Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 13209 

§ 391.21 Application for employment. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(5) The issuing driver’s licensing 

authority, number, and expiration date 

of each unexpired commercial motor 

vehicle operator’s license or permit that 

has been issued to the applicant; 

* * * * * 

■ 9. Amend § 391.23 by revising 

paragraphs (a)(1) and (b) to read as 

follows: 

§ 391.23 Investigation and inquiries. 

(a) * * * 

(1) An inquiry, within 30 days of the 

date the driver’s employment begins, to 

each driver’s licensing authority where 

the driver held or holds a motor vehicle 

operator’s license or permit during the 

preceding 3 years to obtain that driver’s 

motor vehicle record. 

* * * * * 

(b) A copy of the motor vehicle 

record(s) obtained in response to the 

inquiry or inquiries to each driver’s 

licensing authority required by 

paragraph (a)(1) of this section must be 

placed in the driver qualification file 

within 30 days of the date the driver’s 

employment begins and be retained in 

compliance with § 391.51. If no motor 

vehicle record is received from a 

driver’s licensing authority required to 

submit this response, the motor carrier 

must document a good faith effort to 

obtain such information. The inquiry to 

a driver’s licensing authority must be 

made in the form and manner each 

authority prescribes. 

* * * * * 

■ 10. Amend § 391.25 by revising 

paragraph (a) to read as follows: 

§ 391.25 Annual inquiry and review of 

driving record. 

(a) Except as provided in subpart G of 

this part, each motor carrier shall, at 

least once every 12 months, make an 

inquiry to obtain the motor vehicle 

record of each driver it employs, 

covering at least the preceding 12 

months, to each driver’s licensing 

authority where the driver held a 

commercial motor vehicle operator’s 

license or permit during the time 

period. 

* * * * * 

§ 391.27 [Removed and Reserved] 

■ 11. Remove and reserve § 391.27. 

■ 12. Amend § 391.51 as follows: 

■ a. Revise paragraphs (b)(2) and (4); 

■ b. Remove paragraph (b)(6) and 

redesignate paragraphs (b)(7) through (9) 

as paragraphs (b)(6) through (8), 

respectively; 

■ c. Revise newly redesignated 

paragraph (b)(6)(iii); 

■ d. Revise paragraph (d)(1); 

■ e. Remove paragraph (d)(3) and 

redesignate paragraphs (d)(4) through 

(6) as paragraphs (d)(3) through (5), 

respectively; and 

■ f. Revise newly redesignated 

paragraph (d)(3). 

The revisions to read as follows: 

§ 391.51 General requirements for driver 

qualification files. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(2) A copy of the motor vehicle record 

received from each driver’s licensing 

authority pursuant to § 391.23(a)(1); 

* * * * * 

(4) The motor vehicle record received 

from each driver’s licensing authority to 

the annual driver record inquiry 

required by § 391.25(a); 

* * * * * 

(6) * * * 

(iii) If that driver obtained the medical 

certification based on having obtained a 

medical variance from FMCSA, the 

motor carrier must also include a copy 

of the medical variance documentation 

in the driver qualification file in 

accordance with paragraph (b)(7) of this 

section; 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(1) The motor vehicle record received 

from each driver’s licensing authority to 

the annual driver record inquiry 

required by § 391.25(a); 

* * * * * 

(3) The medical examiner’s certificate 

required by § 391.43(g), a legible copy of 

the certificate, or, for CDL drivers, any 

CDLIS MVR obtained as required by 

paragraph (b)(6)(ii) of this section; 

* * * * * 

■ 13. Amend § 391.63 as follows: 

■ a. Revise paragraphs (a)(3) and (4); 

■ b. Remove paragraph (a)(5); and 

■ c. Revise the first sentence of 

paragraph (b). 

The revisions to read as follows: 

§ 391.63 Multiple-employer drivers. 

(a) * * * 

(3) Perform the annual driving record 

inquiry required by § 391.25(a); or 

(4) Perform the annual review of the 

person’s driving record required by 

§ 391.25(b). 

(b) Before a motor carrier permits a 

multiple-employer driver to drive a 

commercial motor vehicle, the motor 

carrier must obtain the driver’s name, 

the driver’s social security number, and 

the identification number, type, and 

issuing driver’s licensing authority of 

the driver’s commercial motor vehicle 

operator’s license. * * * 

■ 14. Amend § 391.67 by revising 

paragraph (a) to read as follows: 

§ 391.67 Farm vehicle drivers of 

articulated commercial motor vehicles. 

* * * * * 

(a) Section 391.11(b)(1) and (7) 

(relating to general qualifications of 

drivers); 

* * * * * 

■ 15. Amend § 391.68 by revising 

paragraph (a) to read as follows: 

§ 391.68 Private motor carrier of 

passengers (nonbusiness). 

* * * * * 

(a) Section 391.11(b)(1) and (7) 

(relating to general qualifications of 

drivers); 

* * * * * 

Issued under authority delegated in 49 CFR 

1.87. 

Robin Hutcheson, 

Acting Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2022–04930 Filed 3–8–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P 

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 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
13210 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

1 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301, Motor Vehicle Safety (49 

U.S.C. 30101 et seq.). 2 49 U.S.C. 30112. 

3For a detailed summary of the FAST Act 

provisions, see the NPRM, 85 FR at 793–794. 

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 nhtsa.webmaster@dot.gov. 

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, 

Callie.Roach@dot.gov; Mr. Daniel 

Koblenz, telephone 202–366–5329, 

Daniel.Koblenz@dot.gov; 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.’’ 

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 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 13211 

4Some 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. 

5NHTSA received three other comments, but they 

were either not substantive or outside the scope of 

this rulemaking. 

certification (part 567), to accommodate 

the exemption program. 

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 § 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. 

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. 

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. 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
13212 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

6See, 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. 

7A 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. 

8See letter to Mr. Bill Cox (March 24, 1997) 

available at https://isearch.nhtsa.gov/files/ 

kill.ztv.html. 

9However, 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). 11 49 U.S.C. 30114(b)(1) and (2). 

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 lowvolume 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

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 

§ 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. 

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. 

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 lowvolume 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. 

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 

§ 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 lowvolume 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 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 13213 

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. 13 49 CFR 567.3. 

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. 

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 lowvolume 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. 

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 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
13214 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

14NHTSA does not consider a vehicle 

manufactured from a rolling chassis to be a vehicle 

produced in more than one stage. 15 85 FR 819. 

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 finalstage 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. 

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 ‘‘lowvolume 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).’’ 

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 lowvolume 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 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 13215 

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

17 85 FR 819. 

18 Id. 

19 85 FR 796. 

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 lowvolume 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

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. 

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. 

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 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
13216 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

20 85 FR 796. 

21 85 FR 797. 

22 49 U.S.C. 30102(a)(7). 

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. 

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. 

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 offthe-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. 

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. 

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 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 13217 

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

26NHTSA explained in the NPRM that some 

FMVSSs are both vehicle and equipment standards. 

85 FR 793. 

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 § 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

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, 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
13218 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

27The 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. 

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. 

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), lowvolume 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

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 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 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 

manufacturerinfo@dot.gov 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. 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
13220 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

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. 

29 49 CFR 565.12(r). 

30 49 CFR 565.10. 

31 73 FR 23367–01, September 30, 2008. 

32Under 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 

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, § 566.5 requires 

manufacturers to ‘‘furnish the 

information’’ to the Administrator and 

provides a street address to do so. 

NHTSA proposed to update § 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. 

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

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

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 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 13221 

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. 

33As NHTSA is not permitting replica vehicles to 

be manufactured in more than one stage, NHTSA 

has not included a reference to part 568. 

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. 

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 

§ 586.5(c). After considering NTEA’s 

comment, we added a clause to 

paragraph (c) to refer to part 567. New 

§ 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. 

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 lowvolume 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 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
13222 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

34 49 U.S.C. 30114(b)(3)(B). 35 49 U.S.C. 30114(b)(3)(B)(i) and (ii). 

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. 

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. 

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 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 13223 

36Although manufacturers keep lists for business 

purposes, it is also required by 49 CFR part 573, 

Defect and Non-Compliance Responsibility and 

Reports. 

manufactured in a given year, the 

burden should be minimal.36

The NPRM proposed that 

manufacturers intending to continue to 

manufacture replica motor vehicle(s) 

must also submit information sufficient 

to establish that their annual worldwide 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 reregister (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 reregister 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: Incremental consumer surplus would be low if 

substitutes such as luxury sports cars and kit cars are viable 

alternatives for consumers.

Not estimated: If replicas manufactured under the rule differ 

greatly in price and/or transaction cost from luxury sports cars 

and kit cars—thus behaving more like a unique product—incremental consumer surplus could be high. 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
13224 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

TABLE 1—RANGES OF OUTCOMES FOR BENEFIT AND COST CATEGORIES—Continued 

Element Low case High case 

Incremental fatalities, injuries 

and property damage.

Estimated: Fatalities would be lower if: Voluntary compliance 

with safety standards is high; production of replicas is on the 

low end; and VMT by replicas is also low. Not Estimated: Fatalities will be lower if replicas primarily function as a substitute for kit cars.

Estimated: Fatalities would be higher if: Voluntary compliance is 

low; production is high; and if VMT is high. Not Estimated: Fatalities would be higher if replicas function as a new market 

that attracts new consumers—implying 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: Reflects low VMT ................................................. Not Estimated: Reflects high VMT. 

Innovation .................................. Not Estimated: The rule is primarily used to replicate old designs.Not Estimated: Manufacturers producing under the 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 impacts.Not Estimated: Job losses from contractors and small businesses that assemble kit cars are around or equal to the job 

gains for small replica manufacturers.

Not Estimated: If kit car production remains relatively stable and 

replica car production increases significantly (consistent with 

case where replicas are a new and separate product category), employment effects would be greater. 

Costs 

Reduced compliance costs ....... Estimated: Captures the cost of installing required safety technologies on an average modern car.Not Estimated: Would consider the avoided costs of forcing required safety technologies into older vehicle designs. 

Reporting costs .......................... Estimated: Reflects low bound of production ............................... Estimated: Reflects high bound of 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 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 13225 

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

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, insurancerelated 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] 

Scenario Annual 

production VMT 

Total 

benefit 

impact 

Total 

cost 

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] 

Scenario Annual production VMT 

Total 

benefit 

impact 

Total 

cost 

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 sevenpercent discount rate, in which case net 

benefits are positive but very close to 

zero ($0.2 to $0.3 million). At a threepercent 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. 

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 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
13226 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

38 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C). 

39See 40 CFR 1501.1(a)(5). 

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. 41 40 CFR 1501.6(a). 

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 

§ 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

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. 

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 lowvolume 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

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 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 13227 

42The 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.’’ 

43This 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. lightvehicle sales by nameplate, August & 8 months.’’ 

Automotive News. September 10, 2018, pp. 56–7. 

44 13 CFR 121.105(a). 

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. 

46Pursuant 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 lowemission 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. 

47Additional detail on these estimates is 

provided in the Final Regulatory Evaluation. 

48NHTSA 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. 

49U.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-withthe-RFA-WEB.pdf (last accessed Oct. 15, 2018). 

50The FAST Act replica motor vehicle provision 

is not self-executing. That is, the Secretary must 

take steps to implement it. 

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. 

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. 

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 threepercent discount rate (between $3.3 

million and $16.8 million at a sevenpercent 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. 

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. 

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 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
13228 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

51The 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. 

52The 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. 

establishes the duties of the 

manufacturers. 

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 threepercent discount rate (between $3.3 

million and $16.8 million at a sevenpercent 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 

§ 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. 

Second, in accordance with the FAST 

Act, manufacturers of replica vehicles 

are required to submit annual reports. 

The annual reports are required by 

§ 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 § 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

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 § 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 

§ 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 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 13229 

53NHTSA does not believe regulation is 

necessary to implement those provisions. 

54 49 U.S.C. 30114(b)(9). 55 85 FR 809. 56See Docket No. NHTSA–2019–0121–0016; 

NHTSA–2019–0121–0011; NHTSA–2019–0121– 

0024; NHTSA–2019–0121–0023; NHTSA–2019– 

0121–0013. 

57This 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. 

58 64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999. 

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. 

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 lowvolume 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. 

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. 

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. 

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 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
13230 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

no regulatory text or interpretation on 

preemption. 

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 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 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 

■ 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. 

■ 2. Revise § 565.12 to read as follows: 

§ 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. 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
13232 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

VIN means a series of Arabic numbers 

and Roman letters that is assigned to a 

motor vehicle for identification 

purposes. 

■ 3. In § 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: 

§ 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). 

* * * * * 

■ 4. In § 565.26, revise paragraph (d), as 

follows: 

§ 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 

■ 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. 

■ 6. Amend § 566.5 by revising the 

introductory text and adding paragraph 

(c)(4) to read as follows: 

§ 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 

■ 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. 

■ 8. Revise § 567.1 to read as follows: 

§ 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. 

■ 9. Amend § 567.3 by adding in 

alphabetical order a definition for 

‘‘replica motor vehicle,’’ to read as 

follows: 

§ 567.3 Definitions 

* * * * * 

Replica motor vehicle means a motor 

vehicle meeting the definition of replica 

motor vehicle in 49 CFR part 586. 

■ 10. Revise § 567.4(a) to read as 

follows: 

§ 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. 

* * * * * 

■ 11. Add § 567.8 to read as follows: 

* * * * * 

§ 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 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 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 thirtyseconds 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)].’’ 

■ 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. 

§ 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. 

§ 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. 

§ 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. 

§ 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, 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
13234 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

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. 

§ 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 § 586.9. 

(b) Each manufacturer wishing to 

manufacture replica motor vehicles 

under this program must be registered, 

according to the requirements in 

§ 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. 

§ 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 § 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 § 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 § 586.12, of its 

intent to continue manufacturing replica 

vehicles to which an approved 

registration applies. 

§ 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, 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 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. 

§ 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. 

§ 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: manufacturerinfo@

dot.gov; 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. 

§ 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 § 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. 

§ 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 cm2 (4.7 in2). 

§ 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 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
13236 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

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. 

§ 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 

■ 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. 

■ 14. Amend § 591.5 by revising 

paragraph (b) to read as follows: 

§ 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 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1