Inspection, Repair, and Maintenance; Periodic Inspection of Commercial Motor Vehicles; Acceptance of Mexico's NOM-068-SCT-2-2014 Inspection Program, 14195-14197 [2016-05933]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 51 / Wednesday, March 16, 2016 / Notices
SC&RA advises that there are
approximately 85,000 trained and
certified mobile crane operators in the
United States, and, of these,
approximately 65,000 operate cranes
over 30 tons lifting capacity.
SC&RA seeks an exemption from the
14-hour rule and the requirement for a
30-minute break for drivers operating
mobile cranes with a rated lifting
capacity of greater than 30 tons. It asks
that the exemptions be for a period of
5 years. SC&RA asserts that these two
HOS rules frequently compel drivers of
these cranes to stop driving and park the
crane to avoid violating their terms.
SC&RA states that complications arise at
this point because the availability of
parking for CMVs is very limited.
SC&RA cites data indicating that there
is a shortage of parking places for CMVs
in the United States and notes ongoing
Federal and State efforts to address this
problem. Parking for cranes is even
more limited because of the dimensions
of these vehicles. SC&RA asserts that
compliance with the two HOS rules
often results in cranes being parked on
the shoulder of public roads. SC&RA
states the width of some cranes is such
that they can only be parked partially on
the shoulder and partially on a travel
lane.
SC&RA describes the unpredictable
nature of the typical workday when a
crane is fixed in place for lifting at a
worksite. The applicant lists a number
of variables that can complicate the
scheduling of crane operations,
including delays waiting for the item to
be lifted to arrive at the work site or to
be rigged so that the crane can lift it.
Unexpected inclement weather can also
trigger delays. SC&RA asserts that the
primary result is that the workday may
be unexpectedly extended. Thus, timing
a crane’s movement from the worksite
and onto public roads at the end of the
day is highly problematic. SC&RA
points out that State and local
restrictions limit the hours of the day,
and sometimes the days of the week,
that cranes may move on public roads.
In addition, movement of cranes may
require a pilot car, the display of signs
and lights, and even an escort vehicle
provided by state or local police.
Movement of cranes is normally at
speeds much slower than the posted
speed limit, and is highly susceptible to
weather and traffic conditions. SC&RA
asserts that the two HOS rules from
which it seeks exemption—the 30minute-break and 14-hour rules—
become most burdensome at this point.
However, SC&RA acknowledges that
crane operators cross State lines on less
than 5 percent of their trips.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:11 Mar 15, 2016
Jkt 238001
IV. Method To Ensure an Equivalent or
Greater Level of Safety
SC&RA does not foresee any negative
impact to safety from the requested
exemption. It believes that granting the
exemption would have a favorable
impact on overall safety by reducing the
frequency of cranes being parked along
public roads. It points out that its
members generally drive a crane less
than 2 hours a day. SC&RA states that
its crane drivers have a low crash rate,
and it attached copies of its driver
training and safety manuals to the
application for exemption. Copies of
these documents are available for
review in the docket for this notice.
Issued on: March 10, 2016.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2016–05902 Filed 3–15–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration
Inspection, Repair, and Maintenance;
Periodic Inspection of Commercial
Motor Vehicles; Acceptance of
Mexico’s NOM–068–SCT–2–2014
Inspection Program
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice on periodic inspection
programs.
AGENCY:
The FMCSA announces its
acceptance of the Norma Oficial
Mexicana ((NOM) or Official Mexican
Standard) concerning the periodic
inspection (PI) of commercial motor
vehicles (CMVs). The Agency has
reviewed NOM–068–SCT–2–2014
(NOM 68) and determined that it should
be added to the list of programs which
are comparable to, or as effective as, the
Federal PI requirements contained in
the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Regulations (FMCSRs). FMCSA’s
acceptance of NOM 68 means that
Mexico-domiciled motor carriers
operating in the United States must
ensure that their CMVs are inspected
´
annually as required by the Secretarıa
de Comunicaciones y Transportes
(SCT). The motor carrier must retain a
copy of the inspection report and a
sticker/decal must be affixed to the
vehicle in order to satisfy the PI
requirements in the United States.
These motor carriers will no longer have
the option of relying on their employees
to conduct inspections of the CMVs the
carrier controls, using commercial
garages for such inspections, or passing
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00117
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
14195
a roadside inspection based on criteria
published by the Commercial Motor
Vehicle Safety Alliance (CVSA) to
comply with the periodic inspection
requirements at 49 CFR part 396.
DATES: This action is effective March 16,
2016. NOM–68 inspection decals issued
on or after October 1, 2015, will be
accepted as proof of a periodic during
roadside inspections and investigations
conducted on or after March 16, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Marcelo Perez, North American Borders
Division, MC–ESB, (512) 916–5440,
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration, 903 San Jacinto Blvd.,
Suite 1100, Austin, TX 78701. Office
hours are from 7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m.,
CDT, Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 210 of the Motor Carrier
Safety Act of 1984 (49 U.S.C. 31142)
(the Act) requires the Secretary of
Transportation to prescribe standards
for annual or more frequent inspection
of CMVs unless the Secretary finds that
another inspection system is as effective
as an annual or more frequent
inspection. On December 7, 1988, in
response to the Act, the Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA), the
agency within the Department of
Transportation responsible for motor
carrier safety until 1999, published a
final rule amending 49 CFR part 396 of
the FMCSRs (53 FR 49402). The final
rule required CMVs operated in
interstate commerce to be inspected at
least once a year. The inspection was to
be based on Federal inspection
standards, or a State inspection program
determined by the FHWA, FMCSA’s
predecessor agency, to be comparable
to, or as effective as, the Federal
standards. Accordingly, if FHWA
decided that a State’s PI program was
comparable to, or as effective as, the
requirements of part 396, then the motor
carrier had to ensure that all of its CMVs
which are required by that State to be
inspected through the State’s inspection
program were inspected. If a State did
not have such a program, the motor
carrier was responsible for ensuring its
CMVs are inspected using one of the
alternatives included in the final rule.
On March 16, 1989, the FHWA
published a notice in the Federal
Register that requested States and other
interested parties to identify and
provide information on the CMV
inspection programs in their respective
jurisdictions (54 FR 11020). Upon
review of the information submitted, the
FHWA published a list of State
E:\FR\FM\16MRN1.SGM
16MRN1
14196
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 51 / Wednesday, March 16, 2016 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
inspection programs that were
determined to be comparable to the
Federal PI requirements (54 FR 50726,
December 8, 1989). This initial list
included 15 States and the District of
Columbia. The list was revised on
September 23, 1991, to include the
inspection programs of the Alabama
Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) Board,
California, Hawaii, Louisiana,
Minnesota, all of the Canadian
Provinces, and the Yukon Territory (56
FR 47982).
On November 27, 1992, the list was
revised to include the Wisconsin bus
inspection program (57 FR 56400). On
April 14, 1994, the list was revised to
include the Texas CMV inspection
program (59 FR 17829). The list was
revised on November 7, 1995, to include
the Connecticut bus inspection program
(60 FR 56183). On February 19, 1998,
the Ohio inspection program for church
buses was added to the list (63 FR
8516), with a notice announcing
FMCSA’s acceptance of certain
enhancements to the program on June
18, 2001 (66 FR 32863). And on October
22, 2008, the list was revised to include
the Massachusetts CMV inspection
program (73 FR 63040).
FMCSA Determination: Official
Mexican Standard, NOM 68
On January 19, 2015, the SCT of
Mexico published its Official Mexican
Standard, NOM–68, in the Official
Gazette, Mexico’s equivalent of the
Federal Register. NOM–68 addresses
Federal inspection standards for CMVs
in Mexico. Beginning May 19, 2015,
Mexico-domiciled motor carriers must
take their vehicles to an SCT-approved
inspection center for a mandatory
vehicle inspection. The inspections
must be performed once every year, and
on the months set on the Inspection
Calendar.
FMCSA has reviewed Mexico’s passfail criteria for the specific vehicle
components and systems examined as
during the mandatory vehicle
inspection and determined that
Mexico’s inspection program is
comparable to, or as effective as,
FMCSA’s requirements. The Agency
compared the pass-fail requirements of
Appendix G to the Federal Motor
Carrier Safety Regulations (i.e., the U.S.
periodic inspection standards), which
includes the 13 vehicle systems and
components listed below with the list of
vehicle systems and components
included in NOM 68.
1. Brake system;
2. Coupling devices;
3. Exhaust system;
4. Fuel system;
5. Lighting devices;
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:11 Mar 15, 2016
Jkt 238001
6. Safe loading;
7. Steering mechanism;
8. Suspension;
9. Frame;
10. Tires;
11. Wheels and rims;
12. Windshield glazing; and,
13. Windshield wipers.
NOM–68 is organized into 79
sections, with multiple sections
covering each of the 13 areas in
Appendix G. In some instances, NOM–
68 covers the requirements in greater
detail and others Mexico’s inspection
standards cover equipment which is not
addressed in the FMCSRs. While
Appendix G does not include the same
level of detail as NOM 68, 49 CFR part
393 provides many of those
requirements in detail comparable to
that of NOM–68. Therefore, NOM 68
provides an annual inspection standard
that requires all the parts and
accessories that must be installed on
CMVs to be in proper working order in
order to pass the inspection.
FMCSA acknowledges that Mexico’s
compliance date for certain vehicle
safety systems and components, such as
antilock braking systems (or ABS),
differs from the U.S. requirements.
However, the Agency does not believe
the differences in the compliance dates
for such systems is a sufficient basis for
considering Mexico’s annual inspection
standards to be substantively different.
Mexico-domiciled motor carriers are
subject to the same requirements as
U.S.- and Canada-domiciled carriers
operating on U.S. public roads with
regard to the requirements of 49 CFR
part 393. This means the presence of an
annual inspection decal would not
provide relief from the requirements of
part 393.
Mexico’s mandatory annual
inspection requirements cover most of
the types of CMVs subject to FMCSA’s
periodic inspection regulations, which
includes passenger-carrying vehicles
designed to transport 16 or more
passengers (including the driver) and
property-carrying vehicles with a gross
weight, gross vehicle weight rating, or
gross combination weight rating of
10,001 pounds or more. Therefore, both
the inspection criteria for the vehicle
components and safety systems, and the
types of vehicles required to be
inspected are comparable to FMCSA’s
requirements.
For CMVs that are subject to FMCSA’s
periodic inspection requirements but
excepted from the NOM 68
requirements, the motor carrier may
continue to rely upon the options
allowed under 49 CFR 396.17. FMCSA
will work with the government of
Mexico and the Commercial Vehicle
PO 00000
Frm 00118
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Safety Alliance to provide detailed
guidance on the specific vehicles
subject to NOM 68 requirements to
ensure uniform and consistent
enforcement of § 396.17 (and the
compatible State requirements adopted
in accordance with 49 CFR part 350
concerning the Motor Carrier Safety
Assistance Program) during roadside
inspections of Mexico-domiciled
vehicles operating in the United States.
It should be noted that in accepting
the Mexico’s program, FMCSA also
accepts the recordkeeping requirements
associated with the inspection program.
Upon successful completion of Mexico’s
inspection, a report is created which
identifies the vehicle, inspector, and the
status of the inspection. In addition to
the report, a program inspection sticker
decal indicating that the vehicle has
passed the inspection will be affixed to
the vehicle’s windshield.
Relationship Between FMCSA’s
Decision Concerning Periodic
Inspection and the Enforcement of the
Requirements Under 49 CFR Part 393
FMCSA notes that its acceptance of
Mexico’s PI program does not in any
way alter the enforcement of the safety
requirements under 49 CFR part 393
concerning vehicle parts and accessories
necessary for safe operations. All
interstate motor carriers operating CMVs
in the United States, including Canadaand Mexico-domiciled motor carriers,
must ensure that their CMVs meet the
applicable requirements under 49 CFR
part 393 regardless of whether the
vehicle has passed a PI. And Part 393
includes cross-references to various
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards
(FMVSSs) established by the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration
and applicable to vehicle
manufacturers. Through these crossreferences, FMCSA holds motor carriers
responsible for ensuring that vehicles
manufactured on or after the effective
dates of the NHTSA standards are
maintained to keep the safety
equipment and features installed by the
manufacturer operable.
While manufacturers building CMVs
designed and sold for use in Canada and
Mexico are not required to meet the
FMVSSs, FMCSA requires that the
motor carriers operating these vehicles
in the United States meet the same
safety requirements applicable to
domestic motor carriers. And, although
the effective date for certain vehicle
safety requirements such as antilock
braking systems under NOM 68 and
Canada’s rules may differ from the
effective date for the U.S. requirements,
vehicles manufactured on or after the
effective dates listed in the FMVSSs,
E:\FR\FM\16MRN1.SGM
16MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 51 / Wednesday, March 16, 2016 / Notices
of the 10 Canadian Provinces (Alberta,
British Columbia, Manitoba, New
Brunswick, Newfoundland, Nova
Scotia, Ontario, Prince Edward Island,
Quebec and Saskatchewan) and the
Yukon Territory, and with today’s
notice, Mexico’s NOM 68 program, as
comparable to, or as effective as, the
Federal PI requirements.
All other jurisdictions either have no
PI programs for CMVs or their PI
programs have not been determined by
the FMCSA to be comparable to, or as
effective as, the Federal PI requirements.
Should any of these jurisdictions wish
to establish a program or modify their
programs in order to make them
comparable to the Federal requirements,
the State should contact the appropriate
FMCSA division office.
Jurisdictions With Equivalent Periodic
Inspection Programs
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
and cross-referenced in part 393, must
meet FMCSA’s requirements when
operating in the United States. These
vehicles are subject to roadside
inspections while operating in the
United States and violations of these 49
CFR part 393 requirements may be cited
on the inspection report.
Acceptance of periodic inspection
decals from Canada or Mexico simply
means that these carriers would not be
cited for violations of 49 CFR 396.17. As
noted above, this decision does not
constitute an exception from any of the
applicable requirements under 49 CFR
part 393. Therefore, today’s decision in
no way compromises safety.
Although passing a roadside
inspection is another option under the
current regime, FMCSA published a
notice of proposed rulemaking on
October 7, 2015 (80 FR 60592), which
would, in response to a petition for
rulemaking from the Commercial
Vehicle Safety Alliance (CVSA),
eliminate this option for all motor
carriers subject to the FMCSRs.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 31132, 31136, 31142,
31502, and 31504; 49 CFR 1.87.
The following is a complete list of
States with inspection programs that
FMCSA has determined are comparable
to, or as effective as, the Federal PI
requirements.
• Alabama (LPG Board),
• California,
• Connecticut,
• District of Columbia,
• Hawaii,
• Illinois,
• Louisiana,
• Maine,
• Maryland,
• Massachusetts,
• Michigan,
• Minnesota,
• New Hampshire,
• New Jersey,
• New York,
• Ohio,
• Pennsylvania,
• Rhode Island,
• Texas,
• Utah,
• Vermont,
• Virginia,
• West Virginia,
• Wisconsin.
Please note that since the list was
originally established, two States have
been removed. Arkansas no longer has
a PI program for buses comparable to, or
as effective, as the Federal PI program.
And Oklahoma repealed its inspection
requirements. Therefore, these States are
no longer listed.
In addition to the States listed above,
FMCSA accepts the inspection programs
Issued on: March 9, 2016.
T.F. Scott Darling, III,
Acting Administrator.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:11 Mar 15, 2016
Jkt 238001
List of Subjects
Highway safety, Highways and roads,
Motor carriers, Motor vehicle
maintenance, Motor vehicle safety,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
[FR Doc. 2016–05933 Filed 3–15–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration
[Docket No. FMCSA–2015–0343]
Qualification of Drivers; Exemption
Applications; Diabetes Mellitus
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration (FMCSA).
ACTION: Notice of applications for
exemptions; request for comments.
AGENCY:
FMCSA announces receipt of
applications from 68 individuals for
exemption from the prohibition against
persons with insulin-treated diabetes
mellitus (ITDM) operating commercial
motor vehicles (CMVs) in interstate
commerce. If granted, the exemptions
would enable these individuals with
ITDM to operate CMVs in interstate
commerce.
SUMMARY:
Comments must be received on
or before April 15, 2016.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
bearing the Federal Docket Management
System (FDMS) Docket No. FMCSA–
2015–0343 using any of the following
methods:
DATES:
PO 00000
Frm 00119
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
14197
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• Mail: Docket Management Facility;
U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12–140,
Washington, DC 20590–0001.
• Hand Delivery: West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington,
DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal
Holidays.
• Fax: 1–202–493–2251.
Instructions: Each submission must
include the Agency name and the
docket numbers for this notice. Note
that all comments received will be
posted without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. Please
see the Privacy Act heading below for
further information.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments, go to https://
www.regulations.gov at any time or
Room W12–140 on the ground level of
the West Building, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. The
Federal Docket Management System
(FDMS) is available 24 hours each day,
365 days each year. If you want
acknowledgment that we received your
comments, please include a selfaddressed, stamped envelope or
postcard or print the acknowledgement
page that appears after submitting
comments on-line.
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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical
Programs Division, (202) 366–4001,
fmcsamedical@dot.gov, FMCSA,
Department of Transportation, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W64–
113, Washington, DC 20590–0001.
Office hours are 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., e.t.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315,
FMCSA may grant an exemption from
E:\FR\FM\16MRN1.SGM
16MRN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 51 (Wednesday, March 16, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14195-14197]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-05933]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
Inspection, Repair, and Maintenance; Periodic Inspection of
Commercial Motor Vehicles; Acceptance of Mexico's NOM-068-SCT-2-2014
Inspection Program
AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice on periodic inspection programs.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FMCSA announces its acceptance of the Norma Oficial
Mexicana ((NOM) or Official Mexican Standard) concerning the periodic
inspection (PI) of commercial motor vehicles (CMVs). The Agency has
reviewed NOM-068-SCT-2-2014 (NOM 68) and determined that it should be
added to the list of programs which are comparable to, or as effective
as, the Federal PI requirements contained in the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Regulations (FMCSRs). FMCSA's acceptance of NOM 68 means that
Mexico-domiciled motor carriers operating in the United States must
ensure that their CMVs are inspected annually as required by the
Secretar[iacute]a de Comunicaciones y Transportes (SCT). The motor
carrier must retain a copy of the inspection report and a sticker/decal
must be affixed to the vehicle in order to satisfy the PI requirements
in the United States. These motor carriers will no longer have the
option of relying on their employees to conduct inspections of the CMVs
the carrier controls, using commercial garages for such inspections, or
passing a roadside inspection based on criteria published by the
Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Alliance (CVSA) to comply with the
periodic inspection requirements at 49 CFR part 396.
DATES: This action is effective March 16, 2016. NOM-68 inspection
decals issued on or after October 1, 2015, will be accepted as proof of
a periodic during roadside inspections and investigations conducted on
or after March 16, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Marcelo Perez, North American
Borders Division, MC-ESB, (512) 916-5440, Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration, 903 San Jacinto Blvd., Suite 1100, Austin, TX 78701.
Office hours are from 7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m., CDT, Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 210 of the Motor Carrier Safety Act of 1984 (49 U.S.C.
31142) (the Act) requires the Secretary of Transportation to prescribe
standards for annual or more frequent inspection of CMVs unless the
Secretary finds that another inspection system is as effective as an
annual or more frequent inspection. On December 7, 1988, in response to
the Act, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the agency within
the Department of Transportation responsible for motor carrier safety
until 1999, published a final rule amending 49 CFR part 396 of the
FMCSRs (53 FR 49402). The final rule required CMVs operated in
interstate commerce to be inspected at least once a year. The
inspection was to be based on Federal inspection standards, or a State
inspection program determined by the FHWA, FMCSA's predecessor agency,
to be comparable to, or as effective as, the Federal standards.
Accordingly, if FHWA decided that a State's PI program was comparable
to, or as effective as, the requirements of part 396, then the motor
carrier had to ensure that all of its CMVs which are required by that
State to be inspected through the State's inspection program were
inspected. If a State did not have such a program, the motor carrier
was responsible for ensuring its CMVs are inspected using one of the
alternatives included in the final rule.
On March 16, 1989, the FHWA published a notice in the Federal
Register that requested States and other interested parties to identify
and provide information on the CMV inspection programs in their
respective jurisdictions (54 FR 11020). Upon review of the information
submitted, the FHWA published a list of State
[[Page 14196]]
inspection programs that were determined to be comparable to the
Federal PI requirements (54 FR 50726, December 8, 1989). This initial
list included 15 States and the District of Columbia. The list was
revised on September 23, 1991, to include the inspection programs of
the Alabama Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) Board, California, Hawaii,
Louisiana, Minnesota, all of the Canadian Provinces, and the Yukon
Territory (56 FR 47982).
On November 27, 1992, the list was revised to include the Wisconsin
bus inspection program (57 FR 56400). On April 14, 1994, the list was
revised to include the Texas CMV inspection program (59 FR 17829). The
list was revised on November 7, 1995, to include the Connecticut bus
inspection program (60 FR 56183). On February 19, 1998, the Ohio
inspection program for church buses was added to the list (63 FR 8516),
with a notice announcing FMCSA's acceptance of certain enhancements to
the program on June 18, 2001 (66 FR 32863). And on October 22, 2008,
the list was revised to include the Massachusetts CMV inspection
program (73 FR 63040).
FMCSA Determination: Official Mexican Standard, NOM 68
On January 19, 2015, the SCT of Mexico published its Official
Mexican Standard, NOM-68, in the Official Gazette, Mexico's equivalent
of the Federal Register. NOM-68 addresses Federal inspection standards
for CMVs in Mexico. Beginning May 19, 2015, Mexico-domiciled motor
carriers must take their vehicles to an SCT-approved inspection center
for a mandatory vehicle inspection. The inspections must be performed
once every year, and on the months set on the Inspection Calendar.
FMCSA has reviewed Mexico's pass-fail criteria for the specific
vehicle components and systems examined as during the mandatory vehicle
inspection and determined that Mexico's inspection program is
comparable to, or as effective as, FMCSA's requirements. The Agency
compared the pass-fail requirements of Appendix G to the Federal Motor
Carrier Safety Regulations (i.e., the U.S. periodic inspection
standards), which includes the 13 vehicle systems and components listed
below with the list of vehicle systems and components included in NOM
68.
1. Brake system;
2. Coupling devices;
3. Exhaust system;
4. Fuel system;
5. Lighting devices;
6. Safe loading;
7. Steering mechanism;
8. Suspension;
9. Frame;
10. Tires;
11. Wheels and rims;
12. Windshield glazing; and,
13. Windshield wipers.
NOM-68 is organized into 79 sections, with multiple sections
covering each of the 13 areas in Appendix G. In some instances, NOM-68
covers the requirements in greater detail and others Mexico's
inspection standards cover equipment which is not addressed in the
FMCSRs. While Appendix G does not include the same level of detail as
NOM 68, 49 CFR part 393 provides many of those requirements in detail
comparable to that of NOM-68. Therefore, NOM 68 provides an annual
inspection standard that requires all the parts and accessories that
must be installed on CMVs to be in proper working order in order to
pass the inspection.
FMCSA acknowledges that Mexico's compliance date for certain
vehicle safety systems and components, such as antilock braking systems
(or ABS), differs from the U.S. requirements. However, the Agency does
not believe the differences in the compliance dates for such systems is
a sufficient basis for considering Mexico's annual inspection standards
to be substantively different. Mexico-domiciled motor carriers are
subject to the same requirements as U.S.- and Canada-domiciled carriers
operating on U.S. public roads with regard to the requirements of 49
CFR part 393. This means the presence of an annual inspection decal
would not provide relief from the requirements of part 393.
Mexico's mandatory annual inspection requirements cover most of the
types of CMVs subject to FMCSA's periodic inspection regulations, which
includes passenger-carrying vehicles designed to transport 16 or more
passengers (including the driver) and property-carrying vehicles with a
gross weight, gross vehicle weight rating, or gross combination weight
rating of 10,001 pounds or more. Therefore, both the inspection
criteria for the vehicle components and safety systems, and the types
of vehicles required to be inspected are comparable to FMCSA's
requirements.
For CMVs that are subject to FMCSA's periodic inspection
requirements but excepted from the NOM 68 requirements, the motor
carrier may continue to rely upon the options allowed under 49 CFR
396.17. FMCSA will work with the government of Mexico and the
Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance to provide detailed guidance on the
specific vehicles subject to NOM 68 requirements to ensure uniform and
consistent enforcement of Sec. 396.17 (and the compatible State
requirements adopted in accordance with 49 CFR part 350 concerning the
Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program) during roadside inspections of
Mexico-domiciled vehicles operating in the United States.
It should be noted that in accepting the Mexico's program, FMCSA
also accepts the recordkeeping requirements associated with the
inspection program. Upon successful completion of Mexico's inspection,
a report is created which identifies the vehicle, inspector, and the
status of the inspection. In addition to the report, a program
inspection sticker decal indicating that the vehicle has passed the
inspection will be affixed to the vehicle's windshield.
Relationship Between FMCSA's Decision Concerning Periodic Inspection
and the Enforcement of the Requirements Under 49 CFR Part 393
FMCSA notes that its acceptance of Mexico's PI program does not in
any way alter the enforcement of the safety requirements under 49 CFR
part 393 concerning vehicle parts and accessories necessary for safe
operations. All interstate motor carriers operating CMVs in the United
States, including Canada- and Mexico-domiciled motor carriers, must
ensure that their CMVs meet the applicable requirements under 49 CFR
part 393 regardless of whether the vehicle has passed a PI. And Part
393 includes cross-references to various Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standards (FMVSSs) established by the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration and applicable to vehicle manufacturers. Through these
cross-references, FMCSA holds motor carriers responsible for ensuring
that vehicles manufactured on or after the effective dates of the NHTSA
standards are maintained to keep the safety equipment and features
installed by the manufacturer operable.
While manufacturers building CMVs designed and sold for use in
Canada and Mexico are not required to meet the FMVSSs, FMCSA requires
that the motor carriers operating these vehicles in the United States
meet the same safety requirements applicable to domestic motor
carriers. And, although the effective date for certain vehicle safety
requirements such as antilock braking systems under NOM 68 and Canada's
rules may differ from the effective date for the U.S. requirements,
vehicles manufactured on or after the effective dates listed in the
FMVSSs,
[[Page 14197]]
and cross-referenced in part 393, must meet FMCSA's requirements when
operating in the United States. These vehicles are subject to roadside
inspections while operating in the United States and violations of
these 49 CFR part 393 requirements may be cited on the inspection
report.
Acceptance of periodic inspection decals from Canada or Mexico
simply means that these carriers would not be cited for violations of
49 CFR 396.17. As noted above, this decision does not constitute an
exception from any of the applicable requirements under 49 CFR part
393. Therefore, today's decision in no way compromises safety.
Although passing a roadside inspection is another option under the
current regime, FMCSA published a notice of proposed rulemaking on
October 7, 2015 (80 FR 60592), which would, in response to a petition
for rulemaking from the Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance (CVSA),
eliminate this option for all motor carriers subject to the FMCSRs.
Jurisdictions With Equivalent Periodic Inspection Programs
The following is a complete list of States with inspection programs
that FMCSA has determined are comparable to, or as effective as, the
Federal PI requirements.
Alabama (LPG Board),
California,
Connecticut,
District of Columbia,
Hawaii,
Illinois,
Louisiana,
Maine,
Maryland,
Massachusetts,
Michigan,
Minnesota,
New Hampshire,
New Jersey,
New York,
Ohio,
Pennsylvania,
Rhode Island,
Texas,
Utah,
Vermont,
Virginia,
West Virginia,
Wisconsin.
Please note that since the list was originally established, two
States have been removed. Arkansas no longer has a PI program for buses
comparable to, or as effective, as the Federal PI program. And Oklahoma
repealed its inspection requirements. Therefore, these States are no
longer listed.
In addition to the States listed above, FMCSA accepts the
inspection programs of the 10 Canadian Provinces (Alberta, British
Columbia, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, Ontario,
Prince Edward Island, Quebec and Saskatchewan) and the Yukon Territory,
and with today's notice, Mexico's NOM 68 program, as comparable to, or
as effective as, the Federal PI requirements.
All other jurisdictions either have no PI programs for CMVs or
their PI programs have not been determined by the FMCSA to be
comparable to, or as effective as, the Federal PI requirements. Should
any of these jurisdictions wish to establish a program or modify their
programs in order to make them comparable to the Federal requirements,
the State should contact the appropriate FMCSA division office.
List of Subjects
Highway safety, Highways and roads, Motor carriers, Motor vehicle
maintenance, Motor vehicle safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 31132, 31136, 31142, 31502, and 31504; 49
CFR 1.87.
Issued on: March 9, 2016.
T.F. Scott Darling, III,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2016-05933 Filed 3-15-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P
