[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 93 (Wednesday, May 14, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 26466-26468]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-12585]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 571
[Docket No. 97-030; Notice 1]
RIN 2127-AG47
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 document proposes to amend the Federal motor vehicle
safety standard on lighting to permit white reflex reflectors designed
to be mounted horizontally in trailer and truck tractor conspicuity
treatments to be mounted vertically in upper rear corner locations if
they comply with photometric requirements when tested horizontally.
This action implements the grant of a rulemaking petition from James
King & Co, and will have the benefit of simplifying compliance with the
standard.
DATES: Comments are due June 30, 1997. The amendments would become
effective 45 days after publication of the final rule.
ADDRESSES: Comments should refer to the docket number and notice
number, and must be submitted to: Docket Section, Room 5109, 400
Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC 20590. (Docket hours are from 9:30
a.m. to 4 p.m.).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patrick Boyd, Office of Safety
Performance Standards, NHTSA (Phone: 202-366-5275; FAX 202-366-4329).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Paragraph S5.7 of Motor Vehicle Safety
Standard No. 108 specifies conspicuity system requirements for truck
tractors, and trailers of 80 or more inches overall width and a gross
vehicle weight rating of more than 10,000 pounds. Part of the
conspicuity treatment consists of two pairs of white material applied
horizontally and vertically to the right and left upper contours of the
body. This material may be either white retroreflective sheeting, or
white reflex reflectors.
This agency has received a petition for rulemaking concerning white
reflectors. Paragraph S5.7.2.1(c) requires white reflex reflectors to
``provide at an observation angle of 0.2 degree, not less than 1250
millicandelas/lux at any light entrance angle between 30 degrees left
and 30 degrees right, including an entrance angle of 0 degree, and not
less than 300 millicandelas/lux at any light entrance angle between 45
degrees left and 45 degrees right.'' A petition from James King & Co.
states that white reflectors designed to give the required performance
at 30 and 45 degree right and left entrance angles when mounted
horizontally cannot do so in the right and left directions when tested
in the vertical position. Consequently, when white reflex reflectors
are molded in bars of multiple reflectors, the reflector bars required
for the two upper rear vertical positions must be different from the
reflector bars that are used in horizontal positions to fulfill
conspicuity requirements. King has asked NHTSA for rulemaking to allow
use of horizontal bars meeting S5.7.2.1(c) in vertical positions.
The agency has granted this petition. The white upper material is
part of the rear conspicuity treatment to improve the distance
perception of a driver of a faster, overtaking vehicle in the same
lane. In this circumstance, the usual view of the truck tractor or
trailer by the driver is close to orthogonal. Since the upper rear
corner material is meant to provide a two dimensional image to vehicles
approaching in the same lane, it does not operate at the high light-
entrance angles typical of views of the sides of vehicles. A
conspicuity-grade reflex reflector bar, regardless of its mounting
orientation, will provide excellent retroreflective performance at the
low light entrance angles typical of upper rear corner material. The
fact that
[[Page 26467]]
a different reflex reflector bar has had to be used for the vertical
portion of the upper rear treatment is an unintended consequence of the
agency's rulemaking activities.
NHTSA tentatively agrees with the petitioner that reflex reflector
bars designed for horizontal mounting should be permitted to be mounted
vertically in the rear upper corners. As the petitioner pointed out, a
corner treatment composed of two identical reflector bars mounted at
right angles maximizes the total range of light entrance angles at
which at least part of the upper treatment can reflect at full
brightness. The agency is therefore proposing that Standard No. 108 be
amended to add new paragraph S5.7.2.2(c) allowing reflex reflectors
meeting the requirements of paragraph S5.7.2.1(c) when installed
horizontally to be installed in all orientations required at the rear
upper locations on truck tractors and trailers subject to the
conspicuity requirements. Such an action will simplify compliance and
should encourage the retrofitting of vehicles in service not subject to
the conspicuity requirements.
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
Since the final rule would not impose any additional burden and is
intended to afford an alternative to existing requirements, it is
hereby tentatively found that an effective date earlier than 180 days
after issuance of the final rule is in the public interest. The final
rule would be effective 45 days after its publication in the Federal
Register.
Rulemaking Analyses
Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
This rulemaking action has not been reviewed under Executive Order
12866. It has been determined that the rulemaking action is not
significant under Department of Transportation regulatory policies and
procedures. The effect of the rulemaking action would be to allow the
same white reflex reflector bars to be used for vertical and horizontal
locations on the rear of truck tractors and trailers, rather than two
different types of bars. The final rule would not impose any additional
burden upon any person. A final rule based on such an action would
reduce costs both to manufacturers and consumers. Impacts of the rule
are so minimal as not to warrant preparation of a full regulatory
evaluation.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The agency has also considered the effects of this rulemaking
action in relation to the Regulatory Flexibility Act. I certify that
this rulemaking action would not have a significant economic effect
upon a substantial number of small entities. Motor vehicle
manufacturers are generally not small businesses within the meaning of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Further, small organizations and
governmental jurisdictions would not be significantly affected since
the price of new motor vehicles should not be impacted. As noted above,
the cost impacts per vehicle are relatively minor. Accordingly, no
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis has been prepared.
Executive Order 12612 (Federalism)
This action has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order 12612 on ``Federalism.'' It has
been determined that the rulemaking action does not have sufficient
federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism
Assessment.
National Environmental Policy Act
NHTSA has analyzed this rulemaking action for purposes of the
National Environmental Policy Act. The rulemaking action would not have
a significant effect upon the environment as it does not affect the
present method of manufacturing reflex reflectors.
Civil Justice Reform
This rulemaking action would not have any retroactive effect. Under
49 U.S.C. 30103, 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. Under 49 U.S.C. 30163, a procedure is set forth 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, it is proposed that 49 CFR part
571 be amended as follows:
PART 571--FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS
1. The authority citation would continue to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117, and 30166;
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.
Sec. 571.108 [Amended]
2. Section 571.108 would be amended by adding new paragraph
S7.5.2.2(c) to read as set forth below:
S7.5.2.2 * * *
(c) If white reflex reflectors comply with paragraph S7.5.2.1(c)
when installed horizontally, they may be installed in all orientations
specified for
[[Page 26468]]
rear upper locations in paragraph S5.7.1.4.1(b) or paragraph
S5.7.1.4.3(b).
Issued on: April 29, 1997.
L. Robert Shelton,
Associate Administrator for Safety Performance Standards.
[FR Doc. 97-12585 Filed 5-13-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
