same horizontal plane as the tail lights and brake lights.' Words are provided by light-emitting diodes (L.E.D.). According to your letter, the L.E.D. display 'is somewhat more intense than existing brake lights, turn and tail lamps.' Exhibit B 'Operation Summary' explains how the system operates with respect to each message, e.g., 'Braking' is 'activated and illuminated in conjunction with brake lights.' Applicable Requirement of Standard No. 108 Paragraph S5.1.3 of Standard No. 108 states that 'No additional lamp, reflective device or other motor vehicle equipment shall be installed before first purchase of a vehicle in good faith for other than resale that impairs the effectiveness of lighting equipment required by Standard No. 108 .' Prior Interpretations of S5.1.3 Relating to Message Boards In the past, the agency has advised that the determination of impairment is initially made by the manufacturer of the motor vehicle on which the supplementary equipment is installed, when it certifies that the vehicle complies with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. Unless that determination is clearly erroneous, NHTSA will not question it. Thus, NHTSA's interpretations are generally cautionary in tone rather than prohibitive. I enclose copies of two interpretations relating to message boards intended for the rear parcel shelves of passenger cars. The first is a letter of August 17, 1989, to Alan S. Eldahr ('Eldahr'). The relevant language of Eldahr is that a rear window message board 'sending messages unrelated to vehicle stops, could confuse and distract a driver following, and in that sense impair the effectiveness of the center lamp.' The second is a letter dated August 13, 1993, to Kenneth E. Ross ('Ross'). The Ross letter discusses the relation of message boards to the aftermarket, as well as the notification and remedy obligations which would fall upon NYTAF as a manufacturer of automotive accessory equipment. Relationship of Eldahr to NYTAF Eldahr indicates that there is less possibility of impairment existing if the message visible to a following driver is related to the lamp function that occurs simultaneously, as happens, for example in the NYTAF system, when stop lamp activation is accompanied by the word 'Braking.' We suggest that vehicle manufacturers installing the NYTAF system follow this guideline in their determinations of whether impairment exists. NYTAF might also wish to reconsider the intensity of the L.E.D. display which you say is 'more' than that of the existing rear lighting equipment, especially as it may affect reaction to the stop signal. The intensity should not be so great as to divert driver attention to the message rather than to the stop signal. There are several areas of Exhibit B 'Operation Summary' which require more specific comment. 'Caution' is activated in conjunction with the hazard warning system. Standard No. 108 requires these systems to simultaneously flash all turn signal lamps, and not sequentially as Exhibit B states. Exhibit B should be corrected to reflect this if it is to be distributed publicly, as we do not understand that the NYTAF system is intended to create sequential flashing of turn signals when operated in the hazard signal mode. The sole explanation of 'Help' is that it is to be activated manually. In our view, a flashing 'Help' while the trailer is in motion would be more likely to impair rear lighting equipment than if it is operable only when the trailer is at rest. In addition, Exhibit B does not indicate whether the 'Help' message is overridden by other messages when related lighting systems are activated. We are unsure of the purpose of 'Clearance Marker' which is operated 'in conjunction with parking lights.' Standard No. 108 does not require truck tractors to be equipped with parking lamps. We believe that you meant taillamps. We do not view this lamp as having an impairing effect upon the taillamps. The name of the lamp is somewhat misleading, as it would be mounted at the center of a vehicle whereas a 'clearance lamp' is intended to indicate a vehicle's overall width. Additionally, on certain trailer designs the three identification lamps are mounted around the vertical centerline in the same location in which you have stated the NYTAF system will be mounted. With respect to the close proximity of the two lighting systems, we believe that the brightness of the NYTAF device compared with that of the identification lamps could impair their ability to signal the presence of a large vehicle in the roadway ahead, the intended function of these lamps. Finally, we note that the color red would indicate a backing function. Although trailers are not required to have backup lamps, Standard No. 108 specifies that the color white shall be used for backup lamps, and we believe that the public has come to associate an activated white lamp on the rear of a vehicle as indicating that the vehicle is in reverse gear. Your client may wish to reevaluate this function in light of possible liability concerns. We hope that these guidelines will be helpful to NYTAF. If you have any further questions, Taylor Vinson will again be happy to answer them (202-366- 5263). Sincerely, John Womack Acting Chief Counsel 2 Enclosures"; |
|
ID: aiam5225OpenMr. Calin Moldovean Vehicle Technology Engineer TUV America, Inc. 5 Cherry Hill Drive Danvers, MA 01923; Mr. Calin Moldovean Vehicle Technology Engineer TUV America Inc. 5 Cherry Hill Drive Danvers MA 01923; "Dear Mr. Moldovean: This responds to your inquiry asking about ho this agency's regulations would apply to the introduction into the United States of a new 'aftermarket' gas cap. I am pleased to have this opportunity to explain our regulations to you. I am also enclosing a copy of a fact sheet entitled 'Information for New Manufacturers of Motor Vehicles and Motor Vehicle Equipment.' By way of background information, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is authorized to issue Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards that set performance requirements for new motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment. NHTSA is not authorized to certify or approve motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment for compliance with the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. Instead, under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, each manufacturer of a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment is responsible for certifying that its products meet all applicable safety standards. There is currently no Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard that is directly applicable to a replacement gas cap. Nevertheless, you should be aware of Safety Standard No. 301, Fuel System Integrity, which may be relevant to the product in question. Standard No. 301 applies only to new motor vehicles and specifies performance requirements that must be met by the fuel system as a whole following crash tests. The standard does not apply to individual components of a fuel system or to aftermarket equipment for use on fuel systems. Although Standard No. 301 would not directly apply to a replacement gas cap, there are responsibilities under Federal law of which you should be aware. Manufacturers of motor vehicle equipment, which includes gas caps, are subject to the requirements in sections 151-159 of the Safety Act concerning the recall and remedy of products with defects relating to motor vehicle safety. In addition, there are prohibitions against certain modifications of new and used vehicles. Section 108(a)(2)(A) of the Safety Act specifies that no manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business shall knowingly render inoperative any device or element of design installed on or in a new or used motor vehicle in compliance with any applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard. Therefore, no person in any of the aforementioned categories may place the gas cap on a motor vehicle if by so doing the vehicle's compliance with Standard No. 301 were negatively affected. Whether your gas cap could be installed on a vehicle by a person in one of those categories without taking the vehicle out of compliance with Standard No. 301 or any other applicable Federal safety standard is a determination that must be made by the entity making the installation. Please note that the prohibition of 108(a)(2)(A) does not apply to individual vehicle owners who alter their own vehicles. Thus, under Federal law, a vehicle owner may install or remove any item of motor vehicle equipment regardless of its effect on compliance with the Federal safety standards. However, the agency encourages vehicle owners not to remove or otherwise tamper with vehicle safety equipment if the modification would degrade the vehicle's safety. We suggest that you also contact the Environmental Protection Agency to see whether EPA has any type of emissions standard that might affect you as the manufacturer of a gas cap. The general telephone number for EPA is (202) 382- 2090. I hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions about NHTSA's safety standards, please feel free to contact Marvin Shaw of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, John Womack Acting Chief Counsel Enclosure"; |
|
ID: aiam5624OpenMr. Curt Stiede BICS Manufacturing P.O. Box 2424 Columbia Falls, MT 59912; Mr. Curt Stiede BICS Manufacturing P.O. Box 2424 Columbia Falls MT 59912; "Dear Mr. Stiede: This responds to your letter to Walter Myers of m staff, and to subsequent telephone conversations with Mr. Myers, about this agency's standards for the product you manufacture. At Mr. Myers' request, you provided detailed schematics of your product and several pictures of it connected to various types of towed vehicles. It appears from these that the product is a trailer converter dolly. You stated that your product is intended as a towing device for a variety of trailers, such as 'gooseneck flatbed, equipment, utility, farm equipment, horse trailers, along with 5th wheel recreational vehicles.' You further stated that it has a combined load range of 3,500 to 15,000 pounds, depending on the trailer weight and engine power of the towing vehicle. You stated that there may be some state restrictions applicable to your trailer dolly, and suggested that some Federal regulations may have to be amended to address such a vehicle. By way of background information, this agency has the authority under Federal law to issue Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS) and related regulations applicable to new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. Vehicle and equipment manufacturers are responsible for 'self- certifying' that their products comply with all applicable FMVSSs. They must also ensure that their products are free of safety-related defects. Once the vehicle or equipment is sold to the first retail customer, the product is no longer subject to the FMVSSs. The first question you raise is whether your trailer dolly is a 'motor vehicle.' The answer is yes. 'Motor vehicle' is defined in 49 U.S. Code (U.S.C.) 30102 as: A vehicle driven or drawn by mechanical power and manufactured primarily for use on public streets, roads, and highways, but does not include a vehicle operated only on a rail line. Your trailer dolly clearly meets the definition of a motor vehicle since the dolly is designed to be drawn by mechanical power on the streets, roads, and highways. It is referred to in NHTSA regulations (49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), section 571.3) as a 'trailer converter dolly,' which is defined as 'a trailer chassis equipped with one or more axles, a lower half of a fifth wheel and a drawbar.' We note that a trailer converter dolly, although fabricated on a trailer chassis, is not a trailer. It is a motor vehicle designed to tow another vehicle rather than carry persons or property itself. The following standards and regulations apply to your manufacture of the trailer converter dolly. As a manufacturer of a motor vehicle, you must submit certain identifying information to NHTSA in accordance with 49 CFR Part 566, Manufacturer Identification (copy enclosed). You must also ensure that a dolly with a hydraulic braking system must meet FMVSS No. 116, Motor vehicle brake fluids (49 CFR 571.116). You must also comply with the requirements of 49 CFR Parts 567, Certification. In addition, in the event that you or NHTSA determines that your product contains a safety-related defect, you would be responsible for notifying purchasers of the defective equipment and remedying the problem free of charge. The enclosed information sheet briefly describes those responsibilities. As Mr. Myers discussed with you, since your trailer dolly is designed and intended for interstate marketing and transport, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) may have requirements applicable to your product. Accordingly, I will forward a copy of your letter to Mr. James Scapellato, Director, Office of Motor Carrier Research and Standards, FHWA, this address, for further response. In the alternative, you may contact Mr. Larry Minor of Mr. Scapellato's staff at this address or at (202) 366-4012 to discuss pertinent FHWA regulations. Finally, you mentioned in your letter that some states may have certain restrictions or requirements for your trailer dolly. NHTSA does not have information on those state requirements. However, you may be able to obtain such information from: American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators 4200 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 1000 Arlington, VA 22203 (703) 522-4200 I hope this information is helpful to you. Should you have any further questions or seek additional information, please feel free to contact Mr. Myers at this address or at (202) 366-2992, or by fax at (202) 366-3820. Sincerely, John Womack Acting 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.