Interpretation ID: aiam3844
Executive Vice President
MMC Services Inc.
Suite 1960
3000 Town Center
Southfield
MI 48075;
Dear Mr. Kano: This responds to your letter of April 13, 1984, addressed to Mr. Roma Brooks of NHTSA's Office of Enforcement. You stated that you were submitting the letter 'to assure that the Agency and Mitsubishi agree in writing as we did verbally' concerning the compliance of a proposed electronic odometer design with Standard No. 101, *Controls and Displays*. You also stated that lead time dictates an imminent decision on design plans, that the agency's 'early approval/response' to your selected solution is greatly appreciated, and that if you do not hear to the contrary within 30 days, you will assume the agency's concurrence. As discussed below, your letter indicates a serious misunderstanding of both Federal statutory requirements and NHTSA policies and procedures. Moreover, your apparent interpretation of Standard No. 101 is incorrect.; First, NHTSA does not grant approval of motor vehicles or motor vehicl equipment. Under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, it is the responsibility of the manufacturer to assure that its vehicles or equipment comply with applicable requirements.; NHTSA is willing to provide interpretations and opinions in response t reasonable requests. However, such interpretations and opinions are only provided in writing and only by NHTSA's Chief Counsel. The agency does not consider itself bound by verbal statements made by agency employees or by interpretations made by persons other than the Chief Counsel.; Moreover, NHTSA does not offer interpretations by remaining silent i response to letters which assert that such silence is assumed to be concurrence. The agency considers the inclusion of such purported conditions to be inappropriate and does not consider itself bound by them.; The agency regrets if Mr. Brooks' conversation contributed to th misunderstandings apparent in your letter. In the future, questions of interpretation should be addressed in writing to the Chief Counsel.; Your question of interpretation concerns a proposed design for a electronic odometer which would display either miles or kilometers. The following represents our opinion based on the facts provided in your letter.; According to your letter, the vehicle's speedometer would display, a the option of the driver, in either miles per hour or kilometers per hour. The selected unit of measure would be identified by a lighted display reading either 'MPH' or 'Km/h'. The digits of the odometer would correspond to the units of measure selected for the speedometer, but the odometer itself would not identify its units of measure. As discussed below, such a design would not meet the requirements of Standard No. 101, since that standard requires an odometer that indicates kilometers to be identified by 'KILOMETERS' or 'km'.; Section S5 of Standard No. 101 requires that 'each passenger car multi-purpose passenger vehicle and truck or bus less than 10,000 pounds GVWR with any display listed in S5.1 or in column 1 of Table 2, shall meet the requirements of this standard for the location, identification, and illumination of such control or display.' Odometers are one of the displays listed in column 1 of Table 2.; Section S5.2.3 references the requirements of Table 2. Footnote 3 o Table 2 specifies the following requirement for odometers:; >>>If the odometer indicates kilometers, then 'KILOMETERS' (or) 'km shall appear, otherwise no identification is required.<<<; Section S5.2.3 further provides that '(t)he identification required o permitted by this section shall be placed on or adjacent to the display that it identifies.; Standard No. 101 thus requires odometers indicating kilometers to b identified by 'KILOMETERS' or 'km', and such identification must be placed on or adjacent to the odometer. Since your proposed design would indicate kilometers, it would be necessary to identify its units of measure according to these requirements.; I would note that these requirements cannot be met merely by placin the odometer adjacent to the speedometer. While the identification of the selected units of measure for the speedometer could be placed adjacent to both the speedometer and odometer, the identification requirements are different for the two displays. Table 2 requires that a speedometer graduated in miles per hour and kilometers per hour be identified by 'MPH and km/h' in any combination of upper or lower case letters. As discussed above, the requirement for odometers is 'KILOMETERS' or 'km'. A single identification of units of measure cannot meet these requirements simultaneously.; Please note that this opinion is limited to the specific issue raise by your letter and does not consider whether the proposed design would otherwise meet the requirements of Standard No. 101.; Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel