Document ID: NHTSA-2011-0101-0001
Agency: nhtsa
Document Type: Proposed Rule
Title: Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards: Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment
Posted Date: 2011-07-13T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 134 (Wednesday, July 13, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 41181-41185]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-17658]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. NHTSA-2011-0101]
 RIN 2127-AK99

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Lamps, Reflective 
Devices, and Associated Equipment

AGENCY: Department of Transportation (DOT), National Highway Traffic 
Safety Administration (NHTSA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: NHTSA is proposing to restore the blue and green color 
boundaries to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108, 
Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated Equipment, that were removed 
when the agency published a final rule reorganizing the standard on 
December 4, 2007.

DATES: Comments to this proposal must be received on or before 
September 12, 2011.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by the docket number in 
the heading of this document, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments on 
the electronic docket site by clicking on ``Help'' or ``FAQ.''
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, M-30, U.S. Department of 
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building, Ground 
Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building, Ground Floor, Room W12-140, between 
9 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, except Federal 
holidays.
     Fax: 202-493-2251.
Regardless of how you submit comments, you should mention the docket 
number of this document.
    You may call the Docket Management Facility at 202-366-9826.
    Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting comments and 
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the Public 
Participation heading of the Supplementary Information section of this 
document. Note that all comments received will be posted without change 
to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information 
provided.

[[Page 41182]]

    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 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 you may visit http://www.dot.gov/privacy.html.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or 
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov, or the street 
address listed above. Follow the online instructions for accessing the 
dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical issues: Mr. Markus 
Price, Office of Crash Avoidance Standards, 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, 
NHTSA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building, Washington, DC 20590 
(Telephone: (202) 366-2992) (Fax: (202) 366-3820).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    NHTSA published a NPRM on December 30, 2005 \1\ to reorganize FMVSS 
No. 108 and improve the clarity of the standard's requirements thereby 
increasing its utility for regulated parties. It was the agency's goal 
during the rewrite process to make no substantive changes to the 
requirements of the standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 70 FR 77454, (Dec. 30, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FMVSS No. 108 has been in existence since 1968. The standard had 
been amended on an ad hoc basis over time resulting in a patchwork 
organization of the standard. Regulated parties had stated that the 
standard was difficult to interpret because of its organization. In 
response to these concerns the agency sought to rewrite the standard to 
make it more understandable by adopting a simplified numbering scheme, 
to improve organization by grouping related materials in a more logical 
and consistent sequence, and to reduce the certification burden of 
regulated parties who previously needed to review a few dozen third-
party documents. The agency issued the December 30, 2005, NPRM in an 
attempt to address these concerns.
    Based on the comments received in response to the NPRM, NHTSA 
published a final rule on December 4, 2007,\2\ amending FMVSS No. 108 
by reorganizing the regulatory text so that it provides a more 
straightforward and logical presentation of the applicable regulatory 
requirements; incorporating important agency interpretations of the 
existing requirements; and reducing reliance on third-party documents 
incorporated by reference. The preamble of the final rule again stated 
that the rewrite of FMVSS No. 108 was administrative in nature and 
would have no impact on the substantive requirements of the standard. 
The final rule made several changes to the proposal contained in the 
NPRM including removing the blue and green color boundary requirements 
from paragraph S14.4.1.3.2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 72 FR 68234, (Dec. 4, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On August 11, 2008, SABIC Innovative Plastics sent a letter to 
NHTSA claiming that the agency did not allow for public comment when it 
made the decision to remove the blue and green color boundaries from 
the standard. SABIC further argued that in removing the blue and green 
color boundaries from paragraph S14.4.1.3.2, the agency substantively 
changed the requirements of FMVSS No. 108 during the rewrite process.

II. Green and Blue Color Boundaries

    Previous to the rewrite of the standard, paragraph S5.1.5 of FMVSS 
No. 108 required that the color of all lamps required by the standard 
comply with SAE J578c, Color Specification for Electric Signal Lighting 
Devices, (FEB 1977). SAE J578c contained color boundary definitions for 
red, yellow, white, green, restricted blue, and signal blue light. The 
NPRM included the boundary definition for the colors blue and green, 
but left out restricted blue. In the final rule the agency removed the 
color boundary definitions for green and blue from paragraph 
S14.4.1.3.2, retaining only the definitions for the red, yellow, and 
white color boundaries.
    The agency is aware that, although neither blue nor green are 
directly used within the standard, it is possible to use these color 
boundaries to certify a material to the outdoor exposure test located 
in the paragraphs of S14.4.2.2. Prior to the reorganization final rule, 
a manufacturer could separately certify both a clear (white) material 
and a blue material to the haze test. The blue material alone could not 
be used in a lamp because the lamp itself would not emit the color of 
light required by the standard (only white, amber, and red lights are 
permitted). Once individually certified to the three year haze test, 
however, the blue and clear material could be mixed to produce a clear 
material with a blue tint, which could then be used in a lamp lens 
provided the lamp itself emits light within the white color boundary. 
Under the standard, the mixed material can be certified to the haze 
test without an additional three years of testing.
    The agency recognizes that removing the color definitions for blue 
and green creates a substantive change to the requirements of FMVSS No. 
108. Since it was not the agency's intention to create any substantive 
modifications to the standard, as stated in the NPRM and preamble of 
the final rule, the agency is proposing to amend FMVSS No. 108 to add 
color boundary definitions for green, restricted blue and signal blue 
so that the requirements of the rewrite coincide with those of the old 
standard. Further, the agency notes that these additional color 
boundary definitions have no impact on color that any lamp must emit. 
The agency is not proposing to change the color requirements for any 
lamp mandated by FMVSS No. 108.

III. Costs, Benefits, and the Proposed Compliance Date

    Because this proposal only restores an existing requirement to the 
standard, the agency does not anticipate that there would be any costs 
or benefits associated with this rulemaking action. Accordingly, the 
agency did not conduct a separate economic analysis for this 
rulemaking.
    The agency proposes an effective date of December 1, 2012, should a 
final rule be issued, to coincide with the effective date of the FMVSS 
No. 108 administrative rewrite.

IV. Public Participation

How do I prepare and submit comments?

    Your comments must be written and in English. To ensure that your 
comments are correctly filed in the Docket, please include the docket 
number of this document in your comments. Your comments must not be 
more than 15 pages long.\3\ We established this limit to encourage you 
to write your primary comments in a concise fashion. However, you may 
attach necessary additional documents to your comments. There is no 
limit on the length of the attachments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See 49 CFR 553.21.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Please submit your comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments on 
the electronic docket site by clicking on ``Help'' or ``FAQ.''

[[Page 41183]]

     Mail: Docket Management Facility, M-30, U.S. Department of 
Transportation, West Building, Ground Floor, Rm. W12-140, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room 
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern 
Time, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: (202) 493-2251.
    If you are submitting comments electronically as a PDF (Adobe) 
file, we ask that the documents submitted be scanned using an Optical 
Character Recognition (OCR) process, thus allowing the agency to search 
and copy certain portions of your submissions.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Optical character recognition (OCR) is the process of 
converting an image of text, such as a scanned paper document or 
electronic fax file, into computer-editable text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Please note that pursuant to the Data Quality Act, in order for 
substantive data to be relied upon and used by the agency, it must meet 
the information quality standards set forth in the Office of Management 
and Budget (OMB) and DOT Data Quality Act guidelines. Accordingly, we 
encourage you to consult the guidelines in preparing your comments. 
OMB's guidelines may be accessed at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/fedreg/reproducible.html. DOT's guidelines may be accessed at http://dmses.dot.gov/submit/DataQualityGuidelines.pdf.

How can I be sure that my comments were received?

    If you submit your comments by mail and wish Docket Management to 
notify you upon its receipt of your comments, enclose a self-addressed, 
stamped postcard in the envelope containing your comments. Upon 
receiving your comments, Docket Management will return the postcard by 
mail.

How do I submit confidential business information?

    If you wish to submit any information under a claim of 
confidentiality, you should submit three copies of your complete 
submission, including the information you claim to be confidential 
business information, to the Chief Counsel, NHTSA, at the address given 
above under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. When you send a comment 
containing information claimed to be confidential business information, 
you should include a cover letter setting forth the information 
specified in our confidential business information regulation.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See 49 CFR part 512.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, you should submit a copy, from which you have deleted 
the claimed confidential business information, to the Docket by one of 
the methods set forth above.

Will the agency consider late comments?

    We will consider all comments received before the close of business 
on the comment closing date indicated above under DATES. To the extent 
possible, we will also consider comments received after that date. 
Therefore, if interested persons believe that any new information the 
agency places in the docket affects their comments, they may submit 
comments after the closing date concerning how the agency should 
consider that information for the final rule.
    If a comment is received too late for us to consider in developing 
a final rule (assuming that one is issued), we will consider that 
comment as an informal suggestion for future rulemaking action.

How can I read the comments submitted by other people?

    You may read the materials placed in the docket for this document 
(e.g., the comments submitted in response to this document by other 
interested persons) at any time by going to http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the online instructions for accessing the dockets. You may also 
read the materials at the Docket Management Facility by going to the 
street address given above under ADDRESSES. The Docket Management 
Facility is open between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through 
Friday, except Federal holidays.

V. Regulatory Notices and Analyses

A. Executive Order 12866, Executive Order 13563, and DOT Regulatory 
Policies and Procedures
    NHTSA has considered the impact of this rulemaking action under 
Executive Order 12866, Executive Order 13563, 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.'' It is not considered to 
be significant under E.O. 12866 or the Department's regulatory policies 
and procedures.
B. National Environmental Policy Act
    We have reviewed this proposal for the purposes of the National 
Environmental Policy Act and determined that it would not have a 
significant impact on the quality of the human environment.
C. 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 the 
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities.
    NHTSA has considered the effects of the proposed rule under the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act. I certify that this proposed rule would not 
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. This proposal restores the green and blue color boundaries 
contained in the currently applicable version of FMVSS No. 108 to the 
administrative rewrite of FMVSS No. 108 which has not yet taken effect. 
Accordingly, we do not anticipate that this proposal would have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
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 rulemaking would 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 would 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.''
E. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)
    Pursuant to Executive Order 12988, ``Civil Justice Reform,'' \6\ 
NHTSA has

[[Page 41184]]

considered whether this rulemaking would have any retroactive effect. 
This proposed rule does not have any retroactive effect.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 61 FR 4729 (Feb. 7, 1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

F. 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 a proposed or final rule that includes 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 cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative if the 
agency publishes with the final rule an explanation why that 
alternative was not adopted.
    This proposed rule is not anticipated to result in the expenditure 
by state, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the 
private sector in excess of $100 million annually. The cost impact of 
this proposed rule is expected to be $0. Therefore, the agency has not 
prepared an economic assessment pursuant to the Unfunded Mandate Reform 
Act.
G. Paperwork Reduction Act
    Under the procedures established by 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. This proposed rule does not contain any collection 
of information requirements requiring review under the PRA.
H. Executive Order 13045
    Executive Order 13045 \7\ applies to any rule that: (1) Is 
determined to be economically significant as defined under E.O. 12866, 
and (2) concerns an environmental, health or safety risk that NHTSA has 
reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children. If 
the regulatory action meets both criteria, we must evaluate the 
environmental health or safety effects of the proposed rule on 
children, and explain why the proposed regulation is preferable to 
other potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives 
considered by us.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 62 FR 19885 (Apr. 23, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This proposed rule does not pose such a risk for children. The 
primary effects of this proposal are to amend the lighting standard to 
restore the green and blue color boundaries.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act (NTTAA) requires NHTSA to evaluate and use existing voluntary 
consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless doing so would 
be inconsistent with applicable law (e.g., the statutory provisions 
regarding NHTSA's vehicle safety authority) or otherwise impractical.
    Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards developed or 
adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. Technical standards 
are defined by the NTTAA as ``performance-based or design-specific 
technical specification and related management systems practices.'' 
They pertain to ``products and processes, such as size, strength, or 
technical performance of a product, process or material.''
    Examples of organizations generally regarded as voluntary consensus 
standards bodies include the American Society for Testing and Materials 
(ASTM), the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE), and the American 
National Standards Institute (ANSI). If NHTSA does not use available 
and potentially applicable voluntary consensus standards, we are 
required by the Act to provide Congress, through OMB, an explanation of 
the reasons for not using such standards.
    This proposal would not adopt or reference any new industry or 
consensus standards that were not already present in FMVSS No. 108.
J. Executive Order 13211
    Executive Order 13211 \8\ applies to any rule that: (1) Is 
determined to be economically significant as defined under E.O. 12866, 
and is likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, 
distribution, or use of energy; or (2) that is designated by the 
Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs as a 
significant energy action. If the regulatory action meets either 
criterion, we must evaluate the adverse energy effects of the proposed 
rule and explain why the proposed regulation is preferable to other 
potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered 
by NHTSA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 66 FR 28355 (May 18, 2001).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This proposal restores the green and blue color boundaries 
contained in the currently applicable version of FMVSS No. 108 to the 
administrative rewrite of FMVSS No. 108 which has not yet taken effect. 
Therefore, this proposed rule will not have any adverse energy effects. 
Accordingly, this proposed rulemaking action is not designated as a 
significant energy action.
K. 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.
L. Plain Language
    Executive Order 12866 requires each agency to write all rules in 
plain language. Application of the principles of plain language 
includes consideration of the following questions:
     Have we organized the material to suit the public's needs?
     Are the requirements in the rule clearly stated?
     Does the rule contain technical language or jargon that 
isn't clear?
     Would a different format (grouping and order of sections, 
use of headings, paragraphing) make the rule easier to understand?
     Would more (but shorter) sections be better?
     Could we improve clarity by adding tables, lists, or 
diagrams?
     What else could we do to make the rule easier to 
understand?
    If you have any responses to these questions, please include them 
in your comments on this proposal.
M. 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 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477-78) or you

[[Page 41185]]

may visit http://www.dot.gov/privacy.html.
    In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA proposes to amend 49 CFR 
part 571 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, 30166; 
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.

Sec.  571.108  [Amended]

    Section 571.108 is amended effective December 1, 2012 by adding 
paragraphs S14.4.1.4.2.4, S14.1.4.2.5, and S14.4.1.4.2.6 to read as 
follows:
* * * * *
    S14.4.1.4.2.4 Green. The color of light emitted must fall within 
the following boundaries:
    y = 0.73-0.73x (yellow boundary);
    y = 0.50-0.50x (blue boundary);
    x = 0.63y-0.04 (white boundary).
    S14.4.1.4.2.5 Restricted Blue. The color of light emitted must fall 
within the following boundaries:
    y = 0.07 + 0.81x (green boundary);
    x = 0.40 -y (white boundary);
    x = 0.13 + 0.60y (violet boundary).
    S14.4.1.4.2.6 Signal Blue. The color of light emitted must fall 
within the following boundaries:
    y = 0.32 (green boundary);
    x = 0.40-y (white boundary);
    x = 0.16 (white boundary);
    x = 0.13 + 0.60y (violet boundary).
* * * * *

    Issued on: July 7, 2011.
Christopher J. Bonanti,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2011-17658 Filed 7-12-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P