National Highway Traffic Safety Administration October 9, 2007 – Federal Register Recent Federal Regulation Documents

Petition for Exemption From the Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard; Fuji Heavy Industries U.S.A., Inc.
Document Number: E7-19754
Type: Notice
Date: 2007-10-09
Agency: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of Transportation
This document grants in full the Fuji Heavy Industries U.S.A., Inc.'s (FUSA) petition for exemption of the Subaru Forester vehicle line in accordance with 49 CFR Part 543, Exemption from the Theft Prevention Standard. This petition is granted because the agency has determined that the antitheft device to be placed on the line as standard equipment is likely to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance with the parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR Part 541). FUSA requested confidential treatment for the information and attachments it submitted in support of its petition. In a letter dated July 10, 2007, the agency granted the petitioner's request for confidential treatment of the indicated areas of its petition.
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Electric-Powered Vehicles: Electrolyte Spillage and Electrical Shock Protection
Document Number: E7-19735
Type: Proposed Rule
Date: 2007-10-09
Agency: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of Transportation
Based on concern that the agency's standard on electric- powered vehicles, as currently written, may inadvertently hinder the development of fuel cell vehicles in the United States, NHTSA is proposing to amend the electrical safety requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 305, Electric-powered vehicles: electrolyte spillage and electrical shock protection. The amendment would ensure that state-of-the-art fuel cell vehicles (FCVs) are consistent with the interests of safety and encompassed by FMVSS No. 305 so that the market may continue to develop. This NPRM also proposes to harmonize FMVSS No. 305 with the revised FMVSS No. 301, as regards rear moving barrier impact test conditions. This rulemaking commenced in response to a petition from the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers.
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Brake Hoses
Document Number: E7-19474
Type: Proposed Rule
Date: 2007-10-09
Agency: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of Transportation
This document, together with a companion final rule; technical amendments; response to petitions; published in today's edition of the Federal Register, addresses issues raised in petitions received in response to a December 2004 final rule that updated the Federal motor vehicle safety standard on brake hoses, and a related petition for rulemaking. In that rule, we incorporated updated versions of substantive specifications of several Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) Recommended Practices relating to hydraulic brake hoses, vacuum brake hoses, air brake hoses, plastic air brake tubing, and end fittings. In this NPRM, we respond to some issues raised in the petitions and propose a number of amendments to the brake hose rule in response to the petitions. In the companion document, we deny several of the petitions and also correct typographical errors in, and inadvertent omissions from, the December 20, 2004 final rule.
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Brake Hoses
Document Number: E7-19467
Type: Rule
Date: 2007-10-09
Agency: Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
This document, together with a companion notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) published in today's edition of the Federal Register, responds to petitions for reconsideration of a December 2004 final rule that updated the Federal motor vehicle safety standard on brake hoses, and to a related petition for rulemaking. In that rule, we incorporated updated versions of substantive specifications of several Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) Recommended Practices relating to hydraulic brake hoses, vacuum brake hoses, air brake hoses, plastic air brake tubing, and end fittings. In this document, we deny several of the petitions and explain why. We also correct typographical errors in, and inadvertent omissions from, the December 20, 2004 final rule. In the companion NPRM, we respond to additional issues raised in the petitions, and propose a number of amendments to the brake hose rule in response to the petitions.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.