RD480 - Non-Conventional Vehicles Study - November 2014
Executive Summary: In September 2011, Delegate Joe May, former chairman of the House Transportation Committee, and then Chairwoman Senator Yvonne Miller, Senate Transportation Committee, called upon the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to establish an ongoing work group to address the increasing consumer demand for vehicles that do not fit into the current motor vehicle definitions provided in the Code of Virginia. (*1) During 2012, the first year of the Non-Conventional Vehicles Study, the work group focused on low-speed vehicles, motorcycle classifications, mopeds, and all-terrain vehicles. Those proposed recommendations passed the General Assembly during the 2013 session (see Chapter 783 of the Virginia Acts of Assembly of 2013). During 2013, the second year of the Non-Conventional Vehicles Study, in addition to the issues carried over from the first year of the study, the current chair of Senate Transportation, Chairman Steve Newman, referred several issues to the group for further review. The group was divided into six separate committees, each with its own charge. After meetings and discussions the work group elected not to propose additional changes in the areas of: definitions for all-terrain vehicles and recreational off-highway vehicles; moped passenger restrictions, penalties, or road restrictions; moped dealer licensing requirements; or the taxation structure of all-terrain vehicles, off-road motorcycles, and mopeds. The 2013 work group did make recommendations for legislation proposing creation of a separate definition (“autocycle”) and requirements for those three-wheel vehicles that operate and handle more as automobiles than motorcycles. This recommendation was in line with the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA) best practices for regulating operation and registration of three-wheel vehicles. Those proposed recommendations passed the General Assembly during the 2014 session (see Chapters 53 and 256 Virginia Acts of Assembly 2014). In addition to the above, during the 2013 study a Specially Constructed Vehicle Committee was formed and a procedure was developed for reviewing specially constructed vehicles presented to DMV for registration. With this process, if a specially constructed vehicle is denied registration by the DMV Office of Vehicle Services and the customer wishes to appeal the decision, or if the Vehicle Services office cannot upon initial review determine whether the vehicle is roadworthy and should be registered, that vehicle can be submitted to the Specially Constructed Vehicles Committee for further review. The Specially Constructed Vehicles Committee will review the registration request and may affirm the Office of Vehicle Services denial of registration or determine that registration should be granted. This committee and process were established during the 2013 study; however, no vehicles were presented to this committee during this timeframe. It was also the consensus of the 2013 work group that another stakeholder group, to include those familiar with the mechanics of these types of vehicles (such as representatives from body shops), should be formed to develop an enhanced inspection program for these specially constructed vehicles to determine roadworthiness. The work group felt that this enhanced inspection program may also include reconstructed, rebuilt, replica, and salvaged vehicles and should include guidelines to inspect for roadworthiness. This was an area to be studied in 2014. The group recommended that meanwhile DMV Vehicle Services should continue to review specially constructed vehicle requests for registration and refer those requests that were denied and appealed or that they could not act upon to the Specially Constructed Vehicles Committee. During the 2014 Non-Conventional Vehicles Study a new vehicle type was presented to the Specially Constructed Vehicle Committee for review. This new vehicle type involved the conversion of off-road motorcycles to on-road use. DMV’s Vehicle Services often receives requests from customers to register off-road motorcycles that owners or dealers have added equipment to in order to convert the motorcycle for on-road use. However, there is no statutory authority that permits DMV to register an off-road motorcycle that has been converted for on-road use. DMV met with stakeholders from the Motorcycle Dealers Association and motorcycle dealerships to discuss creating statutory authority to allow dealers or individuals who purchase off-road vehicles to convert them to on-road use and register them with DMV. Based on discussions with the Motorcycle Dealers Association and individual dealers, DMV agreed to develop legislation, which is included at Appendix B. Based on the 2013 work group’s recommendation, the 2014 study looked at the development of an enhanced inspection program for specially constructed vehicles to determine roadworthiness. Currently, the DMV examines specially constructed vehicles for documentation of its parts to prevent use of stolen parts and they also undergo a Virginia safety inspection. An enhanced inspection program would examine the structural integrity, mechanical safety and roadworthiness of specially constructed vehicles. DMV convened another stakeholder group consisting of members from law enforcement, the insurance industry, and automobile rebuilders to discuss an enhanced inspection program for specially constructed, reconstructed, replica, rebuilt, and salvaged vehicles. After much discussion with the rebuilders and the salvage industry, the group decided not to require an enhanced inspection for rebuilt and salvaged vehicles. With the idea of an enhanced inspection program remaining for specially constructed, reconstructed, and replica vehicles, DMV determined that annually there are only about 1,000 or less specially constructed, reconstructed, and replica vehicles whose owners apply for registration. This determination was based on data from 2011-2013. DMV staff then met with staff from the Virginia State Police (VSP) to determine whether an enhanced inspection program for specially constructed, reconstructed, and replica vehicles was feasible or necessary. After discussion with VSP staff it was determined that an enhanced inspection program for specially constructed, reconstructed, and replica vehicles is not feasible or necessary at this time. DMV surveyed other states and did not find any states with a program that addressed the agency’s needs for development of a program in the Commonwealth. In addition, DMV has no specific data to illustrate a need for an enhanced inspection program. Further, DMV and VSP were unable to determine an appropriate mechanism for conducting enhanced inspections, what heightened standards for structural integrity, mechanical safety and roadworthiness should be applied, or how to go about developing such standards. Without specific data to support the need for an enhanced safety inspection DMV and VSP also determined that identifying and obtaining resources and staff to create and maintain an enhanced inspection program could not be justified. Therefore, no further recommendations are made regarding an enhanced inspection program; however, DMV will continue to monitor the number of specially constructed, reconstructed, and replica vehicles registered each year to determine if there is such a growth in the numbers to warrant revisiting an enhanced inspection program in later years. Lastly, at the final stakeholder meeting of the 2013 Non-Conventional Vehicles Study, the Commissioner of DMV identified the need for the work group to examine the testing and operation of autonomous, or automated, vehicles on Virginia’s public highways. Autonomous and automated vehicles have been tested at the Smart Road operated by the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute, and the Commonwealth is interested in ensuring that there are no statutory or regulatory barriers to the members of the automotive industry that may desire to test automated and autonomous vehicles in the Commonwealth. In October of 2013, DMV met with other state agencies including VSP and VDOT, the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute Center for Automated Vehicle Systems, and the Virginia Center for Transportation Innovation and Research. The role of this group was to consider formulating proposals that would support the testing of autonomous vehicles on the public roads in Virginia and consider draft legislation. The consensus of the group was that Virginia should be in a posture to support autonomous vehicle testing without being too restrictive, which may push manufacturers to other states. The group considered whether some type of permitting process should be implemented to review and approve autonomous vehicles to be tested on the open roads. This would include travel routes and conditions. It was the consensus of the group that VDOT, VSP and DMV would need to work together on this process and contact other states for more information. The group determined that it was not in a position to submit legislation for 2014 as there was still work to be done. The group decided to examine what other states were doing in the area of testing and reconvene after the legislative session in 2014. In August of 2014, DMV again met with the other state agencies including VSP and the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute Center for Automated Vehicle Systems, the Virginia Center for Transportation Innovation and Research, and the Center for Transportation Studies at the University of Virginia. Jay Swanson, Deputy Policy Director for Governor Terrance R. McAuliffe also attended the meeting. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the status of current autonomous and automated vehicle research in the Commonwealth, the pace of technology changes in the automotive industry, and the best ways to attract the automated technology industry, automobile manufacturers, and automotive industry suppliers to the Commonwealth to position Virginia to be at the forefront of the development, testing, and deployment of safe, reliable, autonomous vehicles. This work group decided that it needed to hear from the industry members to determine whether the agencies should propose legislation like other states have done to bring testing of autonomous and automated vehicles to Virginia. In October of 2014, the work group described above met with stakeholders from the automotive industry, Governor’s policy office and the Office of the Attorney General. Stakeholders from the automotive industry included Continental, Volkswagen Group of America, Daimler, General Motors, Nissan, Toyota, Honda, Delphi, the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, ITS America, Kemper Consulting, SAE International, and the Association of Global Automakers. The work group asked for the industry members to identify and discuss any statutory or regulatory barriers that they perceived would prevent them from testing autonomous or automated vehicles in the Commonwealth. Stakeholders provided insightful information and recommendations regarding the infrastructure and support needed from the Commonwealth to prevent barriers to the automotive industry coming to the Commonwealth to test automated and autonomous vehicles. The industry members were adamant that legislation at this time would be more of a hindrance than a help in bringing testing to Virginia. Based on the information provided, the work group decided not to recommend pursuing legislation regarding automated and autonomous vehicles during the 2015 General Assembly session. However, the work group will continue to meet with automotive industry stakeholders to monitor developments in the technology and testing of automated and autonomous vehicles. In addition, the work group asked that members of the automotive industry continue to submit their written comments on any statutory or regulatory barriers they may identify and any reasonable infrastructure needs they may have for testing of autonomous or automated vehicles in the Commonwealth. DMV is pleased to report to the transportation committees of the General Assembly that DMV and the Non-Conventional work group have examined all issues originally referred to the working group by former Delegate May and the late Senator Miller. In addition, over the past three years the work group has also addressed other issues raised by the work group. While this report is the third and final installment for the Non-Conventional study, DMV has developed a process for ongoing stakeholder input on non-conventional vehicles and will continue to refer vehicles to the Specially Constructed Vehicles Committee as the need arises. _________________________________________ (*1) Appendix A: Charge letters from Delegate May and Senator Miller |
Menu
Published Documents
