[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 190 (Thursday, October 1, 1998)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 52592-52600]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-26243]
[[Page 52592]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
23 CAR Part 1345
[Docket No. NHTSA-98-4496]
RIN 2127-AH40
Occupant Protection Incentive Grants
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.
ACTION: Interim final rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This interim final rule implements a new program established
by the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21), under
which States can qualify for incentive grant funds if they adopt and
implement effective programs to reduce highway deaths and injuries
resulting from individuals riding unrestrained or improperly restrained
in motor vehicles. This interim final rule solicits public comment.
Dates: This interim final rule becomes effective November 2, 1998.
Comments on this interim final rule are due no later than November 30,
1998.
Addresses: Written comments should refer to the docket number for this
notice, and be submitted (preferably in two copies) to: Docket
Management, Room PL-401, National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, S.W., Washington,
D.C. 20590. (Docket hours are Monday-Friday, 10 a.m. to 5 p.m.,
excluding Federal holidays.)
For further information contact: Ms. Joan Tetrault, State and Community
Services, NSC-01, NHTSA, 400 Seventh Street, S.W., Washington, D.C.
20590; telephone (202) 366-2121, or Ms. Heidi L. Coleman, Assistant
Chief Counsel for General Law, NCC-30, NHTSA, 400 Seventh Street, S.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20590; telephone (202) 366-1834.
Supplementary information: The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st
Century (TEA-21), Pub. L. 105-178, was signed into law on June 9, 1998.
Section 2003 of the Act established a new incentive grant program under
Section 405 of Title 23, United States Code (Section 405). Under this
new program, States may qualify for incentive grant funds by adopting
and implementing effective programs to reduce highway deaths and
injuries resulting from individuals riding unrestrained or improperly
restrained in motor vehicles. The program was designed to stimulate
increased safety belt and child safety seat use.
Background
Effectiveness of Occupant Protection Systems
Injuries caused by motor vehicle traffic crashes in America are a
major health care problem and are the leading cause of death for people
aged 6 to 27. Each year injuries caused by traffic crashes in the
United States claim approximately 42,000 lives and cost Americans an
estimated $150 billion. Safety belts are an effective means of reducing
fatalities and serious injuries when traffic crashes occur. Safety
belts are estimated to save nearly 11,000 lives each year. Lap and
shoulder belts reduce the risk of fatal injury to front seat passenger
car occupants by 45 percent and the risk of moderate to critical injury
by 50 percent. For light truck occupants, safety belts reduce the risk
of fatal injury by 60 percent and moderate to critical injury by 65
percent.
Child safety seats reduce the risk of fatal injury in a crash by 69
percent for infants (less than 1 year old) and by 47 percent for
toddlers (1-4 years old). In 1997, there were 593 occupant fatalities
among children under 5 years of age. Of those 593 fatalities, an
estimated 298 (54 percent) were totally unrestrained. From 1975 through
1997, an estimated 3,894 lives were saved by the use of child
restraints (child safety seats or adult belts). In 1997, an estimated
312 children under age 5 were saved as a result of child restraint use.
America's Experience With Safety Belts and Child Safety Seats
While the first safety belts were installed by automobile
manufacturers in the 1950s, safety belt use was very low--only 10 to 15
percent nationwide--until the early 1980s. From 1984 through 1987, belt
use increased from 14 percent to 42 percent, as a result of the passage
of safety belt use laws in 31 States. Belt use is now mandated in 49
States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Territories
(which include the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa and the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands), but only 13 States, the
District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Territories allow police
to stop a vehicle solely on the basis of observing a safety belt
violation. Most States require that another violation must first be
observed (i.e., secondary enforcement) before safety belt law violators
can be stopped and issued a citation. Under these conditions, national
safety belt usage seems to have reached a plateau of 69 percent.
The first law requiring children to be in safety seats was enacted
in 1978 in Tennessee. By 1985, all 50 States and the District of
Columbia had passed child passenger laws. Statewide reported usage
rates currently range between 60 and 90 percent, depending on the age
of the child. Most safety seats, however, are used improperly to some
degree.
The President's Call To Increase Safety Belt and Child Safety Seat
Usage
In 1997, President Clinton established the Presidential Initiative
to Increase Seat Belt Usage Nationwide (Presidential Initiative),
setting goals of achieving a safety belt use rate of 85% by the year
2000 and a 90 percent safety belt use rate by 2005. The President also
seeks to reduce child occupant fatalities (0-4 years) by 15 percent in
the year 2000 and by 25 percent in 2005. The Presidential Initiative
contained a four point strategy to meet its goals of increasing safety
belt and child safety seat use.
The first point in the strategy is to build public/private
partnerships to address the issue of safety belt and child safety seat
use. In addition, the strategy calls for States to enact strong laws
and to embrace active, high-visibility enforcement. Finally, the
strategy calls for public and private partners to conduct well-
coordinated, effective public education. The occupant protection
incentive grant program enacted by Congress as part of TEA-21
reinforces key elements of the President's national strategy, by
encouraging States to adopt and strengthen safety belt use laws
(including laws that provide for primary enforcement) and child safety
seat use laws, conduct high visibility enforcement, and establish
education programs.
Grant Criteria
To be eligible for a grant under the new Section 405 statute, a
State must adopt or demonstrate at least four of the following six
criteria: a safety belt use law; a primary safety belt use law; minimum
fines or penalty points against the driver license of an individual for
a violation of the State's safety belt use law or a violation of the
State's child passenger protection law; a special traffic enforcement
program; a child passenger protection education program; and a child
passenger protection law. The elements of these grant criteria and the
manner in which States must demonstrate compliance are explained fully
below:
[[Page 52593]]
1. Safety Belt Use Law
To qualify under this criterion, a State must have in effect a
safety belt use law that makes unlawful throughout the State the
operation of a passenger motor vehicle whenever an individual (other
than a child who is secured in a child restraint system) in the front
seat of the vehicle (and, beginning in fiscal year 2001, in any seat in
the vehicle) does not have a safety belt properly secured about the
individual's body.
Based on the definitions contained in the statute, NHTSA has
determined that the term ``passenger motor vehicle'' means passenger
car, pickup truck, van, minivan, or sport utility vehicle. The statute
did not contain a definition of the term ``child restraint system.''
NHTSA has determined that this term shall have the same meaning as the
term ``child safety seat.'' The term ``child safety seat'' was defined
by the statute. The definitions are reflected in Sec. 1345.3 of the
regulation.
Except for children in child restraint systems, the statute does
not provide for any exemptions from application. However, NHTSA
understands that all States have exemptions written into their safety
belt laws. The agency believes that Congress' intent to aid States in
their efforts to achieve higher belt use rates would not be served by
reading the statute so literally as to deny an incentive grant to
States whose laws contain any exemptions. On the other hand, some
exemptions would either be incompatible with the language of the
statute or would so severely undermine the safety considerations
underlying the statute so as to render a State whose law contains the
exemption ineligible for the incentive grant program.
NHTSA has reviewed existing safety belt laws and has decided to
permit exemptions covering persons with medical excuses; postal,
utility and other commercial drivers who make frequent stops in the
course of their business; emergency vehicle operators and passengers;
persons riding in positions not equipped with safety belts; persons in
public and livery conveyances; persons riding in parade vehicles and
persons in the custody of police. Any State considering an exemption
other than those identified as acceptable should anticipate that the
agency would review the exemption to determine whether it is in
accordance with the intent of the statute and applies to situations in
which the risk to occupants is very low or in which there are exigent
circumstances. For example, the agency would consider an exemption for
persons in vehicles equipped with air bags to be wholly unacceptable.
To demonstrate compliance with this criterion, the State is
required to submit a copy of its law, regulation or binding policy
directive interpreting or implementing the law or regulation that
provides for each element of the safety belt use law criterion. The
State is required to identify any exemptions to its safety belt use
law.
2. Primary Safety Belt Use Law
To qualify under this criterion, a State must provide for primary
enforcement of its safety belt use law. Under a primary enforcement
law, law enforcement officials have the authority to enforce the law
without the need to show that they have probable cause to believe that
another violation had been committed. Any State that provides for
secondary enforcement of its safety belt use law will not qualify for
funds under this criterion. A review of State laws indicates that
currently, 13 States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and all the
U.S. Territories have primary enforcement laws and 36 States have
secondary enforcement laws.
To demonstrate compliance with this criterion, the State is
required to submit a copy of its law, regulation or binding policy
directive interpreting or implementing the law or regulation, that
provides for each element of the primary safety belt use law criterion.
3. Minimum Fine or Penalty Points
To qualify under this criterion, a State must impose a minimum fine
or provide for the imposition of penalty points against the driver's
license of an individual for a violation of the safety belt use law of
the State and for a violation of the child passenger protection law of
the State. In other words, a violation of either the safety belt use
law or the child passenger protection law must trigger the imposition
of a minimum fine or penalty points.
Although the statute does not set a specific monetary amount as a
``minimum fine,'' NHTSA believes it would be inconsistent for Congress
to set a statutory requirement for a minimum fine level, but leave open
the possibility that there would be no monetary penalty or one that is
nominal and insignificant. Accordingly, NHTSA has determined that the
term ``minimum fine'' shall mean a total monetary penalty of at least
$25.00, which may include fines, fees, court costs, or any other
additional monetary assessments collected. The definition of ``minimum
fine'' is contained in Sec. 1345.3 of the regulation.
States will be permitted to meet this grant criterion as either
``Law States'' or ``Data States.'' To qualify as a Law State, the State
must have a law, regulation, or binding policy directive interpreting
or implementing such law or regulation that provides for each element
of the minimum fine/penalty points criterion. A Law State may
demonstrate compliance with this criterion by submitting a copy of its
conforming law, regulation or binding policy directive.
A State that does not have a law, regulation or binding policy
directive that conforms to each element of this criterion may qualify
instead as a Data State. A Data State may show compliance with this
criterion by submitting data covering at least a three-month period
within the last twelve months showing the total number of persons
convicted of a safety belt use or child passenger protection law
violation and that 80% of all such persons were required to pay a fine
of at least $25.00 or had one or more penalty points assessed against
their driver's license. The total number of persons convicted must be
sufficient to show that the State is conducting meaningful enforcement
and adjudication of its safety belt use and child passenger protection
laws.
A State is permitted to submit data based on a representative
sample. By representative sample, the agency means that data should be
obtained from all communities in the State or from a sample of
communities representative of the State as a whole. The agency notes
that a State may qualify as a Law State with respect to its safety belt
use law and as a Data State with respect to its child passenger
protection law, or vice versa.
4. Special Traffic Enforcement Program
To qualify under this criterion, a State must provide for a
statewide Special Traffic Enforcement Program for occupant protection
that emphasizes publicity for the program.
The term ``Special Traffic Enforcement Program'' (STEP) references
a model program that NHTSA recommends for State and community
implementation because it has proven effective in increasing safety
belt use at both statewide and community levels. STEPs combine public
education, publicity and intensified enforcement to increase safety
belt and child safety seat use rates.
Several States have already developed and employed effective STEPs.
In 1993, North Carolina launched a statewide campaign to increase
safety belt use. The ``Click It or Ticket'' program combined law
enforcement blitzes with extensive publicity. North Carolina law
[[Page 52594]]
enforcement agencies conducted 3,425 checkpoints across the State which
resulted in nearly 34,000 safety belt and nearly 2,300 child safety
seat citations. Safety belt use in the State rose from 63 percent to 80
percent.
Georgia is currently conducting a STEP operation called ``Operation
Strap n' Snap.'' This two-year program, which began in August 1997, is
scheduled to include eight enforcement waves. After the first
enforcement wave, Georgia's safety belt use rate climbed to its highest
level ever at 67.75 percent, up from 62 percent.
To qualify under this criterion, a State must plan to implement a
STEP that provides for periodic enforcement efforts. Each enforcement
effort must include the following five elements in chronological order:
(1) A pre-wave seat belt observed use survey; (2) A statewide media
campaign to inform the public about the risks and costs of traffic
crashes, the benefits of increased occupant protection use, and the
need for traffic enforcement as a way to manage those risks and costs;
(3) Local media events announcing the pending enforcement wave; (4) A
wave of enforcement effort consisting of checkpoints, saturation
patrols or other enforcement tactics; and (5) A post-wave observed use
survey coupled with a post-wave media event announcing the results of
the survey and the enforcement effort.
By requiring that States conduct observed use surveys, NHTSA does
not mean to require States to conduct scientifically based surveys with
representative sample sizes. It will be sufficient if pre-wave and
post-wave surveys are based on observed use and conducted at the same
times (day and hour) and locations so that the measures are comparable.
The State's program must provide for at least 2 enforcement efforts
each year and must require the participation of both State and local
law enforcement agencies in each enforcement effort. In addition,
States must demonstrate that their program covers at least 70% of the
State's population.
Coverage can be accomplished by an area-wide or corridor approach,
or a combination of those approaches. Under the area-wide approach, the
population covered by the program is estimated based on the populations
covered by each of the participating local law enforcement
jurisdictions and the total State population. Under the corridor
approach, the population covered is estimated based on traffic volumes
over specified transportation routes, with concentrated enforcement/
education efforts focused on that ``mobile'' population, and the total
traffic volumes statewide on comparable roadways.
To demonstrate compliance in the first year the State receives a
grant based on this criterion, the State must submit a plan to conduct
a program that includes the elements described above. The plan must
provide the approximate dates, durations and locations of the
enforcement efforts planned in the upcoming year and must specify the
types of enforcement methods that will be used during each enforcement
effort. The State must also provide a listing of the law enforcement
agencies that will participate in the enforcement efforts along with an
estimate of the approximate cumulative percentage of the State's
population served by those agencies or the approximate percentage of
the traffic volume on roadways covered by the enforcement program.
In addition, the State must document the activities it plans to
conduct to provide the public with information on the importance of
occupant restraints and to publicize each enforcement effort and its
results. This information should include a sample or synopsis of the
content of the public information messages that will accompany the
enforcement efforts and the strategy the State intends to use to
deliver each message to its target audience.
To qualify for funding in subsequent years, the State must submit
an updated plan for conducting its STEP and information documenting
that the prior year's plan was effectively implemented. The information
shall document that enforcement efforts were conducted; which police
agencies were involved; and the dates, duration and location of each
enforcement effort. The State must also submit samples of materials
used, and document activities that took place to reach the target
population. For example, the State may submit copies of news articles
about the program or document press events, television and radio
coverage or other publicity about the program and the enforcement
efforts.
5. Child Passenger Protection Education Program
To qualify under this criterion, a State must plan to implement a
statewide comprehensive child passenger protection education program
that includes education programs about proper seating positions for
children in air bag equipped motor vehicles and instruction on how to
reduce the improper use of child restraint systems.
To qualify under this criterion, State child passenger protection
education programs must meet the following four elements: (1) The
program must provide information to the public about proper seating
positions for children in air bag equipped motor vehicles, the
importance of restraint use, and instruction on how to reduce the
improper use of child restraint systems; (2) The program must provide
for child passenger safety (CPS) training and retraining to establish
or update child passenger safety technicians, police officers, fire and
emergency personnel and other educators to function at the community
level for the purpose of educating the public about proper restraint
use and to teach child care givers how to install a child safety seat
correctly. The training should encompass the goals and objectives of
NHTSA's Standardized Child Passenger Safety technician curriculum; (3)
The program must provide for child safety seat clinics conducted by
State and or local agencies (health, medical, hospital, enforcement,
etc.); and (4) Each of the State's program activities (with the
exception of the training and retraining activities) must cover at
least 70% of the State's population; that is, the public information
and clinic components of State programs must reach counties or other
subdivisions of the State that collectively contain at least 70% of the
State's population.
To demonstrate compliance in the first fiscal year a State receives
a grant based on this criterion, the State shall submit a comprehensive
plan to conduct a statewide comprehensive child passenger protection
education program that meets the elements set forth above. In its plan,
the State must include a sample or synopsis of the content of the
planned public information program and the strategy that will be used
to reach 70% of the targeted population.
Also, the State must describe the activities that will be used to
train and retrain child passenger safety technicians, police officers,
fire and emergency personnel and other educators and provide the
durations and locations of such training activities. In addition, the
State must provide information on the approximate number of people who
will participate in the training and retraining activities. The State
must also describe its plan to conduct clinics that will serve at least
70% of the targeted population.
To qualify for funding in subsequent years, the State must submit
an updated plan for conducting a child passenger protection education
program and information documenting that the prior year's plan was
effectively implemented. The information shall document that a public
information program, training and child safety seat
[[Page 52595]]
clinics were conducted; which agencies were involved; and the dates,
durations and locations of these programs.
6. Child Passenger Protection Law
To qualify under this criterion, a State must have in effect a law
that requires minors who are riding in a passenger motor vehicle to be
properly secured in a child safety seat or other appropriate restraint
system.
The terms ``passenger motor vehicle'' and ``child safety seat''
which are used to describe this criterion are defined by statute. The
statutory definitions are reflected in Sec. 1345.3 of the regulation.
The statute did not define the term ``minor.''
NHTSA has determined that, to comply with this grant criterion, a
State must make unlawful the operation of a passenger motor vehicle
whenever an individual who is less than 16 years of age is not properly
secured in a child safety seat or other appropriate restraint system in
any seating position of the vehicle. NHTSA believes that Congress'
intent to aid the States in their efforts to achieve higher child
safety seat and safety belt use would not be served if children under
age 16 were allowed to ride unrestrained in a passenger motor vehicle.
NHTSA's review of State laws indicates that some States currently allow
some children under age 16 to ride unrestrained if they are in the rear
seat of passenger vehicles. Other States' laws allow some children
under 16 who ride in certain types of excepted vehicles to be
unrestrained. NHTSA believes that the intent of the legislation was to
eliminate these gaps in coverage. In addition, the agency believes that
defining minor to mean under age 16 is consistent with the majority of
State driver licensing laws that allow individuals at ages 16 and
higher to obtain driver's licenses.
To demonstrate compliance, a State must submit a copy of its law,
regulation, or binding policy directive interpreting or implementing
such law or regulation adopting each element of the child passenger
protection law requirement. In addition, the State is required to
identify any exemptions to its child passenger protection law.
The agency notes that children age 12 and under should always sit
in the back seat of a motor vehicle. Frontal crashes are the most
serious types of crashes. The back seat is the safest seat because it
is farthest away from the impact of such a crash. In addition, people
sitting in the back seat have the soft back of the front seat in front
of them, instead of hard surfaces like the windshield, mirror or
dashboard.
Children should also sit in the back seat to guard against injuries
from air bags. Air bags can seriously injure or kill children who are
in the front seat. In a crash, the air bag must deploy in a fraction of
a second. The energy of the air bag's deployment can harm anyone in the
front seat who is too close to the air bag. Children age 12 and under
who are not properly restrained are particularly at risk.
In addition, the agency wishes to stress the importance of placing
children under age 4 in child safety seats. Specifically, the agency
recommends that children less than 20 pounds, or less than one year
old, be placed in a rear facing infant seat secured in the rear seat of
the vehicle by the safety belts. Children from about 20 to 40 pounds
and at least one year old should be placed in a forward-facing child
seat secured in the rear seat of the vehicle by a safety belt. Children
more than 40 pounds should sit in a booster seat secured in the rear
seat of the vehicle with both portions of a lap/shoulder belt (except
only the lap portion is used with some booster seats equipped with a
front shield). Finally, the agency recommends that children whose
sitting height is high enough so that they can, without the aid of a
booster seat, wear the shoulder belt comfortably across their shoulder
and secure the lap belt across their pelvis and whose legs are long
enough to bend over the front of the seat when their backs are against
the vehicle seat back be secured with both portions of a lap/shoulder
belt.
Certifications in Subsequent Years
NHTSA believes that if a State has qualified under a criterion
based on its laws and there have been no changes in the laws since the
time of the original application, there is little reason to require the
State to resubmit its laws in its application for subsequent year
funds. In lieu of resubmitting its laws to demonstrate compliance in
subsequent years the State receives a grant based on its compliance
with Criterion No. 1 (Safety Belt Use Law), Criterion No. 2 (Primary
Safety Belt Use Law), Criterion No. 3 (Minimum Fine or Penalty Points)
or Criterion No. 6 (Child Passenger Protection Law), the State may
submit a statement certifying that there have been no changes in the
State's laws. A State demonstrating compliance as a Data State under
Criterion No. 3 would still be required to submit all necessary data.
Limitations on Grant Amounts
Section 405 provides, in subsection (c), that an eligible State may
receive as a grant an amount that shall not exceed 25 percent of its
fiscal year 1997 highway safety grant (Section 402) apportionment under
23 U.S.C. 402.
No State may receive a grant in more than six fiscal years. A total
of $68 million has been authorized for the Section 405 program over a
period of five years. Specifically TEA-21 authorizes $10 million for
fiscal year 1999, $10 million for fiscal year 2000, $13 million for
fiscal year 2001, $15 million for fiscal year 2002 and $20 million for
fiscal year 2003. Under Section 405, States are required to match the
grant funds they receive as follows: the Federal share can not exceed
75 percent of the cost of implementing and enforcing the occupant
protection program adopted to qualify for these funds in the first and
second fiscal years the State receives funds; 50 percent in the third
and fourth fiscal years it receives funds; and 25 percent in the fifth
and sixth fiscal years.
No grant may be made to a State unless the State certifies that it
will maintain its aggregate expenditures from all other sources for its
occupant protection programs at or above the average level of such
expenditures in fiscal years 1996 and 1997 (either State or Federal
fiscal year 1996 and 1997 can be used).
The agency will accept a ``soft'' match in Section 405's
administration, as it has for the agency's Section 402 and 410
programs. By this, NHTSA means the State's share may be satisfied by
the use of either allowable costs incurred by the State or the value of
in-kind contributions applicable to the period to which the matching
requirement applies. A State could not, however, use any Federal funds,
such as its Section 402 funds, to satisfy the matching requirements. In
addition, a State can use each non-Federal expenditure only once for
matching purposes.
Award Procedures
To receive a grant in any fiscal year, the State is required to
submit an application to NHTSA, through the appropriate NHTSA Regional
Administrator, which demonstrates that the State meets the requirements
of the grant being requested. The particular requirements of these
grants are defined in detail in Sec. 1345.5 of the regulation. The
State also must submit certifications that: (1) it has an occupant
protection program that meets the grant requirements; (2) it will use
the funds awarded only for the implementation and enforcement of
occupant protection programs; (3) it will administer the funds in
accordance with relevant regulations and OMB Circulars; and (4)
[[Page 52596]]
it will maintain its aggregate expenditures from all other sources for
its occupant protection programs at or above the average level of such
expenditures in fiscal years 1996 and 1997. State or Federal fiscal
years may be used.
In both the first and in subsequent years, once a State has been
informed that it is eligible for a grant, the State must include
documentation in the State's Highway Safety Plan, prepared under
Section 402, that indicates how it intends to use the grant funds. The
documentation must include a Program Cost Summary (HS Form 217)
obligating the section 405 funds to occupant protection programs.
To be eligible for grant funds in fiscal year 1999, States must
submit their applications no later than August 1, 1999. To be eligible
for grant funds in any subsequent fiscal years, States must submit
their applications no later than August 1 of the fiscal year in which
they are applying for funds. The agency will permit (and strongly
encourages) States to submit all of these materials in advance of the
regulatory deadlines.
Upon receipt and subsequent approval of a State's application,
NHTSA will award grant funds to the State and will authorize the State
to incur costs after receipt of an HS Form 217. Vouchers must be
submitted to the appropriate NHTSA Regional Administrator and
reimbursement will be made to States for authorized expenditures. The
funding guidelines applicable to the Section 402 Highway Safety Program
will be used to determine reimbursable expenditures under the Section
405 program. As with requests for reimbursement under the Section 402
program, States should indicate on the vouchers what amount of the
funds expended are eligible for reimbursement under Section 405.
The release of the full grant amounts shall be subject to the
availability of funding for that fiscal year. If there are expected to
be insufficient funds to award full grant amounts to all eligible
States in any fiscal year, NHTSA may release less than the full grant
amounts upon initial approval of the State's application and
documentation and the remainder of the full grant amounts, up to the
State's proportionate share of available funds, before the end of that
fiscal year. Project approval, and the contractual obligation of the
Federal government to provide grant funds, shall be limited to the
amount of funds released.
The Secretary may transfer any amounts remaining available under
Sections 405, 410 and 411 to the amounts made available under any other
of these programs to ensure, to the maximum extent possible, that each
State receives the maximum incentive funding for which it is eligible.
Interim Final Rule
These regulations are being published as an interim final rule.
Accordingly, the new regulations in Part 1345 are fully in effect 30
days after the date of the document's publication. No further
regulatory action by the agency is necessary to make these regulations
effective.
These regulations have been published as an interim final rule
because insufficient time was available to provide for prior notice and
opportunity for comment. Grants will be available beginning in FY 1999.
Many of the grant criteria require States to enact legislation in order
to comply. States are preparing their legislative agendas now for their
1999 legislative sessions. The States have a need to know what the
criteria for grants under this program will be as soon as possible so
they can enact conforming legislation.
In the agency's view, the States will not be impeded by the use of
an interim final rule. The procedures that States must follow under
this new program are similar to procedures that States have followed in
other grant programs administered by NHTSA. These procedures were
established by rulemaking and were subject to prior notice and
opportunity for comment.
Moreover, the criteria are derived from the Federal statute and
their implementation does not involve a significant amount of
discretion on the part of the agency. For these reasons, the agency
believes that there is good cause for finding that providing notice and
comment in connection with this rulemaking action is impracticable,
unnecessary, and contrary to the public interest.
The agency requests written comments on these new regulations. All
comments submitted in response to this document will be considered by
the agency. Following the close of the comment period, the agency will
publish a document in the Federal Register responding to the comments
and, if appropriate, will make revisions to the provisions of Part
1345.
Written Comments
Interested persons are invited to comment on this interim final
rule. It is requested, but not required, that two copies be submitted.
All comments must be limited to 15 pages in length. Necessary
attachments may be appended to those submissions without regard to the
15 page limit. (49 CFR 553.21.) This limitation is intended to
encourage commenters to detail their primary arguments in a concise
fashion.
Written comments to the public docket must be received by November
30, 1998. All comments received before the close of business on the
comment closing date will be considered and will be available for
examination in the docket at the above address before and after that
date. To the extent possible, comments received after the closing date
will also be considered. However, the rulemaking action may proceed at
any time after that date. NHTSA will continue to file relevant material
in the docket as they become available after the closing date, and it
is recommended that interested persons continue to examine the docket
for new materials.
Those persons desiring to be notified upon receipt of their
comments in the docket should enclose, in the envelope with their
comments, a self-addressed stamped postcard. Upon receiving the
comments, the docket supervisor will return the postcard by mail.
Copies of all documents will be placed in Docket No. NHTSA-98-4496;
in Docket Management, Room PL-401, Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street,
SW, Washington, DC 20590.
Regulatory Analyses and Notice
Executive Order 12778 (Civil Justice Reform)
This interim final rule will not have any preemptive or retroactive
effect. The enabling legislation does not establish a procedure for
judicial review of rules promulgated under its provisions. There is no
requirement that individuals submit a petition for reconsideration or
other administrative proceedings before they may file suit.
Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures
The agency has examined the impact of this action and has
determined that it is not significant under Executive Order 12866 and
the Department of Transportation's Regulatory Policies and Procedures.
The action will not have an annual effect on the economy of $100
million or more or adversely affect in a material way a sector of the
economy, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety,
or State, local or tribal governments or communities. It will not
create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action
taken or planned by another agency, and it will not materially alter
the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan
programs or the rights and
[[Page 52597]]
obligations of recipients thereof. Nor does it raise novel legal or
policy issues.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
In compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96-354,
5 U.S.C. 601-612), the agency has evaluated the effects of this action
on small entities. Based on the evaluation, we certify that this action
will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small
entities. States are the recipients of any funds awarded under the
Section 405 program, and they are not considered to be small entities,
as that term is defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This interim final rule contains information collection
requirements. As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3507(d)), the agency has submitted a copy of this section to the
Office of Management and Budget for its review.
The public information and recordkeeping burden for this collection
of information is estimated to be 1736 hours annually. The total number
of respondents is estimated to be up to 56. The average number of hours
per respondent is 31 (1736 hours/56 = 31 hours).
Organizations and individuals desiring to submit comments on the
information collection requirements should submit them to Docket
Management, Room PL-401, National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, S.W., Washington,
D.C. 20590. Comments should refer to the docket number for this notice
and should be sent within 30 days of the publication of this interim
final rule.
The agency considers comments by the public on this collection of
information in: evaluating whether the collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency,
including whether the information will have a practical use; evaluating
the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the collection
of information, including the validity of the methodology and
assumptions used; enhancing the quality, usefulness, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and minimizing the burden of collection of
information on those who are to respond, including through the use of
appropriate automated electronic, mechanical, or other technological
collection techniques or other forms of information technology; e.g.,
permitting electronic submission of responses.
According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are
required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a
valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for this
information collection will be published in the Federal Register after
it is approved by the OMB.
For more details see the Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis available
for copying and review in the public docket.
The title, description, and respondent description of the
information collection are shown below with an estimate of the annual
burden.
Title: Occupant Protection Incentive Grants.
OMB Clearance number: Not assigned.
Description of the need for the information and proposed use of the
information: To determine whether States comply with grant criteria,
NHTSA is requiring States to submit copies of relevant safety belt and
child passenger protection statutes, plans and/or reports on statewide
special traffic enforcement and child passenger protection education
programs and possibly some traffic court records. In addition, to allow
the agency to track grant funds, NHTSA is requiring States to submit a
Program Cost Summary (Form 217), allocating the section 405 funds to
occupant protection programs.
Description of likely respondents (including estimate of frequency
of response to the collection of information): The respondents are the
States. All respondents would submit an application and Form 217 to
NHTSA in each year they seek to qualify for incentive grant funds.
Estimate of total annual reporting and record keeping burden
resulting from the collection of information: NHTSA estimates that each
respondent will take 30 hours to prepare and submit the grant
application and one hour to prepare and submit a Program Cost Summary
(Form 217) for an estimated total hour burden on all respondents of
1736 hours (31 hours x 56 respondents). Based on an estimated cost of
$50.00 per hour employee cost, each response is estimated to cost a
State $1550. If every jurisdiction considered a ``State'' under this
program were to apply, the total cost on all respondents per year would
be $86,800. It is not anticipated, however, that all 56 jurisdictions
will apply each year.
National Environmental Policy Act
The agency has analyzed this action for the purpose of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and has
determined that it will not have any significant impact on the quality
of the human environment.
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4)
requires agencies to prepare a written assessment of the costs,
benefits and other affects of 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. This interim final rule does not meet the
definition of a Federal mandate, because the resulting annual
expenditures will not exceed the $100 million threshold. In addition,
this incentive grant program is completely voluntary and States that
choose to apply and qualify will receive incentive grant funds.
Executive Order 12612 (Federalism)
This action has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order 12612, and it has been determined
that this action will not have sufficient federalism implications to
warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment. Accordingly, a
Federalism Assessment has not been prepared.
List of Subjects in 23 CFR Part 1345
Grant programs--Transportation, Highway safety, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
In consideration of the foregoing, a new Part 1345 is added to
Chapter III of Title 23 of the Code of Federal Regulations to read as
follows:
PART 1345--INCENTIVE GRANT CRITERIA FOR OCCUPANT PROTECTION
PROGRAMS
Sec.
1345.1 Scope.
1345.2 Purpose.
1345.3 Definitions.
Sec. 1345.4 General requirements.
1345.5 Requirements for a grant.
1345.6 Award procedures.
Authority: Pub. L. 105-178; 23 U.S.C. 405; delegation of
authority at 49 CFR 1.50.
Sec. 1345.1 Scope.
This part establishes criteria, in accordance with section 2003 of
the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, for awarding
incentive grants to States that adopt and implement effective programs
to reduce highway deaths and injuries resulting from individuals riding
unrestrained or improperly restrained in motor vehicles.
Sec. 1345.2 Purpose.
The purpose of this part is to implement the provisions of section
[[Page 52598]]
2003 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, 23 U.S.C.
405, and to encourage States to adopt effective occupant protection
programs.
Sec. 1345.3 Definitions.
(a) Child restraint system means child safety seat.
(b) Child safety seat means any device (except safety belts)
designed for use in a motor vehicle to restrain, seat, or position a
child who weighs 50 pounds or less.
(c) Minimum fine means a total monetary penalty which may include
fines, fees, court costs, or any other additional monetary assessments
collected.
(d) Passenger motor vehicle means a passenger car, pickup truck,
van, minivan, or sport utility vehicle.
(e) State means any of the fifty States, the District of Columbia,
Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa or the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.
Sec. 1345.4 General requirements.
(a) Qualification requirements. To qualify for a grant under 23
U.S.C. 405, a State must, for each year it seeks to qualify:
(1) Submit an application to the appropriate NHTSA Regional
Administrator demonstrating that it meets the requirements of
Sec. 1345.5 and include certifications that:
(i) It has an occupant protection program that meets the
requirements of 23 U.S.C. 405;
(ii) It will use the funds awarded under 23 U.S.C. 405 only for the
implementation and enforcement of occupant protection programs;
(iii) It will administer the funds in accordance with 49 CFR part
18 and OMB Circulars A-102 and A-87 and
(iv) It will maintain its aggregate expenditures from all other
sources for its occupant protection programs at or above the average
level of such expenditures in fiscal years 1996 and 1997 (either State
or Federal fiscal year 1996 and 1997 can be used); and
(2) After being informed by NHTSA that it is eligible for a grant,
submit to the agency, within 30 days, a Program Cost Summary (HS Form
217) obligating the section 405 funds to occupant protection programs.
(3) The State's Highway Safety Plan, which is required to be
submitted by September 1 of each year, pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 402 and 23
CFR 1200, should document how it intends to use the Section 405 grant
funds.
(4) To qualify for grant funds in any fiscal year, the application
must be received by the agency not later than August 1 of the fiscal
year in which the State is applying for funds.
(b) Limitation on grants. A State may receive a grant for up to six
fiscal years beginning after September 30, 1998, subject to the
following limitations:
(1) The amount of a grant, under Sec. 1345.5 shall equal up to 25
percent of the State's 23 U.S.C. 402 apportionment for fiscal year
1997, subject to availability of funds.
(2) In the first and second fiscal years a State receives a grant,
it shall be reimbursed for up to 75 percent of the cost of its occupant
protection program adopted pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 405.
(3) In the third and fourth fiscal years a State receives a grant,
it shall be reimbursed for up to 50 percent of the cost of its occupant
protection program adopted pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 405.
(4) In the fifth and sixth fiscal years a State receives a grant,
it shall be reimbursed for up to 25 percent of the cost of its occupant
protection program adopted pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 405.
Sec. 1345.5 Requirements for a grant.
To qualify for an incentive grant, a State must adopt and implement
effective programs to reduce highway deaths and injuries resulting from
individuals riding unrestrained or improperly restrained in motor
vehicles. A State must adopt and implement at least four of the
following criteria:
(a) Safety belt use law. (1) In fiscal years 1999 and 2000, a State
must make unlawful throughout the State the operation of a passenger
motor vehicle whenever an individual (other than a child who is secured
in a child restraint system) in the front seat of the vehicle does not
have a safety belt properly secured about the individual's body.
(2) Beginning in fiscal year 2001, a State must make unlawful
throughout the State the operation of a passenger motor vehicle
whenever an individual (other than a child who is secured in a child
restraint system) in any seating position in the vehicle does not have
a safety belt properly secured about the individual's body.
(3) To demonstrate compliance with this criterion, a State shall
submit a copy of the State's safety belt use law, regulation or binding
policy directive interpreting or implementing the law or regulation
that provides for each element of paragraphs (a)(1) or (a)(2), as
appropriate, of this section. The State is also required to identify
any exemptions to its safety belt use law.
(b) Primary safety belt use law. (1) A State must provide for
primary enforcement of its safety belt use law.
(2) To demonstrate compliance with this criterion, the State shall
submit a copy of its law, regulation or binding policy directive
interpreting or implementing the law or regulation that provides for
each element of paragraph (b)(1) of this section.
(c) Minimum fine or penalty points. (1) A State must provide for
the imposition of a minimum fine of not less than $25.00 or one or more
penalty points on the driver's license of an individual:
(i) For a violation of the State's safety belt use law; and
(ii) for a violation of the State's child passenger protection law.
(2)(i) To demonstrate compliance with this criterion, a Law State
shall submit a copy of the law, regulation or binding policy directive
interpreting or implementing the law or regulation that provides for
each element of paragraph (c)(1) of this section.
(ii) For purposes of this paragraph, a ``Law State'' means a State
that has a law, regulation or binding policy directive interpreting or
implementing the law or regulation that provides for each element of
the minimum fines or penalty points criterion including the imposition
of a minimum fine of not less than $25.00 or one or more penalty points
for a violation of the State's safety belt use and child passenger
protection laws.
(3)(i) To demonstrate compliance with this criterion, a Data State
shall submit data covering a period of at least three months during the
past twelve months showing the total number of persons who were
convicted of a safety belt use or child passenger protection law
violation and that 80 percent or more of all such persons were required
to pay at least $25 in fines, fees or court costs or had one or more
penalty points assessed against their driver's license. The State can
provide the necessary data based on a representative sample.
(ii) For purposes of this paragraph, a ``Data State'' means a State
that does not require the mandatory imposition of a minimum fine of not
less than $25.00 or one or more penalty points for a violation of the
State's safety belt use and child passenger protection laws.
(d) Special traffic enforcement program. (1) A State must establish
a statewide Special Traffic Enforcement Program for occupant protection
that emphasizes publicity for the program. The program must provide for
periodic enforcement efforts. Each enforcement effort must include the
following five elements, in chronological order:
(i) A seat belt observed use survey conducted before any
enforcement wave;
(ii) A media campaign to inform the public about the risks and
costs of traffic
[[Page 52599]]
crashes, the benefits of increased occupant protection use, and the
need for traffic enforcement as a way to manage those risks and costs.
(iii) Local media events announcing a pending enforcement wave;
(iv) A wave of enforcement effort consisting of checkpoints,
saturation patrols or other enforcement tactics.
(v) A post-wave observed use survey coupled with a post-wave media
event announcing the results of the survey and the enforcement effort.
(2) The State's program must provide for at least two enforcement
efforts each year and must require the participation of State and local
police in each effort.
(3) The State's program must cover at least 70% of the State's
population.
(4) To demonstrate compliance with this criterion in the first year
the State receives a grant based on this criterion, the State shall
submit a plan to conduct a program that covers each element identified
in paragraphs (d)(1) through (d)(3) of this section. Specifically, the
plan shall:
(i) Provide the approximate dates, durations and locations of the
efforts planned in the upcoming year;
(ii) Specify the types of enforcement methods that will be used
during each enforcement effort and provide a listing of the law
enforcement agencies that will participate in the enforcement efforts
along with an estimate of the approximate cumulative percentage of the
State's population served by those agencies or the approximate
percentage of the traffic volume on roadways covered by the enforcement
program; and
(iii) Document the activities the State plans to conduct to provide
the public with information on the importance of occupant restraints
and to publicize each enforcement effort and its results. This
information should include a sample or synopsis of the content of the
public information messages that will accompany the enforcement efforts
and the strategy that the State intends to use to deliver each message
to its target audience.
(5) To demonstrate compliance with this criterion in subsequent
fiscal years the State receives a grant based on this criterion, the
State shall submit an updated plan for conducting a special traffic
enforcement program in the following year and information documenting
that the prior year's plan was effectively implemented. The information
shall document that enforcement efforts were conducted; which police
agencies were involved; and the dates, duration and location of each
enforcement effort. The State must also submit samples of materials
used, and document activities that took place to reach the target
population.
(e) Child passenger protection education program. (1) A State must
provide an effective system for educating the public about the proper
use of child safety seats. The program must, at a minimum:
(i) Provide information to the public about proper seating
positions for children in air bag equipped motor vehicles, the
importance of restraint use, and instruction on how to reduce the
improper use of child restraint systems;
(ii) Provide for child passenger safety (CPS) training and
retraining to establish or update child passenger safety technicians,
police officers, fire and emergency personnel and other educators to
function at the community level for the purpose of educating the public
about proper restraint use and to teach child care givers how to
install a child safety seat correctly. The training should encompass
the goals and objectives of NHTSA's Standardized Child Passenger Safety
Technician Curriculum;
(iii) Provide periodic child safety seat clinics conducted by State
and local agencies (health, medical, hospital, enforcement, etc.); and
(iv) The State's program activities (with the exception of the
training and retraining activities) must cover at least 70% of the
State's population; that is, the program activities must take place in
counties or other subdivisions of the State that collectively contain
at least 70% of the State's population.
(2) To demonstrate compliance with this criterion in the first
fiscal year the State receives a grant based on this criterion, the
State shall submit a plan to conduct a child passenger protection
education program that covers each element identified in paragraph (e)
(1) of this section. The information shall include:
(i) A sample or synopsis of the content of the planned public
information program and the strategy that will be used to reach 70% of
the targeted population;
(ii) A description of the activities that will be used to train and
retrain child passenger safety technicians, police officers, fire and
emergency personnel and other educators and provide the durations and
locations of such training activities;
(iii) An estimate of the approximate number of people who will
participate in the training and retraining activities; and
(iv) A plan to conduct clinics that will serve at least 70% of the
targeted population.
(3) To demonstrate compliance with this criterion in subsequent
fiscal years the State receives a grant based on this criterion, the
State shall submit an updated plan for conducting a child passenger
protection education program in the following year and information
documenting that the prior year's plan was effectively implemented. The
information shall document that a public information program, training
and child safety seat clinics were conducted; which agencies were
involved; and the dates, durations and locations of these programs.
(f) Child passenger protection law. (1) The State must make
unlawful the operation of a passenger motor vehicle whenever an
individual who is less than 16 years of age is not properly secured in
a child safety seat or other appropriate restraint system.
(2) To demonstrate compliance with this criterion, a State shall
submit a copy of the law(s), regulation or binding policy directive
interpreting or implementing the law or regulation that provides for
each element of paragraph (f)(1) of this section. In addition, the
State must identify any exemptions to its child passenger protection
law(s).
(g) Certifications in subsequent years. (1) To demonstrate
compliance in subsequent years the State receives a grant based on
criteria in paragraphs (a), (b), (c) or (f) of this section, if the
State's law, regulation or binding policy directive has not changed,
the State, in lieu of resubmitting its law, regulation or binding
policy directive as provided in paragraphs (a)(3), (b)(2), (c)(2)(i) or
(f)(2) of this section, may submit a statement certifying that there
have been no substantive changes in the State's laws, regulations or
binding policy directives.
(2) The certifying statement shall be worded as follows:
(Name of certifying official), (position title), of the (State or
Commonwealth) of ____________________, do hereby certify that the
(State or Commonwealth) of ____________________ has not changed and
is enforcing a law, that conforms to 23 U.S.C. 405 and 23 CFR 1345.5
(insert reference to section and paragraph), (citations to State
law).
Sec. 1345.6 Award procedures.
(a) In each Federal fiscal year, grants will be made to eligible
States upon submission and approval of the application required by
Sec. 1345.4(a) and subject to the limitation in Sec. 1345.4(b). The
release of grant funds under this part shall be subject to the
availability of funding for that fiscal year. If there are expected to
be insufficient funds to award full grant amounts to all eligible
[[Page 52600]]
States in any fiscal year, NHTSA may release less than the full grant
amounts upon initial approval of the State's application and
documentation and the remainder of the full grant amounts, up to the
State's proportionate share of available funds, before the end of that
fiscal year. Project approval, and the contractual obligation of the
Federal government to provide grant funds, shall be limited to the
amount of funds released.
(b) If any amounts authorized for grants under this part for a
fiscal year are expected to remain unobligated in that fiscal year, the
Administrator may transfer such amounts to the programs authorized
under 23 U.S.C. 410 and 23 U.S.C. 411, to ensure to the extent possible
that each State receives the maximum incentive funding for which it is
eligible.
(c) If any amounts authorized for grants under 23 U.S.C. 410 and 23
U.S.C. 411 are transferred to the grant program under this part in a
fiscal year, the Administrator shall distribute the transferred amounts
so that each eligible State receives a proportionate share of these
amounts, subject to the conditions specified in Sec. 1345.4.
Issued on: September 25, 1998.
Ricardo Martinez,
Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
[FR Doc. 98-26243 Filed 9-28-98; 12:12 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
