NHTSA Interpretation File Search Overview Search Tool Request an Interpretation

NHTSA Interpretation File Search

Overview

NHTSA's Chief Counsel interprets the statutes that the agency administers and the standards and regulations that it issues. Members of the public may submit requests for interpretation, and the Chief Counsel will respond with a letter of interpretation. These interpretation letters look at the particular facts presented in the question and explain the agency’s opinion on how the law applies given those facts. These letters of interpretation are guidance documents. They do not have the force and effect of law and are not meant to bind the public in any way. They are intended only to provide information to the public regarding existing requirements under the law or agency policies.

Understanding NHTSA’s Online Interpretation Files

NHTSA makes its letters of interpretation available to the public on this webpage.

An interpretation letter represents the opinion of the Chief Counsel based on the facts of individual cases at the time the letter was written. While these letters may be helpful in determining how the agency might answer a question that another person has if that question is similar to a previously considered question, do not assume that a prior interpretation will necessarily apply to your situation.

Your facts may be sufficiently different from those presented in prior interpretations, such that the agency's answer to you might be different from the answer in the prior interpretation letter;
Your situation may be completely new to the agency and not addressed in an existing interpretation letter;
The agency's safety standards or regulations may have changed since the prior interpretation letter was written so that the agency's prior interpretation no longer applies; or
Some combination of the above, or other, factors.

Searching NHTSA’s Online Interpretation Files

Before beginning a search, it’s important to understand how this online search works. Below we provide some examples of searches you can run. In some cases, the search results may include words similar to what you searched because it utilizes a fuzzy search algorithm.

Single word search

Example: car
Result: Any document containing that word.

Multiple word search

Example: car seat requirements
Result: Any document containing any of these words.

Connector word search

Example: car AND seat AND requirements
Result: Any document containing all of these words.

Note: Search operators such as AND or OR must be in all capital letters.

Phrase in double quotes

Example: "headlamp function"
Result: Any document with that phrase.

Conjunctive search

Example: functionally AND minima
Result: Any document with both of those words.

Wildcard

Example: headl*
Result: Any document with a word beginning with those letters (e.g., headlamp, headlight, headlamps).

Example: no*compl*
Result: Any document beginning with the letters “no” followed by the letters “compl” (e.g., noncompliance, non-complying).

Not

Example: headlamp NOT crash
Result: Any document containing the word “headlamp” and not the word “crash.”

Complex searches

You can combine search operators to write more targeted searches.

Note: The database does not currently support phrase searches with wildcards (e.g., “make* inoperative”).

Example: Headl* AND (supplement* OR auxiliary OR impair*)
Result: Any document containing words that are variants of “headlamp” (headlamp, headlights, etc.) and also containing a variant of “supplement” (supplement, supplemental, etc.) or “impair” (impair, impairment, etc.) or the word “auxiliary.”

Search Tool

NHTSA's Interpretation Files Search

Displaying 7471 - 7480 of 16490

Interpretations	Date

ID: aiam2201 Open Mr. Earl C. Sievers, Finance Manager, Layton Paving Equipment Specialists, 4725 Turner Road, Salem, Oregon 97302; Mr. Earl C. Sievers Finance Manager Layton Paving Equipment Specialists 4725 Turner Road Salem Oregon 97302; Dear Mr. Sievers: This is in response to your letter of January 14, 1976, asking whethe your company's paver product must comply with the requirements of Federal motor vehicle safety standards and regulations, particularly Standards No. 119 and 120.; The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) issue safety standards and regulations for 'motor vehicles.' Section 102(3) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act defines a motor vehicle as a vehicle 'manufactured primarily for use on the public streets, roads, and highways.' Thus, a motor vehicle is a vehicle which the manufacturer expects will use public highways as part of its intended function. The primary Function of some vehicles is of a mobile, work-performing nature, and, as such, their manufacturer contemplates a primary use of the highway. Mobile cranes, rigs, and towed equipment such as chippers and pull-type street sweepers that travel at a normal highway speed are examples in this area. These motor vehicles qualify as trucks or trailers. As such they are subject to the Federal motor vehicle safety standards and regulations. On the basis of the information you have sent us your company's towed paver appears to be in this category of vehicles, and would therefore be considered a 'motor vehicle.'; There are some vehicles which are excepted from the motor vehicl classification despite their use on the highway. Highway maintenance and construction equipment, lane strippers, self-propelled asphalt pavers, and other vehicles whose maximum speed does not exceed 20 mph and whose abnormal configuration distinguished them from the traffic flow are not considered motor vehicles. Your company's paver would not appear to qualify in this category of vehicles since, as a towed paver, it would travel at a speed greater than 20 mph, at least when moving between job sites.; Consequently, your product must comply with the requirements of th Federal standards and regulations. Standard No. 119, New Pneumatic Tires for Vehicles Other than Passenger Cars, does not directly impose any duty on you, because it applies to tires rather than vehicles. However, the NHTSA has recently issued Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 120, Tire Selection and Rims for Vehicles Other Than Passenger Cars (copy enclosed). This standard does require, effective September 1, 1976, that your vehicles be equipped with tires that conform to Standard No. 119 and are of sufficient load rating.; In addition to compliance with the safety standards and regulations you must ensure that your product does not contain a defect relating to motor vehicle safety. Vehicles containing such defects are subject to the notification, remedy, and civil penalty provisions of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act. For example, a vehicle equipped with tires that are designed for speed-restricted use would probably be considered to contain a safety-related defect if the vehicle is expected to travel at higher speeds.; Please contact us if we can be of any further assistance. Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel
ID: aiam4308 Open Mr. Paul Miller, Arizona Bus Sales, Inc., P.O. Box 21226, Phoenix, AZ 85036; Mr. Paul Miller Arizona Bus Sales Inc. P.O. Box 21226 Phoenix AZ 85036; Dear Mr. Miller: This responds to your April 14, 1987 letter to us asking about Federa requirements applicable to the sale of new school buses. You enclosed a copy of a bid from a school bus dealer offering to sell a 48-passenger activity bus to a school district. The bid describes options for changing the school bus paint and deleting 'school options.' You ask whether a bid with 'an option to modify paint, and delete school bus options' accords with our school bus regulations.; The answer to your question depends on the nature of the 'schoo options' which the bid makes nonobligatory. It is unclear from the bid whether the reference is to the school bus performance requirements mandated by our Federal motor vehicle safety standard, or to the way the school bus is painted and marked. If the 'school options' are the features required by Federal school bus safety standards, the answer to your question is no--i.e., the dealer may not sell a new school bus that fails to comply with those standards. On the other hand, Federal law does not prohibit school districts from changing the color or markings of their school buses. Instead, requirements for the identification of school buses are set by each State.; Our agency has two sets of regulations for school buses. The first set issued under the authority of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, applies to the manufacture and sale of new motor vehicles and includes our motor vehicle safety standards for school buses. Those standards set performance requirements that all new school buses must meet, including standards for passenger crash protection, emergency exits, rollover protection and fuel systems. The Safety Act requires manufacturers of school buses to certify that their vehicles comply with all applicable Federal school bus safety standards. The Act also requires school bus dealers to ensure that only complying school buses are sold. These requirements, set by Federal law, apply to each school bus manufacturer and seller.; A school bus dealer cannot elect whether to comply with thos requirements and choose to sell a new activity bus that does not comply with our school bus safety standards.; Our second set of school bus 'regulations,' issued under the Highwa Safety Act, include recommendations for identifying school buses. These recommendations are set forth in Highway Safety Program Standard No. 17, Pupil Transportation Safety (copy enclosed). While the 'standard' recommends that activity buses should be painted yellow and marked 'School Bus,' the decision to adopt its recommendations is made by each State. Therefore, questions you might have about activity bus identification should be addressed to your State officials.; I hope this information is helpful. Please contact me if you hav further questions.; Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones, Chief Counsel
ID: aiam3685 Open The Honorable Charles H. Percy, United States Senate, Washington, DC 20510; The Honorable Charles H. Percy United States Senate Washington DC 20510; Dear Senator Percy: This responds to your letter of April 11, 1983 (Ref. 3098500010 requesting information on behalf of your constituent, Mrs. D. Parutti. Mrs. Parutti is concerned about the growing practice of persons installing darkly tinted film on passenger car windows. She believes this is a dangerous practice because it prevents other drivers from seeing inside the vehicles. Following is a discussion of the implications under Federal law of installing these tinting films.; A Federal regulation already exists which, under certain circumstances precludes the practice referred to by Mrs. Parutti. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has the authority to govern the manufacture of new motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment. Pursuant to the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, we have promulgated Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 205, Glazing Materials, which specifies performance and location requirements for glazing used in vehicles. These requirements include specifications for minimum levels of light transmittance (70 percent in areas requisite for driving visibility, which includes all windows in passenger cars) and abrasion resistance. This specification for light transmittance precludes darkly-tinted windows in new automobiles.; The agency has stated in past interpretations that solar films such a the type referred to in Mrs. Parutti's letter are not glazing materials themselves, and would not have to comply with Standard No. 205. However, installation of such films on new motor vehicles would be prohibited if the vehicle glazing no longer complied with the light transmittance or abrasion requirements of the standard. If a vehicle manufacturer or a dealer places the film on glazing in a vehicle prior to sale of the vehicle, that manufacturer or dealer has to certify that the glazing continues to be in compliance with the requirements of Standard No. 205. Section 108(a)(1) prohibits any person from offering for sale or selling any motor vehicle or equipment that fails to comply with applicable safety standards.; After a new vehicle has been sold to the consumer, he may alter hi vehicle as he pleases, so long as he adheres to all State requirements. Under Federal law, the owner could install the tinting film on glazing in his vehicle whether or not such installation adversely affected the light transmittance and abrasion resistance of his vehicle's glazing. It should be noted, however, that section 108(a)(2)(A) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act provides 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 motor vehicle in compliance with an applicable motor vehicle safety standard. Render inoperative' means to remove, disconnect or degrade the performance of a system or element of design installed pursuant to the Federal safety standards. Thus, none of those persons may knowingly install a solar film on a vehicle for its owner if that act would render inoperative the light transmittance or abrasion resistance of the vehicle glazing. Whether this would be the case would have to be determined by the person making the installation. Violation of this section can result in Federal civil penalties up to $1,000 for each violation.; The individual States must govern the operational use of vehicles b their owners since the agency does not have authority in this area. Thus, it would be up to the States to preclude owners from applying films or one-way glass on their own vehicles. Mrs. Parutti may wish to contact the National Committee on Uniform Traffic Laws (555 Clark Street, Evanston, Illinois 60204) to find out which States have laws that would preclude owners from placing solar film on their automobile windows.; Please contact Hugh Oates of my staff if you have any further question (202- 426-2992).; Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel
ID: aiam5188 Open Mr. Ben F. Barrett Associate Director The Legislative Research Department 300 West Tenth Street, Room 545-N Topeka, KS 66612-1504; Mr. Ben F. Barrett Associate Director The Legislative Research Department 300 West Tenth Street Room 545-N Topeka KS 66612-1504; "Dear Mr. Barrett: This responds to your letter of June 7, 1993, i which you stated that a Kansas school district wants to use 15-passenger buses to transport school children, but does not want to cause those buses to meet the additional safety requirements applicable to school buses. You also stated that although the state definition of a school bus is the same as the Federal definition, it has been suggested that the state amend that definition to exclude 15-passenger vehicles. You asked our comments on the consequences of such legislation, including any sanctions, liability, or other issues that could result. The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, 15 U.S.C. 1381, et seq. (Safety Act), defines a school bus as a passenger motor vehicle 'designed to carry more than 10 passengers in addition to the driver, and which . . . is likely to be significantly used for the purpose of transporting primary, preprimary, or secondary school students to or from such schools or events related to such schools.' This agency defines a bus as a motor vehicle 'designed for carrying more than 10 persons,' and a school bus is further defined as a bus that is sold 'for purposes that include carrying students to and from school or related events.' Thus, the 15-passenger buses to which you referred would clearly fall within the Federal definition of 'school bus.' The Safety Act authorizes this agency to issue Federal motor vehicle safety standards which regulate the manufacture and sale of new motor vehicles. In the case of school buses, it is a violation of Federal law for any person to sell a new school bus that is not certified as complying with all applicable Federal safety standards. The onus is on the seller to ascertain the intended use of the new vehicle, and the seller is subject to substantial penalties for knowingly selling a noncomplying school bus, including civil fines and injunctive sanctions. Section 103(d) of the Safety Act, 15 U.S.C. 1392(d) provides that no state shall maintain in effect any standard regulating an aspect of performance that is regulated by a Federal safety standard unless the state standard is identical to the Federal standard. If it is not, the Federal standard preempts the state standard unless the state standard imposes a higher level of safety and is applicable only to vehicles acquired solely for the state's own use. Therefore, even if the State of Kansas redefines a school bus to exempt 15- passenger buses, Federal law remains applicable and any new school bus sold in Kansas must comply with all applicable Federal safety standards, state law notwithstanding. The purchaser or user of the vehicle is not under the same legal constraints as the seller. Since Federal law applies only to the manufacture and sale of a new vehicle, a school may use any vehicle it chooses to transport its students, whether or not the vehicle meets Federal safety standards. Further, there is no Federal requirement that the state or school district retrofit a vehicle to bring it into compliance with Federal standards. That is because once that vehicle has been sold new to the first customer, the use of that vehicle becomes subject to state law. Although not required by Federal law, this agency strongly recommends that vehicles meeting Federal school bus safety standards be used to transport school children. In that connection, please find enclosed for your information a copy of Highway Safety Program Guideline No. 17, Pupil Transportation Safety. This publication was issued under the authority of the Highway Safety Act of 1966, 23 U.S.C. 401, et seq., which authorizes this agency to issue nonbinding guidelines to which states may refer in developing their own highway safety programs. Guideline 17, jointly issued by this agency and the Federal Highway Administration, provides recommendations to the states on various operational aspects of their school bus and pupil transportation safety programs. Specifically, the Guideline recommends, among other things, that any vehicle designed to carry more than 10 persons and which is used as a school bus comply with all Federal safety standards applicable to school buses at the time the vehicle was manufactured. Finally, we would note that the use of vehicles that do not comply with Federal school bus safety standards to transport school children could result in increased liability in the event of an accident. Therefore, school districts should consult their attorneys and/or insurance carriers for advice on that issue. We hope this information is helpful to you. Should you have any further questions regarding this matter, please feel free to contact Walter Myers of my staff at this address or at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, John Womack Acting Chief Counsel Enclosure";
ID: aiam0169 Open Mr. H.J. Hempel, Vice President, Interamerican Motor Corporation, 14721 Calvert Street, Van Nuys, California 91401; Mr. H.J. Hempel Vice President Interamerican Motor Corporation 14721 Calvert Street Van Nuys California 91401; Dear Mr. Hempel: This is in reply to your letter of May 27 in which you reques information necessary to obtain a D.O.T. number and import 'Pneumant' tires. The information furnished below concerns only those requirements of the Department of Transportation.; Regulations promulgated pursuant to Section 110(e) of National Traffi and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 (15 U.S.C. S1391 et seq., 1399(e)) require any manufacturer, assembler, or importer of a motor vehicle before offering a motor Vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment for importation into the United States to designate a permanent resident of the United States as his agent upon whom service of all processes, notices, orders, decisions, and requirements may be made.; The manufacturer of 'Pneumant' tires is therefore required to designat an agent as prescribed in the regulations (49 C.F.R. S351.45) and I enclose a copy of them, as well as a copy of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, for your information.; Please note that these regulations require the designation to be mad in a specific manner. The designation should contain the following:; >>>(1) a certification by the signer of the designation that it i binding on the manufacturer of 'Pneumant' tires under the laws, corporate by-laws, or other requirements governing the making of the designation by the manufacturer of 'Pneumant' tires at the place and time where it is made,; (2) the full legal name, principal place of business, and mailin address of the manufacturer of 'Pneumant' tires,; (3) trade names, or other designations of origin of the products of th manufacturer of 'Pneumant' tires which do not bear its legal name,; (4) a provision that the designation remains in effect until withdraw or replaced by the manufacturer of 'Pneumant' Tires,; (5) a declaration of acceptance duly signed by the designated agent and; (6) the full legal name and mailing address of the designatio agent.<<<; In addition, the designation should be signed by one with authority t appoint the agent for the manufacturer of 'Pneumant' tires, and this authority should be so indicated.; In your letter you state that it is your understanding that 'all tire used in this Country are subject to approval which will be given in form of a D.O.T. number.' This is incorrect. There is no provision in the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act which provides that motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment are to be approved by the United States Government. On the contrary, under this Act the manufacturer o(sic) the motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment bears the responsibility for complying with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards promulgated pursuant to the Act, and, pursuant to Section 114 of the Act for certifying that his product so complies. In the case of tires, the applicable standard is Standard No. 109 and I enclose a copy of it with applicable amendments for your reference. Standard No. 109 contains requirements for new pneumatic tires for passenger cars, and in order to meet the requirements of the Act, 'Pneumant' tires must comply with Standard No. 109. Furthermore, the manufacturer of these tires must certify in the prescribed manner that such tires so comply.; The 'D.O.T. number' to which you refer is required by Section 201 o the Act and the labelling section (S.4.3 and 'Figure 1') of Standard No. 109. As specified in the standard, the letters 'D.O.T.', when permanently molded into or onto the tire so that the tire is conspicuously labelled on both sidewalls, indicate pursuant to S.4.3(1) and Figure 1 of Standard No. 109, that the tire has been manufactured to conform to applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. This satisfies the certification requirement referred to above.; The code mark number is included as part of the label (as illustrate in Figure 1) pursuant to Section 201 of the Act, when the tire contains a brand name other than the name of the manufacturer, and is included for the purpose of permitting the seller of the tire to identify the manufacturer to the purchaser upon his request.; A code mark number con be obtained from the Department o Transportation by any tire manufacturer on request, but is only necessary when a name other than the manufacturer's is used on the tire. Such a request should be directed to Secretary of Transportation, Attention: Motor Vehicle Safety Performance Service, National Highway Safety Bureau, Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C. 20591. Issuance of the code mark number by the Department of Transportation in no way indicates approval by the government that tires manufactured by the one to whom it is issued meet Federal requirements. As indicated above, the code mark number is to be used purely for labeling purposes.; I am also enclosing a copy of Federal Highway Administration Impor Regulations, (19 C.F.R. S12.80) which are promulgated jointly with the Treasury Department pursuant to Section 108(b) (3) of the Act for your information.; Should you have further questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Lawrence R. Schneider,Acting Assistant Chief Counsel fo Regulations;
ID: aiam5473 Open Mr. Ed Irvine Midwest Conservation Systems P.O. Box 397 Silver Lake, KS 66539; Mr. Ed Irvine Midwest Conservation Systems P.O. Box 397 Silver Lake KS 66539; Dear Mr. Irvine: This responds to your letter asking whether a newl manufactured commercial utility trailer must be equipped with an emergency breakaway system. You state that your customer wishes to purchase a trailer without the battery powered breakaway system that comes with the trailer. Instead, you would like to install your solar energized breakaway system. In a December 7, 1994 telephone conversation with Mr. Marvin Shaw of my staff, you stated that the trailers in question are typically small utility trailers that do not rely on the use of air pressure. I am pleased to have this opportunity to explain the applicable requirements issued by this agency, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). You may also wish to request an interpretation of 49 CFR 393.43 from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), which is the agency that issued that regulation. By way of background information, NHTSA and FHWA are both part of the United States Department of Transportation. Each agency has the authority to issue regulations related to your question. NHTSA, which regulates newly manufactured vehicles, has the authority to issue Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS) which apply to new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. FHWA, which regulates the use of commercial motor vehicles, has the authority to issue Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs), which are applicable to commercial motor vehicles and their operators. We have referred your letter to the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) Office of Motor Carrier Standards, since that agency issued 49 CFR 393.43. While NHTSA has the authority to issue FMVSSs, the agency has not issued any FMVSS that would directly affect the braking performance of a small utility trailer, unless the trailer relies on air pressure. Therefore, if the trailers in question are not air braked vehicles, then you would not need to certify that such a trailer's braking performance complies with an FMVSS, since no applicable FMVSS exists. Please note that your solar energized trailer breakaway system would be considered 'motor vehicle equipment' within the meaning of the statute administered by NHTSA. If this system 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. I hope this information is helpful. If you have any questions about NHTSA's safety standards, please feel free to contact Marvin Shaw at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992. If you wish to contact someone in the FHWA's Office of Chief Counsel concerning the motor carrier standards, please call Charles Medalen at (202) 366-1354. Sincerely, Philip R. Recht Chief Counsel;
ID: aiam3829 Open Mr. Joel S. Premack, Research and Development Laboratories, U.S. Postal Service, Rockville, MD 20852-8101; Mr. Joel S. Premack Research and Development Laboratories U.S. Postal Service Rockville MD 20852-8101; Dear Mr. Premack: This responds to your March 7, 1984 letter to Roger Fairchild of thi office regarding Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 111, Rearview Mirrors. In particular, you asked whether the covering of the rear and rear-side windows on Postal Service Vehicles would be consistent with the requirements of FMVSS 111.; FMVSS 111 (copy enclosed) establishes requirements regarding rearvie mirror systems on new motor vehicles. New Postal Service vehicles would be required to employ one of three optional mirror systems. The first system is a system permitted for use on passenger cars, and includes an inside rearview mirror with a specified field of view and a plane, driver's side exterior mirror also having a specified field of view. The second permissible system is also a passenger car system and is identical to the first system, except that the inside mirror need not provide the specified field of view and an additional passenger side plane or convex rearview mirror must be provided to compensate for the more restricted field of view of the inside mirror. The third system has two plane mirrors of 19.5 square inches reflective surface area each, one mounted on each side of the vehicle.; Based on the materials you provided with your letter, it appears tha Postal Service DJ-5G Models employ the second system described above. In that case, further reduction of the field of view of the inside rearview mirror would not affect compliance with our standard, since an additional passenger side mirror is provided.; If the proposed covering of the rear windows is to be accomplished as modification to vehicles already delivered to the Postal Service, these modifications may not be subject to FMVSS 111 at all. Modifications to vehicles must be consistent with safety standards only to the extent those modification are performed by a vehicle manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or private motor vehicle repair business which knowingly renders inoperative safety equipment installed on the vehicle. See 15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(2)(A). Thus, if the window covering is done by the Postal Service itself, FMVSS requirements are not applicable.; If you have any further questions on this matter, please feel free t contact us.; Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel
ID: aiam5368 Open Mr. Norman Duncan President Study-Tech, Inc. 603 South River Road des Plaines, IL 60016; Mr. Norman Duncan President Study-Tech Inc. 603 South River Road des Plaines IL 60016; "Dear Mr. Duncan: The Federal Highway Administration has forwarded you letter of March 10, 1994, for reply. You request 'an interpretation of the existing vehicle code as it may apply to a safety- warning system that our corporation has devised.' Our agency issues the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards that apply to new motor vehicles, pursuant to the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act ('the Act'). Our Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment is the regulation that governs the performance of lighting equipment that is required on new motor vehicles and determines whether optional lighting equipment is acceptable. As you have described it, the 'Early-Warning Slow Down Safety Light' will automatically be activated when a vehicle decelerates. The system will operate through the stop lamps, but, alternatively, it could employ separate lamps mounted on the rear deck. Your system is similar to others which have been suggested over the years, and we therefore do not feel that a demonstration is necessary as you have offered. With respect to operation of your system through the stop lamps, as you will see from our letter of October 22, 1993, to Dr. Cehelnik, a copy of which I have enclosed, automatic activation of the stop lamps is not permitted by Standard No. 108 which allows the stop lamps to operate only when the brake pedal is applied. As for operation of your system through a separate lamp system, paragraph S5.1.3 of Standard No. 108 permits supplementary lighting equipment provided that it does not impair the effectiveness of lighting equipment required by the standard. Were your separate warning system to utilize red lenses, we believe that it could impair the effectiveness of the required stop lamps by sending at times a false signal, not every deceleration is followed by braking, and the operation of your system when not followed by brake application activating the stop lamps could be confusing to a following driver. On the other hands, if your system utilized amber lenses, we believe that impairment would be unlikely to exist because the public associates this color with the need for caution. The Act itself governs acceptability of your system in the aftermarket (i.e., installed on vehicles in use). Section 108(a)(2)(A) prohibits manufacturers, dealers, distributors, and motor vehicle repair businesses from knowingly rendering inoperative, in whole or in part, any device or element of design installed in accordance with Standard No. 108 and all other safety standards. We interpret this where possible as equating inoperability with impairment. Thus, we would view installation of your system by the persons named above as violative of the Act if it operated through the stop lamp system or if it were a separate lamp system with red lenses. Even where a supplementary lighting system may be permitted under Federal laws and regulations, it remains subject to the laws of the individual states where the system will be operated. We are unable to advise you on State laws, and suggest that you write for an opinion to: American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, 4600 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Va. 22203. Sincerely, John Womack Acting Chief Counsel Enclosure";
ID: aiam2313 Open Mr. Charles N. Eblin, Service Director, City of Marion, 685 Delaware Avenue, Marion, OH 43302; Mr. Charles N. Eblin Service Director City of Marion 685 Delaware Avenue Marion OH 43302; Dear Mr. Eblin: This responds to your May 6, 1976, request for permission to remove th brake system from two trucks that were manufactured with brake systems conforming to the requirements of Standard No. 121, Air Brake Systems.; From the description of the problems you have encountered with th vehicles, I assume that you do not intend to remove the entire brake system, but only one or more antilock systems installed in satisfaction of the 'no lockup' requirement of S5.3.1 of Standard No. 121. Section 108(a)(2)(A) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. S 1397(a)(2)(A)) prohibits, with one exception, knowing disconnection of the antilock system by a manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or repair business. Your dealer's refusal to remove the devices is probably based on this prohibition.; A person that does not fall into these categories is not prohibite from disconnection of the systems. Other State or Federal requirements, such as those of the Bureau of Motor Carrier Safety for operation in interstate commerce, may prohibit disconnection. In any case, the NHTSA urges that you not disconnect safety devices without consulting the vehicle manufacturer with regard to the safety configuration of the vehicle.; Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Acting Chief Counsel
ID: aiam3987 Open Mr. Rod Nash, P.E., Corporate Engineering, Collins Industries, Inc., P.O. Box 58, Hutchinson, KS 67504-0058; Mr. Rod Nash P.E. Corporate Engineering Collins Industries Inc. P.O. Box 58 Hutchinson KS 67504-0058; Dear Mr. Nash: This responds to your May 20, 1985 letter to Mr. Francis Armstrong o the Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). Your letter has been referred to my office for reply.; You asked whether you are correct in certifying a van as a multipurpos passenger vehicle (MPV) if the van carries less than 10 passengers but has the lighting and identifying marks of a school bus. The answer to your question is yes.; I would like you to keep in mind that NHTSA has two sets o regulations, issued under different acts of Congress, which have a bearing on your situation. The first of these is the regulations for the manufacture and sale of new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle equipment, issued by us under the authority of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966. The second set of regulations is the highway safety program standards issued by us under the Highway Safety Act of 1966. The highway safety program standards cover a wide range of subjects and are consider for Federal funding of state highway safety programs. The yellow paint and black markings of school buses are features of school bus safety covered by the program standard for pupil transportation safety.; We promulgated the following definition of a MPV, as found in 49 CF S571.3, under the authority of the Vehicle Safety Act:; >>>'Multipurpose passenger vehicle' means a motor vehicle with motiv power, except a trailer, designed to carry 10 persons or less which is constructed either on a truck chassis or with special features for occasional off-road operation.<<<; You are thus correct in certifying a van as a MPV if it carries les than 11 persons, including the driver. This is the case even if the MPV has the yellow paint and black trim of a school bus. You must certify your MPV as meeting all motor vehicle safety standards applicable to MPV's. You may also voluntarily manufacture the MPV in compliance with the requirements of our school bus safety standards, as long as the vehicle continues to comply with our standards for MPV's.; New vans carrying 11 or more persons (i.e., 10 or more passengers) ar 'buses' under NHTSA's definition of a 'bus.' We define 'bus' as 'a motor vehicle with motive power, except a trailer, designed for carrying more than 10 persons' (49 CFR S571.3). Regardless of how they are painted or marked, new buses that are sold for purposes that include carrying school children must be certified as meeting our school bus safety standards.; You should also note that the color and other identifying features of school bus are aspects of school bus safety covered by Highway Safety Program Standard (HSPS) No. 17, Pupil Transportation Safety. Individual states have chosen to adopt some or all of the highway safety program standards issued by NHTSA for their own highway safety programs. A state's implementation of HSPS No. 17 would affect the operation and identification of school vehicles to the extent of its implementation of the standard's recommendations. A copy of the standard is enclosed for your information.; Please contact me if you have further questions. Sincerely, Jeffrey R. Miller, Chief Counsel

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.

Interpretations	Date

ID: aiam2201 Open Mr. Earl C. Sievers, Finance Manager, Layton Paving Equipment Specialists, 4725 Turner Road, Salem, Oregon 97302; Mr. Earl C. Sievers Finance Manager Layton Paving Equipment Specialists 4725 Turner Road Salem Oregon 97302; Dear Mr. Sievers: This is in response to your letter of January 14, 1976, asking whethe your company's paver product must comply with the requirements of Federal motor vehicle safety standards and regulations, particularly Standards No. 119 and 120.; The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) issue safety standards and regulations for 'motor vehicles.' Section 102(3) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act defines a motor vehicle as a vehicle 'manufactured primarily for use on the public streets, roads, and highways.' Thus, a motor vehicle is a vehicle which the manufacturer expects will use public highways as part of its intended function. The primary Function of some vehicles is of a mobile, work-performing nature, and, as such, their manufacturer contemplates a primary use of the highway. Mobile cranes, rigs, and towed equipment such as chippers and pull-type street sweepers that travel at a normal highway speed are examples in this area. These motor vehicles qualify as trucks or trailers. As such they are subject to the Federal motor vehicle safety standards and regulations. On the basis of the information you have sent us your company's towed paver appears to be in this category of vehicles, and would therefore be considered a 'motor vehicle.'; There are some vehicles which are excepted from the motor vehicl classification despite their use on the highway. Highway maintenance and construction equipment, lane strippers, self-propelled asphalt pavers, and other vehicles whose maximum speed does not exceed 20 mph and whose abnormal configuration distinguished them from the traffic flow are not considered motor vehicles. Your company's paver would not appear to qualify in this category of vehicles since, as a towed paver, it would travel at a speed greater than 20 mph, at least when moving between job sites.; Consequently, your product must comply with the requirements of th Federal standards and regulations. Standard No. 119, New Pneumatic Tires for Vehicles Other than Passenger Cars, does not directly impose any duty on you, because it applies to tires rather than vehicles. However, the NHTSA has recently issued Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 120, Tire Selection and Rims for Vehicles Other Than Passenger Cars (copy enclosed). This standard does require, effective September 1, 1976, that your vehicles be equipped with tires that conform to Standard No. 119 and are of sufficient load rating.; In addition to compliance with the safety standards and regulations you must ensure that your product does not contain a defect relating to motor vehicle safety. Vehicles containing such defects are subject to the notification, remedy, and civil penalty provisions of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act. For example, a vehicle equipped with tires that are designed for speed-restricted use would probably be considered to contain a safety-related defect if the vehicle is expected to travel at higher speeds.; Please contact us if we can be of any further assistance. Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel
ID: aiam4308 Open Mr. Paul Miller, Arizona Bus Sales, Inc., P.O. Box 21226, Phoenix, AZ 85036; Mr. Paul Miller Arizona Bus Sales Inc. P.O. Box 21226 Phoenix AZ 85036; Dear Mr. Miller: This responds to your April 14, 1987 letter to us asking about Federa requirements applicable to the sale of new school buses. You enclosed a copy of a bid from a school bus dealer offering to sell a 48-passenger activity bus to a school district. The bid describes options for changing the school bus paint and deleting 'school options.' You ask whether a bid with 'an option to modify paint, and delete school bus options' accords with our school bus regulations.; The answer to your question depends on the nature of the 'schoo options' which the bid makes nonobligatory. It is unclear from the bid whether the reference is to the school bus performance requirements mandated by our Federal motor vehicle safety standard, or to the way the school bus is painted and marked. If the 'school options' are the features required by Federal school bus safety standards, the answer to your question is no--i.e., the dealer may not sell a new school bus that fails to comply with those standards. On the other hand, Federal law does not prohibit school districts from changing the color or markings of their school buses. Instead, requirements for the identification of school buses are set by each State.; Our agency has two sets of regulations for school buses. The first set issued under the authority of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, applies to the manufacture and sale of new motor vehicles and includes our motor vehicle safety standards for school buses. Those standards set performance requirements that all new school buses must meet, including standards for passenger crash protection, emergency exits, rollover protection and fuel systems. The Safety Act requires manufacturers of school buses to certify that their vehicles comply with all applicable Federal school bus safety standards. The Act also requires school bus dealers to ensure that only complying school buses are sold. These requirements, set by Federal law, apply to each school bus manufacturer and seller.; A school bus dealer cannot elect whether to comply with thos requirements and choose to sell a new activity bus that does not comply with our school bus safety standards.; Our second set of school bus 'regulations,' issued under the Highwa Safety Act, include recommendations for identifying school buses. These recommendations are set forth in Highway Safety Program Standard No. 17, Pupil Transportation Safety (copy enclosed). While the 'standard' recommends that activity buses should be painted yellow and marked 'School Bus,' the decision to adopt its recommendations is made by each State. Therefore, questions you might have about activity bus identification should be addressed to your State officials.; I hope this information is helpful. Please contact me if you hav further questions.; Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones, Chief Counsel
ID: aiam3685 Open The Honorable Charles H. Percy, United States Senate, Washington, DC 20510; The Honorable Charles H. Percy United States Senate Washington DC 20510; Dear Senator Percy: This responds to your letter of April 11, 1983 (Ref. 3098500010 requesting information on behalf of your constituent, Mrs. D. Parutti. Mrs. Parutti is concerned about the growing practice of persons installing darkly tinted film on passenger car windows. She believes this is a dangerous practice because it prevents other drivers from seeing inside the vehicles. Following is a discussion of the implications under Federal law of installing these tinting films.; A Federal regulation already exists which, under certain circumstances precludes the practice referred to by Mrs. Parutti. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has the authority to govern the manufacture of new motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment. Pursuant to the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, we have promulgated Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 205, Glazing Materials, which specifies performance and location requirements for glazing used in vehicles. These requirements include specifications for minimum levels of light transmittance (70 percent in areas requisite for driving visibility, which includes all windows in passenger cars) and abrasion resistance. This specification for light transmittance precludes darkly-tinted windows in new automobiles.; The agency has stated in past interpretations that solar films such a the type referred to in Mrs. Parutti's letter are not glazing materials themselves, and would not have to comply with Standard No. 205. However, installation of such films on new motor vehicles would be prohibited if the vehicle glazing no longer complied with the light transmittance or abrasion requirements of the standard. If a vehicle manufacturer or a dealer places the film on glazing in a vehicle prior to sale of the vehicle, that manufacturer or dealer has to certify that the glazing continues to be in compliance with the requirements of Standard No. 205. Section 108(a)(1) prohibits any person from offering for sale or selling any motor vehicle or equipment that fails to comply with applicable safety standards.; After a new vehicle has been sold to the consumer, he may alter hi vehicle as he pleases, so long as he adheres to all State requirements. Under Federal law, the owner could install the tinting film on glazing in his vehicle whether or not such installation adversely affected the light transmittance and abrasion resistance of his vehicle's glazing. It should be noted, however, that section 108(a)(2)(A) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act provides 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 motor vehicle in compliance with an applicable motor vehicle safety standard. Render inoperative' means to remove, disconnect or degrade the performance of a system or element of design installed pursuant to the Federal safety standards. Thus, none of those persons may knowingly install a solar film on a vehicle for its owner if that act would render inoperative the light transmittance or abrasion resistance of the vehicle glazing. Whether this would be the case would have to be determined by the person making the installation. Violation of this section can result in Federal civil penalties up to $1,000 for each violation.; The individual States must govern the operational use of vehicles b their owners since the agency does not have authority in this area. Thus, it would be up to the States to preclude owners from applying films or one-way glass on their own vehicles. Mrs. Parutti may wish to contact the National Committee on Uniform Traffic Laws (555 Clark Street, Evanston, Illinois 60204) to find out which States have laws that would preclude owners from placing solar film on their automobile windows.; Please contact Hugh Oates of my staff if you have any further question (202- 426-2992).; Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel
ID: aiam5188 Open Mr. Ben F. Barrett Associate Director The Legislative Research Department 300 West Tenth Street, Room 545-N Topeka, KS 66612-1504; Mr. Ben F. Barrett Associate Director The Legislative Research Department 300 West Tenth Street Room 545-N Topeka KS 66612-1504; "Dear Mr. Barrett: This responds to your letter of June 7, 1993, i which you stated that a Kansas school district wants to use 15-passenger buses to transport school children, but does not want to cause those buses to meet the additional safety requirements applicable to school buses. You also stated that although the state definition of a school bus is the same as the Federal definition, it has been suggested that the state amend that definition to exclude 15-passenger vehicles. You asked our comments on the consequences of such legislation, including any sanctions, liability, or other issues that could result. The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, 15 U.S.C. 1381, et seq. (Safety Act), defines a school bus as a passenger motor vehicle 'designed to carry more than 10 passengers in addition to the driver, and which . . . is likely to be significantly used for the purpose of transporting primary, preprimary, or secondary school students to or from such schools or events related to such schools.' This agency defines a bus as a motor vehicle 'designed for carrying more than 10 persons,' and a school bus is further defined as a bus that is sold 'for purposes that include carrying students to and from school or related events.' Thus, the 15-passenger buses to which you referred would clearly fall within the Federal definition of 'school bus.' The Safety Act authorizes this agency to issue Federal motor vehicle safety standards which regulate the manufacture and sale of new motor vehicles. In the case of school buses, it is a violation of Federal law for any person to sell a new school bus that is not certified as complying with all applicable Federal safety standards. The onus is on the seller to ascertain the intended use of the new vehicle, and the seller is subject to substantial penalties for knowingly selling a noncomplying school bus, including civil fines and injunctive sanctions. Section 103(d) of the Safety Act, 15 U.S.C. 1392(d) provides that no state shall maintain in effect any standard regulating an aspect of performance that is regulated by a Federal safety standard unless the state standard is identical to the Federal standard. If it is not, the Federal standard preempts the state standard unless the state standard imposes a higher level of safety and is applicable only to vehicles acquired solely for the state's own use. Therefore, even if the State of Kansas redefines a school bus to exempt 15- passenger buses, Federal law remains applicable and any new school bus sold in Kansas must comply with all applicable Federal safety standards, state law notwithstanding. The purchaser or user of the vehicle is not under the same legal constraints as the seller. Since Federal law applies only to the manufacture and sale of a new vehicle, a school may use any vehicle it chooses to transport its students, whether or not the vehicle meets Federal safety standards. Further, there is no Federal requirement that the state or school district retrofit a vehicle to bring it into compliance with Federal standards. That is because once that vehicle has been sold new to the first customer, the use of that vehicle becomes subject to state law. Although not required by Federal law, this agency strongly recommends that vehicles meeting Federal school bus safety standards be used to transport school children. In that connection, please find enclosed for your information a copy of Highway Safety Program Guideline No. 17, Pupil Transportation Safety. This publication was issued under the authority of the Highway Safety Act of 1966, 23 U.S.C. 401, et seq., which authorizes this agency to issue nonbinding guidelines to which states may refer in developing their own highway safety programs. Guideline 17, jointly issued by this agency and the Federal Highway Administration, provides recommendations to the states on various operational aspects of their school bus and pupil transportation safety programs. Specifically, the Guideline recommends, among other things, that any vehicle designed to carry more than 10 persons and which is used as a school bus comply with all Federal safety standards applicable to school buses at the time the vehicle was manufactured. Finally, we would note that the use of vehicles that do not comply with Federal school bus safety standards to transport school children could result in increased liability in the event of an accident. Therefore, school districts should consult their attorneys and/or insurance carriers for advice on that issue. We hope this information is helpful to you. Should you have any further questions regarding this matter, please feel free to contact Walter Myers of my staff at this address or at (202) 366-2992. Sincerely, John Womack Acting Chief Counsel Enclosure";
ID: aiam0169 Open Mr. H.J. Hempel, Vice President, Interamerican Motor Corporation, 14721 Calvert Street, Van Nuys, California 91401; Mr. H.J. Hempel Vice President Interamerican Motor Corporation 14721 Calvert Street Van Nuys California 91401; Dear Mr. Hempel: This is in reply to your letter of May 27 in which you reques information necessary to obtain a D.O.T. number and import 'Pneumant' tires. The information furnished below concerns only those requirements of the Department of Transportation.; Regulations promulgated pursuant to Section 110(e) of National Traffi and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 (15 U.S.C. S1391 et seq., 1399(e)) require any manufacturer, assembler, or importer of a motor vehicle before offering a motor Vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment for importation into the United States to designate a permanent resident of the United States as his agent upon whom service of all processes, notices, orders, decisions, and requirements may be made.; The manufacturer of 'Pneumant' tires is therefore required to designat an agent as prescribed in the regulations (49 C.F.R. S351.45) and I enclose a copy of them, as well as a copy of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, for your information.; Please note that these regulations require the designation to be mad in a specific manner. The designation should contain the following:; >>>(1) a certification by the signer of the designation that it i binding on the manufacturer of 'Pneumant' tires under the laws, corporate by-laws, or other requirements governing the making of the designation by the manufacturer of 'Pneumant' tires at the place and time where it is made,; (2) the full legal name, principal place of business, and mailin address of the manufacturer of 'Pneumant' tires,; (3) trade names, or other designations of origin of the products of th manufacturer of 'Pneumant' tires which do not bear its legal name,; (4) a provision that the designation remains in effect until withdraw or replaced by the manufacturer of 'Pneumant' Tires,; (5) a declaration of acceptance duly signed by the designated agent and; (6) the full legal name and mailing address of the designatio agent.<<<; In addition, the designation should be signed by one with authority t appoint the agent for the manufacturer of 'Pneumant' tires, and this authority should be so indicated.; In your letter you state that it is your understanding that 'all tire used in this Country are subject to approval which will be given in form of a D.O.T. number.' This is incorrect. There is no provision in the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act which provides that motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment are to be approved by the United States Government. On the contrary, under this Act the manufacturer o(sic) the motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment bears the responsibility for complying with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards promulgated pursuant to the Act, and, pursuant to Section 114 of the Act for certifying that his product so complies. In the case of tires, the applicable standard is Standard No. 109 and I enclose a copy of it with applicable amendments for your reference. Standard No. 109 contains requirements for new pneumatic tires for passenger cars, and in order to meet the requirements of the Act, 'Pneumant' tires must comply with Standard No. 109. Furthermore, the manufacturer of these tires must certify in the prescribed manner that such tires so comply.; The 'D.O.T. number' to which you refer is required by Section 201 o the Act and the labelling section (S.4.3 and 'Figure 1') of Standard No. 109. As specified in the standard, the letters 'D.O.T.', when permanently molded into or onto the tire so that the tire is conspicuously labelled on both sidewalls, indicate pursuant to S.4.3(1) and Figure 1 of Standard No. 109, that the tire has been manufactured to conform to applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. This satisfies the certification requirement referred to above.; The code mark number is included as part of the label (as illustrate in Figure 1) pursuant to Section 201 of the Act, when the tire contains a brand name other than the name of the manufacturer, and is included for the purpose of permitting the seller of the tire to identify the manufacturer to the purchaser upon his request.; A code mark number con be obtained from the Department o Transportation by any tire manufacturer on request, but is only necessary when a name other than the manufacturer's is used on the tire. Such a request should be directed to Secretary of Transportation, Attention: Motor Vehicle Safety Performance Service, National Highway Safety Bureau, Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C. 20591. Issuance of the code mark number by the Department of Transportation in no way indicates approval by the government that tires manufactured by the one to whom it is issued meet Federal requirements. As indicated above, the code mark number is to be used purely for labeling purposes.; I am also enclosing a copy of Federal Highway Administration Impor Regulations, (19 C.F.R. S12.80) which are promulgated jointly with the Treasury Department pursuant to Section 108(b) (3) of the Act for your information.; Should you have further questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Lawrence R. Schneider,Acting Assistant Chief Counsel fo Regulations;
ID: aiam5473 Open Mr. Ed Irvine Midwest Conservation Systems P.O. Box 397 Silver Lake, KS 66539; Mr. Ed Irvine Midwest Conservation Systems P.O. Box 397 Silver Lake KS 66539; Dear Mr. Irvine: This responds to your letter asking whether a newl manufactured commercial utility trailer must be equipped with an emergency breakaway system. You state that your customer wishes to purchase a trailer without the battery powered breakaway system that comes with the trailer. Instead, you would like to install your solar energized breakaway system. In a December 7, 1994 telephone conversation with Mr. Marvin Shaw of my staff, you stated that the trailers in question are typically small utility trailers that do not rely on the use of air pressure. I am pleased to have this opportunity to explain the applicable requirements issued by this agency, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). You may also wish to request an interpretation of 49 CFR 393.43 from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), which is the agency that issued that regulation. By way of background information, NHTSA and FHWA are both part of the United States Department of Transportation. Each agency has the authority to issue regulations related to your question. NHTSA, which regulates newly manufactured vehicles, has the authority to issue Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS) which apply to new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. FHWA, which regulates the use of commercial motor vehicles, has the authority to issue Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs), which are applicable to commercial motor vehicles and their operators. We have referred your letter to the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) Office of Motor Carrier Standards, since that agency issued 49 CFR 393.43. While NHTSA has the authority to issue FMVSSs, the agency has not issued any FMVSS that would directly affect the braking performance of a small utility trailer, unless the trailer relies on air pressure. Therefore, if the trailers in question are not air braked vehicles, then you would not need to certify that such a trailer's braking performance complies with an FMVSS, since no applicable FMVSS exists. Please note that your solar energized trailer breakaway system would be considered 'motor vehicle equipment' within the meaning of the statute administered by NHTSA. If this system 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. I hope this information is helpful. If you have any questions about NHTSA's safety standards, please feel free to contact Marvin Shaw at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992. If you wish to contact someone in the FHWA's Office of Chief Counsel concerning the motor carrier standards, please call Charles Medalen at (202) 366-1354. Sincerely, Philip R. Recht Chief Counsel;
ID: aiam3829 Open Mr. Joel S. Premack, Research and Development Laboratories, U.S. Postal Service, Rockville, MD 20852-8101; Mr. Joel S. Premack Research and Development Laboratories U.S. Postal Service Rockville MD 20852-8101; Dear Mr. Premack: This responds to your March 7, 1984 letter to Roger Fairchild of thi office regarding Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 111, Rearview Mirrors. In particular, you asked whether the covering of the rear and rear-side windows on Postal Service Vehicles would be consistent with the requirements of FMVSS 111.; FMVSS 111 (copy enclosed) establishes requirements regarding rearvie mirror systems on new motor vehicles. New Postal Service vehicles would be required to employ one of three optional mirror systems. The first system is a system permitted for use on passenger cars, and includes an inside rearview mirror with a specified field of view and a plane, driver's side exterior mirror also having a specified field of view. The second permissible system is also a passenger car system and is identical to the first system, except that the inside mirror need not provide the specified field of view and an additional passenger side plane or convex rearview mirror must be provided to compensate for the more restricted field of view of the inside mirror. The third system has two plane mirrors of 19.5 square inches reflective surface area each, one mounted on each side of the vehicle.; Based on the materials you provided with your letter, it appears tha Postal Service DJ-5G Models employ the second system described above. In that case, further reduction of the field of view of the inside rearview mirror would not affect compliance with our standard, since an additional passenger side mirror is provided.; If the proposed covering of the rear windows is to be accomplished as modification to vehicles already delivered to the Postal Service, these modifications may not be subject to FMVSS 111 at all. Modifications to vehicles must be consistent with safety standards only to the extent those modification are performed by a vehicle manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or private motor vehicle repair business which knowingly renders inoperative safety equipment installed on the vehicle. See 15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(2)(A). Thus, if the window covering is done by the Postal Service itself, FMVSS requirements are not applicable.; If you have any further questions on this matter, please feel free t contact us.; Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel
ID: aiam5368 Open Mr. Norman Duncan President Study-Tech, Inc. 603 South River Road des Plaines, IL 60016; Mr. Norman Duncan President Study-Tech Inc. 603 South River Road des Plaines IL 60016; "Dear Mr. Duncan: The Federal Highway Administration has forwarded you letter of March 10, 1994, for reply. You request 'an interpretation of the existing vehicle code as it may apply to a safety- warning system that our corporation has devised.' Our agency issues the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards that apply to new motor vehicles, pursuant to the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act ('the Act'). Our Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment is the regulation that governs the performance of lighting equipment that is required on new motor vehicles and determines whether optional lighting equipment is acceptable. As you have described it, the 'Early-Warning Slow Down Safety Light' will automatically be activated when a vehicle decelerates. The system will operate through the stop lamps, but, alternatively, it could employ separate lamps mounted on the rear deck. Your system is similar to others which have been suggested over the years, and we therefore do not feel that a demonstration is necessary as you have offered. With respect to operation of your system through the stop lamps, as you will see from our letter of October 22, 1993, to Dr. Cehelnik, a copy of which I have enclosed, automatic activation of the stop lamps is not permitted by Standard No. 108 which allows the stop lamps to operate only when the brake pedal is applied. As for operation of your system through a separate lamp system, paragraph S5.1.3 of Standard No. 108 permits supplementary lighting equipment provided that it does not impair the effectiveness of lighting equipment required by the standard. Were your separate warning system to utilize red lenses, we believe that it could impair the effectiveness of the required stop lamps by sending at times a false signal, not every deceleration is followed by braking, and the operation of your system when not followed by brake application activating the stop lamps could be confusing to a following driver. On the other hands, if your system utilized amber lenses, we believe that impairment would be unlikely to exist because the public associates this color with the need for caution. The Act itself governs acceptability of your system in the aftermarket (i.e., installed on vehicles in use). Section 108(a)(2)(A) prohibits manufacturers, dealers, distributors, and motor vehicle repair businesses from knowingly rendering inoperative, in whole or in part, any device or element of design installed in accordance with Standard No. 108 and all other safety standards. We interpret this where possible as equating inoperability with impairment. Thus, we would view installation of your system by the persons named above as violative of the Act if it operated through the stop lamp system or if it were a separate lamp system with red lenses. Even where a supplementary lighting system may be permitted under Federal laws and regulations, it remains subject to the laws of the individual states where the system will be operated. We are unable to advise you on State laws, and suggest that you write for an opinion to: American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, 4600 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Va. 22203. Sincerely, John Womack Acting Chief Counsel Enclosure";
ID: aiam2313 Open Mr. Charles N. Eblin, Service Director, City of Marion, 685 Delaware Avenue, Marion, OH 43302; Mr. Charles N. Eblin Service Director City of Marion 685 Delaware Avenue Marion OH 43302; Dear Mr. Eblin: This responds to your May 6, 1976, request for permission to remove th brake system from two trucks that were manufactured with brake systems conforming to the requirements of Standard No. 121, Air Brake Systems.; From the description of the problems you have encountered with th vehicles, I assume that you do not intend to remove the entire brake system, but only one or more antilock systems installed in satisfaction of the 'no lockup' requirement of S5.3.1 of Standard No. 121. Section 108(a)(2)(A) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. S 1397(a)(2)(A)) prohibits, with one exception, knowing disconnection of the antilock system by a manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or repair business. Your dealer's refusal to remove the devices is probably based on this prohibition.; A person that does not fall into these categories is not prohibite from disconnection of the systems. Other State or Federal requirements, such as those of the Bureau of Motor Carrier Safety for operation in interstate commerce, may prohibit disconnection. In any case, the NHTSA urges that you not disconnect safety devices without consulting the vehicle manufacturer with regard to the safety configuration of the vehicle.; Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Acting Chief Counsel
ID: aiam3987 Open Mr. Rod Nash, P.E., Corporate Engineering, Collins Industries, Inc., P.O. Box 58, Hutchinson, KS 67504-0058; Mr. Rod Nash P.E. Corporate Engineering Collins Industries Inc. P.O. Box 58 Hutchinson KS 67504-0058; Dear Mr. Nash: This responds to your May 20, 1985 letter to Mr. Francis Armstrong o the Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). Your letter has been referred to my office for reply.; You asked whether you are correct in certifying a van as a multipurpos passenger vehicle (MPV) if the van carries less than 10 passengers but has the lighting and identifying marks of a school bus. The answer to your question is yes.; I would like you to keep in mind that NHTSA has two sets o regulations, issued under different acts of Congress, which have a bearing on your situation. The first of these is the regulations for the manufacture and sale of new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle equipment, issued by us under the authority of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966. The second set of regulations is the highway safety program standards issued by us under the Highway Safety Act of 1966. The highway safety program standards cover a wide range of subjects and are consider for Federal funding of state highway safety programs. The yellow paint and black markings of school buses are features of school bus safety covered by the program standard for pupil transportation safety.; We promulgated the following definition of a MPV, as found in 49 CF S571.3, under the authority of the Vehicle Safety Act:; >>>'Multipurpose passenger vehicle' means a motor vehicle with motiv power, except a trailer, designed to carry 10 persons or less which is constructed either on a truck chassis or with special features for occasional off-road operation.<<<; You are thus correct in certifying a van as a MPV if it carries les than 11 persons, including the driver. This is the case even if the MPV has the yellow paint and black trim of a school bus. You must certify your MPV as meeting all motor vehicle safety standards applicable to MPV's. You may also voluntarily manufacture the MPV in compliance with the requirements of our school bus safety standards, as long as the vehicle continues to comply with our standards for MPV's.; New vans carrying 11 or more persons (i.e., 10 or more passengers) ar 'buses' under NHTSA's definition of a 'bus.' We define 'bus' as 'a motor vehicle with motive power, except a trailer, designed for carrying more than 10 persons' (49 CFR S571.3). Regardless of how they are painted or marked, new buses that are sold for purposes that include carrying school children must be certified as meeting our school bus safety standards.; You should also note that the color and other identifying features of school bus are aspects of school bus safety covered by Highway Safety Program Standard (HSPS) No. 17, Pupil Transportation Safety. Individual states have chosen to adopt some or all of the highway safety program standards issued by NHTSA for their own highway safety programs. A state's implementation of HSPS No. 17 would affect the operation and identification of school vehicles to the extent of its implementation of the standard's recommendations. A copy of the standard is enclosed for your information.; Please contact me if you have further questions. Sincerely, Jeffrey R. Miller, Chief Counsel

NHTSA Interpretation File Search

Overview

Understanding NHTSA’s Online Interpretation Files

Reasons interpretation letters in this database may not be applicable to your situation

Searching NHTSA’s Online Interpretation Files

More search options

Search Tool

NHTSA's Interpretation Files Search

ID: aiam2201

ID: aiam4308

ID: aiam3685

ID: aiam5188

ID: aiam0169

ID: aiam5473

ID: aiam3829

ID: aiam5368

ID: aiam2313

ID: aiam3987

Request an Interpretation

How do I submit a request for interpretation?