[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 112 (Monday, June 10, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 29337-29339]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-14256]
[[Page 29337]]
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 571
[Docket No. 96-56, Notice 01]
RIN 2127-AF77
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Warning Devices
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, NHTSA proposes to rescind the Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety Standard that regulates triangular warning devices
intended to be placed on the roadway behind disabled buses and trucks
that have a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) greater than 10,000 lbs.
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) requires commercial carriers
to carry and use one of three types of warning devices: triangular
devices meeting Standard No. 125, fusees or flares. NHTSA is proposing
to rescind the Standard because FHWA can readily specify the carrying
and using of triangular warning devices meeting requirements other than
those in Standard No. 125. This proposal is part of the agency's
efforts to implement the President's Regulatory Reform Initiative to
remove unnecessary regulations.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 25, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Comments must refer to the docket and notice numbers cited
at the beginning of this notice and be submitted to: Docket Section,
Room 5109, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 400
Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. It is requested that 10
copies of the comments be submitted.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical issues: Mr. Richard Van
Iderstine, Office of Vehicle Safety Standards, NPS-21, telephone (202)
366-5280, FAX (202) 366-4329.
For legal issues: Ms. Dorothy Nakama, Office of Chief Counsel, NCC-
20, telephone (202) 366-2992, FAX (202) 366-3820.
Both may be reached at NHTSA, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington,
DC 20590. Comments should not be faxed to these persons, but should be
sent to the Docket Section.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
President's Regulatory Reinvention Initiative
Pursuant to the March 4, 1995 directive ``Regulatory Reinvention
Initiative'' from the President to the heads of departments and
agencies, NHTSA undertook a review of its regulations and directives.
During the course of this review, NHTSA identified regulations that it
could propose to rescind as unnecessary or to amend to improve their
comprehensibility, application, or appropriateness. Among the
regulations identified for potential rescission is Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety Standard No. 125, Warning devices (49 CFR Sec. 571.125).
Background of Standard No. 125
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 125, Warning
devices, specifies requirements for warning devices that do not have
self-contained energy sources (unpowered warning devices) and that are
designed to be carried in buses and trucks that have a gross vehicle
weight rating (GVWR) greater than 10,000 lbs. The unpowered warning
devices are intended to be placed on the roadway behind a disabled
vehicle to warn approaching traffic of its presence. The Standard does
not apply to unpowered warning devices designed to be permanently
affixed to the vehicle. The purpose of the Standard is to reduce deaths
and injuries due to rear-end collisions between moving traffic and
stopped vehicles.
The standard requires that the unpowered warning devices be
triangular, covered with orange fluorescent and red reflex reflective
material, and open in the center. These characteristics are intended to
assure that the warning device has a standardized shape for quick
message recognition and can be readily observed during both daytime and
nighttime, and does not blow over when deployed.
NHTSA has never required that any new vehicle be equipped with the
Standard No. 125 warning device or any other warning device. However,
as explained below, FHWA, which has authority to regulate interstate
commercial vehicles-in-use, mandates that operators of those vehicles
carry and use unpowered warning devices meeting Standard No. 125,
fusees or flares.
Previous Changes to Standard No. 125
Before 1994, Standard No. 125 applied to unpowered warning devices
that are designed to be carried in any type of motor vehicle. On May
10, 1993 (58 FR 27314), NHTSA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking to
amend Standard No. 125 so that the Standard applies only to warning
devices that are designed to be carried in buses and trucks that have a
gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) greater than 10,000 lbs.
NHTSA proposed to limit the scope of Standard No. 125 in order to
provide manufacturers of unpowered warning devices with greater design
freedom and to relieve an unnecessary regulatory burden on industry. At
the same time, the agency proposed to retain the requirements for
warning devices for buses and trucks with a GVWR greater than 10,000
lbs., primarily to support FHWA's regulation of commercial motor
vehicles under the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSR) (49
CFR parts 350-399). Section 393.95 of the FMCSR requires either that
three Standard No. 125 warning devices or specified numbers of fusees
or flares be carried on all trucks and buses used in interstate
commerce. In a final rule published on September 29, 1994 (59 FR
49586), NHTSA limited the applicability of Standard No. 125 as
proposed.
Proposed Rescission of Standard No. 125
In the September 1994 final rule limiting Standard No. 125 to
unpowered warning devices designed to be carried in buses and trucks
with a GVWR greater than 10,000 lbs., NHTSA stated that it was
retaining Standard No. 125 in its narrowed form largely to ensure the
continued availability of standardized unpowered warning devices which
FHWA could specify as a means of complying with its warning device
requirements for commercial vehicle operators. After reviewing Standard
No. 125 in light of the President's Regulatory Review Initiative, NHTSA
tentatively has determined that the retention of Standard No. 125 is
not necessary to ensure the continued availability of unpowered warning
devices.
If Standard No. 125 were rescinded, FHWA would have two options.
First, it could adopt the current manufacturing standards for the
warning devices as an appendix to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Regulations. Section 393.95 would be revised to reference the newly
created appendix as opposed to Section 571.125.
Second, it could work with an industry voluntary standards setting
organization such as the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) to
develop an industry standard on unpowered warning devices containing
requirements similar to those in Standard No. 125. Once those
requirements were developed, FHWA could incorporate them by reference
in Section 393.95.
[[Page 29338]]
NHTSA notes that it has a pending petition from the Transportation
Safety Equipment Institute (TSEI) requesting that NHTSA's testing
protocol for Standard No. 125, Laboratory Test Procedure for Warning
Devices (TP-125-00, April 1, 1977) be amended to reflect the TSEI's
recommended changes. If NHTSA were to rescind Standard No. 125,
equipment manufacturers could work with an industry standard setting
organization to specify the testing protocol that it deems appropriate.
Proposed Effective Date
Because the proposed removal of Standard No. 125 would relieve
regulatory restrictions without compromising safety, the agency has
tentatively determined that there is good cause for concluding that an
effective date earlier than 180 days after issuance is in the public
interest. Accordingly, the agency proposes that, if adopted, the
effective date for the final rule be 45 days after its publication in
the Federal Register.
Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
1. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
This proposed rule was not reviewed under E.O. 12866, Regulatory
Planning and Review. NHTSA has analyzed the impact of this rulemaking
action under the Department of Transportation's regulatory policies and
procedures and determined that it is not ``significant.'' If made
final, this rulemaking action would remove an unnecessary regulation
from the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards.
This action is not expected to have any economic impact on
manufacturers of unpowered warning devices designed to be carried in
motor vehicles with a GVWR of 10,000 lbs. or less since the agency does
not currently regulate the manufacture of those devices.
Based on its assumption that there would continue to be performance
requirements similar to those currently in Standard No. 125, NHTSA
tentatively concludes that the rescission of the Standard would, at
most, have only slight, nonquantifiable economic effects on
manufacturers of unpowered warning devices designed to be carried in
buses and trucks over 10,000 lbs. GVWR.
For these reasons, the agency has concluded that the economic
effects of this proposal would be so minimal that a full regulatory
evaluation is not required.
2. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The agency has also considered the effects of this rulemaking under
the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) I certify that
this proposal would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. If FHWA continued to specify an
unpowered warning device for buses and trucks that have a GVWR greater
than 10,000 lbs. that meets requirements similar or identical to those
in Standard No. 125, and to require operators of such vehicles to carry
the devices or other types of warning devices, the cost of the
unpowered warning devices should not change. Further, manufacturers of
those unpowered warning devices would continue to have essentially the
same market that they currently have. Accordingly, the agency has not
prepared an initial regulatory flexibility analysis.
3. Executive Order 12612 (Federalism)
This proposed rule has been analyzed in accordance with the
principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 12612. The agency
has determined that the proposed rule does not have sufficient
federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism
Assessment.
4. National Environmental Policy Act
The agency has also analyzed this proposed rule for the purpose of
the National Environmental Policy Act. NHTSA has determined that the
proposed rule would not significantly affect the human environment.
5. Paperwork Reduction Act
Standard No. 125 specifies that the warning devices be marked with
certain information, that is considered to be an information collection
requirement, as that term is defined by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) in 5 CFR Part 1320. This collection of information has
been assigned OMB Control No. 2127-0506, (Warning Devices (Labeling))
and has been approved for use through March 31, 1996. Whether NHTSA
decides to ask for a reinstatement of this collection of information
will depend on the final action for this rulemaking.
6. Executive Order 12866 (Civil Justice Reform)
This proposed rule would not have any retroactive effect. Under 49
U.S.C. section 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, except to the extent that the State requirement
imposes a higher level of performance and applies only to vehicles
procured for the State's use. 49 U.S.C. section 30161 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.
Procedures for Filing Comments
Interested persons are invited to submit comments on the proposal.
It is requested 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
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.
[[Page 29339]]
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571
Imports, Incorporation by reference, Motor vehicle safety, Motor
vehicles, Rubber and rubber products, Tires.
In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA proposes to amend 49 CFR
part 571 as follows:
PART 571--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 571 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. 571.125 [Removed and reserved]
2. Sec. 571.125 would be removed, and reserved.
Issued on: May 31, 1996.
Barry Felrice,
Associate Administrator for Safety Performance Standards.
[FR Doc. 96-14256 Filed 6-7-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
