[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 [www.gpo.gov]
[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 http://www.regulations.gov, 
including any personal information provided. To facilitate social 
distancing due to COVID-19, please email a copy of the petition to 
[email protected].
    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. https://www.nhtsa.gov/coronavirus.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  For further information you may 
contact Ms. Callie Roach, telephone 202-597-1312, [email protected]; 
Mr. Daniel Koblenz, telephone 202-366-5329, [email protected]; 
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:
     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.
     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.
     NHTSA has streamlined the regulatory text to clarify how 
NHTSA will process registrations, and how the Agency will address 
``deemed approved'' registrations.
     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 
https://isearch.nhtsa.gov/files/kill.ztv.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 (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 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 (https://vpic.nhtsa.dot.gov/). 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 [email protected] 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 https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/advocacy/How-to-Comply-with-the-RFA-WEB.pdf (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, 
https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics4_336100.htm#47-0000, 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. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/ecec_12162021.pdf, 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, 
https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics4_336100.htm#47-0000, 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. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/ecec_12162021.pdf, 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:
     Have we organized the material to suit the public's needs?
     Are the requirements in the rule clearly stated?
     Does the rule contain technical language or jargon that 
isn't clear?
     Would a different format (grouping and order of sections, 
use of headings, paragraphing) make the rule easier to understand?
     Would more (but shorter) sections be better?
     Could we improve clarity by adding tables, lists, or 
diagrams?
     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 
http://www.dot.gov/privacy.html.

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 https://vpic.nhtsa.dot.gov/ 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 https://vpic.nhtsa.dot.gov/.

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 
https://vpic.nhtsa.dot.gov/ 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 https://vpic.nhtsa.dot.gov/.
* * * * *
    (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 (https://vpic.nhtsa.dot.gov/) 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: 
[email protected]; 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 shall submit updated registration information pursuant to 
Sec.  586.6. The manufacturer may not begin producing the new model of 
replica vehicle or reallocate replica vehicles until its registration 
is either approved by NHTSA or is deemed approved.


Sec.  586.11  Temporary label.

    Each replica motor vehicle shall have a temporary label attached to 
a location on the dashboard or the steering wheel hub that is clearly 
visible from all front seating positions. The label shall meet the 
following requirements:
    (a) The label shall include a heading area in yellow with an alert 
symbol consisting of a solid black equilateral triangle with a yellow 
exclamation point and the word ``WARNING'' in black block capitals in a 
type size that is larger than that used in the remainder of the label 
and the alert symbol in black.
    (b) The label shall include a message area in white with black text 
in at least 20-point font stating: ``This vehicle is a replica motor 
vehicle and is exempt from complying with all current Federal motor 
vehicle safety standards that apply to motor vehicles, and with theft 
prevention and bumper standards in effect on the date of manufacture. 
[The expression ``U.S.'' or ``U.S.A.'' may be inserted before the word 
``Federal''.] See the certification label for a list of the standards 
from which this replica motor vehicle is exempt.''
    (3) The message area shall be not less than 30 cm\2\ (4.7 in\2\).


Sec.  586.12  Annual report.

    Each manufacturer of a replica motor vehicle shall furnish the 
following information to https://vpic.nhtsa.dot.gov/ no later than 
March 1 following the end of a calendar year in which the manufacturer 
produced at least one (1) replica motor vehicle:
    (a) Full individual, partnership or corporate name of the 
manufacturer.
    (b) Residence address of the manufacturer, phone number and email 
address.
    (c) Year to which the report applies (reporting year).
    (d) The complete Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) of each 
replica vehicle manufactured.
    (e) Vehicle make(s) and model(s).
    (f) Replica model year.
    (g) Original model year of the replicated vehicle(s).
    (h) Total number of replica motor vehicles manufactured during the 
reporting year.
    (i) Images of the front, rear, roof, and side views of the original 
vehicle(s) replicated, of the vehicle's exterior, and images of the 
same views of a representative replica manufactured to resemble each 
original vehicle. Submit also information sufficient to establish that 
the replica motor vehicle, as manufactured, resembles the body of the 
original vehicle.
    (j) State whether the replica vehicles contain any of the following 
vehicle safety features: Front or side air bags; lap or lap and 
shoulder belts; advanced safety systems/passive safety systems (listed 
with locations); electronic stability control; rear visibility camera 
system; ejection mitigation.
    (k) If the registrant will be manufacturing the same replica motor 
vehicle(s) in the next calendar year, a notification to NHTSA of which 
replica motor vehicle(s) will be produced, and a certification that the 
registrant will produce no more than 325 replica motor vehicles in 
total. If the manufacturer intends to continue manufacturing replica 
motor vehicle(s), the manufacturer 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

[[Page 13236]]

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.


Sec.  586.13  Revocation of registrations.

    NHTSA may require registrants to provide information related to 
compliance with the requirements of this part at any time. NHTSA may 
revoke an existing registration or deny a registration based on a 
failure to comply with requirements of this part or a finding of a 
safety-related defect or unlawful conduct under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 
et seq. that poses a significant safety risk. Prior to the revocation 
of the registration, NHTSA will provide the registrant a reasonable 
opportunity to correct deficiencies, if such are correctable, based on 
the sole discretion of NHTSA.

PART 591--IMPORTATION OF VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT SUBJECT TO FEDERAL 
SAFETY, BUMPER AND THEFT PREVENTION STANDARDS

0
13. The authority citation for part 591 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  Pub. L. 100-562, 49 U.S.C. 322(a), 30117, 30141-
30147; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.95.


0
14. Amend Sec.  591.5 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:


Sec.  591.5  Declarations required for importation.

* * * * *
    (b) The vehicle or equipment item conforms with all applicable 
safety standards (or the vehicle does not conform solely because 
readily attachable equipment items which will be attached to it before 
it is offered for sale to the first purchases for purposes other than 
resale are not attached), and bumper and theft prevention standards, 
and bears a certification label or tag to that effect permanently 
affixed by the original manufacturer to the vehicle, or by the 
manufacturer to the equipment item or its delivery container, in 
accordance with, as applicable, parts 541, 555, 567, 568, and 581, or 
571 (for certain equipment items) of this chapter, or the vehicle is a 
replica motor vehicle eligible for an exemption under part 586 and is 
being imported by a low-volume manufacturer, as defined at 49 CFR 
586.4.
* * * * *

    Issued under authority delegated in 49 CFR part 1.95 and 49 CFR 
501.4.
Steven S. Cliff,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2022-04030 Filed 3-8-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P