44254 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 164 / Friday, August 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 
WISCONSIN —2008 8-H OUR OZONE NAAQS—Continued 
[Primary and secondary] 
Designated area Designation Classification 
Date1 Type Date1 Type 
Sheboygan County (part): 
Exclusive and west of the following roadways 
going from the northern county boundary 
to the southern county boundary: Highway 43, Wilson Lima Road, Minderhaud Road, County Road KK/Town Line Road, N 10th Street, County Road A S/Center Avenue, Gibbons Road, Hoftiezer Road, Highway 32, Palmer Road/Smies Road/Palmer Road, Amsterdam Road/County Road RR, Termaat Road.
Shoreline Sheboygan County, WI
25............................ 7/15/2019 Nonattainment 12/19/2016 Moderate. 
Sheboygan County (part): 
Inclusive and east of the following roadways 
going from the northern county boundary to the southern county boundary: Highway 43, Wilson Lima Road, Minderhaud Road, County Road KK/Town Line Road, N 10th Street, County Road A S/Center Avenue, Gibbons Road, Hoftiezer Road, Highway 32, Palmer Road/Smies Road/Palmer Road, Amsterdam Road/County Road RR, Termaat Road.
*******  
1This date is July 20, 2012, unless otherwise noted. 
2Excludes Indian country located in each area, unless otherwise noted. 
*******  
5Attainment date is extended to July 20, 2019 for both Inland Sheboygan County, WI, and Shoreline Sheboygan County, WI, nonattai nment 
areas. 
* * * * * 
[FR Doc. 2019–17796 Filed 8–22–19; 8:45 am] 
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 
National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration 
49 CFR Part 571 
[Docket No. NHTSA–2019–0009] 
RIN 2127–AM10 
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety 
Standards; Electric-Powered Vehicles: Electrolyte Spillage and Electrical Shock Protection 
AGENCY : National Highway Traffic 
Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation (DOT). 
ACTION : Final rule. 
SUMMARY : This final rule clarifies the 
direct contact protection requirements for high voltage connectors in Federal 
Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 305, ‘‘Electric-powered vehicles: electrolyte spillage and electrical shock protection.’’ It amends the standard to make clear the allowance of high voltage connectors that require the use of a tool to separate from their mating component. This final rule also makes three minor technical corrections to FMVSS No. 305. 
DATES : 
Effective date: This final rule is 
effective August 23, 2019. 
Compliance date: The compliance 
date for the amendments in this final rule is August 24, 2020. Optional early compliance is permitted. 
Petitions for reconsideration: Petitions 
for reconsideration of this final rule must be received not later than October 7, 2019. 
ADDRESSES : Petitions for reconsideration 
of this final rule must refer to the docket and notice number set forth above and be submitted to the Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590. Note that all petitions received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any 
personal information provided. 
Privacy Act: Please see the Privacy 
Act heading under Rulemaking Analyses and Notices. 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT : You 
may contact Ms. Shashi Kuppa, Office of Crashworthiness Standards; telephone: 202–366–3827; facsimile: 202–493–2990, or Mr. Daniel Koblenz, Office of Chief Counsel; telephone: 202– 366–2992; facsimile: 202–366–3820. The mailing address of these officials is: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590. 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION : 
Table of Contents 
I. Introduction 
II. Alliance Comment to the NPRM III. Final Rule IV. Regulatory Notices and Analyses 
I. Introduction 
On February 28, 2019, NHTSA 
published a notice of proposed 
rulemaking (NPRM) proposing to amend Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 305, ‘‘Electric-powered vehicles: electrolyte spillage and electrical shock protection.’’ 84 FR 6758. The NPRM proposed to amend the regulatory text of FMVSS No. 305 to explicitly permit high-voltage connectors that provide direct contact protection when connected to their mating component and that require the use of a tool to separate from their mating component. The regulatory text that was the subject of the NPRM was 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:08 Aug 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23AUR1.SGM 23AUR1jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES44255 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 164 / Friday, August 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 
1According to its website, the Alliance is an 
advocacy group that represents automakers who 
build 70% of all cars and light trucks sold in the U.S. (see https://autoalliance.org/). 
2The Alliance further requested that NHTSA host 
a public compliance workshop to assist industry stakeholders with understanding and complying with the September 27, 2017 final rule. adopted in a September 27, 2017 final 
rule (82 FR 44945) that sought to harmonize FMVSS No. 305 with Global Technical Regulations (GTRs) No. 13, ‘‘Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Vehicles,’’ and No. 20, ‘‘Electric Vehicle Safety.’’ The purpose of the February 2019 NPRM was to clarify certain wording of that final rule relating to high-voltage connectors. The agency explained that the proposed changes would not negatively affect motor vehicle safety. NHTSA also proposed three minor technical corrections to the standard. NHTSA’s reasoning and justification for the proposed changes were fully explained in the NPRM. 
NHTSA provided an abbreviated 15- 
day comment period for the NPRM because the proposed changes were merely corrective and clarifying in nature, and because the changes would provide manufacturers with additional flexibility to meet the requirements of NHTSA’s September 27, 2017 final rule amending FMVSS No. 305. 
II. Alliance Comment to the NPRM 
NHTSA received just one comment on 
the NPRM, which was submitted by the 
Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers (Alliance) in support of the proposed change.
1The Alliance stated that it 
supported the proposed rule because the rule would clarify the direct contact protection requirements that apply to high voltage connectors, would explicitly permit the use of high voltage connectors that cannot be separated from their mating component without the use of tools, and would harmonize FMVSS No. 305 with GTRs No. 13 and No. 20.
2 
III. Final Rule 
After consideration of the comment 
submitted by the Alliance and all other pertinent matters, NHTSA adopts the amendments proposed in the NPRM for the reasons stated in the NPRM. 
IV. Regulatory Notices and Analyses Executive Order 12866 and DOT Order 
2100.6 
We have considered the potential 
impact of this final rule under Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, and DOT Order 2100.6 and have determined that it is nonsignificant. This rulemaking document was not reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under E.O. 12866. The changes in this final rule largely clarify or correct text adopted by a September 27, 2017 final rule and will have no significant effect on the national economy. This final rule clarifies the direct contact protection requirements that apply to high voltage connectors, and explicitly permits the use of high voltage connectors that cannot be separated from their mating component without the use of tools. 
Executive Order 13771 
E.O. 13771, ‘‘Reducing Regulation and 
Controlling Regulatory Costs,’’ directs 
that, unless prohibited by law, whenever an executive department or agency publicly proposes for notice and comment or otherwise promulgates a new regulation, it shall identify at least two existing regulations to be repealed. In addition, any new incremental costs associated with new regulations shall, to the extent permitted by law, be offset by the elimination of existing costs. Per OMB Memorandum M–17–21, only those rules deemed significant under section 3(f) of E.O. 12866 are considered E.O. 13771 regulatory actions. This final rule is not significant under E.O. 12866, and is therefore not considered an E.O. 13771 regulatory action. 
Regulatory Flexibility Act 
NHTSA has considered the effects of 
this final rule under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., as 
amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 1996). I certify that this final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Any small manufacturers that might be affected by this final rule are already subject to the requirements of FMVSS No. 305. This final rule merely clarifies or corrects text adopted by the September 27, 2017 final rule. This rulemaking action does not impose any additional restrictions that will affect small entities, and in fact, will give greater design flexibility to manufacturers of electric vehicles. 
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. 
Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) 
NHTSA has examined today’s final 
rule pursuant to Executive Order 13132 
(64 FR 43255; Aug. 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 final rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant consultation with State and local officials or the preparation of a federalism summary impact statement. The final 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.’’ 
NHTSA rules can have preemptive 
effect in two ways. First, the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act contains an express preemption provision, stating that 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 preempts any non-identical State legislative and administrative law addressing the same aspect of performance. 
The express preemption provision 
described above is subject to a savings clause under which ‘‘[c]ompliance with a motor vehicle safety standard prescribed under this chapter does not exempt a person from liability at common law.’’ 49 U.S.C. 30103(e). Pursuant to this provision, State common law tort causes of action against motor vehicle manufacturers that might otherwise be preempted by the express preemption provision are generally preserved. However, the Supreme Court has recognized the possibility, in some instances, of implied preemption of State common law tort causes of action by virtue of NHTSA’s rules—even if not expressly preempted. 
This second way that NHTSA rules 
can preempt is dependent upon the existence of an actual conflict between an FMVSS and the higher standard that would effectively be imposed on motor vehicle manufacturers if someone 
obtained a State common law tort judgment against the manufacturer— notwithstanding the manufacturer’s compliance with the NHTSA standard. Because most NHTSA standards established by an FMVSS are minimum standards, a State common law tort cause of action that seeks to impose a higher standard on motor vehicle 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:55 Aug 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23AUR1.SGM 23AUR1jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES44256 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 164 / Friday, August 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 
3The NTTAA seeks to support efforts by the 
Federal government to ensure that agencies work 
with their regulatory counterparts in other countries to address common safety issues. Circular No. A– 119, ‘‘Federal Participation in the Development and Use of Voluntary Consensus Standards and in Conformity Assessment Activities,’’ January 27, 2016, p. 15. manufacturers will generally not be 
preempted. However, if and when such a conflict does exist—for example, when the standard at issue is both a minimum and a maximum standard—the State common law tort cause of action is impliedly preempted. See Geier v. American Honda Motor Co., 529 U.S. 861 (2000). 
Pursuant to E.O. 13132, NHTSA has 
considered whether this final rule preempts State common law causes of action. The agency’s ability to announce its conclusion regarding the preemptive effect of one of its rules reduces the likelihood that preemption will be an issue in any subsequent tort litigation. 
To this end, the agency has examined 
the nature (e.g., the language and 
structure of the regulatory text) and objectives of today’s final rule and finds that this rule, like many NHTSA rules, prescribes only a minimum safety standard. Accordingly, NHTSA does not intend that this final rule preempt state tort law that effectively imposes a higher standard on motor vehicle manufacturers than that established by today’s final rule. Establishment of a higher standard by means of State tort law would not conflict with the minimum standard established by this document. Without any conflict, there could not be any implied preemption of a State common law tort cause of action. 
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; Feb. 
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) specifies whether administrative proceedings are to be required before parties file suit in court; (6) 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. NHTSA notes further that there is no requirement that individuals submit a petition for reconsideration or pursue other administrative proceedings before they may file suit in court. Privacy Act 
Please note that anyone can search the 
electronic form of all documents 
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the document (or signing the document, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT’s complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477–78), or online at http://www.dot.gov/privacy.html. 
Paperwork Reduction Act 
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act 
of 1995 (PRA), a person is not required 
to respond to a collection of information by a Federal agency unless the collection displays a valid OMB control number. There are no information collection requirements associated with this final rule. 
National Technology Transfer and 
Advancement Act 
Under the National Technology 
Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA) (Pub. L. 104–113), ‘‘all Federal agencies and departments shall use technical standards that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies, using such technical standards as a means to carry out policy objectives or activities determined by the agencies and departments.’’ 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 us to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when we decide not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards. 
Pursuant to the above requirements, 
the agency conducted a review of voluntary consensus standards to determine if any were applicable to this final rule. NHTSA searched for but did not find voluntary consensus standards directly applicable to the amendments in this final rule. 
However, consistent with the NTTAA, 
this final rule is aligned with regulations developed globally on electric vehicle safety, namely GTR No. 13 and GTR No. 20.
3The GTRs permit the use of high voltage connectors that 
cannot be separated from their mating component without the use of tools. We believe that the amendments to FMVSS No. 305 would promote harmonization of our countries’ regulatory approaches on electric vehicles and HFCVs. 
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 
of 1995 requires 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 annually (adjusted for inflation with base year of 1995). We note that as this final rule only makes minor adjustments and clarifications to FMVSS No. 305, it will not result in expenditures by any of the aforementioned entities of over $100 million annually. 
Executive Order 13609 (Promoting 
Regulatory Cooperation) 
Executive Order 13609 states that the 
regulatory approaches taken by foreign governments may differ from those taken by U.S. regulatory agencies to address similar issues. In some cases, the differences between the regulatory approaches of U.S. agencies and those of their foreign counterparts might not be necessary and might impair the ability of American businesses to export and compete internationally. In meeting shared challenges involving health, safety, labor, security, environmental, and other issues, international regulatory cooperation can identify approaches that are at least as protective as those that are or would be adopted in the absence of such cooperation. International regulatory cooperation can also reduce, eliminate, or prevent unnecessary differences in regulatory requirements. 
This final rule harmonizes FMVSS 
No. 305 with provisions that are in GTRs No. 13 and No. 20. Specifically, the primary clarification made by this document—that the use of connectors that cannot be separated from their mating component without the use of tools is permissible under FMVSS No. 305—brings FMVSS No. 305 into alignment with GTRs No. 13 and No. 20 requirements relating to high voltage connectors, and so will further the goals of E.O. 13609. 
Regulation Identifier Number 
The Department of Transportation 
assigns a regulation identifier number 
(RIN) to each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:55 Aug 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23AUR1.SGM 23AUR1jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES44257 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 164 / Friday, August 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 
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 vehicles, Motor 
vehicle safety. 
In consideration of the foregoing, 
NHTSA amends 49 CFR part 571 as 
follows: 
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 1.95 and 501.8. 
■2. Amend § 571.305 by 
■a. Adding (in alphabetical order) a 
definition for ‘‘High voltage live part’’ to 
S4; 
■b. Revising S5.4.1.5; 
■c. Revising the introductory text of S8; 
and, 
■d. Revising S9.2(a). 
The addition and revisions read as 
follows: 
§ 571.305 Standard No. 305; Electric- 
powered vehicles; electrolyte spillage and electrical shock protection. 
* * * * * S4. Definitions. 
* * * * * 
High voltage live part means a live 
part of a high voltage source. 
* * * * * 
S5.4.1.5 Connectors. All connectors 
shall provide direct contact protection 
by: 
(a) Meeting the requirements specified 
in S5.4.1.4 when the connector is connected to its corresponding mating component; and, 
(b) If a connector can be separated 
from its mating component without the use of a tool, meeting at least one of the following conditions from (b)(1), (2), or (3) of this section: 
(1) The connector meets the 
requirements of S5.4.1.4 when separated from its mating component; 
(2) The voltage of the live parts 
becomes less than or equal to 60 VDC or 30 VAC within one second after the connector is separated from its mating component; or, 
(3) The connector requires at least two 
distinct actions to separate from its mating component and there are other components that must be removed in order to separate the connector from its mating component and these other components cannot be removed without the use of tools. 
* * * * * 
S8. Test procedure for on-board 
electrical isolation monitoring system. 
Prior to any impact test, the requirements of S5.4.4 for the on-board 
electrical isolation monitoring system shall be tested using the following procedure. 
* * * * * 
S9.2 * * * 
(a) Test method using a resistance 
tester. The resistance tester is connected 
to the measuring points (the electrical 
chassis and any exposed conductive part of electrical protection barriers or any two simultaneously reachable exposed conductive parts of electrical protection barriers that are less than 2.5 meters from each other), and the resistance is measured using a resistance tester that can supply current levels of at least 0.2 Amperes with a resolution of 0.01 ohms or less. The resistance between two exposed conductive parts of electrical protection barriers that are less than 2.5 meters from each other may be calculated using the separately measured resistances of the relevant parts of the electric path. 
* * * * * 
Issued in Washington, DC, under authority 
delegated in 49 CFR 1.95 and 501.5. 
Heidi Renate King, Deputy Administrator. 
[FR Doc. 2019–17814 Filed 8–22–19; 8:45 am] 
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:08 Aug 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\23AUR1.SGM 23AUR1jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES