ID: 77-4.45

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 12/02/77

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Joseph J. Levin Jr.; NHTSA

TO: Glen English; House of Representatives

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This confirms the conversation between Judy Dutterer of your staff and Roger Tilton of my staff concerning the applicability of the new Federal school bus regulations to activity buses.

The Motor Vehicle and School Bus Safety Amendments of 1974 (Pub. L. 93-492) defined school bus to include buses used to transport children to and from school and related events. In the legislative history of those amendments, Congress clearly indicated that all buses used to transport school children to and from events related to school should be covered by the new school bus safety standards. Accordingly, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration requires that all activity buses designed to transport school children to and from such events comply with the new standards.

You should note that we have initiated rulemaking, in response to a petition, to examine the issue of whether activity buses should have different requirements applicable to them since they are frequently involved in long distance student transportation. Any action on that issue will be published in the Federal Register.

ID: nht71-2.19

DATE: 03/23/71

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Douglas W. Toms; NHTSA

TO: Mercedes-Benz of North America Inc.

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: In your letter of February 19 you ask about the possibility of "marketing" a total of 350 Mercedes-Benz C-111 vehicles in the United States which would not conform to all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards.

I have checked this matter out with our legal staff and am advised that it is not possible to import and sell vehicles in the United States unless they meet all Federal standards, or unless they have been exempted from compliance pursuant to Section 123 of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966. Such an exemption is not, as you know, available to Mercedes-Benz since your total annual motor vehicle production greatly exceeds 500 units.

It is possible, however, under our importation regulations (19 CFR @ 12.80(b)(2)(vii)), to enter nonconforming vehicles for a period of up to one year and operate them on the public roads for purposes of test and experimentation provided that the vehicles are exported at the end of that time and are not sold in the interim. Leasing of the vehicle would be permitted during this period.

ID: nht73-4.3

DATE: 04/05/73

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Richard B. Dyson; NHTSA

TO: Michelin Tire Corporation

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is to confirm your conversation with Mr. Schmeltzer of this office in which he informed you that the Regrooved Tire regulation (49 CFR Part 569) does not prohibit the use of branding to meet its labeling requirements. The language in section 569.9 which requires the word "regroovable" to be "molded into or onto" tires designed for regrooving was intended to include any method, such as branding, that would leave the required information sunk into or raised upon the tire surface.

ID: nht90-3.100

TYPE: Interpretation-NHTSA

DATE: July 25, 1990

FROM: George C. Shifflett -- Safety Compliance Specialist, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, NHTSA

TO: Oscar W. Harell (Harrell) Jr. -- Deputy Assistant Commissioner, Facilities Management, Department of Mental Retardation

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 9-4-86 from Erika Z. Jones to Vincent Foster; Also attached to letter dated 11-26-79 from Frank Berndt to W.G. Milby; Also attached to letter dated 1-4-91 from Paul J. Rice to Richard Cahalan (A37; Part 567); Also attached to 49 CFR Chapter V (10-1-89 Edition) Part 567 (text omitted); Also attached to letter dated 8-2-90 from O.W. Harrell, Jr. to Office of the Chief Counsel (OCC 5073)

TEXT:

This is in reply to your letter of July 19, 1990 in which you ask for a note of edification regarding two letters prepared by our legal staff that I sent to you having to do with transportation of the handicapped.

Regretfully I am not authorized to provide edification in this regard. Request for interpretations or edification should be sent to:

Office of the Chief Counsel National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Room 5219 400 Seventh Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20590

Best of luck in your field of aiding the handicapped.

ID: nht80-1.43

DATE: 03/27/80

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank Berndt; NHTSA

TO: Great Dane Trailers Inc.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is to confirm your telephone conversation with Mr. Schwartz of my office, in which he advised you that the manufacturer identifier referred to in Docket 1-22, Notice 10, was the manufacturer identifier required by S4.5.1 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 115. Inasmuch as the Society of Automotive Engineers has already assigned a manufacturer identifier to Great Dane Trailer, Inc., this requirement has been met.

I am forwarding your complete VIN plan to the VIN coordinator as required by S6 of the Standard.

ID: nht74-4.15

DATE: 07/15/74

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; A.G. Detrick; NHTSA

TO: Diamond Reo Trucks Incorporated

TITLE: TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in reference to your defect notification campaign (NHTSA No. 74-0080) concerning Rose Gear steering gears.

Thank you for submitting the information which we had requested. The letter which you have sent to the owners of the involved vehicles, however, does not entirely inect the requirements of 49 CFR, Part 577. Specifically, it is required that paragraphs (a) and (b) of Part 577.4 be quoted exactly as they are written in the regulation. The identifying criteria of motor vehicles or item of motor vehicle equipment in paragraph (b) is the motor vehicle itself in cases where the defect exists in a motor vehicle. Your letter also does not give an estimate of the day by which dealers will be supplied with the necessary parts nor an estimate of the time required to perform the labor required to correct the defect (577.4(e) ii and iii).

You also did not state the risk to traffic safety in the manner prescribed by section 577.4(d). The second sentence in paragraph 2" . . .no situations as described above have occurred on Diamond Reo trucks . . ." is, in our opinion, a disclaimer and is prohibited by section 577.6.

It is therefore necessary for you to rewrite the owner notification letter and send a revised letter by certified mail to all owners who have not yet had their vehicles corrected. This should be done as soon as is reasonably possible. A copy of the revised letter should also be submitted to this office.

If you desire additional information, please contact Mr. J. Murray or W. Reinhart at (202) 426-2340. I am enclosing a copy of Part 577 for your information.

ENC.

ID: nht95-2.2

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: March 14, 1995

FROM: David A. White -- Manager of Reliability, Grumman Olson

TO: Administrator, NHTSA

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO 4/14/95 LETTER FROM PHILIP RECHT TO DAVID A. WHITE (A43; PART 567)

TEXT: Dear Sir:

Grumman Olson requests an alternate location for the certification label required in 49 CFR 567.4 be approved for some of our vehicles. The vehicles involved are our Freight Star line which is a van body mounted on either a cut-a-way chassis or a chassi s cab. The Freight Star is installed on a wide variety of chassis with a wide variety of trim levels in the cab. We use a metal tag that is 3.5" X 6.0" which we need in order to put all the information we need in a readable size type. As chassis manuf acturers have made changes to their doors and interiors by downsizing, adding plastic trim and installation of their labels, Grumman Olson has found it increasingly difficult, if not impossible, to locate the certification tag in required locations. The refore Grumman Olson would request approval to locate the certification tag in a similar location specified for trailers, the left side, forward area of the cargo box. This location will allow a uniform location for the tag regardless of chassis model o r trim level. It is our understanding that some manufacturers of similar vehicles place their certification tags in this location and I assume they have already received approval to do so.

I would appreciate a prompt consideration of this request as it would relieve a significant problem we have in completing vehicles.

(PHOTO OMITTED.)

ID: nht72-6.46

DATE: 06/08/72

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; David Schmeltzer; NHTSA

TO: Super Mold Inc.

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in reply to your phone call of June 6, 1972. Under Part 574, the tire identification number may be placed on the side of the top cap area or may be branded into the tire in accordance with the regulation. If the top cap area is used, the number should be as close to the sidewall as is feasible so that the number will remain legible as long as possible. Seetthe enclosed amendment on this subject (Docket No. 70-12; Notice No. 9).

ID: nht73-5.3

DATE: 09/12/73

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Richard B. Dyson; NHTSA

TO: Richard Hrejsa

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in response to your letter of June 4, 1973, requesting information on remedies for a transferor's failure to make an accurate odometer disclosure statement. I apologize for our delay in replying.

Title IV of the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Saving Act, Public Law 92-513, (1) prohibits the resetting or altering of an odometer to change the miles indicated on it, and (2) establishes a requirement that a transferor (seller) make a written odometer disclosure to his transferee (buyer) at the time of sale. These provisions of the law were in effect when you purchased your car in May 1973.

The two remedies for violations of the law are (1) a private civil action for $ 1,500 or treble damages by a subsequent purchaser of the car, and (2) a suit by the United States Attorney to restrain further violations of the Act. This second remedy is normally utilized only in a case of repeated violations.

If the dealer who sold you the car altered or reset the mileage after January 18, 1973, you may have a civil action against him. Also, if it is as it appears in your letter, the dealer made a false and incomplete mileage disclosure to you after March 1, 1973, which may also make him civilly liable to you. His purchase of the car in October 1972 has no bearing on his disclosure obligations to you.

You may wish to consult with an attorney about your rights in this matter. Enclosed are a copy of the Act and implementing regulations for your information.

ENCLS.

ID: LW007646

Mr. Robert Babcock
Manager, Corporate Affairs
Hyundai America Technical Center, Inc.
5075 Venture Drive
Ann Arbor, MI 48108

Dear Mr. Babcock:

This is in response to your letter of October 7, 2004, in which you requested "confirmation that Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 110 presents no obstacle to the inclusion of a label identifier for the Tire and Loading Information label required in the standard. " Your letter appears to seek clarification of the June 3, 2004, final rule amending Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 110, Tire Selection and Rims for Motor Vehicles with a GVWR of 4,536 Kilograms (10,000 Pounds) or Less (69 FR 31306). Paragraph S4.3(h) of that standard allows a vehicle manufacturer to place an optional bar code or vehicle identification number (VIN) on the righthand edge of the vehicle placard and tire information label. Specifically, you asked whether it would be permissible under paragraph S4.3(h) to place an alphanumeric identifier other than the VIN "outside the box" of the label in order to ensure that the correct label is placed on a specific configuration during the assembly process.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is in the process of responding to petitions for reconsideration of the June 3, 2004, final rule, and we expect to issue our response shortly. We will address the issue raised in your letter in our response to the petitions for reconsideration.

Should you have any remaining or additional questions once the response to the petitions for reconsideration is published, please feel free to submit them to the agency. If you have further questions in the interim, you may contact Mr. George Feygin of my staff at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Jacqueline Glassman
Chief Counsel

ref:110
d.11/16/04