[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 126 (Tuesday, July 1, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35538-35539]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-17106]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Denial of Petition for Rulemaking
This notice sets forth the reasons for the denial of a petition
submitted to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)
under 49 U.S.C. 30142 and 49 CFR part 552 to initiate rulemaking to
amend the Federal Bumper Standard at 49 CFR part 581.
The Coalition of Small Volume Automobile Manufacturers, Inc.
(COSVAM), which describes itself as a non-profit association comprised
of small volume motor vehicle manufacturers (producing less than 5,000
vehicles per year), petitioned NHTSA to amend the Federal Bumper
Standard. The amendment sought by COSVAM would provide an exemption
from the standard's requirements if compliance with those requirements
would cause a manufacturer substantial economic hardship.
As conceived by COSVAM, the exemption would only be available to
manufacturers who did not manufacture in, and/or import into, the
United States in the previous calendar year more than 10,000 vehicles.
COSVAM contended that NHTSA's requirements impose a proportionately
greater burden on small volume manufacturers due to their limited
resources and low production. Additionally, COSVAM contended that small
volume manufacturers have more limited access to technology than their
larger counterparts, and must sustain enormous costs for research and
development and other expenses allocated on a ``per vehicle'' basis,
given the small number of vehicles over which these costs must be
spread.
COSVAM noted that 49 U.S.C. 30113 authorizes NHTSA to exempt motor
vehicles from compliance with a Federal motor vehicle safety standard
based, in part, on a finding that ``compliance with the standard would
cause substantial economic hardship to a manufacturer * * *.'' 49
U.S.C. 30113(b)(3)(B)(i). The organization noted that comparable
language is not found in 49 U.S.C. 32502, the statute that mandated the
issuance of the Federal Bumper Standard. That section instead provides
that an exemption from the standard may be granted, for good cause, to
``(1) a multipurpose passenger vehicle; or (2) a make, model, or class
of a passenger motor vehicle manufactured for a special use, if the
standard would interfere unreasonably with the special use of the
vehicle.'' 49 U.S.C. 32502(c) (1) and (2).
COSVAM contended that the vehicles produced by its members are
manufactured for a special use, specifically for ``unusual, collector
niche, or special purposes.'' The organization described these vehicles
as typically being used as ``week-end cars,'' as opposed to being given
everyday use. COSVAM further
[[Page 35539]]
contended that ``compliance with the bumper standard interferes
unreasonably with such `special use' when compliance causes
`substantial economic hardship' to the (small volume manufacturer).''
Elaborating on this concept, the organization observed that ``(i)f the
(small volume manufacturer) produces no vehicles (or fewer vehicles)
because of the burdens of the standard, and thus incurs substantial
economic hardship, the `special usage' of the vehicles by the vehicles'
owners is diminished or `unreasonably interfered with.'''
COSVAM's final contention was that adoption of an exemption from
the bumper standard will be a ``significant step towards international
harmonization from the perspective of the (small volume
manufacturer).''
After a full and careful analysis of COSVAM's petition and its
supporting rationale, NHTSA has decided to deny the petition. The
agency notes that 49 U.S.C. 32502, the statute under which the bumper
standard was issued, provides no basis for exempting vehicles on the
grounds of economic hardship. Even if such a basis did exist, the
agency notes that COSVAM did not provide any financial information
demonstrating how compliance with the bumper standard causes
substantial economic hardship to small volume manufacturers.
More significantly, COSVAM did not demonstrate that vehicles
produced by small volume manufacturers are manufactured for a special
use. The agency believes that an exotic car licensed and used on public
roads cannot be considered a ``special use'' vehicle. Absent the
showing of such a special use, and that compliance with the bumper
standard would unreasonably interfere with that special use, there is
no basis for exempting a vehicle from the standard under 49 U.S.C.
32502(c)(2).
NHTSA can only exempt a manufacturer from a bumper standard for
reasons specified in section 32502(c). There is no implied authority
for the agency to grant exemptions in situations not covered by that
section. Courts have strictly construed the statutes administered by
NHTSA in determining the scope of the agency's exemption granting
authority. See, e.g., Nader v. Volpe, 475 F. 2d 916 (D.C. Cir., 1973),
holding that the agency's authority to grant temporary exemptions from
the Federal motor vehicle safety standards is limited to the explicit
wording of the statute authorizing such exemptions, now codified at 49
U.S.C. 30113.
Finally, NHTSA does not believe that adoption of the requested
exemption from the bumper standard will further the goals of
international harmonization. Those goals are directed, in part, at
reducing non-tariff barriers to trade, such as those that result from
differences in test standards that apply to vehicles sold in various
markets. Compliance with the bumper standard does not impose such an
impediment to trade because it would not restrict the entry of a
compliant vehicle into other markets.
For the reasons discussed above, NHTSA has concluded that it has no
authority to amend 49 CFR part 581 to exempt small volume manufacturers
from the bumper standard, as requested in COSVAM's petition.
Accordingly, that petition is denied.
Issued on June 25, 1997.
L. Robert Shelton,
Associate Administrator for Safety Performance Standards.
[FR Doc. 97-17106 Filed 6-30-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
