Pasar al contenido principal
Search Interpretations

Interpretation ID: aiam1875

Mr. Jeffrey A. Burt, Arnold and Porter, 1229 Nineteenth Street, NW., Washington, DC 20036; Mr. Jeffrey A. Burt
Arnold and Porter
1229 Nineteenth Street
NW.
Washington
DC 20036;

Dear Mr. Burt: This is in response to your letter of April 22 regarding a propose defect notification letter by the Whittaker Corporation.; In our opinion, the proposed letter does not comply with the defec notification regulation (49 CFR, Part 577) and section 153 of the 1974 Amendments to the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act. The specific areas of nonconformance are:; >>>1. The second sentence must be stated in the form and order a required by section 577.4(b), that is, you must add 'defect--which relates to motor vehicle safety--exists.'; 2. The first sentence in the fourth paragraph referring to the fac that no accidents have been reported could be construed as a disclaimer, and is therefore prohibited by section 577.6.; 3. Since owners may inspect these wheels themselves in lieu of having dealer perform the inspection, it is necessary to provide the owner with a return post card so the owner can certify that the wheels were inspected and do not contain a defect or were exchanged for new wheels.; 4. It is necessary to inform the owner that in the event th manufacturer, dealer or distributor is unable or fails to remedy the defect without charge, the owner may notify the Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, D. C. 20590. This is required by section 153(a)(6) of the 1974 amendment.; If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Mr James Murray of my staff at 426-2840.; Sincerely, Andrew G. Detrick, Director, Office of Defect Investigation, Motor Vehicle Programs;