Parts and Accessories Necessary for Safe Operation; Inspection, Repair, and Maintenance; General Amendments, 60592-60601 [2015-24921]

Download as PDF 60592 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 194 / Wednesday, October 7, 2015 / Proposed Rules 14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at www.dot.gov/privacy. Issued in Washington, DC. Robert C. Lauby, Associate Administrator for Railroad Safety, Chief Safety Officer. [FR Doc. 2015–25461 Filed 10–6–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–06–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 49 CFR Parts 393 and 396 [Docket No. FMCSA–2015–0176] RIN 2126–AB81 Parts and Accessories Necessary for Safe Operation; Inspection, Repair, and Maintenance; General Amendments Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). AGENCY: FMCSA proposes to amend the regulations for ‘‘Parts and Accessories Necessary for Safe Operation,’’ and ‘‘Inspection, Repair and Maintenance,’’ of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) in response to several petitions for rulemaking from the Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance (CVSA) and the American Trucking Associations (ATA), and two safety recommendations from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). Specifically, the Agency proposes to add a definition of ‘‘major tread groove;’’ revise the rear license plate lamp requirement to provide an exception for truck tractors registered in States that do not require tractors to have a rear license plate; provide specific requirements regarding when violations or defects noted on a roadside inspection report need to be corrected; amend Appendix G to the FMCSRs, ‘‘Minimum Periodic Inspection Standards,’’ to include provisions for the inspection of antilock braking systems (ABS), automatic brake adjusters, and brake adjustment indicators, speed-restricted tires, and motorcoach passenger seat mounting anchorages; and amend the periodic inspection rules to eliminate the option for motor carriers to use a violation— free roadside inspection report as proof of completing a comprehensive inspection at least once every 12 months. In addition, the Agency proposes to eliminate introductory text from Appendix G to the FMCSRs asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:56 Oct 06, 2015 Jkt 238001 because the discussion of the differences between the North American Standard Inspection out-of-service criteria and FMCSA’s periodic inspection criteria is unnecessary. DATES: You must submit comments on or before December 7, 2015. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number FMCSA– 2015–0176 using any one of the following methods: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. • Mail: Docket Management Facility (M–30), U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590– 0001. • Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone number is 202–366–9329. • Fax: 202–493–2251. To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods. See the ‘‘Public Participation and Request for Comments’’ heading under the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on submitting comments. If you have questions about this proposed rule, call or email Mr. Mike Huntley, Vehicle and Roadside Operations Division, Office of Bus and Truck Standards and Operations, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, telephone: 202–366–5370; michael.huntley@dot.gov. If you have questions about viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Ms. Barbara Hairston, Program Manager, Docket Services, telephone 202–366–9826. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Executive Summary FMCSA is responsible for regulations to ensure that all commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) are systematically inspected, repaired, and maintained and that all parts and accessories necessary for the safe operation of CMVs are in safe and proper operating condition at all times. In response to several petitions for rulemaking from CVSA and ATA and two safety recommendations from the NTSB, FMCSA proposes to amend various provisions in parts 393 and 396 of the FMCSRs. The proposed amendments generally do not involve the establishment of new or more stringent requirements, but instead clarify existing requirements to increase consistency of enforcement activities. PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 Specifically, the Agency proposes to (1) add a definition of ‘‘major tread groove’’ in § 393.5; (2) delete the requirement in Table 1 of § 393.11 for truck tractors to have a rear license plate light when State law does not require the vehicle to have a rear license plate; (3) clarify § 396.9 regarding when violations or defects noted on a roadside inspection report need to be corrected; (4) amend Appendix G to the FMCSRs, ‘‘Minimum Periodic Inspection Standards,’’ to include provisions for the inspection of (a) ABS, automatic brake adjusters, and brake adjustment indicators, (b) speed-restricted tires, and (c) motorcoach passenger seat mounting anchorages; (5) amend § 396.17(f) to eliminate references to roadside inspections; and (6) amend § 396.19(b) regarding inspector qualifications as a result of the amendments to § 396.17(f) described above. In addition, the Agency proposes to eliminate as unnecessary a portion of Appendix G to the FMCSRs that describes the differences between the out-of-service criteria and FMCSA’s annual inspection. The Agency believes the potential economic impact of these changes is negligible because the proposed amendments generally do not involve new or more stringent requirements, but a clarification of existing requirements. Public Participation and Request for Comments FMCSA encourages you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting comments and related materials. Submitting Comments If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this rulemaking (FMCSA–2015–0176), indicate the heading of the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and material online or by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means. FMCSA recommends that you include your name and a mailing address, an email address, or a phone number in the body of your document so the Agency can contact you if it has questions regarding your submission. To submit your comment online, go to www.regulations.gov, type the docket number, ‘‘FMCSA–2015–0176’’ in the ‘‘Keyword’’ box, and click ‘‘Search.’’ When the new screen appears, click the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ button and type your comment into the text box in the following screen. Choose whether you are submitting your comment as an E:\FR\FM\07OCP1.SGM 07OCP1 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 194 / Wednesday, October 7, 2015 / Proposed Rules individual or on behalf of a third party, and click ’’Submit.’’ If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would like to know that they reached the facility, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. FMCSA will consider all comments and material received during the comment period and may change this proposed rule based on your comments. FMCSA may issue a final rule at any time after the close of the comment period. Viewing Comments and Documents To view comments and as well as any documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to www.regulations.gov, insert the docket number, ‘‘FMCSA–2015–0176’’ in the ‘‘Keyword’’ box, and click ‘‘Search.’’ Next, click the ‘‘Open Docket Folder’’ button and choose the document listed to review. If you do not have access to the Internet, you may view the docket online by visiting the Docket Services in Room W12–140 on the ground floor of the DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Privacy Act In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information the commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system of records notice (DOT/ALL– 14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at www.dot.gov/privacy. Legal Basis for the Rulemaking This rulemaking is based on the authority of the Motor Carrier Act of 1935 [1935 Act] and the Motor Carrier Safety Act of 1984 [1984 Act]. The 1935 Act, as amended, provides that ‘‘[t]he Secretary of Transportation may prescribe requirements for—(1) qualifications and maximum hours of service of employees of, and safety of operation and equipment of, a motor carrier; and (2) qualifications and maximum hours of service of employees of, and standards of equipment of, a private motor carrier, when needed to promote safety of operation’’ (49 U.S.C. 31502(b)). This NPRM would amend the FMCSRs to respond to several petitions VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:56 Oct 06, 2015 Jkt 238001 for rulemaking. The adoption and enforcement of such rules is specifically authorized by the 1935 Act. This proposed rulemaking rests squarely on that authority. The 1984 Act provides concurrent authority to regulate drivers, motor carriers, and vehicle equipment. It requires the Secretary to ‘‘prescribe regulations on commercial motor vehicle safety.’’ The regulations shall prescribe minimum safety standards for CMVs. At a minimum, the regulations shall ensure that: (1) CMVs are maintained, equipped, loaded, and operated safely; (2) the responsibilities imposed on operators of CMVs do not impair their ability to operate the vehicles safely; (3) the physical condition of operators of CMVs is adequate to enable them to operate vehicles safely; (4) the operation of CMVs does not have a deleterious effect on the physical condition of the operators; and (5) that drivers are not coerced by motor carriers, shippers, receivers, or transportation intermediaries to operate a vehicle in violation of a regulation promulgated under 49 U.S.C. 31136 (which is the basis for much of the FMCSRs) or 49 U.S.C. chapters 51 or 313 (49 U.S.C. 31136(a)). This proposed rule concerns (1) parts and accessories necessary for the safe operation of CMVs, and (2) the inspection, repair, and maintenance of CMVs. It is based primarily on section 31136(a)(1) and (2), and secondarily on section 31136(a)(4). This rulemaking would ensure that CMVs are maintained, equipped, loaded, and operated safely by requiring certain vehicle components, systems, and equipment to meet minimum standards such that the mechanical condition of the vehicle is not likely to cause a crash or breakdown. Section 31136(a)(3) is not applicable because this rulemaking does not deal with driver qualification standards. Because the amendments proposed by this rule are primarily technical changes that clarify existing requirements and improve enforcement consistency, FMCSA believes they will be welcomed by motor carriers and drivers alike and that coercion to violate them will not be an issue. Before prescribing any such regulations, FMCSA must consider the ‘‘costs and benefits’’ of any proposal (49 U.S.C. 31136(c)(2)(A) and 31502(d)). As discussed in greater detail in the ‘‘Regulatory Analyses’’ section, FMCSA has determined that this proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action. The Agency believes the potential economic impact is negligible because the proposed amendments generally do PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 60593 not involve the adoption of new or more stringent requirements, but rather the clarification of existing requirements. As such, the costs of the rule would not approach the $100 million annual threshold for economic significance. Background The fundamental purpose of 49 CFR part 393, ‘‘Parts and Accessories Necessary for Safe Operation,’’ is to ensure that no employer operates a CMV or causes or permits it to be operated, unless it is equipped in accordance with the requirements and specifications of that part. However, nothing contained in part 393 may be construed to prohibit the use of additional equipment and accessories, not inconsistent with or prohibited by part 393, provided such equipment and accessories do not decrease the safety of operation of the motor vehicles on which they are used. Compliance with the rules concerning parts and accessories is necessary to ensure vehicles are equipped with the specified safety devices and equipment. On August 15, 2005, FMCSA published a final rule amending part 393 of the FMCSRs to remove obsolete and redundant regulations; respond to several petitions for rulemaking; provide improved definitions of vehicle types, systems, and components; resolve inconsistencies between part 393 and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s (NHTSA) Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (49 CFR part 571); and codify certain FMCSA regulatory guidance concerning the requirements of part 393 (70 FR 48008). Since publication of the 2005 final rule, FMCSA has received petitions for rulemaking to amend part 393 from CVSA, requesting that § 393.5 be amended to include a definition of ‘‘major tread groove,’’ and from ATA, requesting that Table 1 to § 393.11 be amended to delete the requirement for operable rear license plate lights on truck tractors registered in States that do not require a rear license plate to be displayed. In addition, FMCSA received a separate petition from CVSA requesting that the Agency amend Appendix G to the FMCSRs, ‘‘Minimum Periodic Inspection Standards,’’ to include provisions for the inspection of ABS. Like the revisions made in the August 2005 final rule, the amendments requested by CVSA and ATA would simply clarify existing requirements. Proper inspection, repair, and maintenance of CMVs are essential to the safety of motor carrier operations. The purpose of 49 CFR part 396, ‘‘Inspection, Repair, and Maintenance,’’ is to ensure that every motor carrier (1) systematically inspects, repairs, and E:\FR\FM\07OCP1.SGM 07OCP1 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 60594 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 194 / Wednesday, October 7, 2015 / Proposed Rules maintains all motor vehicles subject to its control to ensure that all parts and accessories are in safe and proper operating condition at all times, and (2) maintains records of these inspections, repairs, and maintenance. Generally, systematic means a regular or scheduled program to keep vehicles in a safe operating condition. Part 396 does not specify inspection, repair, or maintenance intervals because such intervals are fleet specific, and in some instances, vehicle specific. The inspection, repair, and maintenance intervals are to be determined by the motor carrier. The requirements in part 396 concerning driver pre- and post-trip inspections and periodic (annual) inspections are in addition to the systematic inspection, repair, and maintenance requirements. FMCSA has also received several petitions from CVSA seeking amendments to part 396. First, while § 396.9(d)(2) requires violations or defects noted on roadside inspection reports to be ‘‘corrected,’’ CVSA requested that the Agency clarify when such vehicle and driver violations or defects must be corrected. Second, CVSA requested that the Agency remove the words ‘‘or roadside’’ from the existing regulatory language of § 396.17 to separate the roadside inspection program conducted by law enforcement officials from the periodic (annual) inspection requirements of § 396.17. Third, CVSA asked that § 396.19 be amended to delete the references to the ‘‘random roadside inspection program.’’ Finally, CVSA requested that FMCSA amend Appendix G to the FMCSRs by deleting the ‘‘Comparison of Appendix G, and the new North American Uniform Driver-Vehicle Inspection Procedure (North American Commercial Vehicle Critical Safety Inspection Items and Out-of-Service Criteria.)’’ As with the proposed amendments to part 393, the proposed revisions to part 396 merely clarify existing requirements. In addition to the CVSA and ATA petitions for rulemaking, the NTSB issued two safety recommendations to FMCSA relating to Appendix G of the FMCSRs as a result of its investigation of an October 13, 2003, crash in Tallulah, Louisiana, involving a motorcoach and a tractor semitrailer combination. First, investigators discovered that the motorcoach had been equipped with speed-restricted tires. While the tires were designed for speeds not to exceed 55 mph, and to provide high-load capacity and durability for inner city transit-bus-type vehicles (which typically do not exceed speeds of 55 mph), the motorcoach was being operated on the interstate at VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:56 Oct 06, 2015 Jkt 238001 speeds exceeding 55 mph at the time of the crash. The NTSB noted that if a speed-restricted tire is used in service above its rated speed for extended periods, a catastrophic failure can result. The NTSB concluded that because the CMV inspection criteria used by FMCSA and others do not address the identification and appropriate use of speed-restricted tires, they overlook an important vehicle safety factor and can result in CMVs intended for highway use being operated with tires not suited for highway speeds. The NTSB issued Safety Recommendation H–05–03 to FMCSA, recommending that the Agency revise Appendix G ‘‘to include inspection criteria and specific language to address a tire’s speed rating to ensure that it is appropriate for a vehicle’s intended use.’’ Second, investigators found that during the crash sequence, many passenger seats did not remain in their original positions because they had been improperly secured to the floor of the vehicle. The NTSB concluded that improperly secured motorcoach passenger seats are not likely to be identified during CMV inspections because no criteria or procedures are available for the inspection of motorcoach seating anchorage systems. The NTSB issued Safety Recommendation H–05–05 to FMCSA, recommending that the Agency (1) develop a method for inspecting motorcoach passenger seat mounting anchorages, and (2) revise Appendix G of the FMCSRs to require inspection of these anchorages. Discussion of Proposed Rulemaking Section 393.5, Definition of ‘‘Major tread groove.’’ Section 393.75 of the FMCSRs specifies the requirements for tires on CMVs operated in interstate commerce. Paragraph (b) states that ‘‘Any tire on the front wheels of a bus, truck, or truck tractor shall have a tread groove pattern depth of at least 4⁄32 of an inch when measured at any point on a major tread groove. The measurements shall not be made where tie bars, humps, or fillets are located’’ [emphasis added]. In addition, § 393.75(c) states that, ‘‘Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, tires shall have a tread groove pattern depth of at least 2⁄32 of an inch when measured in a major tread groove. The measurement shall not be made where tie bars, humps or fillets are located’’ [emphasis added]. In its petition, CVSA stated: The absence of a definition for what constitutes a major tread groove leads to confusion for both enforcement and industry. There are several grooves in a tire and not all PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 of them are necessarily major tread grooves. Dependent on where the tire is worn and what the person understands to be a major tread groove is the important and costly decision on whether or not the tire is required to be replaced. A clear definition will reduce unnecessary disposal of tires due to improper tread depth measurements, as well as reduce improper violations/citations related to § 393.75. CVSA contacted ATA’s Technology & Maintenance Council (TMC) S.2 Tire & Wheel Study Group Task Force and asked them to (1) review the regulatory language in § 393.75(b) and (c), and (2) develop a definition for ‘‘major tread groove.’’ The TMC Task Force recommended that a major tread groove be defined as ‘‘The space between two adjacent tread ribs or lugs on a tire that contains a tread wear indicator or wear bar. (In most cases, the locations of tread wear indicators are designated on the upper sidewall/shoulder of the tire on original tread tires.)’’ CVSA contends that it ‘‘is imperative that measurements for tire wear are taken in consistent locations to help promote uniformity and consistency in both enforcement and maintenance.’’ The proposed definition of ‘‘major tread groove’’ was submitted to, reviewed, and approved by CVSA’s Vehicle Committee (consisting of enforcement, government, and industry representatives) prior to the development and submission of the petition for rulemaking to FMCSA. The petition requests that § 393.5 be amended to include the TMC Task Force’s suggested definition of ‘‘major tread groove.’’ FMCSA agrees that uniformity and consistency in enforcement and maintenance are critical. By including a definition of ‘‘major tread groove’’ in § 393.5—a term that is currently included in the regulatory text of § 393.75(b) and (c), but not specifically defined—the Agency expects increased consistency in the application and citation of § 393.75 during roadside inspections. FMCSA proposes to amend § 393.5 to include a definition for ‘‘major tread groove’’ that is consistent with the definition as proposed by the TMC Task Force. In addition, the following illustration will be added to § 393.75, where the arrows indicate the location of tread wear indicators or a wear bars signifying a major tread groove: E:\FR\FM\07OCP1.SGM 07OCP1 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 194 / Wednesday, October 7, 2015 / Proposed Rules The purpose of the rear license plate lamp is ‘‘to illuminate the license plate from the top or sides.’’ ATA believes that if there is no license plate, there is no need and therefore should be no regulatory requirement for a functioning rear license plate lamp. As simple and commonsensical as this seems, roadside inspectors in some [States] have issued citations to motor carriers when the rear license plate holder is empty and the tractor license plate lamp is either missing or not working. In surveying the 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia, ATA found that 35 states and the District require only one license plate on a tractor, and it is to be placed on the front. Only 14 states require two license plates, one each on the front and back of the tractor. Therefore, the change we are seeking in the application of the regulation would apply to a significant number of commercial trucks with state-issued plates . . . These changes to the existing regulatory requirements to exempt commercial vehicles with no rear license plates will not adversely impact safety and will help eliminate further unnecessary enforcement actions by roadside inspectors. VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:56 Oct 06, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 ‘‘Air Brake Systems’’ (60 FR 13216, March 10, 1995). In addition to requiring ABS on medium and heavy vehicles, the 1995 rule also required all powered vehicles to be equipped with an in-cab lamp to indicate ABS malfunctions. Truck tractors and other trucks equipped to tow air-braked trailers are required to have two separate in-cab lamps: One indicating malfunctions in the towing vehicle ABS and the other in the trailer ABS. Part 393 of the FMCSRs was amended in 1998 to require carriers to maintain ABS installed on truck tractors, single unit trucks, buses, trailers, and converter dollies (63 FR 24454, May 4, 1998). Although the final rule clearly placed on interstate motor carriers the responsibility to maintain the ABS in operable condition at all times, it did not add provisions regarding the periodic inspection of the ABS/ABS malfunction indicator to the minimum periodic inspection standards in Appendix G. This means that a vehicle could pass the periodic inspection with an inoperable ABS/ABS malfunction indicator. However, the operation of the vehicle with the inoperable ABS/ABS malfunction indicator would be a violation of the FMCSRs and would preclude the vehicle from receiving a roadside inspection decal. In its petition, CVSA requested that the Agency amend Appendix G to include specific language regarding the inspection of the ABS system/ malfunction indicator during periodic/ annual inspections. CVSA stated: While we realize that 49 CFR part 393— Parts and Accessories Necessary for Safe Operation has requirements relating to ABS in § 393.55, periodic inspections are typically conducted using Appendix G as a guide (and not Part 393) and as such, ABS operational status is frequently neglected since it is not part of Appendix G. Furthermore, many versions of the preprinted forms used by personnel who conduct periodic inspections do not mention or list ABS as an inspection item. The failure of some motor carriers to check ABS as a part of their preventative maintenance programs is found by roadside inspectors while conducting random roadside inspections. Inspectors are frequently finding commercial motor vehicles with missing or inoperative ABS malfunction indicators or indicators that are constantly illuminated indicating a fault in the ABS. A study was conducted by the Battelle Memorial Institute for FMCSA to assess the status of the ABS warning system on in-service air-braked commercial vehicles. Data from approximately 1,000 CMVs were collected in California, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Washington, by enforcement personnel who had been specifically trained to inspect the ABS warning lamp. With an ABS lamp check problem defined as falling into one of E:\FR\FM\07OCP1.SGM 07OCP1 EP07OC15.201</GPH> asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Table 1 to § 393.11, License Plate Lights. Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108, ‘‘Lamps, reflective devices, and associated equipment,’’ requires all newlymanufactured passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles (MPVs), trucks, and buses to be equipped with a single white license plate light, located at the rear, to illuminate the license plate from the top or sides. The light must be steady burning, and must be activated when the headlamps are activated in a steady burning state or when the parking lamps on passenger cars and MPVs, trucks, and buses are activated. Similarly, § 393.11(a)(1) of the FMCSRs requires all CMVs operated in interstate commerce and manufactured on or after December 25, 1968, to meet at least the minimum applicable requirements of FMVSS No. 108 in effect at the time of manufacture of the vehicle. Footnote 11 to Table 1 of § 393.11 requires that the license plate light ‘‘be illuminated when tractor headlamps are illuminated.’’ In its petition, ATA states: ATA’s petition requests that FMCSA amend the license plate lamp requirement in Table 1 to § 393.11 to read ‘‘At rear license plate to illuminate the plate from the top or sides, except that no license plate lamp is required where state law does not require a license plate to be present.’’ As noted in both FMVSS No. 108 and the FMCSRs, the only function of the rear license plate lamp is to illuminate the rear license plate. FMCSA agrees with ATA that if a truck tractor is not required to display a rear license plate, then there is no corresponding safety need for a functioning rear license plate light. Uniformity and consistency in enforcement are critical. FMCSA proposes to amend Footnote 11 to Table 1 of § 393.11 to indicate that no rear license plate lamp is required on truck tractors registered in States that do not require tractors to display a rear license plate.’’ Appendix G to the FMCSRs—ABS. Section 210 of the Motor Carrier Safety Act of 1984 required the Secretary of Transportation to establish standards for the annual (i.e., periodic) or more frequent inspection of all CMVs engaged in interstate or foreign commerce. In response, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) published a final rule on December 7, 1988, adopting § 396.17, which requires all CMVs to be inspected at least once every 12 months (53 FR 49402, as amended on December 8, 1989 (54 FR 50722)). In establishing specific criteria for the newly required annual inspection, FHWA looked to inspection criteria that had been developed based on the specifications in part 393, notably (1) the CVSA vehicle out-ofservice criteria and (2) the vehicle portion of the FHWA National Uniform Driver-Vehicle Inspection Procedure (NUD–VIP). FHWA decided to use the vehicle portion of the NUD–VIP as the criteria for successful completion of the annual inspection, and in the December 1988 rule, established Appendix G to the FMCSRs as the minimum periodic inspection standards for § 396.17. FHWA noted that utilization of the NUD–VIP would (1) provide the necessary inspection-related pass/fail criteria for the periodic inspection at a more stringent level than the vehicle out-of-service criteria, and (2) provide the proper level of Federal oversight in establishing and revising the criteria. NHTSA did not require medium and heavy vehicles to be equipped with an ABS to improve lateral stability and steering control during braking until 1995, when it published a final rule amending FMVSS No. 105, ‘‘Hydraulic Brake Systems,’’ and FMVSS No. 121, 60595 60596 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 194 / Wednesday, October 7, 2015 / Proposed Rules asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS three categories; no lamp, lamp inoperative, or lamp on (thus indicating an active ABS system fault), a snapshot of this aspect of the CMV population was created. Results indicated that about one in six power units manufactured after March 1, 1997 showed some problem with their ABS warning lamp system. One in three trailers manufactured after March 1, 1998 showed a problem. Furthermore, the study indicated that ABS problems increased with vehicle age so the percentages would likely be higher if the study was repeated today since there are now older vehicles on the road with ABS. FMCSA agrees that the failure of a motor carrier to properly maintain an important safety technology such as ABS should result in the vehicle failing the periodic inspection. And although CVSA did not mention automatic brake adjusters and brake adjustment indicators in its petition, FMCSA believes these brake components should also be included in Appendix G to ensure that vehicles cannot pass the periodic inspection without this important safety equipment. FMCSA amended 49 CFR part 393 on September 6, 1995 (60 FR 46245) to require that interstate motor carriers maintain these devices, but as with the ABS final rule, the Agency did not include automatic brake adjusters and brake adjustment indicators in Appendix G. ABS and automatic brake adjusters and brake adjustment indicator requirements have been included in part 393 for approximately 20 years. Therefore, FMCSA believes that it is reasonable to assume that the vast majority of motor carriers currently include a review of these devices and systems in their annual inspection programs despite the fact that there are no explicit requirements in Appendix G to do so. As such, the Agency believes that amending Appendix G to include a review of ABS and automatic brake adjusters and brake adjustment indicators simply maintains consistency between part 393 and Appendix G, and will result in a de minimis added burden to motor carriers. Section 396.9, Inspection of motor vehicles and intermodal equipment in operation. Section 396.9 of the FMCSRs authorizes special agents of FMCSA, as defined in Appendix B to the FMCSRs, to enter upon and perform inspections of a motor carrier’s vehicles in operation, i.e., to perform roadside inspections. Drivers receiving reports from such inspections are required to provide a copy of the report to the motor carrier or intermodal equipment provider (1) upon his/her arrival at the next terminal or facility, or (2) immediately via mail, fax, or other means if the driver is not scheduled to arrive at a terminal or at a facility of the VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:56 Oct 06, 2015 Jkt 238001 intermodal equipment provider within 24 hours. Section 396.9(d)(2) requires that ‘‘Motor carriers and intermodal equipment providers shall examine the report. Violations or defects noted thereon shall be corrected. Repairs of items of intermodal equipment placed out-of-service are also to be documented in the maintenance records for such equipment.’’ However, § 396.9(d)(2) does not expressly state when such violations or defects need to be remedied. CVSA asked FMCSA to amend § 396.9(d)(2) to specifically require that violations or defects noted in a roadside inspection report ‘‘be corrected prior to redispatching the driver and/or vehicle.’’ In support of its petition, CVSA stated: Upon review of the North American Standard Level I Inspection (Part ‘‘A’’— Driver) training materials, it was noted that the regulatory language ‘‘prior to redispatch’’ does not currently exist in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs). The language has been used exclusively in the North American Standard Out-of-Service Criteria (OOSC) and in the Appendix since the early beginnings of the North American Standard Inspection Program. By adding the regulatory language, it will provide enforcement and industry with a clear understanding of the regulatory intent of when vehicle and driver violations or defects must be corrected. Every driver is required to prepare a driver vehicle inspection report (DVIR) in writing at the completion of each day’s work on each that he or she vehicle operated that lists ‘‘any defect or deficiency discovered by or reported to the driver which would affect the safety of operation of the vehicle or result in its mechanical breakdown’’ (§ 396.11(a)(2) [emphasis added]). Any defects or violations noted during a roadside inspection conducted during that work day, and documented in a report provided to the driver by an inspection official, must be included in the DVIR prepared by the driver at the end of the work day. In addition, § 396.11(a)(3) specifies that prior to requiring or permitting a driver to operate a vehicle, every motor carrier or its agent shall (1) repair any defect or deficiency listed on the DVIR which would be likely to affect the safety of operation of the vehicle (§ 396.11(a)(3)(i)), and (2) certify on the original DVIR that all defects or deficiencies have been repaired or that repair is unnecessary before the vehicle is operated again (§ 396.11(a)(3)(ii)). Section 396.11(a)(3) makes it clear that all defects and deficiencies discovered by or reported to a driver— including those identified during a PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 roadside inspection conducted under the authority of § 396.9—must be corrected (or a certification provided stating that repair is unnecessary) before a vehicle is operated each day. However, the Agency agrees that the language of § 396.9(d)(2) is not as explicit as it could be, and could lead to uncertainty and/or inconsistency in both the enforcement community and the motor carrier industry regarding when violations and defects noted on roadside inspection reports need to be corrected. While CVSA suggested inclusion of language that would require violations or defects to be corrected ‘‘prior to redispatching the driver and/or vehicle,’’ the Agency believes that use of the term ‘‘redispatching’’ could be troublesome in some operations, for example in long-haul, multi-day cross country trips where a vehicle may be ‘‘dispatched’’ only at the trip’s point of origin. On such trips, a driver is required under § 396.11 to ensure—at the beginning of each day—that any defects or deficiencies discovered by or reported to the driver on the previous day have been satisfactorily addressed according to § 396.11(a)(3)(i) and (ii). FMCSA is concerned that amending § 396.9(d)(2) using CVSA’s recommended ‘‘prior to redispatch’’ language could improperly imply that repairs are not required each day on multi-day trips where the vehicle is not ‘‘redispatched’’ every day. Instead, to clarify the intent of § 396.9(d)(2) as discussed above, FMCSA proposes to amend that section by including a specific cross reference to § 396.11(a)(3). The Motor Carrier Safety Act of 1990 required that violations found during inspections funded under the Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program (MCSAP) be corrected in a timely manner, and that States participating in the MCSAP adopt a verification program to ensure that CMVs and operators thereof found in violation of safety requirements have subsequently been brought into compliance. [Sec. 15(d), Pub. L. 101–500, Nov. 3, 1990, 104 Stat. 1219]. Section 396.9(d)(3) requires motor carriers and intermodal equipment providers, within 15 days, to (1) certify that all violations noted have been corrected by completing the ‘‘Signature of Carrier/Intermodal Equipment Provider Official, Title, and Date Signed’’ portions of the roadside inspection form, (2) return the completed roadside inspection form to the issuing agency, and (3) retain a copy of the completed form for 12 months from the date of the inspection. E:\FR\FM\07OCP1.SGM 07OCP1 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 194 / Wednesday, October 7, 2015 / Proposed Rules asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS In a final rule implementing revisions to the MCSAP published on September 8, 1992, the FHWA noted that the ATA had asked ‘‘that carriers be given more time to return inspection reports and file a report at the terminal where the vehicle is maintained.’’ Specifically, the ATA requested that the carrier be allowed 60 days to file a copy of each roadside inspection report. FHWA declined to adopt ATA’s request, stating ‘‘Currently, § 396.9 allows 15 days for the motor carrier to certify correction of defects found in inspections. The FHWA believes that this is sufficient time and, moreover, that these reports on safety violations found on trucks and buses operating on the highways require immediate attention and follow-up by the motor carrier’’ (57 FR 40946, 40951, Sept. 8, 1992). FMCSA requests comments regarding whether the existing 15-day requirement in § 396.9(d)(3) remains appropriate, or whether a different time period should be considered. Section 396.17, Periodic Inspection. Section 396.17(f) states that ‘‘Vehicles passing roadside or periodic inspections performed under the auspices of any State government or equivalent jurisdiction or the FMCSA, meeting the minimum standards contained in appendix G of this subchapter, will be considered to have met the requirements of an annual inspection for a period of 12 months commencing from the last day of the month in which the inspection was performed. If a vehicle is subject to a mandatory State inspection program, as provided in § 396.23(b)(1), a roadside inspection may only be considered equivalent if it complies with the requirements of that program.’’ In its petition, CVSA recommended that § 396.17(f) be amended by removing the words ‘‘roadside or’’ from the current regulatory language. CVSA stated: It is our strong belief that the roadside inspection program and the annual/periodic inspection program need to be decoupled from each other. The roadside inspection program and the North American Standard Out-of-Service Criteria (OOSC) are not equivalent to a ‘‘government mandated maintenance standard’’ for annual or periodic inspections. The North American Standard Inspection Program and North American Standard Out-of-Service Criteria have been in place for more than two decades and were never intended to serve this purpose . . . The roadside inspection is the ‘‘last line of defense’’ for highway safety. When a driver or vehicle is placed out of service during a roadside inspection it is indicative that the motor carrier likely has a failing or defective VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:56 Oct 06, 2015 Jkt 238001 preventative maintenance and/or driver trip inspection program . . . Far too many drivers, roadside inspectors, mechanics, company safety professionals and owner operators reference the OOSC as the ‘‘DOT’’ standard. In our judgment it is a mistake and a misuse of the intent of the OOSC. The OOSC serves as a uniform set of guidelines for law enforcement officials when determining whether a driver and/or vehicle are an imminent hazard. The Policy Statement under Part II of the OOSC states ‘‘These criteria are neither suited nor intended to serve as vehicle maintenance or performance standards.’’ 60597 not necessarily satisfy the requirements of the periodic inspection under this rule. In order to meet the requirements for a periodic inspection, the inspection must be performed using, as a minimum, the criteria contained in Appendix G of this subchapter [emphasis added in all]. FMCSA emphasizes that the purpose of the periodic inspection rule was to have motor carriers take full responsibility for having a qualified mechanic do a thorough inspection of the vehicles the carrier controls. FMCSA does not believe it is appropriate to continue to allow carriers relief from FMCSA emphasizes that under the this responsibility by using a roadside existing regulatory language, only inspection conducted by enforcement roadside inspections ‘‘meeting the officials. Motor carriers are responsible minimum standards contained in for having the means of ensuring the appendix G’’ may be considered to be completion of a periodic inspection equivalent to a periodic/annual irrespective of whether a roadside inspection. This distinction was clearly inspection is performed and this and extensively discussed in the rulemaking would require them to do so December 1988 FHWA final rule at least once every 12 months, discussed earlier that established the irrespective of whether a roadside periodic/annual inspection inspection is performed during that requirements of § 396.17. In that rule, period. FHWA stated: For the reasons explained above, As noted in the NPRM, the commenters FMCSA proposes to amend § 396.17(f) pointed out the differences between random to remove the words ‘‘roadside or’’ from critical element roadside inspections and the current regulatory text as suggested what they perceived as the intent of § 210 of the [1984] Act. They indicated that a random by CVSA in its petition. This proposed amendment would eliminate any roadside inspection was basically concerned with ensuring that the vehicle did not pose uncertainties and make clear that a an imminent danger on the roadway. The roadside inspection is not equivalent to focus is on checking the more critical the periodic/annual inspection required components such as brakes, headlights, brake under § 396.17, even if it is conducted lights, and steering and suspension systems. in accordance with the provisions of In contrast, a periodic inspection should be Appendix G. more concerned with the general overall In addition, CVSA requested that safety condition of the vehicle, including FMCSA remove the section at the end those parts, which if defective, worn, or missing do not pose an immediate danger but of Appendix G titled ‘‘Comparison of nevertheless should be corrected as soon as Appendix G, and the new North possible. Therefore, the rule requires that American Uniform Driver-Vehicle roadside inspections meet the minimum Inspection Procedure (North American standards contained in Appendix G in Commercial Vehicle Critical Safety order to meet the periodic inspection Inspection Items and Out-Of-Service requirements . . . Criteria). In light of the proposed The current inspection standards amendments to § 396.17(f) described associated with the CVSA or NUD–VIP focus on random roadside inspections and examine above, and to further decrease the certain key components of a vehicle to detect possibility of confusion regarding those defects most often identified as causing differing requirements of the roadside or contributing to the severity of commercial inspection program and the periodic/ motor vehicle accidents. The CVSA or NUD– annual inspection program, FMCSA VIP standards, by their very nature, do not proposes to delete the section as require disassembly of parts to effect a thorough inspection. The FHWA believes that suggested by CVSA. Section 396.19, Inspector the criteria on which to judge whether or not Qualifications. Section 396.19 of the the vehicle passes the [periodic] inspection FMCSRs prescribes the minimum should be more thorough than that used during roadside inspections . . . qualifications for individuals Vehicles subjected to random roadside performing periodic/annual inspections vehicle checks which inspect vehicles using under § 396.17(d). Specifically, the criteria included in Appendix G will be § 396.19(b) states that ‘‘Motor carriers considered to have met the requirements of and intermodal equipment providers this rule if they pass the inspection. Note that must retain evidence of that individual’s the current CVSA out-of-service criteria, qualifications under this section. They while very similar to that contained in must retain this evidence for the period Appendix G, are not identical. The fact that during which that individual is a vehicle is subjected to and passes roadside inspection (e.g., receiving a CVSA decal) does performing annual motor vehicle PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07OCP1.SGM 07OCP1 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 60598 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 194 / Wednesday, October 7, 2015 / Proposed Rules inspections for the motor carrier or intermodal equipment provider, and for one year thereafter. However, motor carriers and intermodal equipment providers do not have to maintain documentation of inspector qualifications for those inspections performed either as part of a State periodic inspection program or at the roadside as part of a random roadside inspection program.’’ Consistent with the proposed amendments to § 396.17 discussed above, CVSA’s petition recommended that FMCSA delete the language regarding ‘‘a random roadside inspection program’’ in § 396.19(b). FMCSA agrees and proposes to amend § 396.19(b) as suggested by CVSA. NTSB Recommendations, Speedrestricted tires and motorcoach seat anchorage strength in Appendix G. Speed-restricted tires. After investigating a 2003 motorcoach crash, NTSB recommended that the Agency revise Appendix G ‘‘to include inspection criteria and specific language to address a tire’s speed rating to ensure that it is appropriate for a vehicle’s intended use.’’ FMVSS No. 119, ‘‘New pneumatic tires for motor vehicles with a GVWR [Gross Vehicle Weight Rating] of more than 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) and motorcycles,’’ requires certain information to be marked on the tire sidewall. S6.5(d) of the standard requires that each tire’s maximum load rating for single and dual applications and the corresponding inflation pressure be labeled on the sidewall, which provides information to the vehicle operator to ensure proper selection and use of tires. However, a tire’s maximum speed rating is not required to be labeled on the sidewall, except for tires that are speed-restricted to 90 km/h (55 mph) or below.1 For speed-restricted tires, S6.5(e) of the standard requires that the label on the sidewall be as follows: ‘‘Max Speed lkm/h (lmph).’’ 2 For tires that are not speed-restricted, inspection officials have no way to determine from the sidewall labeling the design maximum speed capability of the tire for the specified maximum load rating and corresponding inflation pressure. 1 NHTSA published an NPRM on September 29, 2010 proposing to upgrade FMVSS No. 119 (75 FR 60036) to require a maximum speed rating label for radial truck tires with load ranges F and above. No final rule has been published to date. 2 With respect to the tires on the motorcoach in the Tallulah, LA crash, the NTSB Highway Accident Report notes ‘‘The restricted speed information was embossed on each tire’s outer sidewall and was clearly visible.’’ VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:56 Oct 06, 2015 Jkt 238001 FMCSA agrees that speed-restricted tires should not be used on CMVs operating on highways in excess of 55 mph for extended periods of time. However, the adoption of a requirement regarding a tire’s speed rating in Appendix G, as recommended by the NTSB in Safety Recommendation H–05– 03, absent a regulatory requirement for tires to be so marked, would result in inconsistent enforcement. As an alternative, FMCSA proposes to add language to section 10 of Appendix G that will prohibit the use of speedrestricted tires on CMVs subject to the FMCSRs unless the use of such tires is specifically designated by the motor carrier. Motorcoach seat anchorage strength. Investigators found that during the Tallulah crash sequence, many passenger seats did not remain securely attached to the floor. The NTSB recommended that the Agency (1) develop a method for inspecting motorcoach passenger seat mounting anchorages, and (2) revise Appendix G of the FMCSRs to require inspection of these anchorages. Section 393.93(a)(3) requires buses manufactured on or after January 1, 1972, to conform to the requirements of FMVSS No. 207, ‘‘Seating systems.’’ FMVSS No. 207 establishes requirements for seats, their attachment assemblies, and their installation to minimize the possibility of their failure by forces acting on them as a result of vehicle impact. For most vehicles required by FMVSS No. 208, ‘‘Occupant crash protection,’’ to have seat belts, the seat belt anchorages must be certified to the strength requirements of FMVSS No. 210, ‘‘Seat belt assembly anchorages,’’ and the seats must be certified to FMVSS No. 207. Part of the FMVSS No. 207 requirements tests the forward strength of the seat attachment to the vehicle replicating the load that would be applied through the seat center of gravity by inertia in a 20 g vehicle deceleration. However, FMVSS No. 207 specifically exempts (at S.4.2) all bus passenger seats, including motorcoaches, except for small school bus passenger seats. As such, there are no performance standards in place in the FMVSSs specifically for motorcoach seat anchorages. Following its investigation of the Tallulah crash, NTSB issued Safety Recommendation H–05–01 to NHTSA to ‘‘develop performance standards for passenger seat anchorages in motorcoaches.’’ On November 25, 2013, NHTSA published a final rule requiring lap/ shoulder belts to be installed for each passenger seating position on (1) all PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 over-the-road buses 3 manufactured on or after November 28, 2016, and (2) all buses other than over-the-road buses manufactured on or after November 28, 2016, with a GVWR greater than 26,000 pounds, with certain exclusions (78 FR 70416). This rule requires the seat belt anchorages, both torso and lap, on passenger seats to be integrated into the seat structure, and these seat belt anchorages to meet the performance requirements of FMVSS No. 210. Testing performed by NHTSA demonstrated that the FMVSS No. 210 requirement ensures that restraints integrated into seats are tested adequately and that the seat attachment is robust. Thus, NHTSA determined that additional FMVSS No. 207 requirements for motorcoach passenger seats are not needed. In consideration of the above, NTSB reclassified Safety Recommendation H–05–01 as ‘‘Closed— Acceptable Alternative Action’’ on July 22, 2014. As noted in the NTSB’s report following the Tallulah crash, ‘‘Many different seating system designs are used in motorcoaches operating in the United States; each manufacturer uses its own hardware and anchorage designs . . .’’ The NTSB also noted that it had examined the issue of motorcoach seat anchorage failure in six previous crash investigations. The NTSB stated ‘‘Several different seat anchorage system designs were used in the motorcoaches involved in these accidents. Even when properly installed and maintained, some seat anchorage systems failed, while others did not, even in similar accident scenarios.’’ Given the wide range of seat anchorage designs, coupled with the lack of testing requirements specifically for seat anchorage strength in the FMVSSs, it is not practicable for FMCSA to develop a detailed methodology for the inspection of motorcoach passenger seat mounting anchorages. However, FMCSA proposes to add a new section to Appendix G that will require an examination of motorcoach seats during the conduct of a periodic inspection in accordance with § 396.17 to ensure that they are securely attached to the vehicle structure. Amendments to Existing Regulatory Guidance If the proposed regulatory amendments are adopted, FMCSA will amend existing regulatory guidance 3 The final rule defines over-the-road bus as ‘‘A bus characterized by an elevated passenger deck located over a baggage compartment, except a school bus.’’ E:\FR\FM\07OCP1.SGM 07OCP1 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 194 / Wednesday, October 7, 2015 / Proposed Rules questions/answers as necessary to maintain consistency with the amended regulatory language. Regulatory Analyses asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures as Supplemented by E.O. 13563) FMCSA has determined that this proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action within the meaning of Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, as supplemented by E.O. 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011), or within the meaning of DOT regulatory policies and procedures (DOT Order 2100.5 dated May 22, 1980; 44 FR 11034, February 2, 1979). The Agency believes the potential economic impact is nominal because the proposed amendments generally do not involve the adoption of new or more stringent requirements, but rather the clarification of existing requirements. As such, the costs of the rule would not approach the $100 million annual threshold for economic significance. Moreover, the Agency does not expect the rule to generate substantial congressional or public interest. This proposed rule therefore has not been formally reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Regulatory Flexibility Act The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires Federal agencies to consider the effects of their regulatory actions on small business and other small entities and to minimize any significant economic impact. The term ‘‘small entities’’ encompasses small businesses and not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.4 Accordingly, DOT policy requires an analysis of the impact of all regulations on small entities and mandates that agencies strive to lessen any adverse effects on these businesses. Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA) (Title II, Pub. L. 104– 121, 110 Stat. 857, March 29, 1996), the proposed rule is not expected to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because the proposed amendments generally do not involve the adoption of new or more stringent requirements, 4 Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), see National Archives at http://www.archives.gov/ federal-register/laws/regulatory-flexibility/601.html. VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:56 Oct 06, 2015 Jkt 238001 but, instead, the clarification of existing requirements. Therefore, there is no disproportionate burden to small entities. Consequently, I certify that the proposed action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. FMCSA invites comment from members of the public who believe there will be a significant impact either on small businesses or on governmental jurisdictions with a population of less than 50,000. Assistance for Small Entities In accordance with section 213(a) of the SBREFA, FMCSA wants to assist small entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better evaluate its effects on themselves and participate in the rulemaking initiative. If the proposed rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please consult the FMCSA point of contact, Mike Huntley, listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of the proposed rule. Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce or otherwise determine compliance with Federal regulations to the Small Business Administration’s Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency’s responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of FMCSA, call 1–888–REG– FAIR (1–888–734–3247). DOT has a policy ensuring the rights of small entities to regulatory enforcement fairness and an explicit policy against retaliation for exercising these rights. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, taken together, or by the private sector of $155 million (which is the value equivalent of $100 million in 1995, adjusted for inflation to 2014 levels) or more in any 1 year. Though this proposed rule would not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 60599 Paperwork Reduction Act This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520). Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) A rule has implications for Federalism under Section 1(a) of Executive Order 13132 if it has ‘‘substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.’’ FMCSA has determined that this proposal would not have substantial direct costs on or for States, nor would it limit the policymaking discretion of States. Nothing in this document preempts any State law or regulation. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform) This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden. Executive Order 13045 (Protection of Children) E.O. 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, Apr. 23, 1997), requires agencies issuing ‘‘economically significant’’ rules, if the regulation also concerns an environmental health or safety risk that an agency has reason to believe may disproportionately affect children, to include an evaluation of the regulation’s environmental health and safety effects on children. The Agency determined this proposed rule is not economically significant. Therefore, no analysis of the impacts on children is required. In any event, this regulatory action could not present an environmental or safety risk that would disproportionately affect children. Executive Order 12630 (Taking of Private Property) FMCSA reviewed this notice of proposed rulemaking in accordance with Executive Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights, and has determined it will not effect a taking of private property or otherwise have taking implications. Privacy The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005 (Pub. L. 108–447, 118 Stat. 2809, 3268, 5 U.S.C. 552a note), requires the E:\FR\FM\07OCP1.SGM 07OCP1 60600 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 194 / Wednesday, October 7, 2015 / Proposed Rules Agency to conduct a privacy impact assessment (PIA) of a regulation that will affect the privacy of individuals. This proposed rule does not require the collection of personally identifiable information (PII). The E-Government Act of 2002, Public Law 107–347, section 208, 116 Stat. 2899, 2921 (Dec. 17, 2002), requires Federal agencies to conduct a privacy impact assessment for new or substantially changed technology that collects, maintains, or disseminates information in an identifiable form. No new or substantially changed technology would collect, maintain, or disseminate information as a result of this rule. Accordingly, FMCSA has not conducted a privacy impact assessment. Executive Order 12372 (Intergovernmental Review) The regulations implementing Executive Order 12372 regarding intergovernmental consultation on Federal programs and activities do not apply to this program. Executive Order 13211 (Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use) FMCSA has analyzed this proposed rule under E.O. 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use. The Agency has determined that it is not a ‘‘significant energy action’’ under that order because it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects under E.O. 13211. asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Executive Order 13175 (Indian Tribal Governments) This rule does not have tribal implications under E.O. 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, through OMB, with an explanation of why using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:56 Oct 06, 2015 Jkt 238001 Voluntary consensus standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management systems practices) are standards that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards. Environment (National Environmental Policy Act, Clean Air Act, Environmental Justice) FMCSA analyzed this NPRM for the purpose of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and determined this action is categorically excluded from further analysis and documentation in an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement under FMCSA Order 5610.1 (69 FR 9680, March 1, 2004), Appendix 2, paragraphs 6(z)(aa) and 6(z)(bb). The Categorical Exclusion (CE) in paragraph 6(z)(aa) covers regulations requiring motor carriers, their officers, drivers, agents, representatives, and employees directly in control of CMVs to inspect, repair, and provide maintenance for every CMV used on a public road. The CE in paragraph 6(z)(bb) covers regulations concerning vehicle operation safety standards (e.g., regulations requiring: Certain motor carriers to use approved equipment which is required to be installed such as an ignition cut-off switch, or carried on board, such as a fire extinguisher, and/or stricter blood alcohol concentration (BAC) standards for drivers, etc.), equipment approval, and/or equipment carriage requirements (e.g. fire extinguishers and flares). The CE determination is available for inspection or copying in the Regulations.gov Web site listed under ADDRESSES. FMCSA also analyzed this rule under the Clean Air Act, as amended (CAA), section 176(c) (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.), and implementing regulations promulgated by the Environmental Protection Agency. Approval of this action is exempt from the CAA’s general conformity requirement since it does not affect direct or indirect emissions of criteria pollutants. Under E.O. 12898 (Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations), each Federal agency must identify and address, as appropriate, ‘‘disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of its programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and lowincome populations’’ in the United PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 States, its possessions, and territories. FMCSA has determined that this proposed rule would have no environmental justice effects, nor would its promulgation have any collective environmental impact. List of Subjects 49 CFR Part 393 Highway safety, Motor carriers, Motor vehicle safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 49 CFR Part 396 Highways and roads. Motor carriers, Motor vehicle equipment, Motor vehicle safety. For the reasons stated above, FMCSA proposes to amend 49 CFR chapter III, subchapter B, as follows: PART 393—PARTS AND ACCESSORIES NECESSARY FOR SAFE OPERATION 1. The authority citation for part 393 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 49 U.S.C. 31136, 31151, and 31502; sec. 1041(b) of Pub. L. 102–240, 105 Stat. 1914, 1993 (1991); and 49 CFR 1.87. 2. Amend § 393.5 to add a definition for ‘‘Major tread groove’’ in alphabetical order to read as follows: ■ § 393.5 Definitions. * * * * * Major tread groove is the space between two adjacent tread ribs or lugs on a tire that contains a tread wear indicator or wear bar. (In most cases, the locations of tread wear indicators are designated on the upper sidewall/ shoulder of the tire on original tread tires.) * * * * * ■ 3. In § 393.11, revise Footnote 11 of Table 1 to read as follows: § 393.11 Lamps and reflective devices. * * * * * Table 1 of § 393.11—Required Lamps and Reflectors on Commercial Motor Vehicles * * * * * Footnote—11 To be illuminated when tractor headlamps are illuminated. No rear license plate lamp is required on truck tractors registered in States that do not require tractors to display a rear license plate. * * * * * PART 396—INSPECTION, REPAIR, AND MAINTENANCE 4. The authority citation for part 396 continues to read as follows: ■ E:\FR\FM\07OCP1.SGM 07OCP1 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 194 / Wednesday, October 7, 2015 / Proposed Rules Authority: 49 U.S.C. 504, 31133, 31136, 31151, and 31502; sec. 32934, Pub. L. 112– 141, 126 Stat. 405, 830; and 49 CFR 1.87. 5. Revise § 396.9(d)(2) to read as follows: ■ § 396.9 Inspection of motor vehicles and intermodal equipment in operation. * * * * * (d) * * * (2) Motor carriers and intermodal equipment providers shall examine the report. Violations or defects noted thereon shall be corrected in accordance with § 396.11(a)(3). Repairs of items of intermodal equipment placed out-ofservice are also to be documented in the maintenance records for such equipment. * * * * * ■ 6. Revise § 396.17(f) to read as follows: § 396.17 Periodic inspection. * * * * * (f) Vehicles passing periodic inspections performed under the auspices of any State government or equivalent jurisdiction or the FMCSA, meeting the minimum standards contained in appendix G of this subchapter, will be considered to have met the requirements of an annual inspection for a period of 12 months commencing from the last day of the month in which the inspection was performed. * * * * * ■ 7. Revise § 396.19(b) to read as follows: § 396.19 Appendix G to Subchapter B of Chapter III—Minimum Periodic Inspection Standards * * * * * * * 1. Brake System * * * l. Antilock Brake System 1 (1) Missing ABS malfunction indicator components (bulb, wiring, etc.). (2) ABS malfunction indicator that does not illuminate when power is first applied to the ABS controller (ECU). (3) ABS malfunction indicator that stays illuminated while power is continuously applied to the ABS controller (ECU). (4) Other missing or inoperative ABS components. * * * * * * * * 10. Tires * * c. Installation of speed-restricted tires (unless specifically designated by motor carrier) * * * * * 14. Motorcoach Seats a. Any passenger seat that is not securely fastened to the vehicle structure. Issued under the authority of delegation in 49 CFR 1.87 on: September 24, 2015. T. F. Scott Darling, III, Acting Administrator. [FR Doc. 2015–24921 Filed 10–6–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P Inspector qualifications. * asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Inspection Items and Out-Of-Service Criteria)’’, including the introductory text and paragraphs 1.—13. The additions and revision read as follows: * * * * (b) Motor carriers and intermodal equipment providers must retain evidence of that individual’s qualifications under this section. They must retain this evidence for the period during which that individual is performing annual motor vehicle inspections for the motor carrier or intermodal equipment provider, and for one year thereafter. However, motor carriers and intermodal equipment providers do not have to maintain documentation of inspector qualifications for those inspections performed as part of a State periodic inspection program. ■ 8. Amend Appendix G to Subchapter B of Chapter III by: ■ a. Adding Section 1.l; ■ b. Revising Section 10.c; ■ c. Adding Section 14; and ■ d. Removing ‘‘Comparison of Appendix G, and the New North American Uniform Driver Vehicle Inspection Procedure (North American Commercial Vehicle Critical Safety VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:56 Oct 06, 2015 Jkt 238001 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 622 [Docket No. 131108946–5860–01] RIN 0648–BD76 Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Dolphin and Wahoo Fishery Off the Atlantic States and Snapper-Grouper Fishery of the South Atlantic Region; Amendments 7/33 National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. AGENCY: 1 This section is applicable to tractors with air brakes built on or after March 1, 1997, and all other vehicles with air brakes built on or after March 1, 1998. This section is also applicable to vehicles over 10,000 lbs. GVWR with hydraulic brakes built on or after March 1, 1999. PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 60601 Proposed rule; request for comments. ACTION: NMFS proposes regulations to implement Amendment 7 to the Fishery Management Plan (FMP) for the Dolphin and Wahoo Fishery off the Atlantic States (Dolphin and Wahoo FMP) and Amendment 33 to the FMP for the Snapper-Grouper Fishery of the South Atlantic Region (Snapper-Grouper FMP) (Amendments 7/33), as prepared and submitted by the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (Council). If implemented, this rule would revise the landing fish intact provisions for vessels that lawfully harvest dolphin, wahoo, or snapper-grouper in or from Bahamian waters and return to the U.S. exclusive economic zone (EEZ). The U.S. EEZ as described in this proposed rule refers to the Atlantic EEZ for dolphin and wahoo and the South Atlantic EEZ for snappergrouper species. The purpose of this proposed rule is to improve the consistency and enforceability of Federal regulations with regards to landing fish intact provisions for vessels transiting from Bahamian waters through the U.S. EEZ and to increase the social and economic benefits related to the recreational harvest of these species, in accordance with the requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act). DATES: Written comments must be received on or before November 6, 2015. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on the proposed rule, identified by ‘‘NOAA–NMFS–2015–0047’’ by any of the following methods: • Electronic Submission: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to www.regulations.gov/ #!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-20150047, click the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments. • Mail: Submit written comments to Nikhil Mehta, Southeast Regional Office, NMFS, 263 13th Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701. Instructions: Comments sent by any other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period, may not be considered by NMFS. All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted for public viewing on www.regulations.gov without change. All personal identifying information (e.g., name, address, etc.), confidential business information, or otherwise sensitive information submitted voluntarily by the sender will be publicly accessible. NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter ‘‘N/ SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\07OCP1.SGM 07OCP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 194 (Wednesday, October 7, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 60592-60601]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-24921]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

49 CFR Parts 393 and 396

[Docket No. FMCSA-2015-0176]
RIN 2126-AB81


Parts and Accessories Necessary for Safe Operation; Inspection, 
Repair, and Maintenance; General Amendments

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: FMCSA proposes to amend the regulations for ``Parts and 
Accessories Necessary for Safe Operation,'' and ``Inspection, Repair 
and Maintenance,'' of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations 
(FMCSRs) in response to several petitions for rulemaking from the 
Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance (CVSA) and the American Trucking 
Associations (ATA), and two safety recommendations from the National 
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). Specifically, the Agency proposes 
to add a definition of ``major tread groove;'' revise the rear license 
plate lamp requirement to provide an exception for truck tractors 
registered in States that do not require tractors to have a rear 
license plate; provide specific requirements regarding when violations 
or defects noted on a roadside inspection report need to be corrected; 
amend Appendix G to the FMCSRs, ``Minimum Periodic Inspection 
Standards,'' to include provisions for the inspection of antilock 
braking systems (ABS), automatic brake adjusters, and brake adjustment 
indicators, speed-restricted tires, and motorcoach passenger seat 
mounting anchorages; and amend the periodic inspection rules to 
eliminate the option for motor carriers to use a violation--free 
roadside inspection report as proof of completing a comprehensive 
inspection at least once every 12 months. In addition, the Agency 
proposes to eliminate introductory text from Appendix G to the FMCSRs 
because the discussion of the differences between the North American 
Standard Inspection out-of-service criteria and FMCSA's periodic 
inspection criteria is unnecessary.

DATES: You must submit comments on or before December 7, 2015.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number FMCSA-
2015-0176 using any one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department 
of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. 
and 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The 
telephone number is 202-366-9329.
     Fax: 202-493-2251.
    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods. 
See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' heading under 
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on 
submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this 
proposed rule, call or email Mr. Mike Huntley, Vehicle and Roadside 
Operations Division, Office of Bus and Truck Standards and Operations, 
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, telephone: 202-366-5370; 
michael.huntley@dot.gov. If you have questions about viewing or 
submitting material to the docket, call Ms. Barbara Hairston, Program 
Manager, Docket Services, telephone 202-366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Executive Summary

    FMCSA is responsible for regulations to ensure that all commercial 
motor vehicles (CMVs) are systematically inspected, repaired, and 
maintained and that all parts and accessories necessary for the safe 
operation of CMVs are in safe and proper operating condition at all 
times. In response to several petitions for rulemaking from CVSA and 
ATA and two safety recommendations from the NTSB, FMCSA proposes to 
amend various provisions in parts 393 and 396 of the FMCSRs. The 
proposed amendments generally do not involve the establishment of new 
or more stringent requirements, but instead clarify existing 
requirements to increase consistency of enforcement activities.
    Specifically, the Agency proposes to (1) add a definition of 
``major tread groove'' in Sec.  393.5; (2) delete the requirement in 
Table 1 of Sec.  393.11 for truck tractors to have a rear license plate 
light when State law does not require the vehicle to have a rear 
license plate; (3) clarify Sec.  396.9 regarding when violations or 
defects noted on a roadside inspection report need to be corrected; (4) 
amend Appendix G to the FMCSRs, ``Minimum Periodic Inspection 
Standards,'' to include provisions for the inspection of (a) ABS, 
automatic brake adjusters, and brake adjustment indicators, (b) speed-
restricted tires, and (c) motorcoach passenger seat mounting 
anchorages; (5) amend Sec.  396.17(f) to eliminate references to 
roadside inspections; and (6) amend Sec.  396.19(b) regarding inspector 
qualifications as a result of the amendments to Sec.  396.17(f) 
described above. In addition, the Agency proposes to eliminate as 
unnecessary a portion of Appendix G to the FMCSRs that describes the 
differences between the out-of-service criteria and FMCSA's annual 
inspection.
    The Agency believes the potential economic impact of these changes 
is negligible because the proposed amendments generally do not involve 
new or more stringent requirements, but a clarification of existing 
requirements.

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    FMCSA encourages you to participate in this rulemaking by 
submitting comments and related materials.

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this 
rulemaking (FMCSA-2015-0176), indicate the heading of the specific 
section of this document to which each comment applies, and provide a 
reason for each suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your 
comments and material online or by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but 
please use only one of these means. FMCSA recommends that you include 
your name and a mailing address, an email address, or a phone number in 
the body of your document so the Agency can contact you if it has 
questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to www.regulations.gov, type the 
docket number, ``FMCSA-2015-0176'' in the ``Keyword'' box, and click 
``Search.'' When the new screen appears, click the ``Comment Now!'' 
button and type your comment into the text box in the following screen. 
Choose whether you are submitting your comment as an

[[Page 60593]]

individual or on behalf of a third party, and click ''Submit.''
    If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them 
in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for 
copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would 
like to know that they reached the facility, please enclose a stamped, 
self-addressed postcard or envelope.
    FMCSA will consider all comments and material received during the 
comment period and may change this proposed rule based on your 
comments. FMCSA may issue a final rule at any time after the close of 
the comment period.

Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments and as well as any documents mentioned in this 
preamble as being available in the docket, go to www.regulations.gov, 
insert the docket number, ``FMCSA-2015-0176'' in the ``Keyword'' box, 
and click ``Search.'' Next, click the ``Open Docket Folder'' button and 
choose the document listed to review. If you do not have access to the 
Internet, you may view the docket online by visiting the Docket 
Services in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the DOT West Building, 
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 
p.m. ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Privacy Act

    In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the 
public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these 
comments, without edit, including any personal information the 
commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system 
of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at 
www.dot.gov/privacy.

Legal Basis for the Rulemaking

    This rulemaking is based on the authority of the Motor Carrier Act 
of 1935 [1935 Act] and the Motor Carrier Safety Act of 1984 [1984 Act].
    The 1935 Act, as amended, provides that ``[t]he Secretary of 
Transportation may prescribe requirements for--(1) qualifications and 
maximum hours of service of employees of, and safety of operation and 
equipment of, a motor carrier; and (2) qualifications and maximum hours 
of service of employees of, and standards of equipment of, a private 
motor carrier, when needed to promote safety of operation'' (49 U.S.C. 
31502(b)).
    This NPRM would amend the FMCSRs to respond to several petitions 
for rulemaking. The adoption and enforcement of such rules is 
specifically authorized by the 1935 Act. This proposed rulemaking rests 
squarely on that authority.
    The 1984 Act provides concurrent authority to regulate drivers, 
motor carriers, and vehicle equipment. It requires the Secretary to 
``prescribe regulations on commercial motor vehicle safety.'' The 
regulations shall prescribe minimum safety standards for CMVs. At a 
minimum, the regulations shall ensure that: (1) CMVs are maintained, 
equipped, loaded, and operated safely; (2) the responsibilities imposed 
on operators of CMVs do not impair their ability to operate the 
vehicles safely; (3) the physical condition of operators of CMVs is 
adequate to enable them to operate vehicles safely; (4) the operation 
of CMVs does not have a deleterious effect on the physical condition of 
the operators; and (5) that drivers are not coerced by motor carriers, 
shippers, receivers, or transportation intermediaries to operate a 
vehicle in violation of a regulation promulgated under 49 U.S.C. 31136 
(which is the basis for much of the FMCSRs) or 49 U.S.C. chapters 51 or 
313 (49 U.S.C. 31136(a)).
    This proposed rule concerns (1) parts and accessories necessary for 
the safe operation of CMVs, and (2) the inspection, repair, and 
maintenance of CMVs. It is based primarily on section 31136(a)(1) and 
(2), and secondarily on section 31136(a)(4). This rulemaking would 
ensure that CMVs are maintained, equipped, loaded, and operated safely 
by requiring certain vehicle components, systems, and equipment to meet 
minimum standards such that the mechanical condition of the vehicle is 
not likely to cause a crash or breakdown. Section 31136(a)(3) is not 
applicable because this rulemaking does not deal with driver 
qualification standards. Because the amendments proposed by this rule 
are primarily technical changes that clarify existing requirements and 
improve enforcement consistency, FMCSA believes they will be welcomed 
by motor carriers and drivers alike and that coercion to violate them 
will not be an issue.
    Before prescribing any such regulations, FMCSA must consider the 
``costs and benefits'' of any proposal (49 U.S.C. 31136(c)(2)(A) and 
31502(d)). As discussed in greater detail in the ``Regulatory 
Analyses'' section, FMCSA has determined that this proposed rule is not 
a significant regulatory action. The Agency believes the potential 
economic impact is negligible because the proposed amendments generally 
do not involve the adoption of new or more stringent requirements, but 
rather the clarification of existing requirements. As such, the costs 
of the rule would not approach the $100 million annual threshold for 
economic significance.

Background

    The fundamental purpose of 49 CFR part 393, ``Parts and Accessories 
Necessary for Safe Operation,'' is to ensure that no employer operates 
a CMV or causes or permits it to be operated, unless it is equipped in 
accordance with the requirements and specifications of that part. 
However, nothing contained in part 393 may be construed to prohibit the 
use of additional equipment and accessories, not inconsistent with or 
prohibited by part 393, provided such equipment and accessories do not 
decrease the safety of operation of the motor vehicles on which they 
are used. Compliance with the rules concerning parts and accessories is 
necessary to ensure vehicles are equipped with the specified safety 
devices and equipment.
    On August 15, 2005, FMCSA published a final rule amending part 393 
of the FMCSRs to remove obsolete and redundant regulations; respond to 
several petitions for rulemaking; provide improved definitions of 
vehicle types, systems, and components; resolve inconsistencies between 
part 393 and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's 
(NHTSA) Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (49 CFR part 571); and 
codify certain FMCSA regulatory guidance concerning the requirements of 
part 393 (70 FR 48008).
    Since publication of the 2005 final rule, FMCSA has received 
petitions for rulemaking to amend part 393 from CVSA, requesting that 
Sec.  393.5 be amended to include a definition of ``major tread 
groove,'' and from ATA, requesting that Table 1 to Sec.  393.11 be 
amended to delete the requirement for operable rear license plate 
lights on truck tractors registered in States that do not require a 
rear license plate to be displayed. In addition, FMCSA received a 
separate petition from CVSA requesting that the Agency amend Appendix G 
to the FMCSRs, ``Minimum Periodic Inspection Standards,'' to include 
provisions for the inspection of ABS. Like the revisions made in the 
August 2005 final rule, the amendments requested by CVSA and ATA would 
simply clarify existing requirements.
    Proper inspection, repair, and maintenance of CMVs are essential to 
the safety of motor carrier operations. The purpose of 49 CFR part 396, 
``Inspection, Repair, and Maintenance,'' is to ensure that every motor 
carrier (1) systematically inspects, repairs, and

[[Page 60594]]

maintains all motor vehicles subject to its control to ensure that all 
parts and accessories are in safe and proper operating condition at all 
times, and (2) maintains records of these inspections, repairs, and 
maintenance. Generally, systematic means a regular or scheduled program 
to keep vehicles in a safe operating condition. Part 396 does not 
specify inspection, repair, or maintenance intervals because such 
intervals are fleet specific, and in some instances, vehicle specific. 
The inspection, repair, and maintenance intervals are to be determined 
by the motor carrier. The requirements in part 396 concerning driver 
pre- and post-trip inspections and periodic (annual) inspections are in 
addition to the systematic inspection, repair, and maintenance 
requirements.
    FMCSA has also received several petitions from CVSA seeking 
amendments to part 396. First, while Sec.  396.9(d)(2) requires 
violations or defects noted on roadside inspection reports to be 
``corrected,'' CVSA requested that the Agency clarify when such vehicle 
and driver violations or defects must be corrected. Second, CVSA 
requested that the Agency remove the words ``or roadside'' from the 
existing regulatory language of Sec.  396.17 to separate the roadside 
inspection program conducted by law enforcement officials from the 
periodic (annual) inspection requirements of Sec.  396.17. Third, CVSA 
asked that Sec.  396.19 be amended to delete the references to the 
``random roadside inspection program.'' Finally, CVSA requested that 
FMCSA amend Appendix G to the FMCSRs by deleting the ``Comparison of 
Appendix G, and the new North American Uniform Driver-Vehicle 
Inspection Procedure (North American Commercial Vehicle Critical Safety 
Inspection Items and Out-of-Service Criteria.)'' As with the proposed 
amendments to part 393, the proposed revisions to part 396 merely 
clarify existing requirements.
    In addition to the CVSA and ATA petitions for rulemaking, the NTSB 
issued two safety recommendations to FMCSA relating to Appendix G of 
the FMCSRs as a result of its investigation of an October 13, 2003, 
crash in Tallulah, Louisiana, involving a motorcoach and a tractor 
semitrailer combination. First, investigators discovered that the 
motorcoach had been equipped with speed-restricted tires. While the 
tires were designed for speeds not to exceed 55 mph, and to provide 
high-load capacity and durability for inner city transit-bus-type 
vehicles (which typically do not exceed speeds of 55 mph), the 
motorcoach was being operated on the interstate at speeds exceeding 55 
mph at the time of the crash. The NTSB noted that if a speed-restricted 
tire is used in service above its rated speed for extended periods, a 
catastrophic failure can result. The NTSB concluded that because the 
CMV inspection criteria used by FMCSA and others do not address the 
identification and appropriate use of speed-restricted tires, they 
overlook an important vehicle safety factor and can result in CMVs 
intended for highway use being operated with tires not suited for 
highway speeds. The NTSB issued Safety Recommendation H-05-03 to FMCSA, 
recommending that the Agency revise Appendix G ``to include inspection 
criteria and specific language to address a tire's speed rating to 
ensure that it is appropriate for a vehicle's intended use.''
    Second, investigators found that during the crash sequence, many 
passenger seats did not remain in their original positions because they 
had been improperly secured to the floor of the vehicle. The NTSB 
concluded that improperly secured motorcoach passenger seats are not 
likely to be identified during CMV inspections because no criteria or 
procedures are available for the inspection of motorcoach seating 
anchorage systems. The NTSB issued Safety Recommendation H-05-05 to 
FMCSA, recommending that the Agency (1) develop a method for inspecting 
motorcoach passenger seat mounting anchorages, and (2) revise Appendix 
G of the FMCSRs to require inspection of these anchorages.

Discussion of Proposed Rulemaking

    Section 393.5, Definition of ``Major tread groove.'' Section 393.75 
of the FMCSRs specifies the requirements for tires on CMVs operated in 
interstate commerce. Paragraph (b) states that ``Any tire on the front 
wheels of a bus, truck, or truck tractor shall have a tread groove 
pattern depth of at least \4/32\ of an inch when measured at any point 
on a major tread groove. The measurements shall not be made where tie 
bars, humps, or fillets are located'' [emphasis added]. In addition, 
Sec.  393.75(c) states that, ``Except as provided in paragraph (b) of 
this section, tires shall have a tread groove pattern depth of at least 
\2/32\ of an inch when measured in a major tread groove. The 
measurement shall not be made where tie bars, humps or fillets are 
located'' [emphasis added].
    In its petition, CVSA stated:

    The absence of a definition for what constitutes a major tread 
groove leads to confusion for both enforcement and industry. There 
are several grooves in a tire and not all of them are necessarily 
major tread grooves. Dependent on where the tire is worn and what 
the person understands to be a major tread groove is the important 
and costly decision on whether or not the tire is required to be 
replaced. A clear definition will reduce unnecessary disposal of 
tires due to improper tread depth measurements, as well as reduce 
improper violations/citations related to Sec.  393.75.

    CVSA contacted ATA's Technology & Maintenance Council (TMC) S.2 
Tire & Wheel Study Group Task Force and asked them to (1) review the 
regulatory language in Sec.  393.75(b) and (c), and (2) develop a 
definition for ``major tread groove.'' The TMC Task Force recommended 
that a major tread groove be defined as ``The space between two 
adjacent tread ribs or lugs on a tire that contains a tread wear 
indicator or wear bar. (In most cases, the locations of tread wear 
indicators are designated on the upper sidewall/shoulder of the tire on 
original tread tires.)''
    CVSA contends that it ``is imperative that measurements for tire 
wear are taken in consistent locations to help promote uniformity and 
consistency in both enforcement and maintenance.'' The proposed 
definition of ``major tread groove'' was submitted to, reviewed, and 
approved by CVSA's Vehicle Committee (consisting of enforcement, 
government, and industry representatives) prior to the development and 
submission of the petition for rulemaking to FMCSA. The petition 
requests that Sec.  393.5 be amended to include the TMC Task Force's 
suggested definition of ``major tread groove.''
    FMCSA agrees that uniformity and consistency in enforcement and 
maintenance are critical. By including a definition of ``major tread 
groove'' in Sec.  393.5--a term that is currently included in the 
regulatory text of Sec.  393.75(b) and (c), but not specifically 
defined--the Agency expects increased consistency in the application 
and citation of Sec.  393.75 during roadside inspections.
    FMCSA proposes to amend Sec.  393.5 to include a definition for 
``major tread groove'' that is consistent with the definition as 
proposed by the TMC Task Force. In addition, the following illustration 
will be added to Sec.  393.75, where the arrows indicate the location 
of tread wear indicators or a wear bars signifying a major tread 
groove:

[[Page 60595]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07OC15.201

    Table 1 to Sec.  393.11, License Plate Lights. Federal Motor 
Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108, ``Lamps, reflective devices, 
and associated equipment,'' requires all newly-manufactured passenger 
cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles (MPVs), trucks, and buses to be 
equipped with a single white license plate light, located at the rear, 
to illuminate the license plate from the top or sides. The light must 
be steady burning, and must be activated when the headlamps are 
activated in a steady burning state or when the parking lamps on 
passenger cars and MPVs, trucks, and buses are activated. Similarly, 
Sec.  393.11(a)(1) of the FMCSRs requires all CMVs operated in 
interstate commerce and manufactured on or after December 25, 1968, to 
meet at least the minimum applicable requirements of FMVSS No. 108 in 
effect at the time of manufacture of the vehicle. Footnote 11 to Table 
1 of Sec.  393.11 requires that the license plate light ``be 
illuminated when tractor headlamps are illuminated.''
    In its petition, ATA states:

    The purpose of the rear license plate lamp is ``to illuminate 
the license plate from the top or sides.'' ATA believes that if 
there is no license plate, there is no need and therefore should be 
no regulatory requirement for a functioning rear license plate lamp. 
As simple and commonsensical as this seems, roadside inspectors in 
some [States] have issued citations to motor carriers when the rear 
license plate holder is empty and the tractor license plate lamp is 
either missing or not working. In surveying the 50 U.S. states and 
the District of Columbia, ATA found that 35 states and the District 
require only one license plate on a tractor, and it is to be placed 
on the front. Only 14 states require two license plates, one each on 
the front and back of the tractor. Therefore, the change we are 
seeking in the application of the regulation would apply to a 
significant number of commercial trucks with state-issued plates . . 
. These changes to the existing regulatory requirements to exempt 
commercial vehicles with no rear license plates will not adversely 
impact safety and will help eliminate further unnecessary 
enforcement actions by roadside inspectors.

    ATA's petition requests that FMCSA amend the license plate lamp 
requirement in Table 1 to Sec.  393.11 to read ``At rear license plate 
to illuminate the plate from the top or sides, except that no license 
plate lamp is required where state law does not require a license plate 
to be present.''
    As noted in both FMVSS No. 108 and the FMCSRs, the only function of 
the rear license plate lamp is to illuminate the rear license plate. 
FMCSA agrees with ATA that if a truck tractor is not required to 
display a rear license plate, then there is no corresponding safety 
need for a functioning rear license plate light. Uniformity and 
consistency in enforcement are critical.
    FMCSA proposes to amend Footnote 11 to Table 1 of Sec.  393.11 to 
indicate that no rear license plate lamp is required on truck tractors 
registered in States that do not require tractors to display a rear 
license plate.''
    Appendix G to the FMCSRs--ABS. Section 210 of the Motor Carrier 
Safety Act of 1984 required the Secretary of Transportation to 
establish standards for the annual (i.e., periodic) or more frequent 
inspection of all CMVs engaged in interstate or foreign commerce. In 
response, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) published a final 
rule on December 7, 1988, adopting Sec.  396.17, which requires all 
CMVs to be inspected at least once every 12 months (53 FR 49402, as 
amended on December 8, 1989 (54 FR 50722)). In establishing specific 
criteria for the newly required annual inspection, FHWA looked to 
inspection criteria that had been developed based on the specifications 
in part 393, notably (1) the CVSA vehicle out-of-service criteria and 
(2) the vehicle portion of the FHWA National Uniform Driver-Vehicle 
Inspection Procedure (NUD-VIP). FHWA decided to use the vehicle portion 
of the NUD-VIP as the criteria for successful completion of the annual 
inspection, and in the December 1988 rule, established Appendix G to 
the FMCSRs as the minimum periodic inspection standards for Sec.  
396.17. FHWA noted that utilization of the NUD-VIP would (1) provide 
the necessary inspection-related pass/fail criteria for the periodic 
inspection at a more stringent level than the vehicle out-of-service 
criteria, and (2) provide the proper level of Federal oversight in 
establishing and revising the criteria.
    NHTSA did not require medium and heavy vehicles to be equipped with 
an ABS to improve lateral stability and steering control during braking 
until 1995, when it published a final rule amending FMVSS No. 105, 
``Hydraulic Brake Systems,'' and FMVSS No. 121, ``Air Brake Systems'' 
(60 FR 13216, March 10, 1995). In addition to requiring ABS on medium 
and heavy vehicles, the 1995 rule also required all powered vehicles to 
be equipped with an in-cab lamp to indicate ABS malfunctions. Truck 
tractors and other trucks equipped to tow air-braked trailers are 
required to have two separate in-cab lamps: One indicating malfunctions 
in the towing vehicle ABS and the other in the trailer ABS.
    Part 393 of the FMCSRs was amended in 1998 to require carriers to 
maintain ABS installed on truck tractors, single unit trucks, buses, 
trailers, and converter dollies (63 FR 24454, May 4, 1998). Although 
the final rule clearly placed on interstate motor carriers the 
responsibility to maintain the ABS in operable condition at all times, 
it did not add provisions regarding the periodic inspection of the ABS/
ABS malfunction indicator to the minimum periodic inspection standards 
in Appendix G. This means that a vehicle could pass the periodic 
inspection with an inoperable ABS/ABS malfunction indicator. However, 
the operation of the vehicle with the inoperable ABS/ABS malfunction 
indicator would be a violation of the FMCSRs and would preclude the 
vehicle from receiving a roadside inspection decal.
    In its petition, CVSA requested that the Agency amend Appendix G to 
include specific language regarding the inspection of the ABS system/
malfunction indicator during periodic/annual inspections. CVSA stated:

    While we realize that 49 CFR part 393--Parts and Accessories 
Necessary for Safe Operation has requirements relating to ABS in 
Sec.  393.55, periodic inspections are typically conducted using 
Appendix G as a guide (and not Part 393) and as such, ABS 
operational status is frequently neglected since it is not part of 
Appendix G. Furthermore, many versions of the preprinted forms used 
by personnel who conduct periodic inspections do not mention or list 
ABS as an inspection item.
    The failure of some motor carriers to check ABS as a part of 
their preventative maintenance programs is found by roadside 
inspectors while conducting random roadside inspections. Inspectors 
are frequently finding commercial motor vehicles with missing or 
inoperative ABS malfunction indicators or indicators that are 
constantly illuminated indicating a fault in the ABS. A study was 
conducted by the Battelle Memorial Institute for FMCSA to assess the 
status of the ABS warning system on in-service air-braked commercial 
vehicles. Data from approximately 1,000 CMVs were collected in 
California, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Washington, by enforcement 
personnel who had been specifically trained to inspect the ABS 
warning lamp. With an ABS lamp check problem defined as falling into 
one of

[[Page 60596]]

three categories; no lamp, lamp inoperative, or lamp on (thus 
indicating an active ABS system fault), a snapshot of this aspect of 
the CMV population was created. Results indicated that about one in 
six power units manufactured after March 1, 1997 showed some problem 
with their ABS warning lamp system. One in three trailers 
manufactured after March 1, 1998 showed a problem. Furthermore, the 
study indicated that ABS problems increased with vehicle age so the 
percentages would likely be higher if the study was repeated today 
since there are now older vehicles on the road with ABS.

    FMCSA agrees that the failure of a motor carrier to properly 
maintain an important safety technology such as ABS should result in 
the vehicle failing the periodic inspection. And although CVSA did not 
mention automatic brake adjusters and brake adjustment indicators in 
its petition, FMCSA believes these brake components should also be 
included in Appendix G to ensure that vehicles cannot pass the periodic 
inspection without this important safety equipment. FMCSA amended 49 
CFR part 393 on September 6, 1995 (60 FR 46245) to require that 
interstate motor carriers maintain these devices, but as with the ABS 
final rule, the Agency did not include automatic brake adjusters and 
brake adjustment indicators in Appendix G.
    ABS and automatic brake adjusters and brake adjustment indicator 
requirements have been included in part 393 for approximately 20 years. 
Therefore, FMCSA believes that it is reasonable to assume that the vast 
majority of motor carriers currently include a review of these devices 
and systems in their annual inspection programs despite the fact that 
there are no explicit requirements in Appendix G to do so. As such, the 
Agency believes that amending Appendix G to include a review of ABS and 
automatic brake adjusters and brake adjustment indicators simply 
maintains consistency between part 393 and Appendix G, and will result 
in a de minimis added burden to motor carriers.
    Section 396.9, Inspection of motor vehicles and intermodal 
equipment in operation. Section 396.9 of the FMCSRs authorizes special 
agents of FMCSA, as defined in Appendix B to the FMCSRs, to enter upon 
and perform inspections of a motor carrier's vehicles in operation, 
i.e., to perform roadside inspections. Drivers receiving reports from 
such inspections are required to provide a copy of the report to the 
motor carrier or intermodal equipment provider (1) upon his/her arrival 
at the next terminal or facility, or (2) immediately via mail, fax, or 
other means if the driver is not scheduled to arrive at a terminal or 
at a facility of the intermodal equipment provider within 24 hours. 
Section 396.9(d)(2) requires that ``Motor carriers and intermodal 
equipment providers shall examine the report. Violations or defects 
noted thereon shall be corrected. Repairs of items of intermodal 
equipment placed out-of-service are also to be documented in the 
maintenance records for such equipment.'' However, Sec.  396.9(d)(2) 
does not expressly state when such violations or defects need to be 
remedied.
    CVSA asked FMCSA to amend Sec.  396.9(d)(2) to specifically require 
that violations or defects noted in a roadside inspection report ``be 
corrected prior to redispatching the driver and/or vehicle.'' In 
support of its petition, CVSA stated:

    Upon review of the North American Standard Level I Inspection 
(Part ``A''--Driver) training materials, it was noted that the 
regulatory language ``prior to redispatch'' does not currently exist 
in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs). The 
language has been used exclusively in the North American Standard 
Out-of-Service Criteria (OOSC) and in the Appendix since the early 
beginnings of the North American Standard Inspection Program. By 
adding the regulatory language, it will provide enforcement and 
industry with a clear understanding of the regulatory intent of when 
vehicle and driver violations or defects must be corrected.

    Every driver is required to prepare a driver vehicle inspection 
report (DVIR) in writing at the completion of each day's work on each 
that he or she vehicle operated that lists ``any defect or deficiency 
discovered by or reported to the driver which would affect the safety 
of operation of the vehicle or result in its mechanical breakdown'' 
(Sec.  396.11(a)(2) [emphasis added]). Any defects or violations noted 
during a roadside inspection conducted during that work day, and 
documented in a report provided to the driver by an inspection 
official, must be included in the DVIR prepared by the driver at the 
end of the work day. In addition, Sec.  396.11(a)(3) specifies that 
prior to requiring or permitting a driver to operate a vehicle, every 
motor carrier or its agent shall (1) repair any defect or deficiency 
listed on the DVIR which would be likely to affect the safety of 
operation of the vehicle (Sec.  396.11(a)(3)(i)), and (2) certify on 
the original DVIR that all defects or deficiencies have been repaired 
or that repair is unnecessary before the vehicle is operated again 
(Sec.  396.11(a)(3)(ii)).
    Section 396.11(a)(3) makes it clear that all defects and 
deficiencies discovered by or reported to a driver--including those 
identified during a roadside inspection conducted under the authority 
of Sec.  396.9--must be corrected (or a certification provided stating 
that repair is unnecessary) before a vehicle is operated each day. 
However, the Agency agrees that the language of Sec.  396.9(d)(2) is 
not as explicit as it could be, and could lead to uncertainty and/or 
inconsistency in both the enforcement community and the motor carrier 
industry regarding when violations and defects noted on roadside 
inspection reports need to be corrected.
    While CVSA suggested inclusion of language that would require 
violations or defects to be corrected ``prior to redispatching the 
driver and/or vehicle,'' the Agency believes that use of the term 
``redispatching'' could be troublesome in some operations, for example 
in long-haul, multi-day cross country trips where a vehicle may be 
``dispatched'' only at the trip's point of origin. On such trips, a 
driver is required under Sec.  396.11 to ensure--at the beginning of 
each day--that any defects or deficiencies discovered by or reported to 
the driver on the previous day have been satisfactorily addressed 
according to Sec.  396.11(a)(3)(i) and (ii). FMCSA is concerned that 
amending Sec.  396.9(d)(2) using CVSA's recommended ``prior to 
redispatch'' language could improperly imply that repairs are not 
required each day on multi-day trips where the vehicle is not 
``redispatched'' every day.
    Instead, to clarify the intent of Sec.  396.9(d)(2) as discussed 
above, FMCSA proposes to amend that section by including a specific 
cross reference to Sec.  396.11(a)(3).
    The Motor Carrier Safety Act of 1990 required that violations found 
during inspections funded under the Motor Carrier Safety Assistance 
Program (MCSAP) be corrected in a timely manner, and that States 
participating in the MCSAP adopt a verification program to ensure that 
CMVs and operators thereof found in violation of safety requirements 
have subsequently been brought into compliance. [Sec. 15(d), Pub. L. 
101-500, Nov. 3, 1990, 104 Stat. 1219]. Section 396.9(d)(3) requires 
motor carriers and intermodal equipment providers, within 15 days, to 
(1) certify that all violations noted have been corrected by completing 
the ``Signature of Carrier/Intermodal Equipment Provider Official, 
Title, and Date Signed'' portions of the roadside inspection form, (2) 
return the completed roadside inspection form to the issuing agency, 
and (3) retain a copy of the completed form for 12 months from the date 
of the inspection.

[[Page 60597]]

    In a final rule implementing revisions to the MCSAP published on 
September 8, 1992, the FHWA noted that the ATA had asked ``that 
carriers be given more time to return inspection reports and file a 
report at the terminal where the vehicle is maintained.'' Specifically, 
the ATA requested that the carrier be allowed 60 days to file a copy of 
each roadside inspection report. FHWA declined to adopt ATA's request, 
stating ``Currently, Sec.  396.9 allows 15 days for the motor carrier 
to certify correction of defects found in inspections. The FHWA 
believes that this is sufficient time and, moreover, that these reports 
on safety violations found on trucks and buses operating on the 
highways require immediate attention and follow-up by the motor 
carrier'' (57 FR 40946, 40951, Sept. 8, 1992). FMCSA requests comments 
regarding whether the existing 15-day requirement in Sec.  396.9(d)(3) 
remains appropriate, or whether a different time period should be 
considered.
    Section 396.17, Periodic Inspection. Section 396.17(f) states that 
``Vehicles passing roadside or periodic inspections performed under the 
auspices of any State government or equivalent jurisdiction or the 
FMCSA, meeting the minimum standards contained in appendix G of this 
subchapter, will be considered to have met the requirements of an 
annual inspection for a period of 12 months commencing from the last 
day of the month in which the inspection was performed. If a vehicle is 
subject to a mandatory State inspection program, as provided in Sec.  
396.23(b)(1), a roadside inspection may only be considered equivalent 
if it complies with the requirements of that program.''
    In its petition, CVSA recommended that Sec.  396.17(f) be amended 
by removing the words ``roadside or'' from the current regulatory 
language. CVSA stated:

    It is our strong belief that the roadside inspection program and 
the annual/periodic inspection program need to be decoupled from 
each other. The roadside inspection program and the North American 
Standard Out-of-Service Criteria (OOSC) are not equivalent to a 
``government mandated maintenance standard'' for annual or periodic 
inspections. The North American Standard Inspection Program and 
North American Standard Out-of-Service Criteria have been in place 
for more than two decades and were never intended to serve this 
purpose . . .
    The roadside inspection is the ``last line of defense'' for 
highway safety. When a driver or vehicle is placed out of service 
during a roadside inspection it is indicative that the motor carrier 
likely has a failing or defective preventative maintenance and/or 
driver trip inspection program . . .
    Far too many drivers, roadside inspectors, mechanics, company 
safety professionals and owner operators reference the OOSC as the 
``DOT'' standard. In our judgment it is a mistake and a misuse of 
the intent of the OOSC. The OOSC serves as a uniform set of 
guidelines for law enforcement officials when determining whether a 
driver and/or vehicle are an imminent hazard. The Policy Statement 
under Part II of the OOSC states ``These criteria are neither suited 
nor intended to serve as vehicle maintenance or performance 
standards.''

    FMCSA emphasizes that under the existing regulatory language, only 
roadside inspections ``meeting the minimum standards contained in 
appendix G'' may be considered to be equivalent to a periodic/annual 
inspection. This distinction was clearly and extensively discussed in 
the December 1988 FHWA final rule discussed earlier that established 
the periodic/annual inspection requirements of Sec.  396.17. In that 
rule, FHWA stated:

    As noted in the NPRM, the commenters pointed out the differences 
between random critical element roadside inspections and what they 
perceived as the intent of Sec.  210 of the [1984] Act. They 
indicated that a random roadside inspection was basically concerned 
with ensuring that the vehicle did not pose an imminent danger on 
the roadway. The focus is on checking the more critical components 
such as brakes, headlights, brake lights, and steering and 
suspension systems. In contrast, a periodic inspection should be 
more concerned with the general overall safety condition of the 
vehicle, including those parts, which if defective, worn, or missing 
do not pose an immediate danger but nevertheless should be corrected 
as soon as possible. Therefore, the rule requires that roadside 
inspections meet the minimum standards contained in Appendix G in 
order to meet the periodic inspection requirements . . .
    The current inspection standards associated with the CVSA or 
NUD-VIP focus on random roadside inspections and examine certain key 
components of a vehicle to detect those defects most often 
identified as causing or contributing to the severity of commercial 
motor vehicle accidents. The CVSA or NUD-VIP standards, by their 
very nature, do not require disassembly of parts to effect a 
thorough inspection. The FHWA believes that the criteria on which to 
judge whether or not the vehicle passes the [periodic] inspection 
should be more thorough than that used during roadside inspections . 
. .
    Vehicles subjected to random roadside vehicle checks which 
inspect vehicles using the criteria included in Appendix G will be 
considered to have met the requirements of this rule if they pass 
the inspection. Note that the current CVSA out-of-service criteria, 
while very similar to that contained in Appendix G, are not 
identical. The fact that a vehicle is subjected to and passes 
roadside inspection (e.g., receiving a CVSA decal) does not 
necessarily satisfy the requirements of the periodic inspection 
under this rule. In order to meet the requirements for a periodic 
inspection, the inspection must be performed using, as a minimum, 
the criteria contained in Appendix G of this subchapter [emphasis 
added in all].

    FMCSA emphasizes that the purpose of the periodic inspection rule 
was to have motor carriers take full responsibility for having a 
qualified mechanic do a thorough inspection of the vehicles the carrier 
controls. FMCSA does not believe it is appropriate to continue to allow 
carriers relief from this responsibility by using a roadside inspection 
conducted by enforcement officials. Motor carriers are responsible for 
having the means of ensuring the completion of a periodic inspection 
irrespective of whether a roadside inspection is performed and this 
rulemaking would require them to do so at least once every 12 months, 
irrespective of whether a roadside inspection is performed during that 
period.
    For the reasons explained above, FMCSA proposes to amend Sec.  
396.17(f) to remove the words ``roadside or'' from the current 
regulatory text as suggested by CVSA in its petition. This proposed 
amendment would eliminate any uncertainties and make clear that a 
roadside inspection is not equivalent to the periodic/annual inspection 
required under Sec.  396.17, even if it is conducted in accordance with 
the provisions of Appendix G.
    In addition, CVSA requested that FMCSA remove the section at the 
end of Appendix G titled ``Comparison of Appendix G, and the new North 
American Uniform Driver-Vehicle Inspection Procedure (North American 
Commercial Vehicle Critical Safety Inspection Items and Out-Of-Service 
Criteria). In light of the proposed amendments to Sec.  396.17(f) 
described above, and to further decrease the possibility of confusion 
regarding differing requirements of the roadside inspection program and 
the periodic/annual inspection program, FMCSA proposes to delete the 
section as suggested by CVSA.
    Section 396.19, Inspector Qualifications. Section 396.19 of the 
FMCSRs prescribes the minimum qualifications for individuals performing 
periodic/annual inspections under Sec.  396.17(d). Specifically, Sec.  
396.19(b) states that ``Motor carriers and intermodal equipment 
providers must retain evidence of that individual's qualifications 
under this section. They must retain this evidence for the period 
during which that individual is performing annual motor vehicle

[[Page 60598]]

inspections for the motor carrier or intermodal equipment provider, and 
for one year thereafter. However, motor carriers and intermodal 
equipment providers do not have to maintain documentation of inspector 
qualifications for those inspections performed either as part of a 
State periodic inspection program or at the roadside as part of a 
random roadside inspection program.''
    Consistent with the proposed amendments to Sec.  396.17 discussed 
above, CVSA's petition recommended that FMCSA delete the language 
regarding ``a random roadside inspection program'' in Sec.  396.19(b).
    FMCSA agrees and proposes to amend Sec.  396.19(b) as suggested by 
CVSA.
    NTSB Recommendations, Speed-restricted tires and motorcoach seat 
anchorage strength in Appendix G.
    Speed-restricted tires. After investigating a 2003 motorcoach 
crash, NTSB recommended that the Agency revise Appendix G ``to include 
inspection criteria and specific language to address a tire's speed 
rating to ensure that it is appropriate for a vehicle's intended use.''
    FMVSS No. 119, ``New pneumatic tires for motor vehicles with a GVWR 
[Gross Vehicle Weight Rating] of more than 4,536 kilograms (10,000 
pounds) and motorcycles,'' requires certain information to be marked on 
the tire sidewall. S6.5(d) of the standard requires that each tire's 
maximum load rating for single and dual applications and the 
corresponding inflation pressure be labeled on the sidewall, which 
provides information to the vehicle operator to ensure proper selection 
and use of tires.
    However, a tire's maximum speed rating is not required to be 
labeled on the sidewall, except for tires that are speed-restricted to 
90 km/h (55 mph) or below.\1\ For speed-restricted tires, S6.5(e) of 
the standard requires that the label on the sidewall be as follows: 
``Max Speed _km/h (_mph).'' \2\ For tires that are not speed-
restricted, inspection officials have no way to determine from the 
sidewall labeling the design maximum speed capability of the tire for 
the specified maximum load rating and corresponding inflation pressure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ NHTSA published an NPRM on September 29, 2010 proposing to 
upgrade FMVSS No. 119 (75 FR 60036) to require a maximum speed 
rating label for radial truck tires with load ranges F and above. No 
final rule has been published to date.
    \2\ With respect to the tires on the motorcoach in the Tallulah, 
LA crash, the NTSB Highway Accident Report notes ``The restricted 
speed information was embossed on each tire's outer sidewall and was 
clearly visible.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FMCSA agrees that speed-restricted tires should not be used on CMVs 
operating on highways in excess of 55 mph for extended periods of time. 
However, the adoption of a requirement regarding a tire's speed rating 
in Appendix G, as recommended by the NTSB in Safety Recommendation H-
05-03, absent a regulatory requirement for tires to be so marked, would 
result in inconsistent enforcement. As an alternative, FMCSA proposes 
to add language to section 10 of Appendix G that will prohibit the use 
of speed-restricted tires on CMVs subject to the FMCSRs unless the use 
of such tires is specifically designated by the motor carrier.
    Motorcoach seat anchorage strength. Investigators found that during 
the Tallulah crash sequence, many passenger seats did not remain 
securely attached to the floor. The NTSB recommended that the Agency 
(1) develop a method for inspecting motorcoach passenger seat mounting 
anchorages, and (2) revise Appendix G of the FMCSRs to require 
inspection of these anchorages.
    Section 393.93(a)(3) requires buses manufactured on or after 
January 1, 1972, to conform to the requirements of FMVSS No. 207, 
``Seating systems.'' FMVSS No. 207 establishes requirements for seats, 
their attachment assemblies, and their installation to minimize the 
possibility of their failure by forces acting on them as a result of 
vehicle impact. For most vehicles required by FMVSS No. 208, ``Occupant 
crash protection,'' to have seat belts, the seat belt anchorages must 
be certified to the strength requirements of FMVSS No. 210, ``Seat belt 
assembly anchorages,'' and the seats must be certified to FMVSS No. 
207. Part of the FMVSS No. 207 requirements tests the forward strength 
of the seat attachment to the vehicle replicating the load that would 
be applied through the seat center of gravity by inertia in a 20 g 
vehicle deceleration.
    However, FMVSS No. 207 specifically exempts (at S.4.2) all bus 
passenger seats, including motorcoaches, except for small school bus 
passenger seats. As such, there are no performance standards in place 
in the FMVSSs specifically for motorcoach seat anchorages. Following 
its investigation of the Tallulah crash, NTSB issued Safety 
Recommendation H-05-01 to NHTSA to ``develop performance standards for 
passenger seat anchorages in motorcoaches.''
    On November 25, 2013, NHTSA published a final rule requiring lap/
shoulder belts to be installed for each passenger seating position on 
(1) all over-the-road buses \3\ manufactured on or after November 28, 
2016, and (2) all buses other than over-the-road buses manufactured on 
or after November 28, 2016, with a GVWR greater than 26,000 pounds, 
with certain exclusions (78 FR 70416). This rule requires the seat belt 
anchorages, both torso and lap, on passenger seats to be integrated 
into the seat structure, and these seat belt anchorages to meet the 
performance requirements of FMVSS No. 210. Testing performed by NHTSA 
demonstrated that the FMVSS No. 210 requirement ensures that restraints 
integrated into seats are tested adequately and that the seat 
attachment is robust. Thus, NHTSA determined that additional FMVSS No. 
207 requirements for motorcoach passenger seats are not needed. In 
consideration of the above, NTSB reclassified Safety Recommendation H-
05-01 as ``Closed--Acceptable Alternative Action'' on July 22, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The final rule defines over-the-road bus as ``A bus 
characterized by an elevated passenger deck located over a baggage 
compartment, except a school bus.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted in the NTSB's report following the Tallulah crash, ``Many 
different seating system designs are used in motorcoaches operating in 
the United States; each manufacturer uses its own hardware and 
anchorage designs . . .'' The NTSB also noted that it had examined the 
issue of motorcoach seat anchorage failure in six previous crash 
investigations. The NTSB stated ``Several different seat anchorage 
system designs were used in the motorcoaches involved in these 
accidents. Even when properly installed and maintained, some seat 
anchorage systems failed, while others did not, even in similar 
accident scenarios.''
    Given the wide range of seat anchorage designs, coupled with the 
lack of testing requirements specifically for seat anchorage strength 
in the FMVSSs, it is not practicable for FMCSA to develop a detailed 
methodology for the inspection of motorcoach passenger seat mounting 
anchorages. However, FMCSA proposes to add a new section to Appendix G 
that will require an examination of motorcoach seats during the conduct 
of a periodic inspection in accordance with Sec.  396.17 to ensure that 
they are securely attached to the vehicle structure.

Amendments to Existing Regulatory Guidance

    If the proposed regulatory amendments are adopted, FMCSA will amend 
existing regulatory guidance

[[Page 60599]]

questions/answers as necessary to maintain consistency with the amended 
regulatory language.

Regulatory Analyses

Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review and DOT 
Regulatory Policies and Procedures as Supplemented by E.O. 13563)

    FMCSA has determined that this proposed rule is not a significant 
regulatory action within the meaning of Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, 
as supplemented by E.O. 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011), or within 
the meaning of DOT regulatory policies and procedures (DOT Order 2100.5 
dated May 22, 1980; 44 FR 11034, February 2, 1979). The Agency believes 
the potential economic impact is nominal because the proposed 
amendments generally do not involve the adoption of new or more 
stringent requirements, but rather the clarification of existing 
requirements. As such, the costs of the rule would not approach the 
$100 million annual threshold for economic significance. Moreover, the 
Agency does not expect the rule to generate substantial congressional 
or public interest. This proposed rule therefore has not been formally 
reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) 
requires Federal agencies to consider the effects of their regulatory 
actions on small business and other small entities and to minimize any 
significant economic impact. The term ``small entities'' encompasses 
small businesses and not-for-profit organizations that are 
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields 
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.\4\ 
Accordingly, DOT policy requires an analysis of the impact of all 
regulations on small entities and mandates that agencies strive to 
lessen any adverse effects on these businesses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), see 
National Archives at http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/laws/regulatory-flexibility/601.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, as amended by the Small 
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA) (Title 
II, Pub. L. 104-121, 110 Stat. 857, March 29, 1996), the proposed rule 
is not expected to have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities because the proposed amendments generally do 
not involve the adoption of new or more stringent requirements, but, 
instead, the clarification of existing requirements. Therefore, there 
is no disproportionate burden to small entities.
    Consequently, I certify that the proposed action will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
FMCSA invites comment from members of the public who believe there will 
be a significant impact either on small businesses or on governmental 
jurisdictions with a population of less than 50,000.

Assistance for Small Entities

    In accordance with section 213(a) of the SBREFA, FMCSA wants to 
assist small entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they 
can better evaluate its effects on themselves and participate in the 
rulemaking initiative. If the proposed rule would affect your small 
business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have 
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please 
consult the FMCSA point of contact, Mike Huntley, listed in the FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of the proposed rule.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal 
employees who enforce or otherwise determine compliance with Federal 
regulations to the Small Business Administration's Small Business and 
Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small 
Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these 
actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness to small 
business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of FMCSA, call 
1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). DOT has a policy ensuring the rights 
of small entities to regulatory enforcement fairness and an explicit 
policy against retaliation for exercising these rights.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) 
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary 
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may 
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, 
taken together, or by the private sector of $155 million (which is the 
value equivalent of $100 million in 1995, adjusted for inflation to 
2014 levels) or more in any 1 year. Though this proposed rule would not 
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule 
elsewhere in this preamble.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information 
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    A rule has implications for Federalism under Section 1(a) of 
Executive Order 13132 if it has ``substantial direct effects on the 
States, on the relationship between the national government and the 
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the 
various levels of government.'' FMCSA has determined that this proposal 
would not have substantial direct costs on or for States, nor would it 
limit the policymaking discretion of States. Nothing in this document 
preempts any State law or regulation.

Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)

    This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize 
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Executive Order 13045 (Protection of Children)

    E.O. 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks 
and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, Apr. 23, 1997), requires agencies 
issuing ``economically significant'' rules, if the regulation also 
concerns an environmental health or safety risk that an agency has 
reason to believe may disproportionately affect children, to include an 
evaluation of the regulation's environmental health and safety effects 
on children. The Agency determined this proposed rule is not 
economically significant. Therefore, no analysis of the impacts on 
children is required. In any event, this regulatory action could not 
present an environmental or safety risk that would disproportionately 
affect children.

Executive Order 12630 (Taking of Private Property)

    FMCSA reviewed this notice of proposed rulemaking in accordance 
with Executive Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Interference with 
Constitutionally Protected Property Rights, and has determined it will 
not effect a taking of private property or otherwise have taking 
implications.

Privacy

    The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005 (Pub. L. 108-447, 118 
Stat. 2809, 3268, 5 U.S.C. 552a note), requires the

[[Page 60600]]

Agency to conduct a privacy impact assessment (PIA) of a regulation 
that will affect the privacy of individuals. This proposed rule does 
not require the collection of personally identifiable information 
(PII).
    The E-Government Act of 2002, Public Law 107-347, section 208, 116 
Stat. 2899, 2921 (Dec. 17, 2002), requires Federal agencies to conduct 
a privacy impact assessment for new or substantially changed technology 
that collects, maintains, or disseminates information in an 
identifiable form. No new or substantially changed technology would 
collect, maintain, or disseminate information as a result of this rule. 
Accordingly, FMCSA has not conducted a privacy impact assessment.

Executive Order 12372 (Intergovernmental Review)

    The regulations implementing Executive Order 12372 regarding 
intergovernmental consultation on Federal programs and activities do 
not apply to this program.

Executive Order 13211 (Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use)

    FMCSA has analyzed this proposed rule under E.O. 13211, Actions 
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use. The Agency has determined that it is not a 
``significant energy action'' under that order because it is not a 
``significant regulatory action'' likely to have a significant adverse 
effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. Therefore, it 
does not require a Statement of Energy Effects under E.O. 13211.

Executive Order 13175 (Indian Tribal Governments)

    This rule does not have tribal implications under E.O. 13175, 
Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because 
it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian 
tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian 
tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between 
the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in their 
regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, through OMB, 
with an explanation of why using these standards would be inconsistent 
with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus 
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or 
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management 
systems practices) are standards that are developed or adopted by 
voluntary consensus standards bodies. This proposed rule does not use 
technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of 
voluntary consensus standards.

Environment (National Environmental Policy Act, Clean Air Act, 
Environmental Justice)

    FMCSA analyzed this NPRM for the purpose of the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and 
determined this action is categorically excluded from further analysis 
and documentation in an environmental assessment or environmental 
impact statement under FMCSA Order 5610.1 (69 FR 9680, March 1, 2004), 
Appendix 2, paragraphs 6(z)(aa) and 6(z)(bb). The Categorical Exclusion 
(CE) in paragraph 6(z)(aa) covers regulations requiring motor carriers, 
their officers, drivers, agents, representatives, and employees 
directly in control of CMVs to inspect, repair, and provide maintenance 
for every CMV used on a public road. The CE in paragraph 6(z)(bb) 
covers regulations concerning vehicle operation safety standards (e.g., 
regulations requiring: Certain motor carriers to use approved equipment 
which is required to be installed such as an ignition cut-off switch, 
or carried on board, such as a fire extinguisher, and/or stricter blood 
alcohol concentration (BAC) standards for drivers, etc.), equipment 
approval, and/or equipment carriage requirements (e.g. fire 
extinguishers and flares). The CE determination is available for 
inspection or copying in the Regulations.gov Web site listed under 
ADDRESSES.
    FMCSA also analyzed this rule under the Clean Air Act, as amended 
(CAA), section 176(c) (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.), and implementing 
regulations promulgated by the Environmental Protection Agency. 
Approval of this action is exempt from the CAA's general conformity 
requirement since it does not affect direct or indirect emissions of 
criteria pollutants.
    Under E.O. 12898 (Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice 
in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations), each Federal 
agency must identify and address, as appropriate, ``disproportionately 
high and adverse human health or environmental effects of its programs, 
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income 
populations'' in the United States, its possessions, and territories. 
FMCSA has determined that this proposed rule would have no 
environmental justice effects, nor would its promulgation have any 
collective environmental impact.

List of Subjects

49 CFR Part 393

    Highway safety, Motor carriers, Motor vehicle safety, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

49 CFR Part 396

    Highways and roads. Motor carriers, Motor vehicle equipment, Motor 
vehicle safety.

    For the reasons stated above, FMCSA proposes to amend 49 CFR 
chapter III, subchapter B, as follows:

PART 393--PARTS AND ACCESSORIES NECESSARY FOR SAFE OPERATION

0
1. The authority citation for part 393 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 31136, 31151, and 31502; sec. 1041(b) of 
Pub. L. 102-240, 105 Stat. 1914, 1993 (1991); and 49 CFR 1.87.

0
2. Amend Sec.  393.5 to add a definition for ``Major tread groove'' in 
alphabetical order to read as follows:


Sec.  393.5  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Major tread groove is the space between two adjacent tread ribs or 
lugs on a tire that contains a tread wear indicator or wear bar. (In 
most cases, the locations of tread wear indicators are designated on 
the upper sidewall/shoulder of the tire on original tread tires.)
* * * * *
0
3. In Sec.  393.11, revise Footnote 11 of Table 1 to read as follows:


Sec.  393.11  Lamps and reflective devices.

* * * * *
Table 1 of Sec.  393.11--Required Lamps and Reflectors on Commercial 
Motor Vehicles
* * * * *
    Footnote--11 To be illuminated when tractor headlamps are 
illuminated. No rear license plate lamp is required on truck tractors 
registered in States that do not require tractors to display a rear 
license plate.
* * * * *

PART 396--INSPECTION, REPAIR, AND MAINTENANCE

0
4. The authority citation for part 396 continues to read as follows:


[[Page 60601]]


    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 504, 31133, 31136, 31151, and 31502; sec. 
32934, Pub. L. 112-141, 126 Stat. 405, 830; and 49 CFR 1.87.

0
5. Revise Sec.  396.9(d)(2) to read as follows:


Sec.  396.9  Inspection of motor vehicles and intermodal equipment in 
operation.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (2) Motor carriers and intermodal equipment providers shall examine 
the report. Violations or defects noted thereon shall be corrected in 
accordance with Sec.  396.11(a)(3). Repairs of items of intermodal 
equipment placed out-of-service are also to be documented in the 
maintenance records for such equipment.
* * * * *
0
6. Revise Sec.  396.17(f) to read as follows:


Sec.  396.17  Periodic inspection.

* * * * *
    (f) Vehicles passing periodic inspections performed under the 
auspices of any State government or equivalent jurisdiction or the 
FMCSA, meeting the minimum standards contained in appendix G of this 
subchapter, will be considered to have met the requirements of an 
annual inspection for a period of 12 months commencing from the last 
day of the month in which the inspection was performed.
* * * * *
0
7. Revise Sec.  396.19(b) to read as follows:


Sec.  396.19  Inspector qualifications.

* * * * *
    (b) Motor carriers and intermodal equipment providers must retain 
evidence of that individual's qualifications under this section. They 
must retain this evidence for the period during which that individual 
is performing annual motor vehicle inspections for the motor carrier or 
intermodal equipment provider, and for one year thereafter. However, 
motor carriers and intermodal equipment providers do not have to 
maintain documentation of inspector qualifications for those 
inspections performed as part of a State periodic inspection program.
0
8. Amend Appendix G to Subchapter B of Chapter III by:
0
a. Adding Section 1.l;
0
b. Revising Section 10.c;
0
c. Adding Section 14; and
0
d. Removing ``Comparison of Appendix G, and the New North American 
Uniform Driver Vehicle Inspection Procedure (North American Commercial 
Vehicle Critical Safety Inspection Items and Out-Of-Service 
Criteria)'', including the introductory text and paragraphs 1.--13.
    The additions and revision read as follows:

Appendix G to Subchapter B of Chapter III--Minimum Periodic Inspection 
Standards

* * * * *

1. Brake System

* * * * *

l. Antilock Brake System \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ This section is applicable to tractors with air brakes built 
on or after March 1, 1997, and all other vehicles with air brakes 
built on or after March 1, 1998. This section is also applicable to 
vehicles over 10,000 lbs. GVWR with hydraulic brakes built on or 
after March 1, 1999.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (1) Missing ABS malfunction indicator components (bulb, wiring, 
etc.).
    (2) ABS malfunction indicator that does not illuminate when 
power is first applied to the ABS controller (ECU).
    (3) ABS malfunction indicator that stays illuminated while power 
is continuously applied to the ABS controller (ECU).
    (4) Other missing or inoperative ABS components.
* * * * *

10. Tires

* * * * *
c. Installation of speed-restricted tires (unless specifically 
designated by motor carrier)
* * * * *

14. Motorcoach Seats

    a. Any passenger seat that is not securely fastened to the 
vehicle structure.

    Issued under the authority of delegation in 49 CFR 1.87 on: 
September 24, 2015.
T. F. Scott Darling, III,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2015-24921 Filed 10-6-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P