Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Air Brake Systems, 58562-58567 [E9-27231]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
58562
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 218 / Friday, November 13, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
except that: penalties may be assessed
against individuals only for willful
violations, and where a grossly
negligent violation or a pattern of
repeated violations has created an
imminent hazard of death or injury to
persons, or has caused death or injury,
a penalty not to exceed $100,000 per
violation may be assessed. Each day a
violation continues shall constitute a
separate offense. Appendix A to this
part contains a schedule of civil penalty
amounts used in connection with this
rule. The railroad is not responsible for
compliance with respect to any
condition inconsistent with the
technical standards set forth in this part
where such variance arises as a result of
actions beyond the control of the
railroad and the railroad could not have
prevented the variance through the
exercise of due diligence. The foregoing
sentence does not excuse any instance
of noncompliance resulting from the
actions of the railroad’s employees,
agents, or contractors.
(b) Criminal Penalty. Whoever
knowingly and willfully makes, causes
to be made, or participates in the
making of a false entry in reports
required to be filed by this part, or files
a false report or other document
required to be filed by this part is
subject to a $5,000 fine and 2 years
imprisonment as prescribed by 49
U.S.C. 522(a) and section 209(e) of the
Federal Railroad Safety Act of 1970, as
amended (45 U.S.C. 438(e)).
Subpart B—Reports
7. The heading to Subpart B—Reports
and Plans is revised to read as set forth
above.
■
§ 234.11
■
[Removed]
8. Section 234.11 is removed.
Issued in Washington, DC, on November 5,
2009.
Joseph C. Szabo,
Administrator, Federal Railroad
Administration.
[FR Doc. E9–27241 Filed 11–12–09; 8:45 am]
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
BILLING CODE 4910–06–P
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:06 Nov 12, 2009
Jkt 220001
49 CFR Part 571
For legal issues: Ari Scott, Office of
the Chief Counsel (NCC–112), NHTSA,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West
Building, Washington, DC 20590
(Telephone: (202) 366–2992) (Fax: (202)
366–3820).
[Docket No. NHTSA–2009–0175]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
RIN 2127–AK62
Table of Contents
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standards; Air Brake Systems
I. Background
II. Petitions for Reconsideration and Agency
Analysis
A. Four-Axle Tractors With a GVWR Under
59,600 Pounds
B. Definition of Typical Three-Axle
Tractors
C. Fuel Tank Loading Specification
D. Typographical Corrections
E. Stopping Distances at Reduced Test
Speeds
III. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures
B. Privacy Act
C. Other Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
IV. Regulatory Text
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation.
ACTION: Final Rule; partial response to
petitions for reconsideration.
SUMMARY: On July 27, 2009, NHTSA
published a final rule that amended the
Federal motor vehicle safety standard
for air brake systems by requiring
substantial improvements in stopping
distance performance. In response, the
agency received eight petitions for
reconsideration. This document
responds to those petitions by correcting
errors in a table published in the final
rule, removing a testing specification,
and adjusting the compliance date for a
small number of vehicles the agency
had not fully accounted for in the final
rule. This document provides a partial
response to the submitted petitions for
reconsideration.
DATES: This final rule is effective
November 24, 2009.
Petitions for reconsideration: Petitions
for reconsideration of this final rule
must be received not later than
December 28, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Any petitions for
reconsideration should refer to the
docket number of this document and be
submitted to: Administrator, National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West
Building, Ground Floor, Docket Room
W12–140, Washington, DC 20590.
The petition will be placed in the
docket. Anyone is able to search the
electronic form of all documents
received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the
document (or signing the document, if
submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may
review DOT’s complete Privacy Act
Statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (Volume
65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
technical issues: Jeff Woods, Office of
Crash Avoidance Standards (NVS–121),
NHTSA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
West Building, Washington, DC 20590
(Telephone: (202) 366–0098) (Fax: (202)
366–7002).
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
I. Background
On July 27, 2009, NHTSA published
a final rule 1 in the Federal Register (74
FR 37122) amending Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No.
121, Air Brake Systems, to require
improved stopping distance
performance for heavy truck tractors.
This rule reduced the maximum
allowable stopping distance, from 60
mph, from 355 feet to 250 feet for the
vast majority of heavy truck tractors. For
a small minority of very heavy tractors,
the maximum allowable stopping
distance was reduced from 355 feet to
310 feet. Having come to the conclusion
that modifications needed for ‘‘typical
three-axle tractors,’’ to meet the
improved requirements were relatively
straightforward, NHTSA provided two
years lead time for those vehicles to
comply with the new requirements.
These typical three-axle tractors
comprise approximately 82 percent of
the total fleet of heavy tractors. The
agency concluded that other tractors,
which are produced in far fewer
numbers and may require additional
work to ensure stability and control
while braking, would require more lead
time to meet the requirements. Due to
extra time needed to design, test, and
validate these vehicles, which included
two-axle tractors and severe service
tractors, the agency allowed four years
lead time for these tractors to meet the
improved stopping distance
requirements.
1 Docket
E:\FR\FM\13NOR1.SGM
# NHTSA–2009–0083.
13NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 218 / Friday, November 13, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
II. Petitions for Reconsideration and
Agency Analysis
NHTSA received eight timely
petitions for reconsideration in response
to the final rule. Separate petitions were
received from the Truck Manufacturers
Association (TMA); the Heavy Duty
Brake Manufacturers Council of the
Heavy Duty Manufacturers Association
(HDBMC); Bendix Spicer Foundation
Brake LLC (Bendix), a joint venture
between Bendix Commercial Vehicle
Systems and Dana Corporation; and
ArvinMeritor. The agency received four
additional petitions supporting and
incorporating the TMA petition by
reference from Daimler Trucks North
America (Daimler); Kenworth Truck
Company (Kenworth); Peterbilt Motors
Company (Peterbilt); and Navistar Truck
Group (Navistar).
The petitions focused on four main
issues, as well as identified some
typographical errors in the final rule.
The main issues included the stopping
distance requirements for reduced
speeds, the omission of four-axle
tractors under 59,600 pounds gross
vehicle weight rating (GVWR) from the
listed requirements and the date at
which the improved stopping distance
requirements should apply to those
tractors, the manner in which NHTSA
characterized the typical three-axle
tractor, and the fuel tank fill level
testing specification. Additionally, the
petitioners requested that NHTSA
correct some typographical errors in the
regulatory text.
This final rule addresses all issues
except those relating to stopping
distance requirements at reduced
speeds. With regard to that issue, the
agency is closely examining the
petitions and working to formulate a
comprehensive response. However, we
are addressing the other issues in this
document. The reason for this two-part
approach is that, because the agency
omitted to address lead time
requirements for tractors with four or
more axles and a GVWR of 59,600
pounds or less, and given the way this
final rule was drafted the amended
regulation inadvertently requires these
vehicles to comply with the upgraded
stopping distance requirements on
November 24, 2009. We recognize that
this would not provide nearly enough
time to design and validate compliant
tractors, and as the agency intended to
provide sufficient time to modify these
vehicles in the final rule, a prompt
amendment is needed to correct this
omission. The specific issues of the
petitions are addressed below.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:35 Nov 12, 2009
Jkt 220001
A. Four-Axle Tractors With a GVWR
Less Than or Equal to 59,600 Pounds
In the final rule, the agency omitted
addressing a compliance date for
tractors with four or more axles that
have a GVWR of less than or equal to
59,600 pounds. Moreover, given the way
the final rule was drafted, these tractors
would inadvertently be required to
comply with the requirements in Table
II on November 24, 2009. Manufacturers
were given either a two- or four-year
lead time before all other tractors were
required to meet the improved stopping
distances in Table II. Specifically,
typical three-axle tractors are required
to comply with the upgraded
requirements on August 1, 2011, while
all other tractors are required to comply
on August 1, 2013.
The issue of lead time for tractors
with four or more axles less than or
equal to 59,600 pounds GVWR was
raised by a number of petitioners. TMA
noted their omission, and requested that
NHTSA amend the rule so that these
tractors are required to comply with the
improved stopping distances on August
1, 2013, which would provide four years
lead time. HDBMC made an identical
request. Bendix also noted the omission,
although did not provide a
recommended lead time.
It was not the agency’s intention to
omit tractors with four or more axles
and a GVWR of 59,600 pounds or less
from the optional requirements of Table
IIa, and therefore require them to
comply with the upgraded requirements
in November 2009. Instead, the agency
acknowledges that these tractors require
lead time commensurate with other
non-typical tractors for purposes of
design, testing, and validation.
Therefore, for the reasons discussed
below, NHTSA is accepting the
recommendation of TMA, HDBMC, and
Bendix, and requiring compliance with
the improved standards for tractors with
four or more axles and a GVWR of less
than or equal to 59,600 pounds by
August 1, 2013, thereby giving four
years of lead time.
In deciding to allow four years of lead
time, instead of two years, the agency
used the same rationale concerning
appropriate lead time as that discussed
in the final rule. In the rule, we allowed
two years of lead time for typical threeaxle tractors because we believed that
the improvements needed to shorten the
stopping distances to meet the new
requirements were relatively
straightforward, and that many of these
tractors would already comply with the
new standards. On the other hand, we
allowed four years lead time for twoaxle tractors and severe service tractors
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
58563
(defined as tractors with a GVWR of
more than 59,600 pounds) for several
reasons. First, for some tractors, we
believed that meeting the improved
stopping distances might require
additional engineering to address
concerns with stability and control
issues. Second, we noted that unlike
‘‘typical’’ three-axle tractors, which
comprise the overwhelming bulk of the
tractor fleet, relatively less design work
had been done on non-typical tractors,
and that more time would be needed for
design, testing, and validation of new
tractor designs. Specifically, in the
section of the final rule dealing with
lead time, we stated:
[O]nly limited development work relevant
to reduced stopping distance has been
performed on [severe service tractors]
vehicles to date. As several commenters
indicated, additional lead time is needed for
complete testing and validation of new brake
systems for these vehicles to ensure that full
compliance can be achieved, without
compromising control, stability, and comfort
elements important to end users.2
Much like severe service tractors, only
limited development work relevant to
reduced stopping distance has been
performed on tractors with four or more
axles and a GVWR of less than or equal
to 59,600 pounds. The agency believes
that this tractor configuration would be
uncommon, because it has a relatively
low GVWR and is equipped with four
axles. By virtue of it having four axles,
we consider that it is not a typical threeaxle tractor and it should be afforded
more lead time for design, testing, and
validation to meet the new stopping
distance requirements. Therefore, we
believe that manufacturers of these
tractors should be given until August 1,
2013 to meet the improved stopping
distance requirements.
B. Definition of Typical Three-Axle
Tractors
TMA and ArvinMeritor raised a
concern regarding the manner in which
NHTSA defined ‘‘typical three-axle
tractor’’ in the final rule. TMA stated
that there was a slight, but substantive,
discrepancy between how NHTSA
defined this term in the preamble of the
final rule, and how it defined it in the
regulatory text of the standard. Because
of this discrepancy, TMA and
ArvinMeritor claim that NHTSA puts
some tractors with severe service
characteristics into the category of
typical three-axle tractors, and thus only
allows two years lead time to meet the
improved standards, when it should
actually allow manufacturers of those
tractors four years of lead time. After
2 74
FR 37154.
E:\FR\FM\13NOR1.SGM
13NOR1
58564
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 218 / Friday, November 13, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
carefully reviewing the TMA and
ArvinMeritor petitions, NHTSA agrees
and is revising the standard to reflect
this, for the reasons described below.
In the final rule, NHTSA made the
following statement regarding the
definition of three-axle tractors:
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
NHTSA used the same definition for a
‘‘typical three-axle tractor’’ as TMA and
HDBMC, which is a 6x4 configuration (three
axles with six wheel positions; a non-driven
steer axle and two rear drive axles) with a
GVWR below 59,600 pounds, a steer axle
with a GAWR equal or less than 14,600
pounds, and tandem drive axles rated equal
or less than 45,000 pounds total capacity.3
This definition was important, because
NHTSA treated typical three-axle
tractors differently than other tractors,
by providing manufacturers less lead
time to meet the improved requirements
for these tractors than other tractors. As
we stated, ‘‘NHTSA is specifying
differing compliance dates for typical
three-axle tractors on the one hand, and
two-axle and severe service tractors on
the other.’’ 4 However, in the text of the
regulation, NHTSA used a shorthand
method of referring to these tractors
that, TMA and ArvinMeritor point out,
includes some tractors that should not
be included. Specifically, the text of the
regulation required that ‘‘three-axle
tractors with a GVWR of 59,600 pounds
or less’’ 5 are required to comply with
the improved requirements by August 1,
2011.
By using the overall GVWR of the
tractor in the regulation, as opposed to
specifying the gross axle weight rating
(GAWR) of the specific axles, NHTSA
incorporated some tractors into the
category of ‘‘typical three-axle tractors’’
that should not have been included. For
example, according to the definition in
the preamble, a tractor with a steer axle
with a GAWR of 18,000 pounds and
combined drive axle GAWRs of 40,000
pounds would not be considered a
typical three-axle tractor. We note that,
for a tractor of this configuration, the
high steer axle weight rating is
consistent with severe service duty.
However, because the vehicle would
have a GVWR of 58,000 pounds, it
would be considered a typical three-axle
tractor using the ‘‘less than or equal to
59,600 pounds GVWR’’ classification in
the regulation.
We believe that the definition of
‘‘typical three-axle tractors’’ should be
limited to those tractors that meet the
definition in the preamble of the final
rule—that is—have a steer axle GAWR
of 14,600 pounds or less and a
3 74
FR 37131.
FR 37154.
5 See paragraph S5 of 49 CFR 571.121.
4 74
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:35 Nov 12, 2009
Jkt 220001
combined drive axle GAWR of 45,000
pounds or less. NHTSA is aware that a
small number of three-axle tractors,
used in some specialty applications,
have heavier steer axles. Much like
other tractors produced in lower
volumes, only limited development
work has been done on these tractors.
Therefore, we believe that
manufacturers of those tractors require
additional lead time to design, test, and
validate improved braking systems on
these tractors. For this reason, we are
modifying the category of vehicles
subject to the two-year lead time to
three-axle tractors with a front axle
(steer axle) less than or equal to 14,600
pounds GAWR, and a combined GAWR
for the rear two axles (drive axles) less
than or equal to 45,000 pounds. This
more precise classification will
encompass the typical three-axle
tractors NHTSA that NHTSA intended it
to encompass, without unintentionally
including a subset of non-typical
tractors.
C. Fuel Tank Loading Specification
In the final rule, NHTSA added a
provision to FMVSS No. 121 specifying
the level of fuel in the fuel tank is 100
percent of rated capacity at the
beginning of testing, and that the level
is not less than 75 percent of rated
capacity during any part of the brake
testing. We stated that we believed that
specifying this will reduce test
variability. In its petition, TMA
requested that NHTSA rescind the fuel
tank loading specification, both for
substantive and procedural reasons.
First, TMA raised a procedural
objection, arguing that NHTSA did not
provide adequate notice in the notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) that it
was considering adding a fuel tank fill
specification. Second, TMA argued that
because tractors are configured with a
wide range of fuel storage options,
specifying the level of fuel carried by
the vehicle as a proportion of the tank(s)
may not reduce test variability. Third,
TMA stated that the fuel specification
may result in test complications in
certain circumstances, such that a
tractor with a front axle that is already
close to its rated load capacity in the
bobtail condition can have the front axle
weight rating exceeded when the
additional weight of a roll bar and test
equipment is combined with full fuel
tanks.
NHTSA has considered TMA’s
petition on this issue, and has decided
to remove the fuel tank fill specification
from the text of the regulation. This
decision is based on the procedural
question of notice alone. Having reexamined the NPRM, we agree that the
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
NPRM did not propose a specification
for filling the fuel tanks.
In these circumstances, we believe it
is appropriate to briefly address a
number of the applicable test conditions
as they currently exist, and will
continue to exist after the fuel tank
specification is removed. FMVSS No.
121 specifies vehicle weight conditions
for its test requirements, and, in
conducting a compliance test, NHTSA
follows those conditions as it does other
test conditions included in the standard.
FMVSS No. 121 specifies various
requirements that vehicles must meet in
loaded and lightly loaded conditions,
including stopping distance
requirements. S5.3.1 refers to Table I.
Table I, Stopping Sequence, of FMVSS
No. 121 provides that certain tests
(including stopping distance tests) are
conducted with the vehicle at its gross
vehicle weight rating (GVWR), and
certain tests are conducted with the
vehicle at lightly loaded vehicle weight
(LLVW).
As to the loaded tests, GVWR is a
term that is defined at 49 CFR 571.3. We
also note that the standard specifies
various other conditions related to
weight for the loaded tests.
Lightly loaded vehicle weight is
determined by adding specified
additional weight to a vehicle’s
unloaded vehicle weight.6 The term
unloaded vehicle weight is defined at 49
CFR 571.3, and means the weight of a
vehicle with maximum capacity of all
fluids necessary for operation of the
vehicle, but without cargo, occupants,
or accessories that are ordinarily
removed from the vehicle when they are
not in use. It thus includes the weight
of full fuel tanks.
For the stopping distance tests in a
lightly loaded weight condition, up to
500 pounds weight (including driver
and instrumentation) is added to the
vehicle’s unloaded vehicle weight. At
the manufacturer’s option, an additional
amount of weight that is not more than
1000 pounds may be added for a roll bar
structure. See S5.3.1.1 (b) and (c). We
note that while different terminology is
used in some cases in these paragraphs
with respect to a vehicle’s unloaded
weight, in a short hand fashion, the
meaning is the same. Thus, ‘‘unloaded
weight’’ in the latter portions of
paragraphs (b) and (c) of S5.3.1.1 of
FMVSS No. 121 has the same meaning
as ‘‘unloaded vehicle weight,’’ and the
reference to ‘‘tractor only configuration’’
at the beginning of (b) has the same
meaning as ‘‘unloaded vehicle weight.’’
TMA raised a concern about the
possible situation of the combined
6 See
E:\FR\FM\13NOR1.SGM
S4 of 49 CFR 571.105.
13NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 218 / Friday, November 13, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
stopping distances for reduced test
speeds associated with the new 250foot, 60 mph stopping distance
requirement in Table II.
Several petitioners raised questions
regarding the agency’s method of
calculating the required stopping
distance at reduced speeds. HDBMC
stated that the new stopping distances
had not been validated by testing at
reduced speeds, and stated that limited
initial testing by HDBMC members
showed that tractors were close to
meeting, or did not meet, the 20 mph,
30-foot stopping distance with a tenpercent margin of compliance. HDBMC
stated that additional testing is planned
and that it will share this data with the
agency when it is available. TMA and
Bendix similarly stated that further
testing needs to be completed to verify
the calculations used to determine the
stopping distances, and TMA requested
that the agency withdraw the reduced
speed stopping distances until it obtains
more test data supporting the new
requirements.
The agency concludes that it will
need more time to complete an analysis
of this issue and therefore we are not
addressing it in this document, but we
will do so in a subsequent response to
petitions for reconsideration.
D. Typographical Corrections
All petitioners pointed out two
typographical errors that appeared in
the regulatory text of the final rule.
First, it was pointed out that two-axle
tractors were mistakenly omitted from
the ‘‘notes’’ portion of Table II. All
petitioners stated that two-axle tractors
should be added to the note for column
three. Second, all petitioners pointed
out that note three, which at one point
reads ‘‘Four of more axles,’’ should read
‘‘Four or more axles.’’ NHTSA is
changing the tables in the regulatory
text to reflect the changes discussed in
this response to petitions for
reconsideration, and will correct these
errors in that process.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
weight of full fuel tanks, driver and
instrumentation, and a roll bar resulting
in a vehicle’s front axle rating being
exceeded. TMA has not demonstrated
that there is a problem. The regulation
has been in place for years, and we have
not encountered any problems. Roll bars
are a manufacturer option that
manufacturers are not required to select,
and manufacturers can design their
vehicles in ways to avoid this possible
problem.
Moreover, as we have explained on a
number of occasions, manufacturers are
not required to test their products in the
manner specified in the relevant safety
standard, or even to test the product at
all, as their basis for certifying that the
product complies with all applicable
standards. A manufacturer may choose
any valid means of evaluating its
products to determine whether the
vehicle or equipment will comply with
the safety standards when tested by the
agency according to the procedures
specified in the standard and to provide
a basis for its certification of
compliance. Thus, a truck tractor
manufacturer may certify that a vehicle
will comply with the lightly loaded
option in S5.3.1.1(b) of FMVSS No. 121
that does not include the weight of a roll
bar without testing in that specific
manner.
III. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
E. Stopping Distances at Reduced Test
Speeds
TMA, HDBMC, and Bendix raised
concerns with the new stopping
distance requirements for tractors that
would be subjected to brake testing from
initial speeds below 60 mph.
Requirements in FMVSS No. 121
provide that if the speed attainable by
a tractor in a distance of two miles is
less than 60 mph, the vehicle shall stop
from a speed in Table II that is four to
eight mph less than the speed attainable
in two miles. In the final rule, the
agency discussed its derivation of the
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:06 Nov 12, 2009
Jkt 220001
A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures
This action partially responds to
petitions for reconsideration regarding
the July 27, 2009 final rule amending
FMVSS No. 121. It was not reviewed by
the Office of Management and Budget
under E.O. 12866. The agency has
considered the impact of this action
under the Department of
Transportation’s regulatory policies and
procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979), and has determined that it is not
‘‘significant’’ under them.
This final rule, partial response to
petitions for reconsideration corrects a
table, adjusts the compliance date for a
small number of truck tractors not fully
accounted for in the final rule, and
removes a testing specification. Today’s
action will not cause any additional
expenses for vehicle manufacturers, and
will reduce some costs by allowing
longer compliance time for a small
number of truck tractors, thereby
allowing a more reasonable schedule for
improved brake design and validation.
Due to the relatively small number of
tractors affected and the fact that this is
merely a change in the compliance
dates, the action will not have any
significant safety impacts.
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
58565
B. Privacy Act
Anyone is able to search the
electronic form of all documents
received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the
document (or signing the document, if
submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may
review DOT’s complete Privacy Act
Statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (Volume
65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78) or you
may visit https://docketsinfo.dot.gov/.
C. Other Rulemaking Analyses and
Notices
In the July 27 final rule, the agency
discussed relevant requirements related
to the Regulatory Flexibility Act, the
National Environmental Policy Act,
Executive Order 13132 (Federalism), the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, Civil
Justice Reform, the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act, the
Paperwork Reduction Act, and
Executive Order 13045 (Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
and Safety Risks). As today’s rule
merely makes minor changes in the lead
time and test conditions, it will not have
any effect on the agency’s analyses in
those areas.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571
Motor vehicle safety, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Tires.
IV. Regulatory Text
In consideration of the foregoing,
NHTSA is amending 49 CFR Part 571 as
follows:
■
PART 571—FEDERAL MOTOR
VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS
1. The authority citation for Part 571
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115,
30117, 30166; delegation of authority at 49
CFR 1.50.
2. Section 571.121 is amended by
revising S5, removing S6.1.18, and
revising Tables II and IIa to read as
follows:
■
§ 571.121
systems.
Standard No. 121; Air brake
*
*
*
*
*
S5. Requirements. Each vehicle shall
meet the following requirements under
the conditions specified in S6. However,
at the option of the manufacturer, the
following vehicles may meet the
stopping distance requirements
specified in Table IIa instead of Table II:
Three-axle tractors with a front axle that
has a GAWR of 14,600 pounds or less,
and with two rear axles that have a
combined GAWR of 45,000 pounds or
E:\FR\FM\13NOR1.SGM
13NOR1
58566
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 218 / Friday, November 13, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
less, that are manufactured before
August 1, 2011; and all other tractors
that are manufactured before August 1,
2013.
*
*
*
*
*
TABLE II—STOPPING DISTANCE IN FEET
Service brake
Emergency brake
PFC
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
PFC
PFC
PFC
PFC
PFC
PFC
PFC
0.9
(1)
Vehicle speed in miles per hour
0.9
(2)
0.9
(3)
0.9
(4)
0.9
(5)
0.9
(6)
0.9
(7)
0.9
(8)
.....................................................................
.....................................................................
.....................................................................
.....................................................................
.....................................................................
.....................................................................
.....................................................................
.....................................................................
.....................................................................
32
49
70
96
125
158
195
236
280
35
54
78
106
138
175
216
261
310
30
45
65
89
114
144
176
212
250
35
54
78
106
138
175
216
261
310
38
59
84
114
149
189
233
281
335
28
43
61
84
108
136
166
199
235
83
123
170
225
288
358
435
520
613
85
131
186
250
325
409
504
608
720
Note:
(1) Loaded and Unloaded Buses.
(2) Loaded Single-Unit Trucks.
(3) Loaded Tractors with Two Axles; or with Three Axles and a GVWR of 70,000 lbs. or less; or with Four or More Axles and a GVWR of
85,000 lbs. or less. Tested with an Unbraked Control Trailer.
(4) Loaded Tractors with Three Axles and a GVWR greater than 70,000 lbs.; or with Four or More Axles and a GVWR greater than 85,000 lbs.
Tested with an Unbraked Control Trailer.
(5) Unloaded Single-Unit Trucks.
(6) Unloaded Tractors (Bobtail).
(7) All Vehicles except Tractors, Loaded and Unloaded.
(8) Unloaded Tractors.
TABLE IIA—STOPPING DISTANCE IN FEET: OPTIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR: (1) THREE-AXLE TRACTORS WITH A FRONT
AXLE THAT HAS A GAWR OF 14,600 POUNDS OR LESS, AND WITH TWO REAR AXLES THAT HAVE A COMBINED
GAWR OF 45,000 POUNDS OR LESS, MANUFACTURED BEFORE AUGUST 1, 2011; AND (2) ALL OTHER TRACTORS
MANUFACTURED BEFORE AUGUST 1, 2013
Service brake
Emergency brake
PFC
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
PFC
PFC
PFC
PFC
PFC
0.9
(1)
Vehicle speed in miles per hour
0.9
(2)
0.9
(3)
0.9
(4)
0.9
(5)
0.9
(6)
.....................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................
32
49
70
96
125
158
195
236
280
35
54
78
106
138
175
216
261
310
38
59
84
114
149
189
233
281
335
40
62
89
121
158
200
247
299
355
83
123
170
225
288
358
435
520
613
85
131
186
250
325
409
504
608
720
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
Note: (1) Loaded and unloaded buses; (2) Loaded single unit trucks; (3) Unloaded truck tractors and single unit trucks; (4) Loaded truck tractors tested with an unbraked control trailer; (5) All vehicles except truck tractors; (6) Unloaded truck tractors.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:35 Nov 12, 2009
Jkt 220001
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\13NOR1.SGM
13NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 218 / Friday, November 13, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
*
*
*
*
*
Issued: November 6, 2009.
Ronald L. Medford,
Acting Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. E9–27231 Filed 11–9–09; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 648
[Docket No. 050613158–5262–03 ]
RIN 0648–AT48
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act
Provisions; Fisheries of the
Northeastern United States; Extension
of Emergency Fishery Closure Due to
the Presence of the Toxin that Causes
Paralytic Shellfish Poisoning
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Temporary rule; emergency
action; extension of effective period;
request for comments.
SUMMARY: This temporary rule extends a
closure of Federal waters. The FDA has
determined that oceanographic
conditions and alga sampling data
suggest that the northern section of the
Temporary Paralytic Shellfish Poison
(PSP) Closure Area remain closed to the
harvest of bivalve molluscan shellfish,
with the exception of sea scallop
adductor muscles harvested and
shucked at sea, and that the southern
area remain closed to the harvest of
whole or roe-on scallops. The
regulations contained in the temporary
rule, emergency action, first published
in 2005, and have been subsequently
extended several times at the request of
the U.S. Food and Drug Administration
(FDA). NMFS is publishing the
regulatory text associated with this
closure in this temporary emergency
rule in order to ensure that current
regulations accurately reflect the
codified text that has been modified and
extended numerous times, so that the
public is aware of the regulations being
extended.
DATES: The amendments to § 648.14, in
amendatory instruction 2, are effective
January 1, 2010. The amendments to
§ 648.14, in amendatory instruction 3,
are effective from January 1, 2010,
through December 31, 2010. The
expiration date of the temporary
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:35 Nov 12, 2009
Jkt 220001
emergency action published on
December 30, 2008 (73 FR 79720), is
extended through December 31, 2010.
Comments must be received by
December 14, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the Small Entity
Compliance Guide, the emergency rule,
the Environmental Assessment, and the
Regulatory Impact Review prepared for
the October 18, 2005, reinstatement of
the September 9, 2005, emergency
action and subsequent extensions of the
emergency action, are available from
Patricia A. Kurkul, Regional
Administrator, National Marine
Fisheries Service, 55 Great Republic
Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930. These
documents are also available via the
internet at https://www.nero.noaa.gov/
nero/hotnews/redtide/.
You may submit comments, identified
by RIN 0648–AT48, by any one of the
following methods:
• Mail: Patricia A. Kurkul, Regional
Administrator, Northeast Region,
NMFS, 55 Great Republic Drive,
Gloucester, MA 01930–2298. Mark on
the outside of the envelope, ‘‘Comments
on PSP Closure.’’
• Fax: (978) 281–9135.
• Electronic Submissions: Submit all
electronic public comments via the
Federal eRulemaking Portal https://
www.regulations.gov.
Instructions: No comments will be
posted for public viewing until after the
comment period has closed. All
comments received are a part of the
public record and will generally be
posted to https://www.regulations.gov
without change. All Personal Identifying
Information (for example, name,
address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by
the commenter may be publicly
accessible. Do not submit Confidential
Business Information or otherwise
sensitive or protected information.
NMFS will accept anonymous
comments. Attachments to electronic
comments will be accepted in Microsoft
Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe
PDF file formats only.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Anna Macan, Fishery Management
Specialist, phone: (978) 281–9165, fax:
(978) 281–9135.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
58567
which can form blooms commonly
referred to as red tides. Current
oceanographic conditions and alga,
sampling data suggest that the northern
section of the Temporary PSP Closure
Area should remain closed to the
harvest of bivalve molluscan shellfish,
with the exception of sea scallop
adductor muscles harvested and
shucked at sea, and that the southern
area should remain closed to the harvest
of whole or roe-on scallops. Red tide
blooms, also known as harmful algal
blooms (HABs), can produce toxins that
accumulate in filter-feeding shellfish.
Shellfish contaminated with the toxin, if
eaten in large enough quantity, can
cause illness or death from PSP.
In 2005, the FDA first requested that
NMFS close an area of Federal waters
off the coasts of New Hampshire and
Massachusetts to fishing for bivalve
shellfish intended for human
consumption. On June 16, 2005, NMFS
published an emergency rule (70 FR
35047) closing the area recommended
by the FDA (i.e., the Temporary PSP
Closure Area). Since 2005, the closure
has been extended several times and the
area has been expanded and divided
into northern and southern components.
The Northern Temporary PSP Closure
Area remained closed to the harvest of
all bivalve molluscan shellfish, while
the Southern Temporary PSP Closure
Area was reopened to the harvest of
Atlantic surfclams, ocean quahogs, as
sea scallop adductor muscles harvested
and shucked at sea. The current closure
will expire on December 31, 2009, and
this action extends this closure for one
additional year, through December 31,
2010.
The boundaries of the northern
component of the Temporary PSP
Closure Area comprise Federal waters
bounded by the following coordinates
specified in Table 1, below. Under this
emergency rule, this area remains closed
to the harvest of Atlantic surfclams,
ocean quahogs, and whole or roe-on
scallops.
TABLE 1: COORDINATES FOR THE
NORTHERN TEMPORARY PSP CLOSURE AREA
Point
Latitude
Longitude
1
2
3
4
5
43°00′N
43°00′N
41°39′N
41°39′N
43°00′N
71°00′W
69°00′W
69°00′W
71°00′W
71°00′W
Background
This emergency closure is being
implemented at the request of the FDA
after samples of shellfish from the
inshore and offshore waters off the
coasts of New Hampshire and
Massachusetts tested positive for the
presence of toxins (saxotoxins) that
cause PSP. These toxins are produced
by the alga Alexandrium fundyense,
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
The boundaries of the southern
component of the Temporary PSP
Closure Area comprise Federal waters
bound by the following coordinates
E:\FR\FM\13NOR1.SGM
13NOR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 218 (Friday, November 13, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 58562-58567]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-27231]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 571
[Docket No. NHTSA-2009-0175]
RIN 2127-AK62
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Air Brake Systems
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation.
ACTION: Final Rule; partial response to petitions for reconsideration.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On July 27, 2009, NHTSA published a final rule that amended
the Federal motor vehicle safety standard for air brake systems by
requiring substantial improvements in stopping distance performance. In
response, the agency received eight petitions for reconsideration. This
document responds to those petitions by correcting errors in a table
published in the final rule, removing a testing specification, and
adjusting the compliance date for a small number of vehicles the agency
had not fully accounted for in the final rule. This document provides a
partial response to the submitted petitions for reconsideration.
DATES: This final rule is effective November 24, 2009.
Petitions for reconsideration: Petitions for reconsideration of
this final rule must be received not later than December 28, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Any petitions for reconsideration should refer to the docket
number of this document and be submitted to: Administrator, National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
West Building, Ground Floor, Docket Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590.
The petition will be placed in the docket. Anyone is able to search
the electronic form of all documents received into any of our dockets
by the name of the individual submitting the document (or signing the
document, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor
union, etc.). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in
the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70;
Pages 19477-78).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical issues: Jeff Woods,
Office of Crash Avoidance Standards (NVS-121), NHTSA, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., West Building, Washington, DC 20590 (Telephone: (202) 366-
0098) (Fax: (202) 366-7002).
For legal issues: Ari Scott, Office of the Chief Counsel (NCC-112),
NHTSA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building, Washington, DC 20590
(Telephone: (202) 366-2992) (Fax: (202) 366-3820).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Petitions for Reconsideration and Agency Analysis
A. Four-Axle Tractors With a GVWR Under 59,600 Pounds
B. Definition of Typical Three-Axle Tractors
C. Fuel Tank Loading Specification
D. Typographical Corrections
E. Stopping Distances at Reduced Test Speeds
III. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures
B. Privacy Act
C. Other Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
IV. Regulatory Text
I. Background
On July 27, 2009, NHTSA published a final rule \1\ in the Federal
Register (74 FR 37122) amending Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard
(FMVSS) No. 121, Air Brake Systems, to require improved stopping
distance performance for heavy truck tractors. This rule reduced the
maximum allowable stopping distance, from 60 mph, from 355 feet to 250
feet for the vast majority of heavy truck tractors. For a small
minority of very heavy tractors, the maximum allowable stopping
distance was reduced from 355 feet to 310 feet. Having come to the
conclusion that modifications needed for ``typical three-axle
tractors,'' to meet the improved requirements were relatively
straightforward, NHTSA provided two years lead time for those vehicles
to comply with the new requirements. These typical three-axle tractors
comprise approximately 82 percent of the total fleet of heavy tractors.
The agency concluded that other tractors, which are produced in far
fewer numbers and may require additional work to ensure stability and
control while braking, would require more lead time to meet the
requirements. Due to extra time needed to design, test, and validate
these vehicles, which included two-axle tractors and severe service
tractors, the agency allowed four years lead time for these tractors to
meet the improved stopping distance requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Docket NHTSA-2009-0083.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 58563]]
II. Petitions for Reconsideration and Agency Analysis
NHTSA received eight timely petitions for reconsideration in
response to the final rule. Separate petitions were received from the
Truck Manufacturers Association (TMA); the Heavy Duty Brake
Manufacturers Council of the Heavy Duty Manufacturers Association
(HDBMC); Bendix Spicer Foundation Brake LLC (Bendix), a joint venture
between Bendix Commercial Vehicle Systems and Dana Corporation; and
ArvinMeritor. The agency received four additional petitions supporting
and incorporating the TMA petition by reference from Daimler Trucks
North America (Daimler); Kenworth Truck Company (Kenworth); Peterbilt
Motors Company (Peterbilt); and Navistar Truck Group (Navistar).
The petitions focused on four main issues, as well as identified
some typographical errors in the final rule. The main issues included
the stopping distance requirements for reduced speeds, the omission of
four-axle tractors under 59,600 pounds gross vehicle weight rating
(GVWR) from the listed requirements and the date at which the improved
stopping distance requirements should apply to those tractors, the
manner in which NHTSA characterized the typical three-axle tractor, and
the fuel tank fill level testing specification. Additionally, the
petitioners requested that NHTSA correct some typographical errors in
the regulatory text.
This final rule addresses all issues except those relating to
stopping distance requirements at reduced speeds. With regard to that
issue, the agency is closely examining the petitions and working to
formulate a comprehensive response. However, we are addressing the
other issues in this document. The reason for this two-part approach is
that, because the agency omitted to address lead time requirements for
tractors with four or more axles and a GVWR of 59,600 pounds or less,
and given the way this final rule was drafted the amended regulation
inadvertently requires these vehicles to comply with the upgraded
stopping distance requirements on November 24, 2009. We recognize that
this would not provide nearly enough time to design and validate
compliant tractors, and as the agency intended to provide sufficient
time to modify these vehicles in the final rule, a prompt amendment is
needed to correct this omission. The specific issues of the petitions
are addressed below.
A. Four-Axle Tractors With a GVWR Less Than or Equal to 59,600 Pounds
In the final rule, the agency omitted addressing a compliance date
for tractors with four or more axles that have a GVWR of less than or
equal to 59,600 pounds. Moreover, given the way the final rule was
drafted, these tractors would inadvertently be required to comply with
the requirements in Table II on November 24, 2009. Manufacturers were
given either a two- or four-year lead time before all other tractors
were required to meet the improved stopping distances in Table II.
Specifically, typical three-axle tractors are required to comply with
the upgraded requirements on August 1, 2011, while all other tractors
are required to comply on August 1, 2013.
The issue of lead time for tractors with four or more axles less
than or equal to 59,600 pounds GVWR was raised by a number of
petitioners. TMA noted their omission, and requested that NHTSA amend
the rule so that these tractors are required to comply with the
improved stopping distances on August 1, 2013, which would provide four
years lead time. HDBMC made an identical request. Bendix also noted the
omission, although did not provide a recommended lead time.
It was not the agency's intention to omit tractors with four or
more axles and a GVWR of 59,600 pounds or less from the optional
requirements of Table IIa, and therefore require them to comply with
the upgraded requirements in November 2009. Instead, the agency
acknowledges that these tractors require lead time commensurate with
other non-typical tractors for purposes of design, testing, and
validation. Therefore, for the reasons discussed below, NHTSA is
accepting the recommendation of TMA, HDBMC, and Bendix, and requiring
compliance with the improved standards for tractors with four or more
axles and a GVWR of less than or equal to 59,600 pounds by August 1,
2013, thereby giving four years of lead time.
In deciding to allow four years of lead time, instead of two years,
the agency used the same rationale concerning appropriate lead time as
that discussed in the final rule. In the rule, we allowed two years of
lead time for typical three-axle tractors because we believed that the
improvements needed to shorten the stopping distances to meet the new
requirements were relatively straightforward, and that many of these
tractors would already comply with the new standards. On the other
hand, we allowed four years lead time for two-axle tractors and severe
service tractors (defined as tractors with a GVWR of more than 59,600
pounds) for several reasons. First, for some tractors, we believed that
meeting the improved stopping distances might require additional
engineering to address concerns with stability and control issues.
Second, we noted that unlike ``typical'' three-axle tractors, which
comprise the overwhelming bulk of the tractor fleet, relatively less
design work had been done on non-typical tractors, and that more time
would be needed for design, testing, and validation of new tractor
designs. Specifically, in the section of the final rule dealing with
lead time, we stated:
[O]nly limited development work relevant to reduced stopping
distance has been performed on [severe service tractors] vehicles to
date. As several commenters indicated, additional lead time is
needed for complete testing and validation of new brake systems for
these vehicles to ensure that full compliance can be achieved,
without compromising control, stability, and comfort elements
important to end users.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 74 FR 37154.
Much like severe service tractors, only limited development work
relevant to reduced stopping distance has been performed on tractors
with four or more axles and a GVWR of less than or equal to 59,600
pounds. The agency believes that this tractor configuration would be
uncommon, because it has a relatively low GVWR and is equipped with
four axles. By virtue of it having four axles, we consider that it is
not a typical three-axle tractor and it should be afforded more lead
time for design, testing, and validation to meet the new stopping
distance requirements. Therefore, we believe that manufacturers of
these tractors should be given until August 1, 2013 to meet the
improved stopping distance requirements.
B. Definition of Typical Three-Axle Tractors
TMA and ArvinMeritor raised a concern regarding the manner in which
NHTSA defined ``typical three-axle tractor'' in the final rule. TMA
stated that there was a slight, but substantive, discrepancy between
how NHTSA defined this term in the preamble of the final rule, and how
it defined it in the regulatory text of the standard. Because of this
discrepancy, TMA and ArvinMeritor claim that NHTSA puts some tractors
with severe service characteristics into the category of typical three-
axle tractors, and thus only allows two years lead time to meet the
improved standards, when it should actually allow manufacturers of
those tractors four years of lead time. After
[[Page 58564]]
carefully reviewing the TMA and ArvinMeritor petitions, NHTSA agrees
and is revising the standard to reflect this, for the reasons described
below.
In the final rule, NHTSA made the following statement regarding the
definition of three-axle tractors:
NHTSA used the same definition for a ``typical three-axle
tractor'' as TMA and HDBMC, which is a 6x4 configuration (three
axles with six wheel positions; a non-driven steer axle and two rear
drive axles) with a GVWR below 59,600 pounds, a steer axle with a
GAWR equal or less than 14,600 pounds, and tandem drive axles rated
equal or less than 45,000 pounds total capacity.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 74 FR 37131.
This definition was important, because NHTSA treated typical three-axle
tractors differently than other tractors, by providing manufacturers
less lead time to meet the improved requirements for these tractors
than other tractors. As we stated, ``NHTSA is specifying differing
compliance dates for typical three-axle tractors on the one hand, and
two-axle and severe service tractors on the other.'' \4\ However, in
the text of the regulation, NHTSA used a shorthand method of referring
to these tractors that, TMA and ArvinMeritor point out, includes some
tractors that should not be included. Specifically, the text of the
regulation required that ``three-axle tractors with a GVWR of 59,600
pounds or less'' \5\ are required to comply with the improved
requirements by August 1, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ 74 FR 37154.
\5\ See paragraph S5 of 49 CFR 571.121.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
By using the overall GVWR of the tractor in the regulation, as
opposed to specifying the gross axle weight rating (GAWR) of the
specific axles, NHTSA incorporated some tractors into the category of
``typical three-axle tractors'' that should not have been included. For
example, according to the definition in the preamble, a tractor with a
steer axle with a GAWR of 18,000 pounds and combined drive axle GAWRs
of 40,000 pounds would not be considered a typical three-axle tractor.
We note that, for a tractor of this configuration, the high steer axle
weight rating is consistent with severe service duty. However, because
the vehicle would have a GVWR of 58,000 pounds, it would be considered
a typical three-axle tractor using the ``less than or equal to 59,600
pounds GVWR'' classification in the regulation.
We believe that the definition of ``typical three-axle tractors''
should be limited to those tractors that meet the definition in the
preamble of the final rule--that is--have a steer axle GAWR of 14,600
pounds or less and a combined drive axle GAWR of 45,000 pounds or less.
NHTSA is aware that a small number of three-axle tractors, used in some
specialty applications, have heavier steer axles. Much like other
tractors produced in lower volumes, only limited development work has
been done on these tractors. Therefore, we believe that manufacturers
of those tractors require additional lead time to design, test, and
validate improved braking systems on these tractors. For this reason,
we are modifying the category of vehicles subject to the two-year lead
time to three-axle tractors with a front axle (steer axle) less than or
equal to 14,600 pounds GAWR, and a combined GAWR for the rear two axles
(drive axles) less than or equal to 45,000 pounds. This more precise
classification will encompass the typical three-axle tractors NHTSA
that NHTSA intended it to encompass, without unintentionally including
a subset of non-typical tractors.
C. Fuel Tank Loading Specification
In the final rule, NHTSA added a provision to FMVSS No. 121
specifying the level of fuel in the fuel tank is 100 percent of rated
capacity at the beginning of testing, and that the level is not less
than 75 percent of rated capacity during any part of the brake testing.
We stated that we believed that specifying this will reduce test
variability. In its petition, TMA requested that NHTSA rescind the fuel
tank loading specification, both for substantive and procedural
reasons. First, TMA raised a procedural objection, arguing that NHTSA
did not provide adequate notice in the notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) that it was considering adding a fuel tank fill specification.
Second, TMA argued that because tractors are configured with a wide
range of fuel storage options, specifying the level of fuel carried by
the vehicle as a proportion of the tank(s) may not reduce test
variability. Third, TMA stated that the fuel specification may result
in test complications in certain circumstances, such that a tractor
with a front axle that is already close to its rated load capacity in
the bobtail condition can have the front axle weight rating exceeded
when the additional weight of a roll bar and test equipment is combined
with full fuel tanks.
NHTSA has considered TMA's petition on this issue, and has decided
to remove the fuel tank fill specification from the text of the
regulation. This decision is based on the procedural question of notice
alone. Having re-examined the NPRM, we agree that the NPRM did not
propose a specification for filling the fuel tanks.
In these circumstances, we believe it is appropriate to briefly
address a number of the applicable test conditions as they currently
exist, and will continue to exist after the fuel tank specification is
removed. FMVSS No. 121 specifies vehicle weight conditions for its test
requirements, and, in conducting a compliance test, NHTSA follows those
conditions as it does other test conditions included in the standard.
FMVSS No. 121 specifies various requirements that vehicles must
meet in loaded and lightly loaded conditions, including stopping
distance requirements. S5.3.1 refers to Table I. Table I, Stopping
Sequence, of FMVSS No. 121 provides that certain tests (including
stopping distance tests) are conducted with the vehicle at its gross
vehicle weight rating (GVWR), and certain tests are conducted with the
vehicle at lightly loaded vehicle weight (LLVW).
As to the loaded tests, GVWR is a term that is defined at 49 CFR
571.3. We also note that the standard specifies various other
conditions related to weight for the loaded tests.
Lightly loaded vehicle weight is determined by adding specified
additional weight to a vehicle's unloaded vehicle weight.\6\ The term
unloaded vehicle weight is defined at 49 CFR 571.3, and means the
weight of a vehicle with maximum capacity of all fluids necessary for
operation of the vehicle, but without cargo, occupants, or accessories
that are ordinarily removed from the vehicle when they are not in use.
It thus includes the weight of full fuel tanks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See S4 of 49 CFR 571.105.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the stopping distance tests in a lightly loaded weight
condition, up to 500 pounds weight (including driver and
instrumentation) is added to the vehicle's unloaded vehicle weight. At
the manufacturer's option, an additional amount of weight that is not
more than 1000 pounds may be added for a roll bar structure. See
S5.3.1.1 (b) and (c). We note that while different terminology is used
in some cases in these paragraphs with respect to a vehicle's unloaded
weight, in a short hand fashion, the meaning is the same. Thus,
``unloaded weight'' in the latter portions of paragraphs (b) and (c) of
S5.3.1.1 of FMVSS No. 121 has the same meaning as ``unloaded vehicle
weight,'' and the reference to ``tractor only configuration'' at the
beginning of (b) has the same meaning as ``unloaded vehicle weight.''
TMA raised a concern about the possible situation of the combined
[[Page 58565]]
weight of full fuel tanks, driver and instrumentation, and a roll bar
resulting in a vehicle's front axle rating being exceeded. TMA has not
demonstrated that there is a problem. The regulation has been in place
for years, and we have not encountered any problems. Roll bars are a
manufacturer option that manufacturers are not required to select, and
manufacturers can design their vehicles in ways to avoid this possible
problem.
Moreover, as we have explained on a number of occasions,
manufacturers are not required to test their products in the manner
specified in the relevant safety standard, or even to test the product
at all, as their basis for certifying that the product complies with
all applicable standards. A manufacturer may choose any valid means of
evaluating its products to determine whether the vehicle or equipment
will comply with the safety standards when tested by the agency
according to the procedures specified in the standard and to provide a
basis for its certification of compliance. Thus, a truck tractor
manufacturer may certify that a vehicle will comply with the lightly
loaded option in S5.3.1.1(b) of FMVSS No. 121 that does not include the
weight of a roll bar without testing in that specific manner.
D. Typographical Corrections
All petitioners pointed out two typographical errors that appeared
in the regulatory text of the final rule. First, it was pointed out
that two-axle tractors were mistakenly omitted from the ``notes''
portion of Table II. All petitioners stated that two-axle tractors
should be added to the note for column three. Second, all petitioners
pointed out that note three, which at one point reads ``Four of more
axles,'' should read ``Four or more axles.'' NHTSA is changing the
tables in the regulatory text to reflect the changes discussed in this
response to petitions for reconsideration, and will correct these
errors in that process.
E. Stopping Distances at Reduced Test Speeds
TMA, HDBMC, and Bendix raised concerns with the new stopping
distance requirements for tractors that would be subjected to brake
testing from initial speeds below 60 mph. Requirements in FMVSS No. 121
provide that if the speed attainable by a tractor in a distance of two
miles is less than 60 mph, the vehicle shall stop from a speed in Table
II that is four to eight mph less than the speed attainable in two
miles. In the final rule, the agency discussed its derivation of the
stopping distances for reduced test speeds associated with the new 250-
foot, 60 mph stopping distance requirement in Table II.
Several petitioners raised questions regarding the agency's method
of calculating the required stopping distance at reduced speeds. HDBMC
stated that the new stopping distances had not been validated by
testing at reduced speeds, and stated that limited initial testing by
HDBMC members showed that tractors were close to meeting, or did not
meet, the 20 mph, 30-foot stopping distance with a ten-percent margin
of compliance. HDBMC stated that additional testing is planned and that
it will share this data with the agency when it is available. TMA and
Bendix similarly stated that further testing needs to be completed to
verify the calculations used to determine the stopping distances, and
TMA requested that the agency withdraw the reduced speed stopping
distances until it obtains more test data supporting the new
requirements.
The agency concludes that it will need more time to complete an
analysis of this issue and therefore we are not addressing it in this
document, but we will do so in a subsequent response to petitions for
reconsideration.
III. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
This action partially responds to petitions for reconsideration
regarding the July 27, 2009 final rule amending FMVSS No. 121. It was
not reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget under E.O. 12866.
The agency has considered the impact of this action under the
Department of Transportation's regulatory policies and procedures (44
FR 11034; February 26, 1979), and has determined that it is not
``significant'' under them.
This final rule, partial response to petitions for reconsideration
corrects a table, adjusts the compliance date for a small number of
truck tractors not fully accounted for in the final rule, and removes a
testing specification. Today's action will not cause any additional
expenses for vehicle manufacturers, and will reduce some costs by
allowing longer compliance time for a small number of truck tractors,
thereby allowing a more reasonable schedule for improved brake design
and validation. Due to the relatively small number of tractors affected
and the fact that this is merely a change in the compliance dates, the
action will not have any significant safety impacts.
B. Privacy Act
Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all documents
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the document (or signing the document, if submitted on
behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review
DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published
on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477-78) or you may
visit https://docketsinfo.dot.gov/.
C. Other Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
In the July 27 final rule, the agency discussed relevant
requirements related to the Regulatory Flexibility Act, the National
Environmental Policy Act, Executive Order 13132 (Federalism), the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, Civil Justice Reform, the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act, the Paperwork Reduction Act,
and Executive Order 13045 (Protection of Children from Environmental
Health and Safety Risks). As today's rule merely makes minor changes in
the lead time and test conditions, it will not have any effect on the
agency's analyses in those areas.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571
Motor vehicle safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Tires.
IV. Regulatory Text
0
In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA is amending 49 CFR Part 571 as
follows:
PART 571--FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS
0
1. The authority citation for Part 571 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117, 30166;
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.
0
2. Section 571.121 is amended by revising S5, removing S6.1.18, and
revising Tables II and IIa to read as follows:
Sec. 571.121 Standard No. 121; Air brake systems.
* * * * *
S5. Requirements. Each vehicle shall meet the following
requirements under the conditions specified in S6. However, at the
option of the manufacturer, the following vehicles may meet the
stopping distance requirements specified in Table IIa instead of Table
II: Three-axle tractors with a front axle that has a GAWR of 14,600
pounds or less, and with two rear axles that have a combined GAWR of
45,000 pounds or
[[Page 58566]]
less, that are manufactured before August 1, 2011; and all other
tractors that are manufactured before August 1, 2013.
* * * * *
Table II--Stopping Distance in Feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Service brake Emergency brake
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vehicle speed in miles per hour PFC PFC PFC PFC PFC PFC PFC PFC
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0.9 (1) 0.9 (2) 0.9 (3) 0.9 (4) 0.9 (5) 0.9 (6) 0.9 (7) 0.9 (8)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
20.............................................................. 32 35 30 35 38 28 83 85
25.............................................................. 49 54 45 54 59 43 123 131
30.............................................................. 70 78 65 78 84 61 170 186
35.............................................................. 96 106 89 106 114 84 225 250
40.............................................................. 125 138 114 138 149 108 288 325
45.............................................................. 158 175 144 175 189 136 358 409
50.............................................................. 195 216 176 216 233 166 435 504
55.............................................................. 236 261 212 261 281 199 520 608
60.............................................................. 280 310 250 310 335 235 613 720
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note:
(1) Loaded and Unloaded Buses.
(2) Loaded Single-Unit Trucks.
(3) Loaded Tractors with Two Axles; or with Three Axles and a GVWR of 70,000 lbs. or less; or with Four or More Axles and a GVWR of 85,000 lbs. or less.
Tested with an Unbraked Control Trailer.
(4) Loaded Tractors with Three Axles and a GVWR greater than 70,000 lbs.; or with Four or More Axles and a GVWR greater than 85,000 lbs. Tested with an
Unbraked Control Trailer.
(5) Unloaded Single-Unit Trucks.
(6) Unloaded Tractors (Bobtail).
(7) All Vehicles except Tractors, Loaded and Unloaded.
(8) Unloaded Tractors.
Table IIa--Stopping Distance in Feet: Optional Requirements for: (1) Three-Axle Tractors With a Front Axle That
Has a GAWR of 14,600 Pounds or Less, and With Two Rear Axles That Have a Combined GAWR of 45,000 Pounds or Less,
Manufactured Before August 1, 2011; and (2) All Other Tractors Manufactured Before August 1, 2013
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Service brake Emergency brake
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Vehicle speed in miles per hour PFC PFC PFC PFC PFC PFC
---------------------------------------------------------------------
0.9 (1) 0.9 (2) 0.9 (3) 0.9 (4) 0.9 (5) 0.9 (6)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
20........................................ 32 35 38 40 83 85
25........................................ 49 54 59 62 123 131
30........................................ 70 78 84 89 170 186
35........................................ 96 106 114 121 225 250
40........................................ 125 138 149 158 288 325
45........................................ 158 175 189 200 358 409
50........................................ 195 216 233 247 435 504
55........................................ 236 261 281 299 520 608
60........................................ 280 310 335 355 613 720
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: (1) Loaded and unloaded buses; (2) Loaded single unit trucks; (3) Unloaded truck tractors and single unit
trucks; (4) Loaded truck tractors tested with an unbraked control trailer; (5) All vehicles except truck
tractors; (6) Unloaded truck tractors.
[[Page 58567]]
* * * * *
Issued: November 6, 2009.
Ronald L. Medford,
Acting Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. E9-27231 Filed 11-9-09; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
