[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 243 (Tuesday, December 19, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 65262-65263]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-30558]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 571
Denial of Petition for Rulemaking; Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standards
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation.
ACTION: Denial of petition for rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document denies a petition from Mr. Philip Sweeney to
require audible exterior back-up warning signals on large motor
vehicles such as school buses and city maintenance vehicles. After
analyzing the petition and data on back-up accidents, NHTSA concludes
that mandating audible backup warning signals may not be effective in
minimizing collisions with pedestrians, especially young children. The
Agency has research underway on other means to reduce such deaths and
injuries.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Jere Medlin, Office of Crash
Avoidance Standards, NHTSA, 400 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC
20590. Mr. Medlin's telephone number is: (202) 366-5276. His facsimile
number is (202) 366-4329.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: At present, none of the Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety Standards requires that a motor vehicle sound an audible
warning signal when the vehicle is driven in reverse or backing up. By
letter dated August 7, 1995, Mr. Philip Sweeney of San Diego,
California, petitioned the agency to issue a standard to require an
audible exterior maintenance vehicles. Mr. Sweeney stated in his
petition that drivers of large vehicles have limited rear visibility,
that young children can sometimes act impulsively, disregarding safety
rules, and that young children have limited ability to anticipate
safety risks.
The agency has reviewed the circumstances associated with the
petitioner's desired solution. It has found that pedestrian response to
exterior audible back-up alarms already on large vehicles has been
studied. This study looked at the human factors involved in relation to
conventional backing-up audible warning systems. The study, ``The
Consideration of Human Factors in the Design of a Backing-up Warning
System'' by Duchon, James C. and Laage, Linneas W., U.S. Bureau of
Mines, is from the
[[Page 65263]]
``Proceedings of the Human Factors Society--30th Annual Meeting--
1986.'' The authors looked at human behavior associated with back-up
alarms. The specific vehicles were front-end loaders in the mining
industry. The findings were that vehicle operators lose the perception
of responsibility for vigilant behavior and that the pedestrians in the
area predictably become habituated to the alarm. The authors also
discussed a discernible alarm that would activate only when there was a
target in danger behind the vehicle, which might be more effective
because it sounded when an object was in proximity to the rear of the
vehicle. Unfortunately, while possibly reducing habituation, such an
alarm does not resolve the fundamental problem with alarms--the change
in behavior of the driver towards being less responsible for the
backing maneuver.
Another research effort looked at pedestrian back-up accidents and
evaluated if an audible exterior back-up alarm would have been
effective in preventing the accident. The study, ``An Audible
Automobile Back-up Pedestrian Warning Device--Development and
Evaluation'', DOT-HS-802-083, November 1976, found that accidents where
no benefit would be expected from an audible exterior alarm included
those where the pedestrian saw the vehicle but was unable to or did not
avoid it (e.g. if the vehicle was backing too fast), where the vehicle
was unoccupied, and when the victim was a child less than 5 years old.
This last item was added because, as the petitioner appears to support,
children have limited abilities to recognize danger signals and risky
situations. It should be noted that children are over-represented in
backing accidents most likely because of this limitation and because
they cannot be seen easily behind a vehicle, even if standing.
Thus, any solution of the back-up accident problem should be able
to address the deaths and injuries to children age 5 years and under.
It would appear that an audible exterior warning signal as proposed by
the petitioner would have little value in addressing backing accidents,
given the above findings.
The agency is currently conducting research to investigate the
feasibility of equipping motor vehicles with cost effective
countermeasures to assist drivers in safely carrying out backing, lane
change and merging maneuvers. The objectives are to determine the
performance of one or more feasible countermeasures and to define
specifications in performance terms without constraining the solutions
to particular devices or technologies. Should the Agency find that
there are cost effective solutions available when that research is
completed, it would consider beginning a rulemaking seeking to mandate
those performance oriented solutions.
Concerning the petitioner's specific reference to school buses, in
1995 an industry-developed standard requiring audible exterior back-up
alarms for all school buses was promulgated by the National Standards
Conference on School Transportation. Thirty-one states have chosen to
mandate back-up alarms on school buses or recommend voluntary
installation. Other regulatory and standards setting organizations such
as the states can mandate audible exterior back-up alarms on such state
and locally owned government vehicles, regardless of the level of
effectiveness and regardless of whether the buses are new or in
service. Thus, audible exterior back-up alarm installations on school
buses are likely to increase at a significant rate.
In addition, many new large trucks are voluntarily equipped with
audible exterior back-up alarms because of Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA) regulations for work site safety that
require a person outside of a vehicle to direct backing operations or
that vehicles in work sites to be equipped with audible exterior back-
up alarms. Vehicle manufacturers, in response to purchasers, appear to
be increasing the number of installations of back-up alarms on large
trucks for the purpose of complying with the OSHA rules.
In sum, although NHTSA continues to be concerned about collisions
between pedestrians and vehicles that are backing up, the agency is not
convinced that mandating audible back-up alarms on large vehicles is
the most effective means to minimize collisions with pedestrians. In
particular, the data do not appear to show that mandating audible
backup alarms would result in minimizing collisions with small
children. NHTSA therefore intends to continue its research efforts and
to look into possible alternatives, such as the effectiveness of
mirrors installed specifically for backing maneuvers. It is premature
for NHTSA to make any decision about mandating any particular solution
at this time.
In accordance with 49 CFR part 552, this completes the agency's
review of the petition. The agency has concluded that there is no
reasonable possibility that the specific requirement requested by the
petitioner would be issued at the conclusion of a rulemaking
proceeding. Accordingly, it denies Mr. Sweeney's petition.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30103, 30162; delegation of authority at 49
CFR 1.50 and 501.8.
Issued on: December 11, 1995.
Barry Felice,
Associate Administrator for Safety Performance Standards.
[FR Doc. 95-30558 Filed 12-18-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-M
