You are on page 1of 17

66786 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No.

219 / Wednesday, November 12, 2008 / Rules and Regulations

Commodity Parts per million

Peppermint, tops .............................................................................................................................................. 0.20


Spearmint, tops ................................................................................................................................................ 0.20

* * * * * Administration, 1200 New Jersey VII. Testing Issues


[FR Doc. E8–26875 Filed 11–10–08; 8:45 am] Avenue, SE., West Building, a. Positioning of Adjustable Features
Washington, DC 20590. b. Testing the Car Bed
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
The petition will be placed in the c. Testing Forward-Facing-Only CRSs in
Rear-Facing Configurations
docket. Anyone is able to search the
d. Specifying the Type Of Harness Used
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION electronic form of all documents For Testing
received into any of our dockets by the VIII. Suggestions for Future Amendments
National Highway Traffic Safety name of the individual submitting the a. Publishing a Yearly Bulletin
Administration comment (or signing the comment, if b. Meaning of ‘‘Available for Purchase’’
submitted on behalf of an association, c. Developing ‘‘standard’’ models of CRSs
49 CFR Parts 571 and 585 business, labor union, etc.). You may d. Define ‘‘model’’ in Child Restraint
review DOT’s complete Privacy Act System Standard
[Docket No. NHTSA–08–0168] e. Rear-Facing CRSs With High Profiles
Statement in the Federal Register
RIN 2127–AK02 IX. Specification of a Manufactured On or
published on April 11, 2000 (Volume
After Date for the Newly Added CRSs
65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78). X. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Standards; Occupant Crash Protection This final rule amends FMVSS No.
Carla Cuentas, Office of
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Crashworthiness Standards, Light Duty 208 to update the child restraint systems
Safety Administration (NHTSA), Vehicle Division (telephone 202–366– (CRSs) listed in Appendix A of the
Department of Transportation (DOT). 4583, fax 202–493–2739). For legal standard. The notice of proposed
issues, contact Deirdre Fujita, Office of rulemaking (NPRM) preceding this final
ACTION: Final rule.
Chief Counsel (telephone 202–366– rule was published on September 25,
SUMMARY: NHTSA is amending Federal 2992, fax 202–366–3820). You may send 2007 (72 FR 54402; Docket 2007–
Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) mail to these officials at the National 28710).
No. 208, ‘‘Occupant crash protection,’’ Highway Traffic Safety Administration, I. Background
to update many of the child restraint U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200
systems (CRSs) listed in Appendix A of New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building, FMVSS No. 208 (49 CFR 571.208)
the standard. The CRSs in Appendix A Washington, DC 20590. requires passenger cars and trucks,
are used by NHTSA to test advanced air buses, and multipurpose passenger
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
bag suppression or low risk deployment vehicles with a gross vehicle weight
systems, to ensure that the air bag Table of Contents rating (GVWR) of 3,856 kilograms (kg)
systems pose no reasonable safety risk I. Background (8,500 pounds (lb)) or less and an
to infants and small children in the real II. Factors for Decision-Making unloaded vehicle weight of 2,495 kg
world. The amendments replace the a. Guiding Factors (5,500 lb) or less to be equipped with
b. Child Restraint Data seat belts and frontal air bags for the
CRSs listed in Appendix A with CRSs c. Additional Considerations
that are more available and more protection of vehicle occupants in
III. Proposed Changes
representative of the CRS fleet currently crashes. While air bags have been very
IV. Comments and Agency Responses on
on the market. CRSs in Appendix A effective in protecting people in
DATES: If you wish to petition for a. Deletions moderate and high speed frontal
reconsideration of this rule, your b. Additions (Identified in Table 1) crashes, there have been instances in
petition must be received by December 1. Proposed Inclusion of Graco Snugride to which they have caused serious or fatal
29, 2008.
Subpart B injuries to occupants who were very
2. Proposed Inclusion of Peg Perego Primo close to the air bag when it deployed.
Effective date: The date on which this Viaggio #IMCC00US to Subpart B
final rule amends the CFR is January 12, On May 12, 2000, NHTSA published a
3. Proposed Inclusion of the Evenflo final rule to require that air bags be
2009. Generations #352 to Subpart C
This final rule adopts a one-year 4. Proposed Inclusion of Cosco Summit designed to create less risk of serious air
phase-in of the requirement to test with Deluxe #22–260 to Subpart C bag-induced injuries and provide
the child restraints in the revised 5. Proposed Inclusion of the Graco SafeSeat improved frontal crash protection for all
Appendix A. Under the phase-in, 50 (Step 2) #8B02 to Subpart C occupants, by means that include
percent of vehicles manufactured on or c. Updating Other CRSs in Appendix A advanced air bag technology
(Identified in Table 2) (‘‘Advanced Air Bag Rule,’’ 65 FR
after September 1, 2009 must be 1. Angel Guard Angel Ride #AA2403FOF
certified as meeting FMVSS No. 208 30680, Docket No. NHTSA 00–7013).
(Subpart A) Under the Advanced Air Bag Rule, to
when tested with the CRSs on the 2. Cosco Arriva #22–013 (Subpart B)
revised Appendix A, and all vehicles 3. Britax Roundabout #E9L02 (Subpart C) minimize the risk to infants and small
manufactured on or after September 1, 4. Graco ComfortSport (Subpart C) children from deploying air bags,
2010 must be so certified. 5. Evenflo Tribute V Deluxe #379 (Subpart manufacturers may suppress an air bag
C) in the presence of a CRS or provide a
ADDRESSES: If you wish to petition for
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES

6. Graco Cherished Cargo (Subpart D) low risk deployment (LRD) system.1


reconsideration of this rule, you should 7. Cosco High Back Booster #22–209
refer in your petition to the docket (Subpart D) 1 The LRD option involves deployment of the air
number of this document and submit V. Compliance Date bag in the presence of a Child Restraint Air Bag
your petition to: Administrator, VI. Early Compliance and Picking and Interaction (CRABI) test dummy, representing a 12-
National Highway Traffic Safety Choosing of CRSs month-old child, in a rear-facing child restraint.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:26 Nov 10, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\12NOR1.SGM 12NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 219 / Wednesday, November 12, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 66787

To minimize the risk to children, been certified as being in compliance restraint system dimensions, weight
manufacturers relying on an air bag with 49 CFR 571.208, S19. (mass) and sales volumes (based on
suppression or LRD system must ensure • Subpart C lists forward-facing confidential manufacturers’ data) to
that the vehicle complies with the toddler and forward-facing convertible 3 identify which CRSs have dimensions
suppression or LRD requirements when CRSs that can be used by the agency to that were representative of the average
tested with the CRSs specified in test the suppression system or the LRD restraint in today’s market, and which
Appendix A of the standard. As part of capabilities of a vehicle that is were possible outliers, with dimensions,
ensuring the robustness of automatic air manufactured on or after the effective weight 5 and/or footprints 6 markedly
bag suppression and LRD systems, date and prior to the termination date outside of those of the ‘‘average’’ CRS.
NHTSA made sure that the appendix specified in the appendix and that has In addition, the agency identified which
contained CRSs that represented a large been certified as being in compliance CRSs had high production totals and,
portion of the CRS market and CRSs with 49 CFR 571.208, S19 or S21. therefore, likely to have the greatest
with unique size and weight • Subpart D lists forward-facing market share (highest sales volume).
characteristics. NHTSA also planned toddler/belt positioning booster systems
and belt positioning booster systems b. Child Restraint Data
regular updates to Appendix A.
On November 19, 2003, in response to that can be used by the agency to test The data used for the NPRM were
petitions for reconsideration of the May the suppression system capabilities of a obtained from CRS manufacturers and
2000 Advanced Air Bag Rule, the vehicle that is manufactured on or after NHTSA’s Ease-of-Use (EOU) consumer
agency published a final rule that the effective date and prior to the information program. The agency’s EOU
revised Appendix A by adding two termination date specified in the program started in 2002 in response to
CRSs that were equipped with appendix and that has been certified as the Transportation Recall Enhancement,
components that attach to a vehicle’s being in compliance with 49 CFR Accountability, and Documentation
LATCH 2 system (68 FR 65179, Docket 571.208, S21 or S23. (TREAD) Act, which directed NHTSA to
No. NHTSA 03–16476). The appendix issue a notice to establish a child
II. Factors for Decision-Making restraint safety rating consumer
has not been updated since then.
a. Guiding Factors information program to provide
CRSs in Appendix A practicable, readily understandable, and
The November 2003 FMVSS No. 208
Appendix A is made up of four (4) timely information to consumers for use
final rule discussed factors that the
subparts, subparts A through D. There in making informed decisions in the
agency considers in deciding whether
are one (1) car bed, seven (7) rear-facing purchase of child restraints. The EOU
Appendix A should be updated (68 FR
child restraint systems, nine (9) program provides information about
at 65188). NHTSA reviews the appendix
forward-facing toddler and forward- child restraints with features that are
to: Maintain a spectrum of CRSs that is easier for consumers to use and install
facing convertible CRSs and four (4) representative of the CRS population in
forward-facing toddler/belt positioning correctly. The EOU program seeks to
production, ensure that only relatively evaluate all CRSs available for sale at
booster systems currently listed and current restraints will be used for
deemed ‘‘effective’’ (i.e., may be used in retail outlets.
compliance testing, determine the The 2006 EOU program assessed 99
compliance testing) in Appendix A. availability of the CRSs and determine different CRSs (including carryover
• Subpart A lists a car bed that can any change in design, other than those seats from the previous year that were
be used by the agency to test the that are purely cosmetic. (If a change to not changed), selected from 14 different
suppression system of a vehicle that is a CRS were clearly cosmetic, such as manufacturers (Docket No. NHTSA–
manufactured on or after the effective color scheme or upholstery, the list 2006–25344). In addition to those 99
date specified in Appendix A and that would not be modified.) 4 In considering CRSs, data for the CRSs currently listed
has been certified as being in whether a particular restraint should be in Appendix A were also collected
compliance with 49 CFR 571.208, S19. in Appendix A, the agency considers during the 2006 EOU program. These
• Subpart B lists rear-facing CRSs that whether the restraint— EOU data were used to determine
can be used by the agency to test the —Has mass and dimensions whether any changes to the appendix
suppression system or the LRD representative of many restraints on were warranted.
capabilities of a vehicle that is the market,
manufactured on or after the effective —Has mass and dimensions c. Additional Considerations
date and prior to the termination date representing outliers, and The agency believes that Appendix A
specified in the appendix and that has —Has been a high sales volume model. should include CRSs with a gamut of
In developing the 2007 NPRM, features that would robustly assess
2 ‘‘LATCH’’ stands for ‘‘Lower Anchors and NHTSA evaluated data, discussed advanced air bag technologies.
Tethers for Children,’’ a term that was developed below, and systematically evaluated the Automatic air bag suppression systems
by child restraint manufacturers and retailers to CRSs in Appendix A. We assessed child
refer to the standardized child restraint anchorage suppress the air bag when a small child
system that vehicle manufacturers must install 3 A convertible CRS is one that converts from a
or a child in a CRS is placed on the seat,
pursuant to FMVSS No. 225, Child Restraint and enable the air bag’s deployment
Anchorage Systems (49 CFR § 571.225). The LATCH rear-facing seat to a forward-facing seat. A
system is comprised of two lower anchorages and combination CRS is one that converts from a when most adults occupy the seat. With
one tether anchorage. Each lower anchorage is a forward-facing seat to a booster seat or a CRS that
rigid round rod or bar onto which the connector of is a convertible that can also be used as a booster. 5 Since the CRSs are used to test air bag

a CRS can be attached. FMVSS No. 225 does not 4 We also stated in the rule that, in considering suppression systems, it was important to identify
permit vehicle manufacturers to install LATCH whether to amend the appendix, we assess whether which CRSs were the lightest and heaviest, and
systems in front designated seating positions unless a variety of restraint manufacturers are represented those that are representative of the average restraint
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES

the vehicle has an air bag on-off switch meeting the in the appendix, and whether a combination of in today’s market in terms of weight.
requirements of S4.5.4 of FMVSS No. 208. Since restraints are in the appendix. Id. These 6 Some air bag suppression systems may have

September 1, 2002, CRSs have been required by considerations bear on our assessment of the degree trouble sensing a CRS if the footprint is shaped in
FMVSS No. 213, Child Restraint Systems (49 CFR to which the CRSs in the appendix are a way that loads the air bag suppression system
§ 571.213), to have permanently attached representative of child restraints in the real world sensors or load cells differently than the CRSs for
components that enable the CRS to connect to a and assess the robustness of advanced air bag which the suppression system was designed to
LATCH system on a vehicle. systems. recognize.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:26 Nov 10, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\12NOR1.SGM 12NOR1
66788 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 219 / Wednesday, November 12, 2008 / Rules and Regulations

respect to CRSs in Appendix A, LRD specify adjustments of the handles and CRSs (see Table 1 below, which
systems deploy the air bag in the sunshields to the positions specified in reproduces Table 1 of the NPRM). The
presence of a CRABI dummy in a rear- the standard to ensure the robustness of reasons for each proposed deletion or
facing CRS. The design and calibration the advanced air bag system. addition were discussed in detail in the
of the advanced air bag system used Third, since CRSs have been required NPRM and readers may refer to the
must perform satisfactorily with a wide to have LATCH components since NPRM for that information (72 FR at
range of CRSs that could be installed in September 1, 2002, the agency has 54405–54407). Our proposed deletions
the vehicle. With that in mind, the decided to replace many of the older were based generally on CRSs that did
NPRM considered the following factors non-LATCH CRSs in Appendix A with not offer any unique characteristics,
in choosing CRSs for inclusion in new equivalent LATCH-equipped CRSs those that were produced in the smallest
Appendix A. from the same manufacturer.9 On the
quantities, or those that have not been
First, with LRD systems for infants other hand, when the LATCH
in production for some time. If we
already being used in some vehicles, the requirement became effective in 2002
agency sought to include rear-facing for child restraints, CRS manufacturers proposed eliminating a CRS that offered
child restraints of varying seat back did not significantly change CRS a unique characteristic, we proposed to
heights. On the one hand, rear-facing structures or designs. Accordingly, we replace it with a similar CRS. Our
CRSs with relatively low seat back expect that suppression and LRD proposed additions also sought to
heights could in some circumstances systems will react to LATCH and non- include more LATCH-equipped CRSs in
present a more challenging test of an LATCH CRSs similarly. In addition, the appendix.
LRD system, especially one consisting of very few vehicles will have lower In addition, comments were requested
an air bag mounted on the top of the anchors in the front outboard passenger on cosmetic replacements of other CRSs
instrument panel, since the back of the seat. in Appendix A (see Table 2 below,
CRS presents less of a reaction surface which reproduces Table 2 of the
III. Proposed Changes
(resistance). With a low back, the air bag NPRM). The reasons for the updates
could fully pressurize and interact in a After considering the factors for were discussed in detail in the NPRM
fully energized state with the child’s decision-making discussed in the (72 FR at 54407–54408). These changes
head as the bag comes over the top of previous section of this preamble,
primarily would update the older CRSs
the CRS seat back. However, recent NHTSA proposed to delete certain CRSs
in the appendix with newer model CRSs
agency testing indicates that CRSs with from Appendix A and to add others.10
that have the same main physical
high backs provide significant The agency noted that some CRSs
undergo annual cosmetic changes that features as the older restraints. To
performance challenges to infant LRD obtain information on whether CRSs in
systems. Therefore, we sought to result in different model numbers for
the new version, and that some of the Appendix A could be replaced by
include in Appendix A rear-facing and
model numbers of the CRSs in the newer, more available models with the
convertible CRSs with seat back heights
NPRM could thus be different in the same relevant physical features as the
that range from 12.75 to 27 in 7 8 to
diversify the spectrum of seat back final rule to reflect the latest model Appendix A child restraints, we
heights. number. The agency docketed a contacted each manufacturer of the
Second, features such as handles and document entitled, ‘‘Technical listed CRS and asked which of their
sunshields of a rear-facing CRS may Assessment of Child Restraint Systems more recently-produced CRSs could be
complicate and challenge the sensing for FMVSS No. 208, Occupant Crash considered an equivalent replacement
operation of certain advanced air bag Protection, Appendix A,’’ that includes for the Appendix A CRS. With one
systems relying on future technologies dimensional information, pictures, and exception related to the Cosco Dream
such as vision-based advanced air bag statistical data on the current CRSs in Ride car bed, manufacturers were able
systems. To ensure that advanced air the appendix and the CRSs proposed for to suggest a possible replacement.11 We
bags perform well with all types of rear- inclusion in the appendix (Docket No. decided that the CRSs in the Appendix
facing CRSs, the agency purposefully 2007–28710–0002) (hereinafter referred that have been out of production the
includes in Appendix A rear-facing to as the 2007 Technical Assessment). longest (i.e., the hardest CRSs to acquire
CRSs that have handles and sunshields. The agency proposed to delete six (6) for testing purposes) should be replaced
NHTSA compliance test procedures existing CRSs and to add five (5) new with newer-model CRSs.

TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF PROPOSED DELETIONS AND ADDITIONS TO APPENDIX A


Appendix
Name Type subpart

Deletions

Britax Handle With Care #191 .................................................................................... Rear-Facing ............................................. B.


Century Assura #4553 ................................................................................................ Rear-Facing ............................................. B.
Century Encore #4612 ............................................................................................... Convertible .............................................. C.
Cosco Olympian #02803 ............................................................................................ Convertible .............................................. C.

7 The upper end of the spectrum (27 in) 10 We noted in the November 2003 FMVSS No. manufactured for retail sale. Cosco was unable to
represents convertible CRSs, which have higher seat 208 final rule that our periodic review of the child suggest a replacement for this CRS because the
back heights than rear-facing-only CRSs. restraints in the appendix may cause the number of manufacturer no longer sells car beds to the general
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES

8 The height measurement used for the rear-facing CRSs contained therein to change slightly as we public (the CRS is manufactured and sold mainly
identify different trends in the use of CRSs from for special needs accounts). After consulting with
CRSs is the height with their base. prior periods. We said then that the number of CRSs the major CRS manufacturers, we only found one
9 The newly added car bed is the only CRS
should not vary by more than 10–20 percent absent car bed that is being manufactured, the Angel Guard
replacement that came from a different any dramatic changes in the design of restraints. Angel Ride. We proposed the Angel Guard Angel
manufacturer. 11 Subpart A of the appendix lists the Cosco Ride as our replacement choice because the CRS is
Dream Ride car bed which is no longer being available to the general public.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:26 Nov 10, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\12NOR1.SGM 12NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 219 / Wednesday, November 12, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 66789

TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF PROPOSED DELETIONS AND ADDITIONS TO APPENDIX A—Continued


Appendix
Name Type subpart

Safety 1st Comfort Ride #22–400 .............................................................................. Convertible .............................................. C.


Britax Expressway ISOFIX ......................................................................................... Forward-Facing ....................................... C.

Additions

Graco Snugride .......................................................................................................... Rear-Facing ............................................. B.


Peg Perego Viaggio #IMCC00US .............................................................................. Rear-Facing ............................................. B.
Cosco Summit DX #22–260 ....................................................................................... Forward-Facing ....................................... C.
Evenflo Generations #352 .......................................................................................... Convertible .............................................. C.
Graco Safeseat (Step 2) ............................................................................................ Combination ............................................ C.

TABLE 2—CRSS THAT COULD BE REPLACED WITH SIMILAR, MORE RECENTLY PRODUCED RESTRAINTS, AND WHAT
THOSE REPLACEMENTS SHOULD BE
Appendix A CRS in Appendix A Type of CRS Replacement
subpart

A ........................ Cosco Dream Ride .............................................. Car bed ........................ Angel Guard Angel Ride #AA2403FOF.
B ........................ Cosco Arriva 02–727 .......................................... Rear-facing ................... Cosco Arriva #22–013.
C ........................ Britax Roundabout .............................................. Convertible ................... Britax Roundabout #E9L02.
C ........................ Century Encore 12 ............................................... Convertible ................... Graco ComfortSport.
C ........................ Evenflo Horizon V ............................................... Convertible ................... Evenflo Tribute 5 Deluxe #379.
D ........................ Century Next Step ............................................... Combination ................. Graco Cherished Cargo.
D ........................ Cosco High Back Booster ................................... Booster ......................... Cosco Hi Back Booster #22–209.

IV. Comments and Agency Responses News expressed concern that the other issues are addressed in this and
on CRSs in Appendix A proposed lead time ‘‘could stretch out the following sections.
The agency received comments on the the wait before these new CRSs are Accompanying this final rule is an
proposal from the Alliance of introduced for testing to Model Year updated Technical Assessment of Child
Automobile Manufacturers (Alliance),13 2010 or later.’’ Some commenters asked Restraint Systems that we have placed
Porsche Cars North America, Inc. for clarification of testing issues, and in the docket for this final rule (‘‘2008
(Porsche), TRW Automotive (TRW), there were a number of ideas suggested Technical Assessment’’). The
Ferrari, General Motors (GM), the for improving the ease and timeliness of assessment contains dimensional
Automotive Occupant Restraints future amendments to Appendix A and information and pictures of the CRSs
Council (AORC), and from community for selecting the CRSs that should be adopted into Appendix A by this final
interest groups Safe Ride News and included in the appendix. These and rule, and statistical data of past EOU
Traffic Safety Projects. Commenters data.
overwhelmingly supported the deletions NPRM, the Alliance reduced the suggested 5-year To improve the clarity of the
compliance period to 3 years for this effort to revise
identified in Table 1 and Table 2 and Appendix A, recognizing that the appendix has not
appendix, we have reformatted the
generally supported the proposed been amended in several years.) tables of Appendix A and have set forth
additions identified in the tables, with The petition also requested that the agency an Appendix A–1 which incorporates
many suggesting further amendments to commit to amending the appendix every three years the revisions adopted by this final rule.
and revise the view the agency announced in the
Appendix A. Several commenters raised past that the appendix should be amended a. Deletions
concerns about the effective date. For annually. The Alliance believes that annual
example, the Alliance stated that it revisions are not needed to protect children because All commenters supported the
believes that as many as possible of the experience has shown that, despite the fact that the proposed deletion of the six CRSs from
appendix has not been amended since 2003, there Appendix A (described in Table 1,
unavailable CRSs in Appendix A should is no known incident in which a child in a CRS in
be replaced with respect to new vehicle the front seat of a vehicle equipped with advanced above). No commenter opposed the
models, but manufacturers should be air bags received a serious injury due to the deletions. Several commenters
deployment of an air bag. In addition, the Alliance suggested that we refresh all the CRSs
allowed to continue to certify believed that annual updates to the appendix is
previously certified models using the inconsistent with the realities of the automobile in the appendix.
existing version of the appendix for at industry, because retesting and recertifying existing Agency Response: We are adopting
least three years.14 In contrast, Safe Ride vehicle models every year as new CRSs are added the proposed deletions for the reasons
to the appendix would, as the petitioner stated, discussed in the NPRM. Regarding the
‘‘create a tremendous burden on manufacturers
12 We later realized that reference to the Encore
which * * * [in light of the absence of known Britax Expressway ISOFIX, this CRS is
was in error. injuries to a child caused by an advanced air bag removed from Appendix A effective on
13 The Alliance is made up of BMW group,
system] would yield little or no safety benefits.’’ the date of publication of this final rule.
Chrysler LLC, Ford Motor Company, General The petitioner stated that it recognized that ‘‘in the
Motors, Mazda, Mitsubishi Motors, Porsche, Toyota,
Deleting and replacing all the CRSs in
event of some unanticipated safety need, such as
the appendix is outside the scope of the
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES

and Volkswagen. the introduction of an entirely new style of CRS that


14 In a petition for rulemaking dated April 27, captures a significant portion of the market, the present rulemaking. However, we
2007, the Alliance requested NHTSA to amend agency could revise the appendix—subject to notice concur with the view that circumstances
FMVSS No. 208 to allow manufacturers the option and lead time constraints—without waiting for
of certifying vehicles to any edition of Appendix A three years from the prior update.’’ The agency is
may warrant updating more than 10 to
for five model years after the edition first becomes responding to issues raised in the petition both in 20 percent of the number of CRSs in the
effective. (In its comment to the September 25, 2007 this final rule, and in a separate rulemaking action. appendix. The allocation of agency

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:26 Nov 10, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\12NOR1.SGM 12NOR1
66790 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 219 / Wednesday, November 12, 2008 / Rules and Regulations

resources have hampered our periodic addition of the new model number model number to indicate that the
updates of the appendix, so it could be IMUN00US. TRW stated that the rubber actual model number is several digits
prudent for a rulemaking, such as inserts in the belt slots of the Primo long and that the 352 was simply a
today’s final rule, to affect more than 10 Viaggio have a tendency to grab the seat prefix. The similar model observed by
to 20 percent of the CRSs in the belt webbing, making it difficult to TRW beginning with the 352 prefix is
appendix. achieve the maximum 134 N belt thus an acceptable model.
tension called for in FMVSS No. 208.
b. Additions (Identified in Table 1) Agency Response: We agree to include With regard to combination CRSs,
With the exception of the Peg Perego model IMUN00US instead of Appendix A categories were developed
Viaggio #IMCC00US, the five child IMCC00US. Market data indicate that prior to the development of combination
restraints that we proposed to add to the model IMCC00US was discontinued CRSs. Therefore, there is not a subpart
Appendix A were supported by in August 2007 and replaced with the of the appendix specific to these
commenters. Accordingly, with the new model name and number Peg restraints. These seats can perform as a
exception of the Peg Perego Viaggio Perego Primo Viaggio SIP IMUN00US. forward-facing harness restraint as well
#IMCC00US, we are adopting the CRSs The changes made for the new version as a booster seat using a vehicle’s seat
for the reasons provided in the NPRM. of the Primo Viaggio SIP are a new belt, so they can technically
However, several commenters had handlebar shape and more ear/head accommodate a one-year-old, three-year-
questions about some of the restraints padding. old, and six-year-old dummy. When
and requested clarification of the NHTSA installed the Peg Perego considering which subpart of the
proposal. Primo Viaggio in seventeen (17) model appendix to categorize these seats, we
year (MY) 2008 vehicles and found that noted that the FMVSS No. 208 advanced
1. Proposed Inclusion of Graco Snugride while the rubber inserts do make it more air bag system requirements do not
to Subpart B difficult to achieve the desired belt require combination CRSs in Subpart C
GM and the Alliance stated that the tension, the desired belt tension is to be tested with the six-year-old
NPRM did not provide a model number attainable. We note that, to achieve the dummy. (See FMVSS No. 208, S23.)
in Table 1 or in the proposed regulatory specified load, the CRS base was pre- Therefore, to ensure adequate testing of
text, while the preamble and 2007 loaded prior to installing the CRS onto all the modes a combination CRS can be
Technical Assessment denoted model the base. Since the IMUN00US is used for, we are listing the Evenflo
#8643. TRW noted that it observed that similar structurally to the IMCC00US Generations 352xxxx in both Subparts C
myriad variants of the Snugride exist and the specified FMVSS No. 208 belt and D of Appendix A.
which appear to have essentially similar tension is achievable using the
The agency is responding to Ferrari’s
construction to the #8643 model and IMUN00US, we are adding the Peg
Perego Primo Viaggio SIP IMUN00US to comment that the CRS should only be
which would likely perform identically
Appendix A. Photographs of the two used in rearward facing configurations
in suppression or LRD tests.
Agency Response: Our intent was not CRSs can be found in the 2008 in the section of this preamble entitled,
to provide a model number for this CRS Technical Assessment. ‘‘Testing Issues.’’
in the regulatory text. The NPRM 4. Proposed Inclusion of Cosco Summit
3. Proposed Inclusion of the Evenflo
mistakenly included the model number Deluxe #22–260 to Subpart C
Generations #352 to Subpart C
for the Graco Snugride in the preamble
and the 2007 Technical Assessment. The NPRM characterized the Evenflo GM stated that it could not find a CRS
Due to the dynamic nature of the CRS Generations as a convertible CRS. with the precise name and model
industry, when selecting new CRSs for GM and the Alliance stated that this number provided in the NPRM and
the appendix, the agency sought to CRS was not on the manufacturer’s suggested the Summit Deluxe High Back
provide, to the extent possible, generic website. Ferrari and TRW pointed out Booster Car Seat model 22565 or the
model numbers. The agency’s intention that this CRS should be classified as a Summit High Back Booster Car Seat
was to make it easier for vehicle combination CRS. Ferrari stated that it model 22260, noting that both have very
manufacturers to find the newly added supports the addition of the Evenflo similar appearance and look like the
CRSs by providing model numbers that Generations only if it will be exempted CRS in the photograph in the 2007
do not specify patterns for soft goods, from testing in a rearward facing Technical Assessment. The Alliance
type of padding, etc., i.e., for items that configuration. TRW stated that there also pointed out that it could not
would not affect the performance of the were similar models to the CRS, such as identify any Cosco CRS with the precise
advanced air bag system. For some the Generations 3521804. name and model number identified in
CRSs, such as for Evenflo child Agency Response: We are adding the
the NPRM. Ferrari supported the
restraints, this meant requiring simply a CRS to Appendix A, but we agree with
addition of the Summit Deluxe ‘‘only if
number prefix,15 or just a name, such as Ferrari and TRW that this CRS was
it will be exempted from testing in
for Graco child restraints, but some categorized incorrectly in the NPRM as
rearward facing configurations.’’
CRSs required complete model a convertible CRS. This CRS is a
forward-facing-only combination CRS. Agency Response: The agency concurs
numbers, such as the child restraints
Accordingly, it is listed under the with the GM comment and is adopting
produced by Cosco. Thus, for the Graco
booster car seat section of the the Cosco Summit Deluxe High Back
Snugride no model number was needed.
manufacturer’s Web site. Booster model 22–262 into Subparts C
2. Proposed Inclusion of Peg Perego As explained earlier in this preamble, and D of the appendix. A picture and
Primo Viaggio #IMCC00US to Subpart B for purposes of Appendix A, Evenflo measurements of the CRS can be found
child restraints can be identified by a in the 2008 Technical Assessment. The
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES

Ferrari stated that the model number


proposed for this CRS was out of generic model number consisting of a agency is responding to Ferrari’s
production and recommended the number prefix. The #352 model number comment that the CRS should only be
provided in the NPRM was merely a used in rearward facing configurations
15 In the appendix, the additional numbers prefix of the intended model number. in the section of this preamble entitled,
following the prefix are indicated by ‘‘X’’s. To avoid confusion, we have revised the ‘‘Testing Issues.’’

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:26 Nov 10, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\12NOR1.SGM 12NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 219 / Wednesday, November 12, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 66791

5. Proposed Inclusion of the Graco the Angel Guard Angel Ride GM and the Alliance realized the
SafeSeat (Step 2) #8B02 to Subpart C AA2403FOF, a car bed with a 3-point mistake, stating that the Graco
The Alliance stated that this CRS was harness, for the reasons provided in the ComfortSport is actually a replacement
on the manufacturer’s Web site but that NPRM. The CRS can be ordered directly for the Century STE 1000, not the
the Alliance was advised by Graco that through Angel Guard and through other Century Encore. In addition, the
the company has stopped sources listed on the manufacturer’s Alliance asked for the identification of
manufacturing a model with the number Web site (http://www.angel-guard.com). a model number for the Graco
or will do so in the very near future. The The agency is responding to TRW’s ComfortSport. TRW stated that it was
Alliance stated that NHTSA should concern about vehicles’ having advised that the model number
substitute the new model name/number sufficient belt length to encircle the provided in the 2007 Technical
that Graco will use for this CRS. TRW restraint in the section of this preamble Assessment was recalled and that a new
stated that Model #8B02 was not found entitled, ‘‘Testing Issues.’’ version was becoming available. TRW
at any of six local large retailers, while noted that it purchased a ComfortSport
2. Cosco Arriva #22–013 (Subpart B) 8C00 for evaluation, because it was
a very similar model 8B05 was found at
a local retailer and an online source was In their comments, GM and the advised that all ComfortSports have the
located for this model. Alliance stated that they could not find same shell.
Agency Response: As discussed this CRS on the manufacturer’s Web Agency Response: Commenters are
earlier, we mistakenly included the site. TRW also could not find any correct that we meant the Graco
model number in the preamble. A sources for this CRS and was informed ComfortSport to replace the Century
model number is not needed. A Graco that it is being phased out. Furthermore, STE 1000. (The Century STE 1000 and
representative (see agency ex parte TRW requested clarification on whether the Century Encore have essentially the
memorandum in the docket for this final the Arriva 02–727 should be tested with same shell, thus the ComfortSport could
rule) confirmed that Graco model its base. have replaced either of these CRSs.) No
numbers identify only cosmetic features Agency Response: We are adopting commenter opposed the addition of the
and that identifying the shell does not the Cosco Arriva #22–013PAW, a rear- Graco ComfortSport, a convertible CRS
necessitate identifying a model number. facing CRS with a 5-point harness, to with a 5-point harness. We are thus
Therefore, the Alliance’s concerns about replace its older counterpart as adopting the proposed change.
that particular model being As discussed earlier, a model number
proposed. The Cosco Arriva #22–
discontinued or TRW’s concern about is not necessary to adequately identify
013PAW is mainly distributed to
not finding that particular model at this Graco CRS. However, we note that
hospitals, health departments, and child
large retail stores is not a problem. (In several ComfortSport models produced
safety businesses or organizations and is
addition, this CRS was incorrectly between January 2, 2007 and August 31,
not sold at retailers (these CRSs are
categorized as a combination CRS in 2007 were recalled due to possible
called ‘‘institutional CRSs’’). However,
Table 1 of the NPRM. As stated in the misrouting of the LATCH belt during
this CRS is easily available to the public
preamble of that document, the child assembly. Graco has assured us that new
as it can be ordered through Cosco or its
restraint is a forward-facing only CRS.) versions are available and that the
distributor, National Safety Resources.16 model numbers of the new versions end
However, we are adding the word We will test the CRS with the base 22–
‘‘Toddler’’ to the name because Graco’s in the number two (2). However, there
999WHO. is still no need to specify a model
Web site and the EOU Web site both list
this CRS as the Graco Toddler SafeSeat. 3. Britax Roundabout #E9L02 (Subpart number for this CRS in Appendix A as
Thus, this final rule adopts the Graco C) no substantive changes were made to
Toddler SafeSeat Step 2. the CRS that will affect the performance
The only comment received on this of a suppression or LRD system.
c. Updating Other CRSs in Appendix A CRS was from TRW, which supported
(Identified in Table 2) the change. TRW stated that this CRS 5. Evenflo Tribute V Deluxe #379
was found at large retailers. (Subpart C)
Commenters generally supported the
Agency Response: We are making the The NPRM requested comments on
seven changes identified in Table 2 of
proposed change. However, we will replacing the Evenflo Horizon V with
the NPRM preamble (the same Table 2
refer to the new restraint as the Britax the Evenflo Tribute V Deluxe 379. The
above of today’s document).
Roundabout E9L02xx; the last two digits only comment on this proposed change
1. Angel Guard Angel Ride of the model number are not needed was from TRW, which stated that it
#AA2403FOF (Subpart A) because they indicate a specific fabric could not find the Evenflo Tribute V
No commenter objected to including design. The Britax Roundabout E9L02xx Deluxe with the model number
this CRS, but TRW stated that it was is a convertible CRS with a 5-point provided in the NPRM.
unable to find a retail source for this harness. Agency Response: As explained
CRS. TRW also expressed concern about 4. Graco ComfortSport (Subpart C) above, the ‘‘379’’ is just a prefix that
the size of this CRS because, the precedes four other digits of the 7-digit
commenter believed, vehicles may not The NPRM requested comments on model number. We are clarifying the
have enough seat belt webbing to reach replacing the Century Encore with the regulatory text to make this clear.
around it with the vehicle seat fully Graco ComfortSport. However, the Further, we are removing the ‘‘Deluxe’’
forward. TRW recommended specifying reference to the Century Encore was a specification because it only designates
in FMVSS No. 208 that when the mistake; that CRS was proposed to be the fabric used and the addition of a cup
vehicle seat belt lacks the length to deleted from Appendix A. holder, which are features that will not
reach around a CRS, the vehicle seat is likely affect the performance of a
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES

moved to the ‘‘first position rearward of 16 A representative of the manufacturer verified suppression or LRD system.
full forward where the seat belt will go that they are contemplating phasing out this CRS; Accordingly, this final rule replaces the
however, they said that they would continue
around the CRS.’’ producing it as long as there was a demand for it
Evenflo Horizon V with the Evenflo
Agency Response: The agency is (see agency ex parte memorandum in the docket for Tribute V 379xxxx, a convertible CRS
replacing the Cosco Dream Ride with this final rule). with a 5-point harness.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:26 Nov 10, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\12NOR1.SGM 12NOR1
66792 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 219 / Wednesday, November 12, 2008 / Rules and Regulations

6. Graco Cherished Cargo (Subpart D) and certify the air bag systems to confidential information that provided
GM and the Alliance stated that they FMVSS No. 208, while ensuring the an estimate of ‘‘the amount of work
could not find the Cherished Cargo on satisfactory performance of vehicles’ needed to evaluate, potentially modify,
the manufacturer’s Web site, although suppression and LRD systems in an and validate’’ its carry-over vehicle
several models that share the name expeditious manner. platforms and believed that the work
This section addresses the following could not be completed by ‘‘the next
Cargo do appear. TRW claimed that
comments relating to the compliance model year introduced one year after
Graco advised them that this CRS was
date. publication of the final rule.’’ GM
discontinued, but that all Cargo models 1. The Alliance agreed that the believed that delaying the effective date
such as the Platinum, Ultra, etc., use the proposed effective date of September 1, until September 1, 2010 would not
same shell and are very similar. TRW 2009 (the beginning of the next model increase any risks to safety, because it
recommended we avoid the Cherished year introduced one year after the has no indications ‘‘that there are any
Cargo and choose a different, more anticipated date of publication of the CRSs in use that do not properly
readily available model of the Cargo final rule) is reasonable with respect to classify’’ with their advanced air bag
series, such as the Platinum Cargo. new vehicle models and to new child systems.
Agency Response: For the reasons of protection systems that will be utilized 3. Ferrari addressed the effective date
availability raised by the commenters, for the first time in MY 2010 (or later) for the Table 2 changes. The commenter
we are replacing the Century Next Step vehicles. However, the commenter stated that there would be an
with the Graco Platinum Cargo, a stated that requiring vehicle unnecessary burden on the
forward-facing-only combination CRS manufacturers to recertify existing manufacturers if existing vehicles
with a 5-point harness. It will be listed vehicles utilizing a different set of CRSs models already certified to comply with
in both Subparts C and D of the would impose a tremendous burden on the old CRSs in Table 2 have to be
appendix. Graco has informed NHTSA those manufacturers. The Alliance certified again for compliance with the
that the Cherished Cargo was not urged the agency to provide new CRSs. Ferrari suggested that
discontinued, but that retailers no manufacturers the option of continuing NHTSA add a provision to FMVSS No.
longer want to carry this CRS in stock to certify, for at least three years, ‘‘carry- 208 stating that if a vehicle
(see agency ex parte memorandum in over’’ models that were previously manufacturer previously certified a
the docket for this final rule). Graco also certified to the existing version of vehicle model using an older CRS listed
confirmed that the Platinum Cargo has Appendix A. The commenter stated in Table 2 and has so certified prior to
the same shell as the Cherished Cargo that, on average, over 75 percent of its the listing of the newer equivalent CRS
and it is more readily available. As members’ MY 2010 models will be in Appendix A, then the vehicle
shown in photographs of the Platinum equipped with ‘‘child protection manufacturer does not have to retest
Cargo and the Cherished Cargo, the systems that are identical to those in the said vehicle model using the newer
CRSs are interchangeable (see the 2008 equivalent MY 2009 models.’’ The CRS. Ferrari believed that ‘‘This
Technical Assessment). commenter stated that in all likelihood approach avoids costly retesting and
7. Cosco High Back Booster #22–209 these models will be certified using the since the newer CRS is by definition
(Subpart D) CRSs on the existing Appendix A, and ‘equivalent’ to the older CRS, there is no
that requiring them to be certified using negative effect on safety.’’
The NPRM requested comments on the CRSs on the new Appendix would 4. In contrast to the above comments,
replacing the Cosco High Back Booster be extremely burdensome, ‘‘even apart some comments supported the proposed
with the Cosco High Back Booster 22– from whether the child protection effective date or expressed concern that
209. TRW commented that it could not systems in those models would need to it was too long. TRW stated that it saw
find this seat at any of the six large be redesigned or recalibrated to assure no concerns with the proposed effective
retailers it searched. They found similar compliance with the standard.’’ date and believed that it provides
models such as the 22–206 at two of the Porsche, a member of the Alliance, sufficient time to adopt the
six retailers. commented in support of the Alliance’s requirements of the proposed rule. Safe
Agency Response: We are adopting comments, but added that the model Ride News believed that the proposed
the Cosco High Back Booster 22–209, a lifespan of Porsche vehicles is typically effective date would be ‘‘too long to
forward-facing only combination CRS longer than the industry norms, lasting wait.’’ The commenter was concerned
with a 5-point harness into Subparts C for seven years or more. Thus, Porsche that because the appendix has not been
and D of the appendix. As of July 28, requested that NHTSA allow updated in years, it is no longer
2008, the manufacturer’s Web site has a manufacturers to use the existing representative of heavier CRSs that have
list of retailers for this CRS on its Web version of Appendix A for up to five been on the market for several years.
site. years following the effective date of the Safe Ride News did not consider it an
final rule.17 ‘‘Any shorter time period unreasonable request to shorten the
V. Compliance Date would likely result in a significant lead-time for manufacturers since the
Consistent with statements NHTSA amount of unnecessary testing, new CRSs will not be difficult to
made in the November 19, 2003 FMVSS especially under circumstances when acquire.
No. 208 final rule regarding lead time most or many of the child restraints on Agency Response: NHTSA
(68 FR at 65188), the agency proposed the list are being replaced.’’ acknowledges that there are competing
that the compliance date for the 2. GM, an Alliance member, requested considerations in updating Appendix A,
proposed changes to Appendix A be the that the effective date of the changes in specifically, the need to have a
next model year introduced one year the final rule be no sooner than representative list while maintaining
after publication of a final rule September 1, 2010. GM submitted some stability to minimize the
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES

modifying Appendix A. The agency certification burden. Having the list


17 Porsche noted that its request is similar to the
believed that the lead time would be reflect real-world use of a variety of
petition for rulemaking from the Alliance
sufficiently long to provide vehicle requesting NHTSA to provide a five-year period for
child restraints, and ensuring the
manufacturers time to procure the carry-over models that were certified to the existing compatibility of suppression and LRD
needed child restraints, test vehicles, version of Appendix A. systems with those restraints, argue for

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:26 Nov 10, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\12NOR1.SGM 12NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 219 / Wednesday, November 12, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 66793

expediency. On the other hand, time after September 1, 2009 must be certified a vehicle model using an older
constraints and costs associated with certified as meeting FMVSS No. 208 CRS that was replaced by this final rule
certification burdens resulting from when tested with the CRSs on the by an ‘‘equivalent’’ CRS (these CRSs
changes to the appendix dictate that revised appendix (which we have were listed in Table 2 of the NPRM and
there are limits to how close in time an designated ‘‘Appendix A–1’’), and all Table 2 of this preamble), the vehicle
effective date can be set. Moreover, as vehicles manufactured on or after manufacturer does not have to retest
part of the exercise of balancing those September 1, 2010 must be so certified said vehicle model using the newer
interests, we also consider the actual as meeting FMVSS No. 208 when tested CRS. We do not believe that such a
effect that the change to Appendix A with the Appendix A–1 child restraints. provision is necessary or appropriate.
has on the robustness of the advanced The September 1, 2009 date ensures that NHTSA does not require vehicle
air bag system, i.e., whether the change suppression and LRD systems will be manufacturers to undertake any of the
to the appendix will result in an actual tested with representative child testing specified in the FMVSSs; a
real-world safety improvement. restraints in an expeditious manner and
NHTSA evaluated the 2000–2007 manufacturer just needs to ensure that
thus maintains the robustness of the
EOU measurement data to determine if its vehicles meet the requirements of the
FMVSS No. 208 test and the soundness
there have been significant shifts in the of the child protection systems, while applicable standard when NHTSA tests
characteristics of CRSs since 2000 and the phase-in addresses the vehicle the manufacturer’s vehicles using the
did not observe any indication of manufacturers’ certification burdens. procedures specified in the standard.
definitive shifts in the CRS Since there are no marked shifts in the Thus, a manufacturer has the discretion
characteristics pertinent to air bag dimensional characteristics of CRSs, a to decide what testing, if any, is needed
performance. (See 2008 Technical phase-in will not have a negative impact to certify the vehicle with the updated
Assessment.) For the few changes we on child safety.19 appendix.
did observe, the changes do not appear The phase-in has a practical effect of
VI. Early Compliance and Picking and
enough to alter an advanced air bag permitting 50 percent of carry-over
Choosing of CRSs
system’s performance. NHTSA vehicles to continue to certify to the
undertook indicant tests of seventeen existing appendix for a period, albeit for The NPRM proposed to provide
(17) MY 2008 vehicles to assist in a shorter period than the Alliance’s manufacturers the option of early
determining whether the CRSs being suggested period of 3 years or Porsche’s compliance with the amended list, i.e.,
added to the appendix would require suggested period of 5 years. (A it was proposed that manufacturers may
manufacturers to redesign their manufacturer may choose to have new choose to certify their vehicles with the
advanced air bag systems. (See matrix in model vehicles or carry-over vehicles of updated Appendix A prior to the
the 2008 Technical Assessment.) The established models, or both, comprise
effective date of the provision, as long
tests indicate that the suppression the 50 percent of vehicles that can be
as the manufacturer notifies the agency
systems will continue to meet FMVSS phased-in to the requirement to certify
No. 208 suppression requirements. This to the revised Appendix A.) The ability that it is exercising this option.
finding is consistent with GM’s to carry over a large percentage of its However, NHTSA proposed that
comment that its vehicles continue to vehicles for a year works to alleviate manufacturers choosing the early
classify CRSs correctly when tested with compliance burdens on manufacturers. compliance option would not be
the CRSs newly added to Appendix A. On the other hand, in response to Safe permitted to pick and choose among the
The agency is currently working on a Ride News, we do not agree that the CRSs that would be newly added by the
response to the Alliance’s April 2007 September 1, 2009 date could be moved final rule. Vehicle manufacturers
petition; therefore, the suggestions of up. Although the CRSs newly added to choosing the early compliance option
the petitioners that there should be a set Appendix A will be more readily would have to ensure that their vehicles
lead time period of 3 or 5 years for re- available than the current seats, meet the advanced air bag requirements
certification of carry-over models will recertifying to the new appendix will when NHTSA uses all of the newly-
be addressed in a subsequent involve more than just procuring the added CRSs (along with the CRSs that
rulemaking action. However, to address new CRSs. Vehicle manufacturers need were not affected by the amendment).
the recertification concerns with respect time to test and certify their vehicles. NHTSA proposed this limitation to
to this Appendix A update, we have Further, as noted above, we have not maintain the integrity of the appendix:
decided that a balancing of the seen indication of significant shifts in The child restraints in each appendix
competing interests can be effectively the CRS characteristics pertinent to air are each part of a comprehensive set
realized by maintaining the compliance bag performance, so there is not a need based on their physical characteristics
date of September 1, 2009 (the to expedite the September 1, 2009 date and as such, should be maintained as a
beginning of the next model year based on potential real-world safety set.
introduced approximately one year after benefits that could be gained.
date of publication of this final rule), Agency Response: No commenter
We are denying Ferrari’s suggestion
while phasing-in the requirement.18 The objected to the proposal, although the
that we specify in FMVSS No. 208 that
effective date and phase-in schedule Alliance stated that lead time
if a vehicle manufacturer previously
apply to all vehicles, without constraints make it very unlikely that
differentiation between new and ‘‘carry- 19 We are submitting a request for OMB clearance any manufacturer will be able to certify
over’’ models (these are vehicles that of the collection of information required under a its MY 2009 vehicles to the new version,
were previously certified to the existing phase-in (for compliance purposes, manufacturers since, the commenter stated, the sales of
must keep records of the vehicles certified to the these vehicles generally commence in
Appendix A). Under the phase-in, 50 current Appendix A or to the amended Appendix
percent of vehicles manufactured on or the fall of 2008 or earlier. We are
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES

A, and report that information to NHTSA so that the


agency knows which CRSs to use to test vehicles ratifying the provisions discussed above
18 As with all phase-ins, the agency is adopting to FMVSS No. 208 suppression and LRD without change. Manufacturers may not
a reporting and recordkeeping requirement to requirements). We request comments on the
collection of information. See the section of this
pick and choose to certify with some
facilitate the agency’s enforcement of the standard.
These reporting and recordkeeping requirements preamble entitled, ‘‘Regulatory Analyses and CRSs from Appendix A and some from
will be set forth in 49 CFR Part 585, Subpart D. Notices.’’ Appendix A–1.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:26 Nov 10, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\12NOR1.SGM 12NOR1
66794 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 219 / Wednesday, November 12, 2008 / Rules and Regulations

VII. Testing Issues rolled up towels, do not allow there is contact by the CRS or test
repeatable installations.21 dummy with the instrument panel.
Commenters raised questions relating
to how the agency will use the CRSs in b. Testing the Car Bed c. Testing Forward-Facing-Only CRSs in
Appendix A. These questions are Rear-Facing Configurations
answered below. In its comment on the proposal to
Ferrari stated that it supported the
adopt the Angel Guard Angel Ride addition of forward-facing-only CRSs to
a. Positioning of Adjustable Features AA2403FOF car bed into Appendix A, subpart C of Appendix A only if the
TRW recommends that NHTSA TRW was concerned that due to the CRSs are excluded from testing in a
specify what position(s) the adjustable large size of the car bed, some vehicles rear-facing configuration. Ferrari
features, e.g., adjustable headrests may not have enough seat belt length to believed that forward-facing-only CRSs
(Evenflo Generations) and positionable reach around this CRS with the vehicle should not be used for testing in a rear-
‘‘feet’’ (Graco Snugride and Evenflo seat fully forward. TRW recommended facing configuration and that FMVSS
Discovery Adjust Right), should be in that FMVSS No. 208 state that when the No. 208 and subpart C of the appendix
during testing because, the commenter vehicle seat belt length is insufficient to should be revised to exclude forward-
stated, they may affect their installation reach around a CRS, the vehicle seat is facing-only CRSs from all types of rear-
in a vehicle and/or how the CRS to be moved to the first position facing testing. Ferrari also
interacts with the vehicle seat, rearward of full forward where the seat recommended splitting subpart C into
suppression system sensors, or belt will go around the CRS. two lists, convertibles (C1) and forward-
deploying air bags. Agency Response: We agree to add a facing-only CRSs (C2), and to revise
Agency Response: We do not agree provision to FMVSS No. 208 to address S20.2.1.1, S20.2.2.1, and S20.4.2 to
that minor adjustments need to be this concern. However, we note that identify only CRSs from subpart C1.
specified in the standard. For the TRW did not identify whether it was Agency Response: We partially agree
FMVSS No. 208 tests conducted with expressing concern about the belt length and partially disagree with this
CRSs, the standard’s test procedures of a specific vehicle. FMVSS No. 208, comment. In the NPRM we proposed to
state that the installer should follow, to include the following language, for the
S7.1, requires seat belt assemblies to
the extent possible, the child restraint belted tests under subpart C: ‘‘Any child
accommodate a 95th percentile adult
manufacturer’s directions regarding restraint listed in this subpart that does
male with the seat in any position. That
proper installation of the CRS. Those not have manufacturer instructions for
standard defines the hip circumference
directions generally provide sufficient using it in a rear-facing position is
of a 95th percentile adult male as being
information to conduct the compliance excluded from use in testing in a belted
47.2 inches (in). The Angel Guard car rear-facing configuration under
test. For example, Evenflo’s instructions bed is approximately 53.75 in around its
for the Evenflo Generations state that S20.2.1.1(a) and S20.4.2.’’ This
perimeter (based on a width of 21.75 in provision already exists in subpart C
the headrest should be positioned and two depth measurements of 16 in).
immediately above the harness slots in with regard to S20.2.1.1(a). We
While the car bed appears to require 7 proposed expanding the exclusion to
use. For other adjustments, the standard in of additional webbing, many vehicle
is silent because the adjustment is S20.4.2 because there are forward-
manufacturers provide additional belt facing-only CRSs in subpart C that
irrelevant for the compliance test; it length beyond the minimum required by
does not matter how the feature is cannot be belted in a rear-facing
the FMVSS. According to 2007 and configuration as specified by S20.4.2.
adjusted because the adjustment does 2008 ‘‘Buying a Safer Car’’
not affect the performance results. Ferrari’s comment was supportive of the
information,22 manufacturers that proposal, and we received no comment
For a few adjustments, FMVSS No. provide longer seat belts typically in opposition. We are thus adopting the
208 specifically overrides the provide an average of 24.67 in of extra proposed language in the final rule.
manufacturer’s instructions but is clear belt length for the right front passenger However, FMVSS No. 208, S20.2.2.1, is
in its instruction in those instances. For position. However, for those vehicles an unbelted rear-facing configuration
example, the agency’s FMVSS No. 208 that may not have sufficient webbing to test that includes forward-facing-only
test procedure (TP 208) does not require reach around the Angel Guard with the CRSs as a misuse condition. Since this
that the CRS be at the manufacturer’s seat in the full forward position, we are is an unbelted test, belt routing is not an
recommended angle.20 In its comment amending FMVSS No. 208, S20.2.3.2(a), issue, so forward-facing-only CRSs are
on the NPRM, TRW recommended to provide a provision similar to the one not excluded from testing under this
rewording FMVSS No. 208 and TP208 in FMVSS No. 208, S20.1.2, which rear-facing configuration test. Such an
to require that the CRS level indicator, allows the seat to be moved rearward if exclusion was not part of the NPRM.
if present, be in the recommended We are not incorporating Ferrari’s
range. We disagree with this suggestion. 21 In the May 12, 2000 Advanced Air Bag Rule, recommendation to create two sub-
FMVSS No. 208 does not specifically NHTSA acknowledged that some consumers do use categories in Subpart C in this
require that the CRS level indicator be rolled up towels or blankets and that manufacturers
rulemaking, but we will consider it
in the recommended range because the may need to address this in designing their
advanced air bag systems. The agency stated: ‘‘We when undertaking future updates of
use of positioning devices, such as note that seat-based systems may, however, need to Appendix A.
‘read’ the presence of a rear-facing infant restraint
20 FMVSS No. 208, S20.2.1.5(c) states: ‘‘* * * that has been stabilized with a rolled up towel or d. Specifying the Type of Harness Used
secure the child restraint by following, to the extent blanket in accordance with the restraint for Testing
possible, the child restraint manufacturer’s manufacturer’s instructions. While we will not use
directions regarding proper installation of the such objects in conducting our compliance tests, TRW recommends clarifying which
type of harness/belt type should be used
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES

restraint for the orientation being installed.’’ The TP the presence of a towel or blanket under the most
208–13, Data Sheet 17, Page 111, states: ‘‘Do not use rearward portion of the child restraint is a real when testing the CRSs because different
any positioning devices such as towels.’’ Therefore, world scenario which some seat-based systems may
need to accommodate.’’ However, for purposes of
types may have been available for the
even though the CRS manufacturer’s directions
specify a recommended angle, achieving it will not conducting our compliance tests, as explained same model number.
be required for compliance tests if the use of above we do not use the towels or blankets. Agency Response: We disagree. In the
positioning devices is necessary. 22 http://www.safercar.gov. NPRM preamble we specified the

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:26 Nov 10, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\12NOR1.SGM 12NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 219 / Wednesday, November 12, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 66795

harness type for the CRSs proposed in any amended version of Appendix A to be c. Developing ‘‘Standard’’ Models of
Table 1 for the reader’s convenience. deemed ‘available for purchase’ (which is the CRSs
Since the harness type is not an term NHTSA used in the November 2003
notice), it must be available from its TRW recommended the agency
influencing factor in suppression or consider working with CRS
manufacturer on the date of publication of
LRD test results, the harness types manufacturers to develop ‘‘standard’’
the final rule promulgating the amendment—
specified were just an indication of the as reflected by the manufacturer’s Web site models of each of the CRSs in the
type present in the CRSs evaluated, for or other product information. [Emphasis in appendix. The ‘‘standard’’ CRS would
illustration purposes. The specifications text.] be based on a typical model offered for
were not intended to be and are not sale by the CRS manufacturer, but
binding as to the specific harness type Agency Response: We do not agree would not be subject to change or
with which the agency must test. This that the term ‘‘available for purchase’’ obsolescence by the manufacturer
final rule also specifies in the preamble means that the child restraint must be without notification to the agency and
the harness type for the CRSs newly available from its manufacturer. The would not be for sale to the public and
added to Appendix A for the reader’s agency considers CRSs to be available would be sold only for the purpose of
convenience, and is not meant to for purchase if it can be purchased from testing and development.
require that the CRS with only that type any source. Consumers have available to Agency Response: We have
of harness type would be used for them a multitude of ways of acquiring considered a similar approach in the
compliance testing. child restraints in today’s marketplace past, which we have called the surrogate
and we believe that the appendix approach, and have noted some
VIII. Suggestions for Future should reflect such real-world
Amendments concerns with it. In the November 2003
acquisition of the restraints, since final rule (68 FR at 65189), we stated
Commenters made a number of consumers could reasonably acquire that surrogates—
suggestions for improving the ease and and use the restraint with the advanced
do not attempt to represent dimensional
timeliness of future amendments to air bag system. In addition, after outliers * * * they cannot ensure the
Appendix A and for selecting the CRSs consideration of the statements made in robustness of an automatic suppression
that should be included in the the November 19, 2003 final rule that system under real world conditions * * *
appendix. The more significant we would not use a CRS for compliance Additionally, without amending FMVSS No.
suggestions are addressed below. testing if it were ‘‘unavailable or 213 to require restraints to be dimensionally
altered’’ on the date of publication of similar to the surrogates, there is no
a. Publishing a Yearly Bulletin assurance that the surrogates will continue to
the final rule adopting it into Appendix
AORC and TRW suggested the agency represent even the average dimensions of
A, we have concluded that the restraints on the market.
should work with CRS manufacturers to statement has been overtaken by events
publish a ‘‘Bulletin’’ annually, which in today’s context. We cannot imagine a We continue to have these concerns
lists suitable equivalent model numbers situation where a new CRS that has with surrogates. Also, updating the
and/or names to those listed in the been added to the appendix will have appendix serves the dual purposes of
appendix. undergone a significant design change finding replacement CRSs for those that
Agency Response: We do not consider between the time of the proposal and have become unavailable, and of
an annual bulletin published by NHTSA the final rule. CRSs adopted into the ensuring that the CRSs listed are
necessary or appropriate at this time. appendix are highly unlikely to be representative of those on the market.
For today’s final rule we made every unavailable or altered on the date of While developing ‘‘standard’’ models
effort to ensure that the CRS models we publication of the final rule adopting would address the availability problems
are including in Appendix A will be them into the appendix since NHTSA associated with the dynamic nature of
available, such as by making sure the works closely with CRS manufacturers the CRS industry, it does not address
model numbers we list do not refer to to ensure that newly added CRSs are not the identification of new trends or
features immaterial to the purposes of slated to be unavailable or altered so outliers or the representation of average
the appendix, such as a soft good (i.e., close in time to the publication of the CRSs on the market. Furthermore, such
upholstery, fabric) design. This does not final rule. Furthermore, if a CRS differs an effort would require a major
preclude industry from working commitment from the CRS
so much on the day of publication of a
together to identify equivalent CRS manufacturers and there is no
rule from the CRS that the agency had
models and publishing a yearly bulletin indication that they would be willing or
proposed and intended to adopt, that
for industry to use. able to pursue such an effort at this
situation should be addressed in a
time.
b. Meaning of ‘‘Available for Purchase’’ rulemaking proceeding that would
remove the CRS from the appendix or d. Define ‘‘Model’’ in Child Restraint
The Alliance stated that even if the
reconsider the merits of its inclusion. System Standard
agency adopts the changes to Appendix
For these reasons, we decline to take the AORC and TRW suggested adopting a
A proposed in the NPRM,
narrow view of ‘‘available for purchase’’ formal ‘‘model’’ designation system for
it will still be possible that some of the CRSs suggested by the Alliance.
listed on the revised Appendix A that is child restraints in FMVSS No. 213 (49
ultimately adopted will not be available at In the NPRM we acknowledged that CFR 571.213) similar to FMVSS No.
the time the final rule is published. The we were aware that some of the 209, S4.1(j), to better track any changes
Alliance urges NHTSA to confirm that if that proposed CRSs would likely change to child restraint models that might
scenario were to occur, it will continue its model numbers before the publication affect performance in a suppression or
policy, first articulated in its November 19, of this final rule. Therefore, for this final LRD test. FMVSS No. 209 requires that
2003 notice, to ‘not use the unavailable or rule, we have verified the model each seat belt assembly be permanently
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES

altered CRS for compliance testing, and the


manufacturers would likewise be relieved of
numbers with the CRS manufacturers and legibly marked or labeled with,
any burden to procure the CRS or use it to and the model numbers of some of the among other things, information on the
test for suppression.’ [Footnote omitted.] 68 CRSs have been updated to reflect the ‘‘model’’ of the assembly. FMVSS No.
FR at 65188. Moreover, the Alliance urges the latest information available from the 209 also states that a ‘‘model’’ shall
agency to confirm that for a CRS listed on CRS manufacturers. consist of a single combination of

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:26 Nov 10, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\12NOR1.SGM 12NOR1
66796 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 219 / Wednesday, November 12, 2008 / Rules and Regulations

webbing having a specific type of fiber IX. Specification of a Manufactured On concluded that no additional
weave and construction, and hardware or After Date for the Newly Added consultation with States, local
having a specific design, and that CRSs governments or their representatives is
webbings of various colors may be In Appendix A–1 we have mandated beyond the rulemaking
included under the same model. The incorporated the NPRM date, September process. The agency has concluded that
commenters stated that FMVSS No. 213 25, 2007, as the ‘‘manufactured on or the rulemaking does not have federalism
could be amended to define a ‘‘child after’’ date for the newly added CRSs. implications because this final rule does
restraint model,’’ in the following This is to distinguish these CRSs from not have ‘‘substantial direct effects on
manner: ‘‘A model shall consist of a others that may have been manufactured the States, on the relationship between
single combination of shell, base, prior to the September date and which the national government and the States,
harness, and vehicle attachment may have had slight design differences. or on the distribution of power and
hardware/provisions/routing having a (The agency is taking this step only as responsibilities among the various
specific design. Webbing and seat a precaution; we do not know of any levels of government.’’
upholstery of various colors may be such differences between like-model
included under the same model.’’ Further, no consultation is needed to
CRSs manufactured before September discuss the preemptive effect of today’s
Agency Response: The suggestions 25, 2007 and those studied by the rulemaking. NHTSA rules can have
raised by the commenters will be kept agency and discussed in the NPRM.) preemptive effect in at least two ways.
in mind when addressing future The CRSs that are unaffected by this First, the National Traffic and Motor
Appendix A rulemakings. We note that rulemaking are maintaining the Vehicle Safety Act contains an express
FMVSS No. 213, S5.5, already requires December 1, 1999 date. preemptive provision: ‘‘When a motor
child restraints to be labeled with the
X. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices vehicle safety standard is in effect under
model name or number. Normally, the
this chapter, a State or a political
CRS manufacturers, for their own Executive Order 12866 and DOT
tracking purposes, indicate with a stamp subdivision of a State may prescribe or
Regulatory Policies and Procedures
on the mold or some other type of visual continue in effect a standard applicable
This rulemaking document was not to the same aspect of performance of a
indication when a mold change has reviewed by the Office of Management
been made. motor vehicle or motor vehicle
and Budget under E.O. 12866. It is not equipment only if the standard is
e. Rear-Facing CRSs With High Profiles considered to be significant under E.O. identical to the standard prescribed
12866 or the Department’s Regulatory under this chapter.’’ 49 U.S.C.
Safe Ride News believed that a low Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034;
seat back height for rear-facing CRSs is 30103(b)(1). It is this statutory command
February 26, 1979). The costs and that preempts State law, not today’s
an important factor for LRD testing and benefits of advanced air bags are
so, the commenter stated, it is important rulemaking, so consultation would be
discussed in the agency’s Final inappropriate.
to include in Appendix A rear-facing Economic Assessment for the May 2000
CRSs with low profiles. According to final rule (Docket 7013). The cost and Second, in addition to the express
the commenter, we should ensure that benefit analysis provided in that preemption noted above, the Supreme
the appendix include restraints that can document would not be affected by this Court has also recognized that State
be used without a base because final rule, since this final rule only requirements imposed on motor vehicle
restraints with a base tended to have a adjusts and updates the CRSs used in manufacturers, including sanctions
higher profile. test procedures of that final rule. The imposed by State tort law, can stand as
Agency Response: Seat back height minimal impacts of today’s amendment an obstacle to the accomplishment and
was one of the parameters used by the do not warrant preparation of a execution of a NHTSA safety standard.
agency in selecting CRSs for Appendix regulatory evaluation. When such a conflict is discerned, the
A. All the rear-facing CRSs in the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution
Regulatory Flexibility Act makes their State requirements
revised Appendix A come with a base
and can be used with or without the In compliance with the Regulatory unenforceable. See Geier v. American
base for the purposes of compliance Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., Honda Motor Co., 529 U.S. 861 (2000).
testing. Appendix A has rear-facing and NHTSA has evaluated the effects of this NHTSA has not discerned any potential
convertible CRSs with seat back heights action on small entities. I hereby certify State requirements that might conflict
that range from 12.75 to 27 in.23 24 The that this final rule will not have a with the final rule, however, in part
rear-facing CRSs we are adding to the significant impact on a substantial because such conflicts can arise in
appendix diversify the spectrum of seat number of small entities. This rule varied contexts. We cannot completely
back heights. affects motor vehicle manufacturers, rule out the possibility that such a
We note that contrary to the multistage manufacturers and alterers, conflict may become apparent in the
commenter’s belief, agency LRD testing but the entities that qualify as small future through subsequent experience
on different car types has indicated that businesses will not be significantly with standard. NHTSA may opine on
CRSs with high seat back heights can for affected by this rulemaking because they such conflicts in the future, if
some designs provide higher injury are already required to comply with the warranted.
values than the low profile CRSs. advanced air bag requirements. This
Accordingly, we are keeping CRSs with final rule does not establish new National Environmental Policy Act
high seat back heights in our test requirements, but instead only adjusts
and updates the CRSs used in test NHTSA has analyzed this final rule
program. for the purposes of the National
procedures of that final rule.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES

Environmental Policy Act. The agency


23 The upper end of the spectrum (27 in) Executive Order 13132 has determined that implementation of
represents convertible CRSs, which have higher seat
back heights than rear-facing-only CRSs. NHTSA has examined today’s final this action would not have any
24 The height measurement used for the rear- rule pursuant to Executive Order 13132 significant impact on the quality of the
facing CRSs is the height with their base. (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) and human environment.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:26 Nov 10, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\12NOR1.SGM 12NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 219 / Wednesday, November 12, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 66797

Paperwork Reduction Act the effect on existing Federal law or 1998, require each agency to write all
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act regulation; (3) provides a clear legal rules in plain language. Application of
of 1995, a person is not required to standard for affected conduct, while the principles of plain language
respond to a collection of information promoting simplification and burden includes consideration of the following
by a Federal agency unless the reduction; (4) clearly specifies the questions:
retroactive effect, if any; (5) adequately • Have we organized the material to
collection displays a valid OMB control
defines key terms; and (6) addresses suit the public’s needs?
number. This final rule contains a • Are the requirements in the rule
collection of information because of the other important issues affecting clarity
and general draftsmanship under any clearly stated?
phase-in reporting requirements being • Does the rule contain technical
established. There is no burden to the guidelines issued by the Attorney
General. This document is consistent language or jargon that isn’t clear?
general public. We will be submitting a • Would a different format (grouping
request for OMB clearance for the with that requirement.
Pursuant to this Order, NHTSA notes and order of sections, use of headings,
collection of information required under paragraphing) make the rule easier to
as follows: The preemptive effect of this
today’s final rule. understand?
final rule is discussed above. NHTSA
These requirements and our estimates
notes further that there is no • Would more (but shorter) sections
of the burden to vehicle manufacturers be better?
requirement that individuals submit a
are as follows: • Could we improve clarity by adding
petition for reconsideration or pursue
NHTSA estimates there are 21 tables, lists, or diagrams?
other administrative proceeding before • What else could we do to make the
manufacturers of passenger cars,
they may file suit in court. rule easier to understand?
multipurpose passenger vehicles,
trucks, and buses having a GVWR of Unfunded Mandates Reform Act If you have any responses to these
3,856 kg (8,500 lb) or less. questions, please write to us at the
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
NHTSA estimates that the annual address provided at the beginning of
of 1995 requires agencies to prepare a
reporting and recordkeeping burden on this document.
written assessment of the costs, benefits
each manufacturer resulting from the and other effects of proposed or final Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)
collection of information is one (1) hour. rules that include a Federal mandate
NHTSA estimates that the annual cost The Department of Transportation
likely to result in the expenditure by assigns a regulation identifier number
burden on each manufacturer, in U.S. State, local or tribal governments, in the
dollars, on each manufacturer will be (RIN) to each regulatory action listed in
aggregate, or by the private sector, of the Unified Agenda of Federal
$35. No additional resources will be more than $100 million annually
expended by vehicle manufacturers to Regulations. The Regulatory Information
(adjusted for inflation with base year of Service Center publishes the Unified
gather annual production information 1995). This final rule will not result in Agenda in April and October of each
because they already compile this data expenditures by State, local or tribal year. You may use the RIN contained in
for their own use. governments, in the aggregate, or by the the heading at the beginning of this
The purpose of the reporting private sector in excess of $100 million document to find this action in the
requirements will be to aid NHTSA in annually. Unified Agenda.
determining whether a manufacturer
has complied with the requirements of Executive Order 13045 Privacy Act
FMVSS No. 208 during the phase-in of Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, Anyone is able to search the
today’s requirements. April 23, 1997) applies to any rule that: electronic form of all comments
National Technology Transfer and (1) Is determined to be ‘‘economically received into any of our dockets by the
Advancement Act significant’’ as defined under E.O. name of the individual submitting the
12866, and (2) concerns an comment (or signing the comment, if
Under the National Technology environmental, health, or safety risk that submitted on behalf of an association,
Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 NHTSA has reason to believe may have business, labor union, etc.). You may
(NTTAA) (Public Law 104–113), ‘‘all a disproportionate effect on children. review DOT’s complete Privacy Act
Federal agencies and departments shall This rulemaking is not subject to the Statement in the Federal Register
use technical standards that are Executive Order because it is not published on April 11, 2000 (Volume
developed or adopted by voluntary economically significant as defined in 65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78).
consensus standards bodies, using such E.O. 12866.
technical standards as a means to carry List of Subjects
out policy objectives or activities Executive Order 13211
49 CFR Part 571
determined by the agencies and Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355,
departments.’’ There are no voluntary May 18, 2001) applies to any Imports, Incorporation by reference,
consensus standards that address the rulemaking that: (1) Is determined to be Motor vehicle safety, Reporting and
CRSs that should be included in economically significant as defined recordkeeping requirements, Tires.
Appendix A. under E.O. 12866, and is likely to have 49 CFR Part 585
Executive Order 12988 a significantly adverse effect on the Motor vehicle safety, Reporting and
supply of, distribution of, or use of recordkeeping requirements
With respect to the review of the energy; or (2) that is designated by the
promulgation of a new regulation, ■ In consideration of the foregoing,
Administrator of the Office of
section 3(b) of Executive Order 12988, NHTSA amends 49 CFR Chapter V as
Information and Regulatory Affairs as a
‘‘Civil Justice Reform’’ (61 FR 4729, set forth below.
significant energy action. This
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES

February 7, 1996) requires that rulemaking is not subject to E.O. 13211. PART 571—FEDERAL MOTOR
Executive agencies make every
Plain Language VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS
reasonable effort to ensure that the
regulation: (1) Clearly specifies the Executive Order 12866 and the ■ 1. The authority citation for Part 571
preemptive effect; (2) clearly specifies President’s memorandum of June 1, continues to read as follows:

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:26 Nov 10, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\12NOR1.SGM 12NOR1
66798 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 219 / Wednesday, November 12, 2008 / Rules and Regulations

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, the number of vehicles manufactured by the design H-point of both the driver’s
30117 and 30166; delegation of authority at each manufacturer under S14.8.1, a and the right front passenger’s seat in
49 CFR 1.50. vehicle produced by more than one their forwardmost seating positions and
■ 2. Section 571.208 is amended by manufacturer shall be attributed to a shall not be located on or adjacent to a
adding S14.8, revising S19.2.1, single manufacturer as provided in surface that can be used for temporary
S19.2.2(d), S20.1.1, the introductory text S14.8.2(a) through (c), subject to or permanent storage of objects that
of S20.2.1.1, S20.2.1.6.1(e), S20.2.2.1, S14.8.3. could obscure the telltale from either
S20.2.3.1, S20.2.3.2(a), S20.4.2, S21.2.1, (a) A vehicle which is imported shall the driver’s or right front passenger’s
S22.1.1, S22.2.1.4(a), S22.2.1.6.1(f), be attributed to the importer. view, or located where the telltale
S23.2.1, and S24.1.1. (b) A vehicle manufactured in the would be obscured from the driver’s
■ 3. Section 571.208 is amended by United States by more than one view if a rear-facing child restraint
revising Appendix A, by adding manufacturer, one of which also listed in Appendix A or A–1, as
Appendix A–1 after Appendix A, and markets the vehicle, shall be attributed appropriate, is installed in the right
by moving Figures A1 and A2 that are to the manufacturer which markets the front passenger’s seat.
now at the end of Appendix A to follow vehicle.
(c) A vehicle produced by more than * * * * *
Appendix A–1. S20.1.1 Tests specifying the use of a
■ 4. Section 571.208 is amended by
one manufacturer shall be attributed to
any one of the vehicle’s manufacturers car bed, a rear facing child restraint, or
revising the headings of Figures A1 and a convertible child restraint may be
A2 that are now placed after Appendix specified by an express written contract,
reported to the National Highway conducted using any such restraint
A–1. listed in sections A, B, and C,
The amended and added text, Traffic Safety Administration under 49
CFR part 585, between the manufacturer respectively, of Appendix A or A–1 of
appendices, and figures read as follows: this standard, as appropriate. The car
so specified and the manufacturer to
§ 571.208 Standard No. 208; Occupant which the vehicle would otherwise be bed, rear facing child restraint, or
crash protection. attributed under S14.8.2(a) or (b). convertible child restraint may be
* * * * * S14.8.3 For the purposes of unused or have been previously used
S14.8 Vehicles manufactured on or calculating average annual production only for automatic suppression tests. If
after September 1, 2009 and before of vehicle for each manufacturer and the it has been used, there shall not be any
September 1, 2010. Vehicles number of vehicles by each visible damage prior to the test.
manufactured on or after September 1, manufacturer under S14.8.1, each * * * * *
2009 and before September 1, 2010, vehicle that is excluded from the S20.2.1.1 The vehicle shall comply
shall comply with S14.8.1 through requirement to test with child restraints in tests using any child restraint
S14.8.4. At any time during the listed in Appendix A or A–1 of this specified in section B and section C of
production year ending August 31, standard is not counted. Appendix A or A–1 of this standard, as
2010, each manufacturer shall, upon S14.8.4 Until September 1, 2011, appropriate, installed in the front
request from the Office of Vehicle Safety vehicles manufactured by a final-stage outboard passenger vehicle seat in the
Compliance, provide information manufacturer or alterer could be following orientations:
identifying the vehicles by make, model certified as complying with S19, S21, (a) * * *
and vehicle identification number that and S23 when using the child restraint (b) * * *
have been certified as complying with systems specified in Appendix A. * * * * *
S19, S21, and S23 (in addition to the Vehicles manufactured on or after S20.2.1.6.1 * * *
other requirements specified in this September 1, 2011 by these (e) Use the loading device equipped
standard) when using the child restraint manufacturers must be certified as with the loading foot shown in Figure
systems specified in Appendix A–1 of complying with S19, S21, and S23 when A1 and position it as shown in Figure
this standard. The manufacturer’s using the child restraint systems A2 of Appendix A and Appendix A–1
designation of a vehicle as meeting the specified in Appendix A–1. of this section. The 15±3 degree angle of
requirements when using the child * * * * * the loading device illustrated in Figure
restraint systems in Appendix A–1 of S19.2.1 The vehicle shall be A2 is determined with an initial preload
this standard is irrevocable. equipped with an automatic of 75±25N.
S14.8.1 Subject to S14.8.2, for suppression feature for the passenger air * * * * *
vehicles manufactured on or after bag which results in deactivation of the S20.2.2.1 The vehicle shall comply
September 1, 2009, the number of air bag during each of the static tests in tests using any child restraint
vehicles certified as complying with specified in S20.2 (using the 49 CFR specified in section B and section C of
S19, S21, and S23 when using the child Part 572 Subpart R 12-month-old CRABI Appendix A or A–1 of this standard, as
restraint systems specified in Appendix child dummy in any of the child appropriate.
A–1 of this standard shall be not less restraints identified in sections B and C
than 50 percent of: of Appendix A or A–1 of this standard, * * * * *
(a) The manufacturer’s average annual as appropriate and the 49 CFR Part 572 S20.2.3.1 The vehicle shall comply
production of vehicles subject to S19, Subpart K Newborn Infant dummy in in tests using any car bed specified in
S21, and S23 of this standard any of the car beds identified in section section A of Appendix A or A–1 of this
manufactured on or after September 1, A of Appendix A or A–1, as standard, as appropriate.
2006 and before September 1, 2009; or appropriate), and activation of the air * * * * *
(b) The manufacturer’s production of bag system during each of the static tests S20.2.3.2 * * *
vehicles subject to S19, S21, and S23 specified in S20.3 (using the 49 CFR (a) Install the car bed following, to the
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES

manufactured on or after September 1, Part 572 Subpart O 5th percentile adult extent possible, the car bed
2009 and before September 1, 2010. female dummy). manufacturer’s directions regarding
S14.8.2 For the purpose of S19.2.2 * * * proper installation of the car bed. If the
calculating average annual production (d) Shall be located within the interior seat belt cannot be secured around the
of vehicles for each manufacturer and of the vehicle and forward of and above car bed, move the seat rearward to the

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:26 Nov 10, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00084 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\12NOR1.SGM 12NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 219 / Wednesday, November 12, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 66799

next detent that allows the belt to be frontal air bag system which results in SUBPART B—REAR-FACING CHILD
secured around the car bed, or if the seat deactivation of the air bag during each RESTRAINTS OF APPENDIX A
is a power seat, using only the control of the static tests specified in S24.2
that primarily moves the seat fore and (using the 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart N Britax Handle with Care 191.
aft, move the seat rearward the 6-year-old child dummy in any of the Century Assura 4553.
minimum distance necessary for the child restraints specified in section D of Century Smart Fit 4543.
seat belt to be secured around the car Appendix A or A–1 of this standard, as Cosco Arriva 02727.
bed. appropriate), and activation of the air Evenflo Discovery Adjust Right 212.
bag system during each of the static tests Evenflo First Choice 204.
* * * * * Graco Infant 8457.
S20.4.2 The vehicle shall comply in specified in S24.3 (using the 49 CFR
tests using any child restraint specified Part 572 Subpart O 5th percentile adult
C. Any of the following forward-
in section B and section C of Appendix female dummy).
facing child restraint systems, and
A or A–1 of this standard, as * * * * * forward-facing child restraint systems
appropriate. S24.1.1 Tests specifying the use of a that also convert to rear-facing,
* * * * * booster seat may be conducted using manufactured on or after December 1,
S21.2.1 The vehicle shall be any such restraint listed in section D of 1999, may be used by the National
equipped with an automatic Appendix A or A–1 of this standard, as Highway Traffic Safety Administration
suppression feature for the passenger air appropriate. The booster seat may be to test the suppression or LRD system of
bag which results in deactivation of the unused or have been previously used a vehicle that has been certified as being
air bag during each of the static tests only for automatic suppression tests. If in compliance with 49 CFR 571.208
specified in S22.2 (using the 49 CFR it has been used, there shall not be any S19, or S21. (Note: Any child restraint
Part 572 Subpart P 3-year-old child visible damage prior to the test. Booster listed in this subpart that does not have
dummy and, as applicable, any child seats are to be used in the manner manufacturer instructions for using it in
restraint specified in section C and appropriate for a 6-year-old child of the a rear-facing position is excluded from
section D of Appendix A or A–1 of this same height and weight as the 6-year- use in testing in a belted rear-facing
standard, as appropriate), and activation old child dummy. configuration under S20.2.1.1(a) and
of the air bag system during each of the * * * * * S20.4.2):
static tests specified in S22.3 (using the
49 CFR Part 572 Subpart O 5th APPENDIX A TO § 571.208— SUBPART C—FORWARD-FACING AND
percentile adult female dummy). SELECTION OF CHILD RESTRAINT
CONVERTIBLE CHILD RESTRAINTS OF
SYSTEMS
* * * * * APPENDIX A
S22.1.1 Tests specifying the use of a This Appendix A applies to vehicles
forward facing child restraint, including manufactured before September 1, 2009 Century Encore 4612.
a booster seat where applicable, may be and to not more than 50 percent of a Cosco Olympian 02803.
conducted using any such restraint manufacturer’s vehicles manufactured Britax Roundabout 161.
listed in section C and section D of on or after September 1, 2009 and before Century STE 1000 4416.
Appendix A or A–1 of this standard, as Cosco Touriva 02519.
September 1, 2010, as specified in S14.8 Evenflo Horizon V 425.
appropriate. The child restraint may be of this standard. This appendix does not Evenflo Medallion 254.
unused or have been previously used apply to vehicles manufactured on or Safety 1st Comfort Ride 22–400.
only for automatic suppression tests. If after September 1, 2010.
it has been used, there shall not be any A. The following car bed, D. Any of the following forward-
visible damage prior to the test. Booster manufactured on or after December 1, facing child restraint systems and belt-
seats are to be used in the manner 1999, may be used by the National positioning seats, manufactured on or
appropriate for a 3-year-old child of the Highway Traffic Safety Administration after December 1, 1999, may be used by
same height and weight as the 3-year- to test the suppression system of a the National Highway Traffic Safety
old child dummy. vehicle that has been certified as being Administration as test devices to test the
* * * * * in compliance with 49 CFR 571.208 suppression system of a vehicle that has
S22.2.1.4 * * * S19: been certified as being in compliance
(a) Using the vehicle safety belts as with 49 CFR 571.208 S21 or S23:
specified in S22.2.1.5 with section C SUBPART A—CAR BED CHILD
and section D child restraints of RESTRAINTS OF APPENDIX A SUBPART D—FORWARD-FACING CHILD
Appendix A or A–1, as appropriate, of RESTRAINTS AND BELT POSITIONING
this section designed to be secured to Cosco Dream Ride 02–719. SEATS OF APPENDIX A
the vehicle seat even when empty; and
* * * * * B. Any of the following rear-facing Britax Roadster 9004.
S22.2.1.6.1 * * * child restraint systems specified in the Century Next Step 4920.
(f) Use the loading device equipped table below, manufactured on or after Cosco High Back Booster 02–442.
with the loading foot shown in Figure Evenflo Right Fit 245.
December 1, 1999, may be used by the
A1 and position it as shown in Figure National Highway Traffic Safety
A2 of Appendix A and Appendix A–1 Administration to test the suppression APPENDIX A–1 TO § 571.208—
of this standard. The 15±3 degree angle or low risk deployment (LRD) system of SELECTION OF CHILD SYSTEMS
of the loading device is determined with a vehicle that has been certified as being RESTRAINT
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES

an initial preload of 75±25 N. in compliance with 49 CFR 571.208 This Appendix A–1 applies to not less
* * * * * S19. When the restraint system comes than 50 percent of a manufacturer’s
S23.2.1 The vehicle shall be equipped with a removable base, the vehicles manufactured on or after
equipped with an automatic test may be run either with the base September 1, 2009 and before
suppression feature for the passenger attached or without the base. September 1, 2010, as specified in S14.8

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:26 Nov 10, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\12NOR1.SGM 12NOR1
66800 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 219 / Wednesday, November 12, 2008 / Rules and Regulations

of this standard. This appendix applies A. The following car bed, suppression system of a vehicle that has
to all vehicles manufactured on or after manufactured on or after the date listed, been certified as being in compliance
September 1, 2010. may be used by the National Highway with 49 CFR 571.208 S19:
Traffic Safety Administration to test the
SUBPART A—CAR BED CHILD RESTRAINTS OF APPENDIX A–1
Manufactured on or after

Angel Guard Angel Ride AA2403FOF ........................................................................................................................... September 25, 2007.

B. Any of the following rear-facing Administration to test the suppression equipped with a removable base, the
child restraint systems specified in the or low risk deployment (LRD) system of test may be run either with the base
table below, manufactured on or after a vehicle that has been certified as being attached or without the base.
the date listed, may be used by the in compliance with 49 CFR 571.208
National Highway Traffic Safety S19. When the restraint system comes

SUBPART B—REAR-FACING CHILD RESTRAINTS OF APPENDIX A–1


Manufactured on or after

Century Smart Fit 4543 .................................................................................................................................................. December 1, 1999.


Cosco Arriva 22–013 PAW and base 22–999 WHO ..................................................................................................... September 25, 2007.
Evenflo Discovery Adjust Right 212 ............................................................................................................................... December 1, 1999.
Graco Infant 8457 ........................................................................................................................................................... December 1, 1999.
Graco Snugride ............................................................................................................................................................... September 25, 2007.
Peg Perego Primo Viaggio SIP IMUN00US ................................................................................................................... September 25, 2007.

C. Any of the following forward- suppression or LRD system of a vehicle use in testing in a belted rear-facing
facing child restraint systems, and that has been certified as being in configuration under S20.2.1.1(a) and
forward-facing child restraint systems compliance with 49 CFR 571.208 S19, S20.4.2):
that also convert to rear-facing, or S21. (Note: Any child restraint listed
manufactured on or after the date listed, in this subpart that does not have Subpart C—Forward-Facing and
may be used by the National Highway manufacturer instructions for using it in Convertible Child Restraints of
Traffic Safety Administration to test the a rear-facing position is excluded from Appendix A–1

Manufactured on or after

Britax Roundabout E9L02xx ........................................................................................................................................... September 25, 2007.


Graco ComfortSport ........................................................................................................................................................ September 25, 2007.
Cosco Touriva 02519 ..................................................................................................................................................... December 1, 1999.
Evenflo Tribute V 379xxxx .............................................................................................................................................. September 25, 2007.
Evenflo Medallion 254 .................................................................................................................................................... December 1, 1999.
Cosco Summit Deluxe High Back Booster 22–262 ....................................................................................................... September 25, 2007.
Evenflo Generations 352xxxx ......................................................................................................................................... September 25, 2007.
Graco Toddler SafeSeat Step 2 ..................................................................................................................................... September 25, 2007.
Graco Platinum Cargo .................................................................................................................................................... September 25, 2007.
Cosco High Back Booster 22–209 ................................................................................................................................. September 25, 2007.

D. Any of the following forward- Administration as test devices to test the Subpart D—Forward-Facing Child
facing child restraint systems and belt- suppression system of a vehicle that has Restraints and Belt Positioning Seats
positioning seats, manufactured on or been certified as being in compliance of Appendix A–1
after the date listed, may be used by the with 49 CFR 571.208 S21 or S23:
National Highway Traffic Safety

Manufactured on or after

Britax Roadster 9004 ...................................................................................................................................................... December 1, 1999


Graco Platinum Cargo .................................................................................................................................................... September 25, 2007
Cosco High Back Booster 22–209 ................................................................................................................................. September 25, 2007
Evenflo Right Fit 245 ...................................................................................................................................................... December 1, 1999
Evenflo Generations 352xxxx ......................................................................................................................................... September 25, 2007
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES

Cosco Summit Deluxe High Back Booster 22–262 ....................................................................................................... September 25, 2007

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:26 Nov 10, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\12NOR1.SGM 12NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 219 / Wednesday, November 12, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 66801

■ 3. The authority citation for part 585 PART 585—PHASE-IN REPORTING 585.34 Definitions
continues to read as follows: REQUIREMENTS 585.35 Response to inquiries
585.36 Reporting requirements
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 585.37 Records
* * * * *
30117, and 30166; delegation of authority at * * * * *
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES

ER12NO08.010</GPH>

49 CFR 1.50. Subpart D—Appendix A–1 of FMVSS No.


208 Phase-in Reporting Requirements § 585.31 Scope.
■ 4. Part 585 is amended by revising 585.31 Scope This part establishes requirements for
Subpart D to read as follows: 585.32 Purpose manufacturers of passenger cars, and of
585.33 Applicability
ER12NO08.009</GPH>

trucks, buses and multipurpose

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:26 Nov 10, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00087 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\12NOR1.SGM 12NOR1
66802 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 219 / Wednesday, November 12, 2008 / Rules and Regulations

passenger vehicles with a gross vehicle Standard No. 208 when using the child incorporation by reference of certain
weight rating (GVWR) of 3,856 restraint systems specified in Appendix publications listed in the rule is
kilograms (kg) (8,500 pounds (lb)) or A–1 of that standard for its vehicles approved by the Director of the Federal
less, to submit a report, and maintain produced in that year. Each report shall Register as of January 1, 2009.
records related to the report, concerning provide the information specified in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT:
the number of such vehicles that are paragraph (b) of this section and in Paul Aguiar, (202) 245–0323 or
certified as complying with S19, S21, section 585.2 of this part. aguiarp@stb.dot.gov. [Federal
and S23 of FMVSS No. 208 (49 CFR (b) Phase-in report content— Information Relay Service (FIRS) for the
571.208) when using the child restraint (1) Basis for phase-in production hearing impaired: 1–800–877–8339.]
systems specified in Appendix A–1 of goals. Each manufacturer shall provide SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A carload
this standard. the number of vehicles manufactured in waybill is a document describing the
the current production year, or, at the characteristics of an individual rail
§ 585.32 Purpose.
manufacturer’s option, in each of the shipment: originating and terminating
The purpose of these reporting three previous production years. A new
requirements is to assist the National freight stations, the names of all
manufacturer that is, for the first time, railroads participating in the movement,
Highway Traffic Safety Administration manufacturing passenger cars, trucks,
in determining whether a manufacturer the points of all railroad interchanges,
multipurpose passenger vehicles or the number of cars, the car types,
has complied with the requirements of buses for sale in the United States must
Standard No. 208 when using the child movement weight in hundredweight,
report the number of passenger cars, the commodity, and the freight revenue.
restraint systems specified in Appendix trucks, multipurpose passenger vehicles
A–1 of that standard. Under 49 CFR Part 1244, a railroad is
or buses manufactured during the required to file a Waybill Sample for all
§ 585.33 Applicability. current production year. line-haul revenue waybills terminating
This part applies to manufacturers of (2) Production of complying vehicles. on its lines if, in any of the three
passenger cars, and of trucks, buses and Each manufacturer shall report on the preceding years, the railroad terminated
multipurpose passenger vehicles with a number of vehicles that meet the 4,500 or more carloads, or it terminated
GVWR of 3,856 kg (8,500 lb) or less. requirements of Standard No. 208 when at least 5% of the total revenue carloads
using the child restraint systems that terminate in a particular state.
§ 585.34 Definitions. specified in Appendix A–1 of that The Waybill Sample is the Board’s
(a) All terms defined in 49 U.S.C. standard. primary source of information about
30102 are used in their statutory freight rail shipments terminated in the
§ 585.37 Records.
meaning. United States. Of particular importance,
(b) Bus, gross vehicle weight rating or Each manufacturer shall maintain
the Board relies on the data in the
GVWR, multipurpose passenger vehicle, records of the Vehicle Identification
‘‘Total Freight LH Revenue’’ (also
passenger car, and truck are used as Number for each vehicle for which
referred to as ‘‘Freight Revenue’’) field
defined in § 571.3 of this chapter. information is reported under § 585.36
to compute its ‘‘Revenue Shortfall
(c) Production year means the 12- until December 31, 2013.
Allocation Method’’ (RSAM)
month period between September 1 of Issued on: October 30, 2008. benchmarks. The RSAM benchmarks,
one year and August 31 of the following David Kelly, which are used in adjudicating certain
year, inclusive. Acting Administrator. rate disputes, measure how much a
(d) Limited line manufacturer means
[FR Doc. E8–26812 Filed 11–10–08; 8:45 am] carrier would need to charge its
a manufacturer that sells three or fewer
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P potentially captive traffic in order to
carlines, as that term is defined in 49
obtain adequate revenues overall.
CFR 583.4, in the United States during In the last few years, questions have
a production year. been raised about how railroads
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
§ 585.35 Response to inquiries. reported fuel surcharge revenue in the
At any time during the production Surface Transportation Board Waybill Sample. The Board sought to
year ending August 31, 2010, each address those questions, and to provide
manufacturer shall, upon request from 49 CFR Part 1244 for consistency in the reporting of fuel
the Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, [STB Ex Parte No. 385 (Sub-No. 6)]
surcharge revenue in the Waybill
provide information identifying the Sample, by clarifying that all railroads
vehicles (by make, model and vehicle Waybill Sample that are required to submit a Waybill
identification number) that have been Sample under 49 CFR Part 1244 should
certified as complying with the AGENCY: Surface Transportation Board. report fuel surcharge revenue as part of
requirements of Standard No. 208 when ACTION: Final Rule. total freight revenue in the ‘‘Freight
using the child restraint systems Revenue’’ field in the waybill-file-record
SUMMARY: The Board is adopting a final layout. Waybill Sample, STB Ex Parte
specified in Appendix A–1 of that
rule to require all carriers that submit No. 385 (Sub-No. 6) (Clarification)
standard. The manufacturer’s
carload-waybill-sample information (published at 72 FR 72000 on December
designation of a vehicle as a certified
(Waybill Sample) under 49 CFR 1244 to 19, 2007).
vehicle is irrevocable.
report fuel surcharge revenue in a In a request for reconsideration filed
§ 585.36 Reporting Requirements. separate waybill field created by the on December 31, 2007, the National
(a) Phase-in reporting requirements. Board for that purpose, commencing Industrial Transportation League (NITL)
Within 60 days after the end of the with the Waybill Sample filed for argued that the Board’s Clarification
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES

production year ending August 31, January 2009. The Board will revise the made it more difficult to identify fuel
2010, each manufacturer shall submit a waybill-file-record layout to reflect this surcharge revenue in the Waybill
report to the National Highway Traffic change. Sample and, therefore, did not promote
Safety Administration concerning its DATES: Effective Dates: This regulation transparency as to the use of fuel
compliance with requirements of is effective January 1, 2009. The surcharges by rail carriers. NITL, with

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:26 Nov 10, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00088 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\12NOR1.SGM 12NOR1