Interpretation ID: nht90-4.34

TYPE: Interpretation-NHTSA

DATE: October 5, 1990

FROM: Roger C. Fairchild -- Shutler and Low

TO: Paul Jackson Rice -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 12-14-90 from P.J. Rice to R.C. Fairchild (A36; VSA 102(3))

TEXT:

We are writing on behalf of a client who wishes to import an off-road vehicle called the Pinzgauer. We request your opinion as to whether this vehicle is considered to be a "motor vehicle" within the meaning of section 102(3) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, and is therefore subject to motor vehicle safety standards.

The Pinzgauer model in question is a six wheel, six wheel drive (6x6) cross country vehicle that is manufactured by Steyr-Daimler-Puch in Austria. A 4x4 version of the Pinzgauer is also produced, but this request relates only to one 6x6 vehicle. The veh icle has a turbo-diesel engine and is rated at approximately 10,000 pounds GVWR.

Enclosed for your consideration are copies of factory brochures on the vehicle (enclosure 1). As can be seen from the brochures, the vehicle was designed to operate on a wide variety of terrain conditions. Its features, such as locking differentials, 4 5 degree gradeability, 335 mm ground clearance, 40 degree angle of approach, 45 degree angle of departure, and 700 mm deep water fording capability clearly distinguish the Pinzgauer from Jeep-type utility vehicles. The Pinzgauer's unusual body configura tion sets it apart from typical on-road vehicles. As noted in the enclosed letter from the vehicle's manufacturer (enclosure 2), the Pinzgauer "was developed as an off-road vehicle with limited on-road suitability."

The Pinzgauer was designed and is principally used for military purposes. According to the manufacturer, approximately 95 percent of the 1,100 Pinzgauers that are produced annually are sold to the armed forces (see enclosure 2). The U.S. Special Forces have purchased a small number of these vehicles. Examples of military uses of the Pinzgauer include uses as platforms for rocket launchers, anti-aircraft guns, mobile workshops and field medical shelters (see enclosure 3). The importer of the vehicle i n question plans to use the vehicle for off-road, recreational purposes. A photo of the vehicle in question is enclosed (see enclosure 4).

According to Steyr-Daimler-Puch, the one vehicle that competes directly with the Pinzgauer in terms of similarity of product and design philosophy is the Mercedes Unimog. On February 7, 1984, NHTSA determined that the Unimog is excluded from the "motor vehicle" category. (See enclosure 5). It appears that both vehicles provide a platform enabling substantial off-road activity, although the Unimog would appear to be used on-road to a greater extent than the Pinzgauer (for highway maintenance purposes). We see no basis for establishing differing classifications for these directly competitive vehicles, particularly classifications based on a finding that the Unimog is used off-road to a greater extent than the Pinzgauer. To do

so would inappropriately provide a major competitive advantage to one manufacturer over the other.

On March 25, 1982, NHTSA issued an interpretation letter regarding the classification of Pinzgauer vehicles. In that letter (see enclosure 6), the agency stated that the Pinzgauer presents a "borderline case" in terms of classification as a motor vehicl e. The agency concluded that, based on available information, the Pinzgauer appeared to be a "motor vehicle." However, the agency also stated that if additional information on five matters (principally relating to the marketing of the vehicle) were prov ided, the agency might reach a different conclusion. The agency offered to reconsider the matter if such information were provided.

Since the current situation involves an owner of a single vehicle wishing to import the vehicle for personal use and does not involve any plan to market the vehicle commercially, we cannot address several of the five information requests. The point rega rding on-street licensing may not be relevant, due to the nearly exclusive use of the vehicles by national military services. To the best of our knowledge, the only Pinzgauers that have been sold in recent years for use in the United States were purchas ed by the Special Forces. An off-road use warning label would not be of significant value where no sale of the vehicle is intended, but such a label could be affixed, if necessary to assure off-road status.

On the other hand, we believe that certain circumstances distinguish the current matter from the one that was raised in 1982. These circumstances are:

1. The current request relates solely to the 6x6 version of the Pinzgauer. This version has a unique body configuration and drive train which distinguish the vehicle from typical, on-road vehicles and make the vehicle particularly well suited to off-road use. It is our understanding that the 1982 letter related to the entire Pinzgauer line, including the 4x4.

2. On February 7, 1984, NHTSA issued a letter stating that the Unimog is not a "motor vehicle." As noted above, the Unimog is comparable to and directly competitive with the Pinzgauer. We believe that the two vehicles should be regulated in a consisten t manner.

3. It is our understanding that the information submitted with respect to the 1982 consideration of the Pinzgauer by NHTSA did not include substantial information on the manufacturer's principal design intent for the Pinzgauer, for tactical (military), o ff-road use and the high percentage of vehicles that are actually used for such military purposes.

For the reasons set forth above, we believe the 6x6 version of the Pinzgauer is not "manufactured primarily for use on the public streets, roads, and highways ..." within the meaning of section 102(3) of the Safety Act. As discussed above, the vehicle's manufacturer has stated that the Pinzgauer "was developed as an off-road vehicle, with limited on-road suitability." We believe that this description of the design intent for the Pinzgauer is particularly true with regard to the 6x6 version; that versi on has a drive-train configuration that is useful in a harsh off-road

environment, but is overdesigned for on-road use.

If you have any questions on this matter, please feel free to contact us.