40760 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 155 / Thursday, August 13, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

1The effective date was subsequently extended to 

September 1, 2006 (71 FR 3786, January 24, 2006). 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

* * * * * 

Nut, tree, group 14 ....................... 0.10 

* * * * * 

Pineapple ...................................... 0.04 

Pineapple, processed residue ...... 0.15 

Pistachio ....................................... 0.10 

Pomegranate ................................ 0.30 

* * * * * 

Spice, subgroup 19B, except 

black pepper ............................. 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. 

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 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 


pwalker on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 155 / Thursday, August 13, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 40761 

2The 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. 

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 GTR2 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, 

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 


pwalker on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES
40762 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 155 / Thursday, August 13, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

3A location where it was proposed in the NPRM, 

that no horn identifier would be required. 

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 

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 


pwalker on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 155 / Thursday, August 13, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 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 

§ 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 


pwalker on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES
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. 

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 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. 

■ 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 


pwalker on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES