Interpretation ID: nht75-1.44

DATE: 12/01/75

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; R. B. Dyson; NHTSA

TO: Detroit Testing Laboratory

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: I am writing to confirm your November 7, 1975, telephone conversation with Mark Schwimmer of this office, concerning testing for the performance requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 106-74, Brake Hoses. I understand that you have a contract with a hose manufacturer to perform certification testing of the brake hose and brake hose assemblies which he manufactuers, and that four motorcycle companies purchase assemblies from your client which are identical but for their varying lengths.

As Mr. Schwimmer explained, Standard No. 106-74 does not specify the testing which a manufacturer must do before certifying that his hose and assemblies comply; it does specify the performance levels which these products must meet when tested by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration for compliance. The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, as amended, requires the manufacturer to conduct a notification and remedy campaign with respect to noncomplying hose and assemblies. He is also subject to a civil penalty of up to $ 1,000 for each noncomplying assembly (not to exceed $ 800,000 for each related series of noncompliances). The amount of testing which he performs has no effect on his notification and remedy obligations. The civil penalty liability, however, does not apply to a person who establishes that he did not, while exercising due care, have reason to know that his product did not comply. "Due care" is a legal concept evaluated on a case-by-case basis, taking into consideration the size of the company, the amount of testing performed, and other factors.