Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Electronic Stability Control Systems; Correction, 34409-34411 [E7-11965]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
34409
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 120 / Friday, June 22, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES
5-B; caneberry subgroup 13-A at 0.35
ppm; grape at 0.20 ppm; grape, raisin at
0.30 ppm; hop, dried cone at 0.10 ppm;
and vegetable, leafy except brassica,
group 4 at 4.0 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This final rule establishes a tolerance
under section 408(d) of FFDCA in
response to a petition submitted to the
Agency. The Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has exempted these types
of actions from review under Executive
Order 12866, entitled Regulatory
Planning and Review (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993). Because this rule has
been exempted from review under
Executive Order 12866, this rule is not
subject to Executive Order 13211,
Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May
22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045,
entitled Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997).
This final rule does not contain any
information collections subject to OMB
approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq., nor does it require any special
considerations under Executive Order
12898, entitled Federal Actions to
Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that
are established on the basis of a petition
under section 408(d) of FFDCA, such as
the tolerance in this final rule, do not
require the issuance of a proposed rule,
the requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.) do not apply.
This final rule directly regulates
growers, food processors, food handlers
and food retailers, not States or tribes,
nor does this action alter the
relationships or distribution of power
and responsibilities established by
Congress in the preemption provisions
of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. As such,
the Agency has determined that this
action will not have a substantial direct
effect on States or tribal governments,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States or tribal
governments, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian
tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined
that Executive Order 13132, entitled
Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999) and Executive Order 13175,
entitled Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:57 Jun 21, 2007
Jkt 211001
67249, November 6, 2000) do not apply
to this rule. In addition, This rule does
not impose any enforceable duty or
contain any unfunded mandate as
described under Title II of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
(Public Law 104–4).
This action does not involve any
technical standards that would require
Agency consideration of voluntary
consensus standards pursuant to 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 note).
VII. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report to each House of
the Congress and to the Comptroller
General of the United States. EPA will
submit a report containing this rule and
other required information to the U.S.
Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller
General of the United States prior to
publication of this final rule in the
Federal Register. This final rule is not
a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: June 6, 2007.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
I
PART 180—AMENDED
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. Section 180.565 is amended as
follows:
I i. In paragraph (a) by alphabetically
adding commodities to the table;
I ii. In paragraph (a) by revising the
entries for Barley, grain; Barley, hay and
Barley, straw in the table;
I iii. In paragraph (b) by removing the
entries for Artichoke, globe; Bean, dry ,
seed; Bean, succulent; and Hops in the
table.
The amendment read as follows:
I
§ 180.565 Thiamethoxam; tolerances for
residues.
(a) * * *
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Parts per
million
Commodity
Artichoke, globe ........................
Barley, grain .............................
Barley, hay ................................
Barley, straw .............................
*
*
*
*
Brassica, head and stem, subgroup 5-A ..............................
Brassica, leafy greens, subgroup 5-B ..............................
*
*
*
*
Caneberry subgroup 13-A ........
*
*
*
*
Grape ........................................
Grape, raisin .............................
*
*
*
*
Hop, dried cones ......................
*
*
*
*
Vegetable, leafy, except brassica, group 4 .........................
*
*
*
*
0.45
0.30
0.40
0.40
*
4.5
3.0
*
0.35
*
0.20
0.30
*
0.10
*
4.0
*
[FR Doc. E7–11794 Filed 6–21–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
49 CFR Part 571
[Docket No. NHTSA–2007–27662]
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standards; Electronic Stability Control
Systems; Correction
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Correcting amendments.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: In April 2007, the agency
published a final rule establishing a new
Federal motor vehicle safety standard
on electronic stability control (ESC)
systems for light vehicles. As part of
that rulemaking, the final rule notice
stated that NHTSA had decided to defer
the standard’s requirements related to
the ESC telltales and controls until the
end of the phase-in period (i.e., until
September 1, 2011). Accordingly, most
of the paragraphs containing ESC
telltale and control requirements were
prefaced with the phrase ‘‘as of
September 1, 2011.’’ However, that
phrase was inadvertently omitted from
two of the paragraphs setting forth ESC
telltale and control requirements. These
amendments correct this administrative
error by adding the phrase ‘‘as of
September 1, 2011’’ to those paragraphs.
DATES: This rule is effective June 22,
2007.
Mr.
Patrick Boyd, Office of Crash Avoidance
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
E:\FR\FM\22JNR1.SGM
22JNR1
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES
34410
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 120 / Friday, June 22, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
Standards, National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
Telephone: (202) 366–6346. Fax: (202)
366–7002.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Crash data
studies of existing vehicles with
electronic stability control demonstrate
that such systems reduce single-vehicle
crashes of passenger cars by 34 percent
and single-vehicle crashes of sport
utility vehicles (SUVs) by 59 percent,
with a much greater percentage
reduction of rollover crashes. NHTSA
estimates that ESC has the potential to
prevent 71 percent of the passenger car
rollovers and 84 percent of the SUV
rollovers that would otherwise occur in
single-vehicle crashes.
On April 6, 2007, NHTSA published
a final rule establishing a new Federal
motor vehicle safety standard (FMVSS)
No. 126, Electronic Stability Control
Systems, that set forth requirements for
ESC systems for new light vehicles (72
FR 17236).1 FMVSS No. 126 contains
performance requirements that include
both definitional and dynamic testing
elements, in order to ensure that ESC
systems can provide the level of yaw
(directional) stability (with
interventions to limit oversteer and
understeer) associated with the high
level of safety benefits observed in crash
data studies of ESC-equipped vehicles,
and it also contains requirements for a
standardized set of ESC telltales and
controls. Most of the ESC-equipped
vehicles currently being manufactured
can satisfy the new standard’s
requirements for yaw stability
performance (i.e., the requirements
which have the potential to prevent
crashes), but none use the exact set of
telltales and controls that the standard
requires.
In order to provide the U.S. fleet with
the substantial safety benefits of ESC as
soon as possible, NHTSA decided to
defer the standard’s requirements
related to the ESC telltales and controls
until the end of the phase-in period. In
addition, we note that the final rule also
accelerated the phase-in schedule
beyond the schedule proposed in the
September 2006 notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM).2 Specifically, the
final rule for FMVSS No. 126 requires
the following phase-in schedule for
ESC: 55 percent of a vehicle
manufacturer’s light vehicles
manufactured during the period from
September 1, 2008 to August 31, 2009
would be required to comply with the
standard; 75 percent of those
1 Docket
No. NHTSA–2007–27662–1.
FR 54712 (Sept. 18, 2006) (Docket No.
NHTSA–2006–25801–1).
2 71
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:57 Jun 21, 2007
Jkt 211001
manufactured during the period from
September 1, 2009 to August 31, 2010;
95 percent of those manufactured
during the period from September 1,
2010 to August 31, 2011, and all light
vehicles thereafter. (This compares to
the NPRM’s proposal for a 30/60/90/all
phase-in schedule over the same time
periods.) The final rule also noted that
some manufacturers will have to
depend upon carry-forward credits for
vehicles with complying ESC systems
manufactured after June 5, 2007 (the
effective date of the final rule) in order
to meet the accelerated phase-in
schedule.
Thus, given the agency’s intention to
encourage rapid installation of this lifesaving technology, we chose to defer the
requirements of the standard regarding
telltales and displays. Although the
agency perceived certain advantages
with standardizing the presentation of
ESC controls and displays, it was not
practicable to implement those changes
in keeping with the accelerated phasein schedule, which we expected to
produce tangible safety benefits.
Accordingly, we decided to preface
paragraphs S5.3.1, S5.3.2, S5.3.4, S5.4.2,
S5.5.2, S5.5.3, and S5.5.6 of Standard
No. 126 with the phrase ‘‘as of
September 1, 2011.’’ However, that
phrase was inadvertently omitted from
paragraphs S5.3.3 and S5.4.3, two other
provisions (discussed below) containing
ESC control and display requirements.
Paragraph S5.3.3 has the effect of
requiring separate telltales for ESC
malfunction warning and for the
warning that ESC has been turned off.
The standard also established separate
symbols for the two conditions.
However, this is not how most current
vehicles equipped with ESC are
manufactured. Typically, such vehicles
today utilize the same telltale to present
messages for both ESC malfunction and
ESC Off. The inadvertent omission of
‘‘as of September 1, 2011’’ from this
paragraph imperils the chances of most
manufacturers to comply with the
phase-in schedule and, concomitantly,
with the agency’s safety objectives
manifest in the ESC standard.
Paragraph S5.4.3 deals with controls
such as that which puts a four-wheeldrive vehicle into the off-road mode by
locking the differentials and transfer
case. When the differentials are locked,
ESC cannot function, and the
differential locking control
automatically disables ESC to avoid
damaging the vehicle. Paragraph S5.4.3
requires the ‘‘ESC-Off’’ telltale to be
illuminated in this circumstance.
However, vehicles in current production
do not have this function, and the carryforward and phase-in credits for four-
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
wheel-drive vehicles with off-road
modes are imperiled by the inadvertent
omission of the phrase ‘‘as of September
1, 2011’’ at the end of the section.
Accordingly, this notice corrects the
inadvertent omissions of the phrase ‘‘as
of September 1, 2011’’ in paragraphs
S5.3.3 and S5.4.3 resulting from
administrative error.
This amendment is a technical one,
and it does not impose or relax any
substantive requirements or burdens on
manufacturers. Therefore, NHTSA finds
for good cause that any notice and
opportunity for comment on these
correcting amendments are not
necessary.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571
Motor vehicle safety, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Tires.
I Accordingly, 49 CFR part 571 is
corrected by making the following
correcting amendments:
PART 571—FEDERAL MOTOR
VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS
1. The authority citation for part 571
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115,
30117, and 30166; delegation of authority at
49 CFR 1.50.
2. Paragraphs S5.3.3 and S5.4.3 of
§ 571.126 are revised to read as follows:
I
§ 571.126 Standard No. 126; Electronic
stability control systems.
*
*
*
*
*
S5.3 ESC Malfunction * * *
*
*
*
*
*
S5.3.3 As of September 1, 2011,
except as provided in paragraph S5.3.4,
the ESC malfunction telltale must
illuminate only when a malfunction(s)
exists and must remain continuously
illuminated under the conditions
specified in S5.3 for as long as the
malfunction(s) exists, whenever the
ignition locking system is in the ‘‘On’’
(‘‘Run’’) position; and
*
*
*
*
*
S5.4 ESC Off and Other System
Controls * * *
*
*
*
*
*
S5.4.3 A control for another system
that has the ancillary effect of placing
the ESC system in a mode in which it
no longer satisfies the performance
requirements of S5.2.1, S5.2.2, and
S5.2.3 need not be identified by the
‘‘ESC Off’’ identifiers in Table 1 of
Standard No. 101 (49 CFR 571.101), but
the ESC status must be identified by the
‘‘ESC Off’’ telltale in accordance with
S5.5, as of September 1, 2011.
*
*
*
*
*
E:\FR\FM\22JNR1.SGM
22JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 120 / Friday, June 22, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES
Issued: June 15, 2007.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. E7–11965 Filed 6–21–07; 8:45 am]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mark Grant, Fishery Management
Specialist, (978) 281–9145, fax (978)
281–9135.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
Regulations governing fishing activity in
the U.S./Canada Management Area are
found at § 648.85. These regulations
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
authorize vessels issued a valid limited
access NE multispecies permit and
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
fishing under a NE multispecies DAS to
Administration
fish in the Eastern U.S./Canada Area
under specific conditions. The final GB
50 CFR Part 648
cod TAC allocation for the 2007 fishing
[Docket No. 040112010–4114–02]
year was specified at 494 mt (May 7,
2007; 72 FR 25709). The regulations at
RIN 0648–XA92
§ 648.85(a)(3)(iv)(D) authorize the
Regional Administrator to close access
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
to the Eastern U.S./Canada Area for all
Conservation and Management Act
limited access NE multispecies DAS
Provisions; Fisheries of the
vessels to prevent over-harvesting the
Northeastern United States; Northeast
TAC allocations for the U.S./Canada
(NE) Multispecies Fishery; Closure of
Management Area.
the Eastern U.S./Canada Area
Based upon VMS daily catch reports
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries
and other available information, to date,
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
52 percent of the 2007 GB cod TAC of
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
494 mt has been harvested. Assuming
Commerce.
this catch rate continues, it is estimated
ACTION: Temporary rule; closure.
that 100 percent of the 2007 GB cod
TAC will be caught by July 12, 2007.
SUMMARY: NMFS announces a temporary
Recent observer data show discards of
closure of the Eastern U.S./Canada Area GB cod have exceeded kept GB cod,
to limited access NE multispecies dayswith a discard-to-kept ratio for GB cod
at-sea (DAS) vessels. Based upon Vessel of approximately 2:1. Additionally, due
Monitoring System (VMS) reports and
to the recent slow growth rate observed
other available information, the
for GB haddock, the catch of undersized
Administrator, Northeast Region, NMFS GB haddock has increased discards of
(Regional Administrator) has projected
this species, as well. Data indicate that
that 100 percent of the total allowable
haddock should be fully recruited to
catch (TAC) of Georges Bank (GB) cod
legal size by late summer 2007.
allocated to be harvested from the
Therefore, based on the available
Eastern U.S./Canada Area would be
information described above, to slow
harvested by July 12, 2007, if current
the catch rate of GB cod in the Eastern
catch rates continue. This action is
U.S./Canada Area and to ensure that the
being taken to prevent the 2007 TAC for TAC for GB cod will not be exceeded,
GB cod in the Eastern U.S./Canada Area as well as to minimize discards of
from being exceeded during the 2007
undersized GB haddock, the Eastern
fishing year, and to minimize the
U.S./Canada Area, including the August
impacts of discards of undersized
through December Eastern U.S./Canada
haddock, in accordance with the
Haddock SAP Pilot Program, should the
regulations implemented under
closure extend into the SAP season, is
Amendment 13 to the NE Multispecies
temporarily closed to all limited access
Fishery Management Plan (FMP) and
NE multispecies DAS vessels, effective
the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
0001 hr June 20, 2007, pursuant to
Conservation and Management Act.
§ 648.85(a)(3)(iv)(D). This area will be
This area will be reopened at a later date reopened at a later date during the 2007
during the 2007 fishing year to provide
fishing year to provide access to the
access to the shared U.S./Canada Stocks shared U.S./Canada cod, haddock, and
of cod, haddock, and yellowtail
yellowtail flounder stocks, pursuant to
flounder, if NMFS determines that the
the regulations at § 648.85(a)(3)(iv)(D), if
area can be reopened without exceeding NMFS determines that the area can be
the GB cod TAC for the 2007 fishing
reopened without exceeding the GB cod
year.
TAC for the 2007 fishing year.
Vessel owners that have made a
DATES: The temporary closure of the
correct VMS declaration indicating their
Eastern U.S./Canada Area to all limited
intention to fish in the Eastern U.S./
access NE multispecies DAS vessels is
effective 0001 hr June 20, 2007, through Canada Area, and crossed the
demarcation line prior to 0001 hr June
2400 hr local time, April 30, 2008.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:57 Jun 21, 2007
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
34411
20, 2007 may continue their trip and
fish in the Eastern U.S./Canada Area.
Vessels that are currently declared into
the Eastern U.S./Canada Area and have
already ‘‘flexed out’’ or ‘‘flexed west,’’
may not reenter the Eastern U.S./Canada
Area after 0001 hr June 20, 2007. Any
vessel that leaves the Eastern U.S./
Canada Area after 0001 hr June 20, 2007
is prohibited from reentering the Eastern
U.S./Canada Area for the remainder of
the fishing year, unless otherwise
notified.
Classification
This action is required by 50 CFR part
648 and is exempt from review under
Executive Order 12866.
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B) and
(d)(3), the Assistant Administrator finds
good cause to waive prior notice and
opportunity for public comment, as well
as the delayed effectiveness for this
action, because prior notice and
comment, and a delayed effectiveness,
would be impracticable and contrary to
the public interest. This action will
temporarily close the Eastern U.S./
Canada Area to NE multispecies DAS
vessels. This action is necessary to slow
the catch rate of GB cod in the Eastern
U.S./Canada Area and prevent the
Eastern U.S./Canada Area GB cod TAC
from being exceeded during the 2007
fishing year. Because of the rapidly
increasing GB cod harvest rate, the
small GB cod TAC, and the substantial
increase of fishing activity in the
Eastern U.S./Canada Area beginning
June 1, 2007, it is projected that 100
percent of the GB cod TAC will be
harvested by July 12, 2007. This
projection was not available until June
14, 2007.
This action is authorized by the
regulations at § 648.85(a)(3)(iv)(D) to
prevent over-harvesting, or to facilitate
achieving, the U.S./Canada Management
Area TACs. The time necessary to
provide for prior notice, opportunity for
public comment, and delayed
effectiveness for this action would
prevent the agency from taking
immediate action to slow the catch rate
of GB cod in the Eastern U.S./Canada
Area and prevent the Eastern U.S./
Canada Area GB cod TAC from being
exceeded prior to the end of the 2007
fishing year. Such a delay would allow
the observed high catch rate of GB cod
to continue and would result in
excessive discards of GB cod. Similarly,
the recent high rates of GB haddock
discard would likely also continue,
resulting in a high level of GB haddock
mortality with neither corresponding
landings, nor value, accruing to
participating vessels. To allow vessels to
continue directed fishing effort on GB
E:\FR\FM\22JNR1.SGM
22JNR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 120 (Friday, June 22, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 34409-34411]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-11965]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 571
[Docket No. NHTSA-2007-27662]
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Electronic Stability
Control Systems; Correction
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Correcting amendments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In April 2007, the agency published a final rule establishing
a new Federal motor vehicle safety standard on electronic stability
control (ESC) systems for light vehicles. As part of that rulemaking,
the final rule notice stated that NHTSA had decided to defer the
standard's requirements related to the ESC telltales and controls until
the end of the phase-in period (i.e., until September 1, 2011).
Accordingly, most of the paragraphs containing ESC telltale and control
requirements were prefaced with the phrase ``as of September 1, 2011.''
However, that phrase was inadvertently omitted from two of the
paragraphs setting forth ESC telltale and control requirements. These
amendments correct this administrative error by adding the phrase ``as
of September 1, 2011'' to those paragraphs.
DATES: This rule is effective June 22, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Patrick Boyd, Office of Crash
Avoidance
[[Page 34410]]
Standards, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. Telephone: (202) 366-6346.
Fax: (202) 366-7002.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Crash data studies of existing vehicles with
electronic stability control demonstrate that such systems reduce
single-vehicle crashes of passenger cars by 34 percent and single-
vehicle crashes of sport utility vehicles (SUVs) by 59 percent, with a
much greater percentage reduction of rollover crashes. NHTSA estimates
that ESC has the potential to prevent 71 percent of the passenger car
rollovers and 84 percent of the SUV rollovers that would otherwise
occur in single-vehicle crashes.
On April 6, 2007, NHTSA published a final rule establishing a new
Federal motor vehicle safety standard (FMVSS) No. 126, Electronic
Stability Control Systems, that set forth requirements for ESC systems
for new light vehicles (72 FR 17236).\1\ FMVSS No. 126 contains
performance requirements that include both definitional and dynamic
testing elements, in order to ensure that ESC systems can provide the
level of yaw (directional) stability (with interventions to limit
oversteer and understeer) associated with the high level of safety
benefits observed in crash data studies of ESC-equipped vehicles, and
it also contains requirements for a standardized set of ESC telltales
and controls. Most of the ESC-equipped vehicles currently being
manufactured can satisfy the new standard's requirements for yaw
stability performance (i.e., the requirements which have the potential
to prevent crashes), but none use the exact set of telltales and
controls that the standard requires.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Docket No. NHTSA-2007-27662-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In order to provide the U.S. fleet with the substantial safety
benefits of ESC as soon as possible, NHTSA decided to defer the
standard's requirements related to the ESC telltales and controls until
the end of the phase-in period. In addition, we note that the final
rule also accelerated the phase-in schedule beyond the schedule
proposed in the September 2006 notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).\2\
Specifically, the final rule for FMVSS No. 126 requires the following
phase-in schedule for ESC: 55 percent of a vehicle manufacturer's light
vehicles manufactured during the period from September 1, 2008 to
August 31, 2009 would be required to comply with the standard; 75
percent of those manufactured during the period from September 1, 2009
to August 31, 2010; 95 percent of those manufactured during the period
from September 1, 2010 to August 31, 2011, and all light vehicles
thereafter. (This compares to the NPRM's proposal for a 30/60/90/all
phase-in schedule over the same time periods.) The final rule also
noted that some manufacturers will have to depend upon carry-forward
credits for vehicles with complying ESC systems manufactured after June
5, 2007 (the effective date of the final rule) in order to meet the
accelerated phase-in schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 71 FR 54712 (Sept. 18, 2006) (Docket No. NHTSA-2006-25801-
1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thus, given the agency's intention to encourage rapid installation
of this life-saving technology, we chose to defer the requirements of
the standard regarding telltales and displays. Although the agency
perceived certain advantages with standardizing the presentation of ESC
controls and displays, it was not practicable to implement those
changes in keeping with the accelerated phase-in schedule, which we
expected to produce tangible safety benefits. Accordingly, we decided
to preface paragraphs S5.3.1, S5.3.2, S5.3.4, S5.4.2, S5.5.2, S5.5.3,
and S5.5.6 of Standard No. 126 with the phrase ``as of September 1,
2011.'' However, that phrase was inadvertently omitted from paragraphs
S5.3.3 and S5.4.3, two other provisions (discussed below) containing
ESC control and display requirements.
Paragraph S5.3.3 has the effect of requiring separate telltales for
ESC malfunction warning and for the warning that ESC has been turned
off. The standard also established separate symbols for the two
conditions. However, this is not how most current vehicles equipped
with ESC are manufactured. Typically, such vehicles today utilize the
same telltale to present messages for both ESC malfunction and ESC Off.
The inadvertent omission of ``as of September 1, 2011'' from this
paragraph imperils the chances of most manufacturers to comply with the
phase-in schedule and, concomitantly, with the agency's safety
objectives manifest in the ESC standard.
Paragraph S5.4.3 deals with controls such as that which puts a
four-wheel-drive vehicle into the off-road mode by locking the
differentials and transfer case. When the differentials are locked, ESC
cannot function, and the differential locking control automatically
disables ESC to avoid damaging the vehicle. Paragraph S5.4.3 requires
the ``ESC-Off'' telltale to be illuminated in this circumstance.
However, vehicles in current production do not have this function, and
the carry-forward and phase-in credits for four-wheel-drive vehicles
with off-road modes are imperiled by the inadvertent omission of the
phrase ``as of September 1, 2011'' at the end of the section.
Accordingly, this notice corrects the inadvertent omissions of the
phrase ``as of September 1, 2011'' in paragraphs S5.3.3 and S5.4.3
resulting from administrative error.
This amendment is a technical one, and it does not impose or relax
any substantive requirements or burdens on manufacturers. Therefore,
NHTSA finds for good cause that any notice and opportunity for comment
on these correcting amendments are not necessary.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571
Motor vehicle safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Tires.
0
Accordingly, 49 CFR part 571 is corrected by making the following
correcting amendments:
PART 571--FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS
0
1. The authority citation for part 571 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117, and 30166;
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.
0
2. Paragraphs S5.3.3 and S5.4.3 of Sec. 571.126 are revised to read as
follows:
Sec. 571.126 Standard No. 126; Electronic stability control systems.
* * * * *
S5.3 ESC Malfunction * * *
* * * * *
S5.3.3 As of September 1, 2011, except as provided in paragraph
S5.3.4, the ESC malfunction telltale must illuminate only when a
malfunction(s) exists and must remain continuously illuminated under
the conditions specified in S5.3 for as long as the malfunction(s)
exists, whenever the ignition locking system is in the ``On'' (``Run'')
position; and
* * * * *
S5.4 ESC Off and Other System Controls * * *
* * * * *
S5.4.3 A control for another system that has the ancillary effect
of placing the ESC system in a mode in which it no longer satisfies the
performance requirements of S5.2.1, S5.2.2, and S5.2.3 need not be
identified by the ``ESC Off'' identifiers in Table 1 of Standard No.
101 (49 CFR 571.101), but the ESC status must be identified by the
``ESC Off'' telltale in accordance with S5.5, as of September 1, 2011.
* * * * *
[[Page 34411]]
Issued: June 15, 2007.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. E7-11965 Filed 6-21-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
