Seņor Info

It appears that nobody here, including Evolution Imports, understands the federalization process very well. While the EPA side of the process is closed from public scrutiny, the NHTSA side is relatively open to public view.

If a car model has not previously been determined to be eligible for importation (see http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/.../ELIG0206.html for the current list), then the RI must submit a petition to NHTSA requesting a determination that the car model is eligible. There are two possible routes to eligiblity: the RI demonstrates that the model he wants to import is substantially similar to a USDM model and can be easily modified to conform to FMVSS (Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards) and Bumper standards, or the RI can demonstrate with (destructive) tests, that the car model can be modified to conformance. Obviously, the Lancer petition can be expected to invoke the "substantially similar" provision.

Here's an outline of the NHTSA process:
1) RI determines what must be changed on the imported car to achieve FMVSS and Bumper compliance. This ususally involves some disassembly and comparison with the USDM version. Access to manufacturer's parts catalogs for both versions are extremely helpful.
2) RI submits a petition to NHTSA documenting exactly what he'll change to achieve compliance.
3) NHTSA reviews petition for deficiencies and once they are all resolved, publishes a notice in the Federal Register soliciting comments on the petition. You can search the Federal Register for such notices at http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/aces140.html. I typicaly use the phrase "Notice of Receipt of Petition for Decision That Nonconforming" (the quotation marks are important) and I tick the "Notices" box and, to speed things up since I search regularly, I indicate and "After" date.
4) Once the Notice is published, NHTSA sets up a "docket" (think file folder) for the petition in which (theoreticly) all documents related to the petition are placed. You can search for NHTSA dockets at http://dms.dot.gov/search/searchFormSimple.cfm.
5) Normally, the period in which NHTSA will accept comments is limited to 30 days. However, if comments ARE received, then the petitioner is given an opportunity to respond to those comments. And then those who contributed comments are invited to respond to the petitioner's response. And, finally, the petitioner is allowed a final response/rebuttal.
6) Finally, after a couple of months spent digesting the docket's information, the NHTSA announces a decision, again published in the Federal Register.

So, let's look at a few NHTSA dockets for insight into the process and its length.

First, to get it out of the way, is the Nissan Skyline GTR docket, http://dms.dot.gov/search/searchResu...mberValue=5507. This docket is distinctive in many ways. First, note the word "Skyline" is never used. The petition originated from J.K. Motors in Baltimore, not Motorex (since then, Motorex has become an RI). Four cars were crashed as part of the testing, since there was no "substantially similar" USDM Nissan. Some of the interior cabin modifications necessary for compliance were withheld from the public docket as "proprietary" information (how does one comment on that?). In any event, there were no public comments, probably due to the fact that Nissan had no intention of ever importing Skylines to the US and, therefore, felt no need to "protect" its importer/dealer network. I have never noticed any other successful petition that required crash tests.
Nov 20, 1998 - Rear crash and gas tank rollover tests performed
Mar 24, 1999 - Petition submitted
Jan 19, 2000 - Petition approved

And here's a sad story, the petition for the 1999-2000 Porsche GT3.
http://dms.dot.gov/search/searchResu...mberValue=7965
May 8, 2000 - Petition Submitted
Oct 6, 2000 - Notice Published
Aug 1, 2001 - Petition Denined
Notice that this took about 15 months, only to receive a denial.

As an aside: What happens when a petition is denied? NHTSA rules require that the imported vehicle(s) be either exported or "abandoned" to the U.S. government. Here's a notice that NHTSA sent to its RIs back in 1994 (see http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/...s/mviinl05.htm):Getting back to the dockets, here are a couple of petitions submitted by G&K, the folks doing the Lancer conversions.

1997-98 Ferrari 456 GT and GTA
http://dms.dot.gov/search/searchResu...berValue=12140
Feb 14, 2002 - Petition Submitted
May 3, 2002 - Notice published
Jun 3, 2002 - Ferrari submits comments
Jul 1, 2002 - Ferrari responds to G&K's response to Ferrari's comments
Jul 25, 2002 - G&K Responds to Ferrari's latest response.
Today - Awaiting NHTSA decision

2002 Ferrari 360s Manufactured before September 1, 2002
http://dms.dot.gov/search/searchResu...berValue=13219
May 28, 2002 - Petition submitted
Sep 10, 2002 - Notice published
Oct 17, 2002 - Ferrari submits comments
Today - Awaiting G&K's response to Ferrari's comments

And here's a really wild petition:
2001 Ferrari 360 cars
http://dms.dot.gov/search/searchResu...mberValue=9628
As you can see, people crawled out the woodwork to respond to this petion. NHTSA, in its comments about approving the petition said:Sadly, this comment has been excised from the docket. This is what happens whem somebody like me makes a post like this in some forum.

So, how long should all this take?

Back in 1996, NHTSA warned its RIs in a newsletter:
It now appears that the time to delivery has increased. The most recent NHTSA announcement of petition approvals, on Sep 10, 2002, shows that the most recent quickest time from petition announcement to petition approval is approximately 3 months (no comments received). This was recorded for the 1999-2002 Mercedes Benz S-Class petition (see docket http://dms.dot.gov/search/searchResu...berValue=12316).

So, that brings us to the end of PART 1 (How Long It
Takes]. PART 2, the EI component, will follow shortly.

TearItUpSports

iTrader: (2)

So have you found the links from G&K concerning the Evolutions? I would like to see that info.

Seņor Info

No, the Lancer petition has not yet even been published.

evosoon

I thought it only take 2-3 weeks to legalize a evolution, at least that's what I have been told by EI

RaX

Wow. That is some quality information. Thank you Senor Info (don't know how to type a frickin tilda ~ over the n ). I'm looking forward to Part 2.

pagong

this is good info...thanks Senor Info

sblvro

iTrader: (2)

the good news is if EI crash test all these evos and nhtsa approves, will it mean that personal orders of evo's direct from the ralliart manufacturer is okay now?

broeli

iTrader: (19)

Didn't EI try to get around crash testing? I don't think they crash tested a single Evo..(although I could be wrong). So all these people have paid for cars that MAY be denied and have to be exported or destroyed? Pretty big risk to take. I'd like to hear what EI is going through and hear from them or a customer that knows what is going on.

BOOYAH1369

So what about after Mitsubishi launches the EVO 8? I wanna import my RHD Japanese US Evo killer, no problem right Senor? I mean, we will have a totally similar model, on the road, tried, tested and true, in the U S of A...no longer will any of us have to claim a mirage-type rocket for our NHTSA docket. Meanwhile, looks like anyone who owns a "street-legal" Evo in the US can be up for a rude awakening prior to this season's SuperBowl.

KK

iTrader: (4)

Even with the car legalized you would still have to go through an RI and convert the car. Motorex do this for Skylines, but they charge something like $16,000 for conversion alone.

I don't think EI are planning to do conversions right now, but that may change in the future... who knows.

Mark

TearItUpSports

iTrader: (2)

Not only this, but to be even imported easily they would have to be identical or similar enough to a legal model that they dont have to be re-certified. A Right hand drive car would be considered completly different, and have to be re-certified ($$$).

There is a lot of risk with what EI/G&K is doing and unfortunatly much of that risk is with the customers, because if things go sour, they are not likely to get their money back (without going to court). Luckily I think it will all work out and those cars will be certified.

Last night I searched the NHTSA site, and could not find any documents on the EVO, though I found a lot of petitions for non-conforming Harleys, and other motorcycles as well as the ones that were mentioned my Mr. Info above.
That means this process is even further behind than I thought.

Seņor Info

So, what exactly is EI's role in this process? EI appears to be acting as a sales broker and it is questionable whether EI's contract with G&K is even legal, given this advice that the NHTSA has given to RIs in a newsletter
What are the Lancer Evo petition's chances of success?

They basically hinge on convincing the NHTSA that the EVO is "substantially similar" to the USDM Lancer. For an excellent discussion of what "substantially similar" means to the NHTSA, I invite you to read the first few pages of this comment submitted in reaction to one of the G&K petitions mentioned above: http://dmses.dot.gov/docimages/pdf81/175328_web.pdf.

Most people in this forum recognize that the similarity between the EVO and the USDM Lancer runs only as deep as the paint. Here are some examples of significant differences:
The EVO's hood and front fenders are made of aluminum, instead of the steel used in the USDM Lancer.
The EVO has an AWD transmission whereas the USDM Lancer is supplied only with FWD.
The EVO's engine bay is stuffed with far more equipment (such as turbocharger, front intercooler, front oil cooler, and associated piping) than the USDM Lancer.

Any one of the items mentioned above could be expected to change the car's center of gravity and inertia moments and crumple zone. And, if NHTSA were made aware of these differences, they likely would require that tests (the destructive kind) be performed. I doubt EI will have the stomach or pockets to crash test a few EVOs.

And what are the chances of the EVO petition drawing comments? I'd guess they are quite high. MMS would quickly and correctly conclude that every grey market EVO allowed into the country would represent one less USDM EVO VIII sale for the MMS dealership network. Although I guess one could hope that MMS would miss the Federal Register notice about the petition, I suspect that they'll get a "courtesy" fax about it from the NHTSA, just in case.

Besides the FMVSS and Bumper standards compliance, there is also the issue of compliance with the Theft Prevention standard. In the case of bringing a car into compliance with the FMVSS and Bumper standards, all conversion work must be performed in the US by an RI. None of the work can be done before the car is actually imported. In the case of the Theft Prevention standard the opposite is true for those cars subject to the standard - all required parts must be inscribed with the car's VIN BEFORE it's imported. Here are some links that further explain this topic:
The list of parts that must be inscribed with the car's VIN if the car model is subject to the Theft Prevention standard is found at: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-...ON=5&TYPE=TEXT
The list of 2002 car models subject to the Theft Prevention standard is found at: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-...id=fr03au01-13 (yes, the 2002 USDM Lancer is considered by NHTSA to be a "high-theft" car model and is subject to the parts-marking requirement of the Theft Prevention standard).
And NHTSA's instructions to RIs on the issue of the Theft Prevention standard compliance may be found at: http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/...s/mviinl06.htmI could be wrong, but I seriously doubt that Mitsubishi inscribed each EVO's VIN on the hood, front fenders, etc. when it manufactured the EVOs and I seriously doubt that Global Performance disassembled the EVOs it shipped to G&K and inscribed each EVO's VIN on the hood, front fenders, etc. before shipping them.

One other point, for you Canadians reading this. EI's website suggests that it may be possible for you to import a street-legal EVO through EI (see http://www.evolutionimports.net/faqs.html#faq3). The truth is that Canada does not allow importation of any car that wasn't originally manufactured to comply with Canadian safety standards. There is no provision in Canadian law that allows "federalization" after the car was manufactured. So, even though an EVO (or Skyline) might be modified to be street-legal in the US, it can't be permanently imported into Canada.

I wonder what contingency plans EI has in case the EVO petition is denied? Chapter 7 bankruptcy? I wonder whether EI's offer in thread A Message from EI to All Members still stands:

sblvro

iTrader: (2)

since the evo 8 will be in the US in a few months, importing a LHD Evo VII/VIII from europe or ralliartUK will be possible? We are not comparing it to the USDM Lancer as being stated above but to the soon to come EVOVIII. I am sure MMSA is doing all this crash testing by now before the launch. So, EI is just jumping the gun and getting everybody to order the EVOVII which will not be sold here in the US since they will be much similar to the EVOVIII, plus you will have the benefits of having AYC/ACD which will not be in the USDM EVOVIII. That is okay, I believe and they will be successful in that. Of course they didn't crash-tested the EVO's, MMSA did!

Tuxedo Cartman

Apparently at least one buyer already has their car from EI, so there is at least one legal one out there. Also, I agree that with the Evo VIII arriving soon, they should have no problems comparing the two of them.

HobieKopek

iTrader: (8)

Who? There are a scattered handful (if that many) on the roads, but who knows HOW LONG they'll be street legal for (there are temporary exclusions if you read up a bit on importation) or how many rules were bent or broken to legalize them?