§286-85 Reconstructed vehicles, approval required.

340 words·~2 min read·/hi/chapter-286/286-85

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

(a)No person shall operate a reconstructed vehicle upon a public highway unless it has been inspected and certified by the designated county agency as meeting the specifications and requirements established in rules and regulations adopted by the state director of transportation.

(b)This section shall not apply to any vehicle which is subject to the rules and regulations of the public utilities commission governing safety of operation and equipment.

(c)Each county through its chief executive officer, shall designate a county department, whose responsibilities shall include the inspection of reconstructed vehicles and the issuance of permits to operate reconstructed vehicles pursuant to standards established by the state director of transportation.

(d)The state director of transportation shall adopt rules pursuant to chapter 91, establishing the fees an inspector may charge for the inspection of a reconstructed vehicle.

(e)The department designated pursuant to subsection

(c)shall identify to the county director of finance every vehicle that has been inspected and approved as a reconstructed vehicle.

(f)This section shall not apply to any privately owned reconstructed vehicle in a county with a population of less than 500,000.

(g)This section shall be inoperative from January 1, 2022, to July 31, 2025. [L 1977, c 77, §2; am L Sp 1977 1st, c 20, §12; am L 1986, c 122, §1; am L 2021, c 129, §3]

Note

Department of transportation report to 2025 legislature on the effects of repealing this section to determine if the repeal should be made permanent. L 2021, c 129, §4.

Revision Note

In subsection (e), "director of finance" substituted for "treasurer" to conform to county charters.

Case Notes

Where Hawaii county did not require posting of reconstructed vehicle permit decal on vehicle and no evidence that defendant actually operated vehicle, officer's suspicion that defendant operated a reconstructed vehicle without a valid permit was not reasonable; thus, evidence of DUI and no reconstruction permit was illegally obtained through an unconstitutional warrantless seizure. 87 H. 487 (App.), 960 P.2d 157 (1998).