Skip to main content
Search Interpretations

Interpretation ID: nht75-6.1

DATE: 08/19/75

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank A. Berndt; NHTSA

TO: International Development Service Inc.

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in reply to your letter of July 8, 1975, asking our opinion on several matters.

You first ask:

"1. If our automobile is imported using a used chassis and where a used or rebuilt engine would be installed in the car in the United States, would you consider that this constitutes the vehicle being classified as used?

We consider a vehicle with a used chassis to be a used automobile.

2. If a used chassis is defined as being used by its being previously titled, does it matter where the titling has occurred?

As the previous answer indicates, it does not matter where titling has occurred.

3. If we import, complete, and sell the car under the conditions stated in number one and your opinion was that this constitutes a used vehicle, then, what would our requirements be in reference to the vehicles complying with the Motor Vehicle Safety Standards under the Act of 1966?"

Federal motor vehicle safety standards apply to used vehicles, that are imported into the United States. The standards are those that were in effect on the date of manufacture of the chassis. Further, you would be a manufacturer of motor vehicles and subject to all regulations that apply to manufacturers, chief of which is to notify purchasers upon discovery of any safety-related defect in your product, and to remedy it.

Your fourth question asks what your responsibilities are under four possible plans of shipping components into the United States. I will assume for purposes of this answer that the chassis are new. These four fact situations differ somewhat from the hypothetical presented in your letter of May 31, 1975, of a motor vehicle complete except for its engine. In these four situations, the vehicle is clearly motor vehicle equipment, an assembly that needs further manufacturing operations for completion, and the remarks of Mr. Schultz in his letter of May 5 on this matter set forth your obligations as a supplier of equipment.