Interpretation ID: 86-1.21

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 02/04/86

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: Mr. Benjamin R. Jackson

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

February 4, 1986 Mr. Benjamin R. Jackson Executive Director Automobile Importers Compliance Association 1607 New Hampshire Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20009 Dear Mr. Jackson: This responds to your letter requesting an interpretation of 49 CFR Part 541, Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard. Specifically, you on vehicles subject to the theft prevention standard to have the required markings entirely within the target area specified for the part by the original manufacturer of the vehicle. You stated that it was possible that target areas specified by the original manufacturer might be suitable for marking by means of labels, but not suitable for marking by means of inscription. If this situation were to occur, you asked if Part 541 could be interpreted to permit manufacturers that must mark by means of inscription to place those markings outside the target area designated by the original manufacturer. Part 541 cannot be so interpreted. In the case of inscribed markings, 541(d)(2)(iii) specifies that the required markings shall be "placed entirely within the target area specified by the original manufacturer for that part." This requirement applies to all markings inscribed for the purposes of Part 541, whether done by an original manufacturer or a direct importer. The policy bases underlying this requirement were explained at length in the preamble to the final rule establishing Part 541. See 50 FR 43166, at 43172, October 24, 1985. First, it is important that all parts be marked in the same target area so that investigators will know exactly where to look on a part for the required marking. The investigator would be alerted to possible suspicious activity if the marking were outside the target area. Second, the different target areas for original equipment and replacement parts marking are intended to ensure that there will be an adequate separation between the areas where the different types of parts will be marked. This will ensure that a thief cannot obliterate an original equipment part marking and affix a counterfeit replacement part marking directly over the area where the original equipment part marking was located. Both of these purposes would be undercut if original manufacturers and direct importers were allowed to designate different target areas for marking vehicles in the same line, Accordingly, Part 541 explicitly requires only one target area for the required marking on each part of a covered line. We do not believe that your concern about inscribing markings on curved surfaces in well-founded. The agency knows of a number of means of inscribing numbers on curved surfaces that would permit direct importers to mark those surfaces within the $15 cost limit set forth in section 604(a)(2) of the Cost Savings Act. Sincerely, Original Signed By Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel