Pasar al contenido principal
Search Interpretations

Interpretation ID: nht91-3.1

DATE: March 27, 1991

FROM: James E. Rooks, Jr. -- Staff Attorney, Association of Trial Lawyers of America

TO: Paul J. Rice -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 5-29-91 from Paul Jackson Rice to James E. Rooks, Jr. (A37; Std. 205; Std. 212; Std. 216; VSA 108(a)(1)(a); VSA 108 (a)(2))

TEXT:

In conjunction with a research project I am completing, I am writing to request a clarification of a NHTSA position.

I am attaching a copy of a "Legal Advisory" column that appeared in Glass magazine for November 1986. There the general counsel of the National Glass Association (NGA) wrote that NHTSA's chief counsel had advised NGA "that federal windshield safety standards are not applicable to replace- ment windshield installations once vehicles have left their new car dealers' lots." He goes on to state that "no kind or amount of work on a damaged windshield renders it inoperable in violation of federal law (because) it is the original damage to the windshield... that renders the windshield inoperable -- not the company that repairs or replaces the already damaged windshield." Presumably the provision of federal law referred to is Section 1397(a)(2)A) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, as amended.

I would appreciate knowing the following:

1. Whether NHTSA currently adheres to the above position with regard to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards 212 and 216;

2. Whether NHTSA currently adheres to the above position with regard to the cited "render inoperable" provision of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, as amended; and

3. Whether these positions have yet been tested in court; if so, what court, and what was the ruling?

Thank you for your attention to this inquiry. The deadline for my research is Friday, March 29, 1991. I would appreciate it a great deal if I could receive a response as soon as possible.

Any written response may be sent by facsimile to 202-342-5484.

Attachment

Article from "Legal Advisory" by Jerald Jacobs entitled Urethane Versus Butyl Windshield Replacement; Must Urethane be used for windshield replacement? What are the legal consequences? (Text omitted)