Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Brake Hoses, 66480-66482 [E6-19198]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
66480
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 220 / Wednesday, November 15, 2006 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 5.—BEFORE/CONCURRENT REQUIREMENTS
Before or concurrently with the actions specified in—
Do these actions—
In accordance with the accomplishment
instructions of—
(1) Paragraph (h)(1) of this AD ..........................
(i) Remove the rudder position sensor of the
automatic flight control system.
(ii) Replace the rudder feel and centering assembly with a new all-mechanical unit.
(iii) Install the rudder pressure reducer and
yaw damper coupler.
(iv) Install provisional wires for rudder system
enhancement.
(v) Replace the P5–3 panel with a new panel
Boeing Service Bulletin 737–22–1042, Revision 1, dated April 5, 1985.
Boeing 737 Service Bulletin 27–1026, dated
January 15, 1971.
Boeing Service Bulletin 737–27A1206, Revision 3, dated December 14, 2000.
Boeing Service Bulletin 737–27–1246, Revision 1, dated February 21, 2002.
Boeing Service Bulletin 737–27–1263, Revision 1, dated September 25, 2003.
Smiths Aerospace Service Bulletin 1150–27–
05A, dated August 28, 2003.
(2) Paragraph (h)(2) of this AD ..........................
(vi) Replace the input lever for the auxiliary
rudder power control package with a new
input lever.
(i) Install provisional wires for rudder system
enhancement.
(ii) Replace the P5–3 panel with a new panel
(iii) Install a new yaw damper coupler .............
(3) Paragraph (h)(3) of this AD ..........................
(iv) Inspect the trailing edge beam on the
vertical fin and rework if necessary.
(v) Replace the input lever for the auxiliary
rudder power control package with a new
input lever.
(i) Install provisional wires for rudder system
enhancement.
(ii) Replace the P5–3 panel with a new panel
(iii) Relocate the wire bundle routing in the
vertical stabilizer.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
(j) As of the effective date of this AD, no
person may install an input control rod, P/
N 251A3495–1, on any airplane.
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
49 CFR Part 571
(k)(1) The Manager, Seattle ACO, FAA, has
the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD,
if requested in accordance with the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
(2) Before using any AMOC approved in
accordance with § 39.19 on any airplane to
which the AMOC applies, notify the
appropriate principal inspector in the FAA
Flight Standards Certificate Holding District
Office.
(3) Except as provided by paragraph (j) of
this AD: AMOCs approved previously in
accordance with AD 2002–20–07 R1 are
approved as AMOCs for the corresponding
provisions of paragraphs (f) and (h) of this
AD.
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS1
Parts Installation
[Docket No. NHTSA–2006–26299]
Issued in Renton, Washington, on
November 3, 2006.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E6–19227 Filed 11–14–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:55 Nov 14, 2006
Jkt 211001
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standards; Brake Hoses
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking;
proposed delay of effective date.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: NHTSA published a final rule
in December 2004 that amended the
Federal motor vehicle safety standard
on brake hoses. In early 2005, the
agency received several petitions for
reconsideration of the rule and a
petition to delay the effective date of the
final rule. At present, the rule is to take
effect on December 20, 2006. To allow
for more time to respond to petitions for
reconsideration, and to give industry
more time to meet new requirements,
this document proposes to delay the
effective date of the final rule for one
year, to December 20, 2007.
DATES: You should submit your
comments not later than November 30,
2006.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Boeing Service Bulletin 737–27–1246, Revision 1, dated February 21, 2002.
Boeing Service Bulletin 737–27–1264, Revision 1, dated April 3, 2003.
Boeing Service Bulletin 737–27A1206, Revision 3, dated December 14, 2000.
Boeing Service Bulletin 737–55–1052, Revision 1, dated August 5, 2004.
Smiths Aerospace Service Bulletin 1150–27–
05A, dated August 28, 2003.
Boeing Service Bulletin 737–27–1247, Revision 1, dated July 25, 2002.
Boeing Service Bulletin 737–27–1262, dated
December 19, 2002.
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–27A1239,
dated January 11, 2001.
We invite you to submit
comments on the proposed delay of the
effective date of the final rule published
on December 20, 2004. You may submit
comments identified by docket number
at the heading of this notice by any of
the following methods:
• Web Site: https://dms.dot.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting
comments on the DOT electronic docket
site by clicking on ‘‘Help and
Information’’ or ‘‘Help/Info.’’
• Fax: 1–(202)–493–2251.
• Mail: Docket Management Facility,
U.S. Department of Transportation, 400
Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building,
Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590.
• Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on
the plaza level of the Nassif Building,
400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington,
DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
online instructions for submitting
comments.
Instructions: All submissions must
include the agency name and docket
number. Note that all comments
received will be posted without change
to https://dms.dot.gov, including any
personal information provided.
Docket: For access to the docket in
order to read background documents or
comments received, go to https://
ADDRESSES:
E:\FR\FM\15NOP1.SGM
15NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 220 / Wednesday, November 15, 2006 / Proposed Rules
dms.dot.gov at any time or to Room PL–
401 on the plaza level of the Nassif
Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search
the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the
comment (or signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may
review DOT’s complete Privacy Act
Statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (Volume
65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78) or you
may visit https://dms.dot.gov.
We shall consider all comments
received before the close of business on
the comment closing date indicated
above. To the extent possible, we shall
also consider comments filed after the
closing date.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
technical issues you may call: Mr. Jeff
Woods, Vehicle Dynamics Division,
Office of Crash Avoidance Standards, at
(202) 366–6206. Mr. Woods’ fax number
is: (202) 366–4921.
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 the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, 400 Seventh
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standard No. 106, Brake hoses (49 CFR
571.106) (FMVSS No. 106), specifies
labeling and performance requirements
for motor vehicle brake hose, brake hose
assemblies, and brake hose end fittings.
The purpose of FMVSS No. 106 is to
reduce deaths and injuries occurring as
a result of brake system failure from
pressure or vacuum loss due to hose or
hose assembly rupture.
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS1
2004 Final Rule
On December 20, 2004 (69 FR 76298)
(DMS Docket No. NHTSA–2003–14483),
NHTSA published a final rule amending
FMVSS No. 106 to update the standard
and incorporate the most recent
substantive technical requirements of
several Society of Automotive Engineers
(SAE) Recommended Practices relating
to hydraulic brake hoses, vacuum brake
hoses, air brake hoses, plastic air brake
tubing, and end fittings. The final rule
specified an effective date of December
20, 2006 for these amendments.
Optional early compliance with the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:55 Nov 14, 2006
Jkt 211001
final rule was permitted as of February
18, 2005.
Petitions for Reconsideration
In early 2005, NHTSA received
petitions for reconsideration of the
December 20, 2004 final rule from
Cooper Standard Automotive (Fluid
Division), Degussa Corporation, George
Apgar Consulting, MPC, Inc., and Parker
Hannifin Corporation (with separate
comments from its Brass Division and
from its Hose Products Division).1 The
petitions addressed a wide range of
FMVSS No. 106 subjects.
Petition for Extension of the Effective
Date
In a submission dated September 12,
2006, Legris petitioned NHTSA for an
extension of the December 20, 2004
final rule for an additional year, to
December 20, 2007. Legris stated that it
learned of the changes to FMVSS No.
106 ‘‘within the past few months’’ and
stated that it cannot make all necessary
changes to its brake hose products
before the December 20, 2006 effective
date. Legris asserted that without the
extension, its business and customer
base will be jeopardized and it will ‘‘be
faced with a considerable loss of both
sales revenue and profits, as well as
losses from products already
manufactured but which could not be
installed in vehicles until after
December 20, 2006.’’
Proposed Extension of Effective Date
The petitions for reconsideration
asked NHTSA to amend many of the
December 20, 2004 final rule’s
provisions on brake hoses, brake hose
assemblies, and end fittings. Our
response to those petitions could affect
current designs of certain types of brake
hoses. The numerous issues raised in
the petitions are complex. In some
cases, the petitioners ask for changes
that differ from those requested by other
petitioners. The agency is in the process
of developing its response to the
petitions. A 12-month extension of the
effective date, to December 20, 2007,
would preserve the status quo until
then. It would also give Legris and
similarly situated companies additional
time to meet updated FMVSS No. 106
requirements.
Because the December 20, 2006
effective date for the final rule is fast
1 In July 2005, Arkema, Inc., submitted a
document styled as a petition for reconsideration.
NHTSA is treating the document as a petition for
rulemaking instead since its regulations (49 CFR
553.35(a)) provide that a document styled as a
petition for reconsideration of a final rule and
received by the agency more than 45 days after the
issuance of that final rule will be treated as a
petition for rulemaking.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
66481
approaching, NHTSA proposes delaying
the effective date for one year, to
December 20, 2007. If made final, this
NPRM would make no substantive
change to the standard, but would delay
the effective date of the December 20,
2006 final rule for another year while
the agency responds to the petitions for
reconsideration of the rule. Thus,
NHTSA seeks public comment on
extending the effective date of the final
rule until December 20, 2007. Because
the agency seeks to provide as much
lead time as possible about its final
determination whether the effective date
will be extended, we have provided a
15-day comment period on the issue of
the extension of the December 20, 2004
final rule’s effective date. If the agency
does not receive any opposing
comments, it will issue a final rule
adopting the extension shortly after the
comment closing date.
Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory
Planning and Review, and DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures
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 under E.O. 12866,
‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review.’’
Further, we have determined that this
action is not ‘‘significant’’ within the
meaning of the Department of
Transportation’s regulatory policies and
procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979).
This NPRM proposes to delay the
effective date of a December 20, 2004
final rule amending FMVSS No. 106. If
made final, there would be no
additional costs associated with the
delay of the effective date. Since the
safety benefits from the December 20,
2004 final rule cannot be quantified,
and are likely minor, the impact of this
extension is also likely minor.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
NHTSA has considered the impacts of
this rulemaking action under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601
et seq.). I certify that the proposed rule
would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. If made final, this rule would
not impose any new requirements or
costs on manufacturers, but instead
would only preserve the status quo for
an additional year.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) (PRA),
E:\FR\FM\15NOP1.SGM
15NOP1
66482
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 220 / Wednesday, November 15, 2006 / Proposed Rules
a person is not required to respond to
a collection of information by a Federal
agency unless the collection displays a
valid OMB control number. Since it
would only delay the effective date of a
final rule, if made final, this NPRM
would not impose any new collection of
information requirements for which a 5
CFR part 1320 clearance must be
obtained.
D. National Environmental Policy Act
We have analyzed this proposed rule
for the purposes of the National
Environmental Policy Act. We have
determined that implementation of this
action would not have any significant
impact on the quality of the human
environment.
E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
This proposed rule would not 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, as specified in
Executive Order 13132.
F. Civil Justice Reform
This proposed rule would not have
any retroactive effect. A petition for
reconsideration or other administrative
proceedings are not required before
parties may file suit in court.
G. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
If made final, this proposed rule
would not result in costs of $100
million or more to either State, local, or
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or
to the private sector. Thus, this
proposed rule is not subject to the
requirements of sections 202 and 205 of
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115,
30117, and 30166; delegations of authority at
49 CFR 1.50 and 501.8.
Issued on: November 7, 2006.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. E6–19198 Filed 11–14–06; 8:45 am]
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS1
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:55 Nov 14, 2006
Jkt 211001
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 229
[Docket No. 060928250–6250–01; I.D.
092506A]
RIN 0648–AU90
Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental
to Commercial Fishing Operations;
Atlantic Large Whale Take Reduction
Plan
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for
comments.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: NMFS proposes to revise the
regulations implementing the Atlantic
Large Whale Take Reduction Plan
(ALWTRP) by expanding the southeast
U.S. restricted area and modifying
regulations pertaining to gillnetting
within the southeast U.S. restricted area.
NMFS proposes to prohibit gillnet
fishing or gillnet possession during
annual restricted periods associated
with the right whale calving season.
Exemptions to the fishing prohibitions
are proposed for strikenet fishing for
sharks and gillnet fishing for Spanish
mackerel south of 29°00′ N. lat. An
exemption to the possession prohibition
is proposed for transiting through the
area if gear is stowed in accordance with
this rule. This action is required to meet
the goals of the Marine Mammal
Protection Act (MMPA) and the
Endangered Species Act (ESA). This
action is necessary to protect northern
right whales from serious injury or
mortality from entanglement in gillnet
gear in their calving area in Atlantic
ocean waters off the Southeast U.S.
DATES: Comments on this proposed rule
must be received by 5 p.m. EST on
December 15, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by the RIN 0648–AU90, by
any of the following methods:
E-mail:
sewhalerule.comments@noaa.gov.
Include RIN 0648–AU90 in the subject
line of the message.
Mail: Assistant Regional
Administrator for Protected Resources,
NMFS, 263 13th Avenue South, St.
Petersburg, FL 33701.
Facsimile (fax) to: 727 824–5309,
Attn: Assistant Regional Administrator,
Protected Resources, NMFS, 263 13th
Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
instructions for submitting comments.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the agency name and
docket number or Regulatory
Information Number (RIN) for this
proposed rulemaking. For detailed
instructions on submitting comments
and additional information on the
rulemaking process, see the ‘‘Public
Participation’’ heading of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document. Copies of the draft
Environmental Assessment (EA), an
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(IRFA), and copies of all citations
referenced in this proposed rulemaking
may be obtained from the persons listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Laura Engleby, 727–824–5312, or Barb
Zoodsma, 904–321–2806. Individuals
who use telecommunications devices
for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal
Information Relay Service at 1–800–
877–8339 between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m.
eastern time, Monday through Friday,
excluding Federal holidays.
Electronic Access: Regulations and
background documents for the ALWTRP
can be downloaded from the ALWTRP
web site at https://www.nero.noaa.gov/
whaletrp/.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The northern right whale (Eubalaena
glacialis) was severely depleted by
commercial whaling, and despite
protection from commercial harvest
since 1935, has not recovered. The
North Atlantic population is believed to
be at or less than 300 individuals,
making it one of the most critically
endangered large whale populations in
the world (NMFS 2005).
The northern right whale has been
listed as endangered under the ESA
since the Act′s passage in 1973 (35 FR
8495, June 2, 1970). In June 1994, NMFS
designated three areas of the right
whale’s Atlantic range in the United
States as critical habitat: (1) Great South
Channel, (2) Cape Cod Bay, and (3) the
southeastern U.S. (59 FR 28793, June 3,
1994). The southeastern U.S. critical
habitat includes coastal waters between
31°15′ N. lat. and 30°15′ N. lat. from the
coast out 15 nautical miles (27.8 km),
and the coastal waters between 30°15′
N. lat. and 28°00′ N. lat. from the coast
out 5 nautical miles (9.3 km) (§ 226.203
of this chapter).
As required by the ESA, NMFS
developed a recovery plan for the
northern right whale in 1991, which
was revised and updated in 2001 and
2005. The current recovery plan states,
E:\FR\FM\15NOP1.SGM
15NOP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 220 (Wednesday, November 15, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 66480-66482]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-19198]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 571
[Docket No. NHTSA-2006-26299]
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Brake Hoses
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking; proposed delay of effective
date.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NHTSA published a final rule in December 2004 that amended the
Federal motor vehicle safety standard on brake hoses. In early 2005,
the agency received several petitions for reconsideration of the rule
and a petition to delay the effective date of the final rule. At
present, the rule is to take effect on December 20, 2006. To allow for
more time to respond to petitions for reconsideration, and to give
industry more time to meet new requirements, this document proposes to
delay the effective date of the final rule for one year, to December
20, 2007.
DATES: You should submit your comments not later than November 30,
2006.
ADDRESSES: We invite you to submit comments on the proposed delay of
the effective date of the final rule published on December 20, 2004.
You may submit comments identified by docket number at the heading of
this notice by any of the following methods:
Web Site: https://dms.dot.gov. Follow the instructions for
submitting comments on the DOT electronic docket site by clicking on
``Help and Information'' or ``Help/Info.''
Fax: 1-(202)-493-2251.
Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, Room PL-401,
Washington, DC 20590.
Hand Delivery: Room PL-401 on the plaza level of the
Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and
docket number. Note that all comments received will be posted without
change to https://dms.dot.gov, including any personal information
provided.
Docket: For access to the docket in order to read background
documents or comments received, go to https://
[[Page 66481]]
dms.dot.gov at any time or to Room PL-401 on the plaza level of the
Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477-78) or you may visit
https://dms.dot.gov.
We shall consider all comments received before the close of
business on the comment closing date indicated above. To the extent
possible, we shall also consider comments filed after the closing date.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical issues you may call: Mr.
Jeff Woods, Vehicle Dynamics Division, Office of Crash Avoidance
Standards, at (202) 366-6206. Mr. Woods' fax number is: (202) 366-4921.
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 the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 106, Brake hoses (49 CFR
571.106) (FMVSS No. 106), specifies labeling and performance
requirements for motor vehicle brake hose, brake hose assemblies, and
brake hose end fittings. The purpose of FMVSS No. 106 is to reduce
deaths and injuries occurring as a result of brake system failure from
pressure or vacuum loss due to hose or hose assembly rupture.
2004 Final Rule
On December 20, 2004 (69 FR 76298) (DMS Docket No. NHTSA-2003-
14483), NHTSA published a final rule amending FMVSS No. 106 to update
the standard and incorporate the most recent substantive technical
requirements of several Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE)
Recommended Practices relating to hydraulic brake hoses, vacuum brake
hoses, air brake hoses, plastic air brake tubing, and end fittings. The
final rule specified an effective date of December 20, 2006 for these
amendments. Optional early compliance with the final rule was permitted
as of February 18, 2005.
Petitions for Reconsideration
In early 2005, NHTSA received petitions for reconsideration of the
December 20, 2004 final rule from Cooper Standard Automotive (Fluid
Division), Degussa Corporation, George Apgar Consulting, MPC, Inc., and
Parker Hannifin Corporation (with separate comments from its Brass
Division and from its Hose Products Division).\1\ The petitions
addressed a wide range of FMVSS No. 106 subjects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In July 2005, Arkema, Inc., submitted a document styled as a
petition for reconsideration. NHTSA is treating the document as a
petition for rulemaking instead since its regulations (49 CFR
553.35(a)) provide that a document styled as a petition for
reconsideration of a final rule and received by the agency more than
45 days after the issuance of that final rule will be treated as a
petition for rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petition for Extension of the Effective Date
In a submission dated September 12, 2006, Legris petitioned NHTSA
for an extension of the December 20, 2004 final rule for an additional
year, to December 20, 2007. Legris stated that it learned of the
changes to FMVSS No. 106 ``within the past few months'' and stated that
it cannot make all necessary changes to its brake hose products before
the December 20, 2006 effective date. Legris asserted that without the
extension, its business and customer base will be jeopardized and it
will ``be faced with a considerable loss of both sales revenue and
profits, as well as losses from products already manufactured but which
could not be installed in vehicles until after December 20, 2006.''
Proposed Extension of Effective Date
The petitions for reconsideration asked NHTSA to amend many of the
December 20, 2004 final rule's provisions on brake hoses, brake hose
assemblies, and end fittings. Our response to those petitions could
affect current designs of certain types of brake hoses. The numerous
issues raised in the petitions are complex. In some cases, the
petitioners ask for changes that differ from those requested by other
petitioners. The agency is in the process of developing its response to
the petitions. A 12-month extension of the effective date, to December
20, 2007, would preserve the status quo until then. It would also give
Legris and similarly situated companies additional time to meet updated
FMVSS No. 106 requirements.
Because the December 20, 2006 effective date for the final rule is
fast approaching, NHTSA proposes delaying the effective date for one
year, to December 20, 2007. If made final, this NPRM would make no
substantive change to the standard, but would delay the effective date
of the December 20, 2006 final rule for another year while the agency
responds to the petitions for reconsideration of the rule. Thus, NHTSA
seeks public comment on extending the effective date of the final rule
until December 20, 2007. Because the agency seeks to provide as much
lead time as possible about its final determination whether the
effective date will be extended, we have provided a 15-day comment
period on the issue of the extension of the December 20, 2004 final
rule's effective date. If the agency does not receive any opposing
comments, it will issue a final rule adopting the extension shortly
after the comment closing date.
Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures
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
under E.O. 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review.'' Further, we have
determined that this action is not ``significant'' within the meaning
of the Department of Transportation's regulatory policies and
procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979).
This NPRM proposes to delay the effective date of a December 20,
2004 final rule amending FMVSS No. 106. If made final, there would be
no additional costs associated with the delay of the effective date.
Since the safety benefits from the December 20, 2004 final rule cannot
be quantified, and are likely minor, the impact of this extension is
also likely minor.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
NHTSA has considered the impacts of this rulemaking action under
the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). I certify that
the proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. If made final, this rule would
not impose any new requirements or costs on manufacturers, but instead
would only preserve the status quo for an additional year.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)
(PRA),
[[Page 66482]]
a person is not required to respond to a collection of information by a
Federal agency unless the collection displays a valid OMB control
number. Since it would only delay the effective date of a final rule,
if made final, this NPRM would not impose any new collection of
information requirements for which a 5 CFR part 1320 clearance must be
obtained.
D. National Environmental Policy Act
We have analyzed this proposed rule for the purposes of the
National Environmental Policy Act. We have determined that
implementation of this action would not have any significant impact on
the quality of the human environment.
E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
This proposed rule would not 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, as specified in Executive Order 13132.
F. Civil Justice Reform
This proposed rule would not have any retroactive effect. A
petition for reconsideration or other administrative proceedings are
not required before parties may file suit in court.
G. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
If made final, this proposed rule would not result in costs of $100
million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or to the private sector. Thus, this proposed rule is not
subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117, and 30166;
delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.50 and 501.8.
Issued on: November 7, 2006.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. E6-19198 Filed 11-14-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
