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: aiam4450OpenMr. Donald N. Stahl District Attorney Office of District Attorney Bureau of Investigation Court House P.O. Box 442 Modesto, CA 95353; Mr. Donald N. Stahl District Attorney Office of District Attorney Bureau of Investigation Court House P.O. Box 442 Modesto CA 95353; "Dear Mr. Stahl: Re: McCoy Tire Service Center D.A. No. CF696 Thi responds to your letter asking about requirements concerning the importation of tire casings. According to your letter, a routine inspection by the California Highway Patrol (CHP) of a local school district's buses disclosed recapped tires on a bus which did not have DOT markings on the tires. The CHP learned that the tire casings were originally designed for use by a rubber tire train in Japan and were new tires that had been imported for recapping purposes. The tire casings were imported as slicks (no tread design), and the slick was removed. The tires were then recapped using the 'bondag' process and sold to the school district. You asked whether it is permissible to import this type of tire casing and, if so, whether the particular type of tire casing meets Department of Transportation standards. Your questions are responded to below. Our opinions are based on the facts provided in your letter. Before addressing your specific questions, I will provide background information about requirements for tires. All tires which are subject to a Federal motor vehicle safety standard must have the symbol 'DOT' molded into the sidewall by the manufacturer or retreader, if those tires are to be imported into the United States. This symbol represents a certification by the manufacturer or retreader that the tire complies with all requirements of the applicable safety standards. New tires for use on school buses are subject to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. ll9 (49 CFR 571.119). Section S6.5(a) of the standard requires that all new tires for use on motor vehicles other than passenger cars have the DOT symbol molded into the sidewall by the manufacturer. Tires without this symbol may not be legally imported. This is also true for used tires manufactured on or after the effective date of Standard No. ll9, March l, l975, with one narrow exception. Used tires for use on motor vehicles other than passenger cars which have less than 2/32 inch of tread remaining and which are imported solely for the purpose of being retreaded in this country prior to resale may be imported without a DOT symbol on the sidewall. I have enclosed a copy of a June l8, l98l letter to Mr. Roy Littlefield, which explains in detail the requirements of this narrow exception to the requirements that used tires have a DOT symbol on the sidewall to be legally imported. No Federal safety standard is applicable to retreaded tires for use on motor vehicles other than passenger cars. They may be imported without certification of compliance by the retreader. However, these tires must have a tire identification number marked on the sidewall, per the requirements of 49 CFR Part 574. Your first question is whether it is permissible to import the type of tire casing at issue. As indicated above, new tires for use on school buses may not be imported without the DOT symbol. However, it is our opinion that the casings at issue are materials needing further manufacturing operations to become completed items of motor vehicle equipment, rather than finished items of motor vehicle equipment (tires which could lawfully be used or sold as they are). This opinion is based on the fact that the casings are being imported as slicks, which generally cannot be used on the public highways under state laws since they have no tread, and since the casings are being imported for purposes of recapping. Your second question is whether the casings at issue meet Department of Transportation standards. A key issue in answering this question is whether the tires are considered to be retreaded tires or new tires subject to Standard No. ll9. It is our opinion that any tires manufactured by applying new tread to new casings are considered new tires rather than retreaded tires, and are subject to the same requirements as any other new tires. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration defines 'retreaded' as 'manufactured by a process in which a tread is attached to a casing.' The term 'casing' is defined as 'a used tire to which additional tread may be attached for the purpose of retreading.' See 49 CFR Part 57l.ll7 and 49 CFR Part 574.3(b). In the situation you described in your letter, the casings were not used tires at the time the 'recapping' took place. Instead, they were simply new tires (originally designed for use on a rubber tire train) which were imported for recapping purposes. These casings would not be considered used tires until they have actually been used (presumably on a train prior to importation, or on the highway, with the new tread attached, in the United States.) Since the tires at issue were not used tires at the time they were recapped, they are not retreaded tires but are instead new tires, subject to Standard No. ll9. The tires would appear not to comply with Standard No. ll9, given the absence of the DOT symbol. Your letter states that the original manufacturer of the tires has stated that the tires are not suitable by any means for highway use. If the tires are not suitable for highway use after they have been recapped, they may contain a safety-related defect. See l5 U.S.C. l4ll et seq. We note that the defect provisions of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act apply to items of motor vehicle equipment regardless of whether there is an applicable safety standard. We hope this information is helpful, and we are referring your letter to our Office of Enforcement. Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel"; |
|
ID: aiam0011OpenMr. Bill Lewandoski Account Manager Kelsey Products Division 38481 Huron River Drive Romulus, MI 48174; Mr. Bill Lewandoski Account Manager Kelsey Products Division 38481 Huron River Drive Romulus MI 48174; Dear Mr. Lewandoski: This responds to your letter of April 30, l99l, t Taylor Vinson of this Office with respect to the regulation of trailer stop lamp activation by Standard No. 108. You have enclosed a photocopy of literature on the Tekonsha Voyager electronic brake control. This system incorporates a manual override side bar that manually activates the trailer brakes without a corresponding activation of the trailer stop lamps. The reason for this is the manufacturer's view that 'STOPPING IS NOT THE INTENT. BY NOT DRIVING THE STOPLIGHTS DURING MANUAL ACTIVATION, THE VOYAGER ELIMINATES FALSE BRAKE LIGHT SIGNALS . . . .' The literature carries the notation that 'THE VOYAGER AND VOYAGER XP MEET NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRANSPORTATION (sic) SAFETY ADMINISTRATION (N.H.T.S.A.) REGULATIONS REGARDING TOW VEHICLE/TRAILER LIGHT APPLICATION.' You have asked whether Standard No. 108 permits application of the trailer brakes without activation of the towing vehicle/trailer stop lamps. It does not. Tekonsha misunderstands the function of a stop lamp. A stop lamp not only indicates the intent of the driver to stop, but also the intent of the driver 'to diminish speed by braking.' (see the definition of 'stop lamp' in SAE Standard J568c, Stop Lamps, August l970, incorporated by reference in Standard No. 108). Paragraph S5.5.4 of Standard No. 108 requires that 'The stop lamps on each vehicle shall be activated upon application of the service brakes.' The Voyager electronic control applies the service brakes to diminish vehicle speed, and therefore the stop lamps are required to be activated. The installation of the Voyager by a manufacturer or dealer before the initial sale of a trailer would therefore appear to be a violation of Standard No. 108 since its operation would create a noncompliance with the standard. As an aftermarket device, it is subject to the 'render inoperative' prohibition of l5 U.S.C. 1397(a)(2)(A). Any manufacturer, distributor, dealer or motor vehicle repair business installing the device after the trailer's initial sale is, in effect, rendering the trailer's stop lamps inoperative when the device is used. Civil penalties are provided for with respect to violations of either Standard No. 108, or section 1397(a)(2)(A). The statement as to compliance with NHTSA regulations is wrong. We appreciate your bringing this matter to our attention. I am forwarding a copy of your letter to our Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance for such further action as it deems appropriate. Sincerely, Paul Jackson Rice Chief Counsel; |
|
ID: aiam1549OpenMr. M.A. Chermak,Imperial-Eastman Corporation,Eastman Division,14-40 North 24th Street,Manitowoc, Wisconsin 54220; Mr. M.A. Chermak Imperial-Eastman Corporation Eastman Division 14-40 North 24th Street Manitowoc Wisconsin 54220; Dear Mr. Chermak:#This responds to your June 24, 1974, question whethe brake hose manufactured before September 1, 1974, to comply with all performance requirements of Standard No. 106-74, *Brake hoses*, may be marked with the DOT symbol after that date, and whether the DOT may be used on hose, fittings, and assemblies prior to that date.#The answer to your questions is no. The DOT symbol means that a vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment was manufactured in compliance with a Federal motor vehicle safety standard and that it complies with the standard. Therefore, the DOT symbol can not be placed on hose, fitting or assemblies manufactured before the date the standard becomes applicable to them, whether or not the DOT is actually placed on the hose before or after the effective date.#With regard to your supply of pre-106 vacuum hose, it may be used in assemblies as late as February 28, 1975, and in vehicles as late as August 31,1975, if it is only clamped to the vehicle and not made into assemblies.#Yours truly,Richard B. Dyson,Assistant Chief Counsel; |
|
ID: aiam0748OpenMr. Satoshi Nishibori, Nissan Motor Co. Ltd., 560 Sylvan Avenue, Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632; Mr. Satoshi Nishibori Nissan Motor Co. Ltd. 560 Sylvan Avenue Englewood Cliffs NJ 07632; Dear Mr. Nishibori: This is in reply to your letter of June 20, 1972, on the subject of th options which may be included in the unloaded vehicle weight of a passenger car under S8.1.1 of Standard 208.; The definition of 'unloaded vehicle weight' is intended to include vehicle equipped with any combination of optional items that are installed by the factory or by the dealer with the factory's authorization. The weight of equipment installed by the dealer without authorization by the manufacturer would not be includable.; To answer your question by use of your example, you must concer yourself with both factory optional air conditioning and with dealer optional air conditioning that is authorized by the factory.; Sincerely, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam4015OpenMr. Roger C. Fairchild, TechLaw, Inc., 12030 Sunrise Valley Drive, Suite 200, Reston, VA 22093; Mr. Roger C. Fairchild TechLaw Inc. 12030 Sunrise Valley Drive Suite 200 Reston VA 22093; Dear Mr. Fairchild: This responds to your letter of June 13, 1985, to Stephen P. Wood o this office, concerning the importation and assembly of chassis-cab units by your client. You asked about the division of certification responsibilities between your client and the manufacturer of the chassis-cab units. In addition, you asked about the accuracy of a summary you have prepared of our safety standards. I hope the following discussion answers your questions.; According to the information provided in your letter and in subsequen telephone conversations, the chassis-cab units would be shipped from a British manufacturer to your client with the occupant compartment or cab, and other major parts, such as the engine and transmission, individually assembled. In addition, the British manufacturer would also affix the vehicle identification number (VIN). Your client would then assemble the vehicles by bolting the parts together with ordinary tools, and add a fifth wheel or hydraulic/dump assembly to the back of the completed vehicles. You said that the British manufacturer of these chassis-cab units has agreed to assume legal responsibility for all duties and liabilities imposed by the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1381 *et seq*.).; Under the Vehicle Safety Act, certification of compliance of a moto vehicle must be by the manufacturer or importer of an incomplete or a completed vehicle. Based upon the facts given above, your client would be importing items of motor vehicle equipment and not motor vehicles, since the various parts have not been assembled to form an incomplete or complete motor vehicle. The British manufacturer should certify that each item of motor vehicle equipment which is covered by a Federal motor vehicle safety standard complies with such standard. Your client would be assembling the various parts and completing the vehicles by adding work-performing components. Therefore, your client would be responsible for certifying the completed vehicles and for assuming the duties and liabilities imposed by the Act. An information sheet briefly describing those duties is enclosed.; If the British manufacturer assembled the chassis-cab unit parts int an incomplete vehicle before exporting them, then the vehicle would be covered by the certification requirements of Part 568, *Vehicles Manufactured in Two or More Stages* (49 CFR Part 568). Section 568.7(a) provides that an incomplete vehicle manufacturer, in this case the British company, can assume responsibility for certifying the vehicle, as long as it accepts all of the legal responsibilities for manufacturers set forth in the Vehicle Safety Act. The incomplete vehicle manufacturer would then be responsible for affixing the certification plate required by Part 567.5(e).; You also ask for our approval of a summary of National Highway Traffi Safety Administration safety standards and regulations applicable to heavy duty trucks. As you correctly stated in your letter, the agency cannot pre- approve motor vehicles or items of motor vehicle equipment. Under section 114 of the Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1403), a manufacturer has the responsibility to certify that its vehicles comply with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. We have, however, reviewed your summary and find it to be a reasonable description of the major requirements of the various safety standards applicable to heavy trucks. As you recognize, a manufacturer cannot rely on a summary, but must base its certification on a vehicle's compliance with all of the requirements of the applicable safety standards.; I hope this information is helpful to you. If you have any furthe questions, please let me know.; Sincerely, Jeffrey R. Miller, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam4013OpenMr. Roger C. Fairchild, TechLaw, Inc., 12030 Sunrise Valley Drive, Suite 200, Reston, VA 22093; Mr. Roger C. Fairchild TechLaw Inc. 12030 Sunrise Valley Drive Suite 200 Reston VA 22093; Dear Mr. Fairchild: This responds to your letter of June 13, 1985, to Stephen P. Wood o this office, concerning the importation and assembly of chassis-cab units by your client. You asked about the division of certification responsibilities between your client and the manufacturer of the chassis-cab units. In addition, you asked about the accuracy of a summary you have prepared of our safety standards. I hope the following discussion answers your questions.; According to the information provided in your letter and in subsequen telephone conversations, the chassis-cab units would be shipped from a British manufacturer to your client with the occupant compartment or cab, and other major parts, such as the engine and transmission, individually assembled. In addition, the British manufacturer would also affix the vehicle identification number (VIN). Your client would then assemble the vehicles by bolting the parts together with ordinary tools, and add a fifth wheel or hydraulic/dump assembly to the back of the completed vehicles. You said that the British manufacturer of these chassis-cab units has agreed to assume legal responsibility for all duties and liabilities imposed by the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1381 *et seq*.).; Under the Vehicle Safety Act, certification of compliance of a moto vehicle must be by the manufacturer or importer of an incomplete or a completed vehicle. Based upon the facts given above, your client would be importing items of motor vehicle equipment and not motor vehicles, since the various parts have not been assembled to form an incomplete or complete motor vehicle. The British manufacturer should certify that each item of motor vehicle equipment which is covered by a Federal motor vehicle safety standard complies with such standard. Your client would be assembling the various parts and completing the vehicles by adding work-performing components. Therefore, your client would be responsible for certifying the completed vehicles and for assuming the duties and liabilities imposed by the Act. An information sheet briefly describing those duties is enclosed.; If the British manufacturer assembled the chassis-cab unit parts int an incomplete vehicle before exporting them, then the vehicle would be covered by the certification requirements of Part 568, *Vehicles Manufactured in Two or More Stages* (49 CFR Part 568). Section 568.7(a) provides that an incomplete vehicle manufacturer, in this case the British company, can assume responsibility for certifying the vehicle, as long as it accepts all of the legal responsibilities for manufacturers set forth in the Vehicle Safety Act. The incomplete vehicle manufacturer would then be responsible for affixing the certification plate required by Part 567.5(e).; You also ask for our approval of a summary of National Highway Traffi Safety Administration safety standards and regulations applicable to heavy duty trucks. As you correctly stated in your letter, the agency cannot pre- approve motor vehicles or items of motor vehicle equipment. Under section 114 of the Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1403), a manufacturer has the responsibility to certify that its vehicles comply with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. We have, however, reviewed your summary and find it to be a reasonable description of the major requirements of the various safety standards applicable to heavy trucks. As you recognize, a manufacturer cannot rely on a summary, but must base its certification on a vehicle's compliance with all of the requirements of the applicable safety standards.; I hope this information is helpful to you. If you have any furthe questions, please let me know.; Sincerely, Jeffrey R. Miller, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam4409OpenKarl F. Milde, Jr., P.C., Law Offices, RFD #8, Box 369, Union Valley Road, Mahopac, NY 10541; Karl F. Milde Jr. P.C. Law Offices RFD #8 Box 369 Union Valley Road Mahopac NY 10541; Dear Mr. Milde: This is in reply to your letter of October 2, 1987, with reference t an electronic circuit that would automatically activate a vehicle's hazard warning system when the vehicle is proceeding slowly, or has stopped in the roadway. You have asked whether such a system has been proposed before, or field tested, and whether Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 would permit its installation on motor vehicles.; The traffic hazard that concerns you, especially that presented by vehicle that has stopped in the roadway without activation of either brakes or hazard warning system, is one that is familiar to many motorists. However, it appears that in actuality most motorists confronted with this hazard are able to react in time to avoid a rear end collision. Accident data available to the agency indicate that crashes of this nature are relatively rare. As you know, many States require activation of the hazard warning system at speeds less than 40 mph on the Interstate system. NHTSA has not proposed a system of this nature, nor has it field tested one. The agency has participated in research with deceleration warning systems, a similar though not identical concept, and concluded that safety benefits were insufficient to propose their adoption.; We see no Federal prohibition against installation of a circuit tha would activate the hazard warning system at a predetermined low rate of speed. Equipment that is not prescribed by the lighting standard is permissible as original equipment as long as it does not impair the effectiveness of equipment that Standard No. 108 does require. And modifications of vehicles in use by persons other than the vehicle owner are permissible as long as they do not render inoperative, in whole or in part, vehicle equipment necessary for compliance with a Federal motor vehicle safety standard. Nor are we aware of any State restrictions on the use of such a system, though you should consult the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators for a definitive answer. Its address is 1201 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20036.; Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam0211OpenMessrs. Ganglberger and Goerter, Semperit, Oesterreichish-Amerikanishe Gummiwerke Aktiengesellschaft, Werke 2, A-02514 Traiskirchen, N.Oe., Austria; Messrs. Ganglberger and Goerter Semperit Oesterreichish-Amerikanishe Gummiwerke Aktiengesellschaft Werke 2 A-02514 Traiskirchen N.Oe. Austria; Gentlemen: Thank you for your reply to our letter of December 11, 1969 concernin tires marked with the legend 'Farm Use Only Tires'.; Concerning the question you raise in your letter relating to the DO symbol, Standard No. 109 requires that the symbol be between the maximum section width and the bead to protect the lettering from obliteration during use. Therefore, placing the DOT symbol at the widest place on the side wall rib as illustrated in your enclosed drawing would not be permitted.; With regard to your question asking if the approved symbol and th manufacturer's code mark is necessary, the approved symbol signifies that the manufacturer certifies that the tire complies with the Standard and is, therefore, necessary. Tires exported to this country without the symbol would be in violation of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966. The code number is only required if your company manufactures a tire with a brand name other than its own, The purpose of the code number is to identify the manufacturer of the tire.; Sincerely, Lawrence R. Schneider, Assistant Chief Counsel, Moto Regulations; |
|
ID: aiam2844OpenHoward E. Chase, Esq. Singer, Hutner, Levine and Seeman 110 East 59th Street New York, NY 10022; Howard E. Chase Esq. Singer Hutner Levine and Seeman 110 East 59th Street New York NY 10022; Dear Mr. Chase: This is in response to your April 6, 1978, lette regarding the eligibility of Officino Alfieri Maserati, S.p.A. (Maserati) to apply for an exemption from the generally applicable average fuel economy standards under the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act, as amended. You concluded that Maserati was eligible for this exemption although it is under common control with another company, Nuova Innocenti S.p.A. (Innocenti), whose annual production of passenger automobiles exceeds 10,000 passenger automobilies. I agree with your conclusion for the reason set forth below. The requirements concerning eligibility for an exemption under the Act are set forth in section 502(c), which provides: On application of a manufacturer who manufactured (whether or not in the United States) fewer than 10,000 passenger automobiles in the second model year preceding the model year for which the application is made, the Secretary may, by rule, exempt such manufacturer from subsection (a). To determine whether Maserati manufactures fewer than 10,000 passenger automobiles, it is necessary to interpret and apply sections 501(9) and 503(c) of the Act. Section 501(9) provides: 'The term 'manufacturer' (sic) (except for purposes of section 502 (c) means to produce or assemble in the customs territory of the United States, or to import.' Section 503(c) provides: (c) Any reference in this part to automobiles manufactured by a manufacturer shall be deemed- - (1) to include all automobiles manufactured by persons who control, are controlled by, or are under common control with, such manufacturer, and (2) to exclude all automobiles manufactured (within the meaning of paragraph (1)) during a model year by such manufacturer which are exported prior to the expiration of 30 days following the end of such model year. If sections 501(9) and 502(c) were considered together and section 503(c) were excluded from consideration, it is clear that Maserati would be eligible for an exemption, since Maserati's annual worldwide production is well under 10,000 automobiles. The key question, as you observed, involves section 503(c)- The question is whether 'manufacture' in section 503(c), as that section applies to section 502(c), means 'to produce or assemble in the customs territory of the United States, or to import' or means 'to produce or assemble, regardless of the geographical location of the act.' The former, restricted definition is given in section 501(9) and applies, except for the purposes of section 502(c), to all Title V. The latter, unrestricted definition is derived from the phrase 'manufactured (whether or not in the United States)' in the first sentence of section 502(c) and applies for the purpose of that section. I believe that 'manufacture', as used in section 503(c), has the restricted meaning. As I interpret the phrase 'for the purposes of section 502(c),' 'manufacture' has the unrestricted meaning only in section 502(c) and even there not in every instance. Thus, the Innocenti automobiles are not counted together with the Maseratis for the purposes of determining eligibility for an exemption under section 502(c). The Innocenti automobiles would be added to Maseratis only if the Innocentis were 'manufactured' in the restricted sense, that is, if the Innocentis were imported into the United States. Since the Innocenti automobiles are not counted with Maserati's, Maserati is eligible for an exemption from the generally applicable average fuel economy standard. This agency will begin processing your petition immediately. If you have any further questions on this matter, please contact Stephen Kratzke of the Office of Chief Counsel at (202) 426-2922. Sincerely, Howard Dugoff Deputy Administrator; |
|
ID: aiam4752OpenMr. Manuel R. Garcia PSC Box 1865 APO NY 09406; Mr. Manuel R. Garcia PSC Box 1865 APO NY 09406; "Dear Mr. Garcia: This is in reply to your letter of April 2, 1990, t Ms. DeMeter of this Office, with respect to importation requirements for motor vehicles. You have recently bought a l974 BMW l602 made 'overseas', and would like information on Federal safety (and EPA) requirements the car must conform to before it is shipped, or, alternatively, whether it is permissible to make the necessary repairs after the car arrives in the United States. Changes in the law affecting importation of cars subject to the Federal motor vehicle safety standards, which were effective January 31, l990, have made the process of importing nonconforming vehicles much more difficult than before. In brief, your car can be imported only if this agency has made a determination that it is capable of conversion to meet the Federal motor vehicle safety standards. If an affirmative determination has been made, you may import the vehicle only if you have a contract with an importer who has registered with this agency to undertake to conform the vehicle to meet Federal requirements. If the conversion work has been performed abroad, the registered importer is nevertheless responsible for submitting verification that the work has been done. At this early date in implementing the law, the agency has made no determinations of vehicle eligibility, and has appointed only a handful of registered importers. I believe that the regulations of the EPA are similar, importation is accomplished through an 'independent commercial importer' (ICI). We are forwarding a copy of your letter to that agency for its response. You haven't indicated when you anticipate importing the BMW. I suggest, as the time approaches, you write our Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, D.C. 20590. He can then provide you with the latest list of registered importers, and vehicles for which affirmative importation determinations have been made. If your car is not among them, you may persuade a registered importer to petition the agency on your behalf. However, there is a fee imposed for consideration of petitions (either $1,560 or $2,150, depending on the car). This is payable in advance, and is non-refundable if a petition is denied. Further, a vehicle owner is not eligible to submit such a petition. You didn't say how 'recently' you bought your car. However, if it was before October 31, l988, and you were stationed outside the U.S. at that time and have never before imported a nonconforming vehicle, the law allows you, until October 31, l992, to import the car personally, without a registered importer and without an importation determination, and to have conversion work done by anyone you choose. You also asked for 'the publication that covers the Code of Federal Regulations and the Federal Register.' I am not sure what you mean, but I am enclosing our new vehicle importation form, Form HS-7, which all importers of motor vehicles must execute upon arrival of their vehicles. It is, in essence, a concise form of the new importation regulation. I am also enclosing copies of that regulation, and the ones on registered importers, vehicle eligibility determinations, and fees. Sincerely, Paul Jackson Rice 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.