Interpretation ID: nht74-3.47

DATE: 05/24/74

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank Berndt; NHTSA

TO: J. Alec Reinhardt

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in reply to your letter of May 17, 1974, asking us to approve language to be substituted for the first two sentences of the second paragraph of White's version of the defect notification letter in campaign #73-0140, as well as substitute language suggested by the Court.

We would consider the language of either submission to conform to 49 CFR Part 577 if the word "may" is stricken. The sentence would then read, "We have found that a defect exists in that. . . ." We have interpreted the regulations to require the finding that the defect exists, not that it may exist. However, the notification letter may indicate that the defect may not be present in every vehicle if that is the case.