Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Controls, Telltales and Indicators, 56713-56717 [E7-19365]

Agencies

• National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
• DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 192 (Thursday, October 4, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 56713-56717]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-19365]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. NHTSA-2007-29272]
RIN 2127-AK04


Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Controls, Telltales and 
Indicators

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: In an August 2005 final rule, we updated our standard 
regulating motor vehicle controls, telltales and indicators. The 
standard specifies requirements for the location, identification, and 
illumination of these items.

[[Page 56714]]

    In May 2006, we published a response to four petitions for 
reconsideration, including one asking us to reconsider a requirement 
for color contrast between identifiers and their backgrounds. We denied 
this petition for reconsideration.
    We received another petition for reconsideration from the Alliance 
of Automobile Manufacturers (the Alliance) of the color contrast 
requirement, specifically for the horn control identifier. In this 
document, we grant the Alliance's petition in part. We propose to amend 
the standard to provide that an identifier is not required if the horn 
control is placed in the middle of the steering wheel. If the horn 
control is placed elsewhere in the motor vehicle, the control would be 
required to be identified by the specified horn symbol in a color that 
stands out clearly against the background.

DATES: You should submit your comments early enough to ensure that 
Docket Management receives them not later than December 3, 2007.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments to the docket number identified in 
the heading of this document by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting 
comments.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
     Mail: Docket Operations, M-30, U.S. Department of 
Transportation, West Building, Ground Floor, Rm. W12-140, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Docket Operations, M-30, West 
Building, Ground Floor, Rm. W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through 
Friday, except Federal Holidays.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and 
docket number or Regulatory Identification Number (RIN) for this 
rulemaking. For detailed instructions on submitting comments and 
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the Public 
Comments heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this 
document. Note that all comments received will be posted without change 
to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information 
provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading under Regulatory Notices.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or 
comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov at any time or to 
West Building, Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through 
Friday, except Federal Holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For non-legal issues you may call Ms. 
Gayle Dalrymple, Office of Crash Avoidance 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, 1200 New Jersey 
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    NHTSA issued 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, ``Controls, Telltales and Indicators with 
Illumination or Color Requirements,'' and Table 2, ``Identifiers for 
Controls, Telltales and Indicators with No Color or Illumination 
Requirements,'' indicate which controls and displays are subject to the 
identification requirements, and how they are to be identified, 
colored, and illuminated.

A. August 2005 Final Rule

    In a final rule published in the Federal Register (70 FR 48295) on 
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 applicable FMVSS.
    The final rule specified an effective date of February 13, 2006 for 
requirements applicable to passenger cars, multipurpose passenger 
vehicles, trucks and buses under 4,536 kg GVWR (10,000 pounds).\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The effective date was subsequently extended to September 1, 
2006 (71 FR 3786, January 24, 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. May 2006 Final Rule; Response to Petitions for Reconsideration

    NHTSA received petitions for reconsideration of the August 17, 2005 
final rule, from the Truck Manufacturers Association (TMA), the 
Association of International Automobile Manufacturers (AIAM) and the 
Alliance. In the August 17, 2005 final rule, the requirement that the 
identifier for each telltale must be in a color that stands out clearly 
against the background was extended to identifiers for controls and 
indicators (see S5.4.3). The Alliance asked for reconsideration of this 
requirement, stating that not all identifiers are in a color that 
stands out clearly against the background. The Alliance further stated 
that it is not needed, citing as an example the horn identifier.
    Most vehicle models use the horn symbol as the identifier, which is 
molded into the air bag cover, without a color ``that stands out 
clearly against the background'' filled in. The Alliance commented 
that: ``The symbol is the same color as the background, but it can 
still be recognized because the embossment stands out against the 
background.'' The Alliance petitioned for the regulatory text at S5.4.3 
to be changed to: ``The identification required by Table 1 or Table 2 
for a telltale, control or indicator shall contrast with the 
background.''
    In the May 15, 2006 final rule, response to petitions for 
reconsideration (71 FR 27964), we noted that over the years, the agency 
had received numerous complaints regarding the inability to locate the 
horn control. NHTSA's Office of Defects Investigation's ARTEMIS 
database has recorded 120 complaints in the past ten years from 
consumers reporting trouble locating the horn control. Of these 120 
complaints, consumers reported 12 crashes, nine near misses, and an 
allegation of a fatality. In the response, NHTSA explained that filling 
in the horn symbol with a color ``that stands out clearly against the 
background'' would make the horn control more visible and would help 
drivers to find the control more readily. For these

[[Page 56715]]

reasons, we denied this part of the Alliance's petition.
    To minimize costs on industry resulting from this requirement, 
NHTSA delayed the compliance date to meet S5.4.3 for five years, to 
September 1, 2011 to ``allow manufacturers to implement the necessary 
changes on most products during the planned product changes in normal 
product development cycles.''

III. Petition for Reconsideration of the Color Contrast Requirement

    In a submission dated June 29, 2006, the Alliance petitioned for a 
reconsideration of the color contrast requirement for the horn symbol. 
This was the only issue raised in the petition. Again, the Alliance 
petitioned for the regulatory text at S5.4.3 to be changed to: ``The 
identification required by Table 1 or Table 2 for a telltale, control 
or indicator shall contrast with the background.'' In support of its 
petition, the Alliance stated that:
     NHTSA denied the Alliance's previous petition based on a 
previously undisclosed analysis of complaints;
     ``[I]t is unclear and cannot be evaluated whether the 
complaints referred to by NHTSA were related to actual horn symbol 
identification,''
     The complaint information should be submitted to the DOT 
Docket;
     ``[S]ignificant cost and investment will still be required 
across the industry,'' to accomplish color contrast of the horn symbol 
on the background of the steering wheel, despite the fact that the 
Alliance agrees that the lead time afforded by the May 2006 final rule 
is adequate ``for compliance with this section in order to minimize the 
associated financial impact * * *'';
     A ``significant concern'' is the ``compatibility of 
materials that may be used to assure long term symbol identification 
durability and contrast * * *'' and that this new combination of 
materials may ``adversely affect airbag cover performance, requiring 
further engineering development. Environmental and manufacturing issues 
related to providing horn symbol contrast cannot be assessed until the 
materials and processes are defined'' and;
     The UN working group considering a GTR \2\ on controls and 
displays is the appropriate forum to understand and discuss horn 
identification problems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The United States participates in the United Nations/
Economic Commission for Europe World Forum for Harmonization of 
Vehicle Regulations (also known as Working Party 29 or WP.29) under 
a 1990 agreement known as the 1998 Global Agreement. The 1998 Global 
Agreement provides for the establishment of global technical 
regulations (GTRs) regarding, among other things, the safety of 
motorized wheeled vehicles, equipment and parts. The Agreement 
contains procedures for establishing GTRs by either harmonizing 
existing regulations or developing new ones.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Furthermore, on October 17, 2006, the Alliance presented a data 
analysis to NHSTA staff of complaints regarding horn control 
identification on various member companies' vehicles. (The presentation 
has been placed in The DOT Docket at NHTSA-2006-23651.) The analysis 
revealed that as manufacturers have adopted membrane switches in the 
center of the steering wheel to activate the horn, consumer complaints 
about horn identification have decreased substantially.

IV. Grant of Petition for Reconsideration and Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking

    NHTSA has been persuaded by the Alliance's petition and 
accompanying data, and grants its petition for reconsideration 
regarding S5.4.3. We believe the Alliance's analysis provided on 
October 17, 2006 has merit. Driver confusion as to the location of the 
horn control has decreased as the horn control is returned where 
drivers intuitively expect to find it to the center of the steering 
wheel hub on more vehicles. If the horn control is located where most 
drivers expect it, the agency believes there is little safety benefit 
from the presence of the horn identifier. In fact, requiring the 
identifier on or adjacent to the control, may contribute to driver 
confusion as manufacturers opt to place the identifier adjacent to the 
control, rather than too close to the large, multi-colored, company 
logo displayed on many vehicles at the center of the wheel.
    At present, S5. Requirements of FMVSS No. 101 states: ``Each 
passenger car, multipurpose passenger vehicle, truck and bus that is 
fitted with a control, a telltale or an indicator listed in Table 1 or 
Table 2 must meet the requirements of this standard for the location, 
identification, color, and illumination of the control, telltale, or 
indicator.'' The horn control indicator is specified in Table 2. So 
that horn controls that are in the middle of the steering wheel would 
not have to meet S5., in this NPRM, we propose to amend S5.4.3 of FMVSS 
No. 101 to read:

    Each identifier used for the identification of a telltale, 
control or indicator must be in a color that stands out clearly 
against the background. However, no identifier is required for a 
horn control activated by the driver pressing on the center of the 
face plane of the steering wheel. For vehicles with a GVWR of under 
4,536 kg (10,000 pounds), the compliance date for this provision is 
September 1, 2011.

    The word ``symbol'' is proposed to be changed to ``identifier'' to 
more accurately include words and abbreviations as identifiers which 
are required to contrast with their backgrounds, as was done in the 
previous final rules to other sections of the standard. This was 
pointed out by the Alliance in its current petition.
    We are not proposing the Alliance's suggested language (``The 
identification required by Table 1 or Table 2 for a telltale, control 
or indicator shall contrast with the background.'') because we believe 
it is too broad. It would allow non-contrasting identifiers for 
telltales, indicators and controls whenever they appear in the vehicle 
(such as the instrument panel).
    At present, S5.2.1 states in part: ``* * * No identification is 
required for any horn (i.e. audible warning signal) that is activated 
by a lanyard or for a turn signal * * *'' To make S5.2.1 consistent 
with the changes to S5.4.3, in this NPRM, we are proposing to revise 
the fourth sentence in S5.2.1 to state in part: ``* * * No 
identification is required for any horn (i.e., audible warning signal) 
that is activated by a lanyard or by the driver pressing on the center 
of the face plane of the steering wheel * * *''.

V. Proposed Leadtime

    We propose for vehicles under 10,000 pounds that the compliance 
date for S5.4.3 would continue to be September 1, 2011. The compliance 
date for the extension of the standard's control, indicator, and 
telltale requirements to vehicles with at GVWR of 4, 536 kg (10,000 
pounds) or greater would continue to be September 1, 2013. If this NPRM 
is made final, optional early compliance would be permitted as of the 
date the final rule is published.

VI. Public Comments

How Do I Prepare and Submit Comments?

    Your comments must be written in English. To ensure that your 
comments are correctly filed in the Docket, please include the docket 
number of this document in your comments.
    Please submit two copies of your comments, including any 
attachments, to Docket Management at the address given above under 
ADDRESSES.
    Comments may also be submitted to the docket electronically by 
logging onto the Dockets Management System Web site at https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting 
comments.

[[Page 56716]]

How Can I Be Sure That My Comments Were Received?

    If you wish Docket Management to notify you upon its receipt of 
your comments, enclose a self-addressed, stamped postcard in the 
envelope containing your comments. Upon receiving your comments, Docket 
Management will return the postcard by mail. Each electronic filer will 
receive electronic confirmation that his or her submission has been 
received.

How Do I Submit Confidential Business Information?

    If you wish to submit any information under a claim of 
confidentiality, you should submit three copies of your complete 
submission, including the information you claim to be confidential 
business information, to the Chief Counsel, NHTSA, at the address given 
above under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. In addition, you should 
submit two copies, from which you have deleted the claimed confidential 
business information, to Docket Management at the address given above 
under ADDRESSES. When you send a comment containing information claimed 
to be confidential business information, you should include a cover 
letter delineating that information, as specified in our confidential 
business information regulation. (See 49 CFR Part 512).

Will the Agency Consider Late Comments?

    We will consider all comments that Docket Management receives 
before the close of business on the comment closing date indicated 
above under DATES. To the extent possible, we will also consider 
comments that Docket Management receives after that date. If Docket 
Management receives a comment too late for us to consider it in 
developing a rule (assuming that one is issued), we will consider that 
comment as an informal suggestion for future rulemaking action.

How Can I Read Comments Submitted By Other People?

    You may read the comments received by Docket Management at the 
address given above under ADDRESSES. The hours of the Docket are 
indicated above in the same location.
    You may also review filed public comments on the Internet. To read 
the comments on the Internet, go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow 
the online instructions for accessing the dockets.
    Please note that even after the comment closing date, we will 
continue to file relevant information in the Docket as it becomes 
available. Furthermore, some people may submit late comments. 
Accordingly, we recommend that you periodically check the Docket for 
new material.

VII. 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 tentatively concludes that if made 
final, this proposed rule will not have any quantifiable cost effect on 
motor vehicle manufacturers. The proposed rule would not impose any new 
requirements but would instead relieve a restriction. In this document, 
NHTSA proposes to exclude horn controls activated by the driver 
pressing on the center of the face plane of the steering wheel from the 
standard's requirement that an identifier be provided. We believe that 
if this proposal is made final, there will be no measurable effect on 
safety. As discussed above, driver confusion as to the location of the 
horn control decreases as the horn control returns to the center of the 
steering wheel hub where drivers intuitively expect to find it. If the 
horn control is located where drivers expect it, there is little safety 
benefit from the presence of the horn identifier.
    Because the economic effects of this proposal 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 Sec.  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.
    I have considered the effects of this rulemaking action under the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) and certify that this 
proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. The proposed rule would not 
impose any new requirements but would instead relieve a restriction.
    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 proposed 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 will not have any significant impact on 
the quality of the human environment.

[[Page 56717]]

D. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    NHTSA has analyzed this proposed rule in accordance with the 
principles and criteria set forth in Executive Order 13132, Federalism 
and has determined that it does not have sufficient Federalism 
implications to warrant consultation with State and local officials or 
the preparation of a Federalism summary impact statement. If made 
final, this proposed rule will not have any substantial impact on the 
States, or on the current Federal-State relationship, or on the current 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various local 
officials.

E. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)

    This proposal would not have any retroactive effect. Under 49 
U.S.C. 21403, 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. 21461 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 proposed 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 
proposed rule.

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 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.
    If made final, this proposed 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. 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.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571

    Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Motor vehicles, Rubber and rubber 
products, and Tires.
    In consideration of the foregoing, it is proposed that 49 CFR part 
571 be amended as set forth below:

PART 571--FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS

    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.

    2. Amend Sec.  571.101 by revising the last sentence in S5.2.1, and 
by revising S5.4.3, to read as follows:


Sec.  571.101  Standard No. 101, Controls, telltales, and indicators.

* * * * *
    S5.2.1 * * * No identification is required for any horn (i.e., 
audible warning signal) that is activated by a lanyard or by the driver 
pressing on the center of the face plane of the steering wheel, or for 
a turn signal control that is operated in a plane essentially parallel 
to the face plane of the steering wheel in its normal driving position 
and which is located on the left side of the steering column so that it 
is the control on that side of the column nearest to the steering wheel 
face plane.
* * * * *
    S5.4.3 Each identifier used for the identification of a telltale, 
control or indicator must be in a color that stands out clearly against 
the background. However, no identifier is required for a horn control 
activated by the driver pressing on the center of the face plane of the 
steering wheel. For vehicles with a GVWR of under 4,536 kg (10,000 
pounds), the compliance date for this provision is September 1, 2011.
* * * * *

    Issued on: September 21, 2007.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
 [FR Doc. E7-19365 Filed 10-3-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P