Interpretation ID: 77-5.12

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 12/21/77

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Joseph J. Levin, Jr.; NHTSA

TO: Robert W. Becker

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in response to your letter of November 7, 1977, asking whether a U.S. importer of tires for resale would be considered the "manufacturer" of those tires for purposes of complying with the identification mark requirements contained in Part 574, Tire Identification and Recordkeeping.

Section 102(5) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1391 et seq.) defines the term "manufacturer" as

any person engaged in the manufacturing or assembling of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment, including any person importing motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment for resale.

According to this definition, the U.S. firm to which you refer would be considered the "manufacturer" for purposes of compliance with the Traffic Safety Act and any standards of regulations promulgated thereunder. This would include compliance with the tire identification and recordkeeping requirements in 49 CFR Part 574. As the manufacturer of the tires, the U.S. importer would be permitted to place its own identification mark on the tires, as required under @ 574.5, in lieu of the European tire producer as the manufacturer of the tires. By this action, all duties imposed upon tire manufacturers under Part 574 would be the responsibility of the U.S. importer.

SINCERELY,

WALTER BECKER

NOVEMBER 7, 1977

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

ATTN: Legal Department

Re: Interpretation of 15 USC 1391(5)

A foreign client of ours has posed a question concerning the interpretation of the 15 U.S.C. 1391(5) definition of "manufacturer" as it applies to the Federal Safety Standards Act, and in particular, to 49 CFR 574.5(a), which requires that the manufacturer's assigned identification mark be molded onto each tire he manufactures.

Our client produces tires for a U. S. firm in their name and pursuant to their specifications. I would therefore respectfully request that you furnish us with a ruling under these circumstances as to whether in fact the referenced U.S. firm is the "manufacturer" (inasmuch as, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1391 (5), they are "importing the motor vehicle equipment for resale"), and therefore only the identification mark of the U.S. firm, and not of the foreign producer, must appear on each tire. This question of interpretation is of grave concern to the parties involved since the U. S. firm finds it, understandably, offensive to sell tires in its own name with a symbol thereon which can be traced back to the foreign producer. At the same time, the intent of the statute would in no way be circumvented by including only the U. S. firm's identification mark since this firm would maintain records of the source of their tires.

Your attention to the above matter is greatly appreciated.

Robert W. Becker