Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Controls, Telltales and Indicators, 40760-40764 [E9-19396]
Download as PDF
40760
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 155 / Thursday, August 13, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
Parts per
million
Commodity
*
*
*
*
Nut, tree, group 14 .......................
*
*
*
*
Pineapple ......................................
Pineapple, processed residue ......
Pistachio .......................................
Pomegranate ................................
*
*
*
*
Spice, subgroup 19B, except
black pepper .............................
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.10
*
0.04
0.15
0.10
0.30
*
1.7
*
*
[FR Doc. E9–19195 Filed 8–12–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
49 CFR Part 571
[Docket No. NHTSA–2009–0145]
RIN 2127–AK04
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standards; Controls, Telltales and
Indicators
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
pwalker on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES
I. Background
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. 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.
In response to 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 final rule, we
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: Effective Date: The effective date
for this final rule is February 9, 2010.
The compliance date for vehicles under
SUMMARY:
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:28 Aug 12, 2009
Jkt 217001
10,000 pounds GVWR for S5.4.3
continues to be September 1, 2011.
Compliance date for the extension of
the standard’s control, indicator, and
telltale requirements to vehicles at
10,000 pounds GVWR or greater over
continues to be September 1, 2013.
Optional early compliance is
permitted as of the date today’s final
rule is published.
Petitions for reconsideration: Petitions
for reconsideration of today’s final rule
must be received not later than
September 28, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration
of the final rule must refer to the docket
number set forth above and be
submitted to the Administrator,
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
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:
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,
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
and illuminated. For the horn control,
Table 2 specifies the horn symbol in
Column 2, and the word ‘‘Horn’’ in
Column 3.
II. 2005 and 2006 Final Rules
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 multitask 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
NHTSA received petitions for
reconsideration of the August 17, 2005
final rule, including one from 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
1 The effective date was subsequently extended to
September 1, 2006 (71 FR 3786, January 24, 2006).
E:\FR\FM\13AUR1.SGM
13AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 155 / Thursday, August 13, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
pwalker on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES
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, 9 near misses, and an allegation
of a fatality. In the +response, NHTSA
explained that filling in the horn symbol
with a color that ‘‘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 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
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:28 Aug 12, 2009
Jkt 217001
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.
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
In a Federal Register document of
October 4, 2007 (72 FR 56713), NHTSA
stated that it has been persuaded by the
Alliance’s petition and accompanying
data, and granted its petition for
reconsideration regarding S5.4.3.
NHTSA stated its belief that 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, NHTSA stated its
belief that 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.
In the NPRM, NHTSA stated that 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,
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
40761
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 the
NPRM, we proposed 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’’ was 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.
NHTSA did not propose to amend
FMVSS No. 101 with 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 stated our belief that the suggested
language 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
the October 2007 NPRM, we proposed
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. Comments to the October 2007
NPRM and NHTSA Discussion of the
Comments
In response to the NPRM, we received
comments from the Alliance, the
Association of International Automobile
Manufacturers, Inc. (AIAM) and from
Mr. Michael Tebbi, a private individual.
Mr. Tebbi stated that he agreed with
the agency that the center of the steering
wheel is where he expects the horn to
be, and ‘‘therefore no icon is needed.’’
However, he expressed concern about
the possibility that horns placed in the
centers of steering wheels could lead to
injuries since ‘‘a consumer will be
E:\FR\FM\13AUR1.SGM
13AUR1
pwalker on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES
40762
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 155 / Thursday, August 13, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
honking the car’s horn as he collides
with another vehicle. If the air bag
deploys while the driver’s hand is
pressing against the center of the
steering wheel, I believe there may be a
possibility of injury to the driver’s arm
or shoulder.’’ This rulemaking addresses
requirements for identification of the
horn control. Since the horn control is
optional, we do not address where in a
motor vehicle the horn control must be
placed. However, based on normal body
kinematics during a crash, we believe
that it is very unlikely that in crashes
with deceleration great enough to cause
air bag deployment, that the driver’s
hand will still be on the air bag cover
at the time of the deployment. Since the
introduction of driver air bags, the usual
location for the horn control has been
under the air bag cover. No problems
regarding horn use such as that
described by Mr. Tebbi have come to
NHTSA’s attention.
The AIAM supported the proposed
amendment to FMVSS No. 101. AIAM
did not suggest changes to the proposed
regulatory text. However, AIAM
identified two related issues that it
asked us to clarify in the preamble to
the final rule. The first was, if a
manufacturer provides a horn control
activated by pressing on the center of
the steering wheel 3 and provides a
second horn control ‘‘off-center, near
the edge of the hub, to identify the
supplemental horn control that operates
by tilting the plane of the hub’’ whether
the second control must meet the S5.4.3
requirement for color contrast. As a
rationale for arguing that no
identification should be required, AIAM
stated that ‘‘[h]istorically, NHTSA has
taken the position that voluntarily
installed items (i.e., items not mandated
by an FMVSS) are not subject to
regulation by NHTSA so long as such
items do not interfere with the operation
of regulated systems or equipment.’’ In
support of its position, AIAM cited a
January 28, 1992 letter to Honda and
what it described as an ‘‘undated’’ letter
to Mazda regarding redundant heating/
ventilator controls. The date of the letter
to Mazda is July 5, 1984.
NHTSA does not agree that the two
cited interpretations are applicable to
the rulemaking at issue. The 1992 letter
to Honda interprets FMVSS No. 123,
Motorcycle controls and displays, not
FMVSS No. 101. Further, the letter
addressed the nature of operation of a
brake system, not the identification
required for a control. The July 5, 1984
letter to Mazda, addresses a ‘‘secondary,
redundant control placed in the rear
3 A location where it was proposed in the NPRM,
that no horn identifier would be required.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:28 Aug 12, 2009
Jkt 217001
seat area facilitating operation of the
heating/ventilation and audio system
functions by rear seat passengers.’’ In
contrast, in the rulemaking at issue, all
horn controls provided would be
operable by the driver, not by ‘‘rear seat
passengers.’’ Thus, the Mazda letter
does not apply to the rulemaking at
issue.
While in some situations NHTSA has
concluded that certain requirements do
not apply to items that are voluntarily
provided or redundant, this is not a
general principle. In considering such
an issue, the agency needs to consider
the specific situation and purpose of a
particular requirement.
AIAM argued that the second horn
control would not be subject to FMVSS
No. 101 because the second control is
‘‘voluntarily installed.’’ All horn
controls are ‘‘voluntarily installed,’’
including those placed in the center of
the face plane of the steering wheel hub.
Moreover, while the second horn
control would be redundant,
unidentified controls in unexpected
places, or controls identified in
unfamiliar ways, may cause confusion
to the driver. As a result of today’s final
rule, identification is not required for
those horn controls that are placed in
the center of the face plane of the
steering wheel hub. All other horn
controls must meet all FMVSS No. 101
requirements that apply to horns.
AIAM also argued that ‘‘since no
identifier is required for a horn control
that is operated at the center of the
steering wheel, any identifier that is
voluntarily affixed there’’ would not
have to meet S5.2 of FMVSS No. 101.
NHTSA does not agree with this
position. 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.
Permitting manufacturer-chosen
identifications of a control for which
identification is specified in FMVSS No.
101 would not be consistent with the
purpose of FMVSS No. 101. Such
alternative horn designations (with each
manufacturer possibly having a different
designation) would result in drivers
spending time trying to understand the
meaning of the manufacturer-chosen
identification and would divert the
‘‘driver’s attention from the driving
task.’’ Such a result would not meet the
need for safety. Therefore, in this final
rule, a horn control placed in the center
of the face plane of the steering wheel
need not be identified. However, if
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
identification is voluntarily provided,
the horn symbol identification in Table
2 or the word ‘‘horn’’ must be used.
We would agree, however, that a
manufacturer could voluntarily use a
horn symbol that is embossed, (i.e.,
without a contrasting color) to identify
a horn control placed in the center of
the face plane of the steering wheel.
Since no identification would be
required in this situation, and since the
embossed horn symbol would not cause
confusion, its use would be permissible.
The Alliance agreed with the proposal
but suggested changes in the regulatory
text as ‘‘technical corrections’’ to
‘‘clarify’’ the agency’s intent. The
Alliance asked for ‘‘clarification on the
meaning of the term ‘center of the face
plane of the steering wheel’ which
could be narrowly interpreted and
create potential questions of
compliance.’’ The Alliance therefore
suggested that S5.2.1 be changed to
read:
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 area of the steering
wheel hub * * *
NHTSA agrees that use of the word
‘‘hub’’ provides clarification as to where
activation of the horn would occur.
However, we believe the term ‘‘center’’
is clear, and decline to adopt ‘‘center
area.’’ There will be no compliance
difficulty: The center of the hub is
located, the driver presses, and if the
horn sounds, the condition is met, and
no identification is necessary.
The second issue raised by the
Alliance is ‘‘the applicability of the
proposed language when manufacturers
voluntarily mark horn controls that are
activated by pressing on the center area
of the steering wheel hub * * * [I]f a
manufacturer chooses to identify a horn
control activated by pressing on the
center area of the steering wheel hub,
the proposed text could be interpreted
to require the symbol to be a contrasting
color.’’ The Alliance offered the
following change to S5.4.3 to ‘‘clarify
this point.’’
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. This
requirement does not apply to the
identification of a horn control activated by
the driver pressing on the center area of the
steering wheel hub.
As earlier explained, we do not agree
with changing ‘‘center’’ to ‘‘center area.’’
As to horn controls placed in the center
of the face plane of the steering wheel,
we agree, also for reasons discussed
earlier, that a manufacturer could use a
E:\FR\FM\13AUR1.SGM
13AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 155 / Thursday, August 13, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
horn symbol (or the word horn) that is
embossed in this situation, i.e., without
a contrasting color.
VI. Leadtime
For vehicles under 10,000 pounds, the
compliance date for S5.4.3 continues 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
continues to be September 1, 2013.
Optional early compliance is permitted
as of the date the final rule is published.
VII. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
pwalker on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES
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. The rule
will not impose any new requirements
but instead relieves a restriction. In this
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:28 Aug 12, 2009
Jkt 217001
final rule, NHTSA excludes 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. This final rule will have 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 no apparent
safety benefit from the presence of the
horn identifier. As a result of this final
rule, vehicle manufacturers are spared
the costs of embossing a horn symbol in
the center of the steering wheel hub and
coloring in the symbol.
Because the economic effects of this
final rule are 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.
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 rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The rule does not impose any new
requirements but relieves 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 final rule
will not have a significant economic
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
40763
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.
D. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
NHTSA has examined today’s final
rule pursuant to Executive Order 13132
(64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) and
concluded that no additional
consultation with States, local
governments or their representatives is
mandated beyond the rulemaking
process. The agency has concluded that
the rule does not have federalism
implications, because the rule does 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.’’
Further, no consultation is needed to
discuss the issue of preemption in
connection with today’s rule. The issue
of preemption can arise in connection
with NHTSA rules in at least two ways.
First, the National Traffic and Motor
Vehicle Safety Act contains an express
preemptive provision: ‘‘When a motor
vehicle safety standard is in effect under
this chapter, a State or a political
subdivision of a State may prescribe or
continue in effect a standard applicable
to the same aspect of performance of a
motor vehicle or motor vehicle
equipment only if the standard is
identical to the standard prescribed
under this chapter.’’ 49 U.S.C.
30103(b)(1). It is this statutory command
that unavoidably preempts State
legislative and administrative law, not
today’s rulemaking, so consultation
would be unnecessary.
Second, the Supreme Court has
recognized the possibility of implied
preemption: In some instances, State
requirements imposed on motor vehicle
manufacturers, including sanctions
imposed by State tort law, can stand as
an obstacle to the accomplishment and
execution of a NHTSA safety standard.
When such a conflict is discerned, the
Supremacy Clause of the Constitution
makes the State requirements
unenforceable. See Geier v. American
Honda Motor Co., 529 U.S. 861 (2000).
However, NHTSA has considered the
nature and purpose of today’s rule and
does not currently foresee any potential
State requirements that might conflict
E:\FR\FM\13AUR1.SGM
13AUR1
40764
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 155 / Thursday, August 13, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
with it. Without any conflict, there
could not be any implied preemption.
E. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice
Reform)
With respect to the review of the
promulgation of a new regulation,
section 3(b) of Executive Order 12988,
‘‘Civil Justice Reform’’ (61 FR 4729,
February 7, 1996) requires that
Executive agencies make every
reasonable effort to ensure that the
regulation: (1) Clearly specifies the
preemptive effect; (2) clearly specifies
the effect on existing Federal law or
regulation; (3) provides a clear legal
standard for affected conduct, while
promoting simplification and burden
reduction; (4) clearly specifies the
retroactive effect, if any; (5) adequately
defines key terms; and (7) addresses
other important issues affecting clarity
and general draftsmanship under any
guidelines issued by the Attorney
General. This document is consistent
with that requirement.
Pursuant to this Order, NHTSA notes
as follows. The issue of preemption is
discussed above in connection with E.O.
13132. NHTSA notes further that there
is no requirement that individuals
submit a petition for reconsideration or
pursue other administrative proceeding
before they 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.
pwalker on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES
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
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:28 Aug 12, 2009
Jkt 217001
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.
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 costeffective or least burdensome alternative
if the agency publishes with the final
rule an explanation why that alternative
was not adopted.
This final 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
In consideration of the foregoing, 49
CFR part 571 is 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. Section 571.101 is amended by
revising the fourth sentence in S5.2.1,
adding a fifth sentence to S5.2.1, and by
revising S5.4.3, to read as follows:
■
§ 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 hub; 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. However, if
identification is provided for a horn
control in the center of the face plane of
the steering wheel hub, the identifier
must meet Table 2 requirements for the
horn.
*
*
*
*
*
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, this requirement does not
apply to an identifier for a horn control
in the center of the face plane of the
steering wheel hub. For vehicles with a
GVWR of under 4,536 kg (10,000
pounds), the compliance date for this
provision is September 1, 2011. For
vehicles with a GVWR of 4,536 kg
(10,000 pounds) or over, the compliance
date for this provision is September 1,
2013.
*
*
*
*
*
Issued on: August 7, 2009.
Ronald L. Medford,
Acting Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. E9–19396 Filed 8–12–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
E:\FR\FM\13AUR1.SGM
13AUR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 155 (Thursday, August 13, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 40760-40764]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-19396]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 571
[Docket No. NHTSA-2009-0145]
RIN 2127-AK04
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Controls, Telltales and
Indicators
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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. 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.
In response to 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 final rule, we 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: Effective Date: The effective date for this final rule is
February 9, 2010. The compliance date for vehicles under 10,000 pounds
GVWR for S5.4.3 continues to be September 1, 2011.
Compliance date for the extension of the standard's control,
indicator, and telltale requirements to vehicles at 10,000 pounds GVWR
or greater over continues to be September 1, 2013.
Optional early compliance is permitted as of the date today's final
rule is published.
Petitions for reconsideration: Petitions for reconsideration of
today's final rule must be received not later than September 28, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration of the final rule must refer
to the docket number set forth above and be submitted to the
Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
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. For the horn control, Table 2 specifies the
horn symbol in Column 2, and the word ``Horn'' in Column 3.
II. 2005 and 2006 Final Rules
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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NHTSA received petitions for reconsideration of the August 17, 2005
final rule, including one from 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
[[Page 40761]]
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, 9 near
misses, and an allegation of a fatality. In the +response, NHTSA
explained that filling in the horn symbol with a color that ``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 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
In a Federal Register document of October 4, 2007 (72 FR 56713),
NHTSA stated that it has been persuaded by the Alliance's petition and
accompanying data, and granted its petition for reconsideration
regarding S5.4.3. NHTSA stated its belief that 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, NHTSA stated its belief that 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.
In the NPRM, NHTSA stated that 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 the NPRM, we proposed
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'' was 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.
NHTSA did not propose to amend FMVSS No. 101 with 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 stated our belief that the suggested language
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 the October 2007 NPRM, we proposed 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. Comments to the October 2007 NPRM and NHTSA Discussion of the
Comments
In response to the NPRM, we received comments from the Alliance,
the Association of International Automobile Manufacturers, Inc. (AIAM)
and from Mr. Michael Tebbi, a private individual.
Mr. Tebbi stated that he agreed with the agency that the center of
the steering wheel is where he expects the horn to be, and ``therefore
no icon is needed.'' However, he expressed concern about the
possibility that horns placed in the centers of steering wheels could
lead to injuries since ``a consumer will be
[[Page 40762]]
honking the car's horn as he collides with another vehicle. If the air
bag deploys while the driver's hand is pressing against the center of
the steering wheel, I believe there may be a possibility of injury to
the driver's arm or shoulder.'' This rulemaking addresses requirements
for identification of the horn control. Since the horn control is
optional, we do not address where in a motor vehicle the horn control
must be placed. However, based on normal body kinematics during a
crash, we believe that it is very unlikely that in crashes with
deceleration great enough to cause air bag deployment, that the
driver's hand will still be on the air bag cover at the time of the
deployment. Since the introduction of driver air bags, the usual
location for the horn control has been under the air bag cover. No
problems regarding horn use such as that described by Mr. Tebbi have
come to NHTSA's attention.
The AIAM supported the proposed amendment to FMVSS No. 101. AIAM
did not suggest changes to the proposed regulatory text. However, AIAM
identified two related issues that it asked us to clarify in the
preamble to the final rule. The first was, if a manufacturer provides a
horn control activated by pressing on the center of the steering wheel
\3\ and provides a second horn control ``off-center, near the edge of
the hub, to identify the supplemental horn control that operates by
tilting the plane of the hub'' whether the second control must meet the
S5.4.3 requirement for color contrast. As a rationale for arguing that
no identification should be required, AIAM stated that
``[h]istorically, NHTSA has taken the position that voluntarily
installed items (i.e., items not mandated by an FMVSS) are not subject
to regulation by NHTSA so long as such items do not interfere with the
operation of regulated systems or equipment.'' In support of its
position, AIAM cited a January 28, 1992 letter to Honda and what it
described as an ``undated'' letter to Mazda regarding redundant
heating/ventilator controls. The date of the letter to Mazda is July 5,
1984.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ A location where it was proposed in the NPRM, that no horn
identifier would be required.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NHTSA does not agree that the two cited interpretations are
applicable to the rulemaking at issue. The 1992 letter to Honda
interprets FMVSS No. 123, Motorcycle controls and displays, not FMVSS
No. 101. Further, the letter addressed the nature of operation of a
brake system, not the identification required for a control. The July
5, 1984 letter to Mazda, addresses a ``secondary, redundant control
placed in the rear seat area facilitating operation of the heating/
ventilation and audio system functions by rear seat passengers.'' In
contrast, in the rulemaking at issue, all horn controls provided would
be operable by the driver, not by ``rear seat passengers.'' Thus, the
Mazda letter does not apply to the rulemaking at issue.
While in some situations NHTSA has concluded that certain
requirements do not apply to items that are voluntarily provided or
redundant, this is not a general principle. In considering such an
issue, the agency needs to consider the specific situation and purpose
of a particular requirement.
AIAM argued that the second horn control would not be subject to
FMVSS No. 101 because the second control is ``voluntarily installed.''
All horn controls are ``voluntarily installed,'' including those placed
in the center of the face plane of the steering wheel hub. Moreover,
while the second horn control would be redundant, unidentified controls
in unexpected places, or controls identified in unfamiliar ways, may
cause confusion to the driver. As a result of today's final rule,
identification is not required for those horn controls that are placed
in the center of the face plane of the steering wheel hub. All other
horn controls must meet all FMVSS No. 101 requirements that apply to
horns.
AIAM also argued that ``since no identifier is required for a horn
control that is operated at the center of the steering wheel, any
identifier that is voluntarily affixed there'' would not have to meet
S5.2 of FMVSS No. 101. NHTSA does not agree with this position. 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.
Permitting manufacturer-chosen identifications of a control for
which identification is specified in FMVSS No. 101 would not be
consistent with the purpose of FMVSS No. 101. Such alternative horn
designations (with each manufacturer possibly having a different
designation) would result in drivers spending time trying to understand
the meaning of the manufacturer-chosen identification and would divert
the ``driver's attention from the driving task.'' Such a result would
not meet the need for safety. Therefore, in this final rule, a horn
control placed in the center of the face plane of the steering wheel
need not be identified. However, if identification is voluntarily
provided, the horn symbol identification in Table 2 or the word
``horn'' must be used.
We would agree, however, that a manufacturer could voluntarily use
a horn symbol that is embossed, (i.e., without a contrasting color) to
identify a horn control placed in the center of the face plane of the
steering wheel. Since no identification would be required in this
situation, and since the embossed horn symbol would not cause
confusion, its use would be permissible.
The Alliance agreed with the proposal but suggested changes in the
regulatory text as ``technical corrections'' to ``clarify'' the
agency's intent. The Alliance asked for ``clarification on the meaning
of the term `center of the face plane of the steering wheel' which
could be narrowly interpreted and create potential questions of
compliance.'' The Alliance therefore suggested that S5.2.1 be changed
to read:
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 area of the steering wheel hub * * *
NHTSA agrees that use of the word ``hub'' provides clarification as
to where activation of the horn would occur. However, we believe the
term ``center'' is clear, and decline to adopt ``center area.'' There
will be no compliance difficulty: The center of the hub is located, the
driver presses, and if the horn sounds, the condition is met, and no
identification is necessary.
The second issue raised by the Alliance is ``the applicability of
the proposed language when manufacturers voluntarily mark horn controls
that are activated by pressing on the center area of the steering wheel
hub * * * [I]f a manufacturer chooses to identify a horn control
activated by pressing on the center area of the steering wheel hub, the
proposed text could be interpreted to require the symbol to be a
contrasting color.'' The Alliance offered the following change to
S5.4.3 to ``clarify this point.''
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. This requirement does not apply to
the identification of a horn control activated by the driver
pressing on the center area of the steering wheel hub.
As earlier explained, we do not agree with changing ``center'' to
``center area.'' As to horn controls placed in the center of the face
plane of the steering wheel, we agree, also for reasons discussed
earlier, that a manufacturer could use a
[[Page 40763]]
horn symbol (or the word horn) that is embossed in this situation,
i.e., without a contrasting color.
VI. Leadtime
For vehicles under 10,000 pounds, the compliance date for S5.4.3
continues 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 continues to be September 1, 2013. Optional early compliance is
permitted as of the date the final rule is published.
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 concludes that this final rule
will not have any quantifiable cost effect on motor vehicle
manufacturers. The rule will not impose any new requirements but
instead relieves a restriction. In this final rule, NHTSA excludes 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. This final rule will have 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 no
apparent safety benefit from the presence of the horn identifier. As a
result of this final rule, vehicle manufacturers are spared the costs
of embossing a horn symbol in the center of the steering wheel hub and
coloring in the symbol.
Because the economic effects of this final rule are 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
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. The rule does not impose any new requirements
but relieves 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 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 will not have any significant impact on
the quality of the human environment.
D. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
NHTSA has examined today's final rule pursuant to Executive Order
13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) and concluded that no additional
consultation with States, local governments or their representatives is
mandated beyond the rulemaking process. The agency has concluded that
the rule does not have federalism implications, because the rule does
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.''
Further, no consultation is needed to discuss the issue of
preemption in connection with today's rule. The issue of preemption can
arise in connection with NHTSA rules in at least two ways. First, the
National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act contains an express
preemptive provision: ``When a motor vehicle safety standard is in
effect under this chapter, a State or a political subdivision of a
State may prescribe or continue in effect a standard applicable to the
same aspect of performance of a motor vehicle or motor vehicle
equipment only if the standard is identical to the standard prescribed
under this chapter.'' 49 U.S.C. 30103(b)(1). It is this statutory
command that unavoidably preempts State legislative and administrative
law, not today's rulemaking, so consultation would be unnecessary.
Second, the Supreme Court has recognized the possibility of implied
preemption: In some instances, State requirements imposed on motor
vehicle manufacturers, including sanctions imposed by State tort law,
can stand as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of a NHTSA
safety standard. When such a conflict is discerned, the Supremacy
Clause of the Constitution makes the State requirements unenforceable.
See Geier v. American Honda Motor Co., 529 U.S. 861 (2000). However,
NHTSA has considered the nature and purpose of today's rule and does
not currently foresee any potential State requirements that might
conflict
[[Page 40764]]
with it. Without any conflict, there could not be any implied
preemption.
E. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)
With respect to the review of the promulgation of a new regulation,
section 3(b) of Executive Order 12988, ``Civil Justice Reform'' (61 FR
4729, February 7, 1996) requires that Executive agencies make every
reasonable effort to ensure that the regulation: (1) Clearly specifies
the preemptive effect; (2) clearly specifies the effect on existing
Federal law or regulation; (3) provides a clear legal standard for
affected conduct, while promoting simplification and burden reduction;
(4) clearly specifies the retroactive effect, if any; (5) adequately
defines key terms; and (7) addresses other important issues affecting
clarity and general draftsmanship under any guidelines issued by the
Attorney General. This document is consistent with that requirement.
Pursuant to this Order, NHTSA notes as follows. The issue of
preemption is discussed above in connection with E.O. 13132. NHTSA
notes further that there is no requirement that individuals submit a
petition for reconsideration or pursue other administrative proceeding
before they 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.
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.
This final 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.
0
In consideration of the foregoing, 49 CFR part 571 is amended as set
forth below:
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. Section 571.101 is amended by revising the fourth sentence in
S5.2.1, adding a fifth sentence to 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 hub; 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. However, if identification is provided for a
horn control in the center of the face plane of the steering wheel hub,
the identifier must meet Table 2 requirements for the horn.
* * * * *
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, this requirement does not apply to an
identifier for a horn control in the center of the face plane of the
steering wheel hub. For vehicles with a GVWR of under 4,536 kg (10,000
pounds), the compliance date for this provision is September 1, 2011.
For vehicles with a GVWR of 4,536 kg (10,000 pounds) or over, the
compliance date for this provision is September 1, 2013.
* * * * *
Issued on: August 7, 2009.
Ronald L. Medford,
Acting Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. E9-19396 Filed 8-12-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P