[Federal Register: October 8, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 196)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 58887-58898]
[DOCID:fr08oc08-13]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. NHTSA 2008-0059]
RIN 2127-AI94

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Designated Seating
Positions and Seat Belt Assembly Anchorages

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Today's final rule amends the definition of the term,
``designated seating position,'' as used in the Federal motor vehicle
safety standards (FMVSS), to indicate more clearly which areas within
the interior of a vehicle meet that definition. Today's final rule also
establishes a calculation procedure for determining the number of
designated seating positions at a seat location for trucks and
multipurpose passenger vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating less
than 10,000 lbs, passenger cars, and buses. Further, this document
eliminates the existing exclusion of auxiliary seats (i.e., temporary
or folding jump seats) from the definition of ``designated seating
position.'' Today's final rule encourages manufacturers to use a
variety of visual cues in the design of the vehicle interior to help
improve occupant awareness as to which areas of a vehicle are not
intended to be used as seating positions. This will help to ensure that
occupants sit in locations where they are afforded the crash protection
required by the FMVSSs.

DATES: The effective date of this final rule is December 8, 2008. The
incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the rule
is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of December 8,
2008.
    Petitions for reconsideration must be received not later than
November 24, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Petitions must be submitted to: Administrator, National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For non-legal issues, you may contact
Chris Wiacek of the NHTSA Office of Crashworthiness Standards by
telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, and by fax at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    For legal issues, you may contact Ed Glancy of the NHTSA Office of
Chief Counsel by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER> and by fax at (202) 366-
3820.
    You may send mail to both of these officials at the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
II. Public Comments on Proposal
III. Final Rule
    A. Changes Since the NPRM
    B. ``Designated Seating position''
    C. Measuring Seating Surface
    D. Calculating the Number of Designated Seating Positions
    E. Auxiliary Seating and Seat Belt Anchorages
IV. Benefits and Costs
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Effective Date
VII. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

I. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    On June 22, 2005, the agency published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) in which we proposed a revised definition of
``designated seating position'' (DSP) and a calculation procedure for
determining the number of seating positions at a seat location (70 Fed.
Reg. 36094; Docket No. NHTSA 2005-21600). The NPRM focused on two main
objectives:
    (1) To provide a more objective definition of DSP and a more
objective method for determining the number of DSPs at a seating
location; and
    (2) To eliminate the existing exclusion of auxiliary seats from the
DSP definition so that all seating locations intended to be used while
a vehicle is in motion provide the appropriate levels of crash
protection.
    The designation of a seating position is important for a variety of
reasons. Under the Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSSs),
motor vehicle manufacturers must meet various performance requirements
for each position designated as a seating position. For example, FMVSS
No. 208, ``Occupant crash protection,'' requires that each designated
seating position, as defined in Sec.  49 CFR 571.3, in a light vehicle
\1\ be provided with the appropriate occupant crash protection system
(e.g., air bag, safety belts or both). If a vehicle has fewer
designated seating positions than the number of seated individuals
actually occupying it, one or more occupants would not be protected by
safety belts and/or other crash protection systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ NHTSA uses the term ``light vehicle'' to refer to passenger
cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks and buses with a gross
vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of not greater than 10,000 lb.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Preliminary Regulatory Evaluation (PRE) that accompanied the
NPRM indicated that, in some vehicles, the number of DSPs did not
reflect real world occupancy. Crash data revealed instances in which
three passengers were occupying seats designated as having only two
seating positions (2-DSP seats). As a result, one of the occupants was
not afforded the crash protection required at a DSP, namely, a safety
belt system. Further, data indicated a drop in seat belt usage rate for
these cases from 53.3 percent to 27.7 percent due to a third occupant
seated at a location without a restraint.
    In addition to the crash data, the agency received numerous
complaints from vehicle purchasers that the number of DSPs at some rear
bench seats was not readily obvious. These bench seats were designated
as having fewer seating positions than purchasers recognized, i.e., at
the time of sale, purchasers believed these bench seats were large
enough to seat three people and assumed that there were seat belts for
all of them when in fact the seats had only 2-DSPs and thus seat belts
for only two people. Based on the crash data and complaints, we
proposed revisions to the ``designated seating position'' definition
intending to aid manufacturers and vehicle purchasers in judging
whether a location is or should be a DSP and in determining the number
of DSPs at a given location.
    The agency proposed to remove the language in the definition that
defined a DSP as a location that is ``likely to be used'' as a seat
while a vehicle is in motion and that meets a hip room metric, based on
the hip dimensions of a 5th percentile adult female. We also proposed
that the number of DSPs at a location would be calculated using a hip
room measurement. Under the proposal, the measured width of a location
and thus the number of DSPs could be limited by the installation of
specified features, i.e., voids or impediments, to indicate that a
portion of a location was not intended to be used as a seating surface.
The characteristics of these voids and impediments were based on those
features that appeared to have the practical effect of limiting
occupancy to the intended number of DSPs in a surveyed fleet. As
explained in the NPRM, the agency's intent was not to require
manufacturers to increase the number of DSPs in vehicles, but to
provide a clearer physical indication of the actual number of locations
at which crash protection features are provided.
    To further ensure that vehicle occupants are provided with
appropriate crash protection, the agency also proposed to eliminate the
exclusion of auxiliary seats from the definition of DSP. Since these
seats are generally designed to be used when the vehicle is in motion,
their occupants need crash protection just as those in other seats do.
However, because these types of seats are not currently regarded as
DSPs, manufacturers are not required to provide crash protection such
as safety belts or lower anchorages and tethers for child seats (LATCH
systems) at those locations.

II. Public Comments on Proposal

    In response to the NPRM, the agency received comments from a
variety of organizations. Comment were submitted by the Alliance of
Automobile Manufacturers (Alliance); General Motors; Subaru; Hyundai;
Nissan; the Truck Manufacturers Association (TMA); Recreation Vehicle
Industry Association (RVIA); Fire Apparatus Manufacturers Association
(FAMA); Fleetwood Enterprises, a motor home manufacturer; Flexsteel
Industries, Inc., a seat manufacturer; Insurance Institute for Highway
Safety (IIHS); Safety Research and Strategies (SRS), a research
organization; and Public Citizen, a public interest organization.
    The commenters generally supported the establishment of a
``designated seating position'' definition that provided greater
specificity. However, all but IIHS raised concern over the definition
and calculation procedure for determining the number of designated
seating positions proposed in the NPRM.
    The motor vehicle manufacturers and the Alliance expressed concern
that the proposed revisions to the DSP definition, particularly the
calculation procedure, would have unintended consequences. General
Motors stated that several front row bucket seats would be classified
as having 2-DSPs, instead of 1-DSP, under the proposal. The Alliance
stated that the void and impediment countermeasures could force
passengers to sit farther outboard, potentially affecting their
protection in a side impact. Hyundai and Nissan stated that the
proposed revisions would require redesign of vehicles, which would
necessitate at least three years of lead time.
    TMA and FAMA both commented that the proposal, if made final, would
impede the unique functions of many commercial and emergency vehicles.
RVIA, Flexsteel, and Fleetwood stated that the proposed procedure for
calculating the number of DSPs would limit the functionality of the
seating positions in their vehicles by requiring

either the designation of additional DSPs and the addition of an equal
number of seat belts or the addition of a countermeasure. These
commenters stated that such design changes would interfere with the
functional nature of motor home seats and furnishings. RVIA also
expressed concern that the elimination of the language ``likely to be
used as a seating position while the vehicle is in motion'' would have
the effect of eliminating the option under FMVSS No. 207, ``Seating
systems,'' of placing a label on a seating location stating that it is
not to be used while the vehicle is in motion, instead of designating
the location as a DSP and installing a seat belt.
    Safety Research and Strategies and Public Citizen questioned the
benefits of the proposed revisions. Safety Research and Strategies
stated that the void and impediment countermeasures were not supported
by human factors analysis, and were based on vehicles with low numbers
of registrations. They also said that the agency did not perform a
statistical analysis of the degree of confidence of the number of
incidents of the vehicles.\2\ Public Citizen questioned the proposal's
use of countermeasures in the measurement for determining the number of
DSPs, and stated that unless seat belts were required, as opposed to
design elements that would reduce seating space, there would be no
benefits associated with the proposal. Both Safety Research and
Strategies and Public Citizen commented that the agency did not provide
a basis for asserting that the proposed definition of DSP and the
associated procedure would preempt State law, including State tort law.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Safety Research and Strategies also stated that its analysis
of the data indicated that the incident rate of three occupants
seated at the 2-DSP rear seat of the Acura Integra 2-Door was twice
as high as presented in the PRE. The incident rates of the Acura
were relied upon by the agency in developing the impediment
countermeasure. However, it is unclear whether Safety Research and
Strategies evaluated data from the same period as in the agency's
analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additional issues raised by commenters are discussed below in the
discussion of the final rule.

III. Final Rule

A. Changes Since the NPRM

    When the agency issued the NPRM in mid-2005, we raised concern that
some motor vehicle seat designs were not indicative of their intended
occupancy. Data from 1997 through 2001 indicated that real world
occupancy rates were exceeding the number of designated seating
positions, particularly on bench and split bench seats. Since 2001,
vehicle seat designs have changed.
    As discussed above, the agency received complaints from vehicle
purchasers regarding the actual number of DSPs at rear bench seats. At
the time of the agency investigation in 2001, NHTSA received a
complaint from a safety research consultant concerning the rear seat of
the 2-door Ford Explorer. Ford submitted information indicating that 35
consumers had complained that they had thought that vehicle had rear
seating for three people and were surprised to learn that there were
only 2 DSPs.
    The most notable change since 2001 has been a decrease in the size
of 2-DSP seat locations. The width of the average seating surface for a
2-DSP seating location in MY 2001 sports utility vehicles surveyed by
the agency was 1,118 mm (44 inches). The width of the average seating
surface for a 2-DSP seating location in comparable MY 2006 vehicles
surveyed by the agency was 979 mm (38.5 inches). Both values reflect
the measurement method in this final rule. The reduced seat size more
clearly indicates to occupants the capacity for which crash protection
is provided.
    Based on changes to current seat design and the comments received
in response to the NPRM, today's document adopts the agency's proposal,
but with several changes.

B. ``Designated Seating Position''

    Consistent with the proposal, the agency is adopting a definition
of ``designated seating position'' that is based on the hip measurement
of a 5th percentile adult female. However, instead of relying on a hip
room measurement, today's final rule incorporates a measurement of
seating surface (e.g., surface width) that corresponds to a 5th
percentile adult female.
    As explained in the NPRM, ``designated seating position'' is
currently defined, in part, as:

    [Any] plan view location capable of accommodating a person at
least as large as a 5th percentile adult female, if the overall seat
configuration and design and vehicle design is such that the
position is likely to be used as a seating position while the
vehicle is in motion [.]

(49 CFR 571.3(b).)

    The NPRM proposed to rely expressly on the hip room dimensions for
a 5th percentile adult female, instead of the somewhat less precise
criteria of being large enough to accommodate such a person. The
proposed definition measured available hip room according to procedures
established by the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE), with
qualifications to provide for measurement of the largest hip room
dimension and the incorporation of H-point in the measurement
procedure.
    We also proposed to eliminate the ``likely to be used''
qualification in the definition. We believe that this language was
insufficiently precise to provide a completely useful guide as to which
positions must be considered DSPs. In proposing to eliminate that
qualification, we recognized that it is not practicable to design a
vehicle to prevent all potential occupant misuse of interior positions.
However, as we stated in the NPRM, there is abundant notice to drivers
and occupants of light vehicles that the use of safety belts is
essential, and therefore, that sitting in a location in a vehicle that
is not equipped with a safety belt is inappropriate and dangerous.
Vehicle literature and advertising, as well as numerous public outreach
programs, inform and remind the public of the need to wear safety belts
while riding in a vehicle. Vehicle owners' manuals are replete with
exhortations about the importance of always wearing a safety belt.
Further, the warning label required to be on the sun visor in every
light vehicle expressly tells vehicle occupants to wear safety belts
always. The public's awareness of these messages is evidenced by the
fact that the national safety belt use rate increased from 71 percent
in 2001 to 82 percent in 2005, an all time high. Nevertheless, the
agency was aware that some vehicles had certain locations that were not
equipped with crash protection and that might have given the appearance
of being seating positions, thereby encouraging their use by
passengers. The ``likely to be used'' language did not provide a
sufficiently objective method of resolving these difficult cases.
    Commenters generally focused on the calculation procedure for
determining the number of DSPs at a location, and did not provide much
comment on the proposed revision to the ``designated seating position''
definition in 49 CFR 571.3(b). Commenters raised issue with the
procedure for measuring hip room specified in the proposed 49 CFR
571.10, which was referenced in the proposed ``designated seating
position'' definition. As explained in greater detail below, the final
definition in Sec.  571.3(b) and procedure in Sec.  571.10 adopted in
this document rely on the width of the seating surface, as opposed to
the proposed hip room measurement.
    Under the definition adopted today, a seat location is regarded as
having at

least one DSP if it has a seat surface width of at least 330 mm (13
inches). Three hundred and thirty millimeters is consistent with the
hip dimensions of a 5th percentile adult female.\3\ We believe that the
actual seat surface width is more reflective of a location's ability to
accommodate an occupant than the proposed hip room measurement. The
proposed hip room measurement potentially included voids between a seat
and interior vehicle trim (e.g., the space between a seat and the
inside of a door), or locations underneath trim (e.g., an arm rest)
that would be unlikely to accommodate a seated occupant. The method for
measuring the width of a seat surface is specified in Sec.  571.10, as
well as the procedure for determining the number of DSPs at a seat
location.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The 5th percentile female hip width specified in S7.1.4 of
FMVSS No. 208 is of 325 mm (12.8 inches). We rounded the measurement
to 330 mm (13 inches) for purposes of the formula proposed below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Measuring Seating Surface

    Today's final rule establishes a procedure for measuring seating
surface width and places it in new section, Sec.  571.10, Designation
of Seating Positions. The seating surface measurement is used, in part,
to determine if a seat location is large enough for a least one
designated seating position. Once a seat location is identified as a
``designated seating position,'' the seat surface measurement is then
used in light vehicles to determine the number of DSPs at that
location.
    The NPRM relied on hip room in determining whether a location is a
DSP, and the number of DSPs at that location. The proposed Sec.  571.10
set out, with several modifications, the procedure in SAE Recommended
Practice J1100 rev. February 2001 ``Motor Vehicle Dimensions.'' The
proposed procedure in Sec.  571.10 differed from the SAE procedure in
that the agency's method would use the H-point as a reference as
opposed to the seating reference point. Additionally, while the SAE
procedure uses the minimum dimension measured laterally between the
interior trim of a vehicle on the ``X'' plane through the seating
reference point, we proposed using a maximum dimension.
    Under the proposal, hip room was to be considered continuous unless
there was a separation greater than 150 mm (5.9 inches) between
adjacent seat cushions, or between a seat cushion and the vehicle
interior, and the separation contained either:
    (1) A fixed, unpadded impediment that is at least 5 mm (0.2 inches)
higher than the highest point on the upper surface of the seat cushion
when viewed in profile, and that extends more than two-thirds of the
horizontal depth of the seat cushion;
    (2) A void that can accommodate a rectangular box 150 mm (5.9
inches) wide, 150 mm (5.9 inches) high, and two thirds the horizontal
depth of the seat cushion in length, such that the box is sitting 2 mm
(0.08 inches) below each point on the top profile of the seat cushion;
or
    (3) A parking brake or gear shift handle, that, when placed in the
lowest possible position, is not less than 25 mm (1.0 inches) higher
than the highest point of the seat cushion.
    Commenters raised a number of issues with the proposed procedure
for measuring a seat location. Manufacturers commented that the
proposed measuring procedure would result in a variety of unintended
consequences. Manufacturers, Safety Research and Strategies, and Public
Citizen questioned whether the countermeasures for terminating a
measurement, i.e., a void or specified impediment, would in fact have
the effect of limiting the number of occupants to the number of DSPs.
    Manufacturers stated that use of the maximum hip room measurement
under the revised SAE procedure would result in an increase in the
number of DSPs at seat locations. The Alliance and General Motors
commented that front row bucket seats in several vehicles are not
separated by any of the proposed countermeasures, and accordingly would
become considered as having 3 DSPs. These commenters stated that the
crash data focused on bench and split bench seats and that the agency
did not demonstrate any problem with bucket seats. Further, the
Alliance, General Motors, and Flexsteel Industries stated that the
measurement at many locations would include the void between two seats
and the void between the seat and interior trim. These commenters
stated that additional space cannot accommodate an occupant, but would
nevertheless be included in the calculation for determining the number
of DSPs at a location. Subaru noted that the measurement as specified
may in some instances measure the area underneath an arm rest, which
provides an obvious impediment to seating.
    Safety Research and Strategies and Public Citizen stated that the
agency did not have any human factors data to demonstrate that the
proposed countermeasures would influence the seating behavior of
occupants. Safety Research and Strategies stated that the agency based
the countermeasures on interior designs of low volume vehicles, which
did not provide a sufficient vehicle population for determining the
effectiveness of the countermeasures.
1. Measuring Procedure
    The agency is adopting a procedure for measuring a seat surface for
the purpose of determining the presence of a DSP location and the
number of DSPs at that location. Seating surface width is reflective of
the actual area available to accommodate an occupant. For example, the
procedure adopted today would not include a void between a seating
surface and the door trim as part of the seating area. Under the final
rule adopted today, seating surface width is the maximum width of a
seating surface measured in a zone extending from a transverse vertical
plane 150 mm (5.9 inches) behind the front leading surface of that
seating surface to a transverse vertical plane 250 mm (9.8 inches)
behind that front leading surface, measured horizontally and
longitudinally.\4\ Using the seating surface avoids the unintended
consequences of the proposal, i.e., increasing the calculated vehicle
seating capacity. Those consequences would have occurred under the
proposal because the maximum H-point measurement included aspects or
areas of the vehicle such as arm rests molded into the side trim that
cannot be used as part of a seating surface.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The dimensions of this zone are based on the definition in
S<IP_ADDRESS> of FMVSS No. 208 of the term ``seat cushion reference
point'' (SCRP). The term is defined as meaning a point placed on the
outboard side of the seat cushion at a horizontal distance between
150 mm (5.9 in) and 250 mm (9.8 in) from the front edge of the seat
used as a guide in positioning the seat.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Noting that the proposed H-point measurement may vary depending on
seat adjustment, Subaru requested that the agency specify an adjustment
procedure prior to measuring hip room. The use of a seating surface
measurement will be less affected by seat position than the proposed H-
point measurement. In addition, today's final rule specifies that
folding, removable, and adjustable seats are measured in the
configuration which results in the single largest maximum seating
surface width.
    In addition to providing a measurement more reflective of a
vehicle's seating area, reliance on seating surface width will, in
part, avoid the unintended consequences of the proposed hip-room
measurement. Based on an agency survey of vehicles, the agency
determined that reliance on seating surface width will result in bucket
seats, which are readily identifiable as one DSP, being

designated as having only a single seating position.
2. Countermeasures
    Today's final rule revises the countermeasures specified in the
NPRM. Under today's final rule, adjacent seat surfaces are considered
continuous, unless:

    (i) The seating surfaces are separated by:
    (A) A fixed trimmed surface whose top surface is unpadded and
that has a width not less than 140 mm (5.5 inches), as measured in
each transverse vertical plane within that measurement zone, or
    (B) A void whose cross section in each transverse vertical plane
within that measurement zone is a rectangle that is not less than
140 mm (5.5 inches) wide and not less than 140 mm (5.5 inches) deep.
The top edge of the cross section in any such plane is congruent
with the transverse horizontal line that intersects the lowest point
on the portion of the top profile of the seating surfaces that lie
within that plane.

or

    (ii) Interior trim interrupts the measurement of the nominal hip
room of the seating surfaces, measured laterally along the ``X''
plane through the H-point. For purposes of this paragraph, the H-
point is located using the SAE three-dimensional H-point machine per
SAE Recommended Practice J826, rev. July 1995, with the legs and leg
weights removed,

or

    (iii) The seating surfaces are adjacent outboard seats, and the
lateral distance between any point on the seat cushion of one seat
and any point on the seat cushion of the other seat is not less than
140 mm (5.5 inches).

    As we stated in the NPRM, we recognize that it is not practical to
design a vehicle to prevent all potential misuse of interior positions
that could be used for seating (70 FR 36096). However, the
countermeasures incorporated in the new definition will provide visual
cues to indicate the number of DSPs at a seat location and thus the
number of people who should sit there. As discussed above, the agency
received a number of complaints from consumers who said that, at time
of purchase, the actual number of manufacturer designated seating
positions at some bench seats was not readily apparent to them. Today's
final rule is intended to eliminate complaints, result in seat designs
that better convey the number of occupants that are intended to occupy
a seat, and ensure that all occupants can be properly restrained.
    Today's final rule provides manufacturers with flexibility in
designing seats. A manufacturer may install an impediment or void as
described above in order to maintain the current number of DSPs. If a
fixed trim surface is appropriately configured, a convenience function,
such as a cup holder, tray or storage, also can serve as an impediment.
A manufacturer is also given the option of preventing two adjacent
seats being treated as a single continuous seating surface by designing
the vehicle interior so that a transverse horizontal line through the
H-points of the two seats intersects surfaces of the vehicle interior.
The model year 2006 Ford Mustang and BMW 3 Series convertible are
examples of vehicles that would qualify under this criterion.
    For purpose of the countermeasures, the H-point is located using
the SAE three-dimensional H-point machine per SAE Recommended Practice
J826, rev. July 1995, with the legs and leg weights removed. In
response to the Alliance's comment that measurements with the legs
removed have not been demonstrated to be repeatable, the agency notes
that its decision not to include the legs for the 3-dimensional tool
when determining the H-point was based on three factors. First, based
on the regulatory text adopted in the final rule, the need to perform
this measurement would occur primarily in the rear seats of sports
cars. The room available for installing the 3-D mannequin is limited in
these vehicles, resulting in greater difficulty and potentially greater
measurement error if the legs were used. Second, the agency eliminated
the measurement box around the H-point and hence the need to determine
either a minimum or maximum hip width. Third, the Alliance did not
provide any documentation supporting its claim.

D. Calculating the Number of Designated Seating Positions

1. Procedure for Determining Number of DSPs
    The agency is adopting a procedure for determining the number of
seating positions at a location once it is determined that a location
has at least one DSP. The procedure for determining the number of DSPs
at a seat location adopted today applies to passenger cars; buses,
except school buses; and trucks and multipurpose passenger vehicles
with a GVWR less than 10,000 lbs. It does not, however, apply to motor
homes, police vehicles, school buses, ambulances, fire fighting
vehicles, and trucks and multipurpose passenger vehicles with a GVWR of
10,000 lbs or greater.\5 \
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The DSP definition itself will be applicable to all vehicles
including motor homes, police vehicles, school buses, ambulances,
fire fighting vehicles, and trucks and multipurpose passenger
vehicles with a GVWR of 10,000 lbs or greater.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The agency recognizes that the usage needs and patterns for seat
locations in motor homes, police vehicles, ambulances, fire fighting
vehicles, and trucks and multipurpose passenger vehicles with a GVWR of
10,000 lbs or greater are different than the usage needs and patterns
for typical light duty vehicles. Further, the crash data did not
demonstrate a problem of the number of occupants exceeding the number
of DSPs in such vehicles.
    Therefore, in order to provide manufacturers the flexibility to
design these vehicles for their more specialized functions, the
calculation procedure will not be used to determine the number of DSPs
in those vehicles. Since the final rule does not reduce the current
requirements for those vehicles, the agency does not anticipate any
departures from the current industry practices for designating seating
positions in these vehicles. For these vehicles, except school buses,
the rule expressly permits the manufacturer of these vehicles to
continue to designate, using a label in compliance with S4.4 of FMVSS
No. 207, locations that are not to be used for seating while the
vehicle is in motion. The rule excludes those locations from the DSP
definition. For school buses, the existing method for determining the
number of passenger seating positions, set forth in S4.1 of FMVSS No.
222, ``School bus passenger seating and crash protection,'' will
continue to apply.
    With regard to the vehicles for which the procedure will apply, we
are specifying the application of one of two calculations, dependent
upon the overall value of the seating surface width. For adjacent seats
with a continuous seating surface width less than 1400 mm (55 inches),
the measured surface would be divided by 350 mm and rounded down to the
nearest whole number to produce the number of DSPs. For adjacent seats
with 1400 mm (55 inches) or more of continuous seating surface, the
measured surface would be divided by 450 mm and rounded down to the
nearest whole number. Also, a compliance test procedure is being
published on the NHTSA Web site concurrently with this final rule.
    A survey of the MY 2006 vehicle fleet indicated that application of
the 350 and 450 divisor values resulted in a DSP number consistent with
the manufacturers' designation. As noted above, the large 2-DSP seats
seen in earlier fleets are not nearly so prevalent in more recent
fleets. Today's final rule encourages manufacturers to continue

this trend. Additionally, the larger divisor for larger seats prevents
larger 3-DSP seats from having to be designated as 4-DSP seats. The
data do not demonstrate a problem with 3-DSP seats being occupied by
four passengers, and do not demonstrate the potential for any benefit
from such a requirement. In addition, for larger vehicles with longer
bench seats (e.g., shuttle buses and limousines), the 450 divisor
results in a designated seating position width that aligns with the
width typically used by seating manufacturers.
    Public Citizen and Safety Research and Strategies questioned the
use of a larger divisor for larger seats. Safety Research and
Strategies suggested that the lack of a problem with larger seats may
be the result of a limited data, and suggested that the agency consider
usage patterns of these larger vehicles after second retail sale. Both
of these commenters also suggested that use patterns may change in the
future that would necessitate 3-DSPs being designated as 4-DSPs.
    The data relied upon by the agency did not indicate a problem of
four occupants seated at 3-DSP locations. The vehicle population
surveyed did not exclude used vehicles (i.e., vehicles after second
retail sale). Commenters did not provide any data to indicate that the
usage pattern in larger vehicles was changing in a manner as they
discussed. Therefore, today's final rule maintains the two separate
calculations based on seating surface width.
    The calculation procedures adopted today specify that the seat
measurement is divided by the appropriate factor, and that the
resulting value is rounded down to produce the number of DSPs. Again,
as already noted, the procedure adopted today relies on seating surface
width as opposed to hip room. Rounding down results in the
determination of the number of DSPs that is consistent with the vehicle
designs of the current fleet, which as discussed above, provide a
better indication of the number of DSPs.
2. Motor Homes
    As stated above, the calculation procedure adopted today does not
apply to motor homes, police vehicles, ambulances, fire fighting
vehicles, and trucks and multipurpose passenger vehicles with a GVWR of
10,000 lbs or greater. This limitation was adopted largely in response
to RVIA, which expressed concern that the agency's proposal was
inconsistent with past agency policy regarding the number of DSPs
required in motor homes and with the practice of the motor home
industry.
    RVIA noted that in the preamble to a final rule dated April 19,
1979, the agency stated:

    It is the agency's position that a manufacturer must provide
designated seating positions for the number of persons it advertises
its vehicle will accommodate. In the case of a motor home, this
means that if such a vehicle is advertised to ``sleep six,'' the
manufacturer must assume that the six persons will ride in the
vehicle to their sleeping destination and thus must designate six
seating positions.

(44 FR 23229, 23234). RVIA said further that the agency confirmed this
position in an April 24, 1995 letter to Four Winds International
Corporation, in which the agency stated:

    This will confirm that it continues to be NHTSA's position that,
as a minimum, there must be as many designated seating positions as
there are sleeping accommodations.

    RVIA appears to have misinterpreted these statements to mean that a
motor home manufacturer is only required to designate a number of DSPs
equal to the number of sleeping accommodations. However, this has not
been the agency's historic interpretation.
    In the 1979 final rule, the agency was discussing a non-compliance
investigation in which a manufacturer advertised a motor home as
``sleeping six,'' but only designated four seating positions (44 FR at
23234). In the preamble to that final rule, the agency also stated,

    Motor home manufacturers are currently required to designate as
a seating position any location intended by the manufacturer to
provide seating accommodation while the vehicle is in motion.

(Id.) In the letter to Four Winds, the agency stressed that ``as a
minimum,'' there must be as many designated seating positions as there
are sleeping accommodations.
    At the same time, NHTSA notes that it does not regard its amendment
of the definition of ``designated seating position'' as having any
effect on the ability of manufacturers to use the option under FMVSS
No. 207 of placing a label on a seating location stating that it is not
to be used while the vehicle is in motion, instead of designating the
location as a DSP and installing a seat belt. RVIA had expressed
concern that the elimination of the language ``likely to be used as a
seating position while the vehicle is in motion'' would have the effect
of eliminating that option. In response to RVIA's concerns, and in
order to make the agency's intention clearer, the final rule includes
in the new DSP definition a specific cross-reference to the provision
of FMVSS No. 207 that permits labeling of a location as one not to be
occupied while the vehicle is in motion. The rule expressly provides
that a seating location so labeled in the listed types of vehicles is
not a DSP.

E. Auxiliary Seating and Seat Belt Anchorages

    Today's final rule eliminates the exclusion of auxiliary seats from
the definition of ``designated seating position.'' Including these
seats in the definition of ``designated seating position'' has the
effect of subjecting these seats to the occupant crash protection
requirements applicable to designated seating positions (e.g., seat
belt requirements).
    When the agency originally adopted the DSP definition, safety belt
use rates were well below 20 percent. The installation of seat belts
for auxiliary seats, i.e., temporary and jump seats, was not then a
high priority for the agency since the risk to occupants of those seats
was a very small part of the problem. Now that safety belt use rates
are much higher, the agency is focusing on occupants who remain
unrestrained. This includes occupants of auxiliary seats, many of whom
are children.
    Under today's final rule, seats formerly considered to be auxiliary
seats are required to meet all requirements in FMVSSs applicable to
designated seating positions, including the requirements of FMVSS No.
210, ``Seat belt assembly anchorages.''
    Traditionally, manufacturers have classified some side-facing seats
in light vehicles as auxiliary or jump seats. The current test
procedures for the anchorage strength requirements as specified in S5.2
of FMVSS No. 210 were designed for forward and rear facing seats only.
Under S5.2, a force must be applied in the direction in which the seat
faces in a plane parallel to the longitudinal centerline of the
vehicle. For side-facing seats, including auxiliary seats, the
direction that the seat faces is perpendicular to the longitudinal
centerline of the vehicle. Consequently, a force cannot be applied
simultaneously in the direction that a side-facing seat faces and in a
plane parallel to the longitudinal centerline of the vehicle. To permit
strength testing of seat belt anchorages at side-facing designated
seating positions, we are amending S5 of FMVSS No. 210 to specify that
for side-facing seats, the specified force would be applied in the
direction that the seat faces in a vertical plane perpendicular to the
longitudinal centerline of the vehicle.
    RVIA stated that subjecting side facing seats to the requirements
of FMVSS No. 210 would not be

practicable and that the load application for Type 1 (lap-only) and
Type 2 (lap and shoulder) belts should be reduced. RVIA stated that
side impacts occur with less frequency and that side impacts generally
occur at lower speeds. However, RVIA did not provide any data to
support its assertion. In addition to side impacts, we are also
concerned about the safety of occupants in these seats when they are
involved in rollover crashes or even frontal crashes where the forces
experienced by the seat belt anchorages can be considerable. Therefore,
we are maintaining the loading requirements under FMVSS No. 210.

IV. Benefits and Costs

    In the NPRM, we tentatively determined that there were three ways
in which manufacturers could respond to the adoption of the proposed
amendments to DSP: (1) Add a lap and shoulder belt; (2) create a space
between the seats to restrict the number of seating positions; and (3)
design an impediment to reduce the likelihood of people sitting in
between the outboard seats. The purpose of today's final rule is not to
require manufacturers to increase the number of DSPs in vehicles, but
is instead to provide a simpler determination, both for manufacturers
and for vehicle occupants, of what constitutes a DSP and of the number
of DSPs at a given seating location. The costs and benefits estimated
for the NPRM were based on the manufacturers' responding to the
proposed DSP definition through one of the three identified options.
    An agency survey of the MY 2006 sport utility vehicle fleet
revealed that manufacturers have substantially addressed the problems
with wide 2-DSP seats by reducing the size of such seats. Reduced seat
size provides a clearer indication to occupants of the number of DSPs
at those locations. Because manufacturers are currently addressing the
issues that were of concern in the NPRM, the costs and benefits of
today's final rule are less than those estimated for the NPRM.
    The vehicles that will need a redesign in response to today's final
rule are primarily sport coupes and convertibles with a 2-DSP second
row, a limited number of multipurpose passenger vehicles with 2-DSP
third row seats, and a truck that was identified as having an auxiliary
seat. The total number of vehicles affected is approximately
386,434.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Specifically, the affected vehicle population is comprised
of 156,974 coupes and convertibles, 193,100 multipurpose passenger
vehicles, 36,360 light trucks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The cost to comply with today's final rule ranges from $426,000 to
$17,833,000. The lower end of this range is the cost if manufacturers
were to install an impediment in affected passenger cars as specified
in Sec.  571.10 and decrease seat surface width in affected light
trucks. We expect that this will be the most likely response from
manufacturers. The upper end of this range is the cost if manufacturers
were to redesign in order to increase the number of DSPs, which would
require the installation of a lap/shoulder belt for the additional
position. Increasing the number of DSPs is a very unlikely response.
The number of DSPs in a vehicle is closely tied to vehicle packaging
and marketing. Increasing the number of DSPs would likely have
implications beyond the cost of providing crash protection at the new
DSP location.
    The main benefit of this final rule is the increased clarity and
certainty provided by the revised definition and the newly established
procedure for determining the number of DSPs at a seat location.
Today's final rule reinforces vehicle consumer awareness as to the
number of DSPs in a vehicle. Again, the intent of today's final rule is
not to require manufacturers to increase the number of DSPs in their
vehicles. However, if manufacturers were to increase the number of DSPs
in the affected vehicle population, we estimate that one life would be
saved. Further discussion on the costs and benefits of today's final
rule are provided in the regulatory impact analysis, which is in the
docket for this rulemaking.

V. Incorporation by Reference

    Under 1 CFR part 51, Incorporation by Reference, the agency must
declare that the Director of the Federal Register has approved
incorporation by reference of a publication into a regulation. In the
NPRM, the agency proposed to amend the general incorporation by
reference provision at Sec.  571.5, Matters incorporated by reference,
to include a centralized index of all of the publications incorporated
into Sec.  571. This was not intended to update such references, but
merely to centralize all of the incorporation by references contained
in Sec.  571. However, due to delays in this rulemaking, we are
delaying the creation of a complete centralized index. Instead, we are
updating the existing information in Sec.  571.5 to include updated
language in regard to incorporation of materials by reference,
including new procedures for retrieving materials from the National
Archives and Records Administration and a new format indicating the
sections and paragraphs where incorporated materials are referenced.
Additionally, we are including in that section all of the materials
referenced in this rulemaking. Some portions of 571.3 and 571.210 were
also amended to include references to the centralized incorporation by
reference table. At a future date, we intend to complete the
centralized incorporation by reference as envisioned in the notice of
proposed rulemaking.

VI. Effective Date

    The definition of ``designated seating position'' adopted in this
document clarifies the existing definition and is not expected to have
a substantial impact on current vehicle design. The degree to which
seat designs exhibit the characteristics that gave rise to the agency's
concerns has lessened in the current fleet. The average width of a 2-
DSP seat in station wagons, and multipurpose passenger vehicles
(including sport utility vehicles) has decreased from 1,118 mm for MY
2001 vehicles to 979 mm for MY 2006 vehicles. Manufacturers are either
providing 3-DSPs or reducing the width of the seating area in order to
more accurately reflect the intended occupancy.
    However, the inclusion of auxiliary seats and the established
procedure for determining the number of DSPs will require minor
redesign of a small population of vehicles. To provide manufacturers
the opportunity to make such redesigns, the agency is providing a lead
time of two years prior to the application of the revised definition
and newly established procedure.

VII. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993), provides for making determinations whether a
regulatory action is ``significant'' and therefore subject to Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) review and to the requirements of the
Executive Order. The Order defines a ``significant regulatory action''
as one that is likely to result in a rule that may:
    (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or

State, local, or Tribal governments or communities;
    (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) Materially alter the budget impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
    (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
    This document was determined to be significant under E.O. 12866 and
was reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget under E.O. 12866.
Further, the agency has prepared a regulatory evaluation as required by
the DOT policies and procedures. A copy of that evaluation has been
placed in the docket for this rulemaking. The impacts of this final
rule are summarized above in the section entitled ``Benefits and
costs.''

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    In compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq., NHTSA has evaluated the effects of this action on small entities.
I hereby certify that this rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    The following is the agency's statement providing the factual basis
for the certification (5 U.S.C. 605(b)). This rule directly affects
motor vehicle manufacturers and motor vehicle seat manufacturers.
According to the size standards of the Small Business Association (at
13 CFR part 121.601), the size standard for manufacturers of
``Automobile Manufacturing'' (NAICS Code 336111) is 1,000 employees or
fewer. Manufacturers of vehicle seats are considered manufacturers of
``Motor Vehicle Seating and Interior Trim Manufacturing'' (NAICS Code
336360). The size standard for NAICS Code 336360 is 500 employees or
fewer.
    The majority of motor vehicle manufacturers do not qualify as a
small business. These manufacturers, along with manufacturers that do
qualify as a small business, would be able to maintain the current
number of DSPs through the design changes outlined in the definition.
The definition does not require vehicles to have a certain number of
designated seating positions, but provides an objective metric to
define the number of DSPs for a given seat.
    Most of the seat manufacturers have 500 or fewer employees. But
again, if design changes are required to maintain a seat's 2-DSP
designation, this can be done by designing seats in accordance with the
above listed specifications at a minimal cost per seat. Accordingly,
there will be no significant economic impact on small businesses, small
organizations, or small governmental units by these amendments. For
these reasons, the agency has not prepared a regulatory flexibility
analysis.

C. Executive Order No. 13132

    NHTSA has examined today's final rule pursuant to Executive Order
13132, Federalism (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 rule does not have federalism implications
because 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.''
    Further, no consultation is needed to discuss the preemptive effect
of today's rule. NHTSA rules can have preemptive effect in at least two
ways. First, the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act contains
an express preemptive 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 that preempts State law, not today's rulemaking, so
consultation would be unnecessary.
    We note that the definition and identification of a ``designated
seating position'' is integral to several FMVSSs, including FMVSS No.
208 and FMVSS No. 110, ``Tire and rim selection.'' As such, a State
definition of ``designated seating position'' would be subject to the
express preemption clause in Sec.  30103(b). However, the agency is not
aware of any State definition for that term, as it applies to the
performance of vehicles regulated under the FMVSSs.
    In addition to the express preemption noted above, the Supreme
Court has also recognized that 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 their State requirements
unenforceable. See Geier v. American Honda Motor Co., 529 U.S. 861
(2000).
    NHTSA discussed the issue of preemption and sought comment from all
stakeholders through publication of the proposed rule in the Federal
Register. No State or local governmental entities submitted any
comments to the docket for the proposed rule.
    Additionally, officials at NHTSA contacted organizations
representing the interests of State and local governments and officials
about this rulemaking and the issue of preemption. The National
Conference of State Legislatures responded, indicating that it did not
have any comments.
    Public Citizen argued in its comment that the agency lacks the
authority to preempt State tort law actions. This final rule does not
foreclose all such actions. It does identify circumstances in which the
agency believes State tort actions would conflict with the agency's
definition of ``designated seating position'' and hinder or frustrate
the accomplishment of the purposes of the FMVSSs, so that specific
claims would be preempted. Public Citizen also suggested that there is
no reason to believe that there would be a conflict. We differ because
NHTSA believes that comfort and convenience significantly affect the
rate of seat belt use and in that belief have in the past adopted
requirements to increase comfort and convenience. One of the oldest
such requirements is the requirement for integral lap and shoulder
belts. It was adopted in part to reduce the tangle of belts then
confronting vehicle occupants.
    Our views regarding the preemptive effect of the amended definition
remain largely as we stated them in the proposal. As noted above, the
definition of ``designated seating position'' in section 571.3
identifies circumstances, i.e., conflicting determinations in State
tort law as to whether a location in a motor vehicle is or ought to be
a designated seating position, that would prevent, hinder or frustrate
the accomplishment of the purposes of the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standards in Part 571 of this title. A tort law judgment premised on
there being more designated seating positions in a motor vehicle than
the number contemplated in that definition could have a negative safety
impact. Such a judgment would tend to induce manufacturers to equip a
seating location with an excessive number of safety belts since the
Federal motor vehicle safety standards require that each designated
seating position be equipped with one or more safety belts. Given that
seat belt comfort and convenience continue to be important

factors affecting the level of safety belt use, as evidenced by the
agency's adoption of requirements to improve comfort and convenience
and by its 2003 report on improving seat belt use,\7\ NHTSA believes
the installation of an excessive number of safety belts would decrease,
not increase, safety. We expect that occupants would be less likely to
use safety belts because limited space would make such use difficult or
uncomfortable. For example, four safety belts could be installed on a
seat that NHTSA believes is appropriate for three occupants. Where the
seat is actually occupied by three occupants, in order to use the
safety belts in the location where they are installed, some of the
occupants may sit uncomfortably close to another occupant and/or the
side of the vehicle. If the occupants attempt to sit in locations where
there is more space between them, the belts will not be properly
aligned with the occupants' bodies, and they might end up sitting on
buckles. This could have the effect of making it less likely that an
occupant will use his or her respective belt because the belt would be
located in an uncomfortable and/or inconvenient location. The potential
for such a scenario would frustrate the efforts of this agency to base
the number of designated seating positions, and thus the number of
safety belts, on reasonably anticipated occupancy levels. This would
hamper our efforts to promote high safety belt use rates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ NHTSA (2003), Initiatives to Address Safety Belt Use.
Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/injury/SafetyBelt/OPIPT_FinalRpt_
07-17-03.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To ensure that there is no ambiguity or doubt about this, the
agency has included such a provision in the text of this final rule, so
that its position regarding preemptive effect is clear.
    While NHTSA has outlined some potential State requirements that may
be preempted, it is conceivable that additional such conflicts may
become clear through subsequent experience with today's regulation.
NHTSA may opine on such conflicts in the future, if warranted. See id.
at 883-86.

D. Executive Order 12988

    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 preemptive
effect of this rule 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 or petition for review of this regulation in court.

E. National Environmental Policy Act

    NHTSA has analyzed this final rule 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.

F. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This amendment does not contain any collection of information
requirements requiring review under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(Pub. L. 104-13).

G. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Under the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(NTTAA) (Pub. L. 104-113), ``all Federal agencies and departments shall
use technical standards that are developed or adopted by voluntary
consensus standards bodies, using such technical standards as a means
to carry out policy objectives or activities determined by the agencies
and departments.''
    Unlike the proposed definition of ``designated seating position,''
today's final rule is not based on voluntary consensus standards. As
noted above, the final rule avoids the unintended consequences of the
proposal, i.e., increasing the calculated vehicle seating capacity. In
developing the final rule, the agency reviewed various voluntary
consensus standards for determining seating positions. The measurement
procedure adopted today incorporates SAE J826 ``Devices for use in
Defining and Measuring Vehicle Seating Accommodations,'' revised July
1995.

H. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires 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). This rulemaking will
not result in expenditures by State, local or tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector in excess of $100 million
annually.

I. Executive Order 13045

    Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any
rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' as
defined under E.O. 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental, health, or
safety risk that NHTSA has reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets
both criteria, we 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 us.
    This rule is not subject to E.O. 13045 because it is not
economically significant as defined in E.O. 12866 and does not involve
decisions based on environmental, health, or safety risks that
disproportionately affect children. The final rule amends the
definition of ``designated seating position.''

J. Regulation 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.

K. 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 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477-78) or you may visit
http://docketsinfo.dot.gov/.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Parts 571

    Imports, Incorporation by reference, Motor vehicle safety,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Tires.

0
In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA amends 49 CFR part 571 as
follows:

PART 571--FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS

0
1. The authority citation for part 571 of Title 49 continues to read as
follows:

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

0
2. Section 571.3 is amended by revising the definitions of ``designated
seating position,'' ``5th percentile adult female,'' ``H-point,''
``Seating reference point,'' ``Torso line,'' and ``95th percentile
adult male'' in paragraph (b) and adding a new paragraph (c) to read as
follows:

Sec.  571.3  Definitions.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    Designated seating position means:
    (1) For vehicles manufactured prior to September 1, 2010, any plan
view location capable of accommodating a person at least as large as a
5th percentile adult female, if the overall seat configuration and
design and vehicle design is such that the position is likely to be
used as a seating position while the vehicle is in motion, except for
auxiliary seating accommodations such as temporary or folding jump
seats. Any bench or split-bench seat in a passenger car, truck or
multipurpose passenger vehicle with a GVWR less than 4,536 kilograms
(10,000 pounds), having greater than 127 centimeters (50 inches) of hip
room (measured in accordance with Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE)
Recommended Practice J1100a, revised September 1975, ``Motor Vehicle
Dimensions'' (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  571.5), shall have
not less than three designated seating positions, unless the seat
design or vehicle design is such that the center position cannot be
used for seating. For the sole purpose of determining the
classification of any vehicle sold or introduced into interstate
commerce for purposes that include carrying students to and from school
or related events, any location in such vehicle intended for securement
of an occupied wheelchair during vehicle operation shall be regarded as
four designated seating positions.
    (2) For vehicles manufactured on and after September 1, 2010,
designated seating position means a seat location that has a seating
surface width, as described in Sec.  571.10(c) of this part, of at
least 330 mm (13 inches). The number of designated seating positions at
a seat location is determined according to the procedure set forth in
Sec.  571.10(b) of this part. However, for trucks and multipurpose
passenger vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating greater than
10,000 lbs, police vehicles as defined in S7 of FMVSS No. 208,
firefighting vehicles, ambulances, and motor homes, a seating location
that is labeled in accordance with S4.4 of FMVSS No. 207 will not be
considered a designated seating position. For the sole purpose of
determining the classification of any vehicle sold or introduced into
interstate commerce for purposes that include carrying students to and
from school or related events, any location in such a vehicle intended
for securement of an occupied wheelchair during vehicle operation is
regarded as four designated seating positions.
* * * * *
    5th percentile adult female means a person possessing the
dimensions and weight of the 5th percentile adult female specified for
the total age group in ``Weight, Height, and Selected Body Dimensions
of Adults: United States--1960-1962,'' first published as Public Health
Service Publication No. 1000 Series 11-No. 8, June 1965 and republished
as DHEW Publication No. (HRA) 76-1074 (incorporated by reference, see
Sec.  571.5).
* * * * *
    H-Point means the pivot center of the torso and thigh on the three-
dimensional device used in defining and measuring vehicle seating
accommodation, as defined in Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE)
Recommended Practice J1100, revised February 2001, ``Motor Vehicle
Dimensions'' (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  571.5).
* * * * *
    Seating reference point (SgRP) means the unique design H-point, as
defined in Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) Recommended Practice
J1100, revised June 1984, ``Motor Vehicle Dimensions'' (incorporated by
reference, see Sec.  571.5), which:
    (1) Establishes the rearmost normal design driving or riding
position of each designated seating position, which includes
consideration of all modes of adjustment, horizontal, vertical, and
tilt, in a vehicle;
    (2) Has X, Y, and Z coordinates, as defined in Society of
Automotive Engineers (SAE) Recommended Practice J1100, revised June
1984, ``Motor Vehicle Dimensions'' (incorporated by reference, see
Sec.  571.5), established relative to the designed vehicle structure;
    (3) Simulates the position of the pivot center of the human torso
and thigh; and
    (4) Is the reference point employed to position the two-dimensional
drafting template with the 95th percentile leg described in Society of
Automotive Engineers (SAE) Standard J826, revised May 1987, ``Devices
for Use in Defining and Measuring Vehicle Seating Accommodation''
(incorporated by reference, see Sec.  571.5), or, if the drafting
template with the 95th percentile leg cannot be positioned in the
seating position, is located with the seat in its most rearward
adjustment position.
* * * * *
    Torso line means the line connecting the ``H'' point and the
shoulder reference point as defined in Society of Automotive Engineers
(SAE) Standard J787b, revised September 1966, ``Motor Vehicle Seat Belt
Anchorage'' (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  571.5).
* * * * *
    95th percentile adult male means a person possessing the dimensions
and weight of the 95th percentile adult male specified ``Weight,
Height, and Selected Body Dimensions of Adults: United States--1960-
1962,'' first published as Public Health Service Publication No. 1000
Series 11-No. 8, June 1965 and republished as DHEW Publication No.
(HRA) 76-1074 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  571.5).
* * * * *
    (c) Any State requirement, including any determination under State
tort law premised on there being more designated seating positions in a
motor vehicle than the number contemplated in the definition of
``designated seating position'' in paragraph (b) of this section would
prevent, hinder or frustrate the accomplishment of the purposes of the
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards in Part 571 of this title, and
is thus preempted by this regulation.
* * * * *

0
3. Section 571.5 is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  571.5  Matter incorporated by reference

    (a) Documents listed in this section and additional documents
referred to in subpart B of this part have been incorporated by
reference into this part. The Director of the Federal Register approved
the incorporation by reference as prescribed in 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1
CFR part 51. For materials subject to change, only the specific version
approved by the Director of the Federal Register and specified in this
section or in subpart B of this part are incorporated. A notice of any
change in these materials will be published in the

Federal Register. Anyone may inspect copies at the NHTSA Reading Room,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, Washington, DC 20590 and at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of this material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to:
http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_
regulations/ibr_locations.html. Approved materials are available from
the sources indicated in paragraph (b) of this section.
    (b) The materials approved for incorporation by reference in this
part and the sections and paragraphs (if applicable) affected include,
but are not limited to, as follows:

American Association of Textile Chemists and Colorists  ................
 (AATCC), 1 Davis Dr., P.O. Box 12215, Research
 Triangle Park, NC 27709..............................
American National Standards Institute (ANSI), 1700      ................
 North Moore St., Suite 1540, Arlington, VA 22209-1903
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), 100  ................
 Barr Harbor Drive, P.O. Box C700, West Conshohocken,
 PA 19428-2959........................................
General Services Administration (GSA), Superintendent   ................
 of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office,
 Washington, DC 20402.................................
Illuminating Engineering Society of North America       ................
 (IES), 120 Wall St., 7th Floor, New York, NY 10005...
Department of Defense, DODSSP Standardization Document  ................
 Order Desk, 700 Robbins Ave., Philadelphia, PA 19111-
 5098.................................................
National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for      ................
 Disease Control (CDC), National Division for Health
 Statistics, Division of Data Services, Hyattsville,
 MD 20782. Phone: 1-800-232-4636; Web: http://
 www.cdc.gov/nchs.....................................
``Weight, Height, and Selected Body Dimensions of                  571.3
 Adults: United States--1960-1962,'' first published
 as Public Health Service Publication No. 1000 Series
 11-No. 8, June 1965 and republished as DHEW
 Publication No. (HRA) 76-1074........................
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
 (NHTSA), Office of Vehicle Safety Standards, DOT-
 NHTSA, 1200 New Jersey Ave, SE., Washington, DC 20590
Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc. (SAE), 400        ................
 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, Pennsylvania 15096.
 Phone: 1-724-776-4841; Web: http://www.sae.org.......
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) Standard J787b,              571.3
 revised September 1966, ``Motor Vehicle Seat Belt
 Anchorage''..........................................
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) Standard J826,      571.3; 571.210
 revised May 1987, ``Devices for Use in Defining and
 Measuring Vehicle Seating Accommodation''............
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) Recommended                  571.3
 Practice J1100a, revised September 1975, ``Motor
 Vehicle Dimensions''.................................
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) Recommended         571.3; 571.210
 Practice J1100, revised June 1984, ``Motor Vehicle
 Dimensions''.........................................
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) Recommended                  571.3
 Practice J1100, revised February 2001, ``Motor
 Vehicle Dimensions''.................................
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) Surface Vehicle             571.10
 Standard J826, revised July 1995, ``Devices for Use
 in Defining and Measuring Vehicle Seating
 Accommodation''......................................
United Nations, Conference Services Division,
 Distribution and Sales Section, Office C.115-1,
 Palais des Nations, CH-1211, Geneva 10, Switzerland.
 Copies of Regulations also are available on the ECE
 internet Web site: www.unece.org/trans/main/wp29/
 wp29regs.html........................................

0
4. Section 571.10 is added to read as follows:

Sec.  571.10  Designation of Seating Positions.

    (a) Application. This section applies to passenger cars, trucks,
multipurpose passenger vehicles, and buses manufactured on or after
September 1, 2010. However, paragraph (b) of this section does not
apply to trucks and multipurpose passenger vehicles with a gross
vehicle weight rating greater than 10,000 lbs, school buses, police
vehicles as defined in S7 of Standard No. 208 (49 CFR 571.208),
firefighting vehicles, ambulances, or motor homes. To determine the
number of passenger seating positions in school buses, see S4.1 of
Standard No. 222 (49 CFR 571.222).
    (b) Number of designated seating positions. The formula for
calculating the number of designated seating positions (N) for any seat
location with a seating surface width greater than 330 mm (13 inches)
is as follows:
    (1) For seat locations with a seating surface width, as described
in paragraph (d), of less than 1400 mm (55.2 inches): N = [Seating
surface width (in mm)/350] round down to the nearest whole number;
    (2) For seat locations with a seating surface width, as described
in paragraph (d), greater than or equal to 1400 mm (55.2 inches): N =
[Seating surface width (in mm)/450] round down to the nearest whole
number.
    (c) Seating surface measurement. (1) As used in this section,
``seating surface width'' is the maximum width of a seating surface
measured in a zone extending from a transverse vertical plane 150 mm
(5.9 inches) behind the front leading surface of that seating surface
to a transverse vertical plane 250 mm (9.8 inches) behind that front
leading surface, measured horizontally and longitudinally.
    (2) Adjacent seating surfaces are considered to form a single,
continuous seating surface whose overall width is measured as specified
in (c)(1) of this section, unless
    (i) The seating surfaces are separated by:
    (A) A fixed trimmed surface whose top surface is unpadded and that
has a width not less than 140 mm (5.5 inches), as measured in each
transverse vertical plane within that measurement zone, or
    (B) A void whose cross section in each transverse vertical plane
within that measurement zone is a rectangle that is not less than 140
mm (5.5 inches) wide and not less than 140 mm (5.5 inches) deep. The
top edge of the cross section in any such plane is congruent with the
transverse horizontal line that intersects the lowest point on the
portion of the top profile of the seating surfaces that lie within that
plane, or
    (ii) Interior trim interrupts the measurement of the nominal hip
room of the seating surfaces, measured laterally along the ``X'' plane
through the H-point. For purposes of this paragraph, the H-point is
located using the SAE three-dimensional H-point machine per Society of
Automotive Engineers (SAE) Surface Vehicle Standard J826, revised July
1995, ``Devices for Use in Defining and Measuring Vehicle Seating
Accommodation'' (incorporated by reference, see section 571.5) with the
legs and leg weights removed, or
    (iii) The seating surfaces are adjacent outboard seats, and the
lateral distance between any point on the seat cushion of one seat and
any point on the seat cushion of the other seat is not less than 140 mm
(5.5 inches).

    (3) Folding, removable, and adjustable seats are measured in the
configuration that results in the single largest maximum seating
surface width.

0
5. Section 571.210 is amended by revising S4.3.2, S5.1, and the
introductory text of S5.2 to read as follows:

Sec.  571.210  Standard No. 210; Seat belt assembly anchorages

* * * * *
    S4.3.2 Seat belt anchorages for the upper torso portion of Type 2
seat belt assemblies. Adjust the seat to its full rearward and downward
position and adjust the seat back to its most upright position. With
the seat and seat back so positioned, as specified by subsection (a) or
(b) of this section, the upper end of the upper torso restraint shall
be located within the acceptable range shown in Figure 1, with
reference to a two-dimensional drafting template described in Society
of Automotive Engineers (SAE) Standard J826, revised May 1987,
``Devices for Use in Defining and Measuring Vehicle Seating
Accommodation'' (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  571.5). The
template's ``H'' point shall be at the design ``H'' point of the seat
for its full rearward and full downward position, as defined in Society
of Automotive Engineers (SAE) Recommended Practice J1100, revised June
1984, ``Motor Vehicle Dimensions'' (incorporated by reference, see
Sec.  571.5), and the template's torso line shall be at the same angle
from the vertical as the seat back.
    (a) For fixed anchorages, compliance with this section shall be
determined at the vertical centerline of the bolt holes or, for designs
using another means of attachment to the vehicle structure, at the
centroid of such means.
    (b) For adjustable anchorages, compliance with this section shall
be determined at the midpoint of the range of all adjustment positions.
* * * * *
    S5.1 Seats with Type 1 or Type 2 seat belt anchorages. With the
seat in its rearmost position, apply a force of 22,241 N in the
direction in which the seat faces to a pelvic body block as described
in Figure 2A, in a plane parallel to the longitudinal centerline of the
vehicle for forward and rear facing seats, and in a plane perpendicular
to the longitudinal centerline of the vehicle for side facing seats,
with an initial force application angle of not less than 5 degrees or
more than 15 degrees above the horizontal. Apply the force at the onset
rate of not more than 222,411 N per second. Attain the 22,241 N force
in not more than 30 seconds and maintain it for 10 seconds. At the
manufacturer's option, the pelvic body block described in Figure 2B may
be substituted for the pelvic body block described in Figure 2A to
apply the specified force to the center set(s) of anchorages for any
group of three or more sets of anchorages that are simultaneously
loaded in accordance with S4.2.4 of this standard.
    S5.2 Seats with Type 2 or automatic seat belt anchorages. With the
seat in its rearmost position, apply forces of 13,345 N in the
direction in which the seat faces simultaneously to a pelvic body
block, as described in Figure 2A, and an upper torso body block, as
described in Figure 3, in a plane parallel to the longitudinal
centerline of the vehicle for forward and rear facing seats, and in a
plane perpendicular to the longitudinal centerline of the vehicle for
side facing seats, with an initial force application angle of not less
than 5 degrees nor more than 15 degrees above the horizontal. Apply the
forces at the onset rate of not more than 133,447 N per second. Attain
the 13,345 N force in not more than 30 seconds and maintain it for 10
seconds. At the manufacturer's option, the pelvic body block described
in Figure 2B may be substituted for the pelvic body block described in
Figure 2A to apply the specified force to the center set(s) of
anchorages for any group of three or more sets of anchorages that are
simultaneously loaded in accordance with S4.2.4 of this standard.
* * * * *

    Issued: October 1, 2008.
David Kelly,
Acting Administrator.
 [FR Doc. E8-23577 Filed 10-7-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 35 (Tuesday, February 22, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 9448-9450]
[FR Doc No: 2022-03707]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2022-0075]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Firestone Grand Prix of St. Petersburg, St.
Petersburg, Florida

AGENCY: Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for
the navigable waters of Tampa Bay, in the vicinity of the St.
Petersburg Municipal Yacht Basin, St. Petersburg, Florida, during the
Firestone Grand Prix of St. Petersburg. The temporary safety zone is
needed to protect the safety of race participants, spectators, and
vessels on the surrounding waterway during the race. Persons and
vessels are prohibited from entering, transiting through, anchoring in,
or remaining within the regulated area unless authorized by the Captain
of the Port St. Petersburg or a designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 6:00 a.m. on Feburary 25, 2022,
through 10:00 p.m. on February 27, 2022.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2022-0075 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Marine Science Technician Second Class Regina Cuevas,
Sector St. Petersburg Prevention Department, Coast Guard; telephone
(813) 228-2191, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background, Purpose, and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice
and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because it is impracticable. The Coast Guard
received information regarding the need for a safety zone on February
2, 2022. Insufficient time remains to publish a NPRM and to receive
public comments, as the event will occur before the rulemaking process
would be completed. Because of the potential safety hazards associated
with the race, the regulations is necessary to provide for the safety
of race participants, spectators, and other vessels navigating the
surrounding waterways. For those reasons, it would be impracticable to
publish an NPRM.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. For the reasons discussed above,
the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C.
70034. The Captain of the Port St. Petersburg has determined that
potential hazards associated with the Firestone Grand Prix of St.
Petersburg race, will be a safety concern for race participants,
spectators, and vessels. This rule is needed to ensure the safety of
vessels and persons within the navigable waters of the safety zone,
during the race event.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a safety zone from 6 a.m. until 10 p.m.,
daily on February 25, 2022, through February 27, 2022. The safety zone
will cover all navigable waters within a specified area of Tampa Bay,
in the vicinity of St. Petersburg, Florida. The duration of the zone is
intended to ensure the safety of the public and these navigable waters
during the race event. No vessel or person will be permitted to enter,
transit through, anchor in, or remain within the safety zone without
obtaining permission from the Captain of the Port St. Petersburg or a
designated representative.
    Persons and vessels may request authorization to enter, transit
through, anchor in, or remain within the regulated area by contacting
the Captain of the Port St. Petersburg by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>,
or a designated representative via VHF radio on channel 16. If
authorization to enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within
the regulated area is granted by the Captain of the Port St. Petersburg
or a designated representative, all persons and vessels receiving such
authorization must comply with the instructions of the Captain of the
Port St. Petersburg or a designated representative. The Coast Guard
will provide notice of the safety zone by Local Notice to Mariners,
Broadcast Notice to Mariners, and/or on-scene designated
representatives.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we
discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This rule has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
location, duration, and scope of the safety zone. The safety zone will
only be enforced for a limited period of time. This time period extends
over the course of three days, during the Firestone Grand Prix of St.
Petersburg race events. Although persons and vessels are prohibited to
enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within the regulated area,
without authorization from the Captain of the Port St. Petersburg or a
designated representative, they may operate in the surrounding area
during the enforcement period. The Coast Guard will provide advance
notification of the safety zone to the local maritime community by
Local Notice to Mariners and/or Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The

term ``small entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit
organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not
dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with
populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5
U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any
vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect 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. We have analyzed this rule under that order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section above.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule would not result
in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and
Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guides the
Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is
one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively
have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves
a safety zone that will prohibit persons and vessels from entering,
transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within the regulated
area during a three day high speed grand prix race event. It is
categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L60(a) Table
3-1 of U.S. Coast Guard Environmental Planning Implementing Procedures.
A Record of Environmental Consideration supporting this determination
is available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places, or vessels.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-
6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
00170.1, Revision No. 01.2.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T07-0075 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T07-0075   Safety Zone; Firestone Grand Prix of St.
Petersburg, St. Petersburg, FL.

    (a) Regulated area. The following area is established as a safety
zone. All waters of the Gulf of Mexico encompassed within the following
points: 27[deg]46'18'' N, 082[deg]37'55.2'' W, thence to position
27[deg]46'18'' N, 082[deg]37'54.6'' W, thence to position
27[deg]46'9.6'' N, 082[deg]37'54.6'' W, thence to position
27[deg]46'9.6'' N, 082[deg]37'33'' W, thence to position
27[deg]46'4.2'' N, 082[deg]37'33'' W, thence to position
27[deg]45'59.4'' N, 082[deg]37'50.4'' W, thence to position
27[deg]46'6.6'' N, 082[deg]37'56.4'' W, thence to position
27[deg]46'13.8'' N, 082[deg]37'55.8'' W, thence back to the original
position 27[deg]46'18'' N, 082[deg]37'55.2'' W. All coordinates are
North American Datum 1983.
    (b) Definition. The term ``designated representative'' means Coast
Guard Patrol Commanders, including Coast Guard coxswains, petty
officers, and other officers operating Coast Guard vessels, and
Federal, state, and local officers designated by or assisting the
Captain of the Port St. Petersburg in the enforcement of the regulated
areas.
    (c) Regulations. (1) All persons and vessels are prohibited from
entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within the
regulated area unless authorized by the Captain of the Port St.
Petersburg or a designated representative.
    (2) Designated representatives may control vessel traffic
throughout the enforcement area as determined by the prevailing
conditions.
    (3) Persons and vessels may request authorization to enter, transit
through, anchor in, or remain within the regulated areas by contacting
the

Captain of the Port St. Petersburg by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or a
designated representative via VHF radio on channel 16. If authorization
is granted by the Captain of the Port St. Petersburg or a designated
representative, all persons and vessels receiving such authorization
must comply with the instructions of the Captain of the Port St.
Petersburg or a designated representative.
    (d) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced daily from 6
a.m. until 10 p.m., on February 25, 2022, through February 27, 2022.

    Dated: February 15, 2022.
Matthew A. Thompson,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Saint Petersburg.
[FR Doc. 2022-03707 Filed 2-18-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 45 (Tuesday, March 8, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12095-12096]
[FR Doc No: 2016-05097]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. CP15-18-000; CP15-18-001; CP15-498-000]

Eastern Shore Natural Gas Company; Notice of Revised Schedule for
Environmental Review of the White Oak Mainline Expansion Project and
System Reliability Project

    This notice identifies the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
staff's revised schedule for the completion of the environmental
assessment (EA) for Eastern Shore Natural Gas Company's (Eastern Shore)
White Oak Mainline Expansion Project and System Reliability Project.
The original notice of schedule, issued on February 10, 2016,
identified April 12, 2016 as the EA issuance date. However, staff has
revised the schedule for issuance of the EA.

                    Schedule for Environmental Review
------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issuance of EA............................  April 25, 2016.
90-Day Federal Authorization Decision       July 24, 2016.
 Deadline.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If a schedule change becomes necessary, an additional notice will
be provided so that the relevant agencies are kept informed of the
projects' progress.

Additional Information

    In order to receive notification of the issuance of the EA and to
keep track of all formal issuances and submittals in specific dockets,
the Commission offers a free service called eSubscription (http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp). Additional information
about the project may be

obtained by contacting the Environmental Project Manager, Gertrude
Johnson, by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER> or by electronic mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: March 2, 2016.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-05097 Filed 3-7-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P