Interpretation ID: nht91-6.20

DATE: October 10, 1991

FROM: James M. Watson

TO: Paul Jackson Rice -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TITLE: Re United States Custom Service file no. 866522R

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 12-10-91 from Paul Jackson Rice to James Watson (A38; VSA 102(3))

TEXT:

I am writing to ask your assistance in a disagreement with Customs about whether a farm vehicle I hope to import has to meet Federal highway safety standards. I am a mechanical engineer living on a small farm. On a trip to Thailand, I saw a unique Thai farm vehicle which I thought would be very convenient to bring bales of hay down from my field for storage in my barn. I am engaged in the process of trying to import one.

I requested a tariff classification ruling from the United States Customs Service in New York. I included a brief discussion in my descriptive literature of those features whose presence or absence indicate it is a farm vehicle rather than a motor vehicle. I was shocked when they decided it is a motor vehicle and enclosed a booklet which says a motor vehicle must be brought into compliance with the DOT motor vehicle highway safety standards before it can enter the country.

I wrote Customs asking how to appeal their ruling. I also wrote DOT NEF-32 a letter, with a copy to Customs, asking if one of its engineers could review Customs' file to offer an opinion whether the vehicle falls within DOT's purview. Customs recently informed me that they have sent the referenced file to U.S. Customs Service Headquarters, 1301 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20229 for their review. If they change their mind, this request for help could become moot. Meanwhile, a DOT engineer called to discuss the matter, sent me a copy of N40-30 (TWH), "Vehicles which are affected by the Federal Safety Standards", and advised me to send you my copies of the material I sent to Customs.

I have enclosed copies of the documents I sent to or received from U.S. Customs. Having read N40-30, I believe my difficulty with Customs derives from my description of these vehicles being used on highways IN THAILAND, even though I tried to make it clear how I intend to use it in the United States and why almost anything can use the roads over there. If you need additional information, you can write to my return address or call me during the day at (412)-655-1200. Your assistance will be appreciated.

LIST OF ENCLOSED DOCUMENTS

A. 22 August 1991 letter from James M. Watson to U.S. Customs in New York City requesting classification for e-tant farm vehicle. Three pertinent sentences have been highlighted.

B. "Information Regarding the Farm Vehicle" enclosure to document A.

Eleven pertinent sentences have been highlighted.

C. Undated postcard received about 30 August 1991 from U.S. Customs in New York City to James M. Watson.

D. 11 September 1991 letter from U.S. Customs in New York City to James M. Watson classifying e-tant as motor vehicle.

E. Customs' Importing a Car" booklet which accompanied document D.

Markings added by Customs on the cover, page 8 and page 10 have been highlighted, as have statements of particular concern to me on page 2.

F. 18 September 1991 letter from James M. Watson to Jean F. Maguire (U.S. Customs in New York City) protesting classification of e-tant as motor vehicle. Two pertinent paragraphs have been highlighted.

G. 17 September 1991 letter from James M. Watson to Jean F. Maguire (U.S. Customs in New York City) enclosure to document F.

H. 19 September 1991 letter from James M. Watson to U.S. DOT with copy to Jean F. Maguire (U.S. Customs in New York City).

I. 30 September 1991 postcard from U.S. Customs in New York City to James M. Watson.

J. 3 October 1991 letter from James M. Watson to U.S. Customs in Washington, D,C. responding to document I. Seven pertinent sentences have been highlighted.

K. 4 October 1991 letter from Jean F. Maguire (U.S. Customs in New York City) to James M. Watson indicating file was forwarded to U.S.

Customs in Washington, D.C. for review.