Interpretation ID: aiam2481
Manager
Safety & Environmental Engineering
White Motor Corporation
35129 Curtis Boulevard
Eastlake
OH 44094;
Dear Mr. Lawrence: This is in reply to your letter of February 18, 1977, asking whether 4 CFR Part 577 conflicts with Section 153(c)(4) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act.; Pursuant to Section 153(c)(4) notification by a manufacturer to dealer must be 'by certified mail or other more expeditious means.' On the other hand, Part 577 requires notification to be given by first class mail to the first or most recent purchaser known to the manufacturer, in your view, which could mean a dealer. You stated that the 'apparently conflicting' requirements affect the mailing of notices to dealers when they are the last known purchasers.; There is no conflict. Part 577 is a regulation for the notification o owners of vehicles, not dealers. The regulation sets forth-- 'requirements for notification to owners of motor vehicles' (577.1) and its purpose 'is to insure that notifications of defects or noncompliances adequately inform and effectively motivate owners...to have such vehicles...inspected and, when necessary, remedied as quickly as possible' (577.2). A dealer is not an 'owner' within the intent of Part 577 and a manufacturer's notification obligation to its dealers is that set out in Section 153(c)(4).; Therefore, we cannot confirm that first class mailings from manufacturer to a dealer conform to Part 577, and your letter offers no facts upon which to base a finding that first class mail is a 'more expeditious means' of dealer notification than certified mail.; Sincerely, Frank A. Berndt, Acting Chief Counsel