Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Controls, Telltales and Indicators, 3786-3789 [06-537]

Agencies

• National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
• DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 15 (Tuesday, January 24, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3786-3789]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-537]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. NHTSA-2006-23651]
RIN 2127-AJ81


Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Controls, Telltales and 
Indicators

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule; delay of effective date.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In a final rule of August 17, 2005 (70 FR 48295), we updated 
our standard regulating motor vehicle controls, telltales and 
indicators. The standard specifies requirements for the location, 
identification, and illumination of these items. The rule extended the 
standard's telltale and indicator requirements to vehicles with a Gross 
Vehicle Weight Rating (GVWR) of 4,536 kg (10,000 pounds) and greater, 
updated the standard's requirements for multi-function controls and 
multi-task displays to make the requirements appropriate for advanced 
systems, and reorganized the standard to make it easier to read. The 
final rule announced an effective date of February 13, 2006, and a 
compliance date of February 13, 2006 for requirements applicable to 
vehicles under 4,536 kg (10,000 pounds) GVWR.
    In response to a petition for extension of the effective date from 
the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers (Alliance), this final rule 
announces a delay in the effective date to September 1, 2006. The 
additional time allows us to consider issues raised by the Alliance and 
other petitioners in petitions to reconsider certain items and 
identifications described in the August 17, 2005 final rule.

DATES: Effective date: The effective date of the rule amending 49 CFR 
571.101 published at 70 FR 48295, August 17, 2005 is delayed until 
September 1, 2006.
    Compliance date: The compliance date for the extension of the 
standard's telltale and indicator requirements to vehicles with a GVWR 
of 4,536 kg (10,000 pounds) or greater is September 1, 2013. The 
compliance date for all other requirements is delayed until September 
1, 2006. Voluntary compliance is permitted as of August 17, 2005.
    Petitions for reconsideration: Petitions for reconsideration of 
this final rule must be received not later than March 10, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration of the final rule must refer 
to the docket and notice number set forth above and be submitted to the 
Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 
Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590, with a copy to Docket 
Management, Room PL-401, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For non-legal issues you may call Ms. 
Gayle Dalrymple, Office of Crash Avoidance

[[Page 3787]]

Standards at (202) 366-5559. Her fax number is (202) 366-7002. For 
legal issues, you may call Ms. Dorothy Nakama, Office of the Chief 
Counsel at (202) 366-2992. Her fax number is (202) 366-3820. You may 
send mail to both of these officials at National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration, 400 Seventh St., SW., Washington, DC 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    NHTSA issued the original version of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety 
Standard (FMVSS) No. 101, Controls and Displays, in 1967 (32 FR 2408) 
as one of the initial FMVSSs. The standard applies to passenger cars, 
multipurpose passenger vehicles (MPVs), trucks, and buses. The purpose 
of FMVSS No. 101 is to assure the accessibility and visibility of motor 
vehicle controls and displays under daylight and nighttime conditions, 
in order to reduce the safety hazards caused by the diversion of the 
driver's attention from the driving task, and by mistakes in selecting 
controls.
    At present, FMVSS No. 101 specifies requirements for the location 
(S5.1), identification (S5.2), and illumination (S5.3) of various 
controls and displays. It specifies that those controls and displays 
must be accessible and visible to a driver properly seated wearing his 
or her safety belt. Table 1, ``Identification and Illumination of 
Controls,'' and Table 2, ``Identification and Illumination of 
Displays,'' indicate which controls and displays are subject to the 
identification requirements, and how they are to be identified, 
colored, and illuminated.

Final Rule

    In the final rule of August 17, 2005, NHTSA amended FMVSS No. 101 
by extending the standard's telltale and indicator requirements to 
vehicles of Gross Vehicle Weight Rating (GVWR) 4,536 kilograms (10,000 
pounds) and over, updating the standard's requirements for multi-
function controls and multi-task displays to make the requirements 
appropriate for advanced systems, and reorganizing the standard to make 
it easier to read. Table 1 and Table 2 continue to include only those 
symbols and words previously specified in the controls and displays 
standard or in another Federal motor vehicle safety standard. However, 
both Tables 1 and 2 were reorganized to make the symbols and words 
easier to find.
    The final rule announced an effective date of February 13, 2006 for 
requirements applicable to passenger cars, multipurpose passenger 
vehicles, trucks and buses under 4,536 kg GVWR.

Extension of Effective Date

    In a petition dated October 3, 2005, the Alliance of Automobile 
Manufacturers (Alliance) petitioned for a delay in the final rule's 
effective date to September 1, 2006. The Alliance stated its position 
that the final rule ``imposes a number of new requirements that will 
become applicable to passenger cars and other light-duty vehicles 
effective February 13, 2006.'' The Alliance asked for the delay to give 
NHTSA enough time to respond to the Alliance's petition for 
reconsideration, filed as a separate document, and also dated October 
3, 2005.
    Although NHTSA stated that the final rule would not require design 
changes, but would relieve restrictions on vehicle manufacturers, the 
Alliance asserted that certain final rule provisions will require 
vehicle redesign that cannot be completed by the February 13, 2006 
effective date. The Alliance stated: ``These new requirements are 
included in: S5.2.1; S5.3.2.2(b); S5.3.4(d); S5.4.3, and S5.5.2. In 
addition appropriate changes are needed to Table 1 and Table 2 along 
with their respective footnotes.'' The Alliance asserted that the 
additional time will allow NHTSA to review and take ``final action'' on 
the issues raised in the Alliance's petition for reconsideration.
    After considering the rationale explaining the need to maintain the 
status quo while NHTSA considers the Alliance's petition for 
reconsideration, NHTSA has decided that it is in the public interest to 
grant the Alliance's petition. By delaying the effective date to 
September 1, 2006, NHTSA will be able to reconsider certain required 
items and identifications described in the August 17, 2005 final rule 
before they become mandatory. Manufacturers will not have to make 
vehicle redesigns that they have informed NHTSA they will not be able 
to complete by February 13, 2006. Since voluntary compliance has been 
permitted as of August 17, 2005, those manufacturers that are able to 
comply by February 13, 2006 may continue to do so. Moreover, because 
the safety benefits of the final rule are very small, there will be no 
measurable effect on safety as a result of this delay in effective 
date. Therefore, NHTSA delays the effective date of the final rule of 
August 17, 2005 (70 FR 48295) to September 1, 2006. We will also 
consider other timely petitions for reconsideration of this final rule 
that we have already received.

Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' (58 FR 
51735, October 4, 1993), provides for making determinations whether a 
regulatory action is ``significant'' and therefore subject to Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) review and to the requirements of the 
Executive Order. The Order defines a ``significant regulatory action'' 
as one that is likely to result in a rule that may:
    (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or 
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the 
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public 
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or 
communities;
    (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an 
action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, 
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations or recipients 
thereof; or
    (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal 
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in 
the Executive Order.
    We have considered the impact of this rulemaking action under 
Executive Order 12866 and the Department of Transportation's regulatory 
policies and procedures. This rulemaking document was not reviewed by 
the Office of Management and Budget under E.O. 12866, ``Regulatory 
Planning and Review.'' The rulemaking action is also not considered to 
be significant under the Department's Regulatory Policies and 
Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979).
    For the following reasons, NHTSA concludes that this final rule 
will not have any quantifiable cost effect on motor vehicle 
manufacturers. This final rule delays from February 13, 2006 to 
September 1, 2006, the effective date for the FMVSS No. 101 final rule 
published on August 17, 2005. Since the delay in the effective date is 
intended to maintain the status quo while NHTSA considers the issues in 
the Alliance's petition for reconsideration, manufacturers will incur 
no costs as a result of the delay in the effective date. The August 17, 
2005 final rule removed a regulatory restriction (for multi-function 
controls) requiring identification ``on or adjacent to'' the controls 
and provided for immediate optional voluntary compliance. Thus, 
manufacturers benefiting from the amendment to FMVSS No. 101's ``on or

[[Page 3788]]

adjacent'' to requirement will not be affected by the delay in the 
effective date. Also, because the safety benefits of this final rule 
are very small, there will be no measurable effect on safety as a 
result of this delay in effective date.
    Because the economic effects of this final rule are so minimal, no 
further regulatory evaluation is necessary.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., 
as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act 
(SBREFA) of 1996), whenever an agency is required to publish a notice 
of rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it must prepare and make 
available for public comment a regulatory flexibility analysis that 
describes the effect of the rule on small entities (i.e., small 
businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions). 
The Small Business Administration's regulations at 13 CFR part 121 
define a small business, in part, as a business entity ``which operates 
primarily within the United States.'' (13 CFR 121.105(a)). No 
regulatory flexibility analysis is required if the head of an agency 
certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on 
a substantial number of small entities. The SBREFA amended the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act to require Federal agencies to provide a 
statement of the factual basis for certifying that a rule will not have 
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities.
    The Head of the Agency has considered the effects of this 
rulemaking action under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et 
seq.) and certifies that this final rule will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The 
statement of the factual basis for the certification is that this final 
rule delays until September 1, 2006, the effective date of the final 
rule published on August 17, 2005. As earlier stated, no small business 
manufacturer will incur costs as a result of this final rule.
    For these reasons, and for the reasons described in our discussion 
on Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures, 
NHTSA concludes that this final rule will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

C. National Environmental Policy Act

    NHTSA has analyzed this rulemaking action for the purposes of the 
National Environmental Policy Act. The agency has determined that 
implementation of this action would not have any significant impact on 
the quality of the human environment.

D. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    Executive Order 13132 requires NHTSA to develop an accountable 
process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input by State and local 
officials in the development of regulatory policies that have 
federalism implications.'' The Executive Order defines ``policies that 
have federalism implications'' to include regulations that have 
``substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between 
the National Government and the States, or on the distribution of power 
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.'' Under 
Executive Order 13132, NHTSA may not issue a regulation with federalism 
implications, that imposes substantial direct compliance costs, and 
that is not required by statute, unless the Federal Government provides 
the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by 
State and local governments, or the agency consults with State and 
local officials early in the process of developing the regulation. 
NHTSA also may not issue a regulation with federalism implications and 
that preempts State law unless the agency consults with State and local 
officials early in the process of developing the regulation.
    NHTSA has analyzed this rulemaking action in accordance with the 
principles and criteria set forth in Executive Order 13132. The agency 
has determined that this rule will not have sufficient federalism 
implications to warrant consultation with State and local officials or 
the preparation of a federalism summary impact statement. This rule 
will not have any substantial effects on the States, or on the current 
Federal-State relationship, or on the current distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various local officials. The reason is that 
this final rule applies to motor vehicle manufacturers, and not to the 
States or local governments. Thus, the requirements of Section 6 of the 
Executive Order do not apply.

E. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)

    Pursuant to Executive Order 12988 ``Civil Justice Reform,'' we have 
considered whether this final rule would have any retroactive effect. 
NHTSA concludes that this final rule will not have any retroactive 
effect. Under 49 U.S.C. 30103, whenever a Federal motor vehicle safety 
standard is in effect, a State may not adopt or maintain a safety 
standard applicable to the same aspect of performance which is not 
identical to the Federal standard, except to the extent that the state 
requirement imposes a higher level of performance and applies only to 
vehicles procured for the State's use. 49 U.S.C. 30161 sets forth a 
procedure for judicial review of final rules establishing, amending, or 
revoking Federal motor vehicle safety standards. That section does not 
require submission of a petition for reconsideration or other 
administrative proceedings before parties may file suit in court.

F. Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a person is not required 
to respond to a collection of information by a Federal agency unless 
the collection displays a valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
control number. This final rule does not require any collections of 
information, or recordkeeping or retention requirements as defined by 
the OMB in 5 CFR part 1320.

G. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272) 
directs NHTSA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory 
activities unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or 
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical 
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling 
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by 
voluntary consensus standards bodies, such as the Society of Automotive 
Engineers (SAE). The NTTAA directs the agency to provide Congress, 
through the OMB, explanations when we decide not to use available and 
applicable voluntary consensus standards.
    After conducting a search of available sources, we have determined 
that there is no applicable voluntary consensus standard for this final 
rule, which delays the effective date of the August 17, 2005 final rule 
amending FMVSS No. 101.

H. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) 
requires Federal agencies to prepare a written assessment of the costs, 
benefits, and other effects of proposed or final rules that include a 
Federal mandate likely to result in the expenditure by

[[Page 3789]]

State, local or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private 
sector, of more than $100 million in any one year (adjusted for 
inflation with base year of 1995). Before promulgating a rule for which 
a written statement is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally 
requires NHTSA to identify and consider a reasonable number of 
regulatory alternatives and adopt the least costly, most cost-
effective, or least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives 
of the rule. The provisions of section 205 do not apply when they are 
inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, section 205 allows NHTSA to 
adopt an alternative other than the least costly, most cost-effective 
or least burdensome alternative if the agency publishes with the final 
rule an explanation why that alternative was not adopted.
    This rule will not result in the expenditure by State, local, or 
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of more 
than $100 million annually. Accordingly, this rule is not subject to 
the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.

I. Plain Language

    Executive Order 12866 requires each agency to write all rules in 
plain language. Application of the principles of plain language 
includes consideration of the following questions:

--Have we organized the material to suit the public's needs?
--Are the requirements in the rule clearly stated?
--Does the rule contain technical language or jargon that is not clear?
--Would a different format (grouping and order of sections, use of 
headings, paragraphing) make the rule easier to understand?
--Would more (but shorter) sections be better?
--Could we improve clarity by adding tables, lists, or diagrams?
--What else could we do to make this rulemaking easier to understand?
    If you have comments on the Plain Language implications of this 
final rule document, please address them to the DOT Docket Number cited 
in the heading of this notice.

J. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)

    The Department of Transportation assigns a regulation identifier 
number (RIN) to each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of 
Federal Regulations. The Regulatory Information Service Center 
publishes the Unified Agenda in April and October of each year. You may 
use the RIN contained in the heading at the beginning of this document 
to find this action in the Unified Agenda.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30166, and 30177; 
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.

    Issued on: January 13, 2006.
Jacqueline Glassman,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 06-537 Filed 1-23-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P