Interpretation ID: nht87-1.60
TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA
DATE: 04/03/87
FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA
TO: Leon Pauksta -- Traffic Manager, Nichimen America, Inc.
TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION
TEXT:
Mr. Leon Pauksta Traffic Manager Nichimen America, Inc. 225 North Michigan Avenue Suite 2322 Chicago, IL 60601-5983
This responds to your February 20 and March 18, 1987 letters requesting guidance on the information which you should provide us so that we can issue an opinion whether a particular vehicle is considered to be a motor vehicle. You explained that this requ est was made with reference to a mini pickup truck your company is considering importing from Taiwan, and that the truck would be used as "off-the-road utility conveyances." have set forth below the factors this agency considers in making determinations of whether a particular vehicle is a motor vehicle.
Section 102(3) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, as amended (15 U.S.C. 1391(3)) defines a "motor vehicle" as
any vehicle driven or drawn by mechanical power manufactured primarily for use on the public streets, roads, and highways, except any vehicle operated exclusively on a rail or rails.
We have interpreted this language as follows. On the one hand, vehicles that are equipped with tracks or are otherwise incapable of highway travel are plainly not motor vehicles. Agricultural equipment, such as tractors, are not motor vehicles. In additi on, vehicles intended and sold solely for off-road use (e.g., airport runway vehicles and underground mining vehicles) are not considered motor vehicles, even though they may be operationally capable of highway travel.
On the other hand, vehicles which use the public highways on a necessary and recurring basis are motor vehicles. For instance, jeep-type utility vehicles are plainly motor vehicles, even though they are equipped with special features to permit off-road o peration. NHTSA has interpreted the definition of "motor vehicle" to include vehicles whose on-road use is substantial, even though use on the public roads is not the vehicles' greatest intended use. Further, if a vehicle is readily usable on the public roads and is in fact used on the public roads by a substantial number of the vehicle's owners, NHTSA has held that the vehicle is a "motor vehicle". This finding was made in the case of dune buggies and regardless of the manufacturer's stated intent rega rding the terrain on which the vehicles were to be operated.
Between these fairly clear areas are the cases the agency has previously characterized as "borderline" cases. These cases typically involve vehicles that have off-road operating capability, but also have on-road operating capability, and about which ther e is little or no evidence about the extent of the vehicle's on-road use. In previous letters of interpretation, this agency has set forth some of the factors it considers to determine whether borderline case vehicles should be classified as motor vehicl es. These factors include:
1. Whether States or foreign countries have permitted or are likely to permit the vehicle to be registered for on-road use;
2. Whether the vehicle is or will be advertised for use on-road as well as off-road, or whether it is or will be advertised exclusively for off-road use;
3. Whether the vehicle's manufacturer or dealers assist or will assist vehicle purchasers in obtaining certificates of origin or title documents.
4. Whether the vehicle is or will be sold by dealers also selling vehicles that are indisputably classified as motor vehicles; and
5. Whether the vehicle has or will have affixed to it a warning label stating that the vehicle is not intended for use on public roads.
If you wish to submit information relevant to the factors discussed above, we would be pleased to consider it and offer you an opinion regarding your vehicle.
Sincerely,
Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel
March 18, 1987
NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION 400 - 7th Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20590
Attn.: Chief Counsel
SUBJECT: Application for Ruling As to Whether a Motor Vehicle is For Primary Use on Public Thoroughfares.
Dear Counsel:
Attached is a copy of our February 20th inquiry. Although it was sent to you almost one month ago we have not received a reply from you.
Because this subject is an active business project for us which is being researched, we do require instructions from your office.
Could you please send instructions as to what kind of information we are required to submit to your office in order to obtain a ruling.
Yours very truly,
NICHIMEN AMERICA INC.
Leon Pauksta, Traffic Manager
cc: Mr. Hattori
February 20, 1987
NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION 400 - 7th Street. S.W. Washington, D.C. 20590
Attn.: Chief Counsel
SUBJECT: Application for Ruling As to Whether a Motor Vehicle is Considered for Primary Use on Public Thoroughfares.
Dear Counsel:
We have been researching the feasibility of importing mini pickup-truck type motor vehicles from Taiwan for use in the U.S. as off-the-road ultility conveyances.
Would you kindly provide instructions as to what kind of information we must submit to your office and any formal application format we should use. It would also be helpful if you could give an estimated time-frame such ruling procedure would involve.
Your prompt response and assistance in this matter would be greatly appreciated.
Yours very truly,
NICHIMAN AMERICA, INC.
Leon Pauksta. Traffic Manager
cc: Mr. Hattori