48006 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 152 / Monday, August 8, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

1See WildEarth Guardians v. U.S. EPA (Case No. 

4:09–CV–02453–CW), Consent Decree dated 

November 10, 2009, as amended by Notice of 

Stipulated Extensions to Consent Decree Deadlines, 

dated April 28, 2011, and Notice of Stipulated 

Extension to Consent Decree Deadline, dated July 

7, 2011. 

2See ibid. 

Federal Register. A major rule cannot 

take effect until 60 days after it is 

published in the Federal Register. This 

action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined 

by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

L. Petitions for Review of This Action 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean 

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of 

this action must be filed in the United 

States Court of Appeals for the 

appropriate circuit by October 7, 2011. 

Filing a petition for reconsideration by 

the Administrator of this final rule does 

not affect the finality of this rule for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. This action may not 

be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Air pollution control, Incorporation 

by reference, Intergovernmental 

relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 

Particulate matter, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, and 

Volatile organic compounds. 

Dated: July 25, 2011. 

Keith Takata, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code 

of Federal Regulations is amended as 

follows: 

PART 52—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

■ 2. Section 52.220 is amended by 

paragraph (c)(386)(ii)(A)(4) to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.220 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(386) * * * 

(ii) * * * 

(A) * * * 

(4) 2007 Transport SIP at pages 21–22 

(Attachment A) (‘‘Evaluation of 

interference with Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration Measures of 

any other State’’). 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Section 52.283 is amended by 

adding paragraph (a)(3) to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.283 Interstate Transport. 

(a) * * * (3) The requirements of 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) regarding 

interference with any other state’s 

measures required under title I, part C 

of the Clean Air Act to prevent 

significant deterioration of air quality, 

except that these requirements are not 

fully met in the Air Pollution Control 

Districts (APCDs) or Air Quality 

Management Districts (AQMDs) listed in 

ths paragraph. 

(i) Amador County APCD 

(ii) Butte County AQMD 

(iii) Calaveras County APCD 

(iv) Feather River AQMD 

(v) Northern Sierra AQMD 

(vi) Mariposa County APCD 

(vii) Tuolumne County APCD 

(viii) North Coast Unified AQMD 

(ix) All other areas in California that are 

subject to the Federal PSD program as 

provided in 40 CFR 52.270. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2011–19898 Filed 8–5–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2011–0211; FRL–9448–5] 

Limited Federal Implementation Plan; 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration; 

California; North Coast Unified Air 

Quality Management District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing a limited 

Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) for 

the North Coast Unified Air Quality 

Management District (NCUAQMD) 

portion of the California State 

Implementation Plan (SIP). We 

proposed this action simultaneously 

with our proposed limited approval and 

limited disapproval of a SIP revision 

submitted by California to address the 

‘‘transport SIP’’ provisions of Clean Air 

Act (CAA) section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 

1997 8-hour ozone National Ambient 

Air Quality Standards (NAAQS or 

standards) and the 1997 fine particulate 

matter (PM2.5) NAAQS (2007 Transport 

SIP) (76 FR 31263, May 31, 2011). This 

limited FIP establishes Federal 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(PSD) permitting requirements for 

nitrogen oxides (NOX) emission sources 

only in the NCUAQMD. 

DATES: Effective Date: This rule is 

effective on September 7, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established docket 

number EPA–R09–OAR–2011–0211 for 

this action. Generally, documents in the 

docket for this action are available 

electronically at http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, California. While all 

documents are listed at http://www.

regulations.gov, some information may 

be publicly available only at the hard 

copy location (e.g., copyrighted 

material, large maps, multi-volume 

reports), and some may not be publicly 

available in either location (e.g., 

Confidential Business Information). To 

inspect the hard copy materials, please 

schedule an appointment during normal 

business hours with the contact listed in 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rory 

Mays, Air Planning Office (AIR–2), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region IX, (415) 972–3227, mays.rory@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’ 

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Proposed Action 

II. Public Comments 

III. EPA Action 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Proposed Action 

On May 31, 2011 (76 FR 31263), EPA 

proposed a limited approval and limited 

disapproval of California’s 2007 

Transport SIP with respect to the 

requirement in CAA section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) that each SIP contain 

adequate measures prohibiting 

emissions of air pollutants in amounts 

which will interfere with other States’ 

measures required under title I, part C 

of the CAA to prevent significant 

deterioration of air quality. We refer to 

this requirement as ‘‘element (3)’’ of 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i). Simultaneously, 

EPA proposed a limited FIP for the 

NCUAQMD to address certain 

requirements of ‘‘element (3)’’ of section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i) that California’s 2007 

Transport SIP failed to satisfy. EPA 

proposed this limited FIP because of a 

statutory duty that we were obligated 

under the terms of a Consent Decree to 

meet by July 10, 2011, unless we 

approved a SIP meeting the applicable 

requirements by that date.1 This 

Consent Decree deadline has been 

extended by stipulation to July 29, 

2011.2

Specifically, for the NCUAQMD, we 

proposed to disapprove California’s 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 152 / Monday, August 8, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 48007 

3By letter dated February 28, 2011, California 

submitted a revised NSD/PSD rule (Rule 110, New 

Source Review (NSR) and Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD)) for approval into the 

NCUAQMD portion of the California SIP. The 

NCUAQMD adopted this amended rule on 

December 9, 2010. 

2007 Transport SIP with respect to 

element (3) of CAA section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS because the NCUAQMD’s SIPapproved PSD permit program does not 

explicitly identify NOX as an ozone 

precursor. Although California recently 

submitted a PSD SIP revision to EPA for 

the NCUAQMD to address this 

requirement,3 we noted in our proposed 

rule that we would not be able to act on 

this SIP revision in time to meet our 

July 10, 2011 consent decree deadline. 

We proposed, therefore, to promulgate a 

limited PSD FIP for the NCUAQMD 

based on the provisions of 40 CFR 52.21 

regulating NOX as an ozone precursor. 

We noted that EPA would retain 

authority to implement the applicable 

requirements of 40 CFR 52.21 for NOX

emission sources in NCUAQMD (unless 

and until EPA delegates such authority 

to the District), while the District would 

retain authority to continue 

implementing any existing SIPapproved PSD requirements. We also 

noted that this limited FIP would apply 

only until EPA approves a PSD SIP 

revision for the NCUAQMD addressing 

this requirement. 

II. Public Comments 

EPA’s proposed action provided a 

30-day public comment period. During 

this period, we received no comments 

on this element of our proposed action. 

III. EPA Action 

Under CAA section 110(c)(1) and for 

the reasons discussed in our May 31, 

2011 proposed rule, we are finalizing 

the limited PSD FIP for the NCUAQMD 

as proposed. The CAA authority for EPA 

to promulgate a FIP is found in CAA 

section 110(c)(1), which provides— 

The Administrator shall promulgate a 

Federal implementation plan at any time 

within 2 years after the Administrator—(B) 

disapproves a State implementation plan 

submission in whole or in part * * * unless 

the State corrects the deficiency, and [EPA] 

approves the plan or plan revision, before the 

Administrator promulgates such [FIP]. 

In a separate action published in 

today’s Federal Register, EPA finalized 

the limited approval and limited 

disapproval of California’s 2007 

Transport SIP, including the 

disapproval with respect to the 

NCUAQMD because of the identified 

deficiency in its SIP-approved PSD 

program. Accordingly, under CAA 

sections 110(c)(1) and for the reasons set 

forth in our May 31, 2011 proposed rule, 

we are finalizing a limited PSD FIP for 

the NCUAQMD. This action 

incorporates the provisions of EPA’s 

Federal PSD program at 40 CFR 52.21, 

as they apply to new or modified major 

sources of NOX as precursors to ozone, 

into the NCUAQMD portion of the 

California SIP. 

EPA currently implements a partial 

PSD FIP for certain types of projects 

located in the NCUAQMD. See 40 CFR 

52.270(b)(2). The limited PSD FIP 

promulgated today adds new and 

modified major sources of NOX

emissions to the list of projects that are 

already subject to the Federal PSD 

Program as provided in 40 CFR 

52.270(b)(2). Thus, EPA will implement 

the applicable requirements of 40 CFR 

52.21 for major NOX emission sources in 

North Coast, unless and until EPA 

delegates such authority to the District 

pursuant to 40 CFR 52.21(u). The 

District, however, retains authority to 

continue implementing any existing 

SIP-approved PSD requirements. 

This limited PSD FIP will apply only 

until EPA approves a PSD SIP revision 

for NCUAQMD meeting the PSD 

requirements applicable to NOX

emissions as precursors to ozone, at 

which time EPA will rescind this 

limited FIP. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

This final action is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under the terms of 

Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993) and is therefore 

not subject to review under Executive 

Order 12866 and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011). 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This final action does not impose an 

information collection burden under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction 

Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Burden is 

defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

generally requires an agency to prepare 

a regulatory flexibility analysis of any 

rule subject to notice and comment 

rulemaking requirements under the 

Administrative Procedure Act or any 

other statute unless the agency certifies 

that the rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. Small entities 

include small businesses, small 

organizations, and small governmental 

jurisdictions. 

For purposes of assessing the impacts 

of this action on small entities, small 

entity is defined as: (1) A small business 

that is a small industrial entity as 

defined in the U.S. Small Business 

Administration (SBA) size standards 

(see 13 CFR 121.201); (2) a small 

governmental jurisdiction that is a 

government of a city, county, town, 

school district, or special district with a 

population of less than 50,000; or (3) a 

small organization that is any not-forprofit enterprise that is independently 

owned and operated and is not 

dominant in its field. 

In the case of North Coast, EPA has 

not yet proposed to approve the SIP 

revision necessary to make NOX a 

precursor to ozone in the context of PSD 

permitting. For this area, EPA is 

establishing a narrow FIP to fill the gap 

with respect to the PSD requirement to 

address NOX as a precursor to ozone. To 

EPA’s knowledge, in the past ten years 

there has been no more than one small 

entity in this area subject to PSD 

permitting requirements for NOX

emissions, and this is not a substantial 

number of entities. EPA does not 

anticipate that there will be additional 

sources that would require such a 

permit in the future, and EPA is not 

required to analyze theoretical future 

impacts. It would be speculative to 

estimate potential impacts on sources 

based solely on theoretical future 

sources. 

After considering the economic 

impacts of this rule on small entities, I 

certify that this final action will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

Although this rule establishes Federal 

permitting requirements that may apply 

to a small number of sources, EPA 

believes that in such an event, there will 

not be a significant economic impact on 

the potentially affected sources and that 

any such impacts would not affect a 

substantial number of sources, 

regardless of size. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

This final action contains no federal 

mandates under the provisions of Title 

II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 

Act of 1995 (UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531– 

1538) for state, local or tribal 

governments or the private sector. The 

action imposes no enforceable duty on 

any state, local or tribal governments or 

the private sector. This action merely 

prescribes EPA’s action in an area for 

which EPA has disapproved the 2007 

Transport SIP in part and not yet 

approved a corrective SIP revision. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
48008 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 152 / Monday, August 8, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

Thus, this rule is not subject to the 

requirements of sections 202 or 205 of 

UMRA. 

This final action is also not subject to 

the requirements of section 203 of 

UMRA because it contains no regulatory 

requirements that might significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments. This 

action merely prescribes EPA’s action in 

an area for which EPA has disapproved 

the 2007 Transport SIP in part and not 

yet approved a corrective SIP revision. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This final action does not have 

federalism implications. It 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, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132. This action 

merely prescribes EPA’s action in an 

area for which EPA has disapproved the 

2007 Transport SIP in part and not yet 

approved a corrective SIP revision. 

Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not 

apply to this action. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Coordination 

With Indian Tribal Governments 

This final action does not have tribal 

implications, as specified in Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000). This action does not impose a FIP 

in any tribal area. Thus, Executive Order 

13175 does not apply to this action. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

EPA interprets EO 13045 (62 FR 

19885, April 23, 1997) as applying only 

to those regulatory actions that concern 

health or safety risks, such that the 

analysis required under section 5–501 of 

the EO has the potential to influence the 

regulation. This final action is not 

subject to EO 13045 because it merely 

prescribes EPA’s action in an area for 

which EPA has disapproved the 2007 

Transport SIP in part and not yet 

approved a corrective SIP revision. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211 (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 

2001)), because it is not a significant 

regulatory action under Executive Order 

12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law 

104–113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) 

directs EPA to use voluntary consensus 

standards in its regulatory activities 

unless to do 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. NTTAA directs EPA to provide 

Congress, through OMB, explanations 

when the Agency decides not to use 

available and applicable voluntary 

consensus standards. This rulemaking 

does not involve technical standards. 

Therefore, EPA did not consider the use 

of any voluntary consensus standards. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, 

February 16, 1994) establishes federal 

executive policy on environmental 

justice. Its main provision directs 

federal agencies, to the greatest extent 

practicable and permitted by law, to 

make environmental justice part of their 

mission by identifying and addressing, 

as appropriate, disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of their programs, 

policies, and activities on minority 

populations and low-income 

populations in the United States. 

EPA has determined that this final 

rule will not have disproportionately 

high and adverse human health or 

environmental effects on minority or 

low-income populations because it does 

not affect the level of protection 

provided to human health or the 

environment. This rule merely 

prescribes EPA’s action in an area for 

which EPA has disapproved the 2007 

Transport SIP in part and not yet 

approved a corrective SIP revision. 

K. Congressional Review Act 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. section 801 et seq., as added by 

the Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, 

generally provides that before a rule 

may take effect, the agency 

promulgating the rule must submit a 

rule report, which includes a copy of 

the rule, to each House of the Congress 

and to the Comptroller General of the 

United States. EPA will submit a report 

containing this rule and other required 

information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. 

House of Representatives, and the 

Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This final action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ 

as defined by 5 U.S.C. section 804(2). 

This rule will be effective on September 

7, 2011. 

L. Determination Under Section 307(d) 

Pursuant to section 307(d)(1)(B) of the 

CAA, this action is subject to the 

provisions of section 307(d). Section 

307(d)(1)(B) provides that the provisions 

of section 307(d) apply to ‘‘the 

promulgation or revision of an 

implementation plan by the 

Administrator under section 110(c) of 

this Act.’’ 

M. Petitions for Judicial Review 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean 

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of 

this action must be filed in the United 

States Court of Appeals for the 

appropriate circuit by October 7, 2011. 

Filing a petition for reconsideration by 

the Administrator of this final rule does 

not affect the finality of this rule for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. This action may not 

be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements (see section 

307(b)(2)). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Air pollution control, Environmental 

protection, Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen 

dioxide, Ozone. 

Dated: July 29, 2011. 

Lisa P. Jackson, 

Administrator. 

Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code 

of Federal Regulations is amended as 

follows: 

PART 52—-[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for Part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Subpart F—California 

■ 2. Section 52.270 is amended by 

adding paragraph (b)(2)(iv) to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.270 Significant deterioration of air 

quality. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(2) * * * 

(iv) Those projects which are major 

stationary sources or major 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 152 / Monday, August 8, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 48009 

1 72 FR 68234, (Dec. 4, 2007). 2 70 FR 77454, (Dec. 30, 2005). 

modifications for nitrogen oxides as 

precursors to ozone under § 52.21. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2011–19897 Filed 8–5–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

49 CFR Part 571 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2007–28322] 

RIN 2127–AL00 

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety 

Standards; Lamps, Reflective Devices, 

and Associated Equipment 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule; response to petitions 

for reconsideration. 

SUMMARY: On December 4, 2007, 

NHTSA published a final rule that 

amended the Federal motor vehicle 

safety standard for lamps, reflective 

devices, and associated equipment with 

an effective date of September 1, 2008. 

In response, the agency received 

thirteen petitions for reconsideration. 

The effective date of the final rule was 

delayed in subsequent notices to 

December 1, 2012. This document 

corrects several technical errors in the 

final rule and completes the agency’s 

response to the issues raised in the 

submitted petitions for reconsideration. 

DATES: Effective Date: The final rule is 

effective December 1, 2012. The 

incorporation by reference of certain 

publications listed in the rule is 

approved by the Director of the Federal 

Register as of December 1, 2012. 

Compliance Date: Voluntary early 

compliance is permitted beginning 

August 8, 2011. 

Petitions for Reconsideration: 

Petitions for reconsideration of this final 

rule must be received not later than 

September 22, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Any petitions for 

reconsideration should refer to the 

docket number of this document and be 

submitted to: Administrator, National 

Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West 

Building, Ground Floor, Docket Room 

W12–140, Washington, DC 20590. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

For technical issues: Mr. Markus 

Price, Office of Crash Avoidance 

Standards (NVS–121), NHTSA, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building, 

Washington, DC 20590 (Telephone: 

(202) 366–0098) (Fax: (202) 366–7002). 

For legal issues: Mr. Thomas Healy, 

Office of the Chief Counsel (NCC–112), 

NHTSA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

West Building, Washington, DC 20590 

(Telephone: (202) 366–2992) (Fax: (202) 

366–3820). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Executive Summary 

II. Background 

III. Petitions for Reconsideration 

A. Definitions 

B. Technical Amendments 

C. Claims of Substantive Amendment 

D. Amendments To Improve Clarity 

IV. Agency Analysis and Response 

A. Definitions 

B. Technical Amendments 

C. Claims of Substantive Amendment 

D. Amendments To Improve Clarity 

E. Preemptive Effect of FMVSS No. 108 

V. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices 

I. Executive Summary 

On December 4, 2007 NHTSA 

published a final rule 1 that amended 

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 

(FMVSS) No. 108, Lamps, reflective 

devices, and associated equipment. That 

final rule reorganized the regulatory text 

and explicitly added to the text existing 

requirements from third-party standards 

that had previously been incorporated 

by reference. In rewriting the standard 

NHTSA sought not to make any 

substantive changes or impose new 

requirements on regulated parties. The 

objectives of the rewrite were to: (1) 

Make requirements easier to find and 

comprehend; (2) present performance 

requirements and test procedures 

together in one place, instead of obliging 

the user to locate the relevant provisions 

of third-party documents previously 

incorporated by reference; and (3) 

update FMVSS No. 108 to reflect 

significant letters of interpretation. The 

rewrite of FMVSS No. 108 was 

considered administrative in nature 

because the standard’s existing 

requirements and obligations were not 

increased, decreased, or substantively 

modified. 

The agency received several petitions 

for reconsideration which stated some 

aspects of the final rule failed to adhere 

to the agency’s stated goal of not 

substantively modifying the standard’s 

existing requirements. Also, the agency 

received petitions for reconsideration 

that identified formatting and 

grammatical errors. In addition to the 

petitions addressing the technical 

aspects of the standard, the agency also 

received a submission questioning the 

discussion of the preemptive effect of 

FMVSS No. 108 included in the 

preamble of the final rule. After careful 

review and consideration of the 

petitions for reconsideration, the agency 

is amending FMVSS No. 108 in order to 

correct technical errors within the final 

rule and is providing a partial response 

to petitions for reconsideration 

including the submission addressing the 

preemptive effect of the rule. The 

remaining items in the petitions for 

reconsideration, which include 

substantive issues and are not addressed 

within this partial response, will be 

addressed in a separate notice. We 

expect to publish that notice before the 

final rule effective date of December 1, 

2012. 

II. Background 

NHTSA published a Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) on 

December 30, 2005 2 proposing to 

reorganize FMVSS No. 108 and improve 

the clarity of the standard’s 

requirements, thereby increasing its 

utility for regulated parties. The 

proposed administrative rewrite 

attempted to make the standard more 

understandable by adopting a simplified 

numbering scheme to improve 

organization; by grouping related 

materials in a more logical and 

consistent sequence; and by reducing 

the certification burden of regulated 

parties who previously needed to 

review a few dozen third-party 

documents. 

From a regulatory perspective, it was 

the agency’s intention, as expressed in 

the NPRM, that the administrative 

rewrite of FMVSS No. 108 would 

neither result in any current obligations 

being diminished, nor any new 

obligations being imposed. In other 

words, the substantive requirements of 

the standard would be identical to those 

of the currently-applicable version of 

FMVSS No. 108 and underlying 

documents incorporated by reference. 

Therefore, we stated that regulated 

parties would not need to make any 

changes to their respective products or 

production processes if our proposal 

were made final. 

The agency considered comments 

received on the NPRM and published a 

final rule on December 4, 2007. The 

final rule incorporated some of the 

comments received in response to the 

NPRM by further consolidating test 

procedures and performance 

requirements from multiple tables to 

single paragraphs, incorporating 

additional Society of Automotive 

Engineers (SAE) documents directly 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES