Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ultra Low Volume Vehicles topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee asks for report on ultra‑low‑volume vehicles; counsel flags emissions wording and NHTSA waiver references
Summary
A Senate report requirement would have DMV study issuing VINs, emissions certification and registration options for ultra‑low‑volume, kit and home‑built vehicles; committee members noted the draft’s phrasing about emissions may need clarification and referenced a 325‑vehicle NHTSA waiver.
Get email alerts on the Ultra Low Volume Vehicles topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The conference committee reviewed a Senate provision directing the commissioner of motor vehicles to report on opportunities to issue state vehicle identification numbers and streamline registration for ultra‑low‑volume vehicles, including kit cars and home‑built vehicles.
Damian Leonard summarized the assignment: the Commissioner would examine waiving some or all Vermont motor vehicle emissions requirements for ultra‑low‑volume motor vehicles; cost‑effective safety certification processes; and a streamlined VIN issuance process. Leonard acknowledged drafting ambiguity about whether the intent was to waive emissions requirements or to study alternative certification models used in other states.
Committee members pointed to federal and other states’ approaches. Leonard noted federal law and NHTSA waivers that allow up to 325 vehicles under certain low‑volume manufacturer provisions and explained “this number is based on there is a NHTSA waiver for up to 325.” Members suggested the report language be broadened to examine other states’ certification approaches rather than limit consideration to waiving emissions requirements.
Why it matters: the report instructs state agencies to explore registration and certification options for a narrow class of small manufacturers and home builders. Conferees asked for clearer drafting to allow examination of waivers and alternative certification models used in other states.
No vote was taken; conferees marked the section for technical edits to clarify the scope of the review and emissions language.

