[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 166 (Monday, August 29, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-21250]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: August 29, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 580
[Docket No. 92-20; Notice 4]
Petition for Approval of Alternate Odometer Disclosure
Requirements
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation.
ACTION: Notice of preliminary determination.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NHTSA's regulation concerning odometer disclosure sets forth
procedures by which a State may petition for approval of alternate
disclosure requirements to those otherwise required by the regulation.
In accordance with these procedures, the State of Florida has submitted
a petition for approval of alternate disclosure requirements allowing
the State not to require the disclosure of the addresses of motor
vehicle dealer transferors and transferees. NHTSA believes that an
odometer disclosure statement that does not include these addresses
threatens the integrity of the current system, and that Florida's
proposed alternative does not properly accommodate the purposes which
these addresses serve. Accordingly, NHTSA preliminarily denies
Florida's petition for approval of the proposed alternate disclosure
requirements.
DATES: Comments concerning this preliminary denial are due no later
than September 28, 1994.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should refer to the docket number of this
notice and should be submitted to: Docket Section, Room 5109, National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW.,
Washington, D.C. 20590. (Docket hours are 9:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.)
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Donaldson, Office of the Chief
Counsel, Room 5219, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400
Seventh Street, SW., Washington, D.C. 20590, (202) 366-1834.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
To address the problem of odometer fraud, 49 U.S.C. chapter 327
(previously 15 U.S.C. 1981 et seq.) (the Act) provides that each person
transferring ownership of a motor vehicle must disclose the mileage on
the vehicle's title. The Act requires the States to conform their
procedures to enable the titles they issue to be used for odometer
disclosure. Section 32705(d) of the Act directs NHTSA to approve
alternate methods of odometer disclosure submitted by a State, provided
that those methods are consistent with the purposes of the disclosure
required by the Act.
NHTSA's implementing regulation, 49 CFR part 580, identifies
specific elements to be included in the odometer disclosure statement
(49 CFR 580.5 and 580.7). The elements of central importance to the
instant petition are the name and current address of both the
transferor and the transferee. The regulation also sets forth
procedures a petitioning State must follow to seek approval of
alternate requirements to those otherwise required of the State (49 CFR
580.11). In accordance with this latter provision, the State of Florida
has submitted a petition for approval of alternate disclosure
requirements.
Basis for the Petition
Florida seeks approval for alternative procedures to those
contained in 49 U.S.C. 32705(b) (previously 15 U.S.C. 1988(d)) and 49
CFR 580.5 (c)(3) and (c)(4). (The petition identifies paragraphs (c)(2)
and (c)(3) of the regulation, but it is clear from its context that
paragraphs (c)(3) and (c)(4) were intended.) These provisions require
odometer disclosure statements to be made on a title produced by means
of a secure printing process and to include the name and current
address of the transferor and transferee.
Florida currently uses two motor vehicle title forms, copies of
which were submitted with the petition. In all aspects of relevance
here, the forms are identical. Both forms contain one block for
transfer of title by seller on the front and three blocks for dealer
reassignment and one block for application for title on the back.
Florida states that the transfer of title and the dealer reassignment
blocks appear as prescribed by 49 CFR 580.5, except that they do not
contain a space for the address of the transferor and transferee.
Notwithstanding the absence of address spaces in these locations,
Florida asserts that its titles comply with the Federal requirements in
all cases except those involving reassignment by a licensed motor
vehicle dealer.
Florida explains that State law (Florida Statutes, Chapter 319)
precludes the assignment of a motor vehicle title by anyone other than
the person in whose name the title was issued, unless the person is a
dealer. Consequently, in a sale between non-dealers, Florida points out
that the required addresses will be available because the transferor's
address appears on the front of the title and the transferee's address
will eventually appear in the block for ``Application for Title by
Purchaser.'' Citing NHTSA's determination (53 FR No. 151 at 29470, Aug.
5, 1988) that information located elsewhere on the title need not be
repeated in the disclosure statement, Florida argues that its titles
comply with Federal requirements related to transfers between non-
dealers.
The alternate procedures for which Florida seeks approval apply to
transfers by or between licensed dealers. Florida acknowledges that its
titles do not make accommodation for the address of a dealer. Instead,
the dealer is required to include its license number in the
reassignment block appearing on the back of the title, when effecting a
subsequent transfer. According to Florida, the Department of Highway
Safety and Motor Vehicles (DHS) maintains records of all licensed
dealers in the State, indexed by both license number and name, from
which current address information is freely available upon request.
Florida asserts that this system is superior to the requirement of
NHTSA's regulation, because the State records contain the latest
available address information, and because consumers can be informed by
the DHS of avenues of relief through the State's consumer complaint
process and its $25,000 dealer license bond. Accordingly, Florida
concludes that the odometer disclosure procedures it imposes on dealers
are fully consistent with the purposes behind the Federal odometer
disclosure requirements, and that its petition should therefore be
granted.
Preliminary Determination
With respect to motor vehicle transfers in which no party is a
dealer, NHTSA agrees that the odometer disclosure procedures imposed by
Florida comply with Federal odometer disclosure requirements. While it
is preferable, from the standpoint of clarity, for the purchaser's
address to appear in the transfer block on the front of the title, we
nevertheless conclude that Florida's procedure adequately accommodates
all statutory and regulatory requirements covering these non-dealer
transactions.
NHTSA does not agree, however, that the procedures Florida imposes
on transactions in which at least one party is a dealer are consistent
with the purposes of the Federal requirements. Even assuming that
consumers are afforded unhindered access to in-state dealer address
information maintained by the DHS pursuant to its licensing authority,
this system fails to recognize the interstate nature of motor vehicle
transfers. Should a dealer from another State be involved in the chain
of transfer on a Florida title, the DHS would be unable to provide the
required address information. Moreover, without any identifying
information beyond a license number from an unknown State, it would be
extremely difficult to determine the location of an out-of-state
dealer.
NHTSA believes that Florida's proposed procedures would hinder
enforcement efforts, which rely on readily available address
information for all transferors and transferees in order to trace the
sales histories of motor vehicles. It is also worth noting that title
blocks lacking a common information element accepted by most States as
the norm for compliance with odometer disclosure requirements are more
likely to be questioned or rejected in interstate transactions. NHTSA
is aware of several such occurrences, and is mindful of their negative
impacts on interstate title transfers. Accordingly, the agency
concludes that Florida's approach is inconsistent with the purposes of
the odometer disclosure laws, and it preliminarily denies Florida's
petition.
Written Comments
Interested persons are invited to comment on this notice. It is
requested that ten copies be submitted.
All comments must be limited to 15 pages in length. This limitation
is intended to encourage commenters to detail their primary arguments
in a concise fashion. Necessary attachments may be appended without
regard to the 15-page limit. (49 CFR 553.21.)
Written comments to the public docket must be received by September
28, 1994. All comments received before the close of business on the
comment closing date will be considered and will be available for
examination in the docket at the above address before and after that
date. To the extent possible, comments received after the comment
closing date will also be considered. However, action on the petition
may proceed at any time after that date. Following the close of the
comment period, NHTSA will publish a final determination on the
petition responding to the comments. NHTSA will continue to file
relevant material in the docket as it becomes available after the
closing date, and it is recommended that interested persons continue to
examine the docket for new material. Those persons desiring to be
notified upon receipt of their comments should enclose, in the envelope
with their comments, a self-addressed, stamped postcard. Upon receiving
the comments, the docket supervisor will return the postcard by mail.
Copies of all comments will be placed in Docket 92-20, Notice 4 of
the NHTSA Docket Section in Room 5109, Nassif Building, 400 7th Street,
SW., Washington, D.C. 20590.
Issued on: August 24, 1994.
John Womack,
Acting Chief Counsel.
[FR Doc. 94-21250 Filed 8-26-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
