Parts and Accessories Necessary for Safe Operation; Application for an Exemption From the Automobile Carriers Conference of the American Trucking Associations, 4602-4605 [2019-02378]
Download as PDF
4602
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 32 / Friday, February 15, 2019 / Notices
According to SFBR, this action is
excluded from environmental review
under 49 CFR 1105.6(c) and from
historic reporting requirements under
49 CFR 1105.8(b).
Board decisions and notices are
available at www.stb.gov.
Decided: February 12, 2018.
By the Board, Scott M. Zimmerman, Acting
Director, Office of Proceedings.
Brendetta Jones,
Clearance Clerk.
[FR Doc. 2019–02555 Filed 2–14–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
(DOT)
Federal Aviation Administration
Notice of Opportunity for Public
Comment on Non-Rule Making Action
To Change Land Use From
Aeronautical to Non-Aeronautical at
Mobile Downtown Airport, Mobile,
Alabama
Federal Aviation
Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
Mobile Downtown Airport, be used for
aeronautical purposes.
The FAA is reviewing a request for an
update to the Mobile Downtown Airport
Layout Plan submitted by the Mobile
Airport Authority. The Airport Layout
Plan update, if approved, would change
the land use on 0.88 acres from
aeronautical to non-aeronautical. The
property will then be leased for
commercial development. The proceeds
from the lease of this property will be
used for airport purposes. The proposed
use of this property is compatible with
airport operations.
Any person may inspect the request
in person at the FAA office listed above
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
In addition, any person may, upon
request, inspect the request, notice and
other documents germane to the request
in person at the Mobile Downtown
Airport (BFM).
Issued in Jackson, Mississippi, on February
4, 2019.
Rans D. Black,
Manager, Jackson Airports District Office,
Southern Region.
[FR Doc. 2019–02372 Filed 2–14–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
Notice is being given that the
FAA is considering a request from the
Mobile Airport Authority to waive the
requirement for one (1) parcel of surplus
property totaling 0.88 acres, located on
Mobile Downtown Airport, be used for
aeronautical purposes.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before March 18, 2019.
ADDRESSES: Comments on this notice
may be mailed or delivered in triplicate
to the FAA at the following address:
Jackson Airports District Office, Attn:
Kevin Morgan, Program Manager, 100
West Cross Street, Suite B, Jackson, MS
39208–2307.
In addition, one (1) copy of any
comments submitted to the FAA must
be mailed or delivered to Chris Curry,
Executive Director, Mobile Airport
Authority at the following address: P.O.
Box 88004, Mobile, AL 36608–0004.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kevin Morgan, Program Manager,
Jackson Airports District Office, 100
West Cross Street, Suite B, Jackson, MS
39208–2307, (601) 664–9891. The land
release request may be reviewed in
person at this same location.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the
provisions of Title 49, U.S.C. 47153(c),
notice is being given that the FAA is
considering a request from the Mobile
Airport Authority to waive the
requirement for one (1) parcel of surplus
property totaling 0.88 acres, located on
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:41 Feb 14, 2019
Jkt 247001
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration
[Docket No. FMCSA–2018–0090]
Parts and Accessories Necessary for
Safe Operation; Application for an
Exemption From the Automobile
Carriers Conference of the American
Trucking Associations
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of final disposition.
AGENCY:
The Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Administration (FMCSA)
announces its decision to grant the
Automobile Carriers Conference (ACC)
of the American Truck Associations
(ATA) for a limited 5-year exemption to
relieve motor carriers operating stinger
steered automobile transporter
equipment from the requirement to
place warning flags on projecting loads
of new motor vehicles. The Federal
Motor Carrier Safety Regulations
(FMCSR) require any commercial motor
vehicle (CMV) transporting a load
which extends more than 4 feet beyond
the rear of the vehicle be marked with
a single red or orange fluorescent
warning flag at the extreme rear if the
projecting load is 2 feet wide or less,
and two warning flags if the projecting
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00171
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
load is wider than 2 feet, located to
indicate the maximum width of loads
which extend beyond the sides and/or
rear of the vehicle. The Agency has
determined that the lack of warning
flags on stinger steered automobile
transporter equipment when
transporting motor vehicles would not
have an adverse impact on safety and
that adherence to the terms and
conditions of the exemption would
achieve a level of safety equivalent to or
greater than the level of safety provided
by the regulation.
DATES: This exemption is effective
February 15, 2019 and ending February
15, 2024.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Luke Loy, Vehicle and Roadside
Operations Division, Office of Carrier,
Driver, and Vehicle Safety, MC–PSV,
(202) 366–0676, Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590–
0001.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments submitted to notice
requesting public comments on the
exemption application, go to
www.regulations.gov at any time or visit
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., ET, Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. The online Federal document management
system is available 24 hours each day,
365 days each year. The docket number
is listed at the beginning of this notice.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
FMCSA has authority under 49 U.S.C.
31136(e) and 31315 to grant exemptions
from certain parts of the Federal Motor
Carrier Safety Regulations. FMCSA must
publish a notice of each exemption
request in the Federal Register (49 CFR
381.315(a)). The Agency must provide
the public an opportunity to inspect the
information relevant to the application,
including any safety analyses that have
been conducted. The Agency must also
provide an opportunity for public
comment on the request.
The Agency reviews safety analyses
and public comments submitted, and
determines whether granting the
exemption would likely achieve a level
of safety equivalent to, or greater than,
the level that would be achieved by the
current regulation (49 CFR 381.305).
The decision of the Agency must be
published in the Federal Register (49
CFR 381.315(b)) with the reasons for
denying or granting the application and,
if granted, the name of the person or
E:\FR\FM\15FEN1.SGM
15FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 32 / Friday, February 15, 2019 / Notices
class of persons receiving the
exemption, and the regulatory provision
from which the exemption is granted.
The notice must also specify the
effective period and explain the terms
and conditions of the exemption. The
exemption may be renewed (49 CFR
381.300(b)).
ACC’s Application for Exemption
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
The ACC applied for an exemption
from 49 CFR 393.87 requesting that
motor carriers operating ‘‘stinger
steered’’ automobile transporter
equipment be relieved from the
requirement to place warning flags on
projecting loads of new motor vehicles.
Stinger steered vehicles are those with
the fifth wheel hitch located on a drop
frame behind and belowthe rear-most
axle of the power unit. A copy of the
application is included in the docket
referenced at the beginning of this
notice.
Section 393.87 of the FMCSRs
requires any CMV transporting a load
which extends beyond the sides by
more than 4 inches, or more than 4 feet
beyond the rear, to have the extremities
of the load marked with red or orange
fluorescent warning flags. Each warning
flag must be at least 18 inches square.
There must be a single flag at the
extreme rear if the projecting load is 2
feet wide or less, and two warning flags
are required if the projecting load is
wider than 2 feet. The flags must be
located to indicate the maximum width
of loads which extend beyond the sides
and/or rear of the vehicle.
In its application, the ACC states
‘‘With the enactment of the FAST
[Fixing America’s Surface
Transportation] Act in December 2015,
stinger steered automobile transporter
equipment are permitted a rear
vehicular overhang allowance of not
less than six feet. [49 U.S.C.
31111(b)(1)(G)] Prior to the enactment of
the FAST Act, the minimum rear
overhang allowance for all automobile
transporters was a minimum of four
feet. [23 CFR Sec. 658.13(e)(ii)]
The ACC states:
The transportation of new motor vehicles
poses a dilemma in adhering to the flag
requirements. Affixing flags or anything else
to the surfaces of the vehicles is not allowed
by vehicle manufacturers as it can lead to
scratches and other damage to the vehicle.
Auto transporters have attempted to adhere
to the intent of the regulations by affixing
flags at the end of the trailers (see
attachments). This in itself can still lead to
vehicle damage by virtue of the flag rubbing
on the vehicle surface. However, this attempt
to comply with the regulatory intent does not
adhere to the letter of the regulations and has
resulted in carriers receiving numerous
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:41 Feb 14, 2019
Jkt 247001
citations for being in violation of the flag
requirements.
The ACC states that motor vehicles
are the only commodity to be
transported that must adhere to the
requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle
Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108,
‘‘Lamps, reflective devices and
associated equipment,’’ and that FMCSS
No. 108 has required motor vehicles to
be equipped with side-facing reflex
reflectors in addition to amber reflectors
in the front of the vehicle and red
reflectors in the rear of the vehicle since
1968. The ACC contends that the
reflective devices that are required to be
on the vehicles being transported, along
with the required lighting and
conspicuity treatments on the trailer
‘‘more than adequately adhere to the
intent of Sec. 383.87 in notifying the
motoring public that a load extends
more than four feet beyond the rear of
the trailer.’’ In addition, ACC states that
FMVSS No. 108 imposes specific
performance criteria for the required
reflectors, whereas there are no such
performance requirements for the flags
required by the FMCSRs.
The ACC states that the automobile
transporter vehicle population is a
fraction of the overall CMV population,
consisting of approximately 16,000
units, and that the stinger steered
vehicle population is a subset of that.
Further, ACC notes that since the
enactment of the FAST Act, the industry
has not experienced an increase in
collisions into the rear end of trucks
with the additional 2 feet of allowable
overhang. The ACC states that
‘‘Statistics show that the accident
frequency of collisions into the rear end
of auto transporters is miniscule with a
rate of less than 0.05%.’’
The exemption would apply to all
motor carriers operating stinger steered
automobile transporter equipment. The
ACC believes that the reflex reflectors
that are required to be installed on the
new motor vehicles being transported,
in conjunction with the various marking
and conspicuity requirements required
on the trailer transporting the new
vehicles, provide a level of safety that is
greater than that achieved by the
warning flags required by the FMCSRs.
Comments
FMCSA published a notice of the
application in the Federal Register on
February 27, 2018, and asked for public
comment (83 FR 8569). The Agency
received four comments: Rick Earl from
United Road; Brian Suhre from Cassens
Transport Company; Kirk Welch from
Toyota Logistics Services, Inc.; and
Shaun Kildare and Peter Kurdock from
PO 00000
Frm 00172
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
4603
Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety
(Advocates).
Mr. Earl, Mr. Suhre, and Mr. Welch
each provided comments supporting the
ACC application. Mr. Earl stated that the
reflex reflectors on the passenger
vehicles being transported provide
significantly higher visibility than the
flags required by section 393.87 of the
FMCSRs, and that the ‘‘flags can damage
the valuable passenger vehicles we
carry, causing significant waste and
discord with our customers and their
customers.’’ In addition, Mr. Earl stated:
The rule itself is sound and makes sense,
but in the specific case of auto hauling it
becomes burdensome and does not add to the
safety of the motoring public. It further adds
confusion from an enforcement perspective.
Our car haulers often find themselves cited
by local law enforcement, have been forced
to turn on lights on the cars we carry before
being allowed to leave the scale or other such
measures employed by the states in an effort
to comply with this unnecessary rule.
Mr. Suhre stated that ‘‘the vehicles we
transport, by their very nature, meet
Federal conspicuity requirements in
both daytime and nighttime,’’ and also
noted that ‘‘vehicle manufacturers
prohibit us from attaching any items to
the vehicles during transport.’’ Like Mr.
Earl, Mr. Suhre noted that drivers ‘‘have
even been required to climb up on the
trailer to turn on the headlights and/or
taillights of a cargo unit before being
allowed to leave an inspection site.’’ Mr.
Welch stated:
The flag requirements on loads extending
beyond four feet from the rear of a trailer
makes perfect sense when that load consists
of a telephone pole, a ladder, or some other
object, in order to alert the motoring public
to its existence. . . . As ACC stated in its
petition request, the current flag placing
requirement is impractical when dealing
with motor vehicles. Attaching flags on the
vehicle at the rear of the transporter and to
the side of the vehicle being transported will
ultimately result in unacceptable damage to
the finish of the new vehicle.
Mr. Welch, like Mr. Earl, noted that
attaching flags on the vehicle at the rear
of the transporter and to the side of the
vehicle being transported will result in
vehicle damage. In addition, Mr. Welch
stated:
The fact that our vehicles must meet
NHTSA lighting standards, including those
for reflex reflectors, in addition to the
lighting and conspicuity of the trailers is
more than enough to alert the motoring
public that a load extension exists. As the
petition request states, NHTSA requirements
are quantifiable standards whereby no such
reflective standards exist for flags, as
required by the FMCSA. This ultimately
results in providing for a safer highway
environment for the traveling public.
E:\FR\FM\15FEN1.SGM
15FEN1
4604
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 32 / Friday, February 15, 2019 / Notices
Advocates opposed the ACC
application because it believes (1) that
the requirement for warning flags in the
FMCSRs and the requirement for reflex
reflectors in the FMVSSs are intended to
address two distinct areas of public
safety, (2) increasing the overhang
length for stinger steered automobile
transporters significantly heightens the
need for proper warnings to the public
of these new longer loads, and (3) there
has not been enough time to determine
the real world on-road effects of the new
overhang standard. Specifically with
respect to its concerns about the
adequacy of reflex reflectors to provide
warning of an overhanging load,
Advocates stated:
The reflectors required by FMVSS 108 are
intended to ensure that passenger motor
vehicles operated by the public can be
identified by other road users. They are not
designed not would the public be expected
to understand that the reflectors (required
since 1968 for this sole purpose) are also
intended to indicate that a CMV is carrying
an unusually wide or overhanging load off
and well above the surface of the roadway.
Compliance with a FMVSS by an automobile
manufacturer is in no way a substitute for a
motor carrier complying with an FMCSR.
These two sets of separate regulations are
intended to address two distinct areas of
public safety. In addition, there is no data
presented in the Application that shows that
reflectors installed on a passenger motor
vehicle provide the intended effect of
warning flags placed on a CMV carrying
overhanging freight.
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
While acknowledging that the FAST Act
extended the rear overhang length for
stinger steered automobile transporters,
Advocates notes that ‘‘Section 5520 of
the FAST Act did not include, and
Congress did not intend, to permit an
exemption from the warning flag
requirement of the FMCSRs.’’ Further,
Advocates expressed concern that
carriers transporting automobiles have
not developed any practical alternatives
to comply with the regulation, such as
flags that do not damage the surface of
an automobile, instead of seeking an
exemption from a critical safety
regulation.
FMCSA Decision
The FMCSA has evaluated the ACC
exemption application, and the
comments received. The Agency
believes that granting the temporary
exemption to relieve motor carriers
operating stinger steered automobile
transporters from the requirement to
place warning flags on projecting loads
of new motor vehicles will provide a
level of safety that is equivalent to, or
greater than, the level of safety achieved
without the exemption. Section
393.87(b) of the FMCSRs requires loads
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:41 Feb 14, 2019
Jkt 247001
that extend more than 4 feet beyond the
rear of a vehicle be marked with
warning flags ‘‘to indicate the maximum
width of loads which extend beyond the
sides and/or rear of the vehicle.’’
[Emphasis added.] The FMCSRs require
a single flag if the projecting load is 2
feet wide or less, and two flags if the
projecting load is wider than 2 feet. The
flags are critical when the extending
load may not be easily identifiable to
the motoring public (i.e., logs, building
materials), and/or when the load may
not extend across the entire width of the
vehicle being used to transport the
item(s).
However, the Agency believes that the
transport of automobiles that are
permitted, by statute, to extend up to 6
feet beyond the rearmost portion of a
stinger steered auto transporter is a
unique situation as compared to the
transportation of other items because
automobiles extend across virtually the
entire width of the stinger steered auto
transporter, and are easily identifiable
as automobiles to the motoring public.
This is especially true if the rearmost
automobile being transported faces the
front of the auto transporter, as the rear
of the automobile is required to be
equipped with two reflex reflectors,1
located as far apart as practicable, that
meet the photometric requirements
specified in FMVSS No. 108. To the
contrary, section 387 of the FMCSRs
requires extending loads to be marked
with ‘‘red or orange fluorescent warning
flags,’’ but does not impose any specific
photometric requirements for these
flags, i.e., required level of visibility
from a certain distance, etc. While
FMVSS No. 108 does not require the
front of automobiles to be equipped
with reflex reflectors, FMCSA believes
that even if the rearmost automobile
being transported is facing the rear of
the auto transporter, oncoming
motorists will easily identify the
extending load as an automobile that
extends across the full width of the auto
transporter.
FMCSA acknowledges Advocates’
comment that the longer, 6-foot
overhang has only been permitted for a
relatively short period of time, and as
such, it is difficult to determine what—
if any—impact the new standard has
had on safety. Nonetheless, the FAST
Act expressly permits stinger steered
automobile transporters to carry loads
that overhang the rear by 6 feet.
Regarding Advocates’ concern that there
has not been enough time to determine
1 Reflex reflector is defined in section 393.5 of the
FMCSRs as ‘‘A device which is used on a vehicle
to give an indication to an approaching driver by
reflected light from the lamps on the approaching
vehicle.’’
PO 00000
Frm 00173
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
the ‘‘additional threat to public safety
that would result from removing
warning flags from these longer loads,’’
the Agency is required to make a
determination that it is likely that an
equivalent or greater level of safety will
be maintained prior to granting any
temporary exemption. As discussed
above, FMCSA believes that the
transport of automobiles via stinger
steered auto transporters is a unique
situation as compared to the
transportation of other items because
automobiles extend across virtually the
entire width of the stinger steered auto
transporter, and are easily identifiable
as automobiles to the motoring public.
Further, the automobile transporter
vehicle population is a very small
fraction of the overall commercial
vehicle population, consisting of
approximately 16,000 units, with the
stinger steered vehicle population a
subset of those 16,000 vehicles. The
very limited exposure of these stinger
steered auto transporters, coupled with
the fact that the automobiles they are
hauling are easily identifiable by
oncoming motorists leads FMCSA to
believe that granting the temporary
exemption is likely to provide a level of
safety that is equivalent to, or greater
than, the level of safety achieved
without the exemption.
Terms and Conditions for the
Exemption
The Agency hereby grants the
exemption for a 5-year period,
beginning February 15, 2019 and ending
February 15, 2024. During the
temporary exemption period, motor
carriers operating stinger steered
automobile transporter equipment will
not have to place warning flags on
projecting loads of motor vehicles that
extend up to 6 feet from the rear of the
automobile transporter.
The exemption will be valid for 5
years unless rescinded earlier by
FMCSA. The exemption will be
rescinded if: (1) Motor carriers and/or
commercial motor vehicles fail to
comply with the terms and conditions
of the exemption; (2) the exemption has
resulted in a lower level of safety than
was maintained before it was granted; or
(3) continuation of the exemption would
not be consistent with the goals and
objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315(b).
Interested parties possessing
information that would demonstrate
that motor carriers operating stinger
steered automobile transporter
equipment with projecting loads of
motor vehicles up to 6 feet from the rear
of the automobile transporter are not
achieving the requisite statutory level of
E:\FR\FM\15FEN1.SGM
15FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 32 / Friday, February 15, 2019 / Notices
safety should immediately notify
FMCSA. The Agency will evaluate any
such information and, if safety is being
compromised or if the continuation of
the exemption is not consistent with 49
U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), will take
immediate steps to revoke the
exemption.
Preemption
In accordance with 49 U.S.C.
31313(d), as implemented by 49 CFR
381.600, during the period this
exemption is in effect, no State shall
enforce any law or regulation applicable
to interstate commerce that conflicts
with or is inconsistent with this
exemption with respect to a firm or
person operating under the exemption.
States may, but are not required to,
adopt the same exemption with respect
to operations in intrastate commerce.
Issued on: December 13, 2019.
Raymond P. Martinez,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2019–02378 Filed 2–14–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Office of the Secretary
[Docket No. DOT–OST–2018–0155]
Privacy Act of 1974; Department of
Transportation, Office of the Secretary
of Transportation; DOT/ALL–17;
Freedom of Information and Privacy
Act Case Files
Office of the Departmental
Chief Information Officer, Office of the
Secretary of Transportation, DOT.
ACTION: Notice of Privacy Act modified
system of records and rescission of
system of records.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
Privacy Act of 1974, the Department of
Transportation proposes to update and
reissue a current Department of
Transportation system of records titled,
‘‘Department of Transportation—DOT/
ALL 017 Freedom of Information Act
(FOIA) and Privacy Act Case Files
System of Records.’’ The Department
also intends to consolidate the following
legacy system, ‘‘DOT/MARAD 003
Freedom of Information and Privacy
Request Records’’ as part of the same
and rescind DOT/MARAD 003.
This system of records will allow the
Department of Transportation, to
include its Operating Administrations,
the Office of the Inspector General, and
Secretarial Offices, to collect and retain
records and related correspondence on
individuals who have filed requests for
information under the Freedom of
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:41 Feb 14, 2019
Jkt 247001
Information Act and Privacy Act of
1974, including requests for review of
final denials of such requests. As a
result of a biennial review of this
system, records have been updated
within the following sections; Security
Classification to include classified and
sensitive records, Categories of
Individuals to include individuals
making requests on behalf of the subject
individual and individuals whose
requests have been referred to the
Department for processing by other
agencies as well as individuals involved
in processing and responding to
requests and/or appeals, Categories of
Records to provide greater clarity of the
type of records and information
included in the system, Purposes to
include responding to litigation
associated with requests, and other
activities required to assist the
Department in executing its
responsibilities, Routine Uses to include
three new routine uses to support
processing of FOIA and Privacy Act
requests, appeals and amendments, and
to facilitate understanding of DOT
processes, Retrievability to expand the
set of identifiers that may be used to
retrieve cases, System Manager to
provide information on where to find
operating administration specific
contacts, and Exemptions Claimed to
clarify that records requested from other
systems are not part of this system of
records. Additionally, this notice
includes non-substantive changes to
simplify the language, formatting, and
text of the previously published notice
to align with the requirements of Office
of Memorandum and Budget
Memoranda A–108. This updated
system, titled Freedom of Information
Act and Privacy Act Case Files, will be
included in the Department of
Transportation’s inventory of record
systems.
Written comments should be
submitted on or before March 18, 2019.
The Department may publish an
amended Systems of Records Notice in
light of any comments received. This
new system will be applicable March
18, 2019.
DATES:
You may submit comments,
identified by docket number DOT–OST–
2018–0155 by any of the following
methods:
• Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Mail: Docket Management Facility,
U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200
New Jersey Ave. SE, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12–140,
Washington, DC 20590–0001.
ADDRESSES:
PO 00000
Frm 00174
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
4605
• Hand Delivery or Courier: West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140,
1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, Monday through
Friday, except Federal Holidays.
• Fax: (202) 493–2251.
Instructions: You must include the
agency name and docket number DOT–
OST–2018–0155. All comments
received will be posted without change
to https://www.regulations.gov, including
any personal information provided.
Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search
the electronic form of all comments
received in any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the
comment (or signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may
review the Department of
Transportation’s complete Privacy Act
statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR
19477–78), or you may visit https://
DocketsInfo.dot.gov.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments received, go to https://
www.regulations.gov or to the street
address listed above. Follow the online
instructions for accessing the docket.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
questions, please contact: Claire W.
Barrett, Departmental Chief Privacy
Officer, Office of the Chief Information
Officer, Department of Transportation,
Washington, DC 20590; privacy@
dot.gov; or 202.527.3284.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
In accordance with the Privacy Act of
1974, 5 U.S.C. 552a, the Department of
Transportation (DOT)/Office of the
Secretary (OST) proposes to update and
reissue a current DOT wide system of
records titled, ‘‘Department of
Transportation/ALL—017 Freedom of
Information Act and Privacy Act Case
Files.’’ The Department also intends to
rescind the following legacy system,
‘‘DOT/MARAD 003 Freedom of
Information and Privacy Request
Records’’ and consolidate records
managed under that Notice as part of the
same.
The updated system of records
consists of information created and used
by the Department’s Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) and Privacy Act
(PA) staff to process requests as well as
to manage the FOIA and PA programs.
The publication of this updated
system of records notice supports DOT
efforts to ensure that all DOT Operating
Administrations, Secretarial Offices,
and the Office of the Inspector General
implement their Privacy Act obligations
E:\FR\FM\15FEN1.SGM
15FEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 32 (Friday, February 15, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4602-4605]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-02378]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
[Docket No. FMCSA-2018-0090]
Parts and Accessories Necessary for Safe Operation; Application
for an Exemption From the Automobile Carriers Conference of the
American Trucking Associations
AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of final disposition.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA)
announces its decision to grant the Automobile Carriers Conference
(ACC) of the American Truck Associations (ATA) for a limited 5-year
exemption to relieve motor carriers operating stinger steered
automobile transporter equipment from the requirement to place warning
flags on projecting loads of new motor vehicles. The Federal Motor
Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSR) require any commercial motor vehicle
(CMV) transporting a load which extends more than 4 feet beyond the
rear of the vehicle be marked with a single red or orange fluorescent
warning flag at the extreme rear if the projecting load is 2 feet wide
or less, and two warning flags if the projecting load is wider than 2
feet, located to indicate the maximum width of loads which extend
beyond the sides and/or rear of the vehicle. The Agency has determined
that the lack of warning flags on stinger steered automobile
transporter equipment when transporting motor vehicles would not have
an adverse impact on safety and that adherence to the terms and
conditions of the exemption would achieve a level of safety equivalent
to or greater than the level of safety provided by the regulation.
DATES: This exemption is effective February 15, 2019 and ending
February 15, 2024.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Luke Loy, Vehicle and Roadside
Operations Division, Office of Carrier, Driver, and Vehicle Safety, MC-
PSV, (202) 366-0676, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments submitted to notice requesting public comments on the
exemption application, go to www.regulations.gov at any time or visit
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., ET, Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays. The on-line Federal document
management system is available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year.
The docket number is listed at the beginning of this notice.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
FMCSA has authority under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 to grant
exemptions from certain parts of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Regulations. FMCSA must publish a notice of each exemption request in
the Federal Register (49 CFR 381.315(a)). The Agency must provide the
public an opportunity to inspect the information relevant to the
application, including any safety analyses that have been conducted.
The Agency must also provide an opportunity for public comment on the
request.
The Agency reviews safety analyses and public comments submitted,
and determines whether granting the exemption would likely achieve a
level of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be
achieved by the current regulation (49 CFR 381.305). The decision of
the Agency must be published in the Federal Register (49 CFR
381.315(b)) with the reasons for denying or granting the application
and, if granted, the name of the person or
[[Page 4603]]
class of persons receiving the exemption, and the regulatory provision
from which the exemption is granted. The notice must also specify the
effective period and explain the terms and conditions of the exemption.
The exemption may be renewed (49 CFR 381.300(b)).
ACC's Application for Exemption
The ACC applied for an exemption from 49 CFR 393.87 requesting that
motor carriers operating ``stinger steered'' automobile transporter
equipment be relieved from the requirement to place warning flags on
projecting loads of new motor vehicles. Stinger steered vehicles are
those with the fifth wheel hitch located on a drop frame behind and
belowthe rear-most axle of the power unit. A copy of the application is
included in the docket referenced at the beginning of this notice.
Section 393.87 of the FMCSRs requires any CMV transporting a load
which extends beyond the sides by more than 4 inches, or more than 4
feet beyond the rear, to have the extremities of the load marked with
red or orange fluorescent warning flags. Each warning flag must be at
least 18 inches square. There must be a single flag at the extreme rear
if the projecting load is 2 feet wide or less, and two warning flags
are required if the projecting load is wider than 2 feet. The flags
must be located to indicate the maximum width of loads which extend
beyond the sides and/or rear of the vehicle.
In its application, the ACC states ``With the enactment of the FAST
[Fixing America's Surface Transportation] Act in December 2015, stinger
steered automobile transporter equipment are permitted a rear vehicular
overhang allowance of not less than six feet. [49 U.S.C.
31111(b)(1)(G)] Prior to the enactment of the FAST Act, the minimum
rear overhang allowance for all automobile transporters was a minimum
of four feet. [23 CFR Sec. 658.13(e)(ii)]
The ACC states:
The transportation of new motor vehicles poses a dilemma in
adhering to the flag requirements. Affixing flags or anything else
to the surfaces of the vehicles is not allowed by vehicle
manufacturers as it can lead to scratches and other damage to the
vehicle. Auto transporters have attempted to adhere to the intent of
the regulations by affixing flags at the end of the trailers (see
attachments). This in itself can still lead to vehicle damage by
virtue of the flag rubbing on the vehicle surface. However, this
attempt to comply with the regulatory intent does not adhere to the
letter of the regulations and has resulted in carriers receiving
numerous citations for being in violation of the flag requirements.
The ACC states that motor vehicles are the only commodity to be
transported that must adhere to the requirements of Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108, ``Lamps, reflective devices
and associated equipment,'' and that FMCSS No. 108 has required motor
vehicles to be equipped with side-facing reflex reflectors in addition
to amber reflectors in the front of the vehicle and red reflectors in
the rear of the vehicle since 1968. The ACC contends that the
reflective devices that are required to be on the vehicles being
transported, along with the required lighting and conspicuity
treatments on the trailer ``more than adequately adhere to the intent
of Sec. 383.87 in notifying the motoring public that a load extends
more than four feet beyond the rear of the trailer.'' In addition, ACC
states that FMVSS No. 108 imposes specific performance criteria for the
required reflectors, whereas there are no such performance requirements
for the flags required by the FMCSRs.
The ACC states that the automobile transporter vehicle population
is a fraction of the overall CMV population, consisting of
approximately 16,000 units, and that the stinger steered vehicle
population is a subset of that. Further, ACC notes that since the
enactment of the FAST Act, the industry has not experienced an increase
in collisions into the rear end of trucks with the additional 2 feet of
allowable overhang. The ACC states that ``Statistics show that the
accident frequency of collisions into the rear end of auto transporters
is miniscule with a rate of less than 0.05%.''
The exemption would apply to all motor carriers operating stinger
steered automobile transporter equipment. The ACC believes that the
reflex reflectors that are required to be installed on the new motor
vehicles being transported, in conjunction with the various marking and
conspicuity requirements required on the trailer transporting the new
vehicles, provide a level of safety that is greater than that achieved
by the warning flags required by the FMCSRs.
Comments
FMCSA published a notice of the application in the Federal Register
on February 27, 2018, and asked for public comment (83 FR 8569). The
Agency received four comments: Rick Earl from United Road; Brian Suhre
from Cassens Transport Company; Kirk Welch from Toyota Logistics
Services, Inc.; and Shaun Kildare and Peter Kurdock from Advocates for
Highway and Auto Safety (Advocates).
Mr. Earl, Mr. Suhre, and Mr. Welch each provided comments
supporting the ACC application. Mr. Earl stated that the reflex
reflectors on the passenger vehicles being transported provide
significantly higher visibility than the flags required by section
393.87 of the FMCSRs, and that the ``flags can damage the valuable
passenger vehicles we carry, causing significant waste and discord with
our customers and their customers.'' In addition, Mr. Earl stated:
The rule itself is sound and makes sense, but in the specific
case of auto hauling it becomes burdensome and does not add to the
safety of the motoring public. It further adds confusion from an
enforcement perspective. Our car haulers often find themselves cited
by local law enforcement, have been forced to turn on lights on the
cars we carry before being allowed to leave the scale or other such
measures employed by the states in an effort to comply with this
unnecessary rule.
Mr. Suhre stated that ``the vehicles we transport, by their very
nature, meet Federal conspicuity requirements in both daytime and
nighttime,'' and also noted that ``vehicle manufacturers prohibit us
from attaching any items to the vehicles during transport.'' Like Mr.
Earl, Mr. Suhre noted that drivers ``have even been required to climb
up on the trailer to turn on the headlights and/or taillights of a
cargo unit before being allowed to leave an inspection site.'' Mr.
Welch stated:
The flag requirements on loads extending beyond four feet from
the rear of a trailer makes perfect sense when that load consists of
a telephone pole, a ladder, or some other object, in order to alert
the motoring public to its existence. . . . As ACC stated in its
petition request, the current flag placing requirement is
impractical when dealing with motor vehicles. Attaching flags on the
vehicle at the rear of the transporter and to the side of the
vehicle being transported will ultimately result in unacceptable
damage to the finish of the new vehicle.
Mr. Welch, like Mr. Earl, noted that attaching flags on the vehicle at
the rear of the transporter and to the side of the vehicle being
transported will result in vehicle damage. In addition, Mr. Welch
stated:
The fact that our vehicles must meet NHTSA lighting standards,
including those for reflex reflectors, in addition to the lighting
and conspicuity of the trailers is more than enough to alert the
motoring public that a load extension exists. As the petition
request states, NHTSA requirements are quantifiable standards
whereby no such reflective standards exist for flags, as required by
the FMCSA. This ultimately results in providing for a safer highway
environment for the traveling public.
[[Page 4604]]
Advocates opposed the ACC application because it believes (1) that
the requirement for warning flags in the FMCSRs and the requirement for
reflex reflectors in the FMVSSs are intended to address two distinct
areas of public safety, (2) increasing the overhang length for stinger
steered automobile transporters significantly heightens the need for
proper warnings to the public of these new longer loads, and (3) there
has not been enough time to determine the real world on-road effects of
the new overhang standard. Specifically with respect to its concerns
about the adequacy of reflex reflectors to provide warning of an
overhanging load, Advocates stated:
The reflectors required by FMVSS 108 are intended to ensure that
passenger motor vehicles operated by the public can be identified by
other road users. They are not designed not would the public be
expected to understand that the reflectors (required since 1968 for
this sole purpose) are also intended to indicate that a CMV is
carrying an unusually wide or overhanging load off and well above
the surface of the roadway. Compliance with a FMVSS by an automobile
manufacturer is in no way a substitute for a motor carrier complying
with an FMCSR. These two sets of separate regulations are intended
to address two distinct areas of public safety. In addition, there
is no data presented in the Application that shows that reflectors
installed on a passenger motor vehicle provide the intended effect
of warning flags placed on a CMV carrying overhanging freight.
While acknowledging that the FAST Act extended the rear overhang length
for stinger steered automobile transporters, Advocates notes that
``Section 5520 of the FAST Act did not include, and Congress did not
intend, to permit an exemption from the warning flag requirement of the
FMCSRs.'' Further, Advocates expressed concern that carriers
transporting automobiles have not developed any practical alternatives
to comply with the regulation, such as flags that do not damage the
surface of an automobile, instead of seeking an exemption from a
critical safety regulation.
FMCSA Decision
The FMCSA has evaluated the ACC exemption application, and the
comments received. The Agency believes that granting the temporary
exemption to relieve motor carriers operating stinger steered
automobile transporters from the requirement to place warning flags on
projecting loads of new motor vehicles will provide a level of safety
that is equivalent to, or greater than, the level of safety achieved
without the exemption. Section 393.87(b) of the FMCSRs requires loads
that extend more than 4 feet beyond the rear of a vehicle be marked
with warning flags ``to indicate the maximum width of loads which
extend beyond the sides and/or rear of the vehicle.'' [Emphasis added.]
The FMCSRs require a single flag if the projecting load is 2 feet wide
or less, and two flags if the projecting load is wider than 2 feet. The
flags are critical when the extending load may not be easily
identifiable to the motoring public (i.e., logs, building materials),
and/or when the load may not extend across the entire width of the
vehicle being used to transport the item(s).
However, the Agency believes that the transport of automobiles that
are permitted, by statute, to extend up to 6 feet beyond the rearmost
portion of a stinger steered auto transporter is a unique situation as
compared to the transportation of other items because automobiles
extend across virtually the entire width of the stinger steered auto
transporter, and are easily identifiable as automobiles to the motoring
public. This is especially true if the rearmost automobile being
transported faces the front of the auto transporter, as the rear of the
automobile is required to be equipped with two reflex reflectors,\1\
located as far apart as practicable, that meet the photometric
requirements specified in FMVSS No. 108. To the contrary, section 387
of the FMCSRs requires extending loads to be marked with ``red or
orange fluorescent warning flags,'' but does not impose any specific
photometric requirements for these flags, i.e., required level of
visibility from a certain distance, etc. While FMVSS No. 108 does not
require the front of automobiles to be equipped with reflex reflectors,
FMCSA believes that even if the rearmost automobile being transported
is facing the rear of the auto transporter, oncoming motorists will
easily identify the extending load as an automobile that extends across
the full width of the auto transporter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Reflex reflector is defined in section 393.5 of the FMCSRs
as ``A device which is used on a vehicle to give an indication to an
approaching driver by reflected light from the lamps on the
approaching vehicle.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FMCSA acknowledges Advocates' comment that the longer, 6-foot
overhang has only been permitted for a relatively short period of time,
and as such, it is difficult to determine what--if any--impact the new
standard has had on safety. Nonetheless, the FAST Act expressly permits
stinger steered automobile transporters to carry loads that overhang
the rear by 6 feet. Regarding Advocates' concern that there has not
been enough time to determine the ``additional threat to public safety
that would result from removing warning flags from these longer
loads,'' the Agency is required to make a determination that it is
likely that an equivalent or greater level of safety will be maintained
prior to granting any temporary exemption. As discussed above, FMCSA
believes that the transport of automobiles via stinger steered auto
transporters is a unique situation as compared to the transportation of
other items because automobiles extend across virtually the entire
width of the stinger steered auto transporter, and are easily
identifiable as automobiles to the motoring public. Further, the
automobile transporter vehicle population is a very small fraction of
the overall commercial vehicle population, consisting of approximately
16,000 units, with the stinger steered vehicle population a subset of
those 16,000 vehicles. The very limited exposure of these stinger
steered auto transporters, coupled with the fact that the automobiles
they are hauling are easily identifiable by oncoming motorists leads
FMCSA to believe that granting the temporary exemption is likely to
provide a level of safety that is equivalent to, or greater than, the
level of safety achieved without the exemption.
Terms and Conditions for the Exemption
The Agency hereby grants the exemption for a 5-year period,
beginning February 15, 2019 and ending February 15, 2024. During the
temporary exemption period, motor carriers operating stinger steered
automobile transporter equipment will not have to place warning flags
on projecting loads of motor vehicles that extend up to 6 feet from the
rear of the automobile transporter.
The exemption will be valid for 5 years unless rescinded earlier by
FMCSA. The exemption will be rescinded if: (1) Motor carriers and/or
commercial motor vehicles fail to comply with the terms and conditions
of the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower level of
safety than was maintained before it was granted; or (3) continuation
of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals and objectives
of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b).
Interested parties possessing information that would demonstrate
that motor carriers operating stinger steered automobile transporter
equipment with projecting loads of motor vehicles up to 6 feet from the
rear of the automobile transporter are not achieving the requisite
statutory level of
[[Page 4605]]
safety should immediately notify FMCSA. The Agency will evaluate any
such information and, if safety is being compromised or if the
continuation of the exemption is not consistent with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315(b), will take immediate steps to revoke the exemption.
Preemption
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31313(d), as implemented by 49 CFR
381.600, during the period this exemption is in effect, no State shall
enforce any law or regulation applicable to interstate commerce that
conflicts with or is inconsistent with this exemption with respect to a
firm or person operating under the exemption. States may, but are not
required to, adopt the same exemption with respect to operations in
intrastate commerce.
Issued on: December 13, 2019.
Raymond P. Martinez,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2019-02378 Filed 2-14-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P