[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 164 (Wednesday, August 23, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 51236-51247]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-21450]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 553

[Docket No. NHTSA-00-7817]
RIN 2127-AH29


Agency Policy Goals and Public Participation in the 
Implementation of the 1998 Agreement on Global Technical Regulations; 
Statement of Policy

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

ACTION: Final rule; statement of policy.

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

SUMMARY: This final rule adopts a policy statement describing the 
agency's activities and practices for facilitating public participation 
concerning issues that arise in the implementation of an international 
agreement for establishing global technical regulations on the safety, 
emissions, energy efficiency and theft prevention of wheeled vehicles, 
equipment and parts. The policy statement also sets forth the general 
substantive policy goals regarding vehicle safety that the agency will 
pursue in participating in the implementation of the agreement. This 
final rule adds the statement as a new appendix to the agency's 
rulemaking procedure regulation.

DATES: This final rule takes effect on September 22, 2000. Petitions 
for reconsideration must be received by October 10, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration should refer to the docket and 
notice

[[Page 51237]]

number of this notice and be submitted to: The Administrator, National 
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW, 
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical and policy issues: Ms. 
Julie Abraham, Director, Office of International Policy and 
Harmonization, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 
Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC 20590. Telephone: (202) 366-2114. 
Fax: (202) 366-2559.
    For legal issues: Nancy Bell, Attorney Advisor, Office of the Chief 
Counsel, NCC-20, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 
Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC 20590. Telephone: (202) 366-2992. 
Fax: (202) 366-3820.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. January 1999 Request for Comments on Draft Policy Statement
III. Summary of Issues Raised by Comments on Draft Policy Statement
    A. Binding regulation versus policy statement
    B. NHTSA's policy goals
    C. Opportunities for public comment and briefings
    1. NHTSA's selection of subjects for global technical 
regulations
    2. NHTSA's development and submission of proposals for global 
technical regulations
    3. Technical consultations regarding proposed global technical 
regulations being considered by WP.29
    D. NHTSA's voting policy with respect to establishing global 
technical regulations
    E. Public participation in U.S. delegations attending WP.29 
meetings
    F. Dissemination of information to the public
    G. Location of NHTSA's public meetings
    H. Ex parte contacts
    I. Other comments
IV. Post-Comment Period Events
    A. Adoption of Terms of Reference and Rules of Procedures for 
Implementing the 1998 Global Agreement and other Agreements 
Implemented by WP.29
    B. April 1999 Transatlantic Consumer Dialogue Meeting and 
Resolution
V. Final Policy Statement--Discussion of and Response to Comments
    A. Binding regulation versus policy statement
    B. NHTSA's policy goals
    C. Opportunities for public comment and briefings
    1. NHTSA's selection of subjects for global technical 
regulations
    2. NHTSA's development and submission of proposals for global 
technical regulations
    3. Technical consultations regarding proposed global technical 
regulations being considered by WP.29
    D. NHTSA's voting policy with respect to establishing global 
technical regulations
    E. Public participation in U.S. delegations attending WP.29 
meetings
    F. Dissemination of information to the public
    G. Location of NHTSA's public meetings
    H. Ex parte contacts
    I. Other comments
VI. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
    Appendix--Highlights of the 1998 Global Agreement Text to be 
added to CFR

I. Background

    On June 25, 1998, the U.S. became the first signatory to the United 
Nations/Economic Commission for Europe (UN/ECE) \1\ Agreement 
Concerning the Establishing of Global and Technical Regulations for 
Wheeled Vehicles, Equipment and Parts Which Can Be Fitted And/or Be 
Used On Wheeled Vehicles (the ``1998 Global Agreement''). The 1998 
Global Agreement provides for the establishment of global technical 
regulations regarding the safety, emissions, energy efficiency and 
theft prevention of wheeled vehicles, equipment and parts.\2\ The 
Agreement contains procedures for establishing global technical 
regulations by either harmonizing existing regulations or developing a 
new regulation.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Economic Commission for Europe was established by the 
United Nations (UN) in 1947 to help rebuild post-war Europe, develop 
economic activity and strengthen economic relations between European 
countries and between them and the other countries of the world.
    \2\ The covered equipment and parts include, but are not limited 
to, exhaust systems, tires, engines, acoustic shields, anti-theft 
alarms, warning devices and child restraint systems.
    \3\ To aid persons unfamiliar with the 1998 Global Agreement in 
gaining an understanding of its provisions, this agency has 
summarized the key aspects in an appendix to the preamble of this 
notice. The complete text of the Agreement may be found on the 
Internet at the following address: http://www.unece.org/trans/main/wp29/wp29wgs/wp29gen/wp29glob.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The establishment of global technical regulations is expected to 
lead to a significant degree of convergence in motor vehicle 
regulations at the regional and national levels. However, while in some 
instances the result may be the adoption of identical or substantially 
identical regulations at those levels, in other instances, the result 
may be regulations that, although dissimilar in some respects, do not 
conflict with each other. While the Agreement obligates the Contracting 
Parties, under certain circumstances, to consider adopting the global 
technical regulations within their own jurisdictions, it does not 
obligate the Parties to adopt them. The Agreement recognizes that 
governments have the right to determine whether the global technical 
regulations established under the Agreement are suitable for their own 
particular safety needs. Those needs vary from country to country due 
to differences in the traffic environment, vehicle fleet composition, 
driver characteristics and seat belt usage rates. Further, the 
Agreement explicitly recognizes the right of governments to adopt and 
maintain technical regulations that are more stringently protective of 
safety and the environment than the global technical regulations.
    This Agreement was negotiated under the auspices of the UN/ECE's 
World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations (WP.29) \4\ under 
the leadership of the United States (U.S.),\5\ the European Community 
(EC), and Japan. Becoming a Contracting Party to the 1998 Global 
Agreement accomplishes several purposes for the U.S. First, it provides 
the U.S. with a vote in the establishment of global technical 
regulations for wheeled vehicles, equipment and parts under the UN/ECE 
and enables the U.S. to take a leading role in effectively influencing 
the selection of the level of vehicle safety regulations world wide.\6\ 
Second, it ensures that U.S. standards and their benefits will be 
properly considered in any effort to adopt a harmonized global 
technical regulation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Formerly, ``Working Party on the Construction of Vehicles 
(WP.29).'' The Forum's website is http://www.unece.org/trans/main/welcwp29.htm
    \5\ The U.S. was represented in those negotiations by this 
agency and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
    \6\ The U.S. does not have a vote under an existing earlier UN/
ECE agreement regarding wheeled vehicles, equipment and parts, known 
as the ``1958 Agreement'' because it is not a contracting party to 
that agreement. Historically, the United States did not become a 
contracting party to the 1958 Agreement because (1) it was not 
feasible to develop regulations regarding motor vehicle safety in 
what was then a primarily common European regulatory development 
forum and (2) NHTSA's enforcement procedures precluded the U.S. from 
engaging in the 1958 Agreement's mutual recognition obligations. 
Although the 1958 Agreement was amended in late 1995 to reduce the 
impediments to becoming a contracting party, the U.S. determined 
that further amendments were necessary. Ultimately, it determined in 
talks with the contracting parties to the 1958 Agreement that the 
most desirable course of action was to develop a new, parallel 
agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 1998 Global Agreement will enter into force on August 25, 2000. 
The Agreement provides that it will enter into force 30 days after the 
number of Contracting Parties \7\ reaches eight. On July 26, 2000, the 
number of Contracting Parties reached eight.\8\ A ninth country, the 
Republic of South Africa, has signed subject to ratification. In 
addition,

[[Page 51238]]

according to the UN/ECE, Spain has decided to sign the Agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ As used here and in the balance of this notice, 
``Contracting Parties'' refers to Contracting Parties to the 1998 
Global Agreement.
    \8\ The first eight Contracting Parties are: Canada, the EC, 
France, Germany, Japan, the Russian Federation, United Kingdom, and 
the U.S.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In anticipation of the Agreement's entry into force, NHTSA recently 
published a notice (65 FR 44565; July 18, 2000) seeking public comment 
on the agency's preliminary recommendations for first motor vehicle 
safety technical regulations to be considered for establishment under 
that Agreement.

II. January 1999 Request for Comments on Draft Policy Statement

    On January 5, 1999, NHTSA published a notice seeking public 
comments on a draft statement of policy concerning the agency's goals, 
and its activities and practices for public participation, in the 
implementation of the 1998 Global Agreement. (64 FR 563). NHTSA issued 
the notice in recognition of the importance of obtaining public input 
before making decisions regarding activities under matters arising 
under the Agreement. In addition, the agency was mindful that various 
public interest groups had expressed concerns about the opportunities 
for the public to participate in activities related to the 1998 Global 
Agreement. Similar concerns had been expressed by other groups about 
other international agreements providing for the establishment of 
international standards by organizations that meet outside the U.S. The 
common concern was that global technical regulations will be 
established abroad without adequate involvement of the American public. 
In the case of the 1998 Global Agreement, groups had also expressed the 
view that the decisions made in Geneva about global technical 
regulations could pre-determine the outcome of subsequent rulemaking 
proceedings in the U.S. regarding Federal Motor Vehicle Safety 
Standards (FMVSSs) even though FMVSSs cannot be amended or established 
without adhering to the Administrative Procedure Act and the statutory 
provisions governing those standards.
    The agency developed the draft policy statement based on the 
comments from a public meeting held by NHTSA in June 1998 and other 
available information. The draft policy statement had two purposes. 
First, it set forth a list of policy goals that would guide this agency 
during its participation in activities under the 1998 Global Agreement. 
Second, it set forth the practices and activities that this agency 
could use to ensure that the public has the information and opportunity 
necessary to follow the development of global technical regulations 
under the 1998 Global Agreement and to provide its views, beginning at 
the earliest stages, regarding those regulations.
    More specifically, the agency described its proposal as follows:

    This agency will publish an annual calendar of [WP.29] meetings 
and listing of global technical regulations under consideration [by 
WP.29]
* * * * *
    This agency plans to seek public comment at two points during 
the development of global technical regulations. In the case of a 
proposal to be submitted by the U.S. for a global technical 
regulation, the first point would be before the proposal is 
submitted. In the case of a proposed global technical regulation 
submitted by a Contracting Party other than the U.S., the first 
point at which the agency would solicit public comment would be when 
the proposal is referred under the 1998 Agreement to a working party 
of experts for consideration. In all cases, the second point would 
be when and if a working party of experts issues a report 
recommending the adoption of a global technical regulation.
* * * * *
    This agency plans to hold informal meetings to brief the public 
about recent and anticipated deliberations and standards development 
work under the 1998 Agreement at those meetings. In addition, 
interested parties may raise questions related to those subjects. 
The public meetings would be scheduled so that one would precede 
each of the three annual * * * meetings [of WP.29 participants] 
(i.e., in March, June and November).

    NHTSA said that it had tentatively chosen not to issue the policy 
statement in the form of a binding regulation. The agency requested 
comments on several specific issues considered pertinent to the draft 
policy statement. One of the specific requests was for comments on what 
specific lessons should be drawn from the involvement of U.S. agencies 
in several other international harmonization fora. In particular, NHTSA 
asked about the experiences of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 
and the Department of Agriculture's Food Safety Inspection Service 
(FSIS) as members of the U.S. Codex delegation in the international 
food safety standard activities of the Codex Alimentarius Commission 
(Codex). It also asked about the FDA's experiences in the international 
drug safety activities of the International Conference of Harmonisation 
of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human 
Use (ICH). Finally, the agency solicited comments on the extent of the 
interest and ability of the public to serve as private sector advisors 
at WP.29 meetings.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ In the interest of simplicity, this notice uses the term 
``WP.29 meetings'' to refer to sessions of WP.29, meetings of WP.29 
working parties of experts, and meetings of the Executive Committee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the agency announced a February 1999 public workshop 
to discuss the draft policy statement with interested persons.

III. Summary of Issues Raised by Comments on Draft Policy Statement

    The February 1999 workshop was attended by representatives of U.S. 
governmental agencies, motor vehicle manufacturer groups, insurance 
groups, and consumer interest groups. Prepared statements were 
presented by Joan Claybrook (Public Citizen), Vann Wilber (Alliance of 
Automobile Manufacturers (AAM)), and Byron Bloch (Auto Safety Design 
(ASD)).
    Subsequently, written comments were received from the following 
organizations: AAM, Motorcycle Industry Council (MIC), Rubber 
Manufacturers Association (RMA), the Society of Automotive Engineers 
(SAE), American Insurance Association (AIA), Advocates for Highway and 
Auto Safety (Advocates), ASD, Center For Auto Safety (CAS), Consumers 
Union (CU), and Public Citizen.
    AAM, SAE, MIC, and RMA expressed support for the draft policy 
statement. These organizations generally agreed that (1) The agency, 
through the policy statement, provides adequate opportunity for all 
interested parties to voice opinions and otherwise participate in the 
1998 Global Agreement process, (2) the regulatory process under the 
Vehicle Safety Act provides additional procedural safeguards for all 
interested parties, and (3) the policy statement must provide the 
agency with sufficient flexibility to consult with other countries.
    Consumer group commenters (AIA, Advocates, ASD, CAS, CU and Public 
Citizen) disagreed, expressing concern that global technical 
regulations will be established abroad without adequate involvement of 
the American public. Consumer group comments regarding public 
participation fell generally within the following categories: (A) 
Issuance of binding regulation instead of policy statement, (B) NHTSA's 
policy goals, (C) Opportunities for public comment and briefings, (D) 
NHTSA's voting policy with respect to establishing global technical 
regulations, (E) Public participation in U.S. delegations attending 
WP.29 meetings, (F) Dissemination of information to the public, (G) 
Location of NHTSA's public meetings, (H) Ex parte contacts, and (I) 
Other comments.

[[Page 51239]]

A. Binding Regulation Versus Policy Statement

    All consumer group commenters stated that NHTSA's policy regarding 
its participation under the 1998 Global Agreement should be issued in 
the form of a regulation, not a policy statement. For example, Public 
Citizen asserted that unlike a policy statement that could be easily 
ignored or summarily revoked by a new administration, a regulation 
provides the public with greater reliability, clarity and specificity 
and that these considerations far outweigh NHTSA's purported need for 
the ``flexibility'' of a policy statement based on the ``newness both 
of the Agreement and of NHTSA's involvement in activities under an 
international agreement to which the U.S. is a contracting party.'' 
Further, Public Citizen suggested that ``NHTSA can always propose 
amendments to the policy regulation through notice and comment 
rulemaking.'' Other commenters urged that a binding regulation would 
ensure that the public is aware of the issues to be decided, is able to 
provide regular input that can effect agency determinations, and is 
appraised of the reasons for the positions taken by the agency.

B. NHTSA's Policy Goals

    All consumer groups said that the first of NHTSA's proposed goals 
under the 1998 Global Agreement, i.e., advancing vehicle safety, by 
either adopting best safety practices from around the world or 
developing new global technical regulations reflecting technological 
advances, should be restated to make it clear that it is the most 
important of the agency's goals. Several of those consumer groups said 
further that that first goal should focus solely on global technical 
regulations reflecting current and anticipated technology. Seeking to 
harmonize NHTSA's standards for non-safety reasons, i.e., achieving 
economic efficiency and cutting costs in the design and production of 
vehicles, should only be a secondary concern. Some suggested that the 
commitment in the 1998 Global Agreement to continuous improvement of 
safety should be reaffirmed to ensure that international standards are 
kept up-to-date.
    Consumer group commenters requested NHTSA not to harmonize existing 
standards with any foreign standard or add a foreign standard to a 
FMVSS as a functionally equivalent compliance alternative if: (1) 
agency resources could be used more productively in developing a 
significantly improved standard; (2) the agency would have to develop 
new test procedures or purchase new testing equipment or facilities and 
if such work or expenditures would detract from other agency 
activities; or (3) it is simply for the purpose of integrating existing 
standards. Others stated that harmonization efforts should focus on 
test procedures and devices, not on performance requirements.

C. Opportunities for Public Comment and Briefings

    Consumer groups said that it is essential that NHTSA use procedures 
similar to the notice and comment rulemaking procedures of the 
Administrative Procedure Act (APA) at all stages of its harmonization 
activities under the 1998 Global Agreement including: (1) NHTSA's 
selection of subjects for global technical regulations, (2) NHTSA's 
development of proposals for global technical regulations, and (3) 
negotiations regarding proposed global technical regulations. A key 
element of this request is that the agency respond in writing to the 
public's comments. Advocates said that the proposed two opportunities 
for written public input are insufficient. That organization said that 
more must be done to provide for public participation throughout the 
WP.29 process and during the negotiations among the working parties of 
experts.
1. NHTSA's Selection of Subjects for Global Technical Regulations
    Consumer group commenters stated that NHTSA should use notice and 
comment procedures and hold public meetings in selecting the subjects 
for which it will develop proposed global technical regulations. More 
specifically, several consumer groups also suggested that NHTSA publish 
a notice (1) requesting comments on whether, for each FMVSS, (a) there 
are any counterpart foreign standards with significantly higher 
benefits, or (b) there is practicable technology that would make 
possible developing and implementing a higher FMVSS, (2) discussing 
comments on any preceding notice regarding harmonization priorities, 
and (3) requesting comments on the priorities that should be adopted by 
NHTSA. Alternatively, they suggested that NHTSA publish a notice 
announcing its tentative decisions regarding the agency's priorities 
and soliciting comments.
2. NHTSA's Development and Submission of Proposals for Global Technical 
Regulations
    Consumer group commenters stated that when NHTSA publishes a draft 
proposed global technical regulation for comment, it should also 
publish a regulatory analysis and identify comparable or related 
foreign standards. They also said that NHTSA should request public 
comments on the draft global standards that it plans to propose to 
WP.29 regardless of whether the agency has previously received comments 
on similar issues in response to notices published by the agency under 
the Vehicle Safety Act (subsequently codified under Title 49 of the 
U.S. Code in Chapter 301, Motor Vehicle Safety).
3. Technical Consultations Regarding Proposed Global Technical 
Regulations Being Considered by WP.29
    Consumer group commenters recommended that the agency establish a 
public docket for each proposed regulation referred to a working party 
of experts. They said that the policy statement should state that the 
agency will provide at least two opportunities for public comment on 
each regulation under development by WP.29, accept public comments 
before developing negotiating positions, respond to public comments 
explaining acceptance or rejection of comments, and announce the 
agency's negotiating positions in advance of negotiations. Further, 
they stated that NHTSA should publish a notice requesting comments 
every time that a substantive change is made or proposed at a meeting 
of a WP.29 working party of experts or a meeting of WP.29, publish a 
notice summarizing events and developments and inviting public comments 
after each such meeting, and not deviate from any announced negotiating 
position after the agency has solicited and responded to comments. 
Also, negotiators should return to U.S. to seek public comments if 
negotiations lead the agency to want to change a previously declared 
U.S. negotiating position.
    Consumer groups commented that, in addition to publishing notices 
and responding to comments, NHTSA should hold public meetings to 
solicit comments prior to at least some WP.29 meetings and to receive 
public comments when significant changes occur in a global technical 
regulation under consideration by WP.29 or in the U.S. position 
regarding that regulation. CU urged the establishment of an on-going 
public forum regarding the implementation of the 1998 Global Agreement, 
including pre- and post-negotiation meetings. Advocates questioned 
whether NHTSA would provide timely debriefings of past WP.29 meetings 
and whether a single agency meeting could provide sufficient

[[Page 51240]]

time to comment on and discuss, in detail, the issues discussed at the 
most recent WP.29 meetings.
    CU also urged NHTSA to follow the practices of the U.S. Codex 
delegation in promoting public participation while Advocates and Public 
Citizen argued that U.S. Codex does not provide for sufficient public 
participation. They said that under U.S. Codex all steps taken to 
involve the public are voluntary and that U.S. Codex maintains complete 
discretion as to the formulation of policy. Further, they stated that 
notification of Codex activities are limited to parties who have 
previously expressed an interest in the activities and there is not 
obligation for the government to respond to comments or provide a 
statement of basis and purpose for its position on agenda items.

D. NHTSA's Voting Policy With Respect to Establishing Global Technical 
Regulations

    Consumer group commenters urged that NHTSA consider public comments 
and all factors legally relevant to rulemaking under the Vehicle Safety 
Act before voting on a recommended global technical regulation. They 
said that the U.S. should vote affirmatively on a global technical 
regulation only if the following three conditions are met: (1) the 
level of safety of the new global standard would be at least equal to 
that in existing FMVSSs; (2) the global standard fully reflects the 
Best Available Technology (BAT); and (3) future technology is 
considered.

E. Public Participation in U.S. Delegations Attending WP.29 Meetings

    Public Citizen argued that (1) NHTSA is not legally precluded from 
paying for the attendance of nongovernmental representatives, (2) 1979 
State Department regulations do not preclude the agency from requesting 
budget authority to pay for consumer or environmental representations 
at WP.29, (3) NHTSA should investigate other governmental efforts to 
pay for nongovernmental representatives and request such 
appropriations, and (4) the agency must ensure that if there is any 
nongovernmental participation in the U.S. delegation it must be equally 
divided between industry and consumer representatives. Other commenters 
expressed concern regarding the fairness of the selection process for 
participation on U.S. delegations. Further, consumer groups stated that 
if NHTSA cannot pay the travel expenses of consumer groups so that they 
are able to participate in the U.S. delegations, there should not be 
any nongovernmental organization (NGO) delegates in the U.S. 
delegation.

F. Dissemination of Information to the Public

    Dissemination of information to the public can be improved, 
according to consumer group commenters, by expediting the availability 
of documents available under the 1958 Agreement and the 1998 Global 
Agreement. They suggested placing WP.29 materials on the international 
page on the NHTSA website. Advocates called for the agency to make 
publicly available all key documents stating positions of other 
Contracting Parties to the 1998 Global Agreement. Commenters suggested 
that NHTSA investigate and establish alternative means, such as 
mailing/facsimile lists and media outlets, to notify interested persons 
who do not have electronic access of WP.29 activities and documents.

G. Location of NHTSA's Public Meetings

    Consumer commenters urged that NHTSA hold its meetings in 
Washington, D.C., not Detroit, because of the travel and expense 
associated with attending these meetings. They urged further that those 
meetings not be combined with existing industry and public meetings 
since the latter meetings would provide insufficient time for a full 
discussion of the issues.

H. Ex Parte Contacts

    Commenters asked that NHTSA disclose ex parte contacts in which 
nongovernmental persons or entities such as industry representatives 
express views concerning activities under the 1998 Global Agreement. 
Some commenters stated that such ex parte contacts between NHTSA and 
industry are undesirable and should not be allowed.

I. Other Comments

    Consumer group commenters urged that at least one of the three 
annual meetings of WP.29 should be held in Washington, DC and that 
stronger provisions for NGO participation in substantive policymaking 
discussions in the WP.29 be adopted. They said that the new terms of 
reference should permit NGOs to observe the substantive discussions of 
the Executive Committee, receive Executive Committee documents, and 
``participate'' in the activities of the working parties of experts. 
Also, some commenters argued that representation of U.S. consumer 
groups and the U.S. public at WP.29 meetings is not satisfied by the 
involvement of international organizations that have been granted 
consultative status by the UN Economic and Social Council parties, 
noting that all but two of the organizations which have obtained that 
status represent the interests of manufacturers.
    AIA said that other countries could use the Technical Barriers to 
Trade Agreement (TBT Agreement) to challenge U.S. efforts to maintain 
or promulgate better safety standards by bringing action under the 
World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute resolution system. It suggested 
that the policy statement should provide assurance that there will be a 
vigorous defense of any U.S. standard which is challenged under the TBT 
Agreement.\10\ Likewise, Public Citizen expressed concern that the U.S. 
motor vehicle standards would be subject to a trade challenge under the 
TBT Agreement. It said further that, even if the U.S. were to defend 
its standards vigorously, the U.S. might not prevail in such a 
challenge despite the fact that the U.S. motor vehicle standards are 
amply supported by ``substantial evidence'' for purposes of the United 
State's domestic administrative law. Public Citizen asked NHTSA to 
define the term ``international standard for Uruguay Round TBT 
purposes,'' and specifically to explain whether a WP.29 standard would 
be considered an ``international standard'' if only the United States 
and some European countries participate in WP.29.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ One of the agreements of the Uruguay Round administered by 
the WTO is the TBT Agreement. (http://www.wto.org) The purpose of 
the TBT Agreement is to ensure that product-standards, technical 
regulations, and related procedures do not create unnecessary 
obstacles to trade. At the same time, the TBT Agreement clearly 
recognizes that each country has the right to establish and maintain 
national technical regulations for the protection of human, animal, 
and plant life and health and the environment, and for prevention 
against deceptive practices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Post-Comment Period Events

A. Adoption of Terms of Reference and Rules of Procedures for 
Implementing the 1998 Global Agreement and other Agreements Implemented 
by WP.29

    At its 119th session in November 1999, WP.29 adopted revised 
``Terms of Reference and Rules of Procedure.'' The new terms and rules 
were endorsed by the Inland Transport Committee at its 62nd session in 
February 2000 and became effective beginning with WP.29's 120th session 
in March 2000. In addition to creating procedures for the coordinated 
implementation of the 1998 Global Agreement and other related 
agreements administered by WP.29, such as the 1958 Agreement, the new 
Terms of Reference enhance the

[[Page 51241]]

transparency of and public participation in the activities of WP.29.

B. April 1999 Transatlantic Consumer Dialogue Meeting and Resolution

    Following the Transatlantic Consumer Dialogue (TACD) meeting in 
Brussels on April 23-24, 1999, the TACD submitted its ``Resolution On 
Auto Safety Standards'' to NHTSA. This document, which was placed on 
the public docket for the January 1999 notice, contains comments that 
are the same or substantially similar to those discussed above.

V. Final Policy Statement--Discussion of and Response to Comments

    We have made a variety of changes in response to the public 
comments. We have decided to add the statement as a new appendix to the 
agency's rulemaking procedure regulation. In addition, we have expanded 
our description of the public participation procedures. In a number of 
instances, we have drawn on our discussions in the preamble of the 
January 1999 notice to add detail to our descriptions in the statement 
of the actions we will take to provide for public participation. To 
promote a continuing public dialogue, the policy statement now provides 
an opportunity for public comment on NHTSA's tentative selection of 
technical regulations for establishment under the 1998 Global 
Agreement. Further, NHTSA has provided an explicit list of the general 
agenda items for its public meetings relating to activities under the 
Agreement.
    The following section discusses the comments summarized in Section 
III and describes the changes made to the 1999 draft policy statement 
in response to some of those comments.

A. Binding Regulation Versus Policy Statement

    NHTSA is issuing these goals and processes in the form of a non-
binding policy statement which provides a general outline of the 
intentions of this agency and which does not create or confer any 
rights, privileges, or benefits. As discussed in its January 1999 
notice, NHTSA must ensure, particularly at the beginning of these 
processes, that there is enough flexibility to allow a sufficient 
degree of experimentation and to allow the specific aspects of its 
activities and procedures to evolve easily and quickly as the U.S. and 
other Contracting Parties gain experience in utilizing limited 
resources to implement the Agreement in a manner that advances safety 
and environmental protection and involves the public in that effort. 
Taking this approach, rather than issuing a binding regulation in the 
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), also recognizes the novelty for 
NHTSA of its involvement in activities under an international agreement 
to which the U.S. is a contracting party.
    However, while we are not issuing a binding regulation, we are 
giving the policy statement additional visibility by adding it to the 
Code of Federal Regulations as Appendix C to Part 553, ``Rulemaking 
Procedures.''
    We emphasize that our adoption of this policy statement will not 
change the process by which we adopt FMVSSs and put them into effect. 
We will continue to issue FMVSSs in accordance with the Vehicle Safety 
Act and through rulemaking proceedings conducted under the 
Administrative Procedure Act and any other applicable statute.

B. NHTSA's Policy Goals

    In the draft policy statement, the agency listed the goal of 
advancing safety first because it regarded that as its most important 
goal. To emphasize that goal's primacy, NHTSA has revised the statement 
so that it explicitly states that the agency's foremost goal under the 
1998 Global Agreement is to advance vehicle safety, particularly by 
developing and adopting technical regulations reflecting consideration 
of existing technology as well as anticipated technological advances 
and safety problems. The agency has also revised its goal regarding the 
harmonization of existing standards to state that the emphasis in its 
harmonization activities would be on raising U.S. standards at least to 
the level of the best practices in the safety standards of other 
Contracting Parties. In response to suggestions by commenters that the 
agency ensure that international standards are kept up-to-date, this 
agency has revised its policy goals to reaffirm its commitment in the 
1998 Global Agreement to continuous improvement of safety. NHTSA's 
other two priority goals, as also revised by this final rule, are 
adopting and maintaining U.S. standards that fully meet the need in the 
U.S. for vehicle safety and enhancing regulatory effectiveness through 
regulatory cooperation with other countries and regions, thereby 
providing greater safety protection with available government 
resources.

C. Opportunities for Public Comment and Briefings

    The policy statement makes extensive provision for the public to 
make its views known to the agency. However, the agency will not use 
APA-like notice and comment procedures because they are impracticable 
for the activities under the policy statement. Our decisionmaking under 
the 1998 Global Agreement and our course of action in WP.29 will 
reflect our consideration of the input from a broad spectrum of the 
public.
    We have expanded our description in the policy statement of the 
activities and procedures for public participation by incorporating 
some of the details in the preamble to the January 1999 notice. There 
will be two opportunities for written public comment on each global 
technical regulation under development by WP.29 during. The first 
opportunity will be provided in connection with the proposal of a 
global technical regulation. In the case of U.S. proposals, this 
opportunity will be provided during the development of the proposal. In 
the case of proposals by other Contracting Parties, it will be provided 
after the proposal had been submitted to WP.29 and referred to a 
working party of experts. The second opportunity will be provided after 
a working party of experts has issued a report and a recommended global 
technical regulation.
    In addition, there will be other ongoing opportunities for public 
participation. The policy statement provides for holding public 
meetings during which public can discuss and comment on consultations 
regarding proposed global technical regulations under the 1998 Global 
Agreement. The agency may also use those meetings periodically to brief 
the public on any other significant international activities, such as 
developments under International Harmonized Research Activities (IHRA). 
Under the IHRA, working groups have been formed to address six issues: 
(1) Biomechanics, (2) Side Impact, (3) Advanced Offset Frontal Crash 
Protection, (4) Vehicle Compatibility, (5) Pedestrian Safety, and (6) 
Intelligent Transportation Systems.
1. NHTSA's Selection of Subjects for Global Technical Regulations
    NHTSA will periodically publish a notice seeking public comments on 
the subjects for which new global technical regulations should be 
considered for establishment under the 1998 Global Agreement. A 
subsequent notice will identify the priorities on which NHTSA will 
focus in the future under the Agreement.

[[Page 51242]]

2. NHTSA's Development and Submission of Proposals for Global Technical 
Regulations \11\
    NHTSA's proposals under the 1998 Global Agreement will derive 
largely from the agency's rulemaking under the Vehicle Safety Act. 
Thus, NHTSA's development of proposals for global technical regulations 
will be based on the results of its existing and ongoing efforts to 
develop FMVSSs. The research and analyses in support of new or revised 
FMVSSs will be used to develop and justify the proposed global 
technical regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ This step is diagramed in Figure 1 of the Appendix.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    When NHTSA develops a draft U.S. proposal for a global technical 
regulation, it will publish a notice discussing the merits of the 
proposal and providing the public with the opportunity to comment on 
the draft regulation.\12\ The notice will generally discuss the safety 
problem addressed by the draft regulation, the rationale for the 
proposed approach for addressing the problem, and the impacts (e.g., 
benefits and cost-effectiveness) of the draft regulation. It will also 
compare the draft regulation with any existing counterpart U.S. 
standard and generally discuss the relative merits of the draft 
regulation and standard. Additionally, NHTSA will consider the comments 
and revise the proposal and any of its supporting documentation as it 
deems appropriate before submitting the proposal to WP.29.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Given the close relationship between activities under the 
1998 Global Agreement and the Vehicle Safety Act, NHTSA may combine 
its notice requesting comments on a draft proposal for a global 
technical regulation with a notice of proposed rulemaking under the 
Vehicle Safety Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Technical Consultations Regarding Proposed Global Technical 
Regulations Being Considered by WP.29 \13\
    With regard to a proposal submitted to WP.29 by a Contracting Party 
other than the U.S., the final policy statement specifies that the 
agency will publish a notice requesting public comments on the proposal 
after it has been referred to a working party of experts and has been 
made available by WP.29. The agency will consider the comments in 
developing a U.S. position on the proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ These processes are diagramed in the Flowcharts in Figures 
1 and 2 of the Appendix.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If a working party of experts recommends a global technical 
regulation (whether proposed by the U.S. or another Contracting Party) 
and sends the regulation and an explanatory report to the Executive 
Committee, NHTSA will publish a notice requesting public comment on the 
recommended global technical regulation and report. NHTSA will consider 
the comments in developing or revising its position on the recommended 
regulation, and in subsequently voting within the Executive Committee 
on whether to establish the recommended regulation.
    The final policy statement also incorporates explanatory details 
from the preamble to January 1999 notice about the public meetings that 
the agency will hold regarding activities under the 1998 Global 
Agreement and about its solicitation of comments prior to WP.29 
sessions and meetings of the working parties of experts. The public 
meeting before the annual November session of WP.29 participants may be 
held separately from or in conjunction with the agency's quarterly 
meeting on its vehicle rulemaking and research and development held in 
the Washington, DC area in September of each year. The public meetings 
will be held during the 60-day period before each of the three annual 
sessions of WP.29 participants.
    To the extent possible and appropriate, each notice announcing one 
of these public meetings will discuss the agenda of the upcoming 
session of WP.29 participants and discuss the agency's general 
positions on the pending work to be discussed at that session. However, 
the agency cautions that its ability to discuss upcoming sessions of 
WP.29 participants and to develop and announce any positions will, in 
part, be dependent upon the timely availability of the provisional 
agenda for each upcoming WP.29 session. The provisional agendas are 
distributed by the WP.29 Secretariat according to the WP.29 Terms of 
Reference and Rules of Procedure. At present, they are rarely available 
more than 30 days before the sessions of WP.29 participants.
    In response to the concern of the consumer group commenters that 
the breadth of the agenda for the public meetings would preclude 
detailed discussion of any particular issues, NHTSA has revised its 
statement of policy to make more explicit the details of those 
meetings, including their timing, agenda, and the opportunity for 
public comment at the meetings, and the dissemination of information 
prior to those meetings. Specifically, at its public meetings, NHTSA 
will: (1) Brief the public on the significant developments that 
occurred at the WP.29 meetings held since the most recent previous 
public meeting, (2) inform the public about the issues to be addressed 
at upcoming WP.29 meetings and any votes scheduled at the next meeting 
of the Executive Committee on recommended technical regulations, and 
(3) invite public comment on those past developments and upcoming 
issues and votes and on possible U.S. positions regarding those votes. 
The agendas for these meetings and NHTSA's reports discussing prior 
WP.29 meetings will be filed in the public docket to keep the public 
updated and familiar with WP.29 activities and to allow the members of 
the public to determine which particular issues they wish to discuss at 
the meetings. Further, the agency may hold ad hoc meetings to discuss 
particular issues.
    NHTSA cannot, due to its limited resources and the practical 
necessities involved in conducting effective consultations with other 
Contracting Parties, provide notice and comment or hold public agency 
meetings every time that a substantive change is made or proposed in a 
proposed global technical regulations under consideration or that a 
substantive change occurs in the U.S. position regarding that 
regulation. Significant changes, such as the introduction of a new 
proposal or an amendment to a proposal, will not occur during a meeting 
of the Executive Committee. Instead, if the Committee concludes that a 
recommended global technical regulation needs substantive revision, it 
will refer the matter back to the appropriate working party of experts. 
If the working party of experts responds with significant revisions to 
a previous recommendation, NHTSA may publish a notice seeking public 
comments on the revisions.

D. NHTSA's Voting Policy With Respect to Establishing Global Technical 
Regulations

    NHTSA will be guided in its voting to establish global technical 
regulations by the priority goals in its policy statement:
     Continuously improve safety and seek high levels of 
safety, particularly by developing and adopting new global technical 
regulations reflecting consideration of current and anticipated 
technology and safety problems.
     Harmonize U.S. standards with those of other countries or 
regions, particularly by raising U.S. standards at least to the level 
of the best practices in those other safety standards.
     Enhance regulatory effectiveness through regulatory 
cooperation with other countries and regions, thereby providing greater 
safety protection with available government resources. Further, NHTSA 
will consider the suitability of the regulation for adoption as a FMVSS 
under the Vehicle Safety Act.

[[Page 51243]]

E. Public Participation in U.S. Delegations Attending WP.29 Meetings

    We initially explored the inclusion of private entities on U.S. 
delegations to WP.29 in the January 1999 notice and in the February 
1999 public meeting. Currently, there are no private sector 
representatives serving as participants in the NHTSA delegation. The 
agency, upon further consideration and research into this issue, has 
determined that it will not seek, through the Department of State, to 
include such participants at this time. We are guided in this decision 
by the Department of State guidelines, which describe the objectives of 
private sector participation and the factors to be considered in the 
justification process. We believe that these objectives will be 
satisfied by the activities and processes described in the policy 
statement. Should we later determine that private sector participation 
in the delegation is desirable, we would follow the guidelines and 
procedures of the Department of State. In response to comments urging 
balanced representation, we note that the guidelines address this 
concern, and we are committed to full compliance, in the event of any 
future decision to include private sector participation. The guidelines 
do not permit the payment of travel expenses for private sector 
participants, absent specific authorization and appropriations. As the 
agency does not currently plan to include private sector participants 
in U.S. delegations, NHTSA will not seek specific appropriations to 
fund such participants.

F. Dissemination of Information to the Public

    NHTSA will promote the availability of documents under the 1958 
Agreement and the 1998 Global Agreement to the public. This effort will 
include placing WP.29-related materials, including summaries of WP.29 
meetings, in the Internet-accessible DOT docket (http://dms.dot.gov/) 
and, to the extent possible, on the NHTSA international website (http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/international/index.html). NHTSA will 
also establish a public docket for each proposed regulation referred to 
a working party of experts. While it is beyond the resource 
capabilities of NHTSA to establish and maintain a mailing/facsimile 
list or utilize media outlets for those who do not have electronic 
access, as suggested by some commenters, all docket materials are 
available in the public docket for public viewing from 10:00 am to 5:00 
pm, Monday through Friday, in Docket Management, Room PL-401, 400 
Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC 20590.

G. Location of NHTSA's Public Meetings

    In response to the public comments and in recognition of the need 
to facilitate the attendance of agency personnel involved in WP.29 
activities, NHTSA anticipates holding these meetings in Washington, DC.

H. Ex parte Contacts

    All ex parte communications and contacts with nongovernmental 
representatives regarding WP.29 activities will be handled in 
accordance with DOT Order 2100.2 governing ex parte communications.

I. Other Comments

    NHTSA was urged that the Terms of Reference for WP.29, which were 
still being negotiated at the time of the written comments, should 
permit NGOs to observe the substantive discussion of the WP.29 
Executive Committee and receive Executive Committee documents, as well 
as provide for NGO participation in the activities of the working 
parties of experts. Further, consumer groups expressed the view that 
the international organizations that have been granted consultative 
status by the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations provide 
no substantive opportunity for participation by the U.S. public and 
that all but two of the organizations represent the interests of 
manufacturers. Article 2, section 2.3 of the Agreement states that,

    any specialized agency and any organization, including 
intergovernmental organizations and non-governmental organizations, 
that have been granted consultative status by the Economic and 
Social Council of the United Nations, may participate in that 
capacity in the deliberations of any Working Party during 
consideration of any matter of particular concern to that agency or 
organization.

Because WP.29 operates under the auspices of the UN/ECE, whose 
arrangements for consultations with nongovernmental organizations are 
governed by guidelines that the Economic and Social Council set in 
Resolution 1296 (XLIV) of May 1968, NHTSA does not have the authority 
to include NGOs that have not been granted consultative status in 
deliberations of Working Parties. However, all sessions of WP.29 and 
its subsidiary bodies, including the working parties, will be held in 
public and all NGOs may attend as allowed under Rule 19 of the Terms of 
Reference for WP.29.\14\ Further, as any NGO has the opportunity, as 
per Article 1 and Annex A of the 1998 Global Agreement, to have its 
views and arguments presented at meetings of the WP.29 working parties 
of experts and of the Executive Committee through pre-meeting 
consulting with representatives of Contracting Parties, NHTSA affirms 
that it will entertain and consider all views and arguments presented 
to it in a timely manner before the beginning of those meetings. 
Further, NHTSA, when possible, will promote the availability of 
Executive Committee documents when they are made public, as discussed 
in Section VI. F. of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Rule 19 provides that ``(t)he sessions of WP.29 and its 
subsidiary bodies shall be held in public.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commenters also asked NHTSA to (1) define ``international 
standard'' for the purposes of the TBT Agreement within the policy 
statement, (2) explain whether a WP.29 standard would be considered an 
``international standard,'' and (3) assure vigorous defense of any U.S. 
standard which is challenged under the TBT Agreement.
    The term ``international standard'' is not defined under the TBT 
Agreement, and it is beyond the purview of NHTSA's discretion to issue 
a definition for its use under the TBT Agreement. We note, however, 
that the term ``international body or system'' is defined under the 
Agreement as a ``body or system whose membership is open to the 
relevant bodies of at least all Members.'' We note further that that 
term has been deemed relevant by parties to the TBT Agreement, such as 
the U.S. and the EC, in examining the meaning of ``international 
standardizing bodies of international standards'' in their official 
submissions to the WTO Committee on TBT. The EC for example, has 
proposed that the key criterion for determining whether a body should 
be accepted as producing international standards is that of 
``international impartiality.'' \15\ ``International impartiality,'' as 
defined by the EC, means that ``all countries with an interest in 
standardization must have access to the work, and international control 
over the results, without either discrimination or privilege as to the 
nationality of the participants.'' Id. In its submissions, the U.S. has 
stated that it is important to ensure that the international 
standardization process is representative of the interests of all 
parties concerned and that ``bodies

[[Page 51244]]

which operate with open and transparent procedures which afford an 
opportunity for consensus among all interested parties will result in 
standards which are relevant on a global basis and prevent unnecessary 
barriers to trade.'' \16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ G/TBT/W/87, 14 September 1998 (98-3468), Committee on 
Technical Barriers to Trade, ``On the Conditions for Acceptance and 
Use of International Standards in the Context of the WTO Technical 
Barriers to Trade Agreement,'' Note from the European Community.
    \16\ G/TBT/W/75, 30 June 1998 (98-2611), Committee on Technical 
Barriers to Trade, ``Transparency in International Standards Draft 
U.S. Proposal for a Decision,'' Contribution from the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While it is premature to examine whether global technical 
regulations under the 1998 Global Agreement could be characterized as 
``international standards,'' the WP.29, as an international standards 
body, will remain accountable to an entire range of interested parties 
and should achieve a high degree of effectiveness in the role assigned 
to it by the 1998 Global Agreement.
    Finally, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative is responsible 
for coordinating and developing policy regarding U.S. standards 
challenged under the TBT Agreement. Accordingly, questions regarding 
the defense of U.S. standards under that Agreement should be directed 
to that Office.

VI. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

    Since this final rule establishes a statement of policy (as opposed 
to a regulation or rule) that will not have the force and effect of 
law, it is not subject to the requirements of the various Executive 
Orders (e.g., Executive Order 12866), statutes or DOT regulatory 
policies and procedures for analysis of the impacts of rulemaking. 
Further, it was not subject to the notice and comment requirements of 
the Administrative Procedure Act. Nevertheless, this agency sought 
public comment on the statement of policy before publishing a final 
version.

Appendix--Highlights of the 1998 Global Agreement

     The Agreement establishes a global process under the 
United Nations, Economic Commission for Europe (UN/ECE), for 
developing global technical regulations ensuring high levels of 
environmental protection, safety, energy efficiency and anti-theft 
performance of wheeled vehicles, equipment and parts which can be 
fitted and/or be used on wheeled vehicles. Motor vehicle engines are 
included. (Preamble, Art. 1)
     Members of the ECE, as well as member countries of the 
United Nations that participate in certain ECE activities, are 
eligible to become Contracting Parties to the 1998 Global Agreement. 
Specialized agencies and organizations that have been granted 
consultative status may participate in that capacity. (Art. 2)
     The Agreement explicitly recognizes the importance of 
continuously improving and seeking high levels of safety and 
environmental protection and the right of national and subnational 
authorities, e.g., California, to adopt and maintain technical 
regulations that are more stringently protective of safety and the 
environment than those established at the global level. (Preamble)
     The Agreement explicitly states that one of its 
purposes is to ensure that actions under the Agreement do not 
promote, or result in, a lowering of safety and environmental 
protection within the jurisdiction of the Contracting Parties, 
including the subnational level. (Art. 1)
     To the extent consistent with achieving high levels of 
environmental protection and vehicle safety, the Agreement also 
seeks to promote global harmonization of motor vehicle and engine 
regulations. (Preamble)
     The Agreement recognizes that governments have the 
right to determine whether the global technical regulations 
established under the Agreement are suitable for their needs. 
(Preamble)
     The Agreement emphasizes that global technical 
regulations will be developed using transparent procedures. (Art. 1)
    Annex A provides that the term ``transparent procedures'' 
includes the opportunity to have views and arguments represented at:
    (1) meetings of working parties of experts through organizations 
granted consultative status; and
    (2) meetings of working parties of experts and of the Executive 
Committee (i.e., the Contracting Parties to the 1998 Global 
Agreement) through pre-meeting consulting with representatives of 
Contracting Parties.
     The Agreement provides two different paths to the 
establishment of global technical regulations. The first is the 
harmonization of existing standards. The second is the establishment 
of a new global technical regulation where there are no existing 
standards. (Article 6.2 and 6.3)
     The process for developing a harmonized global 
technical regulation includes a technical review of existing 
regulations of the Contracting Parties and of the UN/ECE 
regulations, as well as relevant international voluntary standards 
(e.g., standards of the International Standards Organization \17\). 
If available, comparative assessments of the benefits of these 
regulations (also known as functional equivalence assessments) are 
also reviewed. (Art. 1.1.2, Article 6.2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ The International Standards Organization (ISO) is a 
nongovernmental, worldwide federation of national standards bodies 
from approximately 130 countries. (http://www.iso.ch/) It was 
established in 1947. Its mission is to promote the development of 
standardization and related activities in the world with a view to 
facilitating the international exchange of goods and services, and 
to developing cooperation in the spheres of intellectual, 
scientific, technological and economic activity. Its work is carried 
out through a hierarchy of technical committees, subcommittees, and 
working groups.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     The process for developing a new global technical 
regulation includes the assessment of technical and economic 
feasibility and a comparative evaluation of the potential benefits 
and cost effectiveness of alternative regulatory requirements and 
the test method(s) by which compliance is to be demonstrated. 
(Article 6.3)
     To establish any global technical regulation, there 
must be a consensus vote, i.e., all Contracting Parties present and 
voting must vote for establishment. Thus, if any Contracting Party 
votes against a recommended global technical regulation, it would 
not be established. (Annex B, Article 7.2)
     The establishment of a global technical regulation does 
not obligate Contracting Parties to adopt that regulation into its 
own laws and regulations. Contracting Parties retain the right to 
choose whether or not to adopt any technical regulation established 
as a global technical regulation under the Agreement. (Preamble, 
Article 7)
     Consistent with the recognition of that right, 
Contracting Parties have only a limited obligation when a global 
technical regulation is established under the Agreement. If a 
Contracting Party voted to establish the regulation, that 
Contracting Party must initiate the procedures used by the Party to 
adopt such a regulation as a domestic regulation. (Article 7)
    For the U.S., this would likely entail initiating the rulemaking 
process by issuing an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) 
or a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM). If the U.S. were to adopt 
a global technical regulation into national law, it would do so in 
accordance with all applicable procedural and substantive statutory 
provisions, including the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 
Sec. 553 et seq., the Vehicle Safety Act, and comparable provisions 
of other relevant statutes, such as the Clean Air Act.
     The Agreement allows the inclusion in global technical 
regulations of a ``global'' level of stringency for most parties and 
``alternative'' levels of stringency for developing countries. In 
this way, all countries, including the developing ones, will have an 
interest in participating in the development, establishment, 
adoption and implementation of global technical regulations. It is 
anticipated that a developing country may wish to begin by adopting 
one of the lower levels of stringency and later successively adopt 
higher levels of stringency. (Article 4)

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 553

    Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Motor vehicles, Rubber and rubber 
products, Tires.

    In consideration of the foregoing, 49 CFR Part 553 is amended as 
follows:

PART 553--RULEMAKING PROCEDURES

    1. The authority citation for Part 553 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 1657, 30103, 30122, 30124, 30125, 
30127, 30146, 30162, 32303, 32502, 32504, 32505, 32705, 32901, 
32902, 33103 and 33107; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.


[[Page 51245]]


    2. Part 553 is amended by adding the following new Appendix C:

Appendix C to Part 553--Statement of Policy: Implementation of the 
United Nations/Economic Commission for Europe (UN/ECE) 1998 Agreement 
on Global Technical Regulations--Agency Policy Goals and Public 
Participation

I. Agency Policy Goals for the 1998 Global Agreement and International 
Motor Vehicle Safety Harmonization

A. Paramount Policy Goal Under the 1998 Global Agreement

    Continuously improve safety and seek high levels of safety, 
particularly by developing and adopting new global technical 
regulations reflecting consideration of current and anticipated 
technology and safety problems.

B. Other Policy Goals

    1. Adopt and maintain U.S. standards that fully meet the need in 
the U.S. for vehicle safety.
    2. Harmonize U.S. standards with those of other countries or 
regions, particularly by raising U.S. standards at least to the 
level of the best practices in those other safety standards.
    3. Enhance regulatory effectiveness through regulatory 
cooperation with other countries and regions, thereby providing 
greater safety protection with available government resources.

II. Public Participation and the Establishing of Global Technical 
Regulations for Motor Vehicle Safety, Theft, and Energy Efficiency

A. Summary of the Process Under the 1998 Global Agreement for 
Establishing Global Technical Regulations

1. Proposal Stage

    A Contracting Party submits a proposal for either a harmonized 
or new global technical regulation to the Executive Committee of the 
1998 Global Agreement (i.e., the Contracting Parties to the 
Agreement). If appropriate, the Committee then refers the proposal 
to a working party of experts to develop the technical elements of 
the regulation.

2. Recommendation Stage

    When a working party of experts recommends a harmonized or new 
global technical regulation, it sends a report and the recommended 
regulation to the Executive Committee. The Committee then determines 
whether the recommendations are adequate and considers the 
establishment of the recommended regulation.

3. Establishment Stage

    If the Executive Committee reaches consensus in favor of that 
recommended global technical regulation, the global technical 
regulation is established in the Global Registry.

B. Notice of Annual Work Program of WP.29

    Each year, NHTSA will publish a notice concerning the motor 
vehicle safety, theft, and energy efficiency aspects of the annual 
program of work for the UN/ECE's World Forum for Harmonization of 
Vehicle Regulations (WP.29). Each notice will include:
    1. A calendar of scheduled meetings of WP.29 participants and 
working parties of experts, and meetings of the Executive Committee; 
and
    2. A list of the global technical regulations that:
    a. Have been proposed and referred to a working party of 
experts, or
    b. Have been recommended by a working party of experts.

Periodically, the notice will also include a request for public 
comments on the subjects for which global technical regulations 
should be established under the 1998 Global Agreement. The agency 
will publish a subsequent notice identifying the priorities on which 
NHTSA will focus in the future under the 1998 Global Agreement.

C. Public Meetings

    NHTSA will hold periodic public meetings on its activities under 
the 1998 Global Agreement. If the extent of recent and anticipated 
significant developments concerning those activities so warrant, 
NHTSA will hold a public meeting within the 60-day period before 
each of the three sessions of WP.29 held annually. At each of these 
public meetings, NHTSA will:
    1. Brief the public on the significant developments that 
occurred at the session of WP.29, the meetings of the working 
parties of experts and the meetings of the Executive Committee since 
the previous public meeting;
    2. Based on the availability of provisional agendas, inform the 
public about the significant issues to be addressed at upcoming 
session of WP.29 and meetings of the working parties of experts and 
any votes scheduled at the next session of the Executive Committee 
on recommended global technical regulations; and
    3. Invite public comment and questions concerning those past 
developments and upcoming issues and votes and the general positions 
that the U.S. could take regarding those votes, and concerning any 
other significant developments and upcoming matters relating to 
pending proposed or recommended global technical regulations.

Appropriate agency officials will participate in the public 
meetings. These public meetings may be held separately from or in 
conjunction with the agency's quarterly meetings on its vehicle 
rulemaking and research and development programs. The agency may 
hold additional public meetings.

D. Notices Concerning Individual Global Technical Regulations

1. Notice Requesting Written Comment on Proposed Global Technical 
Regulations

    a. Proposals by the U.S. (See Figure 1.)
    Before submitting a draft U.S. proposal for a global technical 
regulation to WP.29, NHTSA will publish a notice requesting public 
comments on the draft proposed global technical regulation. In the 
case of a draft proposal for a harmonized global technical 
regulation, the notice will compare that regulation with any 
existing, comparable U.S. standard, including the relative impacts 
of the regulation and standard. In the case of a draft proposal for 
a new global technical regulation, the notice will generally discuss 
the problem addressed by the proposal, the rationale for the 
proposed approach for addressing the problem, and the impacts of the 
proposal. NHTSA will consider the public comments and, as it deems 
appropriate, revise the proposal and any of its supporting 
documentation and then submit the proposal to WP.29.
    b. Proposals by a Contracting Party other than the U.S. (See 
Figure 2.)
    After a proposal by a Contracting Party other than the U.S. has 
been referred to a working party of experts and has been made 
available in English by WP.29, NHTSA will make the draft proposal 
available in the DOT docket (http://dms.dot.gov/). The agency will 
then publish a notice requesting public comment on the draft 
proposal and will consider the comments in developing a U.S. 
position on the proposal.

2. Notice Requesting Written Comment on Recommended Global Technical 
Regulations

    If a working party of experts recommends a global technical 
regulation and sends a report and the recommended regulation to the 
Executive Committee, NHTSA will make an English language version of 
the report and the regulation available in the DOT docket (http://dms.dot.gov/) after they are made available by WP.29. The agency 
will publish a notice requesting public comment on the report and 
regulation. Before participating in a vote of the Executive 
Committee regarding the establishment of the regulation, the agency 
will consider the comments and develop a U.S. position on the 
recommended technical regulation.

3. Notice Requesting Written Comment on Established Global Technical 
Regulations

    If a global technical regulation is established in the Global 
Registry by a consensus vote of the Executive Committee, and if the 
U.S. voted for establishment, NHTSA will publish a notice requesting 
public comment on adopting the regulation as a U.S. standard. Any 
decision by NHTSA whether to issue a final rule adopting the 
regulation or to issue a notice terminating consideration of that 
regulation will be made in accordance with applicable U.S. law and 
only after careful consideration and analysis of public comments.

E. Availability of Documents

    As we obtain English versions of key documents relating to motor 
vehicle safety, theft or energy conservation that are generated 
under the 1998 Agreement (e.g., proposals referred to a working 
party of experts, and reports and recommendations issued by a 
working party), we will place them in the internet-accessible DOT 
docket (http://dms.dot.gov/). Within the limits of available 
resources, we will also place the documents on an international 
activities page that will be included in our Website (http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/international/index.html).
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P

[[Page 51246]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR23AU00.000


[[Page 51247]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR23AU00.001


    Issued on August 17, 2000.
L. Robert Shelton,
Executive Director.
[FR Doc. 00-21450 Filed 8-22-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-C