Interpretation ID: aiam4388
Esq.
Legal Staff
General Motors Corporation
P.O. Box 33122
Detroit
MI 48232;
Dear Mr. Hand: This responds to your letter seeking an interpretation of Standard No 208, *Occupant Crash Protection* (49 CFR S571.208). Specifically, you asked whether General Motors Corporation (GM) can be deemed the manufacturer of passenger cars produced by Lotus Cars Limited (LCL) for the purposes of S4.1.3.5, the manufacturer attribution provisions of Standard No. 208. After we received your letter, you made us aware of certain changed circumstances. In your letter, you stated that GM did not own the entity that was the exclusive importer of Lotus vehicles, and that GM owned 96 percent of LCL. Subsequently, you have told us that GM wholly owns the companies that import and market Lotus vehicles in the United States and that GM wholly owns LCL. This letter of interpretation is based on the GM - Lotus corporate relationship described in this letter. To the extent that the description in this letter differs from the description set forth in your August, 1986 letter, it reflects our understanding of the changed circumstances. Our conclusion is that, since GM sponsors the importation, distribution, and marketing of these cars, GM may be considered the manufacturer of cars produced by LCL for the purposes of Standard No. 208.; You explained that LCL is a part of Group Lotus, a United Kingdo company that provides engineering services to various motor vehicle manufacturers and produces fewer than a thousand passenger cars a year. Group Lotus is a wholly-owned subsidiary of GM, although LCL designs, builds, and certifies its cars without GM's advice. Approximately 200 Lotus passenger cars are imported into the United States each year by Lotus Performance Cars, Limited Partnership (LPC), a wholly-owned subsidiary of GM. Lotus cars are marketed and distributed in the United States by Lotus Cars USA, Inc., another wholly-owned subsidiary of GM. Hence, GM owns the company that designs and assembles these cars, and GM owns the companies that import and market the vehicles.; Section 102(5) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (1 U.S.C. 1391(5)) defines 'manufacturer' as 'any person engaged in the manufacturing or assembling of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment, including any person importing motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment for resale.' Under this definition, *both* LCL and LPC are statutory manufacturers of Lotus passenger cars. LCL designs and assembles the cars, and has filed a designation of agent for service of process with this agency, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1399(e). By filing a designation of agent, LCL has acknowledged that it is offering its cars for importation into the United States. LPC imports those cars into the United States.; Section S4.1.3.5 of Standard No. 208 sets forth provisions fo instances in which passenger cars have more than one statutory 'manufacturer.' That section provides that the manufacturers may execute an express written contract to specify the manufacturer to which the cars shall be attributed. In the absence of such a contract, S4.1.3.5.1(a) provides that imported passenger cars will be attributed to the importer. Since there is no such contract in this instance, application of this provision means that the Lotus passenger cars, which are produced in the United Kingdom, would be attributed to LPC, the GM subsidiary which imports the cars into the United States.; In the April 12, 1985, proposal to establish attribution requirement in the case of vehicles that have more than one statutory 'manufacturer' (50 FR 14589), NHTSA stated that it considers the statutory definition of 'manufacturer' to be sufficiently broad to include sponsors, depending on the circumstances. See 50 FR 14596. The agency stated that if a sponsor contracts for another manufacturer to produce a design exclusively for the sponsor, the sponsor may be considered the manufacturer of those vehicles, applying basic principles of agency law. On the other hand, the agency stated that the mere purchase of vehicles for resale by a company which also is a manufacturer of motor vehicles does *not* make the purchaser the manufacturer of those vehicles.; Applying these principles to your case, we conclude that GM sponsor the importation of the Lotus vehicles. Both LCL, the actual assembler, and LPC, the actual importer, are wholly-owned subsidiaries of GM. By itself, GM's ownership of both the producer and importer of these cars might not be sufficient to establish that GM was the sponsor of these vehicles for the purposes of Standard No. 208. In addition, however, another wholly-owned subsidiary distributes and markets the vehicles in the United States. GM coordinates the activities of all these subsidiaries. Since GM wholly owns the actual producer of these vehicles and is actively involved in the importation, distribution, and marketing of these vehicles, we believe that GM should be considered to sponsor the importation of the Lotus vehicles. Accordingly, GM rather than LPC, may be considered the importer and manufacturer of these vehicles.; If you have any further questions, please let me know. Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones, Chief Counsel