[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 163 (Tuesday, August 25, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 42837-42841]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-20384]
[[Page 42837]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 571
[Docket No. NHTSA-2009-0049; 2127-AK38]
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 114, Theft Protection
and Rollaway Prevention
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NHTSA is proposing to place a requirement in the Federal motor
vehicle safety standards that certain motor vehicles with an automatic
transmission that includes a ``park'' position manufactured for sale
after September 1, 2010 be equipped with a brake transmission shift
interlock. This interlock will require that the service brake pedal be
depressed before the transmission can be shifted out of ``park,'' and
will function in any starting system key position.
NHTSA is issuing this document in response to a statutory mandate
in the Cameron Gulbransen Kids Transportation Safety Act of 2007. The
proposed rule would not differ from the Congressional requirement. This
rule inserts the mandated requirement into the text of Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety Standard No. 114.
DATES: You should submit your comments early enough to ensure that the
Docket receives them not later than September 24, 2009.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments to the docket number identified in
the heading of this document by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
Mail: Docket Management Facility: U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building Ground
Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
Hand Delivery or Courier: 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Fax: 202-493-2251.
Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting comments and
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the Public
Participation heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this
document. 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 http://DocketInfo.dot.gov.
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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical questions you may
contact Gayle Dalrymple, NVS-123, Office of Rulemaking, (202) 366-5559,
or [email protected]. For legal issues you may contact Ari Scott,
NCC-112, Office of the Chief Counsel, (202) 366-2992, or
[email protected]. You may send mail to both of these officials at
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue,
SE., Washington, DC 20590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. The Legislative Mandate and Changes to FMVSS No. 114
III. Public Participation
IV. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
I. Background
On February 28, 2008, President G.W. Bush signed into law the
``Cameron Gulbransen Kids Transportation Safety Act of 2007'' (the K.T.
Safety Act of 2007). Public Law 110-189, February 28, 2008, 122 Stat
639. This Act related to several aspects of motor vehicle safety
involving incidents where a person, frequently a child, could be hurt
in non-traffic situations. Specifically, the K.T. Safety Act of 2007
addressed safety concerns relating to power windows, rearward
visibility, and vehicles rolling away. With regard to vehicles rolling
away, the specific language of the Act included:
(d) Preventing Motor Vehicles From Rolling Away.--
(1) Requirement.--Each motor vehicle with an automatic
transmission that includes a ``park'' position manufactured for sale
after September 1, 2010, shall be equipped with a system that
requires the service brake to be depressed before the transmission
can be shifted out of ``park''. This system shall function in any
starting system key position in which the transmission can be
shifted out of ``park''.
(2) Treatment As Motor Vehicle Safety Standard--A violation of
paragraph (1) shall be treated as a violation of a motor vehicle
safety standard prescribed under section 30111 of title 49, United
States Code, and shall be subject to enforcement by the Secretary
under chapter 301 of such title.
* * * * *
(e) Definition of Motor Vehicle--As used in this Act and for
purposes of the motor vehicle safety standards described in
subsections (a) and (b), the term `motor vehicle' has the meaning
given such term in section 30102(a)(6) of title 49, United States
Code, except that such term shall not include--
(1) a motorcycle or trailer (as such terms are defined in
section 571.3 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations); or
(2) any motor vehicle that is rated at more than 10,000 pounds
gross vehicular weight.
NHTSA is proposing this rule in response to section (d) of the K.T.
Safety Act of 2007's mandate to require a brake shift transmission
interlock on light vehicles. We further note that the term ``motor
vehicle'' is defined differently in the K.T. Safety Act of 2007 than in
49 U.S.C. 30102. As defined in part (e) of the Act, the term ``motor
vehicle'' means a motor vehicle equal or less than 10,000 pounds
``gross vehicular weight'' that is not a motorcycle or a trailer. As to
how this definition of motor vehicle as stated by the K.T. Safety Act
would relate to ``motor vehicles'' under 49 U.S.C. 30102, the K.T.
Safety Act definition is limited to passenger cars, multipurpose
passenger vehicles, light trucks, and low-speed vehicles.
According to the legislative history of the K.T. Safety Act of 2007
(S. Rep. 110-275, March 13, 2008)) when a vehicle is inadvertently put
into gear or neutral, it may roll away causing harm to bystanders or
individuals in the vehicle. As stated in the Congressional record (Sen.
Rep. 110-275), Congress believes that children are especially at risk
because, should they move a transmission out of the park position, they
may not know what they did or how to stop the vehicle once they realize
what is happening, and a Brake Transmission Shift Interlock (BTSI)
could help prevent these incidents. BTSI, as mandated by Congress,
requires depression of the brake pedal to move the gear shift out of
the ``park'' position. Since small children typically cannot reach the
brake pedal, if a BTSI is in place, Congress decided there is little
chance small children can shift the
[[Page 42838]]
vehicle into gear by themselves.\1\ We note that, in general, key
removal by the operator is still the most effective way to prevent
children from shifting the vehicle's transmission out of the ``park''
position. The K.T. Safety Act mandates that a BTSI should function in
any starting key position.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ While this was the rationale provided by Congress, we note
that NHTSA has no data on actions and behavior of unattended
children in vehicles, although we agree that it is likely accurate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prior to the passage of the K.T. Safety Act of 2007, in August of
2006, the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers and the Association of
International Automobile Manufacturers developed a voluntary agreement
which requires full implementation of BTSI not later than September 1,
2010.\2\ The agreement states that ``any vehicle under 10,000 pounds
produced for the U.S. market, with an automatic transmission that
includes a `park' position shall have a system that requires that the
service brake be depressed before the transmission can be shifted out
of ``park.'' Additionally, the agreement required that manufacturers
provide NHTSA with information about which vehicles were equipped with
BTSI systems, which will be placed in the docket. Automakers
participating in the voluntary agreement include: Aston Martin, BMW
Group, Ford Motor Company, Hyundai Motor, Maserati, Nissan, Suzuki,
DaimlerChrysler Corporation, General Motors, Isuzu Motors, Mazda,
Porsche, Toyota, Ferrari, Honda, Kia Motors, Mitsubishi Motors, Subaru,
and Volkswagen Group.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The announcement and text of this agreement are available on
the NHTSA Web site, http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For its part, since model year (MY) 2007, the agency has made
available to the public on http://www.safercar.gov the list of vehicles
equipped and not equipped with BTSI. Approximately 98 percent of MY
2008 motor vehicles are forecasted to be equipped with a BTSI system
designed in accordance with the agreement. One of the functions of the
K.T. Safety Act of 2007 is that it codifies and makes mandatory the
terms of the agreement for all manufacturers and vehicles as described
above.
II. The Legislative Mandate and Changes to FMVSS No. 114
Because Congress mandated all vehicles be equipped with BTSI, no
action is required by NHTSA for this portion of the legislation to
become effective. However, there are several reasons why we are
proposing to integrate this requirement into Federal Motor Vehicle
Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 114, Theft protection and rollaway
prevention. So that manufacturers and others may conveniently find all
requirements for rollaway prevention systems in the FMVSSs, we are
proposing to locate the requirement for the BTSI together with
requirements for other rollaway systems (in paragraph S5 of FMVSS No.
114). We also note that Congress mandated that a violation of the BTSI
requirement shall be treated as a violation of a motor vehicle safety
standard. To facilitate compliance with the safety requirement and make
clear that NHTSA will enforce violations of the BTSI requirement by way
of the recall and remedy provisions of the National Traffic and Motor
Vehicle Safety Act (49 U.S.C. 30101 et seq.), we are proposing to
integrate the BTSI requirement into FMVSS No. 114.
Comments are requested on our interpretation of various provisions
of section 2(d) of the Act. The last sentence of section (d) states:
``This system shall function in any starting system key position in
which the transmission can be shifted out of `park'. This means that no
matter the starting system position the key is in (e.g., ``lock,''
``accessory,'' or ``start'') the transmission must only shift out of
``park'' when the service brake is depressed. Further, while the second
sentence of section (d)(1) refers to the term ``key,'' we believe that
the BTSI requirement applies to vehicles that operate with all keys,
i.e., a physical device or an electronic code, such as those requiring
the operator to enter the code or push a button to start the vehicle.
In all vehicles, the brake pedal must be depressed in order to shift
the transmission out of the ``park'' position. Other findings we have
made are that the reference to ``gross vehicular weight'' in section
(e)(2) of the Act is referring to ``gross vehicle weight rating
(GVWR),'' a vehicle metric commonly used in the FMVSSs in determining
the applicability of the standards, and that the reference to
``manufactured for sale after September 1, 2010'' in section (d)(1)
means ``manufactured on or after September 1, 2010.'' Finally, we have
not included in FMVSS No. 114 any language relating to a test
procedure. Given the relatively simple nature of the requirement, we do
not believe a test procedure is needed in the regulatory text. However,
in a compliance test, NHTSA will attempt to shift the transmission out
of ``park'' without depressing the vehicle's service brake for each
ignition position. If the transmission is able to be shifted out of
park without the brake pedal depressed, an apparent noncompliance will
be deemed to have been found.
We note that because of the difference in the applicability of the
BTSI requirement and the general applicability requirements of FMVSS
No. 114, we will need to modify paragraph S3, Application, to insert
the BTSI requirement as it was mandated by Congress. According to
section (e) the K.T. Safety Act of 2007:
The term `motor vehicle' has the meaning given such term in
section 30102(a)(6) of title 49, United States Code, except that
such term shall not include--
(1) a motorcycle or trailer (as such terms are defined in
section 571.3 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations); or
(2) any motor vehicle that is rated at more than 10,000 pounds
gross vehicular weight.
The vehicles subject to the K.T. Safety Act of 2007 largely overlap
with the vehicles currently subject to FMVSS No. 114, but there are
some differences. Using the term ``motor vehicle'' as described in 49
U.S.C. 30102, the Congressional definition would apply to passenger
cars, trucks, buses, multipurpose passenger vehicles, and low-speed
vehicles with a GVWR of 10,000 pounds or less. This contrasts with the
vehicle types listed in paragraph S3 of FMVSS No. 114, which includes
``all passenger cars, and to trucks and multipurpose vehicles with a
GVWR of 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) or less. However, it does not
apply to walk-in van-type vehicles.'' Thus, as a result of the
Congressional definition, in addition to all of the vehicles currently
subject to FMVSS No. 114, the BTSI requirement would apply to buses
(under 10,000 pounds), walk-in van-type vehicles, and low-speed
vehicles. We are proposing to add language to paragraph S3 of the
standard, to make it clear that the BTSI requirement applies to this
somewhat larger class of vehicles, while not changing the applicability
of current FMVSS No. 114 requirements.
III. Public Participation
How do I prepare and submit comments?
Your comments must be written and in English. To ensure that your
comments are correctly filed in the Docket, please include the docket
number 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.
Please submit two copies of your comments, including the
attachments,
[[Page 42839]]
to Docket Management at the address given above under ADDRESSES.
Comments may also be submitted to the docket electronically by
logging onto the Docket Management System Web site at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
Please note that pursuant to the Data Quality Act, in order 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://dms.dot.gov.
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?
If you wish to submit any information under a claim of
confidentiality, you should submit three copies of your complete
submission, including the information you claim to be confidential
business information, to the Chief Counsel, NHTSA, at the address given
above under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. In addition, you should
submit two copies, from which you have deleted the claimed confidential
business information, to Docket Management at the address given above
under ADDRESSES. When you send a comment containing information claimed
to be confidential business information, you should include a cover
letter setting forth the information specified in our confidential
business information regulation. (49 CFR part 512.)
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
a final rule (assuming that one is issued), 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 http://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.
IV. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
NHTSA has considered the impacts of this rulemaking action under
Executive Order 12866 and the Department of Transportation's regulatory
policies and procedures. This action was not reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget under E.O. 12866. The agency has considered the
impact of this action under the Department of Transportation's
regulatory policies and procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979),
and has determined that it is not ``significant'' under them. This
rulemaking document was not reviewed under E.O. 12866.
Today's notice proposes to insert the Congressional mandate into
the Federal motor vehicle safety standards for the convenience of
users. It does not impose any additional regulatory requirements. We
also note that most vehicles are already equipped with a BTSI system.
The agency concludes that the impacts of the proposed changes are so
minimal that preparation of a full regulatory evaluation is not
required.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.,
as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
(SBREFA) of 1996), whenever an agency is required to publish a notice
of rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it must prepare and make
available for public comment a regulatory flexibility analysis that
describes the effect of the rule on small entities (i.e., small
businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions).
The Small Business Administration's regulations at 13 CFR part 121
define a small business, in part, as a business entity ``which operates
primarily within the United States.'' (13 CFR 121.105(a)). No
regulatory flexibility analysis is required if the head of an agency
certifies the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. SBREFA amended the Regulatory
Flexibility Act to require Federal agencies to provide a statement of
the factual basis for certifying that a rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
NHTSA has considered the effects of this NPRM under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act. I certify that this NPRM will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This
proposal merely includes in the Federal motor vehicle safety standards
a requirement passed by Congress in the K.T. Safety Act of 2007. No
substantive changes to the Act are being proposed in this notice. Small
organizations and small government units would not be significantly
affected since this proposed action would not affect the price of new
motor vehicles. For the vast majority of motor vehicle manufacturers,
the BTSI requirement merely codifies a voluntary pledge made by
manufacturers to install BTSI systems on all vehicles by September 1,
2010.
Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
NHTSA has examined today's proposal pursuant to Executive Order
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
the proposal does not have federalism implications because it 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.''
Further, no consultation is needed to discuss the issue of
preemption in connection with today's proposed rule. The issue of
preemption can arise in connection with NHTSA rules in at least 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
[[Page 42840]]
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 that unavoidably preempts State legislative and administrative
law, not today's rulemaking, so consultation would be unnecessary.
Second, the Supreme Court has recognized the possibility of implied
preemption: in some instances, State requirements imposed on motor
vehicle manufacturers, including sanctions imposed by State tort law,
can stand as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of a NHTSA
safety standard. When such a conflict is discerned, the Supremacy
Clause of the Constitution makes the State requirements unenforceable.
See Geier v. American Honda Motor Co., 529 U.S. 861 (2000). However,
NHTSA has considered the nature and purpose of today's proposal and
does not currently foresee any potential State requirements that might
conflict with it. Without any conflict, there could not be any implied
preemption.
Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)
With respect to the review of the promulgation of a new regulation,
section 3(b) of Executive Order 12988, ``Civil Justice Reform'' (61 FR
4729, February 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) adequately
defines key terms; and (6) addresses other important issues affecting
clarity and general draftsmanship under any guidelines issued by the
Attorney General. This document is consistent with that requirement.
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 proceeding before they may file suit in
court.
Protection of Children From Environmental Health and Safety Risks
Executive Order 13045, ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19855, April 23, 1997), applies to any
rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' as
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental,
health, or safety risk that the agency has reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets
both criteria, the agency must evaluate the environmental health or
safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the agency.
Although this notice is part of a rulemaking expected to have a
positive safety impact on children, it is not an economically
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
Consequently, no further analysis is required under Executive Order
13045.
Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), a person is not
required to respond to a collection of information by a Federal agency
unless the collection displays a valid OMB control number. There is not
any information collection requirement associated with this NPRM.
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, (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) that are
developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies, such as
the Society of Automotive Engineers. The NTTAA directs us to provide
Congress (through OMB) with explanations when we decide not to use
available and applicable voluntary consensus standards. There are no
voluntary consensus standards developed by voluntary consensus
standards bodies pertaining to the BTSI requirement. However, we note
that currently, most automobile manufacturers incorporate a brake shift
transmission interlock in their vehicles. In 2006, most large vehicle
manufacturers agreed to a voluntary commitment to include a BTSI system
in their vehicles by September 1, 2010. Finally, due to the BTSI
provision in the K.T. Safety Act of 2007, all manufacturers will be
required by statute to include it in their vehicles by September 1,
2010. This NPRM proposes to incorporate the already-existing
requirement into FMVSS No. 114 and does not include any additional
requirements on manufacturers.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
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). Before promulgating a NHTSA rule for which a written statement
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires the agency to
identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives
and adopt the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome
alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of
section 205 do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable
law. Moreover, section 205 allows the agency to adopt an alternative
other than the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome
alternative if the agency publishes with the final rule an explanation
of why that alternative was not adopted.
This NPRM will not result in any expenditure by State, local, or
tribal governments or the private sector. Thus, this NPRM is not
subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
National Environmental Policy Act
NHTSA has analyzed this rulemaking action for the purposes of the
National Environmental Policy Act. The agency has determined that
implementation of this action will not have any significant impact on
the quality of the human environment.
Regulatory Identifier Number (RIN)
The Department of Transportation 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 in April and October of each year. You may
use the RIN contained in the heading at the beginning of this document
to find this action in the Unified Agenda.
Privacy Act
Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the
[[Page 42841]]
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 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages
19477-78) or you may visit http://www.regulations.gov.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571
Motor vehicle safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Tires.
In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA proposes to amend 49 CFR
part 571 as follows:
PART 571--FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS
1. The authority citation for part 571 of Title 49 would continue
to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117, and 30166;
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.
2. Section 571.114 would be amended by revising paragraphs S3 and
S5 and adding paragraph S5.3 to read as follows:
Sec. 571.114 Standard No. 114; Theft protection and rollaway
prevention.
* * * * *
S3 Application. This standard applies to all passenger cars, and to
trucks and multipurpose passenger vehicles with a GVWR of 4,536
kilograms (10,000 pounds) or less. However, it does not apply to walk-
in van-type vehicles. Additionally, paragraph S5.3 of this standard
applies to all motor vehicles, except trailers and motorcycles, with a
GVWR of 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) or less.
* * * * *
S5 Requirements. Each vehicle subject to this standard must meet
the requirements of S5.1, 5.2, and 5.3. Open-body type vehicles are not
required to comply with S5.1.3.
* * * * *
S5.3 Brake Transmission Shift Interlock. Each motor vehicle
manufactured on or after September 1, 2010 with a GVWR of 4,536
kilograms (10,000 pounds) or less with an automatic transmission that
includes a ``park'' position shall be equipped with a system that
requires the service brake to be depressed before the transmission can
be shifted out of ``park.'' This system shall function in any starting
system key position in which the transmission can be shifted out of
``park.'' This section does not apply to trailers or motorcycles.
* * * * *
Issued on August 19, 2009.
Julie Abraham,
Director, Office of International Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer
Programs.
[FR Doc. E9-20384 Filed 8-24-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P