Interpretation ID: aiam2130
Engineering Services Department
Bucyrus- Erie Company
South Milwaukee
WI 53172;
Dear Mr. Smith: This responds to Bucyrus-Erie's October 8, 1975, suggestion that th terms 'unloaded vehicle weight' and 'passenger-carrying capacity' be defined in 49 CFR S 571.3 to reflect explanations of them that appeared in the preamble of recent NHTSA rulemaking on Standard No. 121, *Air Brake Systems*. (40 FR 38160, August 27, 1975). You believe that removable portions of a vehicle that are essential to its function (e.g., the boom on a mobile crane) should not be considered part of the vehicle's 'cargo' as that term is used in the present definition of unloaded vehicle weight.; The NHTSA explained in the preamble to which you refer that th unloaded vehicle weight is easily determined by, in most cases, subtracting the weight of cargo and occupants from the gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) assigned to the vehicle by the manufacturer. We believe that the term 'cargo' clearly indicates that the manufacturer must only subtract the weight of commodities or freight that the vehicle is designed to carry as a transportation function. Presumably the manufacturer of a mobile crane would have no difficulty in concluding under the present definition of 'unloaded vehicle weight' that its vehicle does not transport 'cargo' and that no value must be subtracted from the GVWR on this account.; It does appear that the term 'passenger-carrying capacity' used i Standard No. 121 could be expanded to reflect the exclusion of the operating crew from consideration as passengers. In response to your request we are considering an amendment of S3 to make this concept clearer.; Sincerely, Frank A. Berndt, Acting Chief Counsel