Struggling with posting for some reason but
CRISIS OVER!
MANY THANKS DDOYLE, COULDN'T HAVE DONE IT WITHOUT YOUR INFO!
Got the email this morning, my argument in the previous email:
Mr. Hester:
Based upon the response I received from NHTSA and the information you provided, we have determined that the vehicle can be titled and registered. Please note that the county official must verify the vehicle identification number and the Standard Form 97 that you received at the time of purchase. If you will provide me the county where the vehicle will be domiciled, we will contact them directly to advise them as to our determination.
Respectfully,
Mike Gamble, Assistant Director
Motor Vehicle Division
Alabama Department of Revenue
P.O. Box 327610
Montgomery, AL 36132-7610
Office (334) 242-9008
Fax (334) 353-8698
From: Benton Hester
Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2010 7:32 AM
To: Gamble, Mike
Subject: RE: NHTSA Requirements for Previous Military Vehicles
Mr. Gamble,
Thank you for keeping me abreast of developments with this issue, I realize this is a distraction for you and your staff over a small matter but I appreciate your efforts.
My own conversations with NHTSA representatives has not always been positive, their position is the exemption is for the military and the military alone. However, no one I've spoken to has been able to cite anything that supports this. I've repeatedly asked for specific code that defines the exemption as being in effect ONLY while the U.S. Military owns the vehicle, code that specifies an expiration of the exemption when the U.S. Military sells the vehicle to private individuals and/or any written interpretation that contradicts the wording "Furthermore, because the Safety Act does not regulate sales of vehicles to owners subsequent to the original one, the U.S. armed forces may sell military vehicles to the public at the end of their useful military life without having to bring them into conformity with the FMVSS..." as found in their own Letter of Interpretation of 3/16/1994 I shared with you. My inquiries are rebuffed with "But YOU'RE not the Army!" and they seem unwilling to examine the exact wording of 49 C.F.R. 571.7.
It is my position that the wording of 49 C.F.R. 571.7 is self-evident and these vehicles are exempted from NHTSA standards. As they are exempted from NHTSA standards, then there were no "...standards in effect at the time of manufacture..." (Code of Alabama) to now require the vehicles to conform to. Even if the NHTSA were issue a Letter of Interpretation that in some tortured fashion found 49 C.F.R. 571.7 to mean the exemption expired when the vehicles were sold to private individuals, we cannot escape the fact the Code of Alabama is quite specific about the precise moment that defines which, if any, standards apply. Regardless of the NHTSA's position on whether the exemption survives the sale of the vehicles into private ownership, everyone agrees they were exempt at the moment the Code of Alabama uses to define the applicable standards, if any.
I apologize if I have belabored the point but I a lot riding on this. I paid the U.S. Government better than $9,000 for this truck, then located (ironically) at Ft. Rucker. I've not tried to play any games with any authority or misrepresent any aspect of the truck, I have a valid Florida title and only seek to conform to Alabama laws by titling and tagging the vehicle here.
Thank you again for your time and attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Amos Benton Hester III