[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 226 (Friday, November 25, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-29053]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: November 25, 1994]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. 94-104; Notice 1]
49 CFR Part 571
RIN 2127-AF45
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Lamps, Reflective Devices
and Associated Equipment
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice proposes an amendment to the Federal motor vehicle
standard on lighting to allow the photometric conformance of center
highmounted stop lamps to be determined by a grouping of test points.
Such an action would be consistent with the agency's requirements for
other lamps and would lessen the testing burden for manufacturers. This
action is taken in implementation of a grant of a petition for
rulemaking.
DATES: The due date for comments is January 24, 1995. The amendments
would be effective 30 days after publication of the final rule in the
Federal Register.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Richard Van Iderstine, Office of Rulemaking, NHTSA (202-366-5280).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Dennis Moore of Livermore, California, has
petitioned for rulemaking to amend Standard No. 108 to allow ``a
`Zonal' approach * * * for Compliance Photometric Testing of 3rd Brake
Lights which has already been adopted for Tail Lights, Regular Brake
Lights and Turn Signals.'' Under S5.1.1.6 of Standard No. 108,
taillamps and parking lamps need not meet the minimum photometric
values specified for each of the test points of the relevant SAE
Standards incorporated by reference, provided that the sum of the
minimum candlepower measured at the test points is not less than that
specified for each group listed in Figure 1c. In addition, the more
recent SAE Standards for stop lamps and turn signal lamps that have
been incorporated into Standard No. 108 no longer specify values for
individual test points (though including them as photometric design
guidelines). Instead, they specify required values for ``zones'' only.
In contrast, the applicable photometric values for center
highmounted stop lamps (CHMSLs) are those of Figure 10 of Standard No.
108 and are for individual test points. Moore views this as an anomaly.
He believes that laboratory test results vary so greatly that CHMSLs
must be overdesigned to ensure compliance at each test point. As a
result, they draw more power and have a shorter life expectancy. He
argues that because CHMSL bulbs burn out faster ``and are generally
located in an area that is inconvenient,'' they are not replaced.
NHTSA has granted Mr. Moore's petition and is implementing it
through this proposal. While the agency has no information that
indicates the present requirement results in shorter bulb life and
failure to replace bulbs, it is sympathetic to his position that
photometric compliance for all stop lamps, including CHMSLs, should be
determined on the same basis, as the agency already allows the zonal
method of determining compliance for stop lamps other than CHMSLs. The
agency tentatively concludes that there is no reason why this approach
should not be extended to CHMSLs as well. As with other lamps, adoption
of the zonal method will enable compliance to be judged on the suim of
the candela at the test point within a zone (i.e., the overall light
output of a zone) rather than on the basis of whether each individual
test point meets the prescribed minimum. This will not derogate from
safety, and should make it easier for manufacturers to design and test
lamps that meet Standard No. 108.
In implementation of the grant of the petition, this notice
proposes a revised Figure 10 which would establish zonal photometrics
that are the sums of the minimum current photometric test point values.
Request for Comments
Interested persons are invited to submit comments on the proposal.
It is requested but not required that 10 copies be submitted.
All comments must not exceed 15 pages in length. (49 CFR 553.21).
Necessary attachments may be appended to these submissions without
regard to the 15-page limit. This limitation is intended to encourage
commenters to detail their primary arguments in a concise fashion.
If a commenter wishes to submit certain information under a claim
of confidentiality, three copies of the complete submission, including
purportedly confidential business information, should be submitted to
the Chief Counsel, NHTSA, at the street address given above, and seven
copies from which the purportedly confidential information has been
deleted should be submitted to the Docket Section. A request for
confidentiality should be accompanied by a cover letter setting forth
the information specified in the agency's confidential business
information regulation. 49 CFR part 512.
All comments received before the close of business on the comment
closing date indicated above for the proposal will be considered, and
will be available for examination in the docket at the above address
both before and after that date. To the extent possible, comments filed
after the closing date will also be considered. Comments received too
late for consideration in regard to the final rule will be considered
as suggestions for further rulemaking action. Comments on the proposal
will be available for inspection in the docket. The NHTSA will continue
to file relevant information as it becomes available in the docket
after the closing date, and it is recommended that interested persons
continue to examine the docket for new material.
Those persons desiring to be notified upon receipt of their
comments in the rules docket should enclose a self-addressed, stamped
postcard in the envelope with their comments. Upon receiving the
comments, the docket supervisor will return the postcard by mail.
Effective Date
The effective date of the final rule would be December 27, 1994.
Because the final rule establishes no additional burden on any party,
it is hereby tentatively found for good cause shown that an effective
date for the amendments to Standard No. 108 that is earlier than 180
days after their issuance would be in the public interest.
Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
This action has not been reviewed under Executive Order 12866 (NRM:
We are submitting this notice to OST/OMB for determination of
significance.) It has been determined that the rulemaking action is not
significant under Department of Transportation regulatory policies and
procedures. The purpose of the rulemaking action is to simplify
compliance with Standard No. 108. Since the rule does not have any
significant cost or other impacts, preparation of a full regulatory
evaluation is not warranted.
National Environmental Policy Act
NHTSA has analyzed this rulemaking action for the purposes of the
National Environmental Policy Act. It is not anticipated that a final
rule based on this proposal would have a significant effect upon the
environment. The design and composition of center high-mounted stop
lamps would not change from those presently in production.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The agency has also considered the impacts of this rulemaking
action in relation to the Regulatory Flexibility Act. I certify that
this rulemaking action would not have a significant economic impact
upon a substantial number of small entities. Accordingly, no regulatory
flexibility analysis has been prepared. Manufacturers of motor vehicles
and stop lamps, those affected by the rulemaking action, are generally
not small businesses within the meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility
Act. Further, small organizations and governmental jurisdictions would
not be significantly affected because the price of new vehicles and
stop lamps would not be impacted.
Executive Order 12612 (Federalism)
This rulemaking action has also been analyzed in accordance with
the principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 12612, and
NHTSA has determined that this rulemaking action does not have
sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a
Federalism Assessment.
Civil Justice
A final rule based on this proposal would not have any retroactive
effect. Under 49 U.S.C. 30103 (formerly section 103(d) of the National
Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1392(d)), whenever a
Federal motor vehicle safety standard is in effect, a State may not
adopt or maintain a safety standard applicable to the same aspect of
performance which is not identical to the Federal standard. Section
30163 (formerly 15 U.S.C. 1394) sets forth a procedure for judicial
review of final rules establishing, amending or revoking Federal motor
vehicle safety standards. That section does not require submission of a
petition for reconsideration or other administrative proceedings before
parties may file suit in court.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571
Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Motor vehicles.
In consideration of the foregoing, 49 CFR Part 571 would be amended
as follows:
PART 571--FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS
1. The authority citation for Part 571 would continue to read as
follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30111, 30115, 30162; delegation of
authority at 49 CFR 1.50.
2. Section 571.108 would be amended by revising Figure 10 as
follows:
Sec. 571.108 Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 lamps, reflective
devices, and associated equipment.
* * * * *
Figure 10.--Photometric Requirements for Center High-Mounted Stop Lamps
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minimum
Minimum total for
Individual test points intensity Zones (test points within zones, see note 2) zone
(candela) (candela)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10U-10L........................... 8 Zone I (5U-V, H-5L, H-V, H-5R, 5D-V)............. 125
-V................................ 16
-10R.............................. 8
5U-10L............................ 16 Zone II (5U-5R, 5U-10R, H-10R, 5D-10R, 5D-5R).... 98
-5L............................... 25
-V................................ 25
-5R............................... 25
-10R.............................. 16
5D-10L............................ 16 Zone III (5U-5L, 5U-10L, H-10L, 5-10L, 5D-5L).... 98
-5L............................... 25
-V................................ 25
-5R............................... 25
-10R.............................. 16
H-10L............................. 16 Zone IV (10U-10L, 10U-V, 10U-10R)................ 32
-5L............................... 25
-V................................ 25
-5R............................... 25
-10R.............................. 16
Maximum
intensity
(candela)
See note 1........................ 160
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note 1: The listed maximum shall not occur over any area larger than that generated by a \1/4\ degree radius
within a solid cone angle within the rectangle bounded by test points 10U-10L, 10U-10R, 5D-10L, and 5D-10R.
Note 2: The measured values at each test point shall not be less than 60% of the value listed.
* * * * *
Issued on: November 18, 1994.
Barry Felrice,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 94-29053 Filed 11-23-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P-M
