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: https://
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
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 https://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: https://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 https://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