[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 62 (Wednesday, April 1, 2026)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 16172-16177]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2026-06254]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. NHTSA-2026-0630]
RIN 2127-AM96


Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Modernization of FMVSS 
No. 110 To Accommodate ADS-Equipped Vehicles

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: NHTSA is proposing to amend Federal Motor Vehicle Safety 
Standard (FMVSS) No. 110, ``Tire selection and rims and motor home/
recreation vehicle trailer load carrying capacity information for motor 
vehicles with a GVWR of 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) or less.'' The 
proposed modification would amend a single section of the standard to 
enable compliance by affixing the required placard on the left side of 
the vehicle when there is not a ``driver's side'' for vehicles equipped 
with Automated Driving Systems (ADS) that do not have manually operated 
driving controls. This rulemaking would allow flexibility in complying 
with the standard without detriment to vehicle safety. This action is 
part of a larger NHTSA effort to address vehicle automation in the 
agency's regulations.

DATES: Comments should be submitted no later than May 1, 2026.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by the docket number in 
the heading of this document or by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments on the electronic 
docket site by clicking on ``Help'' or ``FAQ.''
     Mail or Hand Delivery: Docket Management Facility. U.S. 
Department of Transportation. 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building, 
W58-213, Washington, DC 20590 between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern Time, 
Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays. To be sure someone is 
there to help you, please call (202) 366-9826 or (202) 366-9317 before 
coming.
     Fax: 202-493-2251.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and 
docket number for this notice. Note that all comments received will be 
posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any 
personal information provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading 
below.
    Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all 
comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual 
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf 
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's 
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on 
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78) or you may visit https://www.transportation.gov/privacy.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or 
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov or the street 
address listed above. Follow the online instructions for accessing the 
dockets via internet.
    Confidential Business Information: If you claim that any of the 
information in your comment (including any additional documents or 
attachments) constitutes confidential business information within the 
meaning of 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4) or is protected from disclosure pursuant 
to 18 U.S.C. 1905, please see the detailed instructions given under the 
Public Participation heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 
of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical issues, you may contact 
Ms. Lina Valivullah, Office of Automation Safety; Telephone: 202-366-
1810; Email: [email protected]; Facsimile: 202-493-2739. For 
legal issues, you may contact Mr. David Jasinski, NHTSA Office of the 
Chief Counsel, Email: [email protected]. The mailing address of 
these officials is: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Executive Summary
II. Background
III. Proposed Changes
IV. Request for Comment
V. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
VI. Public Participation

I. Executive Summary

    This rulemaking focuses on vehicles equipped with Automated Driving 
Systems (ADS) that do not have manually operated driving controls. 
These vehicles currently are not available for consumer purchase; 
however, there is considerable investment into the safe testing, 
development, and validation of these vehicles, as well as localized 
deployment by manufacturers and rideshare operators. Vehicle automation 
technology has the potential to reduce roadway crashes and fatalities 
while increasing mobility. As the technology is still maturing and many 
of the potential benefits are yet to be realized, NHTSA is engaging in 
a process to remove unnecessary barriers to technological innovation 
while ensuring motor vehicle safety is not compromised.
    NHTSA seeks to address the application of certain existing crash 
avoidance standards to ADS-equipped vehicles without manually operated 
driving controls. In this document, NHTSA proposes to amend Federal 
Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 110, ``Tire selection and 
rims and motor home/recreation vehicle trailer load carrying capacity 
information for motor vehicles with a GVWR of 4,536 kilograms (10,000 
pounds) or less.'' The proposed modification would provide flexibility 
to vehicles without manually operated driving controls in the placard 
section of the standard. This rulemaking

[[Page 16173]]

would remove regulatory burdens with no negative impact to vehicle 
safety.
    NHTSA is working on multiple rulemakings to address requirements 
for ADS-equipped vehicles. This notice solely addresses a placarding 
requirement in FMVSS No. 110 for vehicles without manually operated 
driving controls. The proposed exception does not apply to ADS-equipped 
vehicles with manually operated driving controls.

II. Background

    This proposed rule addresses ADS-equipped vehicles that do not have 
manually operated driving controls. An ADS commonly is considered to be 
a combination of hardware and software that can perform all real-time 
operational and tactical functions required to operate a vehicle on a 
sustained basis.\1\ These functions traditionally are performed by a 
person using manually operated driving controls. As defined in 49 CFR 
571.3 and used throughout this document, manually operated driving 
controls means a system of controls: (i) used by an occupant for real-
time, sustained, manual manipulation of the motor vehicle's heading 
(steering) and/or speed (accelerator and brake); and (ii) positioned 
such that they can be used by an occupant regardless of whether the 
occupant is actively using the system to manipulate the vehicle's 
motion. In an ADS-equipped vehicle designed to be operated only by an 
ADS, manually operated driving controls may not be necessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See, e.g., SAE, Taxonomy and Definitions for Terms Related 
to Driving Automation Systems for On Road Motor Vehicles, 
J3016_202104 (April 30, 2021), available at https://www.sae.org/standards/content/j3016_202104/; Tex. Transp. Code section 545.451.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NHTSA has published prior Federal Register notices requesting 
comment, proposing changes, and updating existing regulations to 
address vehicle automation. These notices include a Request for Comment 
(RFC), ``Removing Regulatory Barriers for Vehicles with Automated 
Driving Systems,'' published on February 13, 2018,\2\ and a subsequent 
Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) with the same title 
published on May 28, 2019.\3\ The RFC posed questions about identifying 
and addressing regulatory barriers for vehicles that lack traditional 
manual controls or have unconventional seating. The ANPRM focused on 
the challenges of testing and verifying compliance for vehicles without 
traditional manual controls. A separate notice of proposed rulemaking 
(NPRM), ``Occupant Protection for Automated Driving Systems,'' was 
published in 2020,\4\ with the corresponding Final Rule, ``Occupant 
Protection for Vehicles with Automated Driving Systems,'' published on 
March 30, 2022.\5\ The rulemaking focused on crashworthiness standards 
for ADS-equipped vehicles without manual driving controls, revising 
definitions and updating occupant protection standards to exclude 
vehicles specifically designed not to contain any occupants. The 2022 
Final Rule also established the definition in 49 CFR 571.3 for manually 
operated driving controls. On December 3, 2020, NHTSA published an 
ANPRM titled, ``Framework for Automated Driving Systems,'' to discuss 
and request comments on the manner in which the agency would define, 
assess, and manage objectively the safety of ADS performance while 
ensuring the needed flexibility to enable further innovation.\6\ The 
ANPRM included recognition of a phased approach to addressing ADS 
safety including NHTSA's modernization of the FMVSS for ADS-equipped 
vehicles without traditional manual driving controls.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 83 FR 6148.
    \3\ 84 FR 24433.
    \4\ 85 FR 17624.
    \5\ 87 FR 18560.
    \6\ 85 FR 78058.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NHTSA proposes a modification to an existing requirement for ADS-
equipped vehicles that do not contain manually operated driving 
controls and therefore cannot be driven by a person in the vehicle. 
ADS-equipped vehicles without manually operated driving controls 
currently face regulatory barriers presented by requirements related to 
manual controls unnecessary for operation of the vehicle by the ADS. 
Though vehicles not intended to be driven manually may not have 
manually operated driving controls, others may have manually operated 
driving controls if converted from a conventional vehicle or if 
equipped with controls for specialized use. NHTSA maintains that any 
vehicle equipped with manually operated driving controls must continue 
to meet all existing safety requirements, regardless of whether the 
vehicle is equipped with an ADS.

III. Proposed Changes

Background

    FMVSS No. 110, ``Tire selection and rims and motor home/recreation 
vehicle trailer load carrying capacity information for motor vehicles 
with a GVWR of 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) or less'' specifies tire 
selection requirements. It also includes a requirement to affix an 
informational placard on the driver's side of the vehicle.

Proposal

    NHTSA proposes to update the language in S4.3 to clarify the 
placard location in a vehicle that does not have manually operated 
driving controls and therefore does not have a ``driver's side.'' The 
proposed addition to S4.3 would provide that, if the vehicle does not 
have a driver's side to affix the placard, the left side of the vehicle 
may be substituted for the driver's side in the stated locations. In 
addition, notification with alternative location details could be 
submitted to NHTSA for approval. NHTSA believes this addition provides 
clarity and flexibility for different types of vehicles without 
affecting safety.

Proposed Effective Date

    As provided by 49 U.S.C. 30111(d), an FMVSS may not become 
effective before the 180th day after the standard is prescribed or 
later than one year after it is prescribed. However, NHTSA may provide 
a different effective date after finding, for good cause shown, that a 
different effective date is in the public interest. NHTSA must publish 
the reasons supporting such a finding. Similarly, 5 U.S.C. 553(d) 
provides that a final rule cannot become effective until at least 30 
days after the date of publication except, among other reasons, the 
rule grants or recognizes an exemption, relieves a restriction, or for 
good cause found and published with the rule. It is in the public 
interest for this proposed rule, if adopted, to be effective 
immediately. Because this proposed rule, if adopted, would remove an 
unnecessary regulatory requirement for ADS-equipped vehicles without 
manually operated controls, there does not appear to be a need for lead 
time for regulated entities to comply. In addition, this proposed rule, 
if adopted, would provide an exemption and relieve a restriction for 
ADS-equipped vehicles. NHTSA seeks comment on whether the rule could be 
made effective within a time period shorter than 180 days or upon 
publication of any final rule.

IV. Request for Comment

    NHTSA seeks public comment on the proposed change to FMVSS No. 110.

V. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, E.O. 14192, and E.O. 14219

    NHTSA has considered the impact of this rulemaking action under 
Executive Orders 12866, 14192, and 14219. This

[[Page 16174]]

proposed rule does not meet the criteria of a ``significant regulatory 
action'' under Executive Order 12866. Therefore, the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) has not reviewed this proposed rule under 
those orders. This proposed rule, if finalized as proposed, is expected 
to be an E.O. 14192 deregulatory action because it removes an 
unnecessary regulatory burden for the reasons discussed above. At this 
stage, the agency has not quantified any potential benefits or costs. 
For this rule, NHTSA does not anticipate any new regulatory costs, as 
it would provide clarity and flexibility without adding any new 
requirements. NHTSA does not anticipate any safety disbenefits for the 
proposed changes. The benefits to this rule would be reduced need for 
vehicle exemptions from this standard. NHTSA requests comment on these 
assumptions and any other information that could help quantify their 
impacts in the final rule.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601-612) (as 
amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act 
(SBREFA) of 1996; 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), agencies must prepare and make 
available for public comment a regulatory flexibility analysis that 
describes the effect of the rulemaking on small entities (i.e., small 
businesses, small organizations, and small government jurisdictions). 
No regulatory flexibility analysis is required, however, if the head of 
an agency or an appropriate designee certifies that the rulemaking will 
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. NHTSA has concluded and hereby certifies that this proposed 
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. As the factual basis for this certification, 
NHTSA finds as follows: as described elsewhere in the preamble, NHTSA 
proposes to remove unnecessary regulatory burdens and costs associated 
with the location of the tire placard, with no negative impact to 
vehicle safety.

National Environmental Policy Act

    The Department has analyzed the environmental impacts of this 
notice of proposed rulemaking pursuant to the National Environmental 
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). Pursuant to 49 CFR 
1.81, the Secretary has delegated the ``functions'' under NEPA to the 
Administrators ``as they relate to the matters within the primary 
responsibility of each Operating Administration.'' NHTSA has determined 
that this rule is categorically excluded pursuant to 23 CFR 
771.118(c)(4). Categorical exclusions are actions identified in an 
agency's NEPA procedures that do not normally have a significant impact 
on the environment and therefore do not require either an environmental 
assessment (EA) or environmental impact statement (EIS). See DOT Order 
5610.1D Sec.  9. In analyzing the applicability of a categorical 
exclusion, the agency must also consider whether extraordinary 
circumstances are present that would warrant the preparation of an EA 
or EIS. Id. Sec.  9(b). The Department's Operating Administrations 
(OAs) may apply CEs established in another OA's procedures. Id. Sec.  
9(f). To do so, the Operating Administration ``must evaluate the action 
for extraordinary circumstances identified in the OA procedures in 
which the CE is established to determine if a normally excluded action 
may have a significant impact and coordinate with the originating OA to 
ensure that the CE is being applied correctly.'' Id. This rulemaking, 
which proposes to amend FMVSS No. 110, ``Tire selection and rims and 
motor home/recreation vehicle trailer load carrying capacity 
information for motor vehicles with a GVWR of 4,536 kilograms (10,000 
pounds) or less,'' to update the regulatory language, is categorically 
excluded pursuant to 23 CFR 771.118(c)(4): Planning and administrative 
activities not involving or leading directly to construction, such as: 
Training, technical assistance and research; promulgation of rules, 
regulations, directives, or program guidance; approval of project 
concepts; engineering; and operating assistance to transit authorities 
to continue existing service or increase service to meet routine 
demand. NHTSA has coordinated with the Federal Transit Administration 
to ensure that this CE is being applied correctly. NHTSA does not 
anticipate any environmental impacts, and there are no extraordinary 
circumstances present in connection with this rulemaking.

Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    NHTSA has examined this rule pursuant to E.O. 13132 (64 FR 43255, 
August 10, 1999) and concluded that no additional consultation with 
States, local governments, or their representatives is mandated beyond 
the rulemaking process. The agency has concluded that this rule does 
not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant consultation 
with State and local officials or the preparation of a federalism 
summary impact statement. The rule does not have ``substantial direct 
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national 
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
    NHTSA rules can have a preemptive effect in two ways. First, the 
National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act contains an express 
preemption provision: When a motor vehicle safety standard is in effect 
under this chapter, a State or a political subdivision of a State may 
prescribe or continue in effect a standard applicable to the same 
aspect of performance of a motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment 
only if the standard is identical to the standard prescribed under this 
chapter. 49 U.S.C. 30103(b)(1). It is this statutory command by 
Congress that preempts any non-identical State legislative and 
administrative law addressing the same aspect of performance. NHTSA is 
not aware of any State motor vehicle equipment or inspection laws or 
regulations that pertain to placement of the informational placard. 
However, NHTSA seeks comment on whether any such State requirements 
exist that would be preempted by this rule, if adopted.
    The express preemption provision described above is subject to a 
savings clause under which compliance with a motor vehicle safety 
standard prescribed under this chapter does not exempt a person from 
liability at common law. 49 U.S.C. 30103(e). Pursuant to this 
provision, State common law tort causes of action against motor vehicle 
manufacturers that might otherwise be preempted by the express 
preemption provision generally are preserved.
    NHTSA rules can also preempt State law if complying with an FMVSS 
would render the motor vehicle manufacturers liable under State tort 
law. Because most NHTSA standards established by an FMVSS are minimum 
standards, a State common law tort cause of action that seeks to impose 
a higher standard on motor vehicle manufacturers generally will not be 
preempted. If and when such a conflict does exist--for example, when 
the standard at issue is both a minimum and a maximum standard--the 
State common law tort cause of action is impliedly preempted. See Geier 
v. American Honda Motor Co., 529 U.S. 861 (2000).
    Pursuant to E.O. 13132 and E.O. 12988, NHTSA has considered whether 
this proposed rule would preempt State common law causes of action. The 
agency's ability to announce its conclusion regarding the preemptive 
effect of one of its rules reduces the likelihood that preemption will 
be an

[[Page 16175]]

issue in any subsequent tort litigation. This rule addresses the 
location of the informational placard. NHTSA believes that this change 
will have no effect on safety. Thus, NHTSA tentatively concludes that 
no conflict with State common law tort actions would occur. Without any 
conflict, there could not be any implied preemption of a State common 
law tort cause of action. NHTSA also seeks comment on this tentative 
conclusion.

Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)

    With respect to the review of the promulgation of a new regulation, 
section 3(b) of E.O. 12988, ``Civil Justice Reform'' (61 FR 4729; Feb. 
7, 1996), requires that Executive agencies make every reasonable effort 
to ensure that the regulation: (1) clearly specifies the preemptive 
effect; (2) clearly specifies the effect on existing Federal law or 
regulation; (3) provides a clear legal standard for affected conduct, 
while promoting simplification and burden reduction; (4) clearly 
specifies the retroactive effect, if any; (5) specifies whether 
administrative proceedings are to be required before parties file suit 
in court; (6) adequately defines key terms; and (7) addresses other 
important issues affecting clarity and general draftsmanship under any 
guidelines issued by the Attorney General. This document is consistent 
with these requirements.
    Pursuant to this Order, NHTSA notes as follows. The issue of 
preemption is discussed above. NHTSA notes further that there is no 
requirement that individuals submit a petition for reconsideration or 
pursue other administrative proceedings before they may file suit in 
court. In addition, the rule provides a clear legal standard for 
compliance, while promoting simplification and burden reduction without 
any reduction in safety.

Privacy Act

    Please note that anyone is able to search the electronic form of 
all comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the 
individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted 
on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). For 
information on DOT's compliance with the Privacy Act, see 
www.transportation.gov/privacy.

National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, as amended by Public Law 107-
107 (15 U.S.C. 272), directs the agency to evaluate and use voluntary 
consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless doing so would 
be inconsistent with applicable law or is otherwise impractical. 
Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., materials 
specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and business 
practices) developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards 
bodies, such as the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE). The NTTAA 
directs us to provide Congress (through OMB) with explanations when the 
agency decides not to use available and potentially applicable 
voluntary consensus standards.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 
Public Law 104-4, requires Federal agencies to prepare a written 
assessment of the costs, benefits, and other effects of proposed or 
final rules that include a Federal mandate likely to result in the 
expenditure by State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, 
or by the private sector, of more than $100 million annually (adjusted 
for inflation with base year of 1995). Adjusting this amount by the 
implicit gross domestic product price deflator for the year 2024 
results in $187 million (125.224/66.937 = 1.87). This NPRM would not 
result in a cost of $187 million or more to either State, local, or 
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private sector. Thus, this 
NPRM is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 of the UMRA.

Executive Order 13609 (Promoting Regulatory Cooperation)

    The policy statement in section 1 of E.O. 13609 provides, in part: 
``The regulatory approaches taken by foreign governments may differ 
from those taken by U.S. regulatory agencies to address similar issues. 
In some cases, the differences between the regulatory approaches of 
U.S. agencies and those of their foreign counterparts might not be 
necessary and might impair the ability of American businesses to export 
and compete internationally. In meeting shared challenges involving 
health, safety, labor, security, environmental, and other issues, 
international regulatory cooperation can identify approaches that are 
at least as protective as those that are or would be adopted in the 
absence of such cooperation. International regulatory cooperation can 
also reduce, eliminate, or prevent unnecessary differences in 
regulatory requirements.''

Severability

    The issue of severability of FMVSSs is addressed in 49 CFR 571.9. 
It provides that if any FMVSS or its application to any person or 
circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the part and the 
application of that standard to other persons or circumstances is 
unaffected. Comments are requested on the severability of this proposed 
FMVSS.

Regulation Identifier Number

    The Department assigns a regulation identifier number (RIN) to each 
regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulations. 
The Regulatory Information Service Center publishes the Unified Agenda 
twice annually. You may use the RIN contained in the heading at the 
beginning of this document to find this action in the Unified Agenda.

Rulemaking Summary, 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(4)

    As required by 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(4), a summary of this rule can be 
found in the Abstract section of the Department's Unified Agenda entry 
for this rulemaking at www.reginfo.gov.

VI. Public Participation

How long do I have to submit comments?

    Please see DATES section at the beginning of this document.

How do I prepare and submit comments?

     Your comments must be written in English.
     To ensure that your comments are correctly filed in the 
Docket, please include the Docket Number shown at the beginning of this 
document in your comments.
     Your comments must not be more than 15 pages long. (49 CFR 
553.21). We established this limit to encourage you to write your 
primary comments in a concise fashion. However, you may attach 
necessary additional documents to your comments. There is no limit on 
the length of the attachments.
     If you are submitting comments electronically as a PDF 
(Adobe) File, NHTSA asks that the documents be submitted using the 
Optical Character Recognition (OCR) process, thus allowing NHTSA to 
search and copy certain portions of your submissions. Comments may be 
submitted to the docket electronically by logging onto the Docket 
Management System website at www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 
instructions for submitting comments.
     You may also submit your comments, including the 
attachments,

[[Page 16176]]

to Docket Management at the address given above under ADDRESSES.
    Please note that pursuant to the Data Quality Act, for substantive 
data to be relied upon and used by the agency, it must meet the 
information quality standards set forth in the OMB and DOT Data Quality 
Act guidelines. Accordingly, we encourage you to consult the guidelines 
in preparing your comments. OMB's guidelines may be accessed at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/fedreg/reproducible.html. DOT's guidelines may 
be accessed at http://www.bts.gov/programs/statistical_policy_and_research/data_quality_guidelines.

How can I be sure that my comments were received?

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

How do I submit confidential business information?

    You should submit a redacted ``public version'' of your comment 
(including redacted versions of any additional documents or 
attachments) to the docket using any of the methods identified under 
ADDRESSES. This ``public version'' of your comment should contain only 
the portions for which no claim of confidential treatment is made and 
from which those portions for which confidential treatment is claimed 
has been redacted. See below for further instructions on how to do 
this.
    You also need to submit a request for confidential treatment 
directly to the Office of the Chief Counsel. Requests for confidential 
treatment are governed by 49 CFR part 512. Your request must set forth 
the information specified in part 512. This includes the materials for 
which confidentiality is being requested (as explained in more detail 
below); supporting information, pursuant to part 512.8; and a 
certificate, pursuant to part 512.4(b) and part 512, Appendix A.
    You are required to submit to the Office of the Chief Counsel one 
unredacted ``confidential version'' of the information for which you 
are seeking confidential treatment. Pursuant to part 512.6, the words 
``ENTIRE PAGE CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION'' or ``CONFIDENTIAL 
BUSINESS INFORMATION CONTAINED WITHIN BRACKETS'' (as applicable) must 
appear at the top of each page containing information claimed to be 
confidential. In the latter situation, where not all information on the 
page is claimed to be confidential, identify each item of information 
for which confidentiality is requested within brackets: ``[ ].''
    You are also required to submit to the Office of the Chief Counsel 
one redacted ``public version'' of the information for which you are 
seeking confidential treatment. Pursuant to part 512.5(a)(2), the 
redacted ``public version'' should include redactions of any 
information for which you are seeking confidential treatment (i.e., the 
only information that should be unredacted is information for which you 
are not seeking confidential treatment).
    NHTSA is currently treating electronic submission as an acceptable 
method for submitting confidential business information to the agency 
under part 512. Please do not send a hardcopy of a request for 
confidential treatment to NHTSA's headquarters. The request should be 
sent to Dan Rabinovitz in NHTSA's Office of the Chief Counsel (NCC) at 
[email protected]. You may either submit your request via email 
or request a secure file transfer link. Manufacturers or any companies 
that already have a Confidential Business Information (CBI) Portal 
account or an Enterprise Account with NHTSA should use the CBI Portal 
for their submission. If you submit a CBI request, please also email a 
courtesy copy of the request to David Jasinski at 
[email protected].

Will the Agency consider late comments?

    We will consider all comments that Docket Management receives 
before the close of business on the comment closing date indicated 
above under DATES. To the extent possible, we will also consider 
comments that Docket Management receives after that date. If Docket 
Management receives a comment too late for us to consider in developing 
the final rule, we will consider that comment as an informal suggestion 
for future rulemaking action.

How can I read the comments submitted by other people?

    You may read the comments received by Docket Management at the 
address given above under ADDRESSES. The hours of the Docket are 
indicated above in the same location. You may also see the comments on 
the internet. To read the comments on the internet, go to 
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for accessing the 
dockets.
    Please note that, even after the comment closing date, we will 
continue to file relevant information in the Docket as it becomes 
available. Further, some people may submit late comments. Accordingly, 
we recommend that you periodically check the Docket for new material.

    Issued on March 27, 2026, in Washington, DC, under authority 
delegated in 49 CFR 1.95.
Jonathan Morrison,
Administrator.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571

    Motor vehicle safety, Motor vehicles.

Proposed Regulatory Text

    In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA proposes to amend 49 CFR 
part 571 as set forth below.

PART 571--FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS

0
1. The authority citation for part 571 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117, and 30166; 
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.95.

0
2. Section 571.110 is amended by revising the introductory text of 
paragraph S4.3, to read as follows:


Sec.  571.110  Standard No. 110; Tire selection and rims and motor 
home/recreation vehicle trailer load carrying capacity information for 
motor vehicles with a GVWR of 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) or less.

* * * * *
    S4.3 Placard. Each vehicle, except for a trailer or incomplete 
vehicle, shall show the information specified in S4.3 (a) through (g), 
and may show, at the manufacturer's option, the information specified 
in S4.3 (h) and (i), on a placard permanently affixed to the driver's 
side B-pillar. In each vehicle without a driver's side B-pillar and 
with two doors on the driver's side of the vehicle opening in opposite 
directions, the placard shall be affixed on the forward edge of the 
rear side door. If the above locations do not permit the affixing of a 
placard that is legible, visible, and prominent, the placard shall be 
permanently affixed to the rear edge of the driver's side door. If this 
location does not permit the affixing of a placard that is legible, 
visible, and prominent, the placard shall be affixed to the inward 
facing surface of the vehicle next to the driver's seating position. If 
the vehicle does not have a driver's side, the left side of the vehicle 
may be substituted for the driver's side. If none of the preceding 
locations is practicable, notification of that fact, together with 
drawings or photographs showing a suggested alternate location in the 
same general area, shall be submitted for approval to the 
Administrator, National

[[Page 16177]]

Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, DC 20590. This 
information shall be in the English language and conform in color and 
format, not including the border surrounding the entire placard, as 
shown in the example set forth in Figure 1 in this standard. At the 
manufacturer's option, the information specified in S4.3 (c), (d), and, 
as appropriate, (h) and (i) may be shown, alternatively to being shown 
on the placard, on a tire inflation pressure label which must conform 
in color and format, not including the border surrounding the entire 
label, as shown in the example set forth in Figure 2 in this standard. 
The label shall be permanently affixed and proximate to the placard 
required by this paragraph. The information specified in S4.3 (e) shall 
be shown on both the vehicle placard and on the tire inflation pressure 
label (if such a label is affixed to provide the information specified 
in S4.3 (c), (d), and, as appropriate, (h) and (i)) may be shown in the 
format and color scheme set forth in Figures 1 and 2. If the vehicle is 
a motor home and is equipped with a propane supply, the weight of full 
propane tanks must be included in the vehicle's unloaded vehicle 
weight. If the vehicle is a motor home and is equipped with an on-board 
potable water supply, the weight of such on-board water must be treated 
as cargo.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2026-06254 Filed 3-31-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P