[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 117 (Monday, June 19, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 31946-31947]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-14901]



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



DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. 95-42; Notice 1]
RIN 2127-AF67


Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Seat Belt Assemblies; 
Child Restraint Systems

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: This notice proposes to delete the colorfastness requirements 
for seat belt assemblies. The purpose of those requirements is to 
ensure that motorists are not discouraged from using safety belts out 
of a concern that the belts will transfer their coloring to motorists' 
clothing. NHTSA tentatively concludes that manufacturer concerns about 
public acceptance are sufficient by themselves to ensure that 
manufacturers will make their belts colorfast. Therefore, retention of 
the requirements is not necessary.

DATES: Comment Dates: Comments must be received by August 18, 1995.
    Proposed Effective Date: If adopted, the proposed amendments would 
become effective 30 days following publication of the final rule.

ADDRESSES: Comments should refer to the docket and notice number of 
this notice and be submitted to: Docket Section, Room 5109, National 
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., 
Washington, DC 20590. (Docket Room hours are 9:30 a.m.-4 p.m., Monday 
through Friday.)

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Clarke B. Harper, Office of 
Vehicle Safety Standards, NPS-12, National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. 
Telephone: (202) 366-4916.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to the March 4, 1995 directive, 
``Regulatory Reinvention Initiative,'' from the President to the heads 
of departments and agencies, NHTSA has undertaken a review of all its 
regulations and directives. During the course of this review, the 
agency identified several requirements and regulations that are 
potential candidates for rescission, including the colorfastness 
requirements in Standard No. 209, ``Seat Belt Assemblies.''
    Standard No. 209 includes colorfastness requirements out of concern 
that occupants would be less likely to wear their seat belt if the 
webbing stained their clothing. Paragraphs S4.2 (g) and (h) of the 
Standard require seat belt webbing to resist transferring color to a 
wet or dry crock cloth and to resist staining (the colorfastness 
requirements). Test procedures to determine that the colorfastness 
requirements are met are found in S5.1 (g) and (h) of the Standard.
    NHTSA tentatively concludes that market forces would be sufficient, 
in the absence of the current requirements, to encourage seat belt 
manufacturers to use webbing that will not stain clothing. The agency 
is not aware of any basis for believing that rescission of the 
colorfastness requirements would lessen colorfastness or safety. 
Therefore, NHTSA is proposing to delete the colorfastness requirements 
from Standard No. 209. NHTSA is also proposing to delete references to 
these requirements in Standard No. 213, ``Child Restraint Systems.''

Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    NHTSA has considered the impact of this rulemaking action under 
E.O. 12866 and the Department of Transportation's regulatory policies 
and procedures. This rulemaking document was not reviewed under E.O. 
12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review.'' This action has been 
determined to be not ``significant'' under the Department of 
Transportation's regulatory policies and procedures. NHTSA believes 
that there would be no gain or loss of safety benefits from Standards 
Nos. 209 and 213 as a result of rescission of the colorfastness 
requirements. Manufacturers may have a very minor cost savings 
(approximately $50 per test) as they will no longer have to certify 
compliance with these requirements.
Regulatory Flexibility Act

    NHTSA has also considered the impacts of this notice under the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act. I hereby certify that this proposed rule 
would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of 
small entities. As explained above, NHTSA does not anticipate that this 
proposal will significantly economically impact small manufacturers, or 
small entities that purchase safety belts or vehicles.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (P.L. 96-
511), there are no requirements for information collection associated 
with this proposed rule.

National Environmental Policy Act

    NHTSA has also analyzed this proposed rule under the National 
Environmental Policy Act and determined that it would not have a 
significant impact on the human environment.

Executive Order 12612 (Federalism)

    NHTSA has analyzed this proposal in accordance with the principles 
and criteria contained in E.O. 12612, and has determined that this 
proposed rule would not have significant federalism implications to 
warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

Civil Justice Reform

    This proposed rule would not have any retroactive effect. Under 49 
U.S.C. 30103, whenever a Federal motor vehicle safety standard is in 
effect, a State may not adopt or maintain a safety standard applicable 
to the same aspect of performance which is not identical to the Federal 
standard, except to the extent that the state requirement imposes a 
higher level of performance and applies only to vehicles procured for 
the State's use. 49 U.S.C. 30161 sets forth a procedure for judicial 
review of final rules establishing, amending or revoking Federal motor 
vehicle safety standards. That section does not require submission of a 
petition for reconsideration or other administrative proceedings before 
parties may file suit in court.

Submission of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments on the proposal. 
It is requested but not required that 10 copies be submitted.
    All comments must not exceed 15 pages in length. (49 CFR 553.21). 
Necessary attachments may be appended to these submissions without 
regard to the 15-page limit. This limitation is intended to encourage 
commenters to detail their primary arguments in a concise fashion.
    If a commenter wishes to submit certain information under a claim 
of confidentiality, three copies of the complete submission, including 
[[Page 31947]] purportedly confidential business information, should be 
submitted to the Chief Counsel, NHTSA, at the street address given 
above, and seven copies from which the purportedly confidential 
information has been deleted should be submitted to the Docket Section. 
A request for confidentiality should be accompanied by a cover letter 
setting forth the information specified in the agency's confidential 
business information regulation. 49 CFR part 512.
    All comments received before the close of business on the comment 
closing date indicated above for the proposal will be considered, and 
will be available for examination in the docket at the above address 
both before and after that date. To the extent possible, comments filed 
after the closing date will also be considered. Comments received too 
late for consideration in regard to the final rule will be considered 
as suggestions for further rulemaking action. Comments on the proposal 
will be available for inspection in the docket. The NHTSA will continue 
to file relevant information as it becomes available in the docket 
after the closing date, and it is recommended that interested persons 
continue to examine the docket for new material.
    Those persons desiring to be notified upon receipt of their 
comments in the rules docket should enclose a self-addressed, stamped 
postcard in the envelope with their comments. Upon receiving the 
comments, the docket supervisor will return the postcard by mail.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571

    Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Motor vehicles.

    In consideration of the foregoing, it is proposed that 49 CFR part 
571 be amended as follows:

PART 571--FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS

    1. The authority citation for part 571 would continue to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117, and 30166; 
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.


Sec. 571.209  [Amended]

    2. Section 571.209 would be amended by removing S4.2(g), S4.2(h), 
S5.1(g) and S5.1(h).
    3. Section 571.213 would be amended by revising S5.4.1(b) to read 
as follows:


Sec. 571.213  Standard No. 213; Child restraint systems.

* * * * *
    S5.4.1 * * *
    (b) Meet the requirements of S4.2 (e) and (f) of FMVSS No. 209 
(Sec. 571.209); and

* * * * *
    Issued on: June 14, 1995.
Barry Felrice,
Associate Administrator for Safety Performance Standards.
[FR Doc. 95-14901 Filed 6-16-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P