Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 249 / Tuesday, December 29, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 85533 

1 72 FR 51908. 

2March 15, 2010, 75 FR 12140. This was the 

second response to petitions for reconsideration of 

the 2007 final rule. 

3S6.1.2 and S6.1.3 relate to Standard No. 214’s 

door crush resistance requirements. 

4Prior to the error, a vehicle with a curb weight 

less than 3,500 lb (‘‘vehicle A’’) could have met a 

force requirement of 2 times the vehicle curb 

weight, which would be a load of less than 7,000 

lb. Similarly, prior to the error, a vehicle with a 

curb weight greater than 3,500 lb (‘‘vehicle B’’) 

could have met a force requirement of 7,000 lb. 

After the error, the option was removed, so under 

S6.1.3, vehicle A was also subject to a test with a 

load of 7,000 lb, and vehicle B was also subject to 

a load of two times its curb weight. NHTSA did not 

intend for the vehicles to have to be certified to 

both a force requirement of two times the curb 

weight and a 7,000 lb requirement. 

5https://one.nhtsa.gov/DOT/NHTSA/ 

Vehicle%20Safety/Test%20Procedures/ 

Associated%20Files/TP-214-s05.pdf. 

6 74 FR 63180, 63220; December 2, 2009. 

7 Id. 

except an application to change the club 

station license trustee. An application to 

modify a club station license grant to 

change the license trustee name must be 

submitted to a Club Station Call Sign 

Administrator and must be signed by an 

officer of the club. 

* * * * * 

■ 35. Section 97.23 is revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 97.23 Mailing and email addresses. 

Each license grant must show the 

grantee’s correct name, mailing address, 

and email address. The email address 

must be an address where the grantee 

can receive electronic correspondence. 

Revocation of the station license or 

suspension of the operator license may 

result when correspondence from the 

FCC is returned as undeliverable 

because the grantee failed to provide the 

correct email address. 

[FR Doc. 2020–28779 Filed 12–28–20; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

49 CFR Part 571 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2020–0111] 

RIN 2127–AM31 

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety 

Standards; Side Impact Protection, 

Ejection Mitigation; Technical 

Corrections 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation. 

ACTION: Final rule; technical corrections. 

SUMMARY: This final rule corrects errors 

in Federal Motor Vehicle Safety 

Standard (FMVSS) No. 214, ‘‘Side 

impact protection,’’ and in FMVSS No. 

226, ‘‘Ejection mitigation.’’ The error 

occurred in FMVSS No. 214 when an 

amendment to FMVSS No. 214 was 

transcribed into the Code of Federal 

Regulations. The error to FMVSS No. 

226 arose as a result of a drafting error 

when NHTSA issued FMVSS No. 226. 

This final rule amends the standards to 

reflect the intent of the Agency when it 

issued the standards. 

DATES: This rule is effective December 

29, 2020. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Vincent Wu or Mr. James Myers, 

NHTSA Office of Crashworthiness 

Standards, telephone 202–366–1740. 

Mailing address: 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE, West Building, Washington, 

DC 20590. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

document corrects minor errors in 

FMVSS No. 214, ‘‘Side impact 

protection,’’ and FMVSS No. 226, 

‘‘Ejection mitigation.’’ The first error 

resulted when the Federal Register 

transcribed regulatory text for FMVSS 

No. 214. The second error occurred 

when the Agency drafted the regulatory 

text for FMVSS No. 226 in establishing 

the standard. 

FMVSS No. 214 

On September 11, 2007, NHTSA 

published a final rule that incorporated 

a vehicle-to-pole test in FMVSS No. 214, 

‘‘Side impact protection.’’ 1 In response 

to petitions for reconsideration of the 

rule,2 NHTSA published a final rule on 

March 15, 2010 that, among other 

matters, corrected unit conversion errors 

in S6.1.2 and S6.1.3 of the standard.3

The March 15, 2010 final rule set forth 

the regulatory text for S6.1.3, ‘‘Peak 

crush resistance’’ as follows: ‘‘The peak 

crush resistance shall not be less than 

two times the curb weight of the vehicle 

or 31,138 N (7,000 lb), whichever is 

less.’’ 75 FR at 12140, col. 1 (emphasis 

added). Similar language was also 

included in the revised S6.2.3, which 

stated, ‘‘Peak crush resistance. The peak 

crush resistance shall not be less than 

three and one half times the curb weight 

of the vehicle or 53,378 N (12,000 lb), 

whichever is less.’’ Id. However, the 

phrase ‘‘whichever is less’’ was not 

included in S6.1.3 as published in the 

Code of Federal Regulations, though the 

phrase was included in S6.2.3 (49 CFR 

571.214). 

The door crush force requirements 

establish threshold protections for 

occupants from injury-causing intrusion 

into the occupant space that can occur 

during a side impact. The phrase 

‘‘whichever is less’’ in S6.1.3 was meant 

to clarify which of the maximum door 

crush force levels applies to vehicles, 

depending upon the vehicle’s curb 

weight.4 However, when the phrase was 

mistakenly eliminated, it created 

ambiguity and potentially implied that 

S6.1.3 required higher forces to be used 

than NHTSA had intended. Without the 

phrase, there is potential for 

manufacturer confusion and the 

possibility that some may certify to an 

overly stringent door crush force 

requirement than NHTSA intended. 

NHTSA (and, we believe, industry as a 

whole) has applied S6.1.3 with the 

understanding and effect that the 

‘‘whichever is less’’ language was meant 

to be as it is in S6.2.3—see, e.g., 

NHTSA’s test procedure (TP) manual for 

FMVSS No. 214 issued by NHTSA’s 

Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance for 

testing vehicles to Standard No. 214. 

The TP has always aligned with the 

correct original regulatory text.5 That 

said, the absence of the phrase reduces 

the clarity of S6.1.3 and introduces an 

unintended ambiguity that NHTSA 

would like to correct. This technical 

amendment corrects the error by adding 

‘‘whichever is less’’ back in S6.1.3. 

FMVSS No. 226 

On January 19, 2011, NHTSA 

published a final rule establishing 

FMVSS No. 226, ‘‘Ejection mitigation.’’ 

The final rule intended to exclude from 

the applicability of the standard 

vehicles with no doors or with doors 

that are designed to be easily attached 

or removed so the vehicle can be 

operated without doors. In the notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM) preceding 

the final rule, the Agency requested 

comment on whether ‘‘[v]ehicles that 

have no doors, or exclusively have 

doors that are designed to be easily 

attached or removed so that the vehicle 

can be operated without doors’’ were 

still being produced.6 NHTSA further 

explained that, ‘‘Assuming the vehicles 

are being manufactured, NHTSA 

proposes excluding the vehicles on 

practicability grounds,’’ and requested 

comment on the issue.7 Subsequently, 

in the final rule, NHTSA proceeded to 

exclude the vehicles in the text of the 

preamble. The Agency made its intent to 

exclude the vehicles in the final rule 

clear, explaining in the preamble that: 

‘‘Comments were requested but none 

were received on whether vehicles are 

still being manufactured that have no 

doors, or exclusively have doors that are 

designed to be easily attached or 

removed so that the vehicle can be 

operated without doors. NHTSA 


KHAMMOND on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
85534 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 249 / Tuesday, December 29, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 

8 76 FR 3291. 

proposed excluding these vehicles on 

practicability grounds. This final rule 

adopts the exclusion.’’ 8

However, notwithstanding the 

Agency’s clear intent expressed by that 

preamble text, NHTSA inadvertently 

did not include this exclusion in the 

final rule’s regulatory text, so it is not 

reflected in FMVSS No. 226 as set forth 

in the CFR (49 CFR 571.226). The 

practical effect of this error is likely 

inconsequential, because since the 

effective date of FMVSS No. 226, 

NHTSA has applied the standard as 

excluding such vehicles from FMVSS 

No. 226. Regardless, even if the practical 

effect of the error is inconsequential, 

NHTSA would like to correct this 

drafting error by adding the exclusion of 

the vehicles to S2, ‘‘Application,’’ of the 

standard. 

Effective Date 

NHTSA is making the changes 

effective on publication in the Federal 

Register. NHTSA is issuing these 

corrections in a final rule because 

NHTSA finds that notice and comment 

are unnecessary. The amendment to 

FMVSS No. 214 corrects an error that 

arose with publication of the standard 

in the CFR. The correction to FMVSS 

No. 226 is made to correct NHTSA’s 

drafting error when the Agency issued 

the standard. The correcting 

amendments simply make technical 

corrections to align the regulatory text 

with NHTSA’s expressed intent when 

the Agency issued the standards 

concerning the performance standard in 

No. 214 and the application of No. 226. 

The practical effect of these corrections 

is inconsequential. For the above 

reasons, NHTSA finds good cause for 

making this correcting amendment 

effective on publication in the Federal 

Register. 

Regulatory Notices and Analyses 

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 and 

DOT Rulemaking Procedures 

NHTSA has considered the impact of 

this final rule under Executive Orders 

(E.O.) 12866 and 13563, as well as 

under the Department of 

Transportation’s administrative 

rulemaking procedures set forth in 49 

CFR part 5, subpart B. This final rule 

makes technical corrections and is not 

considered significant under these 

Executive orders. The rule corrects the 

regulatory text to align it with the 

Agency’s intent in drafting the language 

at issue. There are no costs or benefits 

associated with this technical correction 

because the Agency has been operating 

as if the language changes included in 

this final rule have been in effect since 

the publication of the earlier final rules. 

Executive Order 13771 (Regulatory 

Reform) 

As this final rule is nonsignificant, it 

is not subject to the offset requirements 

of E.O. 13771. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

This final rule correcting the 

standards at issue will not have an 

adverse impact on the quality of the 

human environment. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act (RFA) (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 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. This rule simply makes 

technical corrections and is not 

expected to have an impact on any 

entities. 

Executive Orders 13132 (Federalism) 

NHTSA has examined today’s final 

rule pursuant to E.O. 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. This final rule 

simply makes technical corrections and 

does not have sufficient federalism 

implications to warrant consultation 

with State and local officials or the 

preparation of a federalism summary 

impact statement. The rule will 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. 

Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice 

Reform) 

When promulgating a regulation, E.O. 

12988, ‘‘Civil Justice Reform’’ (61 FR 

4729; February 7, 1996), specifically 

requires that the Agency must make 

every reasonable effort to ensure that the 

regulation, as appropriate: (1) Specifies 

in clear language the preemptive effect; 

(2) specifies in clear language the effect 

on existing Federal law or regulation, 

including all provisions repealed, 

circumscribed, displaced, impaired, or 

modified; (3) provides a clear legal 

standard for affected conduct rather 

than a general standard, while 

promoting simplification and burden 

reduction; (4) specifies in clear language 

the retroactive effect; (5) specifies 

whether administrative proceedings are 

to be required before parties may file 

suit in court; (6) explicitly or implicitly 

defines key terms; and (7) addresses 

other important issues affecting clarity 

and general draftsmanship of 

regulations. 

Pursuant to this order, NHTSA notes 

as follows. The preemptive effect of this 

final rule is discussed above in 

connection with E.O. 13132. This rule 

simply makes technical corrections and 

does not have any retroactive effect. 

There is no requirement that individuals 

submit a petition for reconsideration or 

pursue other administrative proceedings 

before they may file suit in court. 

Executive Order 13609: Promoting 

International Regulatory Cooperation 

This final rule simply makes technical 

corrections and will have no effect on 

international regulatory cooperation. 

National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

This final rule simply makes technical 

corrections. There are no voluntary 

consensus standards that apply to this 

final rule. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

This final rule only makes technical 

corrections and is not subject to the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995. There are no costs associated with 

this rule. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

There are no Paperwork Reduction 

Act requirements associated with this 

technical correction. 

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. 

Privacy Act 

Anyone is able to search the 

electronic form of all comments 

received into any of our dockets by the 

name of the individual submitting the 

comment (or signing the comment, if 

submitted on behalf of an organization, 

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 you may visit http://

www.dot.gov/privacy.html. 


KHAMMOND on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 249 / Tuesday, December 29, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 85535 

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571 

Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Motor 

vehicles, Rubber and rubber products, 

Tires. 

Accordingly, 49 CFR part 571 is 

amended by making the following 

correcting amendments: 

PART 571—FEDERAL MOTOR 

VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 571 

of title 49 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 

30117, and 30166; delegation of authority at 

49 CFR 1.95. 

■ 2. Section 571.214 is amended by 

revising S6.1.3 to read as follows: 

§ 571.214 Standard No. 214; Side impact 

protection. 

* * * * * 

S6.1.3 Peak crush resistance. The 

peak crush resistance shall not be less 

than two times the curb weight of the 

vehicle or 31,138 N (7,000 lb), 

whichever is less. 

* * * * * 

■ 2. Section 571.226 is amended by 

revising S2 to read as follows: 

§ 571.226 Standard No. 226; Ejection 

mitigation. 

* * * * * 

S2. Application. This standard 

applies to passenger cars, and to 

multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks 

and buses with a gross vehicle weight 

rating of 4,536 kg or less, except walkin vans, modified roof vehicles, 

convertibles, and vehicles with no doors 

or with doors that are designed to be 

easily attached or removed so the 

vehicle can be operated without doors. 

Also excluded from this standard are 

law enforcement vehicles, correctional 

institution vehicles, taxis and 

limousines, if they have a fixed security 

partition separating the 1st and 2nd or 

2nd and 3rd rows and if they are 

produced by more than one 

manufacturer or are altered (within the 

meaning of 49 CFR 567.7). 

* * * * * 

Issued in Washington, DC, under authority 

delegated in 49 CFR 1.95. 

James C. Owens, 

Deputy Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2020–27543 Filed 12–28–20; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 21 

[Docket No. FWS–HQ–MB–2019–0103; 

FF09M22000–201–FXMB1232090000] 

RIN 1018–BE67 

Migratory Bird Permits; Management 

of Conflicts Associated With DoubleCrested Cormorants (Phalacrocorax 

auritus) Throughout the United States 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service (Service) establishes a new 

permit for State and federally 

recognized Tribal (hereafter ‘‘Tribe’’ or 

‘‘Tribal’’) fish and wildlife agencies for 

the management of double-crested 

cormorants (Phalacrocorax auritus; 

hereafter ‘‘cormorants’’). The new 

permit authorizes specific take activities 

that are normally prohibited and are 

intended to relieve or prevent impacts 

from cormorants on lands or in waters 

managed by State or Tribal fish and 

wildlife agencies to address conflicts 

related to the following issues: Wild and 

publicly stocked fish managed by State 

fish and wildlife agencies or federally 

recognized Tribes; Tribal- and Stateowned or operated aquaculture facilities 

(including hatcheries); human health 

and safety; State- or Tribal-owned 

property and assets; and threatened and 

endangered species (listed under the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended, or identified in State- or 

Tribal-specific legislation as threatened 

or endangered) or those listed as Species 

of Greatest Conservation Need in State 

Wildlife Action Plans. The Service 

retains ultimate authority for regulating 

the take of cormorants. States and Tribes 

have the discretion to determine 

whether, when, where, and for which of 

the above purposes they conduct lethal 

take within limits and allocations set by 

the Service. 

DATES: This rule takes effect on 

February 12, 2021. 

Supplementary Documents: The 

Environmental Protection Agency will 

announce the availability of the Final 

Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) 

associated with this rulemaking action. 

The Service will execute a Record of 

Decision no sooner than 30 days from 

the date of publication of the notice of 

availability of the FEIS by the 

Environmental Protection Agency. 

Information Collection Requirements: 

If you wish to comment on the 

information collection requirements in 

this rule, please note that the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) is 

required to make a decision concerning 

the collection of information contained 

in this rule between 30 and 60 days after 

the date of publication of this rule in the 

Federal Register. Therefore, comments 

should be submitted to OMB by January 

28, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: You may inspect comments 

received on the draft environmental 

impact statement and associated 

proposed rule and view the final 

environmental impact statement and 

other documents associated with this 

rulemaking action at http://

www.regulations.gov in Docket No. 

FWS–HQ–MB–2019–0103. 

Information Collection Requirements: 

Written comments and suggestions on 

the information collection requirements 

should be submitted within 30 days of 

publication of this document to 

www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. 

Find this particular information 

collection by selecting ‘‘Currently under 

Review—Open for Public Comments’’ or 

by using the search function. Please 

provide a copy of your comments to the 

Service Information Collection 

Clearance Officer, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, 5275 Leesburg Pike, 

MS: PRB (JAO/3W), Falls Church, VA 

22041–3803 (mail); or Info_Coll@fws.gov 

(email). Please reference OMB Control 

Number 1018–0175 in the subject line of 

your comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jerome Ford, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Department of the Interior, 

(202) 208–1050. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The Service is the Federal agency 

delegated with the primary 

responsibility for managing migratory 

birds. Our authority derives from the 

Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 

(MBTA; 16 U.S.C. 703–712), as 

amended, which implements 

conventions with Great Britain (for 

Canada), Mexico, Japan, and Russia. We 

implement the provisions of the MBTA 

through the regulations in parts 10, 13, 

20, 21, 22, and 92 of title 50 of the Code 

of Federal Regulations (CFR). The 

MBTA protects migratory birds (listed 

in 50 CFR 10.13) from take, except as 

authorized under the MBTA. 

Regulations pertaining to specific 

migratory bird permit types are at 50 

CFR parts 21 and 22. The Service works 

on migratory bird conservation in 

partnership with four Flyway Councils 

(Atlantic, Mississippi, Central, and 

Pacific), which include representatives 


KHAMMOND on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES