Home/Federal/Federal Register/2022-04030

Rule2022-04030

Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) Requirements; Manufacturer Identification; Certification; Replica Motor Vehicles; Importation of Vehicles and Equipment Subject to Federal Safety, Bumper, and Theft Prevention Standards

Primary source

Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.

Published

March 9, 2022

Effective

March 9, 2022

Issuing agencies

Transportation DepartmentNational Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Abstract

This final rule implements an exemption program for replica motor vehicles manufactured or imported by low-volume manufacturers, as set forth in Section 24405 of the Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act). The FAST Act amended the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act to direct the Secretary of Transportation (NHTSA by delegation) to exempt annually 325 replica motor vehicles manufactured or imported by low-volume manufacturers from Federal motor vehicle safety standards that apply to motor vehicles, but not standards that apply to motor vehicle equipment. To implement the exemption program and the procedural mandates of the FAST Act, this final rule establishes a new part 586 and amends VIN requirements in part 565, manufacturer identification requirements in part 566, manufacturer certification requirements in part 567, and importation requirements in part 591.

Full Text

<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 87 Issue 46 (Wednesday, March 9, 2022)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 46 (Wednesday, March 9, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 13209-13236]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2022-04030]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Parts 565, 566, 567, 586, and 591

[Docket No. NHTSA-2021-0006]
RIN 2127-AL77

Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) Requirements; Manufacturer
Identification; Certification; Replica Motor Vehicles; Importation of
Vehicles and Equipment Subject to Federal Safety, Bumper, and Theft
Prevention Standards

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA);
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This final rule implements an exemption program for replica
motor vehicles manufactured or imported by low-volume manufacturers, as
set forth in Section 24405 of the Fixing America's Surface
Transportation Act (FAST Act). The FAST Act amended the National
Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act to direct the Secretary of
Transportation (NHTSA by delegation) to exempt annually 325 replica
motor vehicles manufactured or imported by low-volume manufacturers
from Federal motor vehicle safety standards that apply to motor
vehicles, but not standards that apply to motor vehicle equipment. To
implement the

[[Page 13210]]

exemption program and the procedural mandates of the FAST Act, this
final rule establishes a new part 586 and amends VIN requirements in
part 565, manufacturer identification requirements in part 566,
manufacturer certification requirements in part 567, and importation
requirements in part 591.

DATES:
Effective Date: This rule is effective March 9, 2022.
Petitions for reconsideration: Petitions for reconsideration of
this final rule must be received no later than April 25, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration of this final rule must refer
to the docket and notice number set forth above and be submitted to the
Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590. Note that all petitions
received will be posted without change to <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">http://www.regulations.gov</a>,
including any personal information provided. To facilitate social
distancing due to COVID-19, please email a copy of the petition to
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#83edebf7f0e2adf4e6e1eee2f0f7e6f1c3e7ecf7ade4ecf5">[email&#160;protected]</a>.
Privacy Act: Please see the Privacy Act heading under Rulemaking
Analyses and Notices.
Confidential Business Information: If you wish to submit any
information under a claim of confidentiality, you should submit three
copies of your complete submission, including the information you claim
to be confidential business information, to the Chief Counsel, NHTSA,
at the address given under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. In
addition, you should submit a copy, from which you have deleted the
claimed confidential business information, to Docket Management at the
address given above. When you send a comment containing information
claimed to be confidential business information, you should include a
cover letter setting forth the information specified in NHTSA's
confidential business information regulation (49 CFR part 512). To
facilitate social distancing due to COVID-19, NHTSA is treating
electronic submission as an acceptable method for submitting
confidential business information (CBI) to the Agency under 49 CFR part
512. <a href="https://www.nhtsa.gov/coronavirus">https://www.nhtsa.gov/coronavirus</a>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information you may
contact Ms. Callie Roach, telephone 202-597-1312, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#14577578787d713a467b75777c54707b603a737b62">[email&#160;protected]</a>;
Mr. Daniel Koblenz, telephone 202-366-5329, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#a9edc8c7c0ccc587e2c6cbc5ccc7d3e9cdc6dd87cec6df">[email&#160;protected]</a>;
Office of the Chief Counsel. The mailing address of these officials is:
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE, West Building, Washington, DC 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Executive Summary
II. Final Rule Decisions--General
a. Who qualifies for the exemption program as a low-volume
manufacturer?
b. Number of Permitted Exempted Vehicles
c. Vehicles Built in Two or More Stages
III. Definitions
a. Low-Volume Manufacturer
b. Replica Motor Vehicle
1. Meaning of the Term ``Resemble''
2. Meaning of the Term ``Body''
3. Prototypes
4. Requirement To Manufacture Under License Agreement for
Intellectual Property Rights
IV. Safety Requirements
a. Equipment FMVSS
b. Safety-Related Defects
V. Registration Requirements
a. When and How To Register
b. Required Information
c. Time Periods
d. Deemed Approved
VI. Other Administrative Requirements
a. Manufacturer Identification Requirements (49 CFR Part 566)
b. Manufacturer Identifier and VIN Requirements
c. Declaration Form for Replica Motor Vehicles
VII. Labels and Other Consumer Disclosures
a. Permanent Label
b. Written Notice to Dealers and First Purchasers; Temporary
Label
VIII. Reporting
IX. Termination of Exemptions
a. Revocation
b. Expiration
X. List of Registrants
XI. Overview of Benefits and Costs
XII. Effective Date
XIII. Regulatory Notices and Analyses

I. Executive Summary

This final rule establishes an exemption program for replica motor
vehicles manufactured or imported by low-volume manufacturers, as
directed by Section 24405 of the FAST Act (Pub. L. 114-94). The
National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (Safety Act) \1\ states
that ``a person may not manufacture for sale, sell, offer for sale,
introduce or deliver for introduction in interstate commerce, or import
into the United States, any motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment''
unless the vehicle or equipment complies with all applicable Federal
motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS) in effect on the date of
manufacture, unless covered by a nonapplication provision or exempted
under the Safety Act.\2\ Section 24405 of the FAST Act, entitled,
``Treatment of Low-Volume Manufacturers,'' amended 49 U.S.C. 30114
(Special exemptions) by adding a new subsection (b) that mandated the
creation of a new exemption program for replica vehicles. Subsection
(b) requires the Secretary of Transportation (NHTSA by delegation) to
exempt ``325 replica motor vehicles per year that are manufactured or
imported by a low-volume manufacturer'' from 49 U.S.C. 30112(a)
regarding FMVSS ``applicable to motor vehicles and not motor vehicle
equipment.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301, Motor Vehicle Safety (49 U.S.C. 30101
et seq.).
\2\ 49 U.S.C. 30112.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Section 30114(b) requires low-volume manufacturers seeking an
exemption to register with NHTSA and gives the agency a limited period
to review and either approve or deny an application for registration
before the application is deemed approved. It requires that NHTSA
require the manufacturers to affix permanent labels to the exempted
motor vehicles to identify the vehicle as a replica and provide other
information determined necessary by NHTSA. The provision also requires
annual reporting to NHTSA and directs NHTSA to maintain an up-to-date
list of registrants and a list of the makes and models of exempted
motor vehicles at least annually (and publish such list in the Federal
Register or on NHTSA's website). The FAST Act amendments direct that
the 325-vehicle production authorization is limited to the calendar
year in which the exception is granted, and that unused production
capacity (i.e., the difference between the 325-vehicle authorization
and actual vehicle production) does not accrue and carry forward into
subsequent calendar years, but expires at the end of the calendar year
in which it was granted. The provisions authorize NHTSA to revoke an
existing registration based on a failure to comply with applicable
requirements, or a finding by the agency of either a safety-related
defect or unlawful conduct that poses a significant safety risk.
This final rule implements the replica motor vehicle exemption
program mandated under 24405 of the FAST Act. NHTSA published the
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) preceding this final rule on
January 7, 2020 (85 FR 792, Docket No. NHTSA-2019-0121).\3\ NHTSA
proposed to establish the replica motor vehicle exemption program in 49
CFR part 586, and proposed amendments to the agency's regulations for
VIN requirements (49 CFR part 565), manufacturer identification (part
566), and

[[Page 13211]]

certification (part 567), to accommodate the exemption program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\3\ For a detailed summary of the FAST Act provisions, see the
NPRM, 85 FR at 793-794.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

As proposed in the NPRM, 49 CFR part 586 included the FAST Act
definitions to define and adopt the exemption program, along with both
procedural and substantive requirements to implement the FAST Act's
mandates. The NPRM proposed to exempt low-volume manufacturers (that
qualified for the replica program and registered with NHTSA) from the
requirements of Sec. 30112(a), thereby allowing for the production of
up to 325 replica motor vehicles per year (hereafter ``covered replica
vehicles'') per replica manufacturer. This exemption was to be
conditioned on the replica manufacturer complying with all requirements
of the program.
Under the NPRM, covered replica vehicles would be exempt from
complying with the ``vehicle'' standards in effect on the date of
manufacture of the replica vehicle that apply to new vehicles of the
replica's type (passenger car, multipurpose passenger vehicle, truck,
or bus), but would not to be exempt from ``equipment'' standards.\4\
Thus, equipment would still be required to comply with any equipment-
level FMVSS performance requirement in effect on the equipment's date
of manufacture.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\4\ Some of the FMVSS are ``vehicle'' standards that apply only
to new completed vehicles as a unit and not to aftermarket
components, some are ``equipment'' standards that apply to original
and aftermarket items of equipment, and a few are both vehicle and
equipment standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

After reviewing the comments to the NPRM, NHTSA has adopted the
majority of proposed provisions but has adjusted some aspects of the
program based on the feedback received. The discussion in this preamble
follows the overall outline of the NPRM and discusses, under each
section, the proposed requirement, comments received, and NHTSA's
decisions for this final rule.

Summary of Comments

NHTSA received 20 comments on the NPRM. The commenters included
prospective replica vehicle manufacturers, suppliers, trade
associations, consultants and individuals.\5\ Commenters were generally
supportive of the proposed rule, but some suggested changes to specific
aspects of the NPRM. The significant comments are summarized below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\5\ NHTSA received three other comments, but they were either
not substantive or outside the scope of this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The FAST Act defines a replica vehicle as a vehicle ``intended to
resemble the body'' of another motor vehicle that was manufactured at
least 25 years before the replica. NHTSA proposed several requirements
to implement this ``resemblance'' requirement in an objective manner,
such as that a ``replica motor vehicle'' must have the same length,
width, and height as the vehicle being replicated (hereafter,
``original motor vehicle''). In response, commenters, including
potential replica motor vehicle manufacturers, suppliers, the Specialty
Equipment Market Association (SEMA), Vehicle Services Consulting, Inc.
(VSCI), and several individuals, urged NHTSA to provide more
flexibility in implementing the resemblance requirement. Many
commenters argued that NHTSA should allow the dimensions of the replica
motor and the original motor vehicle to deviate by up to 10 percent.
Commenters pointed to the definition of a ``specialty motor vehicle''
used by the California Air Resources Board (CARB), which provides such
deviation. The NPRM also defined ``body'' as including any part of the
vehicle that is not part of the chassis or frame. Some potential
replica manufacturers suggested a vehicle's body should be limited to
the body's exterior design and appearance.
Several commenters discussed the provisions of the NPRM that NHTSA
proposed for the purpose of ensuring intellectual property (IP) rights
and ownership were adequately protected. The NPRM proposed a
requirement that manufacturers submit documentation to support the
manufacturer's assertion that the replica vehicle is intended to
resemble the original. The Alliance for Automotive Innovation
(Alliance) supported the proposal, asserting that public disclosure of
the documentation ``will permit intellectual property owners to take
action to protect their rights if they believe that the applicant does
not have the necessary authorizations.'' Other commenters suggested
that NHTSA simply require that replica motor vehicle manufacturers
certify or declare that they have all necessary rights to produce a
replica motor vehicle, rather than require them to provide the
underlying documentation. NHTSA also received comments on whether
replica vehicles should be required to reproduce logos and emblems from
the original vehicle.
Comments were mixed on whether manufacturers of incomplete vehicles
should be eligible for the replica program, and how NHTSA should apply
the FAST Act exemption to vehicles produced in multiple stages. While
commenters from industry, including SEMA, were supportive of allowing
the use of incomplete vehicles in the replica manufacturing process,
they also stated that replica manufacturers generally do not expect to
produce their vehicles in more than one stage.
Several commenters questioned whether the procedural requirements
in the NPRM relating to the automatic approval of replica manufacturers
registrations were consistent with the FAST Act, which states that an
application should be ``deemed approved'' if NHTSA does not respond to
the application within 90 days.
Regarding labeling and disclosure requirements, some commenters
believed it overly burdensome to require that the certification label
list all the standards from which the replica motor vehicle is
exempted. Some comments objected to the redundancy of having to provide
temporary labels in addition to the statutorily-mandated labeling.
Several commenters addressed NHTSA's interpretation of the FAST
Act's provisions regarding preemption of State titling and registration
laws. Some commenters disagreed with NHTSA's interpretation that State
titling and registration laws could require vehicles to be equipped
with certain safety equipment.

Differences Between the NPRM and Final Rule

This final rule adopts most of the proposal but has revised or
clarified several aspects in response to comments, as highlighted
below. All changes, and others of a more minor nature, are discussed in
the relevant sections of this final rule.
The main changes are:
<bullet> Registrants will not be required to submit actual
documentation to demonstrate they own or have license to the
intellectual property (IP) necessary to manufacture a replica motor
vehicle. Instead, they must certify to this fact.
<bullet> A replica motor vehicle will not be required to maintain
the exact dimensions of the original motor vehicle to meet the
requirement that it ``resemble'' the original motor vehicle. A 10
percent leeway is provided. NHTSA is also not requiring that replica
motor vehicles resemble not only the original vehicle's exterior, but
also its interior.
<bullet> NHTSA has streamlined the regulatory text to clarify how
NHTSA will process registrations, and how the Agency will address
``deemed approved'' registrations.
<bullet> This final rule reduces the amount of information replica
manufacturers must disclose to members of the public, compared to the
NPRM's proposal.

[[Page 13212]]

NHTSA has also reconsidered its view of 49 U.S.C. 30114(b)(9),
which states that the replica program shall not be construed to
preempt, affect, or supersede State titling or registration laws or
regulations.

II. Final Rule Decisions--General

a. Who qualifies for the exemption program as a low-volume
manufacturer?

49 U.S.C. 30114(b)(1) limits the exemption to not more than 325
replica motor vehicles per year ``that are manufactured or imported by
a low-volume manufacturer.'' NHTSA interpreted this provision in the
NPRM to mean that replica vehicles must be produced by a low-volume
manufacturer and that ``replica vehicles may only be imported by their
fabricating low-volume manufacturer.'' \6\ Further, NHTSA proposed that
each low-volume manufacturer would be limited to importing 325 replica
vehicles per year, regardless of the calendar year of manufacture.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\6\ See, 85 FR 795. Interpreting the statute to allow replicas
to be produced by foreign manufacturers that do not qualify as low-
volume manufacturers and then imported by low-volume manufacturers
is contrary to Congress's intent to create an exemption program
designed to address the unique financial challenges small
manufacturers face.
\7\ A low-volume manufacturer would not be permitted to import
more than 325 replica vehicles into the U.S. in a single calendar
year, regardless of whether those vehicles were fabricated over the
course of two calendar years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

NHTSA stated that replica vehicles produced by a foreign low-volume
manufacturer may only be imported by that specific registered low-
volume manufacturer. NHTSA stated it interpreted the wording of the
FAST Act provision in the same way NHTSA has interpreted the hardship
exemption provision in 49 U.S.C. 30113, i.e., as not authorizing the
agency to grant hardship exemptions to entities that seek to import
vehicles they did not produce.\8\ NHTSA asserted that interpreting
Sec. 24405 of the FAST Act in the same manner is appropriate because
both provisions recognize that small manufacturers are faced with
unique financial challenges in meeting the FMVSS, and provide
exemptions to alleviate this burden. NHTSA argued that by prohibiting
an entity seeking to import replica motor vehicles from registering as
a low-volume manufacturer of replica vehicles unless it is also the
entity fabricating the replica vehicles would ensure that small
importers are not permitted to import replica vehicles manufactured by
large foreign manufacturers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\8\ See letter to Mr. Bill Cox (March 24, 1997) available at
<a href="https://isearch.nhtsa.gov/files/kill.ztv.html">https://isearch.nhtsa.gov/files/kill.ztv.html</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments Received
NHTSA received differing views on its proposal to allow only a
fabricating manufacturer to register as a replica vehicle manufacturer
and to import replica vehicles. The American Association of Motor
Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA) and the Alliance supported NHTSA's
proposal to ensure conformance to the 325 vehicles per manufacturer
limit. SEMA, Caterham Cars Ltd. (Caterham) and ElectroMeccanica
Vehicles Corp. (ElectroMeccanica) requested that NHTSA allow foreign
fabricating replica manufacturers the option to assign one subsidiary
or distributor to import and sell replica motor vehicles.
NHTSA Response
NHTSA has reconsidered the discussion in the NPRM and agrees with
the commenters who argued that it is not necessary to limit the
eligibility for the replica program to importers who fabricate the
vehicles. There is no such prohibition in the FAST Act provisions \9\
and the agency believes that including such a prohibition is not
necessary to ensure conformance to the 325-vehicles per manufacturer
cap. NHTSA believes that the general statutory definition for
``manufacturer,'' which covers both entities that manufacture motor
vehicles and entities that import motor vehicles for resale, should
apply.\10\ This is to say, the definition does not stipulate that an
importer must only import the vehicles they fabricate; importers have
been permitted to import vehicles produced by other entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\9\ However, 49 U.S.C. 30114(b)(2) provides that ``[NHTSA] shall
establish terms that ensure that no person may register as a low-
volume manufacturer if the person is registered as an importer under
section 30141 of this title.''
\10\ 49 U.S.C. 30102(a)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

NHTSA does not believe it is necessary to require a low-volume
foreign manufacturer to use a single low-volume entity to import its
replica motor vehicles, provided limits are in place on the
importation. The total production of that low-volume foreign
manufacturer may not exceed 5,000 vehicles annually (i.e., it must be a
low-volume manufacturer), its importers must all be ``low-volume''
(importing or producing fewer than 5,000 vehicles annually), and the
total number of replica motor vehicles imported into the U.S. by all of
its U.S.-based importers combined cannot exceed 325 vehicles.

b. Number of Permitted Exempted Vehicles

The FAST Act exempts ``not more than 325 replica motor vehicles per
year that are manufactured or imported by a [registered] low-volume
manufacturer.'' \11\ NHTSA proposed provisions implementing this
provision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\11\ 49 U.S.C. 30114(b)(1) and (2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments Received
Three comments concurred with the agency's statements about the
325-vehicle cap. VSCI asked NHTSA to clarify that the exemption limit
did not apply in two situations. First, VSCI suggested that the limit
did not apply to replica motor vehicles produced by a manufacturer for
sale outside the United States, if the total annual production for the
manufacturer did not exceed 5,000. Second, VSCI asked whether the
manufacturer could produce similar vehicles in excess of the 325-limit
if those vehicles were certified as complying with all applicable
FMVSS. The National Automobile Dealers Association (NADA) supported the
325-limit but cautioned that manufacturers should not be allowed to
evade this limit through multiple importers, shell corporations or
multi-stage manufacturing processes. An individual noted that, where
multiple manufacturers planned to produce replica motor vehicles based
on the same vehicle, the 325-limit should apply to the total vehicles
produced by all such manufacturers. The individual did not suggest how
NHTSA should allot the vehicles among the manufacturers in such a
scenario.
Agency Response
Under 49 U.S.C. 30114(b), a replica motor vehicle manufacturer must
be a low-volume manufacturer. Under Sec. 30114(b)(7)(A), the term
``low volume manufacturer'' means a motor vehicle manufacturer, other
than a person who is a registered importer, whose annual worldwide
production, including by a parent or subsidiary of the manufacturer, if
applicable, is not more than 5,000 motor vehicles. Thus, following this
definition, NHTSA will count the vehicles produced by parent and
subsidiary companies of an entity claiming to be a low-volume
manufacturer to see if the entity qualifies as a low-volume
manufacturer. Under section 30114, individual low-volume manufacturers
are limited to not more than 325 replica motor vehicles per year. NHTSA
agrees that a replica motor vehicle manufacturer must not be permitted
to exceed the 325-vehicle production cap using affiliated parent or

[[Page 13213]]

subsidiary companies, as that would be contrary to the provisions of
the exemption. The annual production cap for replica motor vehicle
manufacturers applies to the registered entity as well as to
productions by parent or subsidiary companies and manufacturers under
common ownership. To be clear, a replica motor vehicle manufacturer
cannot exceed the production cap using affiliated parent or subsidiary
companies.
A low-volume manufacturer is permitted to produce a variety of
replica motor vehicle models, so long as the cumulative production for
the manufacturer is not more than 325 replica motor vehicles per year.
In such a case, the low-volume manufacturer must state in all
applications how it has allocated the 325 vehicles it produced among
the different models.
As noted above, the Safety Act treats U.S.-based importers that are
subsidiaries of foreign manufacturers as manufacturers. Thus, importers
that are subsidiaries of foreign manufacturers are limited to importing
up to a total of 325 replica motor vehicles across all connected
companies. This assumes, of course, that the importer and the foreign
manufacturer are both low-volume manufacturers.
Finally, VSCI's understanding is correct that the cap does not
apply to replica motor vehicles produced by a low-volume manufacturer
that are sold outside the United States. Also, the 325 cap does not
include vehicles produced by a low-volume manufacturer that are
certified as compliant with all applicable FMVSS, since compliant
vehicles do not require an exemption to be sold in the United States.
(If the manufacturer produces more than 5,000 motor vehicles annually,
however, it would not be a low-volume manufacturer, and would not
qualify for this replica vehicles exemption program.)

c. Vehicles Built in Two or More Stages

NHTSA requested comment on whether the replica vehicle program
should exclude vehicles manufactured in two or more stages. The agency
was concerned that some of the proposed requirements may be impossible
to meet unless the replica vehicle is manufactured in a single stage.
For instance, NHTSA identified a potential incompatibility between the
multistage manufacturing process and a requirement that the vehicle's
vehicle identification number (VIN) identify the vehicle as a replica.
NHTSA sought to ensure replica vehicles are properly identified as
replicas in their VINs, and that the VIN denote the make, model, and
model year of the original vehicle. NHTSA was concerned that those
requirements could not be met by vehicles produced in two or more
stages because, under NHTSA's VIN regulation, each vehicle manufactured
in two or more stages has a VIN assigned by the incomplete vehicle
manufacturer.\12\ NHTSA noted that it was unlikely an incomplete
vehicle manufacturer would know the make, model, and model year of the
vehicle being replicated, so the VIN would be missing this information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\12\ 49 CFR 565.13(a). See also 49 CFR 567.3 for definitions of
``incomplete vehicle,'' ``incomplete vehicle manufacturer,''
``final-stage manufacturer,'' and other terms relevant to this
discussion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

NHTSA also noted its belief that replica manufacturers would not,
as a practical matter, be able to take advantage of multistage
manufacturing, because NHTSA interpreted the FAST Act as requiring that
all manufacturers involved in the fabrication of a vehicle manufactured
in more than one stage would need to be low-volume manufacturers. As
incomplete vehicle manufacturers are typically not low-volume
manufacturers, producing a replica vehicle through the multistage
manufacturing process did not seem feasible. As an alternative to
excluding multistage manufacturing from the exemption program, NHTSA
sought comment on allowing joint registration submissions from two or
more manufacturers wishing to manufacture the replica vehicle. NHTSA
envisioned that, under a joint registration program, the incomplete
vehicle manufacturer would know at the onset of manufacturing the make,
model, and model year of the vehicle the replica resembles, and thus
would be able to code information about the finished replica vehicle
into the VIN. However, NHTSA did not propose any regulatory text that
would facilitate such a joint registration program.
Comments Received
NHTSA received divergent views on whether replica motor vehicles
should be required to be manufactured in a single stage. The AAMVA, the
National Truck Equipment Association (NTEA) and the Alliance supported
the proposal to exclude multistage manufacturing. AAMVA noted that it
is essential to tie the VIN to the manufacturer at each stage of
manufacturing if NHTSA decides to allow multi-stage manufacturing. NTEA
agreed that most multistage manufacturers would not qualify as low
volume manufacturers and that ensuring compliance across multiple
manufacturers would be difficult. VSCI supported NHTSA's alternative to
allow joint registrations for incomplete/intermediate vehicle
manufacturers wishing to produce or import replica motor vehicles.
Calloway and SEMA noted that current replica vehicle manufacturing
practices typically do not involve producing vehicles in more than one
stage. These commenters describe a process where replica vehicle
manufacturers purchase a subassembly from a supplier consisting of an
assemblage of parts (referred to as a ``rolling chassis''). The
subassembly does not include an engine, and therefore does not meet
NHTSA's definition of an incomplete vehicle.\13\ The commenters asked
for clarification that the agency does not consider a vehicle
manufactured from a rolling chassis to be a vehicle produced in more
than one stage.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\13\ 49 CFR 567.3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, other commenters, while agreeing that multistage
manufacturing of replica vehicles is not currently the norm, urged
NHTSA to allow multistage manufacturing as an option. MOKE USA (MOKE)
specifically discussed the economic benefits that large-scale
manufacturing offered and indicated that replica vehicle manufacturers
could not benefit from these economies if multistage manufacturing were
not a possibility. Edelbrock LLC also commented that the regulation
should not require incomplete vehicle manufacturers supplying
components to replica vehicle manufacturers to be small manufacturers.
Agency Response
After considering the comments, NHTSA has decided to establish
terms that make available the replica vehicle exemption only to replica
motor vehicles produced in a single stage. As explained above, NHTSA
originally raised for comment a prohibition on the multistage
manufacturing of replica vehicles out of a concern that it would not be
feasible for incomplete vehicle manufacturers to code information
identifying a vehicle as a replica into the vehicle's VIN. Incomplete
vehicle manufacturers are required to encode the vehicle type into the
VIN, and NHTSA did not think it probable that the incomplete vehicle
manufacturer would know, when it assigned the VIN, that the final-stage
manufacturer would be producing a replica vehicle. NHTSA has strong
interests in having the VIN show that the vehicle is a replica to
enable the agency to enforce the 325-vehicle annual production cap, and
to examine State and police crash data

[[Page 13214]]

files in the future (which identify vehicles by VINs) to ascertain the
involvement of replica vehicles in crashes and in crashes involving
injury or fatality (and, possibly, the circumstances involving the
crash and the mechanisms involved in injury outcome).
The comments NHTSA received did not alleviate the agency's concern
about the ability of incomplete vehicle manufacturers to encode replica
vehicle VINs properly. Commenters validated the notion that such a
system could work if there were a complex and reliable coordination
between a final-stage replica manufacturer and the incomplete vehicle
manufacturer to ensure the VIN properly indicates a replica vehicle
when the final-stage manufacturer obtains the incomplete vehicle. (This
coordination concept was somewhat similar to the ``joint registration''
arrangements NHTSA envisioned in the NPRM when the agency discussed
allowing joint registrations of incomplete/intermediate/final vehicle
manufacturers wishing to produce replica motor vehicles.) However,
commenters did not provide information on how such a system could be
enforced by NHTSA, given the complex administrative and recordkeeping
problems it would create for both NHTSA and the replica industry.
Moreover, as we noted above, the commenters' reception to allowing
multistage-manufactured replica vehicles was lukewarm, with industry
groups and potential manufacturers not opposed to the idea, but not
strongly supportive either. Apparently, as evident from the comments,
this was because prospective replica manufacturers plan not to
manufacture vehicles (in multiple stages) using incomplete vehicles but
instead plan to manufacture the vehicles using ``rolling chasses,''
where they assemble the vehicle out of parts not involving an
incomplete vehicle.\14\ Given that replicas will likely be produced
other than in a multistage manufacturing process, and given NHTSA's
concerns that the manufacture of replica vehicles in more than one
stage might not produce crucial information the agency needs to oversee
the safety of replica vehicles, we have decided, at this stage of the
exemption program, that replica vehicles must be produced in a single
stage.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\14\ NHTSA does not consider a vehicle manufactured from a
rolling chassis to be a vehicle produced in more than one stage.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Moreover, NHTSA believes that, as a practical matter, there is an
inherent inconsistency between the multistage manufacturing process and
the FAST Act exemption. As discussed in the NPRM, the agency
interpreted the FAST Act to require all manufacturers involved in the
manufacture of a replica vehicle to be low-volume manufacturers. As
incomplete vehicle manufacturers are usually large manufacturers, we do
not believe replica vehicles using incomplete vehicles would qualify
for the replica vehicle exemption. Further, from a safety standpoint it
did not make sense to exempt replica vehicles that use incomplete
vehicles produced by large manufacturers, as the large manufacturers
have the resources to produce incomplete vehicles that could be made
into vehicles that could conform to braking and other vehicle safety
standards. While some commenters argued that NHTSA should permit the
multistage manufacture of replica vehicles, they supported the
multistage manufacturing of the vehicles primarily for the potential
economic benefits of doing so, and did not explain how the multistage
manufacturing process is consistent with the Safety Act. Given the
difficulty in administering VIN requirements for incomplete replica
vehicles, the plans of the replica industry to use rolling chasses and
not incomplete vehicles to produce replica vehicles, and the fact that
incomplete vehicle manufacturers are not low-volume manufacturers,
NHTSA has decided to require that replica vehicles must be manufactured
in a single stage. NHTSA has adopted a definition of ``replica motor
vehicle'' to reflect this decision.

III. Definitions

The provisions in the FAST Act directing this exemption program
define the terms ``low-volume manufacturer'' and ``replica motor
vehicle.'' To facilitate implementation of the program, NHTSA proposed
to define the term ``replica motor vehicle manufacturer'' as ``a low-
volume manufacturer that is registered as a replica motor vehicle
manufacturer pursuant to the requirements in this part.''

a. Low-Volume Manufacturer

Section 30114(b)(7)(A) defines ``low-volume manufacturer'' as: ``a
motor vehicle manufacturer, other than a person who is registered as an
importer under section 30141 of this title, whose annual worldwide
production, including by a parent or subsidiary of the manufacturer, if
applicable, is not more than 5,000 motor vehicles.'' Since several of
NHTSA's existing regulations already use the term ``low-volume
manufacturer,'' and, in some cases, define the term differently than
the FAST Act provision, NHTSA proposed that part 586 define ``low-
volume manufacturer'' by simply referring to 49 U.S.C. 30114(b)(7).
Thus, the proposed definition \15\ stated: ``Low-volume manufacturer is
defined in 49 U.S.C. 30114(b)(7).''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\15\ 85 FR 819.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments Received
NHTSA received several comments suggesting that we clarify aspects
of the ``low-volume manufacturer'' term. (We addressed related issues
in the section above titled, ``Who qualifies for the exemption program
as a low-volume manufacturer.'') Some commenters believed that the
regulatory text of part 586 should communicate the production limits
set by the FAST Act so that the meaning of the term would be clearer on
the face of the regulation. Some commenters believed the regulatory
text should specify that the limit of 325 vehicles per year cannot be
evaded through multiple subsidiaries. VSCI suggested NHTSA should
clarify that low-volume manufacturers can produce or import up to 325
replica motor vehicles per year, regardless of how many replica
vehicles the manufacturer produces outside of the U.S., as long as the
total number of vehicles produced worldwide is less than 5,000. Some
commenters believed the regulatory text should be clarified as it
applies to foreign manufacturers who could have more than one U.S.-
based subsidiary, or to domestic manufacturers who own multiple
subsidiaries. Edelbrock suggested that NHTSA clarify that suppliers to
low-volume manufacturers are not limited to supporting only 325 replica
vehicles per year. SEMA, VSCI, and Caterham commented that U.S.-based
subsidiaries of foreign manufacturers should be permitted to import
replica motor vehicles, in addition to the foreign manufacturer itself.
NHTSA Response
After considering the comments, NHTSA has included regulatory text
defining ``low-volume manufacturer'' and clarifying aspects of the
term. NHTSA has responded to several of the comments in the above-
mentioned section. The final rule regulatory text specifies that the
325-vehicle limit, or ``cap,'' applies across all subsidiaries owned by
a single manufacturer. That is, as long as the total global production
of the connected subsidiary manufacturers does not exceed 5,000

[[Page 13215]]

vehicles annually, the connected manufacturers that wish to register as
replica vehicle manufacturers may all do so, so long as their
registrations note the connections and allocate (and identify to NHTSA)
the 325-cap between the manufacturers. All connected subsidiary
manufacturers must be low-volume manufacturers and must, cumulatively,
produce no more than 325 replica vehicles annually. A foreign low-
volume manufacturer seeking to have its replica motor vehicles imported
into the United States is only permitted to have up to 325 replica
motor vehicles imported in total. U.S.-based subsidiaries of foreign
low-volume manufacturers are treated the same as replica vehicle
manufacturers sharing common ownership, i.e., they must be low-volume,
must register with NHTSA and must explain to the agency the connections
to each other and allocate (and identify to NHTSA) the 325-cap among
themselves. NHTSA emphasizes that the statute prohibits an entity from
being a registered importer under 49 U.S.C. 30141 and registering as a
replica motor vehicle manufacturer.
For purposes of this final rule, NHTSA will use the terms ``replica
motor vehicle manufacturer,'' ``replica manufacturer,'' ``applicant''
and ``registrant'' interchangeably to mean a low-volume manufacturer
that is or seeks to be registered under part 586.

b. Replica Motor Vehicle

The FAST Act defines a ``replica motor vehicle'' as a motor vehicle
produced by a low-volume manufacturer that (i) is intended to resemble
the body of another motor vehicle that was manufactured not less than
25 years before the manufacture of the replica motor vehicle; and (ii)
is manufactured under a license for the product configuration, trade
dress, trademark, or patent, for the motor vehicle that is intended to
be replicated from the original manufacturer, its successors or
assignees, or current owner of such product configuration, trade dress,
trademark, or patent rights.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\16\ 49 U.S.C. 30114(b)(7)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

NHTSA's proposed definition for ``replica motor vehicle'' largely
tracked the statutory definition, but included a few minor
modifications to emphasize that replica motor vehicles must be
manufactured by a replica manufacturer and that production is limited
to 325 replica motor vehicles in that calendar year.\17\ NHTSA also
proposed requirements to ensure that a replica vehicle meets the
requirement that it be intended to resemble the original motor
vehicle.\18\ In addition, NHTSA addressed the provision relating to IP
rights associated with the original motor vehicle.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\17\ 85 FR 819.
\18\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Meaning of the Term ``Resemble''
The FAST Act provides that a replica vehicle is one ``intended to
resemble the body'' of another motor vehicle that was manufactured at
least 25 years before the replica. NHTSA proposed requirements to give
objective meaning to ``intended to resemble.'' NHTSA explained in the
NPRM \19\ that the agency would interpret the term ``resemble'' as
requiring the same height, width, and length of the original motor
vehicle. NHTSA incorporated this interpretation of the term
``resemble'' into the proposed registration requirements to require
manufacturers to submit documentation to support that the replica
vehicle is ``intended to resemble'' the original vehicle by
demonstrating that the replica vehicle has the same length, width, and
height as the original, including images of the original vehicle and
design plans for the replica vehicle. The NPRM did not specify that the
replica vehicle must incorporate the original motor vehicle's logos and
emblems to ``resemble'' the underlying vehicle.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\19\ 85 FR 796.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments Received
Thirteen commenters argued that NHTSA's view that a replica motor
vehicle must have the same length, width and height as the original
vehicle was overly restrictive and burdensome. In addition to making
arguments about the plain language meaning of the word ``resemble,''
some were concerned that requiring a replica motor vehicle to have the
same dimensions as the original motor vehicle would make it more
difficult for replica vehicle manufacturers to incorporate new safety
features, use off-the-shelf components and/or components that comply
with equipment FMVSS, or make replica motor vehicles more fuel
efficient. Some potential replica motor vehicle manufacturers claimed
that they had made significant business investments premised on the
assumption that NHTSA would permit some leeway in the dimensions of
replica motor vehicles. Most commenters suggested that part 586 should
be consistent with the California Air Resources Board (CARB) definition
for a ``specialty produced motor vehicle'' (SPMV). The SPMV definition
used by CARB states that a SPMV resembles another motor vehicle ``on an
overall 1:1 scale (<plus-minus>10 percent) of original body lines,
excluding roof configuration, ride height, trim attached to the body,
fenders, running boards, grille, hood or hood lines, windows, and axle
location.'' The commenters argued that adopting a 10 percent leeway
would address the various safety and economic concerns they raised.
NHTSA Response
After considering the comments, NHTSA agrees that the proposed
interpretation of ``resemble'' (requiring a replica motor vehicle
maintain the exact dimensions of the original motor vehicle) was too
restrictive. While objectivity is crucial, NHTSA agrees that the
statute's use of the word ``resemble,'' as opposed to a more stringent
term (e.g., ``identical''), indicates Congress's intent to allow some
leeway in the appearance of a replica motor vehicle. Providing replica
motor vehicles with a 10 percent margin recognizes the practical
difficulties of manufacturing vehicles on a low-volume basis to
specified physical dimensions in light of technological developments
and equipment requirements.
While NHTSA is allowing for some variation in the dimensions of
replica vehicles as compared to the original vehicle, the agency is not
strictly adopting a <plus-minus>10 percent cutoff as the accepted
tolerance. This is because there may be instances where variation
greater than 10 percent may be warranted (e.g., to allow for modern
safety features). NHTSA seeks to avoid a cutoff that necessitates the
agency's having to deny an application or find a noncompliance
automatically when seeing a difference slightly outside of the 10
percent margin. Thus, the final rule allows a 10 percent tolerance in
the dimensional differences between the original vehicle and the
replica vehicle without need for further justification. The final rule
also provides a means by which replica manufacturers may seek approval
for dimensional differences that exceed10 percent, but such proposed
designs will be critically examined by NHTSA. Differences deemed
unwarranted will be grounds for NHTSA's denying the registration on the
finding the vehicle does not qualify as a replica vehicle.
Whether a replica motor vehicle sufficiently ``resembles'' an
original motor vehicle is a matter NHTSA will decide on an
individualized basis and in its discretion, taking into account the
overall appearance of the vehicle. The closer a replica motor vehicle
tracks the original dimensions, the more likely it is that NHTSA will
determine the

[[Page 13216]]

vehicle is eligible for, or has been produced in conformance with, an
exemption under 49 CFR part 586. To be clear, the FAST Act creates an
exemption program designed to allow historic models to be replicated in
a less costly way by low-volume manufacturers. NHTSA does not interpret
``resemble'' in a manner in that would allow vehicles that are merely
inspired by older vehicles to be built, or otherwise allow for artistic
license to create vehicles that merely remind the public of past
automotive heritage.
2. Meaning of the Term ``Body''
NHTSA also discussed in the NPRM \20\ its tentative determination
that the term ``body'' meant any part of the vehicle that is not part
of the chassis or frame, which would include, but would not be limited
to, a vehicle's exterior sheet metal and trim, the passenger
compartment, trunk, bumpers, fenders, grill, hood, interior trim,
lights and glazing. NHTSA based this interpretation on the agency's
definition of ``body type'' in 49 CFR 565.12, which is defined as the
general configuration or shape of a vehicle distinguished by such
characteristics as the number of doors or windows, cargo-carrying
features and the roofline (e.g., sedan fastback, hatchback). Because
this definition references both exterior and interior features, NHTSA
interpreted ``body'' as including both exterior and interior features
as well, such that merely replicating the exterior features of the
vehicle may not be sufficient.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\20\ 85 FR 796.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments Received
Five commenters (SEMA, VSCI, and three potential replica motor
vehicle manufacturers) believed NHTSA incorrectly interpreted the term
``body'' in the NPRM. According to these commenters, ``body'' is a term
of art in the automotive industry, which refers only to a vehicle's
exterior design and appearance and does not include interior features.
They believe NHTSA should align its interpretation of ``body'' with the
definition used by industry.
NHTSA Response
NHTSA agrees with the commenters that the agency's tentative
interpretation of ``body'' in the NPRM was too broad. Given that the
intent of the replica vehicle statute is to permit the sale of vehicles
with an outward appearance that looks like a motor vehicle sold at
least 25 years ago, the only aspects of the vehicle that would be
covered by the term ``body'' should be those that affect the outside
appearance of the replica motor vehicle. This would not cover the
interior portions of the replica motor vehicle, such as the passenger
compartment, except to the extent that their design affects the outside
appearance of the vehicle. NHTSA makes this decision also to facilitate
replica vehicle manufacturers' efforts to incorporate new safety
features into the body of their vehicles, and to use off-the-shelf
components and/or components that comply with the equipment FMVSS.
3. Prototypes
The NPRM proposed the replica vehicle must resemble the body of
another motor vehicle that was manufactured ``for consumer sale'' not
less than 25 years before the manufacture of the replica motor vehicle.
NHTSA asserted its belief \21\ that the provision ``for consumer sale''
indicates that the replica vehicle exemption program was not to apply
to prototype, concept or show vehicles that were never sold to
consumers. The Safety Act defines a motor vehicle as a vehicle driven
or drawn by mechanical power and manufactured primarily for use on
public streets, roads, and highways.\22\ NHTSA stated that, since
prototypes or concepts are not intended for sale to the public, they
are not motor vehicles for these purposes. Accordingly, since the FAST
Act provision requires that the replica vehicle resemble another motor
vehicle manufactured for consumer sale, a vehicle replicating a
prototype would not qualify for the exemption.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\21\ 85 FR 797.
\22\ 49 U.S.C. 30102(a)(7).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments Received and NHTSA Response
All commenters responding to this issue agreed with NHTSA's
proposal. This final rule adopts the provision for the reasons
discussed in the NPRM.
4. Requirement To Manufacture Under License Agreement for Intellectual
Property Rights
The FAST Act definition of a replica motor vehicle provides that
such vehicles are ``manufactured under a license for the product
configuration, trade dress, trademark, or patent, for the motor vehicle
that is intended to be replicated from the original manufacturer, its
successors or assignees, or current owner of such product
configuration, trade dress, trademark, or patent rights.'' The NPRM
proposed that this provision required replica vehicles to be licensed
products,\23\ meaning that the replica manufacturer must obtain all
legal rights necessary to produce the replica vehicle from the original
manufacturer, its successes or assignees, or current owner of such
intellectual property rights. NHTSA proposed that, when submitting its
registration, manufacturers must provide a binding certification that
attests that they can legally produce each replica vehicle model they
propose to make. This proposed requirement meant that manufacturers
would have to certify that they have determined the legal rights
required and that they have obtained all licenses or permissions
necessary to produce the replica vehicle.\24\ Applications that contain
a missing or incomplete certification would be disapproved. NHTSA also
proposed that manufacturers must provide supporting documentation that
sets forth a description of the types of IP necessary to produce the
replica vehicle, describing the status of each of those rights. If the
manufacturer had a license for particular rights, the agency proposed
it should provide documentation to that effect. NHTSA sought comment on
whether the replica vehicle manufacturer should be required to obtain a
license to use the original vehicle's make and model names.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\23\ 85 FR 797.
\24\ In the NPRM, NHTSA stated it viewed its role as ensuring
that the manufacturers who register under part 586 meet the
statutory requirements set forth in the FAST Act; manufacturers
would be responsible for performing the due diligence necessary to
determine what intellectual property rights are needed, and to
obtain relevant rights. 85 FR 798.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments Received
Many of the commenters addressed NHTSA's proposed requirements
regarding intellectual property (IP) rights. VSCI, SEMA, Edelbrock,
NADA, and potential replica vehicle manufacturers believed that NHTSA
should require a certified statement that the replica vehicle owner
either is the owner of all relevant IP rights, or has obtained the IP
rights from the owner(s). These commenters disagreed with NHTSA's
requiring the submission of documentation, stating that NHTSA was not
the proper entity to address the issue of IP rights. Some commenters
noted that NHTSA can revoke a license if such a statement was
determined to be invalid. In contrast, two commenters, Tom Scarpello
and the Alliance, supported a requirement that the potential replica
vehicle manufacturer demonstrate that it has the IP rights. The
Alliance argued that NHTSA should attend to the rights of IP holders,
and

[[Page 13217]]

stated that the documentation accompanying an application should be in
the public domain to help an IP holder who needed to assert its rights.
The Alliance asked NHTSA to place the documentation in the public
domain as soon as possible.
NHTSA Response
After considering the comments, NHTSA has decided not to require
the submission of documentation showing ownership of IP or a license to
use that IP. NHTSA's domain of expertise is automotive safety, not
intellectual property; NHTSA does not have the expertise to access the
validity or sufficiency of documentation submitted to show IP rights.
Disputes over IP rights and ownership are best resolved through
adjudicatory processes set up by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
and the Federal courts. Given NHTSA's limited role in such processes, a
requirement to submit the documentation to NHTSA is a paperwork burden
that the agency cannot justify.
Accordingly, this final rule requires a low-volume manufacturer
registering as a replica manufacturer to certify that the vehicle will
be manufactured under a license for the product configuration, trade
dress, trademark, or patent. This requirement is necessary pursuant to
49 U.S.C. 30114(b)(7)(B)(ii). It helps ensure that the vehicle is a
``replica motor vehicle'' as defined by Sec. 30114(b)(7)(B), and thus
qualifies for the FAST Act special exemption for replica vehicles.
However, NHTSA is also requiring the registrant to certify it has
obtained all IP necessary to produce the replica vehicle, not only the
IP rights pertaining to the exterior of the vehicle, but also any IP
implicated by designs elsewhere in the vehicle, such as the interior.
Congress provided a special exemption for replica vehicles but clearly
did so intending that all IP is to be respected in producing the
vehicles.
The commenters did not support NHTSA's requiring a replica motor
vehicle to include the make/model or badging on the vehicle. Commenters
stated that this could create confusion between the replica vehicle and
the original vehicle. Commenters also argued that NHTSA should not
require the make/model of the replicated vehicle to be disclosed on the
certification label and/or application, but merely the model year,
asserting that such a disclosure could create a copyright violation.
NHTSA has decided that it will not require any make/model or badging
for the vehicle being replicated on the exterior of the vehicle.
However, NHTSA will require replica vehicle manufacturers to include
the make/model and model year of the vehicle they intend to replicate
as part of their registration applications. Similarly, NHTSA will make
available on NHTSA's website the information of make, model, and model
year of the original vehicle the vehicle replicates. This information
facilitates NHTSA's oversight of the program by helping the agency
determine whether the registrant is manufacturing vehicles consistent
with the information in its registration, and verify whether they are
correctly labeling the vehicles with the information required by
section 30114(b)(3)(A).
Making this information public also increases the transparency of
the program, better informing the public as to which vehicles are
replicated, and IP rights asserted by registrants. Publishing this
information on NHTSA's website reasonably facilitates the public's role
in overseeing the IP aspect of the program. IP rights are most
effectively protected through a transparent registration process in
which IP owners can protect their own rights. For those processes to
work, owners and holders of IP rights must know when a replica motor
vehicle manufacturer claims to hold the IP rights to the original
vehicle. NHTSA will make public on its website certain other aspects of
the vehicle that implicate IP rights, such as whether the replica
vehicle is of a limited edition or customized model. Members of the
public will be able to review this information and inform NHTSA of
apparent improprieties or concerns that may disqualify a registration
in the program.

IV. Safety Requirements

a. Equipment FMVSS

NHTSA explained in the NPRM that the FAST Act exempts replica motor
vehicles from complying with the ``vehicle'' Federal motor vehicle
safety standards in effect on the date of manufacture of the replica.
The vehicle standards are those that apply to new vehicles of the
replica's type (e.g., passenger car, multipurpose passenger vehicle,
see 49 CFR 571.3). The FAST Act is clear that replica vehicles are not
exempt from the FMVSS that apply to ``equipment'' on or in the
vehicle.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\25\ 49 U.S.C. 30114(b)(1)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments Received
A few commenters argued that there were some situations in which
NHTSA should exempt replica vehicles from equipment standards. SEMA and
Callaway argued that replica vehicle manufacturers should be permitted
to use seat belts that do not fully comply with FMVSS No. 209 (which is
an equipment standard) if the replica motor vehicle's design is
inconsistent with the standard (e.g., if the use of retractors is not
possible due to the vehicle's design). SEMA, Edelbrock, and Callaway
argued that, because compliance with the new vehicle equipment
requirements in FMVSS No. 108 may not be technically or financially
possible for replica motor vehicle manufacturers, NHTSA should permit
compliance with replacement equipment requirements. Similarly, SEMA and
Edelbrock argued that replica motor vehicle manufacturers should be
permitted to use glazing that meets the ``aftermarket requirement'' in
FMVSS No. 205, which allows the use of glazing that complies with 49
CFR 571.205a.
NHTSA Response
The FAST Act does not provide NHTSA with discretion to exempt
replica vehicles from equipment standards. Accordingly, replica vehicle
manufacturers must ensure that their vehicles comply with equipment
standards such as FMVSS No. 209. However, we note that this final rule
permits manufacturers a 10 percent leeway to vary from the dimensions
of the original vehicle designs. As commenters suggested in the
discussion as to dimensional flexibility, this flexibility should
enable the installation of modern safety features, such as FMVSS No.
209-compliant retractors. That fact is one of the agency's primary
reasons for permitting such flexibility. Accordingly, this leeway
should satisfactorily accommodate the installation of compliant
equipment.
NHTSA concurs that the lighting and glazing standards (FMVSS Nos.
108 and 205, respectively) have provisions that apply to vehicles
(constituting a ``vehicle standard'') and provisions that apply to
replacement equipment (which constitute an equipment standard).\26\ We
concur with the commenters' suggestion that this final rule should
permit replica vehicles to meet the requirements for replacement
equipment in the lighting and glazing standards. A reasonable reading
of the FAST Act provision leads to this outcome, since FMVSS Nos. 108
and 205a include equipment-specific provisions, and because the only
source of relevant equipment may be in the aftermarket replacement
equipment market. NHTSA therefore agrees that,

[[Page 13218]]

while lighting equipment and glazing must be FMVSS-compliant, replica
motor vehicle manufacturers must meet the replacement equipment
requirements of those standards, and not the vehicle-specific
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\26\ NHTSA explained in the NPRM that some FMVSSs are both
vehicle and equipment standards. 85 FR 793.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. Safety-Related Defects

NHTSA explained in the NPRM that obtaining an exemption from the
FMVSS applicable to vehicles would have no effect on a replica vehicle
manufacturer's obligation under the Safety Act to recall and remedy its
vehicles found by the manufacturer or NHTSA to contain a defect that
creates an unreasonable risk to safety. Further, manufacturers of
replica vehicles must comply with the requirements of 49 U.S.C. 30116
through 30120A relating to defect reporting and notification. In
addition, the FAST Act specifies that a low-volume manufacturer's
registration in the program may be revoked if the manufacturer fails to
comply with requirements, if its vehicles are found to contain a
safety-related defect, or if the manufacturer engages in unlawful
conduct that poses a significant safety risk. NHTSA did not receive any
significant comments on this issue. This final rule adopts these
provisions as they were proposed in the NPRM.

V. Registration Requirements

Under 49 U.S.C. 30114(b)(2), low-volume manufacturers must be
registered ``[t]o qualify for an exemption.'' The NPRM proposed
requirements to implement the registration requirements, discussed
below.

a. When and How To Register

NHTSA proposed that each manufacturer wishing to manufacture
replica motor vehicles under this program must register as a replica
motor vehicle manufacturer for the calendar year in which the replica
motor vehicle is manufactured. NHTSA would determine whether a
manufacturer is eligible to manufacture replica motor vehicles based on
the information the manufacturer provides in its registration
documents. The agency proposed that manufacturers must register using
the NHTSA Product Information Catalog and Vehicle Listing (vPIC)
platform (<a href="https://vpic.nhtsa.dot.gov/">https://vpic.nhtsa.dot.gov/</a>). Comments were requested on
whether to allow submissions by mail as well.
Comments Received and NHTSA Response
VSCI agreed that prospective replica manufacturers should only
register through vPIC. NHTSA received no comments relating to whether
written submissions should also be permitted. This final rule requires
the vPIC platform to be used to register for and submit information to
the replica exemption program. This computerized platform facilitates
NHTSA's oversight and administration of the program, better allowing
the agency to keep track of registrations and assess submissions. The
vPIC platform also increases the transparency of registrations,
enabling members of the public to examine registrations and learn about
replica vehicle manufacturers and the vehicles they produce. Requiring
that all applicants register via vPIC also better enables NHTSA to meet
the time limits provided by the FAST Act for decisions on the
submissions.

b. Required Information

NHTSA proposed that persons seeking to register must submit
information sufficient to establish that their annual world-wide
production, including by a parent or subsidiary of the manufacturer, if
applicable, does not exceed 5,000 motor vehicles, and a statement
certifying to that effect, including the total number of motor vehicles
produced by or on behalf of the registrant in the 12 months prior to
filing the registration.
The NPRM proposed that each registrant must provide information
about the replica vehicle(s) it intends to manufacture, including a
statement identifying the original vehicle(s) the manufacturer intends
to replicate by make, model, and model year. The NPRM proposed that
registrants must submit images of the front, rear, and side views of
the original vehicle's exterior. The manufacturer would also need to
provide documents showing that it obtained the intellectual property
rights necessary to produce the replica vehicle, documents to support
that it has done so, and a statement certifying to that effect. The
NPRM stated that proof of such rights could be shown by furnishing a
license for the product configuration, trade dress, trademark, or
patent, for the intended replica motor vehicle from the original
manufacturer, its successors or assignees, or the current owner of such
product configuration, trade dress, trademark, or patent. This
documentation could also include a statement as to why obtaining
licenses for certain intellectual property is not required.
NHTSA proposed that the replica vehicle manufacturer would need to
certify that it would not manufacture more than 325 replica motor
vehicles in a calendar year. NHTSA interpreted the 325-vehicle limit in
the FAST Act to mean that a manufacturer would be limited to 325
replica vehicles, regardless of whether it is manufacturing replicas of
different makes and models of vehicles.
Comments Received and NHTSA Response
No significant comments were received on this issue. This final
rule adopts the provisions as discussed in the NPRM.

c. Time Periods

49 U.S.C. 30114(b)(5) specifies that NHTSA has 90 days to review
and approve or deny a registration, plus an additional 30 days if the
registration is determined to be incomplete. NHTSA anticipated setting
up the program so that registration under part 586 on the vPIC portal
provides an acknowledgment of receipt of the registration to the
manufacturer when the registration is submitted. The NPRM proposed
that, since some of the information would be provided by the
manufacturer in attachments, NHTSA would review the submission,
including attachments, within 90 days of acknowledging receipt to
ensure that the registration is complete.
NHTSA proposed procedures to provide for registrants submitting an
incomplete application. Rather than denying the incomplete application
immediately and outright, the proposed procedures would permit NHTSA to
inform the manufacturer that the registration is incomplete via email.
NHTSA proposed to give registrants 60 days from the date of NHTSA's
email to submit the necessary information to complete the registration.
If the necessary information were not submitted within 60 days, the
registration would be denied.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\27\ The manufacturer may resubmit the registration (presumably,
the resubmitted registration will include the information that was
missing from the prior application) but doing so would restart the
90-day clock. The NPRM proposed to deny repetitious, incomplete, or
inadequate registrations. For example, if a manufacturer resubmitted
a previously denied registration in identical form, NHTSA could deny
the application without requesting additional information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Under the proposal, once a manufacturer submitted missing
information within 60 days of being informed of the incomplete status,
NHTSA would have 30 additional days to review the amended registration.
That is, these 30 days would be added to any remaining days from the
initial 90-day review period. If the submission was still incomplete,
NHTSA would deny the registration. If a registrant submitted
information on its own initiative (without being notified by NHTSA that

[[Page 13219]]

its registration is incomplete), NHTSA would have the same 30
additional days added to any remaining days from the initial 90-day
period to review the amended registration. These additional days to
review would provide NHTSA the ability to manage its resources to
accommodate and account for incomplete registrations.
Comments Received and NHTSA Response
The only comment on this issue was from SEMA, which concurred with
the proposal to allow 60 days to reply to a request for additional
information. Aside from clarifying changes made to the regulatory text,
this final rule adopts the provisions relating to the timing of
incomplete registrations as discussed in the NPRM.

d. Deemed Approved

49 U.S.C. 30114(b)(5) states that any registration not approved or
denied within 90 days after initial submission, or 120 days if the
registration submitted is incomplete, shall be deemed approved. The
NPRM proposed that a manufacturer would not be considered registered
with NHTSA unless the manufacturer received confirmation from NHTSA
that it is registered. The NPRM proposed that a manufacturer whose
registration was not approved or denied within the allotted time, and
who believed its registration was deemed approved, should still be
required to receive confirmation of the approval from NHTSA. NHTSA
would add the manufacturer to the up-to-date list of registrants once
approval was confirmed.
NHTSA explained that this proposal for confirmation of approvals
was to safeguard the integrity of the exemption program against
confusion and fraud. The agency sought to avoid situations in which a
manufacturer might assume its registration was deemed approved when, in
fact, it was never received. The proposal explained the confirmation
process would better-establish a means of communication between the
agency and the manufacturer, and better ensure the list of replica
manufacturers on NHTSA's website is complete and accurate. A complete
and accurate list is important for the public to determine whether a
manufacturer qualifies for an exemption, and which vehicles are covered
by the exemption. The list also provides NHTSA with a strong
enforcement mechanism to monitor which manufacturers are lawfully
presenting themselves as registrants, and which vehicles are
appropriately offered for sale.
If a registration were deemed approved but had not met part 586
requirements originally, the NPRM proposed a means by which NHTSA could
request additional information from the ``deemed approved''
manufacturer to rectify the registration. NHTSA proposed that, when
notified of the submission's shortcomings, the manufacturer would have
60 days to submit information to correct and/or complete the
registration.
Comments Received
Calloway, Caterham, DeLorean Motor Company (DeLorean), Edelbrock,
VSCI and SEMA all disagreed with NHTSA's proposal to require
manufacturers to confirm that their application had been ``deemed
approved.'' Commenters stated that this requirement was contrary to the
FAST Act, with Calloway adding that this requirement would essentially
allow NHTSA unlimited time to process applications. Edelbrock, VSCI and
SEMA also noted that NHTSA retains the authority to revoke a ``deemed
approved'' application that it later determined was improper.
NHTSA Response
NHTSA agrees that the proposed ``deemed approved'' procedure could
have been less burdensome on registrants, but believes that many of the
concerns of the commenters arose from a misunderstanding of the
proposal and can be addressed with the following explanation of the
registration process and clarifying changes to the regulatory text.
NHTSA developed the vPIC platform to accommodate the replica vehicles
exemption program. The platform is designed so that, when NHTSA
receives an application through its vPIC portal, the vPIC system will
acknowledge the application, provide the registrant with a key number
to track its application, and automatically start a 90-day timer. At
the end of 90 days, if NHTSA has taken no action on the application,
vPIC will automatically add the applicant to the list of approved
replica motor vehicle manufacturers (albeit, with a note that their
application was ``deemed approved'' rather than affirmatively approved
by the agency). An application that has not been affirmatively approved
and does not show up on the list of approved replica manufacturers,
would occur only because (1) NHTSA determined the application was
incomplete, or (2) NHTSA denied the application.
In both of the above two scenarios, the vPIC system is programmed
to notify the applicant of NHTSA's determination. If, for some reason,
such notice was not received, it was because the application was
determined to be incomplete or was denied--and that a technical issue
(e.g., the email was blocked by the applicant's ``spam filter'')
prevented receipt of the notification. Because a determination that an
application was incomplete or denied would automatically generate an
email communication from NHTSA to the applicant, the agency emphasizes
that it is in the interest of potential applicants that they enquire
with NHTSA as to why their application has not been ``deemed
approved,'' and their name listed, after 90 days.
NHTSA designed vPIC and the registration system to provide for open
email communications between applicants and the agency. An applicant
could have overlooked the notice or had an email address configured
such that the email was not delivered (perhaps it was mistakenly
identified as ``spam''). NHTSA sought to prevent a situation where an
applicant assumes it is approved and commences operations after 90
days, when the application was incomplete, denied, or never received.
Such an applicant would be at risk of potentially violating 49 U.S.C.
30112(a) for manufacturing for sale or selling nonconforming vehicles.
Accordingly, NHTSA drafted this final rule with text encouraging
applicants to check the list of approved registrants after 90 days, and
to inquire with the agency if their name is missing. Applicants can
easily check the status of their application themselves on the vPIC
website using the key number that NHTSA sends in the confirmation email
generated at the time the application is submitted. They can also
contact the NHTSA Manufacturer Helpdesk at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#caa7aba4bfacaba9bebfb8afb8a3a4aca58aaea5bee4ada5bc">[email&#160;protected]</a> or
1-888-399-3277.
NHTSA also reiterates that, while the agency, by statute, will deem
approved registrants if the agency does not respond to the application
within the statutory timeframe, the agency can review the ``deemed
approved'' application later in the process to determine whether it
meets the requirements of the FAST Act and part 586. It is NHTSA's
understanding that the purpose of the provision is to ensure that
replica motor vehicle manufacturers are not burdened by procedural
delays beyond their control. To ensure the provision does not become a
means by which nonconforming replica vehicles not meeting requirements
can be produced and sold, the agency makes clear that NHTSA can
determine later, based on the contents of the application, that the
application should be denied, and at such time may take steps to remove
the manufacturer from the list of registrants.

[[Page 13220]]

In its comments, SEMA supported this position and noted that NHTSA has
authority to revoke a ``deemed approved'' registration later found not
to meet the requirements of part 586.
Given commenter confusion over NHTSA's procedures for ``deemed
approved'' registrants, NHTSA is finalizing clarified regulatory text
describing the procedures for processing and approving or denying
registrations.

VI. Other Administrative Requirements

a. Manufacturer Identification Requirements (49 CFR Part 566)

NHTSA proposed amending part 566 to list replica motor vehicles
among the types of vehicles that must be identified to the agency. Low-
volume manufacturers who wish to manufacture replica motor vehicles and
who have already submitted information under part 566 would be required
to update their information before manufacturing the replica vehicles.
NHTSA intended the addition of ``replica motor vehicles'' to the types
of vehicles listed in part 566 to identify the manufacturer as a
replica vehicle manufacturer. The manufacturer of a replica vehicle
would determine the standards from which the replica vehicle is exempt
by examining the ``application'' sections of the standards. We proposed
that the vehicle's vehicle identification number (VIN) and
certification labels would reflect that the vehicle is a replica of a
specific vehicle type defined in 571.3 (e.g., replica passenger car,
replica multipurpose passenger vehicle, etc.).
Currently, Sec. 566.5 requires manufacturers to ``furnish the
information'' to the Administrator and provides a street address to do
so. NHTSA proposed to update Sec. 566.5 to indicate that
manufacturers, other than manufacturers of replica vehicles, could
submit the part 566 information via the vPIC portal or via mail to the
agency's address. However, the NPRM proposed that replica motor vehicle
manufacturers, specifically, must submit the information via vPIC
because of administrative requisites. Because of the short time limits
under which NHTSA must decide on the registrations, electronic vPIC
records (versus paper copies) would expedite NHTSA's review of the
applications. (The agency notes that most, if not all part 566
manufacturer identification entries are currently submitted on vPIC.)
Comments Received and NHTSA Response
No significant comments were received on this aspect of the
program. Thus, NHTSA is requiring the use of the vPIC website to reduce
the administrative costs and complications that are associated with
processing hard-copy replica vehicle manufacturer applications, and in
recognition that a large portion of the information submitted to
register as a replica motor vehicle manufacturer would need to be
uploaded to vPIC so that it can be made available to the public.
Moreover, the use of the vPIC system ensures that an applicantt that is
later ``deemed approved'' will be reliably added to the list of
approved registrants. Because most, if not all, part 566 manufacturer
identification entries are currently submitted on vPIC, NHTSA believes
requiring replica manufacturers to use vPIC will not be burdensome.

b. Manufacturer Identifier and VIN Requirements

Manufacturers intending to manufacture motor vehicles for sale or
introduction into interstate commerce in the United States must obtain
a manufacturer identifier, which is incorporated into the vehicle's VIN
(see section below). NHTSA has a contract with SAE International to
assign manufacturer identifiers to manufacturers in the United States.
Manufacturers located outside of the U.S. must obtain a manufacturer
identifier from the WMI-issuing entity in the country in which they are
located.\28\ U.S. manufacturers should contact SAE International
directly (and not NHTSA) to request the assignment of a manufacturer
identifier. They would do so by telephoning 724-772-8511 or by writing
to: SAE International, 400 Commonwealth Avenue, Warrendale, PA 15096,
Attention: WMI Coordinator. The NPRM proposed that replica motor
vehicle manufacturers also must obtain unique manufacturer identifiers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\28\ If a country does not have a WMI-issuing entity, the
manufacturer may request a WMI from SAE. This service is separate
from SAE's issuance of WMIs for U.S. manufacturers under contract
with NHTSA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

NHTSA's regulations at 49 CFR part 565 require, among other things,
a motor vehicle manufacturer to assign each motor vehicle manufactured
for sale in the United States a 17-character VIN that uniquely
identifies the vehicle. Under part 565, a vehicle identification number
is ``a series of Arabic numbers and Roman letters that is assigned to a
motor vehicle for identification purposes.'' \29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\29\ 49 CFR 565.12(r).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VINs deter vehicle theft and serve a variety of public safety
purposes. VINs serve ``to increase the accuracy and efficiency of
vehicle recall campaigns'' \30\ and are the key identifier in data
systems that track such things as compliance with Federal importation
regulations, vehicle registrations, insurance coverage, and motor
vehicle crashes. Entities that today utilize VINs in data systems
include NHTSA, vehicle manufacturers, State motor vehicle departments,
law enforcement agencies, insurance companies, and organizations and
individuals involved in motor vehicle safety research.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\30\ 49 CFR 565.10.
\31\ 73 FR 23367-01, September 30, 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

NHTSA proposed several administrative changes to the VIN
requirements to account for replica vehicles. The changes are discussed
in detail in the NPRM (85 FR at 801).
Comments Received
AAMVA asked for clarification that NHTSA is not changing current
coding, and expressed concern that many other State data systems would
require changes if this were the case. One individual stated that the
make, model and model year of the replicated vehicle should be coded in
the VIN. NTEA recommended putting all requirements in part 586 as was
done in part 595, ``Vehicle Modifications to Accommodate People with
Disabilities,'' rather than amending parts 567 and 568.
NHTSA Response
This final rule does not change how VINs are coded for non-replica
motor vehicles. The primary change it makes is to add requirements
unique to replica motor vehicles--most notably the requirement that, in
addition to the information required for the replica motor vehicle's
type classification, the manufacturer must code the make, model, and
year of the original motor vehicle being replicated into the ``vehicle
attributes'' section of the VIN (positions four through eight). NHTSA
does not anticipate that States must change their VIN coding system
because of the replica vehicle VIN requirements.
NHTSA is not adopting NTEA's suggestion that the labeling
requirements for replica vehicles should be moved from the
certification regulation (49 CFR part 567) to part 586. The commenter
would like part 586 to contain all the requirements for replica
vehicles, in a manner similar to that of 49 CFR part 595 subpart C,
which sets forth an exemption from the Safety Act's ``make
inoperative'' provision.\32\ We

[[Page 13221]]

have decided not to use the approach of subpart C because the scope of
the replica vehicle regulation is much broader, and more comprehensive,
than the make inoperative exemption program of part 595 subpart C. The
replica vehicle regulation pertains to the manufacture of new vehicles
and involves exempting the vehicles from the Safety Act's directive to
meet Federal crashavoidance and crashworthiness standards. The
regulation setting forth an exemption from the make inoperative
requirement is narrow and could be self-contained in a single subpart.
In addition, regarding the labeling requirement at issue, we believe it
makes sense to establish the requirement in part 567 because the label
for replica vehicles serves to replace the certification label required
by part 567 for nonexempt vehicles. It is fitting to place the
requirement in part 567, since that is NHTSA's designated location for
permanent label requirements relating to a manufacturer's certification
of compliance with, or exemption from, the FMVSS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\32\ Under section 30122, a vehicle manufacturer, distributor,
dealer, rental company or repair business, may not knowingly make
inoperative any part of a device or element of design installed in
or on a motor vehicle or item of equipment in compliance with an
applicable FMVSS. NHTSA has the authority to issue regulations that
exempt regulated entities from the make inoperative provision (49
U.S.C. 30122(c)). The agency has used that authority to adopt 49 CFR
part 595, ``Make Inoperative Exemptions.'' Part 595 subpart C sets
forth an exemption permitting persons in certain circumstances to
modify vehicles after first sale to accommodate persons with
disabilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

However, we have made a slight revision to part 586 in response to
NTEA's comment. The agency emphasizes that each replica vehicle
manufacturer is responsible for knowing and meeting all NHTSA
requirements applying to the manufacture and sale of its vehicles;
NHTSA had included text on that basic tenet in proposed Sec. 586.5(c).
After considering NTEA's comment, we added a clause to paragraph (c) to
refer to part 567. New Sec. 586.5(c) states that each replica motor
vehicle manufacturer shall meet all statutory and regulatory
requirements, including requirements at 49 CFR part 567.\33\ NHTSA
believes this addition will make it more convenient for replica vehicle
manufacturers to locate the labeling requirements in part 567 and will
illustrate there are Safety Act requirements of which they must be
aware contained other than in part 586.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\33\ As NHTSA is not permitting replica vehicles to be
manufactured in more than one stage, NHTSA has not included a
reference to part 568.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

c. Declaration Form for Replica Motor Vehicles

NHTSA proposed that imported replica vehicles would be subject to
requirements in 49 CFR part 591, Importation of Vehicles and Equipment
Subject to Federal Safety, Bumper and Theft Prevention Standards.
Section 591.5, Declarations required for importation, requires
importers to file declarations and documentations with the U.S. Customs
and Border Protection at the time vehicles or items of motor vehicle
equipment are imported. Consistent with NHTSA's treatment of vehicles
that are subject to exemptions under 49 CFR part 555, Temporary
Exemption from Motor Vehicle Safety and Bumper Standards, NHTSA
expected that replica vehicles could be imported pursuant to 49 CFR
591.5(b). This is to say, importers would mark box ``2A'' on NHTSA's
HS-7 declaration form, Importation of Motor Vehicles and Motor Vehicle
Equipment Subject to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety, Bumper Standards,
when importing a replica motor vehicle. NHTSA requested comment on
whether the agency should amend 49 CFR 591.5 to provide clarity and
include specific language that states that replica vehicles may be
imported pursuant to a declaration under 49 CFR 591.5(b).
Comments Received
SEMA and others supported NHTSA's proposal to allow replica vehicle
manufacturers to check box 2A on the importer form (Form HS-7).
Conversely, AAMVA requested a separate listing on the importer form for
clarity.
NHTSA Response
As explained in the NPRM, NHTSA believes that replica motor
vehicles should be treated similarly to vehicles exempted under NHTSA's
general exemption authority (49 U.S.C. 30113), since they are not being
imported for a specified purpose other than resale. NHTSA therefore
does not believe it is necessary to amend the HS-7 declaration form at
this time. Importers of replica motor vehicles should mark box 2A on
the form.
We note that this final rule includes a minor change to the
regulatory text to 49 CFR part 591.5(b) so that the regulation
specifically includes replica motor vehicles as a category of imported
vehicles. Although NHTSA proposed making this change in the preamble to
the NPRM and specifically took comment on it, due to a clerical error,
the changes to part 591.5(b) were inadvertently omitted from the
proposed regulatory text. NHTSA has also added clarifying language to
49 CFR part 591.5(b) to explicitly specify that an importer of a
replica motor vehicle must be a ``low-volume manufacturer'' as that
term is defined under the replica program.

VII. Labels and Other Consumer Disclosures

49 U.S.C. 30114(b)(3)(A) directs NHTSA to require low-volume
manufacturers to affix a permanent label to motor vehicles produced
pursuant to a replica vehicle exemption. The label ``identifies the
specified standards and regulations for which the vehicle is exempt
from section 30112(a), states that the vehicle is a replica, and
designates the model year such vehicle replicates.'' Id. Section
30114(b)(3)(B) states that NHTSA may require a low-volume manufacturer
of a replica vehicle to deliver written notice of the exemption to the
dealer and the first consumer purchaser of the vehicle.

a. Permanent Label

NHTSA proposed that the requirement for permanent labeling be
incorporated into the requirements for certification labels under 49
CFR part 567 because part 567 includes permanent labeling requirements
pertaining to FMVSS certification. NHTSA proposed added statements for
replica vehicles. For replicas, NHTSA proposed that the label state
that the vehicle is a replica, state the make, model, and model year of
the vehicle it replicates, state that the vehicle is exempt from FMVSS
that apply to a vehicle of its type, and include a list of all vehicle
FMVSS and regulations the vehicle does not meet.
Comments Received
Several commenters expressed concerns about the requirement to list
all the FMVSS from which the replica motor vehicle was exempt on the
permanent label, stating that such a requirement would be unwieldy and
unfeasible. As an alternative, ElectroMeccanic and an individual
suggested a simpler label that directed the reader elsewhere for more
information, such as to the owner's manual, the manufacturer's website,
or a location like the underside of the vehicle hood. Morgan Motor
Company (Morgan), VSCI and SEMA suggested an option of an alternative
statement indicating that the vehicle is exempt from all FMVSS except
those specifically identified by the manufacturer.
NHTSA Response
49 U.S.C. 30114(b)(3)(A) specifically states that a replica motor
vehicle must be permanently affixed with a label ``that identifies the
specified standards and regulations for which such vehicle is exempt
from section 30112(a).'' Since NHTSA is not provided with discretion to
avoid this disclosure, the agency is

[[Page 13222]]

adopting the permanent labeling requirement as proposed, with minor
revisions. Identifying the standards and regulations from which the
vehicle is exempt is consistent with the statute, whereas allowing
replica manufacturers to list only the standards with which a replica
motor vehicle complies is not. The former makes clear to the
prospective purchaser the universe of FMVSSs with which the replica
vehicle does not comply, as required by the FAST Act. NHTSA does not
believe that allowing the label to direct customers to the
manufacturer's website is consistent with the statutory language,
since: (a) Such information would not be permanently affixed on a
label; and, (b) a website might not be maintained, or may have service
interruptions. Referring readers to an owner's manual also does not
meet the FAST Act requirement that the information be disclosed on a
permanent label. A label on the underside of the hood is unacceptable
because such a disclosure is not prominently placed and is unlikely to
be noticed.
That said, NHTSA agrees that this final rule should permit the
label to be separate from the certification label. While the
information described in 49 U.S.C. 30114(b)(3)(A) must be permanently
affixed on a single label (``a label''), it need not be combined with
the certification label. Accordingly, NHTSA has revised the labelling
requirement in this final rule to allow replica motor vehicles to
permanently affix the information in 49 U.S.C. 30114(b)(3)(A) to either
the certification label, or a separate label located adjacent to or
near the certification label.

b. Written Notice to Dealers and First Purchasers; Temporary Label

The FAST Act specifies that NHTSA may require registrants to
provide ``written notice of the exemption'' to dealers and first
purchasers of replica vehicles.\34\ NHTSA proposed to require a written
disclosure to dealers and first purchasers of the vehicles consisting
of a list of the FMVSS and regulations from which the vehicle is
exempt. The written notice was to be in the owner's manual or in a
separate document. The written disclosure was to include a ``purpose
statement'' for each standard and regulation from which the vehicle is
exempt. Such statements were intended to assist consumers in
understanding the safety implications of the exemptions. The agency
proposed the purpose statements be in a Table 1 to part 586. In
addition, NHTSA proposed replica vehicles must have a temporary label
attached to a location on the dashboard or the steering wheel hub
warning prospective purchasers that the replica vehicle is exempt from
the vehicle FMVSSs, theft prevention and bumper standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\34\ 49 U.S.C. 30114(b)(3)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments Received
NADA supports the idea of providing information to purchasers, but
believes that manufacturers should have the option of providing the
information in Table 1 or in the temporary label, provided the label
also points to a reference website where consumers can find more
information on the exemptions. SEMA and Edelbrock disagree with
requiring manufacturers to provide consumers with the information in
Table 1. SEMA compared potential purchasers to kit car owners--i.e., as
SEMA described them, car enthusiasts who know what they are purchasing.
SEMA also claimed that new car purchasers rely on the agency's New Car
Assessment Program website to understand the value of the FMVSS.
NHTSA sought comment on whether information warning prospective
purchasers about the replica vehicles' nonconformance with applicable
standards should be provided in advertisements and other marketing
materials for the vehicles. Morgan stated this would be unnecessary
since such warnings would be seen at the point of sale when the vehicle
is viewed.
NHTSA Response
NHTSA concurs with the commenters' arguments about the redundancy
of the proposed requirements and has decided against adopting some
aspects of the proposed disclosures. NHTSA believes that a temporary
label in the passenger compartment would be sufficient to meet the
purpose of the proposed requirements for written disclosure to the
dealer and the first purchaser \35\ and that providing both the
temporary label and a written disclosure is unnecessary. NHTSA
concludes that a temporary label is a more effective way of
communicating that the vehicle is exempt from the FMVSS because it
would be in a prominent visible location and the consumer would need to
affirmatively handle and remove the label. NHTSA agrees not to require
that purpose statements be disclosed to consumers. Listing the specific
standards and regulations from which the replica vehicle is exempt
should be sufficient to convey to the consumer the extent to which the
standards do not apply to the FMVSSs, and NHTSA does not have reason to
believe that a disclosure of the purpose behind each standard would
affect the purchasing decisions of prospective replica vehicle
purchasers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\35\ 49 U.S.C. 30114(b)(3)(B)(i) and (ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VIII. Reporting

Under 49 U.S.C. 30114(b)(3)(C), NHTSA must require replica
manufacturers to submit an annual report providing the number and
description of motor vehicles exempted as replica motor vehicles,
including a list of the exemptions included on the mandatory label
described in the above section. NHTSA proposed that annual reports must
be submitted within 60 days of the end of the calendar year. Because
these vehicles would be produced in limited quantities, NHTSA believed
that the information for the report could be entered after each vehicle
is manufactured, and that a 60-day deadline for submitting the report
at the end of the calendar year is therefore reasonable.
NHTSA proposed that annual reports include: The manufacturer's
legal name; the manufacturer's address, phone number and email address;
the calendar year for which the annual report is submitted (replica
model year), and the total number of replica vehicles manufactured
during that year; a list of the different versions of replica motor
vehicles produced by make, model, and original model year of replicated
vehicle; a list of the FMVSS and regulations from which each version of
replica vehicle (by make, model, and original model year of replicated
vehicle) is exempt; images of the front, rear, and side views of the
original vehicle(s) replicated, of both the vehicle's exterior, and
images of the same views of a representative replica manufactured to
resemble each original vehicle; and a full complete package of
descriptive information, views, and arguments sufficient to establish
that the replica motor vehicles, as manufactured, resemble the body of
the original vehicle. The reports would also be required to include: A
statement of whether the registrant will be manufacturing the same
replica motor vehicle(s) in the next calendar year, and, if so, an
estimate of the number of vehicles that would be manufactured. NHTSA
proposed the annual report include a list of the complete VINs of all
replica vehicles included in the annual report. These requirements
would assist NHTSA in enforcing the annual limit of 325 replica
vehicles per manufacturer. NHTSA believed that, as manufacturers
already maintain lists of all VINs

[[Page 13223]]

manufactured in a given year, the burden should be minimal.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\36\ Although manufacturers keep lists for business purposes, it
is also required by 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Non-Compliance
Responsibility and Reports.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The NPRM proposed that manufacturers intending to continue to
manufacture replica motor vehicle(s) must also submit information
sufficient to establish that their annual world-wide production,
including by a parent or subsidiary of the manufacturer, if applicable,
is not more than 5,000 motor vehicles, and a statement certifying to
that effect, including the total number of motor vehicles produced by
or on behalf of the registrant in the 12-month prior to filing the
registration. The reports would also include a statement as to whether
the replica vehicle contains any of the following vehicle safety
features--air bags, seat belts, advanced safety systems/passive safety
systems (listed with locations), electronic stability control, rear
visibility camera system, and ejection mitigation air bags.
NHTSA proposed that the annual report must be submitted using vPIC.
NHTSA believed that the use of the online portal would be less
burdensome than requiring manufacturers to submit their annual reports
by mail. Online submission of the annual reports would also assist
NHTSA in complying with the FAST Act requirement that NHTSA maintain a
list of manufacturers on its website of replica motor vehicles and the
make and model of exempted vehicles being produced.
Comments Received and NHTSA Response
No significant comments were received on this issue. NHTSA adopts
the proposal for the reasons discussed above and in the NPRM.

IX. Termination of Exemptions

a. Revocation

49 U.S.C. 30114(b)(5) specifies that NHTSA has the authority to
revoke a registration based on a failure to comply with requirements or
a finding of a safety-related defect or unlawful conduct. NHTSA
proposed that NHTSA may require registrants to provide information at
any time demonstrating compliance with the requirements of part 586,
and that the agency may revoke an existing registration, or deny a
registration, based on a failure to comply with part 586, or on a
finding of either a safety-related defect or unlawful conduct under the
Safety Act that poses a significant safety risk. The proposed section
provided that NHTSA would provide a registrant a reasonable opportunity
to correct deficiencies, if such are correctable, based on the sole
discretion of NHTSA.
Comments Received and NHTSA Response
The only views received on this issue supported the agency's
position and noted that NHTSA has authority to revoke a ``deemed
approved'' registration later found not to meet requirements. NHTSA
adopts the proposal for the reasons discussed above and in the NPRM.

b. Expiration

49 U.S.C. 30114(b)(5) provides that an exemption granted to a low-
volume manufacturer may not be transferred to any other person, and
that the 325-vehicle production authorization is limited to the
calendar year in which the exception is granted, and unused production
capacity (i.e., the difference between the 325-vehicle authorization
and actual vehicle production) does not accrue and carry forward into
subsequent calendar years, but expires at the end of the calendar year
in which it was granted. NHTSA interpreted 49 U.S.C. 30114(b)(5) as
referring to unused production capacity under an exemption in a
calendar year, and not as requiring that manufacturers must re-register
(renew their registrations) annually. NHTSA proposed that registrants
may carry forward their registration by informing NHTSA in an annual
report (discussed above) of their intent to continue manufacturing the
vehicles covered by the approved registration, and need not formally
re-register annually at the end of the calendar year concerning those
covered vehicles.
Comments Received and NHTSA Response
No significant comments were received on this issue. NHTSA adopts
the proposal for the reasons discussed in the NPRM.

X. List of Registrants

49 U.S.C. 30114(b)(5) specifies that NHTSA must maintain an up-to-
date list of registrants and a list of the make and model of exempted
motor vehicles on at least an annual basis and publish such list in the
Federal Register or on a website operated by NHTSA. NHTSA proposed it
would post such a list on NHTSA's website where it can be easily
accessed and updated.

Comments Received and NHTSA Response

No significant comments were received on this issue. NHTSA adopts
the proposal for the reasons discussed in the NPRM.

XI. Overview of Benefits and Costs

NHTSA prepared a preliminary regulatory evaluation for the NPRM
that requested comment on the framework for the benefit cost analysis
and preliminary estimates included in the analysis. No significant
comments were received on the evaluation.
For this final rule, NHTSA has developed a Final Regulatory
Evaluation (FRE) that discusses the potential costs, benefits and other
impacts of this regulatory action. The FRE is available in the docket
for this final rule and may be obtained by downloading it or by
contacting Docket Management at the address or telephone number
provided at the beginning of this document.
The table below provides a summary of the various benefits and
costs that may accrue from this rule, as well as the various factors
that define the range of possible outcomes.

Table 1--Ranges of Outcomes for Benefit and Cost Categories
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Element Low case High case
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benefits
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Incremental consumer surplus Not estimated: Not estimated: If
Incremental replicas
consumer surplus manufactured under
would be low if the rule differ
substitutes such as greatly in price
luxury sports cars and/or transaction
and kit cars are cost from luxury
viable alternatives sports cars and kit
for consumers. cars--thus behaving
more like a unique
product--incrementa
l consumer surplus
could be high.

[[Page 13224]]

Incremental fatalities, Estimated: Estimated:
injuries and property Fatalities would be Fatalities would be
damage. lower if: Voluntary higher if:
compliance with Voluntary
safety standards is compliance is low;
high; production of production is high;
replicas is on the and if VMT is high.
low end; and VMT by Not Estimated:
replicas is also Fatalities would be
low. Not Estimated: higher if replicas
Fatalities will be function as a new
lower if replicas market that
primarily function attracts new
as a substitute for consumers--implying
kit cars. substitution from
more compliant
vehicles--or, if
replica vehicle
drivers choose to
increase their VMT
specifically to
enjoy the replica
vehicle, rather
than as a
substitute for
mileage driven in
substitute
vehicles.
Incremental fuel use........ Not Estimated: Not Estimated:
Reflects low VMT. Reflects high VMT.
Innovation.................. Not Estimated: The Not Estimated:
rule is primarily Manufacturers
used to replicate producing under the
old designs. rule seek to
incorporate some
newer technologies
into replica
vehicles. Could
lead to innovation
to make technology
fit into older
designs. (e.g.,
miniaturization).
Incremental employment Not Estimated: Job Not Estimated: If
impacts. losses from kit car production
contractors and remains relatively
small businesses stable and replica
that assemble kit car production
cars are around or increases
equal to the job significantly
gains for small (consistent with
replica case where replicas
manufacturers. are a new and
separate product
category),
employment effects
would be greater.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Costs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reduced compliance costs.... Estimated: Captures Not Estimated: Would
the cost of consider the
installing required avoided costs of
safety technologies forcing required
on an average safety technologies
modern car. into older vehicle
designs.
Reporting costs............. Estimated: Reflects Estimated: Reflects
low bound of high bound of
production. production.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

NHTSA calculated the impact of the final rule on benefits by
analyzing the change in safety impacts related to increased fatalities,
injuries and property costs due to eliminating compliance with vehicle
FMVSS and bumper standards. The primary impact on benefits of this
final rule would be an expected increase in fatalities and injuries for
drivers and occupants in both replica vehicles and some portion of
their crash partners due to reducing FMVSS requirements. Per-vehicle
benefit and cost impacts are presented by vehicle type and discount
rate in Table 2:

Table 2--Summary of Benefit and Cost Impacts
[Per vehicle, 2017 dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact Passenger cars LTVs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benefits--3% Discount Rate............ -$8,449 to -$1,068................. -$9,514 to -$744.
Benefits--7% Discount Rate............ -$6,314 to -$794................... -$7,039 to -$548.
Costs--3% Discount Rate............... -$2,215 to -$827................... -$1,935 to -$664.
Costs--7% Discount Rate............... -$2,174 to -$812................... -$1,899 to -$652.
Net Benefits--3% Discount Rate........ -$6,233 to -$241................... -$7,579 to $80.
Net Benefits--7% Discount Rate........ -$4,139 to $18..................... -$5,140 to $104.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There is considerable uncertainty in the degree of regulatory
relief replica vehicle manufacturers would incorporate into the vehicle
manufacturing process under the final rule. That is, although the final
rule would eliminate compliance requirements with all vehicle FMVSS and
bumper standards, at least some replica vehicle manufacturers may
comply voluntarily with at least some vehicle FMVSS and bumper
standards.
At a minimum, NHTSA believes it is reasonable to assume that
replica vehicle manufacturers will provide at least three-point seat
belts voluntarily. The agency notes that, in the NPRM, this assumption
was based, at least in part, on NHTSA's view that States could still
require vehicle safety features as part of the registration and titling
requirements. As discussed further below, NHTSA has reconsidered this
view in part, as the Agency is now not taking a position on what types
of State laws would or would not be preempted. However, regardless of
this question, NHTSA continues to believe that it is reasonable that
belts will be installed in at least many replica vehicles because, at a
minimum, consumers will demand seat belts or insurance companies would
likely either require them in replica vehicles or charge prohibitively
high premiums for replica vehicles without seat belts. Thus, NHTSA
believes it would be unrealistic to expect replica vehicle
manufacturers to sell replica vehicles that would be manufactured
without belts. In this analysis, NHTSA investigates the implications of
seat belt requirements by presenting benefit and cost impacts under a
baseline in which all replica vehicle manufacturers provide three-point
seat belts voluntarily (referred to as the Voluntary Seat Belts
scenario).
NHTSA believes it is also possible that at least some replica
vehicle manufacturers will design vehicles that voluntarily comply with
all standards except those that would impair the resemblance of replica
vehicles to the corresponding original vehicles. NHTSA represents the
implications of appearance constraints by presenting benefit and cost
impacts under a baseline in which all replica vehicle manufacturers
comply with all relevant standards except for those assumed to have the
strongest effect on vehicle appearance: All air bags (affecting the
appearance of steering wheels, dashboards, and the lining of the
interior), roof crush resistance (affecting the appearance of pillars),
and bumper standards. This scenario is referred to as the Appearance
Constraint scenario). However, though NHTSA believes the same factors
that would encourage the Voluntary Seat Belts scenario would be present
here, the Agency believes that these factors, particularly consumer
demand, are likely weaker here, and

[[Page 13225]]

thus that this scenario may be less likely than the above scenario.
The FRE also presents per-vehicle estimates under a scenario in
which replica vehicle manufacturers relax compliance with all standards
affected by the final rule (referred to as the Full Exemption
scenario). However, NHTSA does not expect this scenario to be a
realistic outcome under the final rule, due to consumer demand,
insurance-related factors, and possible litigation concerns, and the
uncertainty regarding the effect of various State laws, and thus only
presents this information as a sensitivity case.
We, thus, present estimates under the Voluntary Seat Belts and
Appearance Constraint scenarios as upper and lower bounds,
respectively, of the scope of impacts that would likely be observed
under the final rule. NHTSA estimates that involvement in the part 586
exemption program established by this final rule will save low-volume
manufacturers of replica passenger cars and light trucks and vans
(LTVs) between $3.4 million and $17.2 million at a three-percent
discount rate (between $3.3 million and $16.9 million at a 7% discount
rate) annually, resulting from the elimination of the requirement to
certify compliance of their vehicles with the vehicle FMVSS, fuel
economy standards, bumper standards, and labeling requirements. NHTSA
estimates that the annual impact on benefits associated with the final
rule will be between -$68.4 million and -$4.1 million at a 3% discount
(between -$51.1 million and -$3.1 million at a 7% discount rate)
annually, resulting from incremental property damage, injury, and
fatality costs.

Table 21--Total Annual Discounted Net Benefits
[Millions of 2017 dollars, 3% discount rate]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total benefit Total cost
Scenario Annual production VMT impact impact Net benefits
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appearance Constraint.................... 3,600 Cars, 400 LTVs........ Low Case....................... -$4.1 -$3.4 -$0.8
Appearance Constraint.................... 3,600 Cars, 400 LTVs........ High Case...................... -9.6 -3.4 -6.2
Appearance Constraint.................... 7,200 Cars, 800 LTVs........ Low Case....................... -8.3 -6.5 -1.8
Appearance Constraint.................... 7,200 Cars, 800 LTVs........ High Case...................... -19.3 -6.5 -12.8
Voluntary Seat Belts..................... 3,600 Cars, 400 LTVs........ Low Case....................... -14.6 -8.7 -5.8
Voluntary Seat Belts..................... 3,600 Cars, 400 LTVs........ High Case...................... -34.2 -8.7 -25.5
Voluntary Seat Belts..................... 7,200 Cars, 800 LTVs........ Low Case....................... -29.2 -17.2 -12.0
Voluntary Seat Belts..................... 7,200 Cars, 800 LTVs........ High Case...................... -68.4 -17.2 -51.2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table 22--Total Annual Discounted Net Benefits
[Millions of 2017 dollars, 7% discount rate]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total benefit Total cost
Scenario Annual production VMT impact impact Net benefits
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appearance Constraint.................... 3,600 Cars, 400 LTVs........ Low Case....................... -$3.1 -$3.3 $0.3
Appearance Constraint.................... 3,600 Cars, 400 LTVs........ High Case...................... -7.2 -3.3 -3.8
Appearance Constraint.................... 7,200 Cars, 800 LTVs........ Low Case....................... -6.2 -6.4 $0.2
Appearance Constraint.................... 7,200 Cars, 800 LTVs........ High Case...................... -14.3 -6.4 -8.0
Voluntary Seat Belts..................... 3,600 Cars, 400 LTVs........ Low Case....................... -10.9 -8.6 -2.3
Voluntary Seat Belts..................... 3,600 Cars, 400 LTVs........ High Case...................... -25.5 -8.6 -17.0
Voluntary Seat Belts..................... 7,200 Cars, 800 LTVs........ Low Case....................... -21.8 -16.9 -4.9
Voluntary Seat Belts..................... 7,200 Cars, 800 LTVs........ High Case...................... -51.1 -16.9 -34.2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The estimated net benefits for replica passenger cars under the
final rule are negative in all cases except in the Appearance
Constraint scenario under the low VMT assumption at a seven-percent
discount rate, in which case net benefits are positive but very close
to zero ($0.2 to $0.3 million). At a three-percent discount rate, net
benefits are negative but near zero (-$1.8 million to -$0.8 million) in
the Appearance Constraint scenario under the low VMT assumption. Net
benefits are negative in the Voluntary Seat Belts scenario under the
high VMT assumption at both discount rates (-$51.2 million to -$2.3
million). These results indicate that the final rule is expected to:
(1) Generate negative safety impacts exceeding the corresponding
production cost savings across most combinations of key assumptions in
the analysis; or (2) generate negative safety impacts similar in
magnitude to the corresponding production cost savings under the most
conservative assumptions in the analysis.

XII. Effective Date

This final rule is effective immediately upon publication in the
Federal Register. The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) states that a
rule cannot be made effective less than 30 days after publication
unless the rule falls under one of three exceptions. One of these
exceptions is for a rule that ``grants or recognizes an exemption or
relieves a restriction.'' \37\ This rule would fall under this
exception because it would create a process through which manufacturers
could obtain exemptions to manufacture replica vehicles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\37\ 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The only comment on the agency's proposed immediate effective date
was from SEMA, which concurred with the proposal. NHTSA adopts the
effective date as proposed.

XIII. Regulatory Notices and Analyses

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 and DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures

NHTSA has considered the impact of this rulemaking action under
E.O. 12866, E.O. 13563, and the Department of Transportation's
administrative

[[Page 13226]]

rulemaking procedures. This rulemaking is not considered significant
and was not reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget under E.O.
12866. This rule is considered ``of special note to the Department''
under DOT Order 2100.6A, Rulemaking and Guidance Procedures, and has
been reviewed by the Office of the Secretary of Transportation. The
amendments adopted by this final rule implement an exemption program
mandated by Sec. 24405 of the FAST Act for low-volume manufacturers,
and involve a relatively small number of motor vehicles. There will be
costs avoided by low-volume manufacturers when producing replica
vehicles because the vehicles will not be required to meet all the
Federal regulations and FMVSS applicable to new motor vehicles.
Potential benefits could also include increased consumer surplus and
increased incremental employment impacts among small manufacturers.
Safety disbenefits could result from crashes if replica vehicles do not
meet the vehicle safety standards, but NHTSA believes the vehicles will
be used only occasionally due to their unique designs. NHTSA assumes
that 40 low-volume manufacturers will produce between 4,000 and 8,000
replica vehicles annually, and the vehicles are expected to be driven,
on average, no more than 2,280 miles per year. Further, NHTSA believes
the vehicles will likely be equipped with critical safety equipment
such as seat belts for reasons that include meeting conditions of
insurance carriers and consumer demand. The program will not have a
significant effect on the national economy, in part because of the
small number of vehicles affected by this program.

National Environmental Policy Act

The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C.
4321-4347) requires Federal agencies to consider the environmental
impacts of major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of
the human environment, as well as the impacts of alternatives to the
action.\38\ The FAST Act requires NHTSA to establish an exemption
program for replica vehicles, and this action implements that exemption
program and the procedural mandates in the Act. The aspects of the
program under the jurisdiction of NHTSA that could have environmental
impacts include the exemption from the FMVSS (including those that
affect the weight of the vehicle and thereby influence motor vehicle
fuel economy) and the exemption from average fuel economy standards,
both of which are specifically prescribed by statute. Although the FRE
considers the impacts of this rule, NHTSA does not have the authority
to consider alternatives that would subject replica vehicles covered
under this program to the vehicle FMVSS or the average fuel economy
standards in 49 U.S.C. 32902. Therefore, NHTSA is precluded from
considering the environmental and safety impacts of those aspects of
the replica vehicle exemption program in its rulemaking and is not
required to address them in its Environmental Assessment.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\38\ 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C).
\39\ See 40 CFR 1501.1(a)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

When a Federal agency prepares an environmental assessment, the
Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) NEPA implementing regulations
(40 CFR parts 1500-1508) require it to ``[b]riefly discuss the purpose
and need for the proposed action, alternatives [. . .], and the
environmental impacts of the proposed action and alternatives, and
include a listing of agencies and persons consulted.'' \40\ This
section serves as the agency's Final Environmental Assessment (Final
EA) for those aspects of the program for which NHTSA may exercise
discretion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\40\ 40 CFR 1501.5(c)(2). The Draft Environmental Assessment
(Draft EA) included as part of the NPRM quoted from and cited to the
CEQ NEPA implementing regulations prior to their revision earlier
this year. 85 FR 43304 (Jul. 16, 2020) (eff. Sep. 14, 2020).
Citations and references to the CEQ NEPA implementing regulations
have been updated as appropriate to reflect these revisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

This document sets forth the purpose of and need for this action.
The purpose of this rulemaking is to implement the exemption program
and the procedural mandates described in Section 24405 of the FAST Act,
which directs NHTSA to exempt annually a limited number of replica
motor vehicles manufactured or imported by low-volume manufacturers
from the FMVSS that apply to motor vehicles, but not standards that
apply to motor vehicle equipment. In addition, replica vehicles are
exempt from the requirements of 49 U.S.C. 32304, 32502, and 32902, as
well as from section 3 of the Automobile Information Disclosure Act (15
U.S.C. 1232). This action is needed to implement a program to grant the
exemptions directed by the FAST Act for the manufacture of replica
vehicles. NHTSA is also establishing labeling, consumer disclosure, and
registration requirements to ensure adequate public awareness of and
agency oversight over these vehicles.
The labeling, registration, and other procedural requirements of
this final rule are not anticipated to have anything other than de
minimis environmental impacts. These aspects of the program are largely
ministerial in nature for replica vehicle manufacturers and importers
and are not likely to change sales volumes. Any environmental impacts
that could occur as a result of the manufacture or operation of these
motor vehicles will occur as a function of the statute requiring
exemption from the applicable FMVSS and average fuel economy standards,
and NHTSA does not have sufficient discretion to alter these impacts
meaningfully. Further, NHTSA assumes that only 40 low-volume
manufacturers will produce between 4,000 and 8,000 replica vehicles
annually, and the vehicles are expected to be driven, on average, no
more than 2,280 miles per year. With regard to all aspects of the
replica vehicle exemption program (including the exemption from the
FMVSS and average fuel economy standards), these vehicles represent an
extremely small fraction of overall motor vehicle sales and on-road
vehicle miles traveled that will be disbursed throughout the country.
As a result, they are unlikely to cause environmental impacts that
could rise to any level of significance.
NHTSA invited public comments on the contents and tentative
conclusions of the Draft EA. No public comments addressing the Draft EA
were received. Furthermore, none of the public comments that were
received addressed any issues related to the human environment that
would be relevant to the Final EA.
Based on the foregoing, NHTSA concludes that the final rule will
have only a de minimis impact on the quality of the human environment.
Based on the Final EA, NHTSA concludes that implementation of any of
the alternatives considered in this notice, including the final
regulations, will not have a significant effect on the human
environment and that a ``finding of no significant impact'' is
appropriate. This statement constitutes the agency's ``finding of no
significant impact,'' and an environmental impact statement will not be
prepared.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\41\ 40 CFR 1501.6(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Regulatory Flexibility Act

Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.,
as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
(SBREFA) of 1996), whenever an agency is required to publish an NPRM or
final rule, generally it must prepare and make available for public
comment a regulatory flexibility analysis that describes the effect of
the rule on small entities (i.e., small businesses, small
organizations, and small governmental

[[Page 13227]]

jurisdictions). The Small Business Administration's regulations at 13
CFR part 121 define a small business, in part, as a business entity
``which operates primarily within the United States.'' (13 CFR
121.105(a)). A regulatory flexibility analysis is not required if the
head of the agency certifies that the action would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires Federal agencies to provide a
statement of the factual basis for certifying that a rule would not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
In compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, NHTSA has
evaluated the effects of this final rule on small entities and has
prepared a Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA).
This final rule will impact small entities that are low-volume
manufacturers that choose to produce replica vehicles.\42\ A small
entity falls under North American Industry Classification System
(NAICS) Nos. 336111, 336112, and 336120 for Automobile Manufacturing,
Light Truck and Utility Vehicle Manufacturing, and Heavy Duty Truck
Manufacturing. Pursuant to 13 CFR 121.201, which establishes size
standards regulations to define small businesses, entities in these
industries with 1,500 or fewer employees are considered small business
concerns. NHTSA expects that most, if not all, replica manufacturers
will have 1,500 or fewer employees. NHTSA estimates that up to 40 small
manufacturers will want to register as low-volume manufacturers of
replica vehicles, but that about 10 would be foreign replica
manufacturers.\43\ Since the Small Business Administration's
regulations limit Regulatory Flexibility Act applicability to small
businesses that operate primarily within the United States, foreign
manufacturers that would participate in the replica vehicle program are
not covered by the Act.\44\ Therefore, for purposes of the FRFA, this
final rule is expected to impact 30 small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\42\ The FAST Act amended the Safety Act (49 U.S.C. 30114(7)(A))
to define ``low-volume manufacturer'' as ``a motor vehicle
manufacturer, other than a person who is registered as an importer
under section 30141 of this title, whose annual worldwide
production, including by a parent or subsidiary of the manufacturer,
if applicable, is not more than 5,000 motor vehicles.''
\43\ This assumption is based on the percent of all passenger
cars sold in the US but are manufactured outside the US. Between
January and August 2018, 76.1% of vehicles sold in the U.S. were
produced domestically and 23.9% were imported. ``U.S. light-vehicle
sales by nameplate, August & 8 months.'' Automotive News. September
10, 2018, pp. 56-7.
\44\ 13 CFR 121.105(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Until the FAST Act was enacted, all low-volume manufacturers of
replica vehicles were subject to virtually the same Safety Act
requirements as the largest manufacturers when producing new motor
vehicles. Generally, in FMVSS rulemaking, small manufacturers are given
more lead time to comply with new FMVSS requirements, such as by having
longer lead times or phase-in timelines to comply with new
requirements,\45\ and they can also petition for exemptions from
certain FMVSS for limited periods of time on certain specific
grounds.\46\ However, notwithstanding the flexibility regarding
compliance dates and limited-period exemptions, until the FAST Act,
low-volume manufacturers of replica vehicles had the same
responsibilities as larger manufacturers to certify their vehicles as
complying with all applicable FMVSS. These FMVSS comprise standards
applying to ``equipment'' and standards applying to the ``vehicle'' as
a unit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\45\ 49 CFR 571.8(b). Unless contrary to statute or NHTSA
expressly determines otherwise, intermediate and final-stage
manufacturers and alterers are provided an additional year to meet a
standard or an amendment to a standard.
\46\ Pursuant to 49 CFR part 555, a manufacturer may petition
for a temporary exemption on the bases of substantial economic
hardship, making easier the development or field evaluation of new
motor vehicle safety or impact protection, or low-emission vehicle
features, or that compliance with a standard would prevent it from
selling a vehicle with an overall level of safety or impact
protection at least equal to that of nonexempted vehicles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The FAST Act allows registered replica vehicle manufacturers to
manufacture vehicles that are exempt from meeting the ``vehicle''
FMVSS. NHTSA estimates that involvement in the part 586 exemption
program will save low-volume manufacturers of replica passenger cars
and light trucks, MPVs, and buses (LTVs) between $3.4 million and $17.2
million at a three-percent discount rate (between $3.3 million and
$16.8 million at a seven-percent discount rate) annually resulting from
the elimination of the requirement to comply with the vehicle FMVSS,
fuel economy standards, bumper standards, and labeling
requirements.\47\ This means that each replica vehicle manufacture
will, on average, experience cost savings of between $85,000 and
$430,000 annually at a three-percent discount rate and between $82,000
and $420,000 annually at a seven-percent discount rate.\48\ NHTSA
expects this cost savings to have a significant positive economic
impact on the 30 regulated small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\47\ Additional detail on these estimates is provided in the
Final Regulatory Evaluation.
\48\ NHTSA divided the total cost savings by 40 because these
estimates are based on NHTSA's assumption that there will be a total
of 40 replica manufacturers producing, on average, 200 vehicles per
year. In addition to the 30 replica manufacturers that NHTSA expects
to be considered small businesses by SBA, the total cost savings
also include savings to an estimated 10 replica manufacturers that
would be manufacturers not operating primarily in the U.S.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

According to guidance provided by the SBA's Office of Advocacy, to
determine whether the number of small entities significantly impacted
is substantial, an agency may need to look not only at the number of
significantly impacted entities, but also at the percentage of affected
small entities so impacted.\49\ Since the rule is expected to
significantly economically impact 100 percent of the 30 regulated small
entities, this would be a substantial number. Therefore, the replica
vehicle program is expected to significantly economically affect a
substantial number of small entities. Accordingly, NHTSA has prepared
this Final Regulatory Flexibility Act analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\49\ U.S. Small Business Administration Office of Advocacy, A
Guide for Government Agencies: How to Comply with the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, 21-22 (August 2017), available at <a href="https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/advocacy/How-to-Comply-with-the-RFA-WEB.pdf">https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/advocacy/How-to-Comply-with-the-RFA-WEB.pdf</a> (last accessed Oct. 15, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Overview of the Objectives of and Legal Basis for the Final Rule
NHTSA is issuing this final rule to implement an exemption mandated
under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (Safety Act)
(49 U.S.C. 30114(b)), as amended by the Fixing America's Surface
Transportation Act (the FAST Act). Section 30114(b) directs NHTSA, by
delegation, to exempt not more than 325 replica motor vehicles per year
that are manufactured or imported by a low-volume manufacturer. The
exemption is limited to the FMVSS applicable to motor vehicles, not
motor vehicle equipment. The Safety Act, as amended, requires that, to
qualify for an exemption, the low-volume manufacturer must ``register
with [NHTSA] at such time, in such manner, and under such terms that
[NHTSA] determines appropriate'' (49 U.S.C. 30114(b)(2)), and that
NHTSA require certain labeling and reporting requirements (49 U.S.C.
30114(b)(3)).
NHTSA is issuing this final rule to establish 49 CFR part 586 to
implement the replica motor vehicle exemption.\50\ Part 586 establishes
the requirements and procedures for the registration of low-volume
manufacturers as replica motor vehicle manufacturers and

[[Page 13228]]

establishes the duties of the manufacturers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\50\ The FAST Act replica motor vehicle provision is not self-
executing. That is, the Secretary must take steps to implement it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which the
Rule Will Apply; Compliance Impacts
This final rule will affect manufacturers who have a total annual
worldwide production of 5,000 vehicles or less who wish to produce
replica vehicles. According to 13 CFR 121.201, the Small Business
Administration's size standards regulations used to define small
business concerns, vehicle manufacturers would fall under North
American Industry Classification (NAICS) No. 336111, Automobile
Manufacturing, which has a size standard of 1,500 employees. Using the
size of 1,500 employees or fewer, NHTSA estimates that most, if not
all, of the manufacturers that will seek to produce replica vehicles
will be small businesses. NHTSA estimates that there will be
approximately 40 manufacturers (30 operating primarily in the U.S.)
that will qualify for and will participate in the replica vehicle
exemption program.
Although this final rule will significantly affect small
manufacturers, we do not anticipate that it will have a negative
economic impact. Instead, this final rule will reduce compliance costs
for the small businesses that produce replica vehicles under the
exemption program. NHTSA estimates that manufacturers will save between
$3.4 million and $17.2 million at a three-percent discount rate
(between $3.3 million and $16.8 million at a seven-percent discount
rate) annually. The cost savings result from low-volume manufacturers
no longer having to conform their vehicles to the ``vehicle'' FMVSS.
A Description of the Projected Reporting, Record Keeping and Other
Compliance Requirements of the Rule, Including an Estimate of the
Classes of Small Entities Which Will Be Subject to the Requirement and
the Type of Professional Skills Necessary for Preparation of the Report
or Record
The final rule contains reporting, record keeping and other
compliance requirements to implement the replica vehicle program. All
the reporting and record keeping requirements discussed below are
mandated or contemplated by the FAST Act or are necessary to carrying
out the statute.
First, in accordance with the FAST Act, low-volume manufacturers
wishing to qualify for an exemption must register with NHTSA in
accordance with part 586. The FAST Act mandates this registration
requirement in Sec. 30114(b)(1)(B)(2), specifying that ``a low-volume
manufacturer shall register with [NHTSA] at such time, in such manner,
and under such terms that [NHTSA] determines appropriate.'' NHTSA
estimates that it would take each manufacturer 10 hours to draft and
compile the submission. At an estimated cost of $59.75 per hour,\51\
this burden would cost each manufacturer $597.50 one time for each
original vehicle the manufacturer seeks to replicate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\51\ The hourly wage is estimated to be $42.30 per hour.
National Industry-Specific Occupational Employment and Wage
Estimates NAICS 336100--Motor Vehicle Manufacturing, May 2020,
<a href="https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics4_336100.htm#47-0000">https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics4_336100.htm#47-0000</a>, last
accessed October 12, 2021. The Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates
that wages represent 70.8 percent of total compensation to private
workers, on average. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2021). Employer
Costs for Employee Compensation--September 2021. <a href="https://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/ecec_12162021.pdf">https://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/ecec_12162021.pdf</a>, last accessed
January 6, 2021. Therefore, NHTSA estimates the total hourly
compensation cost to be $59.75.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Second, in accordance with the FAST Act, manufacturers of replica
vehicles are required to submit annual reports. The annual reports are
required by Sec. 30114(b)(1)(C), which specifies that the annual
report include the number and description of the motor vehicles
exempted and a list of the exemptions described on a permanent label
required by Sec. 30114(b)(3)(A) (described below). The final rule
requires that the annual report be submitted online. In lieu of a
requirement that registrants renew their registrations, the final rule
only requires registrants to report to NHTSA if they will be producing
the same replica motor vehicles the following calendar year. NHTSA
estimates that compiling and submitting the annual report will take two
hours and involve primarily administrative skills. NHTSA estimates that
labor to compile the report will cost $59.75 per hour, for a total cost
to compile the report of $119.50.\52\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\52\ The hourly wage is estimated to be $42.30 per hour.
National Industry-Specific Occupational Employment and Wage
Estimates NAICS 336100--Motor Vehicle Manufacturing, May 2020,
<a href="https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics4_336100.htm#47-0000">https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics4_336100.htm#47-0000</a>, last
accessed October 12, 2021. The Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates
that wages represent 70.8 percent of total compensation to private
workers, on average. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2021). Employer
Costs for Employee Compensation--September 2021. <a href="https://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/ecec_12162021.pdf">https://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/ecec_12162021.pdf</a>, last accessed
January 6, 2021. Therefore, NHTSA estimates the total hourly
compensation cost to be $59.75.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Third, in accordance with the FAST Act, the final rule requires the
registrants to disclose information to consumers. Because the replica
vehicles would be exempt from complying with current FMVSS, it is
important that the consumer understand the reduced level of safety
provided by the vehicle. Pursuant to Sec. 30114(b)(3)(A), the final
rule requires registrants to affix a permanent label to the vehicle
identifying the specified standards and regulations from which the
vehicle is exempt, stating that the vehicle is a replica, and
designating the model year such vehicle replicates. Pursuant to Sec.
30114(b)(3)(B), the final rule requires registrants to provide written
notice of the exemption to the dealer and the first purchaser of the
vehicle for purposes other than resale by affixing a temporary label to
each vehicle. NHTSA estimates that the permanent labels would cost $1
per vehicle and the temporary labels would cost $1 per vehicle. If each
manufacturer produces 200 vehicles, the total cost per manufacturer
would be $400 for both the permanent labels and the temporary labels.
An Identification, to the Extent Practicable, of All the Relevant
Federal Rules Which May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the Final
Rule
NHTSA does not know of any Federal rules that duplicate, overlap,
or conflict with this final rule.
A Description of Any Significant Alternatives to the Rule That
Accomplish the Stated Objectives of the Applicable Statutes and
Minimize Any Significant Economic Impact of the Final Rule on Small
Entities
The FAST Act provision directing the establishment of the replica
exemption program prescribes specific requirements that limit NHTSA's
discretion to adopt regulatory approaches. However, for the purpose of
evaluating regulatory alternatives under the requirements of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, NHTSA considered alternatives to lessen the
economic impact of the final rule on small entities.
First, NHTSA decided against requiring that replica motor vehicles
resemble not only the original vehicle's exterior, but also its
interior (as proposed in the NPRM). NHTSA has not quantified the impact
of this approach in the final rule but has concluded that it would
decrease the burden on small entities.
Second, NHTSA proposed to require registrants to submit images with
each registration and documentation confirming that the replica vehicle
will have the same dimensions (height, width, and length) as the
original vehicle. In this final rule, NHTSA decided to provide a 10
percent leeway in the dimensions. NHTSA believes the rule strikes an
appropriate balance between ensuring that the program is

[[Page 13229]]

limited to vehicles that resemble previously-made vehicles, while not
unduly burdening low-volume manufacturers. The 10 percent margin also
allows more flexibility to manufacturers to incorporate modern
amenities and safety features in the interior.
Third, this final rule does not require applicants to submit actual
documentation to demonstrate they own or have license to the
intellectual property (IP) necessary to manufacture a replica motor
vehicle. Instead, they simply must certify to this fact.
Fourth, this final rule reduces the amount of information replica
manufacturers must disclose to members of the public, compared to the
NPRM's proposal.
Accordingly, NHTSA has concluded this final rule minimizes burdens
on small entities to the extent consistent with the Safety Act, the
FAST Act, and the Regulatory Flexibility Act, and that there are no
further reasonable alternative approaches that would further minimize
burden on small entities.

E.O. 13132 (Federalism)

NHTSA has examined this final rule pursuant to E.O. 13132 (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and concludes that no additional consultation
with States, local governments or their representatives is mandated
beyond the rulemaking process. The agency has concluded that the
rulemaking will not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant
consultation with State and local officials or the preparation of a
federalism summary impact statement. This final rule makes no
determination regarding the preemptive effect of the exemption program
for replica motor vehicles manufactured or imported by low-volume
manufacturers.
The FAST Act provision directing NHTSA to allow registered low-
volume manufacturers to produce replica vehicles contains two unique
provisions that have preemption implications.\53\ Although the agency
did not explicitly request comment on its characterizations of these
provisions in the NPRM, NHTSA received comments on the second
provision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\53\ NHTSA does not believe regulation is necessary to implement
those provisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The first preemption issue is implicated by 49 U.S.C. 30114(b)(6),
which provides protection to the original manufacturer, its successor
or assignee, or current owner, who grants a license or otherwise
transfers rights to a low-volume manufacturer to produce replicas of
vehicles. The Act states that such persons shall incur no liability to
any person or entity under Federal or State statute, regulation, local
ordinance, or under any Federal or State common law for such license or
assignment to a low-volume manufacturer. This legislative directive is
set forth in the FAST Act and NHTSA has not interpreted it. Therefore,
this final rule has no effect on that directive. The agency received no
comments on this issue.
NHTSA received five comments related to the second preemption
issue--its interpretation of the FAST Act provision. This provision
states that ``nothing in [the exemption for low-volume manufacturers
subsection of the Act] shall be construed to preempt, affect, or
supersede any State titling or registration law or regulation for a
replica motor vehicle, or exempt a person from complying with such law
or regulation.'' \54\ In the NPRM, NHTSA interpreted this provision to
mean that NHTSA's requirements for replica motor vehicles are intended
to be minimum safety requirements only, and that States would be
permitted to have their own replica motor vehicle safety standards for
vehicles titled or registered in their State.\55\ That is, the agency
interpreted the provision to mean that ``nothing'' about the program
would preempt ``any State titling or registration law or regulation,''
even if those laws concerned the safety performance of the vehicle. All
comments addressing this issue disagreed with the agency's
interpretation of this provision, although NHTSA did not explicitly
request comment on this issue and did not receive comment from any
State or organization representing States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\54\ 49 U.S.C. 30114(b)(9).
\55\ 85 FR 809.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The comments on this issue, submitted by the Specialty Equipment
Market Association (SEMA), Vehicle Services Consulting, Inc. (VSCI),
the National Automobile Dealers Association (NADA), Edelbrock LLC, and
Morgan Motor Company, are largely consistent in their views.\56\ Each
takes the position that the FAST Act creates an exemption from the
FMVSS for covered replica vehicles and that the NPRM incorrectly
interpreted the proposed rule as creating a minimum standard for
replica vehicles. An exemption, the commenters contend, preempts State
statutes and common law tort obligations for the covered vehicles;
therefore, due to the exemption, States may not create safety standards
for replica vehicles through their titling and registration laws.
Interpreting the FAST Act otherwise, they argue, would frustrate
Congress's intent to provide compliance relief for replica vehicle
manufacturers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\56\ See Docket No. NHTSA-2019-0121-0016; NHTSA-2019-0121-0011;
NHTSA-2019-0121-0024; NHTSA-2019-0121-0023; NHTSA-2019-0121-0013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

After consideration of the comments, NHTSA concurs that Section
24405 of the FAST Act directs the creation of an annual exemption for
certain replica motor vehicles from the FMVSS, and that this rule
establishes the eligibility criteria for that exemption. Neither the
statute nor the rule speaks to whether or not an exemption establishes
a minimum safety requirement for these vehicles, and NHTSA does not
believe it is necessary provide its view on this issue here. However,
though the agency has changed its view regarding whether this rule
constitutes a minimum standard, the agency is refraining from making a
determination on the preemptive effect of this exemption, the operation
of which is governed by the statutory language rather than NHTSA's
action in this rulemaking. Accordingly, any necessary preemption
determinations are reachable even in the absence of an express agency
view on this general issue as they remain adjudicable on a case-by-case
basis, such as in the context of a judicial proceeding.
After consideration of the comments, and with the benefit of the
additional time that has passed since the circulation of a prior
unpublished final rule, NHTSA now rescinds its interpretation of the
preemptive effect of this exemption program, including its prior
characterization of the replica exemption as a minimum requirement and
its later reflections in the unpublished final rule.\57\ The FAST Act
contains an express provision that addresses preemption at 49 U.S.C.
30114(b)(9), and the agency's views on the preemptive effect of the
replica exemption are not essential to the execution of the exemption
program. Therefore, it is unnecessary in this rulemaking for the agency
to interpret the preemptive effect of this exemption.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\57\ This rulemaking creates a new exemption program for replica
motor vehicles. Therefore, there are no serious reliance interests
implicated by NHTSA's decision not to express a view on this issue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Under E.O. 13132,\58\ an agency may not promulgate a regulation
that preempts State law, unless the agency complies with certain
requirements. Those requirements, however, do not apply to the present
regulation as the agency did not make any preemption determination.
This final rule contains

[[Page 13230]]

no regulatory text or interpretation on preemption.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\58\ 64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

As noted above, Section 24405 of the FAST Act directs NHTSA by
delegation to create an annual exemption for certain replica motor
vehicles from the FMVSS applicable to motor vehicles. NHTSA concludes
that no additional consultation with States, local governments, or
their representatives is mandated beyond the rulemaking process.

E.O. 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)

When promulgating a regulation, E.O. 12988, ``Civil Justice
Reform'' (61 FR 4729; February 7, 1996), specifically requires that the
Agency must make every reasonable effort to ensure that the regulation,
as appropriate: (1) Specifies in clear language the preemptive effect;
(2) specifies in clear language the effect on existing Federal law or
regulation, including all provisions repealed, circumscribed,
displaced, impaired, or modified; (3) provides a clear legal standard
for affected conduct rather than a general standard, while promoting
simplification and burden reduction; (4) specifies in clear language
the retroactive effect; (5) specifies whether administrative
proceedings are to be required before parties may file suit in court;
(6) explicitly or implicitly defines key terms; and (7) addresses other
important issues affecting clarity and general draftsmanship of
regulations.
Pursuant to this Order, NHTSA notes that the preemptive effect of
this rule is discussed above in connection with E.O. 13132. NHTSA has
also considered whether this rulemaking would have any retroactive
effect, and concludes that it does not. NHTSA notes further that there
is no requirement that individuals submit a petition for
reconsideration or pursue other administrative proceeding before they
may file suit in court.

E.O. 13609: Promoting International Regulatory Cooperation

Under E.O. 13609 (77 FR 26413, May 4, 2012), agencies must consider
whether the impacts associated with significant variations between
domestic and regulatory approaches are unnecessary or may impair the
ability of American business to export and compete internationally. In
meeting shared challenges involving health, safety, labor, security,
environmental, and other issues, international regulatory cooperation
can identify approaches that are at least as protective as those that
are or would be adopted in the absence of such cooperation.
International regulatory cooperation can also reduce, eliminate, or
prevent unnecessary differences in regulatory requirements. Sections 3
and 4 of E.O. 13609 direct an agency to conduct a regulatory analysis
and ensure that a proposed rule does not cause unnecessary obstacles to
foreign trade. This requirement applies if a rule constitutes a
significant regulatory action, or if a regulatory evaluation must be
prepared for the rule.
NHTSA has analyzed this action under the policies and agency
responsibilities of E.O. 13609 and has determined that this action
would have no effect on international regulatory cooperation.

National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

Under the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(NTTAA) (Pub. L. 104-113), all Federal agencies and departments shall
use technical standards that are developed or adopted by voluntary
consensus standards bodies, using such technical standards to carry out
policy objectives or activities determined by the agencies and
departments, except when use of such a voluntary consensus standard
would be inconsistent with the law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary
consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., materials
specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and business
practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies, such as the SAE International. The NTTAA directs
NHTSA to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency
decides not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus
standards. NHTSA did not find any voluntary consensus standards that
would apply to this rule.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) requires Federal
agencies to prepare a written assessment of the costs, benefits and
other effects of proposed or final rules that include a Federal mandate
likely to result in the expenditure by State, local or tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of more than
$100 million annually (adjusted for inflation with base year of 1995).
Before promulgating a rule for which a written statement is needed,
section 205 of the UMRA generally requires NHTSA to identify and
consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the
least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative that
achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 do
not apply when they are inconsistent with the applicable law. Moreover,
section 205 allows NHTSA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative if the
agency publishes with the final rule an explanation why the agency did
not adopt the alternative.
This rule is not anticipated to result in the expenditure by State,
local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private
sector in excess of 100 million ($154 million when adjusted for
inflation), annually.

Paperwork Reduction Act

Under the procedures established by the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (PRA), a person is not required to respond to a collection of
information by a Federal agency unless the collection displays a valid
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. The Information
Collection Requests (ICR) for a proposed new information collection and
proposed revisions to the existing information collections were
forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and
comment when the NPRM was published. As OMB deferred review while NHTSA
reviewed the comments to the NPRM, NHTSA has resubmitted the ICR for
this final rule.
OMB has tentatively assigned the following control numbers.
Approval of the control numbers are subject to OMB's review of NHTSA's
ICR addressing public comments on the NPRM.
a. OMB Control No: 2127-0043, Title: Manufacturer Identification--
49 CFR part 566;
b. OMB Control No: 2127-0510, Title: Consolidated Labeling
Requirements for 49 CFR parts 565 and 567;
c. OMB Control No: 2127-0746, Title: 49 CFR part 586, Replica Motor
Vehicles.
NHTSA's ICR describes the nature of the information collections and
their expected burden. As described in the NPRM, the FAST Act mandated
many registration, labeling and reporting requirements. This final rule
establishes new collection of information requirements to implement
those FAST Act provisions, requiring registrants to provide information
to NHTSA and to dealers and consumers pertaining to registration,
annual reporting, labeling, and written notification to dealers and
owners. This final rule also makes changes to existing information
collections for manufacturer identification, VIN requirements, and
certification labeling. NHTSA has submitted supporting statements to

[[Page 13231]]

OMB explaining how the final rule's collections of information respond
to the comments received from the public. None of the changes made in
this final rule affect the estimates in the NPRM of these requirements.

Plain Language

E.O. 12866 requires each agency to write all rules in plain
language. Application of the principles of plain language includes
consideration of the following questions:
<bullet> Have we organized the material to suit the public's needs?
<bullet> Are the requirements in the rule clearly stated?
<bullet> Does the rule contain technical language or jargon that
isn't clear?
<bullet> Would a different format (grouping and order of sections,
use of headings, paragraphing) make the rule easier to understand?
<bullet> Would more (but shorter) sections be better?
<bullet> Could we improve clarity by adding tables, lists, or
diagrams?
<bullet> What else could we do to make the rule easier to
understand?
If you have any responses to these questions, please send them to
the NHTSA officials listed in the ``For Further Information'' section
at the beginning of this document.

Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)

The Department of Transportation assigns a regulation identifier
number (RIN) to each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of
Federal Regulations. The Regulatory Information Service Center
publishes the Unified Agenda in April and October of each year. You may
use the RIN contained in the heading at the beginning of this document
to find this action in the Unified Agenda.

Privacy Act

Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an organization, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477-78) or you may visit
<a href="http://www.dot.gov/privacy.html">http://www.dot.gov/privacy.html</a>.

List of Subjects

49 CFR Part 565

Motor vehicle safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

49 CFR Part 566

Motor vehicle safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

49 CFR Part 567

Labeling, Motor vehicle safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

49 CFR Part 586

Motor vehicle safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Labeling, Replica motor vehicles.

In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA amends 49 CFR chapter V as
follows:

PART 565--VEHICLE IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (VIN) REQUIREMENTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 565 is revised to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30114, 30115, 30117, 30141,
30146, 30166, and 30168; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.95.

0
2. Revise Sec. 565.12 to read as follows:

Sec. 565.12 Definitions.

(a) Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards Definitions. Unless
otherwise indicated, all terms used in this part that are defined in 49
CFR 571.3 are used as defined in 49 CFR 571.3.
(b) Other definitions. As used in this part--
Body type means the general configuration or shape of a vehicle
distinguished by such characteristics as the number of doors or
windows, cargo carrying features and the roofline (e.g., sedan,
fastback, hatchback).
Check digit means a single number or the letter X used to verify
the accuracy of the transcription of the vehicle identification number.
Engine type means a power source with defined characteristics such
as fuel utilized, number of cylinders, displacement, and net brake
horsepower. The specific manufacturer and make shall be represented if
the engine powers a passenger car or a multipurpose passenger vehicle,
or truck with a gross vehicle weight rating of 4,536 kg (10,000 lb) or
less.
High-volume manufacturer, for purposes of this part, means a
manufacturer of 1,000 or more vehicles of a given type each year.
Incomplete vehicle means an assemblage consisting, as a minimum, of
frame and chassis structure, power train, steering system, suspension
system and braking system, to the extent that those systems are to be
part of the completed vehicle, that requires further manufacturing
operations, other than the addition of readily attachable components,
such as mirrors, or tire and rim assemblies, or minor finishing
operations such as painting, to become a completed vehicle.
Line means a name that a manufacturer applies to a family of
vehicles within a make which have a degree of commonality in
construction, such as body, chassis or cab type.
Low-volume manufacturer, for purposes of this part, means a
manufacturer of fewer than 1,000 vehicles of a given type each year.
Make means a name that a manufacturer applies to a group of
vehicles or engines.
Manufacturer means a person--
(1) Manufacturing or assembling motor vehicles or motor vehicle
equipment; or
(2) Importing motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment for resale.
Manufacturer identifier means the first three digits of a VIN of a
vehicle manufactured by a high-volume manufacturer, and the first three
digits of a VIN and the twelfth through fourteenth digits of a VIN of a
vehicle manufactured by a low-volume manufacturer.
Model means a name that a manufacturer applies to a family of
vehicles of the same type, make, line, series and body type.
Model year means the year used to designate a discrete vehicle
model, irrespective of the calendar year in which the vehicle was
actually produced, provided that the production period does not exceed
24 months.
Original model year of a replicated vehicle means the stated model
year of a vehicle that has been replicated pursuant to 49 CFR part 586.
Plant of manufacture means the plant where the manufacturer affixes
the VIN.
Replica motor vehicle means a motor vehicle meeting the definition
of replica motor vehicle in 49 CFR part 586.
Replica model year means the calendar year in which a replica motor
vehicle was manufactured.
Series means a name that a manufacturer applies to a subdivision of
a ``line'' denoting price, size or weight identification and that is
used by the manufacturer for marketing purposes.
Trailer kit means a trailer that is fabricated and delivered in
complete but unassembled form and that is designed to be assembled
without special machinery or tools.
Type means a class of vehicle distinguished by common traits,
including design and purpose. Passenger cars, multipurpose passenger
vehicles, trucks, buses, trailers, incomplete vehicles, low speed
vehicles, and motorcycles are separate types.

[[Page 13232]]

VIN means a series of Arabic numbers and Roman letters that is
assigned to a motor vehicle for identification purposes.

0
3. In Sec. 565.15(b), amend Table 1--Type of Vehicle and Information
Decipherable by adding an entry for ``Replica motor vehicle'' after the
entry for ``Low speed vehicle'' to read as follows:

Sec. 565.15 Content requirements

(b) * * *

Table I--Type of Vehicle and Information Decipherable

* * * * *
Replica motor vehicle: The make, model, and model year of the
original replicated vehicle; and the information listed in this table
for the vehicle's type classification (e.g., if the replica meets the
definition for passenger car in 49 CFR 571.3, the following information
is required: make, line, series, body type, engine type, and all
restraint devices and their locations).
* * * * *

0
4. In Sec. 565.26, revise paragraph (d), as follows:

Sec. 565.26 Reporting requirements.

* * * * *
(d) The information required under paragraph (c) of this section
shall be submitted at least 60 days prior to offering for sale the
first vehicle identified by a VIN containing that information, or if
information concerning vehicle characteristics sufficient to specify
the VIN code is unavailable to the manufacturer by that date, then
within one week after that information first becomes available. The
information shall be submitted to <a href="https://vpic.nhtsa.dot.gov/">https://vpic.nhtsa.dot.gov/</a> or to:
Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, ATTN:
VIN Coordinator, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
Manufacturers of replica motor vehicles shall furnish the information
by using the portal at <a href="https://vpic.nhtsa.dot.gov/">https://vpic.nhtsa.dot.gov/</a>.

PART 566--MANUFACTURER IDENTIFICATION

0
5. The authority citation for part 566 is revised to read as follows:

Authority: National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (49
U.S.C. 30114(b), 30166) and Sec. 24405(a) of the Fixing America's
Surface Transportation Act (Pub. L. 114-94); delegation of authority
at 49 CFR 1.95.

0
6. Amend Sec. 566.5 by revising the introductory text and adding
paragraph (c)(4) to read as follows:

Sec. 566.5 Requirements

Each manufacturer of a motor vehicle (other than a replica motor
vehicle), and each manufacturer of covered equipment, shall furnish the
information specified in paragraphs (a) through (c) of this section to
<a href="https://vpic.nhtsa.dot.gov/">https://vpic.nhtsa.dot.gov/</a> or to: Administrator, National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington,
DC 20590. Manufacturers of replica motor vehicles shall furnish the
information by using the portal at <a href="https://vpic.nhtsa.dot.gov/">https://vpic.nhtsa.dot.gov/</a>.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(4) In the case of replica motor vehicles, the manufacturer shall
include, in the description of each type of motor vehicle it
manufactures, a designation that the vehicle is a replica motor
vehicle.

PART 567--CERTIFICATION

0
7. The authority citation for part 567 is revised to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30114, 30115, 30117, 30166,
32504, 33101-33104, 33108 and 33109; delegation of authority at 49
CFR 1.95.

0
8. Revise Sec. 567.1 to read as follows:

Sec. 567.1 Purpose.

The purpose of this part is to specify the content and location of,
and other requirements for, the certification label to be affixed to
motor vehicles as required by the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle
Safety Act, as amended (the Vehicle Safety Act) (49 U.S.C. 30114 and
30115) and the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act, as
amended (the Cost Savings Act) (49 U.S.C. 30254 and 33109), to address
certification-related duties and liabilities, and to provide the
consumer with information to assist them in determining which of the
Federal motor vehicle safety standards (part 571 of this chapter),
bumper standards (part 581 of this chapter), and Federal theft
prevention standards (part 541 of this chapter), are applicable to the
vehicle.

0
9. Amend Sec. 567.3 by adding in alphabetical order a definition for
``replica motor vehicle,'' to read as follows:

Sec. 567.3 Definitions

* * * * *
Replica motor vehicle means a motor vehicle meeting the definition
of replica motor vehicle in 49 CFR part 586.

0
10. Revise Sec. 567.4(a) to read as follows:

Sec. 567.4 Requirements for manufacturers of motor vehicles.

(a) Each manufacturer of motor vehicles (except replica motor
vehicles and vehicles manufactured in two or more stages) shall affix
to each vehicle a label, of the type and in the manner described below,
containing the statements specified in paragraph (g) of this section.
* * * * *

0
11. Add Sec. 567.8 to read as follows:
* * * * *

Sec. 567.8 Requirements for manufacturers of replica motor vehicles.

(a) Each manufacturer of a replica motor vehicle shall affix to
each vehicle a label, of the type and in the manner described below,
containing the statements specified in paragraph (e) of this section.
(b) The label shall be riveted or permanently affixed in such a
manner that it cannot be removed without destroying or defacing it.
(c) The label shall be affixed to either the hinge pillar, door-
latch post, or the door edge that meets the door-latch post, next to
the driver's seating position, or if none of these locations is
practicable, to the left side of the instrument panel. If that location
is also not practicable, the label shall be affixed to the inward-
facing surface of the door next to the driver's seating position. If
none of the preceding locations is practicable, notification of that
fact, together with drawings or photographs showing a suggested
alternate location in the same general area, shall be submitted for
approval to the Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590. The
location of the label shall be such that it is easily readable without
moving any part of the vehicle except an outer door.
(d) The lettering on the label shall be of a color that contrasts
with the background of the label.
(e) The label shall contain the following information and
statements, in the English language, lettered in block capitals and
numerals not less than three thirty-seconds of an inch high, in the
order shown:
(1) Name of manufacturer: Except as provided in paragraphs
(e)(1)(i) and (ii) of this section, the full corporate or individual
name of the actual assembler of the vehicle shall be spelled out,
except that such abbreviations as ``Co.'' or ``Inc.'' and their foreign
equivalents, and the first and middle initials of individuals, may be
used. The name of the manufacturer shall be preceded by

[[Page 13233]]

the words ``Manufactured By'' or ``Mfd By.''
(2) Month and year of manufacture: This shall be the time during
which work was completed at the place of main assembly of the vehicle.
It may be spelled out, as ``June 2000,'' or expressed in numerals, as
``6/00.''
(3) ``Gross Vehicle Weight Rating'' or ``GVWR'' followed by the
appropriate value in pounds, which shall not be less than the sum of
the unloaded vehicle weight, rated cargo load, and 150 pounds times the
number of the vehicle's designated seating positions.
(4) ``Gross Axle Weight Rating'' or ``GAWR,'' followed by the
appropriate value in pounds, for each axle, identified in order from
front to rear (e.g., front, first intermediate, second intermediate,
rear). The ratings for any consecutive axles having identical gross
axle weight ratings when equipped with tires having the same tire size
designation may, at the option of the manufacturer, be stated as a
single value, with the label indicating to which axles the ratings
apply.
(i) Examples of combined ratings: GAWR:
(A) All axles--2,400 kg (5,290 lb.) with LT245/75R16(E) tires.
(B) Front--5,215 kg (11,500 lb.) with 295/75R22.5(G) tires.
(C) First intermediate to rear--9,070 kg (20,000 lb.) with 295/
75R22.5(G) tires.
(ii) [Reserved].
(5) The following statement: ``This vehicle is a replica motor
vehicle that replicates a [insert make and model of the replicated
motor vehicle] originally manufactured in model year [insert year].''
(6) Either:
(i) The statement: ``This replica motor vehicle is exempt from the
following Federal motor vehicle safety, theft prevention, and bumper
standards in effect on [insert the date of manufacture of the replica
motor vehicle] for [insert replica's type of motor vehicle (e.g.,
passenger cars)]: [insert a list of all standards from which the
vehicle exempt pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30114(b)].'' (The expression
``U.S.'' or ``U.S.A.'' may be inserted before the word ``Federal.'');
or
(ii) The statement: ``This replica motor vehicle is exempt from the
Federal motor vehicle safety, theft prevention, and bumper standards in
effect on [insert the date of manufacture of the replica motor vehicle]
for [insert replica's type of motor vehicle (e.g., passenger cars)]
that are listed on the label found in [insert location of label listing
standards from which the vehicle is exempt under 49 U.S.C. 30114(b)]'';
and
(7) Vehicle identification number.
(f) If the label required under paragraph (a) includes the
statement found in paragraph (e)(6)(ii) of this section, the
manufacturer must affix to the replica motor vehicle a second label
that meets the following criteria:
(1) The label shall be riveted or permanently affixed to the
vehicle in such a manner that it cannot be removed without destroying
or defacing it;
(2) The label shall be affixed to the location identified in
paragraph (e)(6)(ii).
(3) The lettering on the label shall be of a color that contrasts
with the background of the label.
(4) The label shall contain the following statements, in the
English language, lettered in block capitals and numerals not less than
three thirty-seconds of an inch high: ``This replica motor vehicle is
exempt from the following Federal motor vehicle safety, theft
prevention, and bumper standards in effect on [insert the date of
manufacture of the replica motor vehicle] for [insert replica's type of
motor vehicle (e.g., passenger cars)]: [insert a list of all standards
for which the vehicle is exempt pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30114(b)].''

0
12. Add part 586 to read as follows:

PART 586--REPLICA MOTOR VEHICLES

Sec.
586.1 Scope.
586.2 Purpose.
586.3 Applicability.
586.4 Definitions.
586.5 General requirements.
586.6 Registration.
586.7 Processing of registrations.
586.8 Incomplete registrations.
586.9 Deemed approved registrations.
586.10 Updating existing registrations.
586.11 Temporary label.
586.12 Annual report.
586.13 Revocation of registrations.

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30112 and 30114; delegation of authority
at 49 CFR 1.95.

Sec. 586.1 Scope.

This part specifies requirements and procedures under 49 U.S.C.
30114(b) for the registration of low-volume manufacturers as replica
motor vehicle manufacturers and establishes the duties of the
manufacturers.

Sec. 586.2 Purpose.

The purpose of this part is to implement 49 U.S.C. 30114(b) to
exempt not more than 325 replica motor vehicles per year that are
manufactured or imported by low-volume manufacturers from certain
requirements for motor vehicles. This part specifies eligibility
requirements for low-volume manufacturers to qualify for the exemption.
They must register with NHTSA as a replica motor vehicle manufacturer
according to procedures for the registration of such manufacturers,
meet content and format requirements for registration submissions, and
meet requirements for updating registrations. This part also provides
for the revocation of registrations and sets forth labeling, reporting,
and other requirements. Manufacturers are not exempted under 49 U.S.C.
30114(b) unless they register with NHTSA pursuant to this part 586.

Sec. 586.3 Applicability.

This part applies to low-volume manufacturers that wish to register
with NHTSA as a replica motor vehicle manufacturer, and to
manufacturers registered as replica motor vehicle manufacturers.

Sec. 586.4 Definitions.

All terms in this part that are defined in 49 U.S.C. 30102 and in
49 CFR 571.3 are used as defined therein.
Low-volume manufacturer means a motor vehicle manufacturer, other
than a person who is registered as an importer under 49 U.S.C. 30141,
whose annual worldwide production, including by a parent or subsidiary
of the manufacturer, if applicable, is not more than 5,000 vehicles.
Original model year of a replicated vehicle means the stated model
year of a vehicle that has been replicated pursuant to 49 CFR part 586.
Replica motor vehicle means a motor vehicle that--
(1) Is produced by a manufacturer meeting the definition of replica
motor vehicle manufacturer under part 586 that has not manufactured 325
replica motor vehicles in the current calendar year;
(2) Is intended to resemble the body of another motor vehicle that
was manufactured for consumer sale not less than 25 years before the
manufacture of the replica motor vehicle;
(3) Is manufactured in a single stage; and
(4) Is either:
(i) Manufactured under a license for all of the intellectual
property rights of the motor vehicle that is intended to be replicated,
including, but not limited to, product configuration, trade dress,
trademark, and patent, from the original manufacturer, or its
successors or assignees; or,
(ii) Manufactured by a current owner of such intellectual property,
including,

[[Page 13234]]

but not limited to, product configuration trade dress, trademark, and
patent rights.
Replica motor vehicle manufacturer means a low-volume manufacturer,
that is registered as a replica motor vehicle manufacturer pursuant to
the requirements in this part.
Replica model year means the calendar year in which a replica motor
vehicle was manufactured.

Sec. 586.5 General requirements.

(a) Each manufacturer wishing to register as a replica motor
vehicle manufacturer must have a calendar year, worldwide production,
including any by a parent or subsidiary of the manufacturer, of not
more than 5,000 motor vehicles, and must not be a registered importer
under 49 CFR part 592. Only one registration is permitted for
manufacturers sharing common ownership. If a manufacturer wishes to
manufacture replica motor vehicles and share common ownership with a
registered replica motor vehicle manufacturer, it may only do so after
the registered replica vehicle manufacturer submits an updated
registration submission indicating that the exemption for 325 replica
vehicles will be divided between the manufacturers. Replica
manufacturers sharing common ownership will be limited to a total of
325 replica vehicles. An update to a registration to add a manufacturer
under common ownership shall allocate the exemption for 325 replica
vehicles between the manufacturers. An update to the registration to
adjust the allocation must be made pursuant to Sec. 586.9.
(b) Each manufacturer wishing to manufacture replica motor vehicles
under this program must be registered, according to the requirements in
Sec. 586.6, as a replica motor vehicle manufacturer for the calendar
year in which the replica motor vehicle is manufactured.
(c) Each replica motor vehicle manufacturer shall meet all
statutory and regulatory requirements, including requirements in 49 CFR
part 567, applicable to motor vehicle manufacturers, except:
(1) 49 U.S.C. 30112(a) regarding the Federal motor vehicle safety
standards applicable to vehicles (as opposed to standards applicable to
motor vehicle equipment) in effect on the date of manufacture of the
replica motor vehicle; and
(2) 49 U.S.C. 32304, 32502, 32902 and 15 U.S.C. 1232.
(d) Each replica motor vehicle manufacturer shall:
(1) Meet all the requirements set forth in this part;
(2) Not manufacture more than 325 replica motor vehicles in a
calendar year; and,
(3) Meet 49 U.S.C. 30112(a) regarding the Federal motor vehicle
safety standards applicable to equipment items installed on the
vehicle.
(e) Each replica motor vehicle, as manufactured, shall resemble the
original replicated vehicle.
(f) An exemption granted by NHTSA may not be transferred to any
other person, and shall expire at the end of the calendar year for
which it was granted with respect to any volume authorized by the
exemption that was not applied by the replica motor vehicle
manufacturer to vehicles built during that calendar year.

Sec. 586.6 Registration.

(a) A manufacturer may register under this part as a manufacturer
of replica motor vehicles if:
(1) The manufacturer is not registered as an importer under 49 CFR
part 592;
(2) The manufacturer's annual worldwide production, including any
by a parent or subsidiary of the manufacturer, is not more than 5,000
motor vehicles;
(3) The manufacturer has submitted manufacturer identification
information pursuant to part 566.
(b) To register as a replica motor vehicle manufacturer, a
manufacturer must submit, using the NHTSA Product Information Catalog
and Vehicle Listing (vPIC) platform (<a href="https://vpic.nhtsa.dot.gov/">https://vpic.nhtsa.dot.gov/</a>) its
name, address, and email address, and the following:
(1) Information sufficient to establish:
(i) That the manufacturer's annual world-wide production, including
any by a parent or subsidiary of the manufacturer, is not more than
5,000 motor vehicles, and a statement certifying to that effect,
including the total number of motor vehicles produced by or on behalf
of the registrant in the 12-month prior to filing the registration;
and,
(ii) That the manufacturer is not registered as an importer under
49 CFR part 592;
(2) A statement identifying the original vehicle(s) the
manufacturer intends to replicate by make, model, and model year;
(3) Information sufficient to establish that the replica vehicle(s)
the manufacturer will replicate is intended to resemble the body of the
original vehicle, including:
(i) The images of the front, rear, and side views of the exterior
of the original vehicle;
(ii) If the manufacturer has previously replicated the original
vehicle(s), images of the front, rear, and side views of the exterior
of a representative replica motor vehicle;
(iii) If the manufacturer has not previously replicated the
original vehicle(s), design plans for the replica vehicles;
(iv) Information to show that the replica motor vehicle will have a
height, width, and length within 10 percent of the original motor
vehicle and,
(v) If the replica motor vehicle deviates from the height, width,
or length of the original motor vehicle by more than 10 percent, an
explanation of why such deviations were necessary.
(4) A certification that the manufacturer has determined the
intellectual property rights required, and that the manufacturer has
obtained all licenses and permissions necessary to legally produce the
replica motor vehicle described in the application, or is the owner of
such intellectual property.
(5) A statement certifying that the manufacturer will not
manufacture more than the number of replica motor vehicles covered by
the requested exemption, a number not more than 325 replica motor
vehicles in a calendar year; and,
(6) All information required by part 566 to identify itself to
NHTSA as a motor vehicle manufacturer.
(c) A manufacturer is not considered registered under this part 586
unless:
(1) The registration is approved; or,
(2) The registration is deemed approved under Sec. 586.9.
(d) A replica motor vehicle manufacturer shall submit an updated
registration submission prior to beginning manufacture of any replica
vehicle model(s) not covered by their existing registration and will
not begin manufacturing those additional replica vehicle model(s) until
the registration is either approved or deemed approved as specified
under Sec. 586.9.
(e) A registrant need not reapply annually if the registrant seeks
to manufacture the same replica vehicles (make, model and model year)
for which it received approval. The registrant must provide
notification, by way of its annual report pursuant to Sec. 586.12, of
its intent to continue manufacturing replica vehicles to which an
approved registration applies.

Sec. 586.7 Processing of registrations.

Upon receipt of a registration submitted on vPIC, NHTSA will
automatically notify the registrant by email within 90 days of the
receipt whether the registration is approved,

[[Page 13235]]

denied, or incomplete. This notification will be sent to the email
address provided in the manufacturer's original submission. If an
application is approved, the registrant's name will automatically be
added to the list of approved registrants on NHTSA's website. NHTSA
will deny a registration if:
(a) NHTSA determines that the registrant does not meet the
requirements of this part 586;
(b) The registration is incomplete, and the registrant has failed
to provide the missing information within 60 days after being notified
by NHTSA pursuant to 586.8; or,
(c) The registration relies on the same facts and circumstances as
a previously denied registration.

Sec. 586.8 Incomplete registrations.

(a) If NHTSA determines that a submission is incomplete, NHTSA will
notify the registrant, by email, within 90 days, that there is missing
information. The registrant shall have 60 days to submit the missing
information. This notification will be sent to the email address
provided in the manufacturer's original submission.
(b) If NHTSA receives the missing information within 60 days of
notifying the registrant that its submission is incomplete, NHTSA will
approve or deny the registration within a period of time equivalent to
the number of days that were remaining in the original 90-day period at
the time NHTSA sent the notification, plus an additional 30 days.
(c) If a registrant does not respond to NHTSA's notification that
its submission is incomplete within 60 days, or the registrant responds
within 60 days but the additional information submitted is not
sufficient to complete the registration, the registration may be
denied.

Sec. 586.9 Deemed approved registrations.

(a) If NHTSA does not act on a registration within 90 days of
NHTSA's receipt of the submission, NHTSA will notify a registrant by
email on or after the 90th day that the registration has been deemed
approved. Registrants that have been deemed approved will be included
on NHTSA's list of approved replica motor vehicle manufacturers.
(b) A manufacturer that has not received an email notification from
NHTSA about NHTSA's decision on the application following 90 days from
submission of the registration should contact NHTSA's Manufacturers
Helpdesk to determine the status of its registration (Email:
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#b0ddd1dec5d6d1d3c4c5c2d5c2d9ded6dff0d4dfc49ed7dfc6">[email&#160;protected]</a>; Telephone: 1-888-399-3277). Manufacturers may
also contact the helpdesk for information about the status of their
registrations at any time, or may themselves check the status using the
key provided them when they submitted their registration application. A
manufacturer that has not received an email confirmation from NHTSA
that its registration has been deemed approved may be subject to
enforcement action by NHTSA for violating 49 U.S.C. 30112(a) if NHTSA
finds that the registration was incomplete or denied, and that an email
notification had been sent to the email address provided in the
manufacturer's submission.
(c) If NHTSA determines that a registration that had been deemed
approved is incomplete or fails to meet the requirements for
registrants in this part 586, NHTSA may request additional information
from the registrant in writing, which includes by email. A manufacturer
shall have 60 days to respond to a request for additional information.
If the manufacturer fails to respond within the 60 days or submits
information that does not support that it meets the requirements of
this part 586, NHTSA may revoke the registration.

Sec. 586.10 Updating existing registrations.

A registered replica manufacturer shall submit updated registration
information prior to commencing manufacture of a new model of replica
vehicle or reallocating the number of replica vehicles to be made by
two or more replica manufacturers under common ownership. The
manufacturer shal

[…truncated; see source link]

View on FederalRegister.gov →Plain-text source

Indexed from Federal Register on March 9, 2022.

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.