You are on page 1of 4

Federal Register / Vol. 71, No.

163 / Wednesday, August 23, 2006 / Proposed Rules 49407

The FAR rule requires that agencies Sec. (2) Ensuring interoperability and
acquire PIV products and services that 4.1300 Scope of subpart. conformance to applicable Federal
comply with the FIPS PUB 201 standard. The 4.1301 Contractual implementation of standards for the lifecycle of the
impact on small entities will, therefore, vary personal identity verification
components; and
depending on the approval process for
vendor products and services. 4.1302 Acquisition of approved products (3) Maintaining a written plan for
4. Description of projected reporting, and services for personal identity ensuring ongoing conformance to
recordkeeping, and other compliance verification. applicable Federal standards for the
requirements of the rule, including an 4.1303 Contract clause. lifecycle of the components.
estimate of the classes of small entities which
will be subject to the requirement and the 4.1300 Scope of subpart. 4.1303 Contract clause.
type of professional skills necessary for This subpart provides policy and The Contracting Officer shall insert
preparation of the report or record. procedures associated with Personal the clause at 52.204–9, Personal Identity
The rule does not impose any new Identity Verification as required by— Verification of Contractor Personnel, in
reporting, recordkeeping, or compliance (a) Federal Information Processing solicitations and contracts when
requirements. Standards Publication (FIPS PUB) contract performance requires
5. Identification, to the extent practicable, Number 201, ‘‘Personal Identity
of all relevant Federal rules which may
contractors to have physical access to a
Verification of Federal Employees and federally-controlled facility or access to
duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the rule. Contractors’’; and
The rule does not duplicate, overlap, or a federally-controlled information
(b) Office of Management and Budget system.
conflict with any other Federal rules.
6. Description of any significant (OMB) guidance M–05–24, dated
[FR Doc. 06–7088 Filed 8–22–06; 8:45 am]
alternatives to the rule which accomplish the August 5, 2005, ‘‘Implementation of
stated objectives of applicable statutes and Homeland Security Presidential
which minimize any significant economic Directive (HSPD) 12—Policy for a
impact of the rule on small entities. Common Identification Standard for
There are no practical alternatives that will Federal Employees and Contractors’’. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
accomplish the objectives of HSPD–12.
4.1301 Contractual implementation of National Highway Traffic Safety
The FAR Secretariat has submitted a personal identity verification requirement. Administration
copy of the IRFA to the Chief Counsel
(a) Agencies must follow FIPS PUB
for Advocacy of the Small Business
201 and the associated OMB 49 CFR Part 531
Administration. A copy of the IRFA may
implementation guidance for personal
be obtained from the FAR Secretariat. [Docket No. NHTSA–2006–25593]
identity verification for all affected
The Councils will consider comments
contractor and subcontractor personnel Exemptions From Average Fuel
from small entities concerning the
when contract performance requires Economy Standards; Passenger
affected FAR Part 4 in accordance with
contractors to have physical access to a Automobile Average Fuel Economy
5 U.S.C. 610. Comments must be
federally-controlled facility or access to Standards
submitted separately and should cite 5
a Federal information system.
U.S.C 601, et seq. (FAR case 2005–017), (b) Agencies must include their AGENCY: National Highway Traffic
in correspondence. implementation of FIPS PUB 201 and Safety Administration (NHTSA),
C. Paperwork Reduction Act OMB guidance M–05–24, in Department of Transportation (DOT).
solicitations and contracts that require ACTION: Proposed Decision to Grant
The Paperwork Reduction Act does the contractor to have physical access to
not apply because the proposed changes Exemption.
a federally-controlled facility or access
to the FAR do not impose information to a Federal information system. SUMMARY: This proposed decision
collection requirements that require the (c) Agencies must designate an official responds to a petition filed by Spyker
approval of the Office of Management responsible for verifying contractor Automobielen B.V. (Spyker) requesting
and Budget under 44 U.S.C. 3501, et employee personal identity. that it be exempted from the generally
seq. applicable average fuel economy
4.1302 Acquisition of approved products standard of 27.5 miles per gallon (mpg)
List of Subjects in 48 CFR Part 4 and services for personal identity
for model years 2006 and 2007, and
Government procurement. that, for Spyker, lower alternative
Dated: August 17, 2006.
(a) In order to comply with FIPS PUB standards be established. In this
201, agencies must only purchase document, NHTSA proposes that the
Ralph De Stefano,
approved personal identity verification requested exemption be granted to
Director, Contract Policy Division. products and services. Agencies may Spyker and that alternative standards of
Therefore, DoD, GSA, and NASA acquire the approved products and 18.9 mpg be established for MY’s 2006
propose amending 48 CFR part 4 as set services from the GSA, Federal Supply and 2007.
forth below: Schedule 70, Special Item Number (SIN)
132–62, HSPD–12 Product and Service DATES: Comments on this proposed
PART 4—ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS Components. decision must be received on or before
(b) When acquiring personal identity September 22, 2006.
1. The authority citation for 48 CFR verification products and services not ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
part 4 continues to read as follows: using the process in paragraph (a) of this by any of the following methods:
Authority: 40 U.S.C. 121(c); 10 U.S.C. section, agencies must ensure that the • Web site:
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS

chapter 137; and 42 U.S.C. 2473(c). applicable products and services are Follow the instructions for submitting
2. Revise Subpart 4.13 to read as approved as compliant with FIPS PUB comments on the DOT electronic docket
follows: 201 including— site.
(1) Certifying the products and • Fax: 1–202–493–2251.
Subpart 4.13—Personal Identity services procured meet all applicable • Mail: Docket Management Facility;
Verification Federal standards and requirements; U.S. Department of Transportation, 400

VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:07 Aug 22, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23AUP1.SGM 23AUP1
49408 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 163 / Wednesday, August 23, 2006 / Proposed Rules

Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, than 10,000 passenger automobiles in automobile fuel economy standards for
Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590– the affected model year. In determining MYs 2006 and 2007. This petition was
001. the maximum feasible average fuel filed less than 24 months before the
• Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on economy, the agency is required under beginning of MYs 2006 and 2007 and
the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 49 U.S.C. 32902(f) to consider: was therefore untimely under 49 CFR
400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, (1) Technological feasibility 526.6(b). Spyker indicated that its
DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday (2) Economic practicability decision to enter the U.S. market for MY
through Friday, except Federal holidays. (3) The effect of other Federal motor 2006 was not made until late 2004 after
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to vehicle standards on fuel economy, and it reached an agreement with Audi that Follow the (4) The need of the United States to allowed Spyker to use a U.S. certified
online instructions for submitting conserve energy. powerplant.
comments. The statute permits NHTSA to Under the circumstances, NHTSA
Instructions: All submissions must establish alternative average fuel concludes that Spyker took reasonable
include the agency name and docket economy standards applicable to measures to submit a petition in as
number or Regulatory Identification exempted low volume manufacturers in timely a manner as possible. The agency
Number (RIN) for this rulemaking. For one of three ways: (1) A separate notes that Spyker’s ability to enter the
detailed instructions on submitting standard for each exempted U.S. market apparently hinged on
comments and additional information manufacturer; (2) a separate average fuel obtaining a U.S.-certified powerplant.
on the rulemaking process, see the economy standard applicable to each This, according to Spyker, was not
Request for Comments heading of the class of exempted automobiles (classes possible or feasible until it reached an
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of would be based on design, size, price, agreement with Audi to provide the
this document. Note that all comments or other factors); or (3) a single standard required engine. Therefore, the agency
received will be posted without change for all exempted manufacturers. has determined that good cause exists
to, including any Background Information on Spyker for the late submission of the petition.
personal information provided. Please This is consistent with a previous
see the Privacy Act heading under Spyker is a Dutch company, which determination made by the agency with
Rulemaking Analyses and Notices. manufacturers limited-production regard to the timeliness of a petition
Docket: For access to the docket to sports cars, built to individual order. submitted by DeTomaso Automobiles,
read background documents or Spyker debuted its first in vehicle 2000. Ltd. (see, 64 FR 73476; December 30,
comments received, go to http:// The company operations are located in 1999; Docket No. NHTSA–99–6676). at any time or to Room PL– Zeewolde, The Netherlands. The
petitioner stated that in 2003, Spyker of Methodology Used To Project
401 on the plaza level of the Nassif
North America LLC was incorporated in Maximum Feasible Average Fuel
Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW.,
Delaware as a subsidiary of Spyker in Economy Level for Spyker
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except order to address U.S. distribution. The Baseline Fuel Economy
Federal holidays. petitioner also stated that in 2004,
Spyker took the company public by To project the level of fuel economy
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For which could be achieved by Spyker in
means of an initial public offering. It is
technical issues, contact Ken Katz, Lead listed on the Amsterdam Stock the 2006 and 2007 model years, NHTSA
Engineer, Fuel Economy Division, Exchange. considered whether there were
Office of International Policy, Fuel As stated by petitioner, Spyker has technical or other improvements that
Economy, and Consumer Programs, at teamed up with Cosworth Technologies, would be feasible for these vehicles, and
(202) 366–0846, facsimile (202) 493– a 100 percent-owned subsidiary of whether the company currently plans to
2290, electronic mail Audi, to integrate the LEV V8 incorporate such improvements in the For legal issues, powertrain of the Audi A8 into the vehicles. The agency reviewed the
contact Stephen Wood of the Office of Spyker chassis. technological feasibility of any changes
the Chief Counsel, at (202) 366–2992. The petitioner stated that it and their economic practicability.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: manufactured a total of 51 vehicles NHTSA interprets ‘‘technological
between 2002 and 2004, and projects feasibility’’ as meaning that technology
Statutory Background which would be available to Spyker for
that it will manufacturer no more than
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. section 160 vehicles per year between 2005 and use on its 2006 and 2007 model year
32902(d), NHTSA may exempt a low 2007. In 2006 and 2007, the years for automobiles, and which would improve
volume manufacturer of passenger which an alternative standard is the fuel economy of those automobiles.
automobiles from the generally requested, Spyker projects that 77 and The areas examined for technologically
applicable average fuel economy 112 vehicles, respectively, will be feasible improvements were weight
standards if NHTSA concludes that exported to the U.S. reduction, aerodynamic improvements,
those standards are more stringent than engine improvements, drive line
the maximum feasible average fuel The Spyker Petition improvements, and reduced rolling
economy for that manufacturer and if NHTSA’s regulations on low volume resistance.
NHTSA establishes an alternative exemptions from CAFE standards state The agency interprets ‘‘economic
standard for that manufacturer at its that petitions for exemption are practicability’’ for the purpose of
maximum feasible level. Under the submitted ‘‘not later than 24 months petitions filed under 49 CFR part 525 as
statute, a low volume manufacturer is before the beginning of the affected meaning the financial capability of the
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS

one that manufactured (worldwide) model year, unless good cause for later manufacturer to improve its average fuel
fewer than 10,000 passenger submission is shown’’ (49 CFR economy by incorporating
automobiles in the second model year 525.6(b)). technologically feasible changes to its
before the model year for which the NHTSA received a petition from 2006 and 2007 model year automobiles.
exemption is sought (the affected model Spyker on May 11, 2005, seeking In assuming that capability, the agency
year) and that will manufacture fewer exemption from the passenger has always considered market demand

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:59 Aug 22, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23AUP1.SGM 23AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 163 / Wednesday, August 23, 2006 / Proposed Rules 49409

as an implicit part of the concept of vehicle manufacturer from an outside attain those generally applicable
economic practicability. Consumers source. As such, the ability to obtain standards. Nevertheless, the agency
need not purchase what they do not further fuel economy improvements estimates that the additional fuel
want. from engine and drive train consumed by operating the MYs 2006
In accordance with the concerns of modifications is limited. The petitioner and 2007 fleets of Spyker vehicles at the
economic practicability, NHTSA has also stated that the fuel economy label CAFE of 18.9 mpg (compared to a
considered only those improvements values of the vehicle are similar to those hypothetical 27.5 mpg fleet) is 13,138
that would be compatible with the basic of similar vehicles, e.g., Cadillac XLR, barrels of fuel. Obviously, this is
design concepts of Spyker’s automobile. Dodge Viper, Porsche 911. insignificant compared to the fuel used
Since NHTSA assumes that Spyker will daily by the entire motor vehicle fleet,
continue to build high performance Model Mix
which amounts to 8.4 million barrels
cars, design changes that would remove Spyker has no opportunity to improve per day for passenger cars in the United
items traditionally offered on these its fuel economy by changing its fleet States in 2003 (USDOE/EIA, Monthly
types of vehicles were not considered. mix since it has stated that it will only Energy Review, April 2005, Table 11.2).
Such changes to the basic design would export one model to the U.S. during the
be economically impracticable since years for which this petition was filed. Maximum Feasible Average Fuel
they might well significantly reduce the Economy for Spyker
Effect of Other Federal Motor Vehicle
demand for these automobiles, thereby The agency has tentatively concluded
reducing sales and causing significant that it would not be technologically
economic injury to the low volume Federal motor vehicle safety feasible and economically practicable
manufacturer. standards (FMVSS) and regulations are for Spyker to improve the fuel economy
anticipated to have an adverse effect on of its MY 2006 and 2007 fleet above an
Technology for Fuel Economy the fuel economy of Spyker’s vehicles. average of 18.9 mpg for those years, that
Improvement These standards include 49 CFR part Federal automobile standards would not
The nature of Spyker’s vehicles 581, Bumper Standard and FMVSS 208, adversely affect achievable fuel
generally do not result in high fuel Occupant crash protection. These economy beyond the amount already
economy values. Also, Spyker lags in standards may reduce achievable fuel factored into Spyker’s projections, and
having the latest developments in fuel economy values, since they result in that the national effort to conserve
efficiency technology because suppliers increased vehicle weight. Spyker’s energy would not be affected by
generally provide components and projection reflected the impact of these granting the requested exemption and
technology to small manufacturers only standards. Spyker is a small company establishing an alternative standard.
after supplying large manufacturers. and engineering resources are limited, Consequently, the agency tentatively
Spyker states that the requested limiting the amount of resources Spyker concludes that the maximum feasible
alternative fuel economy values can apply to comply with both the average fuel economy for Spyker is 18.9
represent the best possible CAFE that mandatory standards and the fuel mpg for MYs 2006 and 2007.
Spyker can achieve for the 2006 and economy requirements. Chapter 329 permits NHTSA to
2007 model years. For MYs 2006 and Additionally, as a small volume establish an alternative average fuel
2007, Spyker stated that the fuel manufacturer, the more stringent economy standard applicable to
economy value of 18.9 mpg 1 represents California evaporative emission exempted manufacturers in one of three
the best possible CAFE that it can standards will apply to Spyker ways: (1) A separate standard may be
achieve. beginning in MY 2006, and the U.S. established for each exempted
Spyker produces a small lightweight EPA Tier 2–LEV II exhaust standards manufacturer; (2) classes, based on
innovative sports vehicle. Performance will be applicable in MY 2007. A design, size, price or other factors, may
is achieved through obtaining maximum portion of Spyker’s limited engineering be established for the automobiles of
output per unit of engine displacement resources will have to be expended to exempted manufacturers, with a
and the use of lightweight aerodynamic comply with these more stringent separate fuel economy standard
body designs. The vehicle’s compact emissions standards including, but not applicable to each class; or (3) a single
dimensions provide efficient limited to, evaporative emission standard may be established for all
performance coupled with a strong and standards. exempted manufacturers. The agency
relatively lightweight aerodynamic body tentatively concludes that it would be
The Need of the United States To appropriate to establish a separate
construction. Since the chassis/body
Conserve Energy standard for Spyker.
configuration is small, aerodynamic and
lightweight, further fuel economy The agency recognizes there is a need While the agency has the option of
improvements through changes to the to conserve energy, to promote energy establishing a single standard for all
chassis and body appear to be limited. security, and to improve balance of exempted manufacturers, we note that
Spyker has stated that it is unable to payments. However, as stated above, previous exemptions have been granted
change the supplier of the vehicle’s NHTSA has tentatively determined that to manufacturers of high-performance
engine and that the engine is the most it is not technologically feasible or cars, luxury cars and specialized
advanced engine available to a small economically practicable for Spyker to vehicles for the transportation of
achieve an average fuel economy in persons with physical impairments. The
1 Spyker based this fuel economy on the MYs 2006 and 2007 above the levels set agency’s experience in establishing
combined fuel economy of 19.1 obtained at the U.S. forth in this proposed decision. exemptions indicates that selection of a
EPA, reduced by 0.15 mpg in order to allow for
Granting an exemption to Spyker and single standard would be inappropriate.
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS

potential production variation. As opposed to

reducing 19.1 mpg value by 0.15 mpg, Spyker setting an alternative standard at that Such a standard would have little
added 0.15 mpg to the value in the petition. Given level would result in only a negligible impact on energy conservation while
that fuel economy compliance is determined in increase in fuel consumption and would doing little to ease the burdens faced by
tenths of mpg, the agency confirmed with a
representative of Spyker that the petition is
not affect the need of the United States small manufacturers which cannot meet
requesting an alternative fuel economy requirement to conserve energy. In fact, there would the fuel economy standards applicable
of 18.9 mpg. not be any increase since Spyker cannot to larger manufacturers. Similarly, the

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:59 Aug 22, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23AUP1.SGM 23AUP1
49410 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 163 / Wednesday, August 23, 2006 / Proposed Rules

agency is not proposing to establish determined that this proposed p.m., Monday through Friday, except
alternative standards based on different exemption if adopted, would not Federal holidays.
classes of vehicles. Again, the agency’s significantly affect the human Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search
experience has been that vehicles environment. Regardless of the fuel the electronic form of all comments
manufactured by low volume economy of the exempted vehicles, they received into any of our dockets by the
manufacturers may differ widely in size, must pass the emissions standards name of the individual submitting the
price, design or other factors. Based on which measure the amount of emissions comment (or signing the comment, if
the information available at this time, per mile traveled. Thus, the quality of submitted on behalf of an association,
we do not believe it would be the air is not affected by the proposed business, labor union, etc.). You may
appropriate to establish class-based exemptions and alternative standards. review DOT’s complete Privacy Act
alternative standards. Further, since the exempted passenger Statement in the Federal Register
automobiles cannot achieve better fuel published on April 11, 2000 (Volume
Regulatory Impact Analyses
economy than is proposed herein, 65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78) or you
NHTSA has analyzed this proposal granting these proposed exemptions may visit
and determined that neither Executive would not affect the amount of fuel We will consider all comments
Order 12866 nor the Department of used. received before the close of business on
Transportation’s regulatory policies and the comment closing date indicated
procedures apply. Under Executive How You May Comment on the Spyker
below. To the extent possible, we shall
Order 12866, the proposal would not Application
also consider comments filed after the
establish a ‘‘rule,’’ which is defined in We invite you to submit comments on closing date. We will publish a notice of
the Executive Order as ‘‘an agency the application described above. You final action on the application in the
statement of general applicability and may submit comments [identified by the Federal Register pursuant to the
future effect.’’ The proposed exemption DOT Docket number in the heading of authority indicated below.
is not generally applicable, since it this document] by any of the following
would apply only to Spyker, as methods: List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 531
discussed in this notice. Under DOT • Web site: Energy conservation, Gasoline,
regulatory policies and procedures, the Follow the instructions for submitting Imports, Motor Vehicles.
proposed exemption would not be a comments on the DOT electronic docket In consideration of the foregoing, 49
‘‘significant regulation.’’ If Departmental site by clicking on ‘‘Help and CFR part 531 would be amended to read
policies and procedures were Information’’ or ‘‘Help/Info.’’ as follows:
applicable, the agency would have • Fax: 1–202–493–2251.
determined that this proposed action is • Mail: Docket Management Facility, PART 531—[AMENDED]
not significant. The principal impact of U.S. Department of Transportation, 400
this proposal is that the exempted Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, 1. The authority citation for part 531
company would not be required to pay Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590. continues to read as follows:
civil penalties if its maximum feasible • Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on Authority: 49 U.S.C. 32902, delegation of
average fuel economy were achieved, the plaza level of the Nassif Building, authority at 49 CFR 1.50.
and purchasers of those vehicles would 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, 2. Section 531.5 would be amended
not have to bear the indirect burden of DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday by adding paragraph (b)(15) to read as
those civil penalties in the form of through Friday, except Federal holidays. follows:
higher prices. Since this proposal is for • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
an alternative standard at the level Follow the § 531.5 Fuel economy standards.
tentatively determined to be the online instructions for submitting * * * * *
maximum feasible levels for Spyker for comments. (b) * * *
MYs 2006 and 2007, no fuel would be Instructions: All submissions must (15) Spyker Automobielen B.V.
saved by establishing a higher include the agency name and docket
alternative standard. NHTSA finds in number or Regulatory Identification AVERAGE FUEL ECONOMY STANDARD
the Section on ‘‘The Need of the United Number (RIN) for this rulemaking. Note
States to Conserve Energy’’ that because that all comments received will be (Miles per
Model year
of the small size of the Spyker fleet, that posted without change to http:// gallon)
incremental usage of gasoline by, including any personal 2006 ........................................ 18.9
Spyker’s customers would not affect the information provided. 2007 ........................................ 18.9
United States’ need to conserve Docket: For access to the docket in
gasoline. There would not be any order to read background documents or
Issued on: August 17, 2006.
impacts for the public at large. comments received, go to http://
The agency has also considered the at any time or to Room PL– H. Keith Brewer,
environmental implications of this 401 on the plaza level of the Nassif Director, Crash Avoidance Standards.
proposed exemption in accordance with Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., [FR Doc. E6–13957 Filed 8–22–06; 8:45 am]
the Environmental Policy Act and Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:59 Aug 22, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23AUP1.SGM 23AUP1