ID: 20314.ztv

Ronald R. Sheldon, President
Metro Motors Corporation
2595 North Orange Blossom Trail
Kissimmee, FL 34744

Dear Mr. Sheldon:

This is in reply to your letter to Taylor Vinson of this Office, asking if there has been a change of policy regarding whether off-road vehicles are considered motor vehicles. I apologize for the delay in our response. As discussed below, there has not been any change in our policy

We informed Mr. Sanford of Metro Motors in a letter dated January 25, 1999 that it was our opinion that the small truck Metro wished to import was not a "motor vehicle" required to comply with Federal motor vehicle safety regulations. We listed several factors that we took into consideration in our decision. You claim that we stated that "these vehicles could not be sold through automotive distribution, nor could they bear the brand name of an automobile company selling licensable automobiles." You report that Kia Motors has announced that it will begin marketing this type of vehicle with the Kia brand name and through its distribution system.

In our January 1999 letter, we explained that in instances where the agency is asked whether a vehicle is a motor vehicle when it has both off-road and on-road operating capabilities, and about which there is little or no evidence about the extent of the vehicle's on-road use, we have applied five factors in offering our advice. In our letter, we listed the five factors, and discussed how they applied to your vehicle, as follows:

1. Whether the vehicle will be advertised for use on-road as well as off-road, or whether it will be advertised exclusively for off-road use.

You stated that your product literature contains an advisory that the vehicles are for off-road use only. This factor suggests that the vehicles should not be considered motor vehicles.

2. Whether the vehicle's manufacturer or dealers will assist vehicle purchasers in obtaining certificates of origin or title documents to register the vehicle for on-road use.

The sample certificate of origin you enclosed in your letter states "THIS VEHICLE DOES NOT CONFORM TO ALL SAFETY AND EMISSIONS STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO ON-ROAD VEHICLES IN THE UNITED STATES." Therefore, this factor would indicate that the vehicles should not be considered motor vehicles.

3. Whether the vehicle is or will be sold by dealers also selling vehicles that are classified as motor vehicles.

As noted previously, you have informed us that the vehicles "will be marketed to industrial equipment distributors (forklift dealers) and professional turf dealers (golf course equipment firms) and specialty houses (industrial sweeper & scrubber dealers)." The vehicles sold by these dealers are not motor vehicles. This factor suggests that the vehicles should not be considered motor vehicles.

4. Whether the vehicle has or will have affixed to it a warning label stating that the vehicle is not intended for use on the public roads.

As noted above, two warning placards will be affixed to the exterior of the vehicle body. This factor would indicate that the vehicles are not motor vehicles.

5. Whether states or foreign countries have permitted or are likely to permit the vehicle to be registered for on-road use.

Since the vehicles closely resemble small trucks and vans used on the public roads, it is possible that states would permit them to be registered for highway use. In fact, the State of Maryland has issued an emissions approval certificate for one of the vehicles. Therefore, this factor suggests that the vehicles should be considered motor vehicles.

Based on the representations in your letter and considering all of the five factors discussed above, on balance, we believe that your vehicles are not "motor vehicles." However, we will reexamine this conclusion if we learn that, for example, the vehicles are in fact used on the public roads by a substantial number of owners.

As indicated by the discussion presented in our January 1999 letter, the issue of whether the vehicle is or will be sold by dealers also selling vehicles that are classified as motor vehicles is one of several factors that we consider together in determining whether it is a motor vehicle; the factor is not determinative by itself.

Sincerely,
Frank Seales, Jr.
Chief Counsel
ref:571
d.5/4/00

ID: nht73-2.44

DATE: 12/14/73

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Lawrence R. Schneider; NHTSA

TO: Alexander F. Klein

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: Your letter of December 3, 1973, indicates that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Region II office referred you to this office for an explanation of your rights under the Federal odometer disclosure requirements.

After January 18, 1973, the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act prohibited alteration, resetting, or disconnection of a vehicle odometer with the intent to defraud a purchaser. After March 1, 1973, regulations under the Act require each seller to make a signed, written disclosure of a vehicles recorded mileage to his purchaser. If he knows the odometer reading is inaccurate, he must also state that the actual mileage is unknown. This statement must be made before the vehicle is sold.

If these regulations were violated in your particular case, as Trooper Moran's investigation may indicate, a civil remedy is available to you under @ 409 of the Act for $ 1,500 or treble damages, whichever is greater. To obtain your remedy, @ 409 provides that you may bring a private civil action in State or Federal court.

You may wish to consult an attorney about the possibility of bringing an action in your case. I am enclosing the relevant portion of the Act and the odometer regulation for your information.

ENCLS.

December 3, 1973

Ref: Martin Pincus D/B/A Four Ace Service 3718 Hempstead Tpke. Levittown, New York

Chief Counsel National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Dear Sir;

I was informed by your Westchester office that you could be of assistance to me.

I purchased a 1968 Odsmobile from referenced dealer, june 4, 1973 for $ 1545.00 fifteen hundred fourty five dollars.

Due to the investigation of "Trooper J. Moran" of the State of New York motor vehicle department, it has been proven that the odometer was turned back prior to my purchase.

I would very much appreciate any assistance that you can give me in effect in reimbursement.

Respectfully,

Alexander F. Klein

November 30, 1973

State of New York County of Suffolk Town of Huntington

I, Alexander F Klein, was born on Sept. 7, 1924 in New York City, New York and presently reside at 43 Columbine Lane, Kings Park, New York. I am employed as an inspector for the Department of Defense.

On June 4, 1973 I purchased a used 1968 Brown Oldsmobile Toronado, 2-door, hard-top, Vehicle Identification Number 394878M611769 from Martin Pincus at Four Ace Service, 3718 Hempstead Tpke., Levittown, New York. At the time of purchase I requested a bill of sale and Mr. Pincus instructed a middle-aged woman in his office to write out the bill of sale. Mr. Pincus gave me a bill of sale recording the sale of the vehicle for $ 1,000 and signed by George M. Carbone. Mr. Pincus also gave me a "Used Motor Vehicle Warranty". When I purchased the vehicle the mileage registering device on the dashboard showed a mileage of 39,999 miles. On May 15, 1973 I left a $ 50 check deposit with Four Ace and on June 4, 1973 I gave Mr. Pincus a certified check for $ 1,450 for the remainder of the balance. An additional check for $ 45 for muffler repairs was also given to Mr. Pincus.

False statements made herein are punishable as a Class A(Illegible Word) pursuant to Section 210.45 of the Penal Law.

Sworn to before me this 30th day of November 1973.

John M. Moran Trooper

Signed:(Illegible Words)

Witness: John M. Moran

ID: 1985-01.37

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 02/26/85

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank Berndt; NHTSA

TO: Mr. Giorgio Kirchner Federazione Italiana Fuoristrada

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

AIR MAIL

Mr. Giorgio Kirchner Segreteria Generale Federazione Italiana Fuoristrada 20131 Milano Via Capranica, 4 ITALY

Dear Mr. Kirchner:

This responds to your letter asking for information about U.S. Federal laws covering tires. For your information, I have enclosed a copy of a letter I sent to a Brazilian tire manufacturer last year, explaining all of the requirements which must be satisfied by a foreign manufacturer selling tires in the United States and enclosing copies of the pertinent regulations.

You stated that you were particularly interested in knowing the meanings and the corresponding values of identification symbols required to appear an sidewalls of tires subject to Standard No. 119. You listed as examples of symbols you were interested in load range and "P.R."

The load range is a letter between "A" and "N", with an A being the lowest load range and N being the highest. Load ranges are designed to tires for use on motor vehicles other than passenger cars because such tires may have identical physical dimensions and, therefore, identical size designations, but widely differing load-carrying capabilities. To ensure that these tires are used only in situations where their load-carrying capability is sufficient, section S6.5(j) of Standard No. 119 requires a letter designating the load range to appear on the sidewall of each tire for use on motor vehicles other than passenger cars. If you are interested in learning the load-carrying capability of the load ranges assigned to a particular tire size, you should contact one of the standardization organizations listed in section S5.1(b) of the enclosed copy of Standard No. 119.

I believe that the symbol "P.R." refers to the ply rating for a tire. The ply rating is an older system which performed the same function now served by the load range. Under the ply rating system, tires were rated from 2 to 24 plies, with the lower numbers indicating a lesser load-carrying capability. Standard No. 119 does not require that a ply rating appear on the sidewall of tires. I have enclosed a copy of a page from the most recent yearbook published by the American standardization organization, the Tire a Rim Association, which shows how to convert a ply rating to the appropriate load range.

If you need further information or have any questions on the enclosed materials, please feel free to contact me.

Sincerely,

Original Signed By

Frank Berndt Chief Counsel

Enclosures

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 407 7th St. S.W. WASHINGTON D.C. 20580 (Stati Uniti)

Milano, 27.12.84

Re : U.S. Federal Laws covering Tires

Dear Sirs,

We should like to receive information covering the above mentioned U.S. Federal Laws and the one named FMVSS119.

We are particularly interested in knowing the readings (and the corresponding values) of identification symbols carried on tire sidewalls, i.e.:

Load Range, P.R., etc.

We thank you for your assistance.

We remain Yours faithfully Federazione Italiana Fuoristrada Segreteria Generale Giorgio Kirchner

ID: 1984-3.26

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 09/13/84

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank Berndt; NHTSA

TO: R.S. Anson -- Managing Director, Anson Plastics Limited

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: Mr. R. S. Anson Managing Director Anson Plastics Limited Brunleys, Kiln Farm Milton Keynes MK11 3EN England

Dear Mr. Anson: This responds to your July 27, 1984, letter to Mr. George Parker of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) concerning Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 106, Brake Hoses. Your letter was referred to this office for reply.

You asked whether your nylon tubing brake hoses may be sold to vehicle manufacturers in the United States if the tubing met the requirements of Standard No. 106, but did not conform to the requirements of any SAE Standard, viz. , SAE J844, "Nonmetallic Air Brake System Tubing." The answer to your question is yes.

Under Section 108(a) (1) (A) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 (15 U.S.C. 1391 et seq.) manufacturers are prohibited from selling or importing into the United States new motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment manufactured on or after the effective date of any applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard which did not conform with such Standard (15 U.S.C. 1397). If your brake hoses comply with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 106, they may be sold in this country.

Paragraph S4 of Standard No. 106 defines a "brake hose" as:

a flexible conduit, other than a vacuum tubing connector, manufactured for use in a brake system to transmit or contain the fluid pressure or vacuum used to apply force to a vehicle's brakes.

We wish to emphasize that flexible conduits manufactured out of nylon tubing that transmit or contain the pressure or vacuum used to apply force to a vehicle's brakes are "brake hoses." Your nylon tubing air brake hoses are thus required to meet all applicable requirements of the standard. These requirements are extensive and include tests relating to high and low temperature resistance, oil and ozone resistance, length change, air pressure, burst strength, tensile strength, water absorption and tensile strength, zinc cloride resistance, and end fitting corrosion resistance.

Your hose need not be tested to requirements that are obviously inapplicable.

For example, the adhesion test is not applicable because there are no layers in the hose's construction which could fail to adhere.

By way of background information, the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act imposes general responsibilities on manufacturers of motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment regarding safety defects. Under Sections 151 et seq., manufacturers must notify purchasers about safety-related defects and remedy such defects free of charge. Section 109 imposes a civil penalty of up to $1,000 upon any person who fails to provide notification of or remedy for a defect in motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment.

We are enclosing a copy of FMVSS No. 106, as of this date. For your convenience, we are also enclosing an information sheet entitled "Where to Obtain Motor Vehicle Safety Standards and Regulations."

Finally, in your letter you indicated that Title 49 of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations, Chapter III, specifies requirements for brake tubing designed for use between a towed and towing vehicle. You inquired into the requirements of the Bureau of Motor Carrier Safety for brake tubing used in other applications. We have forwarded your letter to that agency for their reply.

Sincerely,

Frank Berndt Chief Counsel Enclosures

ID: 1985-04.37

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 11/25/85

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Erika Z. Jones; NHTSA

TO: P.J. Pennells

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT:

November 25, 1985 P.J. Pennells Pilkington Glass Limited Triplex House Eckersall Road Kings Norton Birmingham ENGLAND B38 8SR Dear Mr. Pennells: Thank you for your letter of October 7, 1985, concerning the application of our glazing regulation to slow moving vehicles, such as agricultural vehicles and earth moving equipment. I hope the following discussion answers your questions. As with all our safety standards, Standard No. 205, Glazing Materials, applies only to vehicles classified as motor vehicles by the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act. Section 102(3) of the Vehicle Safety Act defines the term "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. The agency does not consider agricultural vehicles, such as tractors, to be motor vehicles since the legislative history of the Vehicle Safety Act indicates that Congress did not intend to cover those vehicles. Whether construction vehicles, such as earth movers, will be considered motor vehicles depends on their use. For example, construction vehicles intended and sold solely for off-road use are not. I have enclosed a copy of an information sheet prepared by the agency which discusses additional factors we consider in determining whether a vehicle meets the statutory definition of "motor vehicle." We would be glad to give you an opinion as to whether a particular construction vehicle would be classified as a motor vehicle for the purposes of our regulations, if you will provide us with specific information about the design characteristics and use of the vehicle. Since the Occupational Safety and Health Administration in the U.S. Department of Labor has regulations which effect off-road construction vehicles, I have referred a copy of your letter to that agency. I hope this information is of assistance to you. If you have any further questions, please let me know. Sincerely, Original Signed By Erika Z. Jones Chief Counsel Enclosures

ID: GF009226

Mr. Siyamak Ahl
KMAK INT'L INC.
639 Maple Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90014

Dear Mr. Ahl:

This responds to your e-mail regarding requirements for brake pad importers. Specifically, you ask whether a brake pad importer must obtain DOT approval or certification. The answer is no.

Title 49, United States Code (U.S.C.), section 30101, et seq. (the Act) authorizes the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to issue safety standards applicable to new motor vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. All motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment manufactured or imported for sale in the United States must comply with all applicable safety standards set forth in 49 CFR Part 571. NHTSA does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301, manufacturers are required to certify that their vehicles and equipment meet applicable requirements.

There is no Federal motor vehicle safety standard (FMVSS) specifically applicable to brake pads. Instead, several FMVSSs regulate entire brake systems. Specifically, Standards No. 105, 121, 122, and 135 regulate brake systems for various types of motor vehicles. Vehicle manufactures are responsible for certifying that their vehicles comply with all applicable FMVSSs, including relevant brake system requirements. Accordingly, brake pad manufactures or importers are not directly responsible for any certification requirements.

We note that despite the fact that NHTSA does not directly regulate brake pads, any brake pad designed to be used on a motor vehicle is an item of motor vehicle equipment and is subject to the notification and remedy (recall) provisions of 49 U.S.C. 30118-30120. If a manufacturer or NHTSA determines that the product contains a safety-related defect, the manufacturer is responsible for notifying purchasers of the defective vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment and remedying the problem free of charge.

Enclosed please find an information sheet for new manufacturers of motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment. I hope this information is helpful. If you need further assistance, please contact George Feygin of my staff at this address or at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Jacqueline Glassman
Chief Counsel

Enclosure
ref:121
d.2/6/04

ID: nht88-3.66

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 10/10/88

FROM: JODY JOHNSON -- IOWA VEHICLE REGISTRATION MOTOR VEHICLE DIVISION

TO: DANIEL F. WIECHMANN

TITLE: NONE

ATTACHMT: ATTACHED TO LETTER DATED 07/05/89 FROM JEFFREY R. MILLER -- NHTSA TO FRED GRANDY, REDBOOK A33 (3); STANDARD 108; LETTER DATED 05/09/89 FROM FRED GRANDY -- CONGRESS TO JERRY CURRY -- NHTSA; LETTER DATED 05/05/89 FROM DANIEL F. WIECHMANN TO ROBER T A. DETERMAN, RE THE STATE OF IOWA VS. BARRY LYNN SPEICH; LETTER DATED 09/23/88 FROM DANIEL F. WIECHMANN TO RUTH SKLUZACEEK, RE THE STATE OF IOWA VS. BARRY LYNN SPEICH, FRANKLIN COUNTY CRIMINAL NO. WD488435; NO 24.432.0788 [321.424] OF THE CODE OF IOWA; LETTER DATED 10/14/88 FROM DANIEL F. WIECHMANN TO RALPH HITCHCOCK -- NHTSA, RE THE STATE OF IOWA VS. BARRY LYNN SPEICH, FRANKLIN COUNTY CRIMINAL NO WD488435; NO. 24.432.0788 [321.424] OF THE CODE OF IOWA

TEXT: Dear Mr. Wiechmann:

Thank you for your letter inquiring on Iowa requirements pertaining to lighting requirements.

The department specifically does not approve head lamp covers. The reason for this is Iowa administrative rule chapter 450, 761 -- 450.1(321) adopts Federal Standards on equipment approval which implements Iowa Code section 321.424.

If the headlamp covers in question meet the Federal Standards they would qualify under Iowa law.

May I suggest contacting the following address to see if the headlamp covers in question comply with the Federal Standards.:

Mr. Ralph Hitchcock

U.S. Department of Transportation

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Standards

NRM-10

400 7th Street SW

Washington, D.C.

Phone: 202-366-0842

Mr. Hitchcock should be able to supply you with the information needed.

If you have any questions, please let me know.

Sincerely,

ID: nht91-5.36

DATE: September 6, 1991

FROM: Paul Jackson Rice -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TO: Vel McCaslin -- Director, Grace After School

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 7-16-91 from Vel McCaslin to Mary Versailles

TEXT:

This responds to your letter of July 16, 1991, asking whether Grace After School is a "school" or "school-related event." This letter was in response to our letter of May 29, 1991, which concluded that the vans used to transport children to your program would be considered "school buses" only if your program is a "school or school-related event." You explained that your program is conducted from 3 p.m. to 6 p.m. daily, and operates under the auspices of Grace Presbyterian Church. The program picks up children from three area schools and brings them to the church. Once there, they are provided with snacks, have a period of about 1 hour for homework, and then go into activities like roller skating, art, music, and religion classes." No transportation home is provided. You also accept children from Grace School, a school which is connected with the church, but those children do not need transportation.

To determine whether a program like Grace After School is a "school," the agency looks at whether the function of the facility is primarily educational or custodial in nature. Based upon the description you have provided, it does not appear that Grace After school is a school.

To determine whether a program like Grace After School is a school-related event," the agency looks at the overall relationship between the program and the schools from which children are being transported to attend the program. Assuming that there is no significant relationship between Grace After School and the schools from which the children are being transported, it does not appear that Grace After School is a school-related event.

I hope you find this information helpful. If you have further questions, please contact Mary Versailles of my staff at this address or by telephone at (202) 366-2992.

ID: nht88-3.92

TYPE: INTERPRETATION-NHTSA

DATE: 11/03/88 EST

FROM: ERIKA Z. JONES -- CHIEF COUNSEL, NHTSA

TO: MAX J. MIZEJEWSKI -- FOREIGN MARKETING SPECIALISTS, INC.

ATTACHMT: LETTER DATED 04-07-88 RE: ROAD READER TO NHTSA FROM MAX J. MIZEJEWSKI, FOREIGN MARKETING SPECIALISTS, INC.; OCC-1862; UNDATED LETTER TO MARK JANSEN, CHEVY DUTY PICK UP PARTS, FROM ERIKA Z. JONES, NHTSA; A32; STD.108

TEXT: This is in response to your letter in which you asked whether a product your company plans to import would be subject to any Federal motor vehicle safety standard (FMVSS). According to your letter, this product, which you refer to as a "Roadreader," att aches to the front of a motor vehicle and has two sensors which give a visual and audible alarm when the vehicle drifts off a road. You indicated that this product would be connected to the wiring related to the turn signals. You noted that this device does not affect vehicle functions such as acceleration, braking lighting, or visibility. You further stated that if required, you would provide the device to NHTSA or another government agency for inspection.

Section 103 of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act ("Safety Act") directs the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to establish safety standards for motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment. Title 49 CFR Part 571 contai ns the safety standards promulgated by the agency. Although you stated that this device does not affect the electrical wiring related to the turn lights, I suggest you closely review Standard No. 108,Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment ( Copy enclosed). This safety standard applies to both motor vehicle equipment installed in new motor vehicles and replacement equipment sold in the aftermarket.

While I cannot conclusively say that this standard is or is not applicable to your product based on the limited facts in your letter, this standard may apply to your product because the wiring for your device is connected to components (i.e., turn lights ) subject to the standard. For instance, S4.5.11 requires that components including the turn signal lamps must be wired to flash. More generally, S4.1.3 forbids the installation of an additional piece of motor vehicle equipment that impairs the lightin g equipment required by Standard No. 108. Therefore,

a device such as yours is permissible as original vehicle equipment provided that it does not impair the effectiveness of the lighting equipment required by the standard.

As for the sale of your product in the aftermarket for vehicles in use, Section 108 of the Safety Act prohibits a manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business from knowingly rendering inoperative any device or element of design ins talled on or in a motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment in compliance with a FMVSS. Since an importer is defined by the Safety Act as a manufacturer, you should assure that installation of your device does not render inoperative, in whole or in part, the turn signal lamp or any other item of motor vehicle equipment subject to Standard No. 108.

As for your second question concerning inspection and approval of your product, you should be aware that NHTSA does not provide approvals of motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment. Under Section 114 of the Safety Act, it is the responsibility of the manufacturer to ensure that its vehicles or equipment comply with all applicable safety standards. Further, as you noted, you would be responsible for recalling any safety-related defects which you or this agency finds in your product.

You also should be aware that laws from particular States may apply to your device. Therefore, you may wish to contact the State and local transportation authorities in the areas where you intend to market your product. The American Association of Moto r Vehicle Administrators (4600 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Va. 22203) may also be able to provide information about State laws concerning devices similar to your product.

Enclossssssure

ID: amphibious_vehicle6175

Mr. Paul Larkin
Compliance and Research Services, Inc.
1701 West Front Street
Plainfield, NJ 07063




Dear Mr. Larkin:

This is in response to your letter, in which you asked if an amphibious vehicle your client is seeking to import would be classified as a "motor vehicle."  As explained below, our answer is yes.

Title 49 U.S. Code 30112 prohibits the importation of any motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment that is not certified to all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards."Motor vehicle" is defined at 49 U.S.C. 30102(a)(6) as:

[A] vehicle driven or drawn by mechanical power and manufactured primarily for use on the public streets, roads, and highways, but does not include a vehicle operated only on a rail line.

Vehicles equipped with tracks, agricultural equipment, and other vehicles incapable of highway travel are not motor vehicles.Certain vehicles designed and sold solely for off-road use (e.g., airport runway vehicles and underground mining vehicles) are not motor vehicles, even if they may be operationally capable of highway travel.

In your letter you stated that your client, Rodedawg International Industries, wishes to import for sale into the U.S. an amphibious vehicle.You stated that the vehicle, the Rodedawg, is designed for "off-road use only, and will be sold, advertised, and marketed as such.You also stated that the certificate of origin will include a statement noting that the vehicle is not designed for use on public roads.You listed various vehicle characteristics demonstrating the vehicles amphibious capabilities and further stated that it is equipped with a throttle stop that limits the maximum speed on roads to 25 miles per hour.

The agency has consistently stated that off-road capabilities alone do not remove a vehicle from the definition of a "motor vehicle" (See letter to Judith Jurin Semo, April 19, 1994).While relevant, vehicle distribution and declarations contained in the certificate of origin are not determinative.The statutory definition directs us to consider the vehicle as manufactured.

Aside from the amphibious nature of the vehicle, the Rodedawg as manufactured is not readily distinguishable from other motor vehicles that have off-road capabilities, e.g., sport utility vehicles.Sport utility vehicles are considered motor vehicles and are generally classified as multipurpose passenger vehicles under our regulations.

We also note that the manufacturers website advertises the Rodedawg as a sport utility vehicle (http://rodedawgsuv.com/index.html, visited July 23, 2005) and represents the vehicle as an automobile.

Based on the design of the vehicle the Rodedawg would be classified as a "motor vehicle". If you have any further questions, please contact Mr. Chris Calamita of my office at (202) 366-2992.

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Wood
Acting Chief Counsel

ref:571
d.1/24/06