Está en la página 1de 7

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No.

155 / Friday, August 12, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 47131

#Depth in feet
above ground.
*Elevation in
feet
(NGVD) modi-
State City/town/county Source of flooding Location fied
♦Elevation in
feet
(NAVD)
modified

Guadalupe River .............. Approximately .65 mile downstream of ♦598


the confluence of North Guadalupe
Tributary.
Approximately 420 feet upstream of the ♦635
Union Pacific Railroad.
New Channel Comal River At the convergence with Dry Comal ♦625
Creek.
At the divergence from the Old Channel ♦625
Comal River and Comal Springs.
North Guadalupe Tributary At the confluence with the Guadalupe ♦602
River.
Approximately 110 feet upstream of FM ♦678
1044/Old Marion Road.
Old Channel Comal River At the confluence with the Comal River ... ♦618
At the divergence from the New Channel ♦625
Comal River and Comal Springs.
South Guadalupe Tribu- At the confluence with the North Guada- ♦602
tary. lupe Tributary.
Approximately 100 feet upstream of FM ♦672
1044/Old Marion Road.

Maps are available for inspection at the New Braunfels Municipal Building, 424 South Castell Avenue, New Braunfels, Texas.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. anchorages will be installed in locations 401, 400 Seventh Street, SW.,
83.100, ‘‘Flood Insurance.’’) that permit wheelchairs to be secured Washington, DC 20590.
Dated: August 4, 2005. where they block access to emergency FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
David I. Maurstad, exit doors. Petitioners requested non-legal issues, you may call Mr.
Acting Director, Mitigation Division, reconsideration of the final rule’s use of Charles Hott, Office of Crashworthiness
Emergency Preparedness and Response transverse vertical and horizontal planes Standards at (202) 366–0247. His FAX
Directorate. to define the area around the side and number is (202) 493–2739.
[FR Doc. 05–15992 Filed 8–11–05; 8:45 am] rear emergency exit doors where For legal issues, you may call Ms.
BILLING CODE 9110–12–P wheelchair anchorages may not be Dorothy Nakama, Office of the Chief
located. This request is granted. Counsel at (202) 366–2992. Her FAX
Petitioners also asked NHTSA to number is (202) 366–3820.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION reconsider the ‘‘DO NOT BLOCK’’ You may send mail to both of these
warning label. This request is denied. officials at National Highway Traffic
National Highway Traffic Safety Safety Administration, 400 Seventh St.,
This final rule applies to new school
Administration SW., Washington, DC, 20590.
buses equipped with wheelchair
securement anchorages. Nothing in this SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
49 CFR Part 571
final rule requires school buses to be so
[Docket No. NHTSA–99–5157] equipped. I. Summary of Final Rule
RIN 2127–AJ47 DATES: Effective date: The effective date Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
for the final rule is: April 24, 2006. Standard (FMVSS) No. 217, Bus
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Manufacturers are provided optional emergency exits and window retention
Standards; Bus Emergency Exits and early compliance with this final rule and release, (49 CFR 571.217), specifies
Window Retention and Release beginning August 12, 2005. Petitions for requirements for the retention of
reconsideration: Petitions for windows other than windshields in
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic
buses, and requirements for operating
Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT. reconsideration of the final rule must be
forces, opening dimensions, and
ACTION: Final rule; response to petitions received not later than September 26,
markings for bus emergency exits. The
for reconsideration. 2005.
purpose of FMVSS No. 217 is to
SUMMARY: This document responds to ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration minimize the likelihood of occupants
petitions for reconsideration of an April of the final rule must refer to the docket being thrown from the bus in a crash
19, 2002 final rule amending Federal and notice number set forth above and and to provide a means of readily
Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 217, be submitted to the Administrator, accessible emergency egress.
‘‘Bus emergency exits and window National Highway Traffic Safety On April 19, 2002 (67 FR 19343)(DMS
retention and release.’’ That final rule Administration, 400 Seventh Street, Docket No. NHTSA–99–5157), NHTSA
amended the standard to reduce the SW., Washington, DC, 20590, with a published a final rule amending FMVSS
likelihood that wheelchair securement copy to Docket Management, Room PL– No. 217 to reduce the likelihood that

VerDate jul<14>2003 12:47 Aug 11, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\12AUR1.SGM 12AUR1
47132 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 155 / Friday, August 12, 2005 / Rules and Regulations

wheelchair securement anchorages 1 not be located. All three petitioners right sides of the emergency door
would be installed such that a stated that the area should instead be opening.
wheelchair secured thereto would block defined using ‘‘the rectangular Blue Bird recommended that both
access to emergency exit doors. For a parallelepiped fixture’’ described in sections S5.4.3.1(b) and (c) be replaced
side emergency exit door, the final rule S5.4.2.1 of the standard. by a new S5.4.3.1(b) that states:
restricted these anchorages from being The petitioners also asked NHTSA to In the case of rear emergency exit doors in
placed in an area bounded by transverse reconsider the ‘‘DO NOT BLOCK’’ school buses, no portion of a wheelchair
vertical planes 305 mm (12 inches) warning label. They requested that the securement anchorage shall be located within
forward and rearward of the center of the area of the parallelepiped specified in
‘‘DO NOT BLOCK’’ warning label be S5.4.2.1(1) [sic] if the GVWR is more than
the door aisle and a longitudinal vertical required for only emergency exit doors, 10,000 pounds, or specified in S5.4.2.2 if the
plane through the longitudinal and not emergency exit windows. GVWR is 10,000 pounds or less.
centerline of the school bus.
For a rear emergency exit door, the Both of these issues are discussed Agency response: We are granting the
final rule restricted the anchorages from below. petitioners’ requests regarding this
being placed in an area bounded by: issue, with one change.
a. Exclusion Zone at the Rear At present, all school bus
(a) Longitudinal vertical planes
Emergency Door manufacturers use rear emergency exit
tangent to the left and right sides of the
door opening; The petitioners disagreed with the doors that are centered in the rear of the
(b) A horizontal plane 1,145 mm (45 agency’s decision in the final rule to use school bus. The rear emergency exit
inches) above the bus floor; and transverse vertical and horizontal planes doors are larger than the minimum
(c) A transverse vertical plane that is opening width, to allow for different
to define the area around the rear
either: seating configurations that may change
emergency exit door where wheelchair
(1) 305 mm (12 inches) forward of the the location of the aisle leading to the
anchorages may not be located
bottom edge of the door opening (for rear emergency exit door. In the
(S5.4.3.1(b) and (c)). All three
school buses with a gross vehicle weight rulemaking creating S5.4.3.1(b) and (c),
petitioners stated that the area should
rating (GVWR) over 4,536 kg) (over the new language referred to the
instead be defined using ‘‘the longitudinal vertical planes tangent to
10,000 lb), or
(2) 150 mm (6 inches) forward of the rectangular parallelepiped fixture’’ the right and left sides of the door
bottom edge of the door opening within described in S5.4.2.1(a)(1) of the opening without taking into
the bus occupant space (for school buses standard. Blue Bird stated that the consideration that school bus
with a GVWR of 4,536 kg or less)(10,000 parallelepiped is 24 inches in width, manufacturers could be manufacturing
lb or less). whereas the rear emergency door the rear emergency exit doors wider
The final rule also provided that in opening on many (if not all) school than the minimum required opening.
school buses with one or more buses exceeds 24 inches.2 The The agency does not believe there is a
wheelchair securement anchorages, petitioners believed that, by requiring need to require the clearance area for
emergency exit doors and emergency that wheelchair securement anchorages anchorages to be greater than the
exit windows must bear a label stating, must not be located such that any clearance area for the exit itself.
‘‘DO NOT BLOCK’’. The agency portion of the anchorage is within the The intent of this rulemaking action is
believed that the label was needed to space bounded by longitudinal vertical to prohibit wheelchair securement
help ensure that access to these doors planes tangent to the left and right sides anchorages in the rear exit staging area.
and exits is not blocked with of the door opening, the final rule According to petitioners, the larger rear
wheelchairs or other items, such as book penalizes manufacturers that provide emergency exit doors give
bags, knapsacks, sports equipment or larger than required emergency door manufacturers the ability to position the
band equipment. openings (i.e., by limiting to a greater placement of the rear exit door in the
The April 19, 2002 final rule specified extent the placement of wheelchair center of the bus body and the flexibility
an effective date of April 21, 2003 for securement anchorages). AmTran stated to maintain the clearance area required
the amendments. Optional early that FMVSS No. 217 allows by FMVSS No. 217 with different
compliance with the final rule was manufacturers to position the seating configurations. The agency
permitted. By way of Federal Register rectangular parallelepiped anywhere agrees that the parallelepipeds
documents published April 22, 2003 (68 within the rear emergency exit door referenced by the standard define the
FR 19752) and March 12, 2004 (69 FR opening, and that the final rule should clearance needed to adequately use the
11815), NHTSA delayed the effective thus specify that the clearance area can emergency exit, and that there is not a
date to April 21, 2006. be from either the left or right side of the safety benefit to require wheelchair
emergency door. Petitioners also stated securement anchorages to be placed
II. Petitions for Reconsideration that the wording of S5.4.3.1(b) and (c) outside the area bounded by the door
NHTSA received petitions for is not in agreement with the diagram in opening. Therefore, in this final rule
reconsideration of the April 19, 2002 Figure 6C. The figure appears to specify NHTSA is amending the language at
final rule from three school bus that the shaded region within which no S5.4.3.1(b) to allow the manufacturers
manufacturers: Thomas Built Buses; anchorage can be located is 24 inches the same flexibility for placing
American Transportation Corporation wide for buses with a GVWR of 10,000 wheelchair securement anchorages as
(now known as IC Corporation); and pounds or more, and is not dependent they currently have for maintaining the
Blue Bird Body Company. The on the distance between the left and rear exit door clearance area required by
petitioners requested reconsideration of FMVSS No. 217.
the final rule’s use of transverse vertical 2 Blue Bird stated that the larger rear emergency The agency generally agrees with the
and horizontal planes to define the area door opening has provided flexibility for school bus approach suggested by Blue Bird, with
around the side and rear emergency exit manufacturers in meeting customer needs one exception. Blue Bird’s suggested
(regarding the location of passenger seating on the
doors where wheelchair anchorages may various models of school buses) to maximize
language would not prohibit wheelchair
passenger capacity while still maintaining the anchorages that are recessed into the
1 Defined at S4 of 49 CFR 571.222. required ‘‘staging area’’ at the rear emergency door. school bus floor. Today’s final rule

VerDate jul<14>2003 12:47 Aug 11, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\12AUR1.SGM 12AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 155 / Friday, August 12, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 47133

defines the staging area by referencing egress from school buses by persons position. Blue Bird further stated that
the parallelepipeds described in other than the original manufacturer of manufacturers may be faced with a
S5.4.2.1(a)(1) (for school buses with a the school bus was the potentially requirement to install torso restraints at
GVWR greater than 10,000 lb) and unsafe behavior that the label was the outboard seating positions such that
S5.4.2.2 (for school buses with a GVWR intended to forestall. The warning label the belt may cross the area of a side
of 10,000 lb or less). The parallelepipeds provides the public a heightened emergency exit window, thereby
would be positioned flush with the awareness about the need for keeping potentially ‘‘blocking’’ access to the
floor, as described in S5.4.2.1(a), and emergency exits clear, from persons emergency window.
with the rear surface of the installing items such as aftermarket Agency response: If the upper torso
parallelepiped tangent to the opening of wheelchair securement devices, belt would block access to an emergency
the rear emergency exit door. Paragraph wheelchairs, or school bus seats, to window, we believe that an alternative
S5.4.3.1(b) is revised to prohibit the school bus drivers, monitors, and design—one that does not block
placement of any wheelchair students. We do not agree with the access—ought to be considered. Nothing
securement anchorage both within the petitioners that further clarification is has changed in FMVSS No. 217
space occupied by the parallelepiped needed in the standard on precisely concerning the blockage of access to
when it is so situated, and anywhere what ‘‘do not block’’ means or how side emergency exit windows.
within a downward vertical projection wheelchairs, tether straps, belts or other Manufacturers are currently required to
of the parallelepiped. Thus, anchorages devices should be situated near take into account the placement of the
that are raised, flush, or recessed into emergency exits. The label is simple and upper torso belt so that the side
the school bus floor beneath the clear. The agency believes that requiring emergency exit windows in buses with
parallelepiped will not be permitted.3 more wording to describe how various GVWRs of 10,000 pounds or less can
This amendment eliminates the need for items that are carried in school buses meet the emergency exit-opening
Figures 6B and 6D of the standard, and may or may not partially block an exit requirement now in FMVSS No. 217.
thus those figures are removed and could reduce users’ desire to read the 4. Effect on Child Restraint Installations
reserved. label or ability to understand it.
The petitioners objected to a Do Not
b. Do Not Block Label 2. Notice of a Window Labeling Block label in part due to a concern that
Requirement confusion will arise as to how child
1. General
Blue Bird believed that the NPRM did restraints should be placed adjacent to
All three petitioners opposed the not provide notice that the agency was an emergency exit window. Thomas
requirement that emergency exits considering a labeling requirement for Built stated that FMVSS No. 225, Child
windows be labeled with the words: ‘‘emergency windows.’’ We disagree. At restraint anchorage systems, requires
‘‘DO NOT BLOCK.’’ The petitioners 64 FR 10606 of the NPRM, NHTSA buses under 10,000 pounds GVWR to be
believed that the standard should sought comments: on the extent to equipped with at least two ‘‘LATCH’’ 4
include objective criteria for which school buses have been or are attachments in rear seating positions in
determining whether a window is being designed so that wheelchairs can certain locations. Thomas Built believed
blocked, and should state whether or to be secured so as to hinder access to any that many customers who operate small
what extent blockage is permitted of an emergency exit (question 1); and on buses for day care or Head Start will
emergency exit window by wheelchairs whether NHTSA should both require a require LATCH attachments throughout
and other items, such as child restraints, warning label and prohibit the the bus, and believed that customers of
upper tether straps of child restraints, installation of wheelchair securement larger buses will order the anchorage
and passenger torso belts. devices that make it possible to secure systems throughout the bus. Blue Bird
Agency response: As explained in the a wheelchair in an area where it will stated that although FMVSS No. 225
April 19, 2002 final rule, the ‘‘do not block access to an emergency exit does not require that school buses be
block’’ label originated in part from (question 6). FMVSS No. 217 equipped with the upper tether
NHTSA’s concern with track seating. ‘‘emergency exits’’ includes windows as anchorage of a LATCH system, several
With track systems, the configuration of well as doors. Thus, the NPRM sought States have indicated to school bus
the seats is determined by the user, not comments on labeling requirements for manufacturers that they will want such
the school bus manufacturer. NHTSA both windows as well as doors. tether anchorages to be installed. Blue
was concerned about modifiers possibly Furthermore, the intent of the Bird further stated that the known
installing anchorages in positions that rulemaking was to increase the methods of providing tether anchorages
would result in the blockage of side likelihood that emergency exits will not in school buses include: (1) Anchoring
emergency exits by wheelchairs, so the be blocked so as to hamper occupants’ the tether to the side wall behind the
agency adopted the warning label ability to leave the bus. Emergency child safety restraint system or, (2)
requirement to alert modifiers and users egress takes place through both anchoring the tether to the lap belts of
to the potential hazards of such emergency windows and doors. Thus, the seat behind it. Blue Bird argued that
installation. 67 FR at 19347. improved emergency egress
The inadvertent or unknowing requirements for both windows and 4 ‘‘LATCH’’ stands for ‘‘Lower Anchors and

blockage of or impeding emergency Tethers for Children,’’ a term that was developed
doors, including by way of a ‘‘do not by child restraint manufacturers and retailers to
block’’ label, was contemplated by the refer to the standardized child restraint anchorage
3 The agency will check for compliance with
NPRM. system required by Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
S5.4.3.1(b) by positioning the parallelepiped Standard No. 225 (49 CFR § 571.225). This system
laterally in the door exit using the procedures for 3. Type 2 Seat Belts has two lower anchorages, each consisting of a rigid
evaluating compliance with the unobstructed round rod or bar onto which the connector of a
opening requirements of S5.4.2.1 and S5.4.2.2. Blue Bird stated that vehicles used by child restraint system can be snapped. The bars are
Thus, as long as there is a space laterally along the Head Start agencies are required to be located at the intersection of the vehicle seat
width of the emergency door that meets S5.4.3.1(b), equipped with Type 2 seat belts (if the cushion and seat back. For passenger vehicles, there
the requirement is satisfied. We do not intend to is also an upper tether anchor to which the top
restrict the placement of anchorages in any and all
Head Start Allowable Alternative tether of a child restraint system can be hooked.
spaces along the width of the door that can Vehicle’s GVWR is 10,000 pounds or However, school buses are not required to have the
accommodate the parallelepiped. less) at each outboard passenger seating top tether anchorage of the LATCH system.

VerDate jul<14>2003 12:47 Aug 11, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\12AUR1.SGM 12AUR1
47134 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 155 / Friday, August 12, 2005 / Rules and Regulations

a tether strap in each of these scenarios VIII. Statutory Basis for the Final Rule IX. Regulatory Analyses and Notices
could possibly constitute a blockage of
We have issued this final rule A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT
the side emergency window if there is
pursuant to our statutory authority. Regulatory Policies and Procedures
an emergency exit window at that
rearward seating position. Under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301, Motor Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory
Agency response: In our ‘‘Guideline Vehicle Safety (49 U.S.C. 30101 et seq.), Planning and Review’’ (58 FR 51735,
for the Safe Transportation of Pre-school the Secretary of Transportation is October 4, 1993), provides for making
Age Children in School Buses,’’ we responsible for prescribing motor determinations whether a regulatory
recommend that child restraint systems vehicle safety standards that are action is ‘‘significant’’ and therefore
not be placed next to emergency exit practicable, meet the need for motor subject to Office of Management and
windows in school buses. NHTSA vehicle safety, and are stated in Budget (OMB) review and to the
believes that it is possible that objective terms. 49 U.S.C. 30111(a). requirements of the Executive Order.
placement of a child restraint in the seat When prescribing such standards, the The Order defines a ‘‘significant
next to an emergency exit window Secretary must consider all relevant, regulatory action’’ as one that is likely
could impede occupant exit in an available motor vehicle safety to result in a rule that may:
emergency. If a Do Not Block label helps (1) Have an annual effect on the
information. 49 U.S.C. 30111(b). The economy of $100 million or more or
to prevent school bus users from
Secretary must also consider whether a adversely affect in a material way the
installing child restraints such that the
restraints themselves or the tether straps proposed standard is reasonable, economy, a sector of the economy,
could impede emergency egress from practicable, and appropriate for the type productivity, competition, jobs, the
the exit, the label will have achieved its of motor vehicle or motor vehicle environment, public health or safety, or
purpose. Accordingly, the agency is not equipment for which it is prescribed State, local, or Tribal governments or
convinced that emergency window exits and the extent to which the standard communities;
should not be labeled with the Do Not will further the statutory purpose of (2) Create a serious inconsistency or
Block label due to the label’s potential reducing traffic accidents and deaths otherwise interfere with an action taken
effect on the placement of child and injuries resulting from traffic or planned by another agency;
restraints. accidents. Id. Responsibility for (3) Materially alter the budgetary
Thomas Built and Blue Bird stated promulgation of Federal motor vehicle impact of entitlements, grants, user fees,
that there are situations where their safety standards was subsequently or loan programs or the rights and
customers require LATCH attachments delegated to NHTSA. 49 U.S.C. 105 and obligations of recipients thereof; or
at all seating positions in school buses 322; delegation of authority at 49 CFR (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues
that require emergency exit windows, 1.50. arising out of legal mandates, the
and therefore, it may be necessary to President’s priorities, or the principles
place child restraint attachments next to As a Federal agency, before set forth in the Executive Order.
emergency exit windows. NHTSA does promulgating changes to a Federal We have considered the impact of this
not believe that there would be a huge motor vehicle safety standard, NHTSA rulemaking action under Executive
demand from customers of the large also has a statutory responsibility to Order 12866 and the Department of
school buses who would order LATCH follow the informal rulemaking Transportation’s regulatory policies and
in all seating positions throughout the procedures mandated in the procedures. This rulemaking document
bus. Typically, most school districts Administrative Procedure Act at 5 was not reviewed by the Office of
would only order school buses with a U.S.C. Section 553. Among these Management and Budget under E.O.
couple of rows of seating equipped with requirements are Federal Register 12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planning and
a mechanism to install child restraint publication of a general notice of Review.’’ The rulemaking action is also
systems. However, if there is a situation proposed rulemaking, and giving not considered to be significant under
where the customer wants a LATCH interested persons an opportunity to the Department’s Regulatory Policies
system installed in every seating participate in the rulemaking through and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February
position in buses with a seating capacity submission of written data, views or 26, 1979).
greater than 46, there is an option to arguments. After consideration of the For the following reasons, we believe
install side emergency exit doors in that this final rule; response to petitions
public comments, we must incorporate
these buses instead of emergency exit for reconsideration will not have any
into the rules adopted, a concise general
windows. cost effects on school bus
statement of the rule’s basis and manufacturers. When it amended
5. School Buses Without Wheelchair purpose. FMVSS No. 222 to specify requirements
Anchorages The agency has carefully considered for wheelchair securement anchorages
AmTran believes that the ‘‘DO NOT these statutory requirements in and devices, NHTSA did not envision
BLOCK’’ label should be required on promulgating this final rule; response to that the anchorages would be placed so
emergency exits in all school buses with petitions for reconsideration to amend that wheelchair securement anchorages
or without wheelchair anchorages. The FMVSS No. 217. As previously and devices or secured wheelchairs
agency intended this rulemaking to discussed in detail, this document would block access to any exit door. In
apply only to new school buses responds to petitions for reconsideration analyzing the potential impacts of that
manufactured or sold with one or more of a final rule that we issued in April rulemaking, NHTSA anticipated that
wheelchair anchorage positions. To 2002. We have carefully considered the vehicle manufacturers would, if
minimize misunderstandings about petitions before issuing today’s necessary, remove seats to make room
which new school buses must be document. As a result, we believe that for securing wheelchairs in a forward-
labeled, this final rule clarifies S5.5.3(d) this final rule reflects consideration of facing position and that, if necessary,
to make it clear that the label applies additional buses would be purchased to
all relevant available motor vehicle
only to ‘‘school buses manufactured or offset the lost seating capacity.
safety information.
sold as new with one or more To the extent that vehicle
wheelchair anchorage positions.’’ manufacturers have not removed any

VerDate jul<14>2003 12:47 Aug 11, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\12AUR1.SGM 12AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 155 / Friday, August 12, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 47135

seats and have instead installed C. Executive Order 13045 (Economically organizations, and small governmental
wheelchair securement anchorages and Significant Rules Disproportionately jurisdictions). However, no regulatory
devices in locations where the securing Affecting Children) flexibility analysis is required if the
of wheelchairs will result in the Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, head of an agency certifies the rule
blocking of exits, the agency April 23, 1997) applies to any rule that: would not have a significant economic
overestimated the costs of that earlier impact on a substantial number of small
(1) is determined to be ‘‘economically
rulemaking. If securement devices were entities. SBREFA amended the
significant’’ as defined under E.O.
being so installed, the impact of Regulatory Flexibility Act to require
12866, and (2) concerns an
adopting the amendments made in this Federal agencies to provide a statement
environmental, health or safety risk that
notice would be to conform vehicle of the factual basis for certifying that a
NHTSA has reason to believe may have
manufacturer practices to the rule would not have a significant
a disproportionate effect on children. If
assumptions made in the analysis of economic impact on a substantial
the regulatory action meets both criteria,
that earlier rulemaking. number of small entities.
we must evaluate the environmental The agency Administrator has
Because the economic impacts of this health or safety effects of the planned considered the effects of this rulemaking
final rule are so minimal (i.e., the rule on children, and explain why the action under the Regulatory Flexibility
annual effect on the economy is less planned regulation is preferable to other Act (5 U.S.C. § 601 et seq.) and certifies
than $100 million), no further regulatory potentially effective and reasonably that this final rule will not have a
evaluation is necessary. feasible alternatives considered by us. significant economic impact on a
This final rule is not subject to the substantial number of small entities.
B. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) Executive Order because it is not The rationale for this certification is
Executive Order 13132 requires us to economically significant as defined in that, as noted immediately above,
develop an accountable process to E.O. 12866. It does involve decisions NHTSA is not aware that any school bus
ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by based on health or safety risks that manufacturer, or any small school bus
State and local officials in the disproportionately affect children on manufacturer, is presently
development of regulatory policies that schoolbuses with wheelchair manufacturing school buses with
have federalism implications.’’ ‘‘Policies securement anchorages. However, this wheelchair securement anchorages or
that have federalism implications’’ is rulemaking serves to reduce, rather than devices that may result in blocking
increase, that risk. access to an emergency exit, or that any
defined in the Executive Order to
include regulations that have D. Executive Order 12778 (Civil Justice small school or school district has
‘‘substantial direct effects on the States, Reform) school buses with wheelchair
on the relationship between the national securement anchorages or devices that
Pursuant to Executive Order 12778, may result in blocking access to an
government and the States, or on the ‘‘Civil Justice Reform,’’ we have
distribution of power and emergency door. Accordingly, the
considered whether this final rule has agency believes that this final rule will
responsibilities among the various any retroactive effect. We conclude that
levels of government.’’ Under Executive not affect the costs of the manufacturers
it does not have such an effect. Under of school buses considered to be small
Order 13132, we may not issue a 49 U.S.C. 30103, whenever a Federal
regulation with Federalism business entities. A small manufacturer
motor vehicle safety standard is in could meet the new requirements by
implications, that imposes substantial effect, a State may not adopt or maintain
direct compliance costs, and that is not placing a wheelchair securement
a safety standard applicable to the same anchorage or device in a location other
required by statute, unless the Federal aspect of performance which is not
government provides the funds than in an exit aisle. Changing the
identical to the Federal standard, except placement of a wheelchair securement
necessary to pay the direct compliance to the extent that the state requirement
costs incurred by State and local anchorage or device in this fashion
imposes a higher level of performance might necessitate the removal of a seat
governments, or unless we consult with and applies only to vehicles procured
State and local governments, or unless in some cases. In those instances, there
for the State’s use. will be a small net loss of passenger
we consult with State and local officials 49 U.S.C. 30161 sets forth a procedure
early in the process of developing the capacity.
for judicial review of final rules
proposed regulation. We also may not establishing, amending or revoking F. National Environmental Policy Act
issue a regulation with Federalism Federal motor vehicle safety standards. We have analyzed this rule for the
implications and that preempts State That section does not require purposes of the National Environmental
law unless we consult with State and submission of a petition for Policy Act and determined that it would
local officials early in the process of reconsideration or other administrative not have any significant impact on the
developing the proposed regulation. proceedings before parties may file suit quality of the human environment.
This final rule will not have in court.
substantial direct effects on the States, G. Paperwork Reduction Act
on the relationship between the national E. Regulatory Flexibility Act Under the Paperwork Reduction Act
government and the States, or on the Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility of 1995 (PRA), a person is not required
distribution of power and Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., as amended by to respond to a collection of information
responsibilities among the various the Small Business Regulatory by a Federal agency unless the
levels of government, as specified in Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of collection displays a valid OMB control
Executive Order 13132. The reason is 1996) whenever an agency is required to number. This final rule does not impose
that this final rule, applies to motor publish a notice of rulemaking for any new collection of information
vehicle manufacturers, not to the States proposed or final rule, it must prepare requirements for which a 5 CFR part
or local governments. Thus, the and make available for public comment 1320 clearance must be obtained. The
requirements of Section 6 of the a regulatory flexibility analysis that term ‘‘collection of information’’ does
Executive Order do not apply to this describes the effect of the rule on small not include the ‘‘public disclosure of
final rule. entities (i.e., small businesses, small information originally supplied by the

VerDate jul<14>2003 12:47 Aug 11, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\12AUR1.SGM 12AUR1
47136 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 155 / Friday, August 12, 2005 / Rules and Regulations

Federal government to the recipient for State, local or tribal governments, in the Service Center publishes the Unified
the purpose of disclosure to the public.’’ aggregate, or by the private sector, of Agenda in April and October of each
(See 5 CFR 1320.3(c)(2).) Since NHTSA more than $100 million in any one year year. You may use the RIN contained in
is specifying the exact language with (adjusted for inflation with base year of the heading at the beginning of this
which school bus manufacturers must 1995). Before promulgating a NHTSA document to find this action in the
label their emergency exit doors and rule for which a written statement is Unified Agenda.
emergency exit windows, the labels are needed, section 205 of the UMRA
not collections of information and do List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571
generally requires us to identify and
not need clearance from OMB. consider a reasonable number of Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Motor
H. National Technology Transfer and regulatory alternatives and adopt the vehicles, Rubber and rubber products,
Advancement Act least costly, most cost-effective or least Tires.
burdensome alternative that achieves ■ In consideration of the foregoing, the
Section 12(d) of the National the objectives of the rule. The
Technology Transfer and Advancement Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards
provisions of section 205 do not apply (49 CFR part 571) are amended as set
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104– when they are inconsistent with
113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272) forth below.
applicable law. Moreover, section 205
directs us to use voluntary consensus allows us to adopt an alternative other PART 571—FEDERAL MOTOR
standards in our regulatory activities than the least costly, most cost-effective VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS
unless doing so would be inconsistent or least burdensome alternative if we
with applicable law or otherwise publish with the final rule an ■ 1. The authority citation for part 571
impractical. Voluntary consensus explanation why that alternative was continues to read as follows:
standards are technical standards (e.g., not adopted. Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115,
materials specifications, test methods, This final rule will not result in costs 30117, and 30166; delegation of authority at
sampling procedures, and business of $100 million or more to either State, 49 CFR 1.50.
practices) that are developed or adopted local, or tribal governments, in the
by voluntary consensus standards aggregate, or to the private sector. Thus, ■ 2. Section 571.217 is amended by
bodies, such as the Society of this rule is not subject to the revising in S5.4.3.1, paragraph (b);
Automotive Engineers (SAE). The requirements of sections 202 and 205 of removing, in S5.4.3.1, paragraph (c);
NTTAA directs us to provide Congress, the UMRA. revising in S5.5.3, paragraph (d); and
through OMB, explanations when we removing and reserving Figures 6B and
decide not to use available and J. Plain Language 6D of this section.
applicable voluntary consensus Executive Order 12866 requires each
standards. § 571.217 Bus emergency exits and
agency to write all rules in plain window retention and release.
After conducting a search of available
language. Application of the principles * * * * *
sources, we have determined that there
of plain language includes consideration
are not any voluntary consensus S5.4.3.1 * * *
of the following questions:
standards that we can use in this final * * * * *
rule. We have searched the SAE’s —Have we organized the material to suit
(b) In the case of rear emergency exit
Recommended Practices applicable to the public’s needs?
doors in school buses, using the
buses, and have not found any —Are the requirements in the rule
parallelepiped described in
standards prohibiting placement of clearly stated?
S5.4.2.1(a)(1) (for school buses with a
wheelchairs in front of emergency exit —Does the rule contain technical
GVWR greater than 10,000 lb) or
doors. We have also reviewed the language or jargon that is not clear?
S5.4.2.2 (for school buses with a GVWR
National Standards for School Buses —Would a different format (grouping
of 10,000 lb or less), when the
and School Bus Operations and order of sections, use of headings,
parallelepiped is positioned, as
(NSSBSBO)(1995 Revised Edition). The paragraphing) make the rule easier to
described in S5.4.2.1(a), flush with the
NSSBSBO includes a subsection under understand?
floor and with the rear surface of the
‘‘Standards for Specially Equipped —Would more (but shorter) sections be
parallelepiped tangent to the opening of
School Buses’’ called ‘‘Securement and better?
the rear emergency exit door, there must
Restraint System for Wheelchair/ —Could we improve clarity by adding
not be any portion of a wheelchair
Mobility Aid and Occupant.’’ Paragraph tables, lists, or diagrams?
securement anchorage within the space
1.k. of this provision (on page 61) states: —What else could we do to make this
occupied by the parallelepiped or
‘‘The securement and restraint system rulemaking easier to understand?
within the downward vertical projection
shall be located and installed such that In the March 5, 1999 (64 FR of the parallelepiped, as shown in
when an occupied wheelchair/mobility 10604)(DOT Docket No. NHTSA–99– Figure 6C.
aid is secured, it does not block access 5157) and April 19, 2002 (67 FR
* * * * *
to the lift door.’’ Since this provision 19343)(DOT Docket No. NHTSA–99–
5157) final rule, we raised the plain S5.5.3 School Bus.
does not address blocking access to an
emergency exit, we have decided not to language issues stated above. None of * * * * *
use it in the rulemaking at issue. the public commenters addressed plain (d) On the inside surface of each
language concerns in their NPRM school bus with one or more wheelchair
I. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act comments. anchorage positions, there shall be a
Section 202 of the Unfunded label directly beneath or above each
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) K. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN) ‘‘Emergency Door’’ or ‘‘Emergency Exit’’
requires Federal agencies to prepare a The Department of Transportation designation specified by paragraph (a) of
written assessment of the costs, benefits assigns a regulation identifier number S5.5.3 of this standard for an emergency
and other effects of proposed or final (RIN) to each regulatory action listed in exit door or window. The label shall
rules that include a Federal mandate the Unified Agenda of Federal state in letters at least 25 mm (one inch)
likely to result in the expenditure by Regulations. The Regulatory Information high, the words ‘‘DO NOT BLOCK’’ in

VerDate jul<14>2003 12:47 Aug 11, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\12AUR1.SGM 12AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 155 / Friday, August 12, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 47137

a color that contrasts with the Issued on: August 8, 2005.


background of the label. Jeffrey W. Runge,
* * * * * Administrator.
[FR Doc. 05–16016 Filed 8–11–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P

VerDate jul<14>2003 12:47 Aug 11, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\12AUR1.SGM 12AUR1

También podría gustarte