Interpretation ID: nht95-6.21
TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA
DATE: August 28, 1995
FROM: Lawrence A. Beyer, Esq. -- Attorney for Liphardt & Associates
TO: Administrator -- NHTSA
TITLE: Petition for Exemption for Inconsequential Defect or Noncompliance
ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO 10/20/95 LETTER FROM JOHN WOMACK TO LAWRENCE A. BEYER (A43; REDBOOK 2; PART 556)
TEXT: This petition for inconsequential defect or noncompliance is submitted under 49 CFR Part 558, on behalf of:
Liphardt & Associates 15 Trade Zone Drive Ronkonkoma, NY
a New York State corporation.
[Illegible Lines]
The non-compliance relates to
49 CFR Part 592.5(f) Notification of change of facility information:
49 CFR Part 592.8(e) Hold period for inspection
49 CFR Part 592.6(f) Poor compliance photography
49 CFR Part 592.6(d) Label may not have correctly identified RI
BACKGROUND:
Liphardt & Associates has been a DOT Registered Importer since 1990, concentrating in the importation of noncomplying vehicles from Europe. However in 1994, due to sudden economic conditions, importation of vehicles from the Canadian market to the US market became viable, and there was significant need for Registered Importers to assist in vehicle importation and certification. The Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance (OVSC) was also deluged with Canadian vehicle importation situations. Liphardt was approached by a Customs House Broker in upstate New York, and was requested to set up an additional facility for the processing (modification, documentation and holding) of [Illegible Line] this facility. It turns out that Liphardt's control over these vehicles was lost, that the processing was handled by persons other than Liphardt authorized personnel and the inconsequential defect or noncompliance occurred. Liphardt notified OVSC of this situation in February, 1995 and conducted its own investigation. In March, 1995, Liphardt voluntarily suspended all Canadian importations, and met informally with NHTSA staff.
SAFETY COMPLIANCE
NHTSA has reviewed compliance packages submitted on these vehicles, and the vast majority have been deemed sufficient for release of compliance bond.
Canadian vehicles, for the most part, differ from US FMVSS only in the following areas:
1. Odometer may not be labeled KM;
2. Passive restraint systems for passenger cars;
Certification Labels must also be affixed to the vehicles in accordance with 49 [Illegible Word]
Many odometers are labeled KM by the original manufacturer. In any event, the odometer/speedometer is routinely changed to a miles based instrument, since the marketability of kilometer based vehicles is severely impaired. All passenger [Illegible Word] Certification labels may have misnamed the Registered Importer. While this in unfortunate, the purpose of naming the RI on the certification label is to ensure that the responsible RI is known for subsequent defect/recalls. OVSC maintains a very accurate computer system in which the VIN and the responsible RI are listed. Therefore, if a vehicle with the wrong name listed on the RI section of the certification label was involved in a situation where the actual RI needed to be involved, NHTSA could easily provide the correct RI name.
Clearly these defects and non-compliance are not significant and are inconsequential to vehicle safety. Liphardt has tried to work within the regulatory framework to advise OVSC of the situations and seeks this petition and exemption process to finalize this matter.
Liphardt has corrected the cause of the noncompliance and will continue to abide by the duties of a registered importer as defined in 49 CFR 592.
Thank you.