[Federal Register: May 6, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 87)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 23938-23939]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr06my05-8]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 565
[Docket No. NHTSA-2005-21073]
Vehicle Identification Number Requirements; Technical Amendment
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule; technical amendment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document contains a technical amendment to the agency's
Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) requirements. The amendment
clarifies the definition of ``model year'' included in that regulation.
DATES: This rule is effective June 6, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Eric Stas, Office of the Chief
Counsel (telephone (202) 366-2992) (fax (202) 366-3820); National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Part 565 specifies the format, content, and
physical requirements for the VIN system. The VIN system simplifies
vehicle identification information retrieval and increases the accuracy
and efficiency of vehicle recall campaigns. Section 565.3 provides
definitions for the part and contains a definition for ``model year.''
One of the items of the information included in the vehicle's VIN is
its model year.
Before NHTSA published a final rule establishing part 565 (48 FR
22567, May 19, 1983), the VIN requirements comprised Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 115. The final rule essentially
moved the VIN requirements to Part 565 from FMVSS No. 115 without
changing any substantive requirements of FMVSS No. 115.
However, the new Part 565 did contain some minor technical changes.
One of the changes concerned the definition of ``model year.'' In its
migration from FMVSS No. 115 to Part 565, the definition of ``model
year'' was changed slightly, with the word ``calendar'' added to the
text. Under the current definition, ``model year'' is defined as ``the
year used to designate a discrete vehicle model irrespective of the
calendar year in which the vehicle was actually produced, so long as
the actual period is less than 2 calendar years'' (emphasis added).
Prior to the change, the definition of ``model year'' read ``the year
used to designate a discrete vehicle model irrespective of the calendar
year in which the vehicle was actually produced, so long as the actual
period is less than 2 years'' (emphasis added).
On November 19, 2002, we received a letter from Erika Jones, Esq.,
asking whether 49 CFR Sec. 565.6(d)(1) permits a manufacturer to
designate vehicles as belonging to a single model year, where the
production period for such vehicles falls within three different
calendar years but runs for less than 24 months in total. Relying on
the ``less than 2 calendar years'' phrase of Section 565.3(j), we
responded on February 4, 2003 to Ms. Jones' inquiry, concluding that
Part 565 does not permit a manufacturer to designate a single model
year where the production period falls over a period of three calendar
years.
On January 7, 2005, we received a letter from General Motors (GM)
asking us to reconsider our conclusion, as stated in our February 4,
2003 letter to Ms. Erika Jones. GM stated that our interpretation was
contrary to actual, long-standing industry practices and discussed the
practical impacts of our interpretation. GM further argued that the
interpretation creates an unnecessary burden for vehicle manufacturers
because it is common practice for a manufacturer to use a model year
designation for the production of a vehicle that spans over three
calendar years, particularly when a manufacturer introduces a
substantial design change for a vehicle model. This practice allows the
manufacturer to ``obtain early experience with the performance of a new
model and to correct problems, including potential safety defects,
before a large volume of vehicles has been delivered to dealers and
customers.''
After considering GM's arguments, we decided to rescind our
February 4, 2003 interpretation. In a letter to GM dated February 16,
2005, we stated that we would interpret the term ``model year'' as a
period not to exceed 24 months. We noted that in the preamble to the
1983 rule establishing Part 565, we had stated, ``[t]he substantive
requirements of Standard 115 are unchanged by this action.'' That is,
it was not the agency's intention to change the substantive
requirements of the VIN regulation or to alter existing industry
practices.
We now recognize that the addition of the term ``calendar'' created
confusion. We are accordingly issuing this technical amendment to
clarify the definition of ``model year'', consistent
[[Page 23939]]
with our February 16, 2005 interpretation.
This amendment is a technical one, and it does not impose or relax
any substantive requirements or burdens on manufacturers. Therefore,
NHTSA finds good cause that any notice and opportunity for comment on
this technical amendment is not necessary.
Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
This technical amendment has not been reviewed under Executive
Order 12866. The technical amendment is not ``significant'' within the
meaning of the Department of Transportation's regulatory policies and
procedures. As discussed above, this is a technical amendment, and it
will not result in any substantive impact.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (95 U.S.C. Sec. 601 et seq., as
amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
(SBREFA) of 1996) provides that no regulatory flexibility analysis is
required if the head of an agency certifies the rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
SEBRFA amended the Regulatory Flexibility Act to require Federal
agencies to provide a statement of the factual basis for certifying
that a rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
NHTSA has considered the effects of this technical amendment under
the Regulatory Flexibility Act. I hereby certify that it will not have
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. Accordingly, the agency has not prepared a final regulatory
flexibility analysis for this technical amendment. NHTSA makes these
statements on the basis that, as a technical amendment that corrects or
clarifies existing regulatory provisions, this rule will not impose any
significant costs on anyone. The costs of the underlying rule were
analyzed at the time of its initial issuing as a final rule. Therefore,
it has not been necessary for NHTSA to conduct a regulatory evaluation
or Regulatory Flexibility Analysis for this technical amendment.
At the time that the final rule for 49 CFR Part 565 was issued, we
explained that the part did not impose any new costs or provide any
savings. It was simply a migration of the agency's VIN requirements
from FMVSS No. 115 to 49 CFR Part 565. We explained that this will
``make it easier for motor vehicle manufacturers, many of which are
small businesses, to understand and apply the agency's requirements for
vehicle identification numbers. For these reasons, small businesses,
small governmental organizations, and small organizations that purchase
motor vehicles or rely on VINs for other recordkeeping or
administrative matters, will not be affected by the rule.''
C. National Environmental Policy Act
NHTSA has analyzed this rulemaking action for the purposes of the
National Environmental Policy Act. The agency has determined that
implementation of this action will not have any significant impact on
the quality of the human environment.
D. Executive Order 12612 (Federalism)
NHTSA has analyzed this rulemaking action under the principles and
criteria in Executive Order 12612. The agency has determined that this
technical amendment does not have sufficient Federalism implications to
warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment. No State laws will
be affected.
E. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)
Executive Order 12988 requires that agencies review proposed
regulations and legislation and adhere to the following general
requirements: (1) The agency's proposed legislation and regulations
shall be reviewed by the agency to eliminate drafting errors and
ambiguity; (2) The agency's proposed legislation and regulations shall
be written to minimize litigation; and (3) The agency's proposed
legislation and regulations shall provide a clear legal standard for
affected conduct rather than a general standard, and shall promote
simplification and burden reduction.
When promulgating a regulation, Executive Order 12988, specifically
requires that the agency must make every reasonable effort to ensure
that the regulation, as appropriate: (1) Specifies in clear language
the preemptive effect; (2) specifies in clear language the effect on
existing Federal law or regulation, including all provisions repealed,
circumscribed, displaced, impaired, or modified; (3) provides a clear
legal standard for affected conduct rather than a general standard,
while promoting simplification and burden reduction; (4) specifies in
clear language the retroactive effect; (5) specifies whether
administrative proceedings are to be required before parties may file
suit in court; (6) explicitly or implicitly defines key terms; and (7)
addresses other important issues affecting clarity and general
draftsmanship of regulations.
NHTSA has reviewed this technical amendment according to the
general requirements and the specific requirements for regulations set
forth in Executive Order 12988. This technical amendment simply
clarifies the definition of the term ``model year'' in 49 CFR Part 565.
This change does not result in any preemptive effect and does not have
a retroactive effect. A petition for reconsideration or other
administrative proceeding is not required before parties may file suit
in court.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 565
Motor vehicle safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
0
For the reasons stated above, NHTSA amends 49 CFR part 565 as follows:
PART 565--VEHICLE IDENTIFICATION NUMBER REQUIREMENTS
0
1. The authority citation continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117, 30141, 30146,
30166, and 30168; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.
0
2. Section 565.3 is amended by revising paragraph (j) to read as
follows:
Sec. 565.3 Definitions.
* * * * *
(j) Model Year means the year used to designate a discrete vehicle
model, irrespective of the calendar year in which the vehicle was
actually produced, provided that the production period does not exceed
24 months.
* * * * *
Issued: May 3, 2005.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 05-9140 Filed 5-5-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P