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: aiam3684OpenConfidential; Confidential; Dear Confidential: This is in reply to your letter of February 24, 1983, asking for a interpretation of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 123, *Motorcycle Controls and Displays*.; The last sentence of paragraph S5.3.1 is: >>>'If a motorcycle is equipped with self-proportioning or antiloc braking devices utilizing a single control for front and rear brakes, the control shall be located and operable in the same manner as a rear brake control.'<<<; You have asked if your interpretation is correct that this sentenc does not preclude the use of single control braking systems which do not incorporate 'self-proportioning' or 'antilock' braking devices. Your interpretation is correct, (sic) The sentence establishes a requirement that applies only to those self-proportioning devices with a single control. It does not require a second control nor does it preclude a single control system without proportioning devices.; You have also asked that we provide clarification as to wha self-proportioning means. This term includes any brake input device the actuation of which applies braking torque to both the front and rear wheels. Use of such a self-proportioning device does not preclude additional brake actuation devices. Examples include certain current model Moto Guzzi motorcycles.; As you have requested the publicly available copies of your letter an this response shall not include your name and address. If you have any further questions, we shall try to answer them.; Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam0191OpenMr. J. C. Eckhold, Automotive Safety Director, Ford Motor Company, The American Road, Dearborn, MI 48121; Mr. J. C. Eckhold Automotive Safety Director Ford Motor Company The American Road Dearborn MI 48121; >>>Re: Consumer Information<<< Dear Mr. Eckhold: This is in response to your telegram of December 15 concerning th submission of consumer information on passenger cars produced by your associated company in England. You stated, 'This data will be submitted to the Bureau thirty (30) or more days in advance of any of these cars being offered for sale in the United States as required by section 375.6 as published on October 22, 1969.'; The regulation (49 CFR S 375.6(b))requires information to be mad available to prospective purchasers, on or after January 1, 1970, on 'each of the vehicles offered for sale' at the dealer showroom. The general applicability of the information is to vehicles manufactured on or after January 1, 1970. The intent of the regulation is to provide prospective vehicle buyers with information on all the various types of vehicles currently being manufactured and available for purchase after that date.; You apparently are assuming that, within the meaning of the regulation no vehicles are 'offered for sale' to prospective purchasers except those that are physically present in the dealer showroom. This certainly does not reflect the practice of most manufacturers, whose dealers, while keeping a representative stock of vehicles on hand, offer for sale (and enter into contracts for sale of) the manufacturer's complete line of vehicles. This interpretation would, furthermore, tend to defeat the main reason for providing information to prospective purchasers, since a dealer would never be obligated to provide information on vehicles other than those that happened to be in his possession at a given moment.; We advise you, therefore, that the term 'vehicles offered for sale' i the prospective purchaser requirement, 49 CFR S 375.6(b), refers to all the types of vehicles that a manufacturer represents, or the dealer represents with the permission of the manufacturer, as being available for purchase by the general public at a particular dealer location. The regulation requires that consumer information be provided to prospective purchasers on each of there (sic) vehicles on or after January 1, 1970, and to the Administrator 30 days in advance of its availability to prospective purchasers.; Sincerely, Lawrence R. Schneider, Acting Assistant Chief Counsel fo Regulations; |
|
ID: aiam0190OpenMr. J. C. Eckhold, Automotive Safety Director, Ford Motor Company, The American Road, Dearborn, MI 48121; Mr. J. C. Eckhold Automotive Safety Director Ford Motor Company The American Road Dearborn MI 48121; >>>Re: Consumer Information<<< Dear Mr. Eckhold: This is in response to your telegram of December 15 concerning th submission of consumer information on passenger cars produced by your associated company in England. You stated, 'This data will be submitted to the Bureau thirty (30) or more days in advance of any of these cars being offered for sale in the United States as required by section 375.6 as published on October 22, 1969.'; The regulation (49 CFR S 375.6(b))requires information to be mad available to prospective purchasers, on or after January 1, 1970, on 'each of the vehicles offered for sale' at the dealer showroom. The general applicability of the information is to vehicles manufactured on or after January 1, 1970. The intent of the regulation is to provide prospective vehicle buyers with information on all the various types of vehicles currently being manufactured and available for purchase after that date.; You apparently are assuming that, within the meaning of the regulation no vehicles are 'offered for sale' to prospective purchasers except those that are physically present in the dealer showroom. This certainly does not reflect the practice of most manufacturers, whose dealers, while keeping a representative stock of vehicles on hand, offer for sale (and enter into contracts for sale of) the manufacturer's complete line of vehicles. This interpretation would, furthermore, tend to defeat the main reason for providing information to prospective purchasers, since a dealer would never be obligated to provide information on vehicles other than those that happened to be in his possession at a given moment.; We advise you, therefore, that the term 'vehicles offered for sale' i the prospective purchaser requirement, 49 CFR S 375.6(b), refers to all the types of vehicles that a manufacturer represents, or the dealer represents with the permission of the manufacturer, as being available for purchase by the general public at a particular dealer location. The regulation requires that consumer information be provided to prospective purchasers on each of there (sic) vehicles on or after January 1, 1970, and to the Administrator 30 days in advance of its availability to prospective purchasers.; Sincerely, Lawrence R. Schneider, Acting Assistant Chief Counsel fo Regulations; |
|
ID: aiam1964OpenMr. Robert P. Crawford, President, Athens Sport Cycles, Inc., 20 W. Stimson Avenue, Athens, OH 45701; Mr. Robert P. Crawford President Athens Sport Cycles Inc. 20 W. Stimson Avenue Athens OH 45701; Dear Mr. Crawford: This is in response to your letter of May 18, 1975, in which you ask number of questions relating to tire registration procedures, and in amplification of your telephone conversation with Mr. Schwartz of my office. We will answer your questions in the order raised.; >>>1 and 2. There is a universal tire registration form (figure 3 i the enclosed Part 574) which manufacturers are required to furnish to you or you may reproduce pursuant to S 574.7 of the regulation.; 3. Since the regulation requires that the manufacturers or their agent maintain the records, the forms should either be sent to the manufacturer or his designated agent. A number of manufacturers utilize services such as the Tire Safety Registry in New Jersey to keep their records, but they merely act as the manufacturer's agent. There is to our knowledge no central place to send the forms for all manufacturers.; 4. We have no idea what is meant by a retailer I.D. number. Ou recommendation is that you contact the manufacturers to determine what they mean.; 5. Our tire recordkeeping regulation only applies to tires for use o motor vehicles. Thus, tires for use on off-road vehicles would not fall within the regulation.; 6. As required by S 574.8 of the enclosed regulation, completed form must be sent to manufacturers every 30 days. The only exception is where you sell less than 40 tires of all makes and manufacturers in the 30- day period, in which case you may wait until you sell 40 tires or for 6 months, whichever comes first.; 7. Retailers are not required to keep any tire owner forms. 8. It is the responsibility of the dealer to mail the forms, althoug he may ask the customer to fill out the form at the time of purchase.<<<; On behalf of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, let m commend you for your desire to fully comply with the requirements of our tire recordkeeping regulations. It is through the efforts of dealers such as you that motorcyclists and their passengers are protected against tire defects which might lead to injury or death.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam1934OpenMr. Beller, Alfred Teves GMBH, 6 Frankfurt/Main 2, Postfach 119155, Germany; Mr. Beller Alfred Teves GMBH 6 Frankfurt/Main 2 Postfach 119155 Germany; Dear Mr. Beller: This responds to your April 29, 1975, question whether S5.4.3 o Standard No. 105-75, *Hydraulic brake systems*, permits a brake fluid warning statement on a filler cap to be partially obscured by two 'contact blades' on the cap which apparently are inserted into a receptacle attached to the vehicle. The description you enclose is similar to one submitted with an earlier request which we evaluated in a March 3, 1975, letter to your representative, Mr. Paul Utans.; Sections S5.4.3(b) requires that the statement be 'located so as to b visible by direct view.' As we noted in our March 3 letter, this requirement prohibits an arrangement which would obscure any parts of the statement. We also noted that S5.4.3(b) permits a location within 4 inches of the brake fluid reservoir filler plug or cap to accommodate arrangements which do not permit use of the filler cap as a location.; From the drawing you enclose, we conclude that the contact blade obscure part of the warning and it therefore would not comply with the requirement of S5.4.3(b). As an enforcement matter, we would find it impossible to allow a 'minor noncompliance' and still be able to enforce a standard objectively. We do not consider the ability to turn the cap to expose the warning to constitute 'visible by direct view.'; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam2679OpenMr. Stephen C. Nimmer, Senior Supervising Engineer, Oshkosh Truck Corporation, Box 2566, Oshkosh, WI 54901; Mr. Stephen C. Nimmer Senior Supervising Engineer Oshkosh Truck Corporation Box 2566 Oshkosh WI 54901; Dear Mr. Nimmer: This is in reply to your letter of August 29, 1977, asking fo confirmation of your interpretation of S4.5.4 of Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108.; Paragraph S4.5.4 requires that 'The stop lamps on each vehicle shall b activated upon application of the service brakes.' Oshkosh trucks are equipped with split air brake systems. This system incorporates a parking brake system on the rear axles. You indicated that there are three conditions under which the parking brakes will apply:>>>; Condition 1. - Parking Application. The spring brakes are driver applied through a hand operated parkin control.; Condition 2. - Rear Service Brake System Failure. The spring brakes can be driver applied through the service brake foo operated treadle valve control in the event of a failure in the rear service brake system.; Condition 3. - Spring Brake Cavity Pressure Loss. A component failure which allows air pressure to exhaust from th spring cavity of the rear brake chambers will cause the spring brakes (parking brakes) to apply. This condition is not driver initiated.'<<<; You have interpreted Condition 2 as the only 'services brake application since it is the only one of the three that is driver-initiated through the service brake control, and that stop lamp activation under the other two Conditions is not required by Standard No. 108.; This will confirm your interpretation. With respect to Condition 1, w do not consider that driver application of the parking brake portion of the service brake system is 'application of the service brakes' within the meaning of S4.5.4. Nor do we consider that activation of the parking brakes through component failure is 'application of the service brakes', your Condition 3.; Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Deputy Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam1893OpenMr. Frazer F. Hilder, General Counsel, General Motors Corporation, General Motors Building, 3044 West Grand Boulevard, Detroit, MI 48202; Mr. Frazer F. Hilder General Counsel General Motors Corporation General Motors Building 3044 West Grand Boulevard Detroit MI 48202; Dear Mr. Hilder: This is in response to your letter of March 21, 1975, inquiring as t the effect of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 121 on Massachusetts and New Jersey State laws relating to air brake performance.; As you are aware, section 103(d) of the National Traffic and Moto Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 (15 U.S.C. 1392(d)) provides that no state or political subdivision of a State may promulgate or continue in effect standards applicable to an aspect of motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment performance which is covered by a Federal motor vehicle safety standard, unless the standards are identical.; Standard No. 121 includes provisions relating to truck and bus brak performance, including requirements for stopping distances. A more restrictive State brake requirement than that specified in Standard 121 is voided by S 103(d) since the Federal standard is intended to cover all aspects of air brake performance.; The Federal requirements must be regarded as conclusive with regard t service, emergency, and parking braking capabilities in order to maintain the uniformity necessary in a Federal regulatory scheme. This was affirmed in a recent decision rendered in a case brought by the Motorcycle Industry Council, Inc. against the State of California in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California concerning the preemption of a California State requirement that motorcycle headlamps be wired to operate when the engine is running. The Court held that the California requirement is preempted by the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 since the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration intended to cover all aspects of performance directly involving motorcycle headlamps.; Therefore, requirements such as those described in your letter would b preempted by Standard 121 since the aspects of performance that would be affected are covered by the Federal standard. You should note that this discussion of State 'requirements' only refers to rules of general applicability within a State or municipality. It does not refer to purchase specifications that may be imposed by any person or organization, including a State or municipality, with respect to vehicles purchased for the person or organization's own use. Such specifications are not limited by Federal law, and in the case of governmental bodies are specifically allowed by S103(d), although of course they cannot alter a manufacturer's duty to conform to Federal standards.; Sincerely, James C. Schultz, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam4493OpenMr. Wayne Apple 14738 Bronson Avenue San Jose, CA 95124; Mr. Wayne Apple 14738 Bronson Avenue San Jose CA 95124; Dear Mr. Apple: This is in reply to your letter of December 29, 1987 in which you ask whether a U-Turn Indicator 'is reasonable, within federal regulations or specifications, and if the Department of Transportation has interest in the concept and/or product.' Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment contains specifications for original and replacement lighting equipment. None of these specifications is for a U-turn indicator. However, a U-turn indicator is acceptable as original vehicle equipment provided it does not impair the effectiveness of the lighting equipment that the standard requires, such as turn signal lamps, headlamps, taillamps, and stop lamps. Your proposed specifications recognize the importance of differentiation between the left turn signal and the U-turn indicator, and we encourage you to minimize the possibility of impairment. Standard No. 108 does not cover a U-turn indicator as an aftermarket device, but it is subject to the general restriction that its installation must not render inoperative, in whole or in part, any lamp, reflective device, or associated equipment that was installed pursuant to Standard No. 108. (15 U.S.C. 1397(a)(2)(A)) The legality of use of an aftermarket device of this nature would be determinable under the laws of the State in which a vehicle equipped with it is registered or operated. The American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, 120l Connecticut Ave. N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036, may be able to advise you further on State laws. Accident data available to the agency does not permit us to identify specific crashes in which a vehicle is making a U-turn. However, an analysis of data from one of our files that contains information on almost 3 million crashes indicates that the general type of crash for which U-turn crashes are a subset (left-turning crashes) constitutes less than 6% of the total crash experience. Thus, we believe that the number of U-turn crashes is substantially less than the 6% represented by the broader category of crashes involving left-turning vehicles. We do not know the basis for your statement that your U-turn indicator 'will probably reduce accidents involving U-turns by over thirty percent'. However, the agency is interested in exploring concepts that could enhance vehicle safety. I am providing our Office of Research and Development with a copy of your letter for such further comment as may be warranted. We appreciate your interest in safety. Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel CC: Michael Finkelstein; |
|
ID: aiam4277OpenMr. David A. White, Senior Safety Engineer, Grumman Olson, Post Office Box 2005, Sturgis, MI 49091; Mr. David A. White Senior Safety Engineer Grumman Olson Post Office Box 2005 Sturgis MI 49091; Dear Mr. White: This letter responds to your inquiry of November 17, 1986, asking thi agency to approve an alternate location for the certification label of a light duty truck your company intends to manufacture for the United States Post Office. Section 567.4 of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) regulations requires that a motor vehicle manufacturer affix a certification label to each vehicle it makes, and permits the manufacturer to place the label in any one of the places set out in that provision. If none of those locations is practicable, S567.4 directs the manufacturer to suggest an alternate place to affix the label, and to ask our approval for that alternative.; You explain in your letter that in the circumstances you describe, th S567.4 locations are impractical. First, you explain, the vehicle's sliding doors make the hinge pillar and door latch post and edge too small and irregularly shaped for a label. Second, if your company places the label on the inside of the sliding door, opening the door would hide the label. Third, you assert that the instrument panel is too small for a label.; You enclose a drawing to illustrate where your company intends to plac the certification label. According to your description, the certification label will be placed on a fixed panel behind the driver, and between the cab and the load compartment. This panel is one part of a three piece assembly of which the remaining two components are a center sliding door and a second fixed panel. You state that a person can see the certification label from the driver's area without moving any vehicle item.; In directing a manufacture to put its certification label in thos places set out in S567.4, NHTSA's purpose is to make these labels easy to see and read. Based on the information you supplied, the agency determines that for this particular design, installing the certification label as your company proposes will facilitate seeing and reading the label, while placing the label as specified in S567.4 may not be practicable or might interfere with those activities. Therefore, on the condition that your company's label complies in all other respects with S567.4, NHTSA grants your request to install the certification label on the forward side of the left hand bulkhead fixed panel.; Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones, Chief Counsel |
|
ID: aiam4278OpenMr. David A. White, Senior Safety Engineer, Grumman Olson, Post Office Box 2005, Sturgis, MI 49091; Mr. David A. White Senior Safety Engineer Grumman Olson Post Office Box 2005 Sturgis MI 49091; Dear Mr. White: This letter responds to your inquiry of November 17, 1986, asking thi agency to approve an alternate location for the certification label of a light duty truck your company intends to manufacture for the United States Post Office. Section 567.4 of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) regulations requires that a motor vehicle manufacturer affix a certification label to each vehicle it makes, and permits the manufacturer to place the label in any one of the places set out in that provision. If none of those locations is practicable, S567.4 directs the manufacturer to suggest an alternate place to affix the label, and to ask our approval for that alternative.; You explain in your letter that in the circumstances you describe, th S567.4 locations are impractical. First, you explain, the vehicle's sliding doors make the hinge pillar and door latch post and edge too small and irregularly shaped for a label. Second, if your company places the label on the inside of the sliding door, opening the door would hide the label. Third, you assert that the instrument panel is too small for a label.; You enclose a drawing to illustrate where your company intends to plac the certification label. According to your description, the certification label will be placed on a fixed panel behind the driver, and between the cab and the load compartment. This panel is one part of a three piece assembly of which the remaining two components are a center sliding door and a second fixed panel. You state that a person can see the certification label from the driver's area without moving any vehicle item.; In directing a manufacture to put its certification label in thos places set out in S567.4, NHTSA's purpose is to make these labels easy to see and read. Based on the information you supplied, the agency determines that for this particular design, installing the certification label as your company proposes will facilitate seeing and reading the label, while placing the label as specified in S567.4 may not be practicable or might interfere with those activities. Therefore, on the condition that your company's label complies in all other respects with S567.4, NHTSA grants your request to install the certification label on the forward side of the left hand bulkhead fixed panel.; Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones, 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.