Interpretation ID: aiam0355
Recreational Vehicle Institute
Inc.
Suite 406
1140 Connecticut Avenue
Washington
DC 20006;
Dear Mr. Humphreys: This is in response to your letter of May 13, 1971, with which yo enclosed eleven questions that time precluded answering at the recent Recreational Vehicle Institute symposium. Some of the questions are really comments or expressions of opinion, and the answer must be of the same nature.; >>>1. Where does the manufacturer's responsibility start and end, an where does the sub-contractor's or supplier's responsibility start and end?; This question must obviously be answered in general terms. The primar thrust of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act is the regulation of manufacturers. Under the statutory scheme set up by Congress and the standards and regulations that we have issued, the 'manufacturer' is viewed as the final producer of a particular product--either a completed vehicle or a defined type of motor vehicle equipment. Although we recognize that in virtually all types of manufacturing there is actually a multiple chain of production from basic raw materials to final product, it is necessary for our purposes to fix legal responsibility on the final 'assembler', our legal system offers ample ways in which the final manufacturer can and does share some of the responsibility with his suppliers, primarily through the system of contracts and warranties that is basic to all commercial activities. Thus, where a standard is concerned, we look to the final manufacturer for compliance purposes. His responsibilities are, of course, modified by the possibility of a due care defense, whether or not supplied products are involved. There are some exceptions: for example, the Vehicles Manufactured in Two or More Stages regulation places some limited responsibilities on the manufacturers of 'incomplete vehicles', and the responsibility for safety-related defects extends to all manufacturers of other vehicle components, whether or not covered by a standard.; 2. Are RV manufacturers required to provide more proof of complianc than the compliance nameplate?; There is no requirement that manufacturers 'provide proof o compliance', beyond the certification label, as a routine matter (the sense in which the question was probably intended). If the NHTSA discovers evidence of noncompliance with the standards, by testing or otherwise, it normally asks the manufacturer to provide the test results or other information or data that formed the basis for his certification that the product conformed to the particular standard in question. This is a normal function of the administrative process whereby the agency gathers all available information in the course of deciding whether and how to proceed in an enforcement action. Obviously, it is in the manufacturer's interest to maintain carefully the records of testing and other data upon which he bases his certification.; 3. Are defect reports required relative to plumbing or electrica defects which are functional defects but could in some cases have safety implications? Who makes the decision concerning the safety implication?; Defect reports and appropriate notification action are required in th case of any defects determined to be safety-related. These would include defects in the plumbing or electrical systems, as in any other system of the vehicle. Section 113 of the Act requires the vehicle manufacturer to make this determination and take appropriate action on his own initiative. The NHTSA also has the authority to make an independent determination on the question, under procedures that afford the manufacturer the opportunity to present his own evidence.; 4. Is there a statutory requirement that rulings and standards in fac be reasonable, and in fact reduce some known hazard? If so, how do you establish the fact that a particular hazard is real, does exist and the proposed standards will reduce such hazards?; The act requires that a standard 'shall be practicable, shall meet th need for motor vehicle safety, and shall be stated in objective terms,' and also that it be 'reasonable, practicable, and appropriate for the particular type of motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment for which it is prescribed.' The NHTSA devotes a great deal of effort to establishing that hazards are 'real', and that a standard 'will reduce such hazard'. The effort is multifaceted, and includes analysis of known accident data, existing research data, research studies and tests funded and managed by NHTSA, information gathered from industry and other sources, and the knowledge and expertise of NHTSA technical personnel.; 5. What will be the NHTSA's view in regard to a motor home that exceed the chassis manufacturer's GVWR?; Under the new certification regulations scheduled to come into effec January 1, 1972, the final-stage manufacturer will have the responsibility for establishing the GVWR of his vehicle, and there are no inherent restrictions on the value that he establishes. It is anticipated that the standards will base many of the performance requirements on the GVWR and GAWR of the vehicle, and it may often be to the final- stage manufacturer's advantage to remain within the incomplete vehicle manufacturer's recommended values in order to take full advantage of the protections provided by the regulation on Vehicles Manufactured in Two or More Stages.; 6. Mr. Wood's talk mentioned that 'some trailers' might be included i the definition of 'passenger motor vehicle' in S 976, the 'Hart Bill'. What trailers are 'some trailers'?; Our opinion on the meaning of terms in bills before Congress can onl be speculative, and the terms in question may be changed if and when the bill is enacted, or clarified by legislative history. 'Motor vehicles' under the present National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act clearly include trailers. We are not sure whether or not the reference in the definition ('any motor vehicle manufactured primarily for the transportation of its operator and passengers upon the public streets, roads, and highways') to 'its operator' is intended to excluded trailers.; 7. Do you think that the NHTSA should use 'due care' before proposing standard to be reasonably certain that there exists correlation between a small- scale test and realistic tests--which are preferably large scale?; The answer to question 4. includes the statutory criteria under whic the NHTSA operates in issuing standards and regulations. The validity of test procedures is one of the basic things that must be taken in to account by the NHTSA in the issuance of any regulation.; 8. When a proposal or rule is issued, have the test procedures bee proven by the government? If not, how can 'doubted' results be correlated by the NHTSA test facilities? How do you compare results as related to test equipment?; In terms of the broad generalities of the question and the scope o this letter, little more can be said in addition to the answers to questions 4. and 7. The agency must make every reasonable effort to assure that the standards meet the statutory criteria, and are the best way of dealing with the safety problems involved.; 9. What are the present tie down angle requirements for seat belts an are there any exceptions?; The requirements for seat belt installations are contained in th published standards, and we request that persons concerned with requirements such as those mentioned first examine the standards as they relate to his particular case. We will be pleased to answer questions related to specific requirements of the standards, either by letter or in person.; 10. It would seem that the standards and due care testing lead to concentration of the industry into a few major companies. Is NHTSA concerned about this effect and is it willing to see it happen in order to accomplish NHTSA's goal?; The economic impact of the standards is one of the main concerns of th NHTSA in its rulemaking activity, it is part of the determination of 'practicability' required by the Act. Mr. Toms devoted a major part of his address at the banquet (after the question was asked) to this problem, and his remarks probably contain the most complete discussion on the subject that we can offer.; 11. Which, if any, of the speakers has had personal experienc vacationing in a recreational vehicle?; The speakers, and other personnel of the NHTSA, have the responsibilit to discharge their functions as objectively and fairly as possible, unbiased by their 'personal experiences', vacationing or otherwise. We hope and intend that the motor vehicle safety program will, to the greatest extent possible, enable the public to have safe and enjoyable vacation experiences with your members' products.<<<; Sincerely, Lawrence R. Schneider, Acting Chief Counsel