Bill language would let a few Vermont‑built specialty cars register without emissions testing
Loading...
Summary
A provision under review in S.326 would create a limited‑use registration for small manufacturers that build cars in Vermont from scratch, exempting up to 12 new vehicles per year from the state's emissions inspection while requiring safety compliance; committee members asked for clearer drafting on the 12‑vehicle cap and usage limits.
The Vermont House Transportation Committee heard testimony April 9 on proposed language in S.326 to allow a small number of specialty, limited‑use vehicles built in Vermont to be registered without the state's emissions inspection.
Justin Johnson, a lobbyist at MMR representing RotSpeed, a Milton‑based company that builds replica/limited‑production sports cars, told the committee the measure would let vehicles built from scratch receive Vermont‑issued VINs without triggering modern emissions testing requirements that some cars cannot meet because they lack OBD‑II ports. "Right now we are not able to register our cars in Vermont," Johnson said. "This section just cracks the door open a little bit — it defines the vehicle, requires it to meet safety requirements, but it does not require the emissions inspection."
Johnson described the cars as lightweight, carbon‑fiber‑bodied two‑seat sports cars that use certified engines from major manufacturers and include modern safety equipment. He said volumes are small — RotSpeed currently has capacity to make about 12 cars a year and expects only one or two would be registered in Vermont — and that price points start near $600,000. He said the 12‑vehicle figure was chosen as a Vermont analog to California's 500‑vehicle waiver, explaining population differences made 12 a comparable cap.
Committee members sought clarifications about several drafting points. Lawmakers asked whether the cap means 12 new registrations per year or a total of 12 vehicles on the road; Johnson and the chair indicated the intent was 12 new registrations per year and recommended changing the draft to say "new registrations" explicitly. Members also questioned language limiting on‑road use (a provision referencing "not to exceed one day a week" or similar language in the draft) and asked staff to compare the proposal with existing antique/hot‑rod classifications to avoid overlap.
Representatives asked about safety oversight and said the proposed exemption applies only to emissions testing. Johnson confirmed vehicles would still be subject to state safety inspection requirements and DOT‑approved components such as glass. He said he had discussed the idea with the agency that administers emissions and that the agency was open to a small‑number exemption because it would not jeopardize Vermont's state implementation plan under the Clean Air Act.
The committee did not vote on the language. Members asked the bill sponsor and stakeholders to return with clarified draft wording to resolve whether the cap applies to new registrations per year or total registrations, to refine the usage limitation language, and to confirm how the proposal compares to antique and show‑car statutes. The committee paused for a short break and scheduled follow‑up testimony on those points.
