Pasar al contenido principal
Search Interpretations

Interpretation ID: aiam0811

Mr. Stan Haransky, Truck Body & Equipment Association, Inc., 5530 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 1220, Washington, DC 20015; Mr. Stan Haransky
Truck Body & Equipment Association
Inc.
5530 Wisconsin Avenue
Suite 1220
Washington
DC 20015;

Dear Mr. Haransky: This is in reply to your letter of July 20, 1972, concerning th Certification of vehicles having a dual purpose. You ask how you should determine weight ratings when a vehicle is intended to carry loads of varying weights, and cite as an example a vehicle designed to carry both gasoline and; 2 fuel oil. You indicate that you are presently placing a secon certification label on the vehicle, a copy of which you enclose, to inform the customer of the allowable weights.; The method you are using may not be consistent with the Certificatio regulations, as our position is that weight or axle values that may be confused with GAWR or GVWR cannot appear on the Certification (Part 567) label, or on adjoining labels. This will be the case if the 'total' in the 'chassis rated weight' column differs from the figure you provide on the Part 567 label for GVWR (assuming that the front and rear axle figures are identical to the GAWR figures on the Part 567 label). Gross vehicle weight rating is not necessarily the total of all axle weight ratings.; We recommend that the weight ratings be computed on the basis of th heaviest load that the vehicle is designed to carry, without attempting (for certification purposes) to anticipate the density of particular cargoes.; Yours truly, Richard B. Dyson, Assistant Chief Counsel