[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 151 (Wednesday, August 6, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 42226-42229]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-20574]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 571
[Docket No. 90-01; Notice 6]
RIN 2127-AG81
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; School Bus Pedestrian
Safety Devices
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In response to a petition for rulemaking from Transpec Inc.,
this document proposes to amend Standard No. 131, School Bus Pedestrian
Safety Devices, with respect to the conspicuity requirements for stop
signal arms. Specifically, the agency would amend the standard to
permit the use of additional light sources on the surface of
retroreflective stop signal arms.
DATES: Comments. Comments must be received on or before October 6,
1997.
Effective Date: The amendments made by this rulemaking would be
effective [Insert date of publication of the final rule in the Federal
Register].
ADDRESSES: Comments should refer to the docket and notice numbers above
and be submitted to: Docket Section, National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC 20590. Docket
hours are 9:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical issues: Mr. Charles
Hott, Office of Vehicle Safety Standards, National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590
(202) 366-0247.
For legal issues: Mr. Paul Atelsek, Office of Chief Counsel, NCC-
20, telephone (202) 366-2992, FAX (202) 366-3820.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On May 3, 1991, NHTSA published a final rule establishing Federal
Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 131, School bus pedestrian safety
devices (56 FR 20363). The standard requires each new school bus to be
equipped with a stop signal arm. A stop signal arm is a device
patterned after a conventional ``STOP'' sign and attached to the
driver's side of a school bus. When the school bus's red signal lights
are activated, the stop signal arm automatically extends outward from
the bus. Its purpose is to alert motorists that a school bus is
stopping or has stopped. The standard specifies requirements about the
stop signal arm's appearance, size, conspicuity, operation and
location.
To ensure the conspicuity of a stop signal arm, Standard No. 131
specifies that the device must either be reflectorized or be
illuminated with flashing lamps. If reflectorization is used to comply
with the standard, ``the entire surface of both sides of the stop
signal arm'' must be reflectorized. (S5.3.1, emphasis added) If
flashing lamps are used to comply with the standard, S5.3.2 requires
the lamps to comply with the location and performance requirements set
forth in S6.2 of the Standard.
In a November 21, 1995, letter from NHTSA's Chief Counsel to
Specialty Manufacturing Company, a manufacturer of stop signal arms,
NHTSA addressed the use of Light Emitting Diodes (LEDs) to outline the
word ``Stop'' on the stop arm blade. In that letter, the agency stated
that
[[Page 42227]]
because the LEDs would obscure a portion of the surface that is
required to be reflectorized, LEDs would not be permitted under the
reflectorization option (S5.3.1) but could be used in conjunction with
flashing lamps under the flashing lamp option (S5.3.2).
II. Petition for Rulemaking
On April 24, 1997, the law firm of Winston and Strawn, on behalf of
its client, Transpec, Inc. (Transpec), submitted a petition for
rulemaking requesting that S5.3.1 of the standard be amended to allow
the use of LEDs on stop signal arms.\1\ The petition seeks to amend the
section to permit red LEDs on the surface of the stop arm that are
``contained within a light channel not greater than 10mm (.394 inch)
wide centered within the stroke width of each letter.'' Under the
requested amendment, the minimum stroke width of letters containing
LEDs would be increased from 20 mm (0.79 inch) to 25 mm (0.8984 inch).
The LEDs would be required to flash at the rate specified for stop arm
lamps conforming to S5.3.2. The petitioner believes that such an
amendment would increase the conspicuity and the readability of school
bus stop arms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Transpec also submitted a petition under 49 CFR part 555 for
a temporary exemption from compliance with motor vehicle standards.
Since part 555 applies only to manufacturers of motor vehicles, this
procedure for a temporary exemption is not applicable to Transpec, a
manufacturer of motor vehicle equipment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The petition also seeks to permit a percentage of the surface area
of the stop arm to be obscured by mounting brackets and other necessary
components, with the aggregate area obscured by the LEDs and other
components not to exceed 7.5 percent of the surface area of the stop
arm.
In support of its petition, Transpec cited a study by the
University of South Florida showing that a significant percentage of
motorists are passing stopped school buses, despite the use of the stop
arms currently required by Standard No. 131.\2\ In Transpec's view, the
amendments it proposed would reduce the incidence of illegal passing by
motorists and increase safety for children exiting school buses.
Transpec also stated that LEDs on the stop signal arm would not alter
the fundamental appearance of the stop arm and would thus not confuse
interstate motorists, who might not have encountered LED-equipped stop
arms in their home states.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Illegal Passing of Stopped School Buses in Florida,
University of South Florida College of Engineering at vii (February
1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Agency's Decision
NHTSA has decided to grant Transpec's petition and to propose
amending Standard No. 131 to permit the use of additional light sources
on retroreflective stop signal arms. The agency regards such an
amendment to be consistent with the agency's intent that the
reflectorization and lighting requirements assure the conspicuity of
stop signal arms. The agency has granted similar petitions in the past.
In response to a petition seeking to facilitate the use of strobe lamps
on stop arms, NHTSA amended Standard No. 131 on March 24, 1994 (59 FR
26759), to remove design-restrictive language specifying a flash rate
that effectively prohibited strobe lamps. The agency noted that its
primary concern was to ``assure the conspicuity of stop signal arms.''
The agency continues to believe that this is the most important
consideration in regulating the conspicuity of stop signal arms.
In proposing to adopt the substance of the amendments sought by
Transpec, NHTSA requests comments and test data about the effectiveness
of LED-equipped stop signal arms as a means of enhancing stop-arm
conspicuity. Because LED light sources are not the only means for
achieving an illuminated legend, NHTSA also requests comment on the use
of other light sources, such as miniature incandescent and neon light
sources, and their effectiveness.
In the final rule establishing Standard No. 131, NHTSA emphasized
that uniformity was necessary to ensure that school bus stopping and
signaling procedures give passing motorists a consistent message
throughout the country. By standardizing the color scheme, shape, and
word STOP, the agency sought to ensure that a driver traveling in a
different State would encounter the ``same familiar stop sign design
throughout the country.'' (56 FR 20363, 20366). While the agency
tentatively agrees with Transpec's assessment that the LED-equipped
stop arms would not create confusion, it requests comments on this
issue relative to LEDs and other sources that could be used for legend
illumination.
With respect to the details of Transpec's request, the agency is
concerned that specifying red as the color for light sources may
restrict the use of other colors. It may be that white light sources
would provide equivalent conspicuity, since the lettering being
enhanced is white. The agency requests comment on whether to allow use
of either red or white LEDs or other light sources, or to allow only
one color of emitted light. Rather than limit the permitted light
sources to LEDs, as proposed by Transpec, the agency is proposing to
permit any type of light source in the legend lamps. In addition to
LEDs, miniature halogen and non-halogen light sources, and neon long-
arc discharge sources are becoming common in automotive signal
lighting. In view of the availability of these other light sources, the
agency is proposing to amend S6.2.2.1 to eliminate the word
``filament'' to remove this as a restriction against non-filament light
sources that could be used in the legend lamps.
There is the potential for confusion in existing S6.2.2.2 with the
term ``gaseous discharge lamp'' because it covers a broad range of
light sources. It can apply not only to the intended xenon short-arc
discharge lamps already permitted, but to long-arc neon and other
gaseous discharge light sources. Yet these other sources are not
necessarily handicapped by having the short ``on'' time performance as
the xenon short-arc sources. Thus, most other discharge-arc sources can
comply with the duty cycle requirements of S6.2.2.1 as stated above. To
eliminate the potential for confusion, S6.2.2.2, which has been
intended to address only xenon short-arc discharge sources, is proposed
to be amended to state specifically that it applies only to such
sources.
Given that NHTSA considers the conspicuity of the stop arm to be
paramount, the agency seeks comment on what, if any, intensities and
test procedures should be required for lamps used on stop arms. In
addition, NHTSA notes that the Society of Automotive Engineers
standards referenced in FMVSS 131 are not current. Would it be useful
to update some or all of these to the latest versions? Would there be
any burden associated with making such changes?
In proposing the option of additional light sources on the surface
of retroreflective stop arms, NHTSA is proposing regulatory language to
accommodate reasonably-foreseeable designs other than Transpec's. For
example, Transpec's design has LEDs centered within each letter of the
word STOP. However, another approach would be to outline each letter of
the word STOP with light sources. In addition, Transpec proposed that
the minimum stroke width of letters containing LEDs be increased from
20 mm to 25 mm, perhaps to partially compensate for the loss of
retroreflective material in the area occupied by the 9.52 mm-wide LEDs
within each letter. Instead, NHTSA is proposing that the ``net stroke
width'' (the stroke width minus the lamps' width) of each letter
[[Page 42228]]
containing lamps be at least 15 mm. This approach would accommodate the
Transpec design, while also accommodating other possible designs such
as outlining the inside perimeter of each letter with white lamps. (A
design that, for example, outlined the outside perimeter of each letter
with red lamps would remain subject to the existing 20 mm minimum
stroke width.)
In response to a separate request in the Transpec petition, NHTSA
is also proposing to amend S5.3.1 to specify the maximum amount of the
reflectorized surface that may be obscured by nonreflectorized
attachment and electrical components. The agency is proposing that
nonreflectorized materials, such as mounting brackets, bolts, and other
necessary components, may not obscure more than 7.5 percent of the
total surface area of either side of a stop signal arm. The agency
requests comments about this proposed requirement and whether 7.5
percent, the percentage requested by Transpec, is an appropriate
amount. NHTSA is proposing a similar amendment to S5.2.1 to provide
that the portion of the white border that may be obscured by attachment
hardware or other components shall not exceed 10 percent.
Since the proposed amendments would permit an optional method of
compliance with S5.3.1, and would thus not impose a new requirement on
any manufacturer, NHTSA considers that good cause exists for proposing
an immediate effective date for the amendments. The agency requests
comments on whether an immediate effective date would be appropriate.
Regulatory Analyses and Notices
A. Executive Order 12866 (Federal Regulation) and DOT Regulatory
Policies and Procedures
This notice was not reviewed under Executive Order 12866, the
Office of Management and Budget having determined that it is not
significant within the definitions of the Executive Order. NHTSA has
analyzed this rulemaking and determined that it is not significant
within the meaning of the Department of Transportation regulatory
policies and procedures. The agency has determined that the economic
effects of the amendment would be so minimal that a full regulatory
evaluation is not required. Since the amendment would impose no new
requirement but simply would allow for an alternative design, any cost
impacts would be in the nature of slight, nonquantifiable cost savings.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, NHTSA has
evaluated the effects of this rulemaking on small entities. Based on
this evaluation, I hereby certify that the amendment would not have
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Few of the school bus manufacturers qualify as small entities. In
addition, manufacturers of motor vehicles, small businesses, small
organizations, and small governmental units that purchase motor
vehicles would not be significantly affected by the amendments.
Accordingly, a regulatory flexibility analysis has not been performed.
C. Federalism Assessment
This action has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order 12612. NHTSA has determined that
the rulemaking would not have sufficient federalism implications to
warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
D. Environmental Impacts
In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969,
NHTSA has considered the environmental impacts of this rule. The agency
has determined that this rule would not have a significant effect on
the quality of the human environment.
F. Civil Justice Reform
This rule has no 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,
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. 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.
Public 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. 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.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571
Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Motor vehicles, Rubber and rubber
products, Tires.
In consideration of the foregoing, 49 CFR part 571 is 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. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117, and 30166;
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50
Sec. 571.131 [Amended]
2. Section 571.131 would be amended by revising S5.2.1, S5.2.2,
S5.3.1, S6.2.2.1 and S6.2.2.2, and by adding S5.3.1.1 through S5.3.1.3
to read as follows:
[[Page 42229]]
Sec. 571.131 Standard No. 131, School bus pedestrian safety devices.
* * * * *
S5.2.1 The stop signal arm shall have a white border at least 12
mm (0.47 inches) wide on both sides, except as provided in S5.2.3.
Mounting brackets, clips, bolts, or other components necessary to the
mechanical or electrical operation of the stop signal arm may not
obscure more than 10 percent of the border.
S.5.2.2 The stop signal arm shall have the word ``STOP'' displayed
in white upper-case letters on both sides, except as provided in
S5.2.3. The letters shall be at least 150 mm (5.9 inches) in height.
The letters shall have a stroke width of at least 20 mm (0.79 inches),
except as provided in S.5.3.1.1.
* * * * *
S5.3.1 Except as provided in S5.3.1.1, S5.3.1.2, S5.3.1.3, or
S5.3.1.4, the entire surface of both sides of each stop signal arm
shall be reflectorized with Type III retroreflectorized material that
meets the minimum specific intensity requirements of S6.1 and Table I.
S.5.3.1.1 The legend of the retroreflective stop arm may be
illuminated in a manner such that light is emitted from the surface of
each letter or from the area immediately surrounding each letter. Only
red or white lamps may be used, and all such lamps shall be of one
color. They shall form the complete shape of each letter of the legend,
and shall be affixed to all letters (or to the areas immediately
surrounding all letters) in the legend. The width of each letter shall
remain constant. The lamps shall either lie on the centerline of each
letter of the legend or outline each letter of the legend. If the lamps
are contained within each letter, the net stroke width (not including
the width of the lamp(s)) of each letter of the legend specified in
S5.2.2 shall not be less than 15 mm (0.59 inches). When the stop arm is
extended, the lamps shall flash at the rate specified in S6.2.2, with a
current ``on'' time that complies with S6.2.2.1.
S5.3.1.2 Nonreflectorized mounting brackets, bolts, or other
components necessary to the mechanical or electrical operation of the
stop signal arm shall not obscure more than 7.5 percent of the total
surface area of either side of the stop signal arm.
S5.3.1.3 When two stop signal arms are installed on a school bus,
the forward side of the rearmost stop signal arm shall not be
reflectorized.
* * * * *
S6.2.2.1 Lamps, except those subject to S6.2.2.2, shall have a
current ``on'' time of 30 to 75 percent of the total flash cycle. The
total current ``on'' time for the two terminals shall be between 90 and
110 percent of the total flash cycle.
S6.2.2.2 Xenon short-arc gaseous discharge lamps shall have an
``off'' time before each flash of at least 50 percent of the total
flash cycle.
* * * * *
Issued on: July 31, 1997.
L. Robert Shelton,
Associate Administrator for Safety Performance Standards.
[FR Doc. 97-20574 Filed 8-5-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
