[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 184 (Monday, September 23, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77575-77580]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-21681]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2022-0242]


Parts and Accessories Necessary for Safe Operation; Application 
for an Exemption From Encore Flooring & Building Products, USDOT 
#2329419

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

ACTION: Notice of final disposition; grant of exemption.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) 
announces its decision to grant an application from Encore Flooring & 
Building Products (Encore, USDOT #2329419) for an exemption to allow it 
to operate commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) equipped with a module 
manufactured by Intellistop, Inc. (Intellistop). The Intellistop module 
is designed to pulse the required rear clearance, identification, and 
brake lamps from a lower-level lighting intensity to a higher-level 
lighting intensity 4 times in 2 seconds when the brakes are applied and 
then return the lights to a steady-burning state while the brakes 
remain engaged. The Agency has determined that granting the exemption 
to Encore would likely achieve a level of safety equivalent to, or 
greater than, the level of safety achieved by the regulation.

DATES: This exemption is effective September 23, 2024 and ending 
September 24, 2029.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. David Sutula, Vehicle and Roadside 
Operations Division, Office of Carrier, Driver, and Vehicle Safety, MC-
PSV, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration; 1200 New Jersey 
Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001; (202) 366-9209; <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#08454b585b5e486c677c266f677e"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="b9f4fae9eaeff9ddd6cd97ded6cf">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, go to www.regulations.gov, insert the docket 
number ``FMCSA-2022-0242'' in the keyword box, and click ``Search.'' 
Next, sort the results by ``Posted (Newer-Older),'' choose the first 
notice listed, click ``Browse Comments.''
    To view documents mentioned in this notice as being available in 
the docket, go to www.regulations.gov, insert the docket number 
``FMCSA-2022-0242'' in the keyword box, click ``Search,'' and chose the 
document to review.
    If you do not have access to the internet, you may view the docket 
online by visiting Dockets Operations 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. 
To be sure someone is there to help you, please call (202) 366-9317 or 
(202) 366-9826 before visiting Dockets Operations.

II. Legal Basis

    FMCSA has authority under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b) to grant 
exemptions from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs). 
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 the applicant's safety analysis. The Agency must 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(a)). The Agency must 
publish its decision in the Federal Register (49 CFR 381.315(b)). If 
granted, the notice will identify the regulatory provision from which 
the applicant will be exempt, the effective period, and all terms and 
conditions of the exemption (49 CFR 381.315(c)(1)). If the exemption is 
denied, the notice will explain the reason for the denial (49 CFR 
381.315(c)(2)). The exemption may be renewed (49 CFR 381.300(b)).

[[Page 77576]]

III. Background

A. Current Regulatory Requirements

    Section 393.25(e) of the FMCSRs requires all exterior lamps (both 
required lamps and any additional lamps) to be steady burning, with 
certain exceptions not relevant here. Two other provisions of the 
FMCSRs--section 393.11(a) and section 393.25(c)--mandate that required 
lamps on CMVs meet the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety 
Standard (FMVSS) No. 108 in effect at the time of manufacture. FMVSS 
No. 108, issued by the U.S. Department of Transportation's National 
Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), includes a requirement 
that installed brake lamps, whether original or replacement equipment, 
be steady burning.

B. Applicant's Request

    Encore applied for an exemption from 49 CFR 393.25(e) to allow it 
to operate CMVs equipped with Intellistop's module. When the brakes are 
applied, the Intellistop module is designed to pulse the rear 
clearance, identification, and brake lamps from a lower-level lighting 
intensity to a higher-level lighting intensity 4 times in 2 seconds and 
then maintain the original equipment manufacturer's (OEM) level of 
illumination for those lamps until the brakes are released and 
reapplied. Intellistop asserts that its module is designed to ensure 
that if the module ever fails, the clearance, identification, and brake 
lamps will default to normal OEM function and illumination.
    Encore's application followed the Agency's October 7, 2022 (87 FR 
61133), denial of Intellistop's application for an industry-wide 
exemption to allow all interstate motor carriers to operate CMVs 
equipped with the Intellistop module. While the Agency determined that 
the scope of the exemption Intellistop sought was too broad to ensure 
that an equivalent level of safety would be achieved, the Agency 
explained that individual motor carrier applications for exemption may 
be more closely aligned with FMCSA authorities. Exemptions more limited 
in scope would allow the Agency to ensure compliance with all relevant 
FMCSA regulations because the individual exemptee would be easily 
identifiable and its compliance with applicable regulations could be 
monitored, thus providing a level of safety equivalent to compliance 
with 49 CFR 393.25(e).
    Encore stated that previous research demonstrated that the use of 
pulsating brake-activated lamps increases the visibility of vehicles 
and should lead to a significant decrease in rear-end crashes. In 
support of its application, Encore submitted several reports of 
research conducted by NHTSA on the issues of rear-end crashes, 
distracted driving, and braking signals.<SUP>1 2 3</SUP> This same body 
of research was also referenced in Intellistop's industry-wide 
exemption application. Relying on these studies, Encore stated that the 
addition of brake-activated pulsating lamp(s) will not have an adverse 
impact on safety and would likely maintain a level of safety equivalent 
to or greater than the level of safety achieved without the exemption.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See NHTSA Study--Evaluation of Enhanced Brake Lights Using 
Surrogate Safety Metrics https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/811127.pdf; As part of the General Findings the NHTSA study 
report concluded that ``rear lighting continues to look promising as 
a means of reducing the number and severity of rear-end crashes.''
    \2\ See also NHTSA Study--Enhanced Rear Lighting and Signaling 
Systems https://tinyurl.com/y2romx76 or https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/task_3_results_0.pdf; As part of the conclusions 
NHTSA found that enhanced, flashing brake lighting ``demonstrated 
improvements in brake response times and other related performance 
measures.''
    \3\ See also NHTSA--Traffic Safety Facts https://tinyurl.com/yxglsdax or https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/tsf811128.pdf; which concluded that flashing brake lights were a 
promising signal for improving attention-getting during brake 
applications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A copy of the application is included in the docket referenced at 
the beginning of this notice.

IV. Comments

    FMCSA published a notice of the Encore application in the Federal 
Register on January 27, 2023, and asked for public comment (88 FR 
5399). The Agency received 20 comments from organizations and 
individuals, including Intellistop, Inc.; Pi-Lit, Inc.; Meiborg 
Brothers, Inc.; the Truck Safety Coalition (TSC); the Transportation 
Safety Equipment Institute (TSEI); and 15 other commenters. Fifteen of 
the commenters favored the exemption application, and five commenters 
(TSEI and 4 anonymous commenters) expressed concerns.
    TSEI reiterated comments it had previously made in support of the 
safety benefits of brake-activated warning lamps when used in 
conjunction with steady burning red brake lamps as well as its prior 
support of the exemption requests from Groendyke Transport, National 
Tank Truck Carriers (NTTC), and Grote Industries. Despite these 
previous expressions of support for the potential benefits of some 
brake warning lamp configurations, TSEI stated that it is concerned 
about any exemption permitting the pulsing of lamps that are currently 
required to be steady burning without a thorough consideration of 
safety data and research. TSEI stated that the aim of future rulemaking 
should be to ensure consistent application across all vehicles equipped 
with such pulsating lamps and recommended that the Agency engage in a 
formal rulemaking to amend part 393 to allow for pulsating brake lamps.
    Four anonymous commenters cited various reasons for opposing the 
application, mainly contending that Agency resources should be focused 
on other areas. One commenter stated that the flashing lamps may be 
more distracting to other motorists.
    TSC supported Encore's request and stated that enhanced rear 
signaling (ERS) can provide functionality beyond what traditional CMV 
lighting and reflective devices offer, including: drawing attention to 
CMVs stopped ahead; increasing awareness of roadside breakdowns; 
notification of emergency braking; and improving driver confidence both 
in ERS-equipped CMVs and in the following vehicle. TSC also stated 
that, in addition to these safety benefits, ERS performance is superior 
to that of steady burning brake lamps in conditions of severe weather, 
taillight glare, and around infrastructure obstacles.
    Intellistop supported the applicant's request for exemption. It 
commented that for over 20 years multiple States have allowed pulsing 
or flashing of brake lamps. Many State driver training schools 
recommend tapping brakes when a CMV is slowing or stopping to warn 
other drivers. Intellistop stated that it is unlikely that other 
motorists would confuse the use of their module with the recommendation 
to tap brakes when a CMV is slowing or stopping.
    Twelve additional commenters supported granting the exemption. 
These commenters believe that any technology that has been shown to 
reduce rear-end crashes should be allowed and cited various benefits of 
brake activated pulsating lamps, including (1) enhanced awareness that 
the vehicle is making a stop, especially at railroad crossings, and (2) 
increased visibility in severe weather conditions. Several commenters 
noted that 37 States currently allow brake lamps to flash. In addition, 
three commenters noted that the guidelines developed by the American 
Driver and Traffic Safety Education Association advise driving 
instructors to teach new drivers to pulse brake lamps when stopping to 
improve visibility.

V. Equivalent Level of Safety Analysis

    Encore requested that FMCSA grant an exemption from 49 CFR 
393.25(e)--requiring certain exterior lamps to be

[[Page 77577]]

steady burning--to allow it to operate CMVs equipped with Intellistop's 
module. FMCSA has determined that in order for Encore to operate 
vehicles in compliance with the FMCSRs, an exemption from 49 CFR 
393.25(e) must be accompanied by limited exemptions from 49 CFR 
393.11(a) and 393.25(c), both of which mandate that required lamps on 
CMVs operated in interstate commerce must, ``at a minimum, meet the 
applicable requirements of 49 CFR 571.108 (FMVSS No. 108) in effect at 
the time of manufacture of the vehicle.'' FMCSA grants exemptions only 
when it determines ``such exemption[s] would likely achieve a level of 
safety that is equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be 
achieved absent the exemption[s].''
    Rear-end crashes generally account for approximately 30 percent of 
all crashes. They often result from a failure to respond (or delays in 
responding) to a stopped or decelerating lead vehicle. Data on crashes 
that occurred between 2010 and 2016 show that large trucks are 
consistently three times more likely than other vehicles to be struck 
in the rear in two-vehicle fatal crashes.<SUP>4 5</SUP> FMCSA is deeply 
interested in the development and deployment of technologies that can 
reduce the frequency, severity, and risk of rear-end crashes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic 
Safety Administration (2012), Traffic Safety Facts--2010 Data; Large 
Trucks, Report No. DOT HS 811 628, Washington, DC (June 2012), 
available at: https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/811628.
    \5\ U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic 
Safety Administration (2018), Traffic Safety Facts--2016 Data; Large 
Trucks, Report No. DOT HS 812 497, Washington, DC (May 2018), 
available at: https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/Publication/812497.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Both FMCSA and NHTSA have examined alternative rear-signaling 
systems to reduce the incidence of rear-end crashes. While research 
efforts concluded that improvements in the incidence of rear-end 
crashes could be realized through certain rear-lighting systems that 
flash,\6\ the FMCSRs do not currently permit the use of pulsating, 
brake-activated lamps on the rear of CMVs. FMCSA believes that the two 
agencies' previous research programs demonstrate that rear-signaling 
systems may be able to ``improve attention getting'' to reduce the 
frequency and severity of rear-end crashes. Any possible benefit must 
be balanced against a possible risk of increased driver distraction and 
confusion. In balancing these interests, the Agency was compelled to 
deny the Intellistop application for exemption because the industry-
wide scope of the request was too broad for the Agency to effectively 
monitor for the potential risk of driver distraction or confusion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Expanded Research and Development of an Enhanced Rear 
Signaling System for Commercial Motor Vehicles: Final Report, 
William A. Schaudt et al. (Apr. 2014) (Report No. FMCSA-RRT-13-009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Agency acknowledges the limitations of the research studies 
completed to date and the overall data deficiencies in this area. 
Nonetheless, as noted in its Intellistop decision, the Agency 
recognizes that existing data do suggest a potential safety value in 
the use of alternative rear-signaling systems, generally. Specifically, 
FMCSA considered NHTSA's research concerning the development and 
evaluation of rear-signaling applications designed to reduce the 
frequency and severity of rear-end crashes via enhancements to rear-
brake lighting. The study examined enhancements for (1) redirecting 
drivers' visual attention to the forward roadway (for cases involving a 
distracted driver) and (2) increasing the saliency or meaningfulness of 
the brake signal (for inattentive drivers).\7\ The research considered 
the attention-getting capability and discomfort glare of a set of 
candidate rear brake lighting configurations using driver judgments and 
eye-drawing metrics. The results of this research served to narrow the 
set of candidate lighting configurations to those that would most 
likely be carried forward for additional on-road study. Based on 
subjective participant responses, this research indicates some form of 
flashing or variation in brake light brightness may be more than two 
times more attention-getting than the baseline, steady-burning brake 
lights for distracted drivers.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See NHTSA Study--Evaluation of Enhanced Brake Lights Using 
Surrogate Safety Metrics https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/811127.pdf.
    \8\ Ibid. While data demonstrated that brighter flashing lights 
were the most attention-getting combination for distracted drivers 
in this study, flashing lights with no increase in brightness were 
still more effective at capturing a distracted driver's attention 
than the baseline steady-burning brake lamps. Both look-up (eye 
drawing) data and interview data supported the hypothesis that 
simultaneous flashing of all rear lighting combined with increased 
brightness would be effective in redirecting the driver's eyes to 
the lead vehicle when the driver is looking away with tasks that 
involve visual load.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While some of the data collected in the study may not be 
statistically significant, the study results nonetheless indicate that 
additional efforts to get drivers' attention when they are approaching 
the rear of a CMV that is stopping may be helpful to reduce driver 
distraction and, ultimately, rear-end crashes. This was among several 
reasons why researchers concluded that the promising nature of enhanced 
brake lighting systems warranted additional work and research. FMCSA 
believes the acquisition of relevant data through real-world monitoring 
is of critical importance as the Agency continues to seek new and 
innovative options for reducing crashes. This is particularly true 
given the data limitations noted in previous studies.
    Despite finding a potential safety value in the use of alternative 
rear-signaling technology, in the Intellistop decision the Agency 
determined that the data presently available did not justify an 
exemption to allow all interstate motor carriers to alter the 
performance of an FMVSS-required lighting device (i.e., stop lamps) on 
any CMV. In contrast, however, Encore's application requests an 
exemption from the steady-burning brake lamp requirement for CMV 
operations by only one interstate motor carrier. As FMCSA noted in its 
denial of Intellistop's industry-wide exemption application, individual 
motor carrier exemption requests more closely align with FMCSA and 
NHTSA authorities to ensure compliance with all other applicable 
regulations and with the safety performance of the smaller population 
of affected motor carriers. With an individual motor carrier exemption, 
the Agency can also more easily monitor compliance with terms and 
conditions intended to ensure operations conducted under the exemption 
do in fact provide an equivalent level of safety. Encore's application 
demonstrates why this is particularly true, since the vehicles operated 
by Encore under the exemption would be easily identifiable, and 
compliance with NHTSA's ``make inoperative'' prohibition and other 
related regulations could be readily checked.
    The Agency's decision to grant this exemption is based on the data 
suggesting enhanced rear signal systems, such as pulsing brake lights, 
may help reduce the frequency and severity of rear-end crashes, as well 
as on the limited number of vehicles operating under the exemption. 
Encore currently operates a nationwide fleet of approximately 223 
vehicles. The installation of the module on CMVs operated by a single 
motor carrier provides the opportunity for the Agency to collect data 
on the effects of pulsing brake lights in real-world conditions. The 
terms and conditions FMCSA imposes through this exemption will ensure 
appropriate Federal oversight in the use of these devices on a finite 
number of CMVs utilizing a phased-in approach.

[[Page 77578]]

    Initially restricting the application of this exemption to a 
limited portion of Encore's fleet will allow for a comparison between 
the crash involvement of Encore CMVs equipped with the Intellistop 
device, those without the device, and the overall crash involvement of 
CMVs operated by similarly sized motor carriers with similar operations 
and overall safety performance. Data collected through this exemption 
and any other similar exemptions the Agency may grant in the future 
will allow for an evaluation of how the Intellistop module may improve 
following-vehicle driver responses to CMV braking. Consideration of the 
scope of any particular carrier's operation and the number and types of 
vehicles the carrier operates are critical to ensuring FMCSA gathers 
the most relevant data as the Agency considers safety benefits gained 
by the deployment of these rear brake lamp systems in CMV operations. 
The Agency's incremental approach in granting this limited exemption 
will also allow FMCSA to investigate and respond as appropriate to any 
incidents of alleged driver confusion attributable to use of the brake 
lamp systems in CMV operations, which some commenters have raised as a 
potential concern.
    FMCSA acknowledges that, until recently, all pulsating rear lamp 
exemptions the Agency granted involved the addition of non-mandatory 
auxiliary lights while the Intellistop module that Encore seeks to 
install alters the functionality of original equipment manufacturers' 
lamps. Nonetheless, those previous exemptions are instructive, most 
notably Groendyke. The Groendyke exemption involved auxiliary lamps 
rather than required lighting, but, like the Intellistop module, the 
modulation of the auxiliary lamps in the Groendyke exemption occurs 
during braking. More importantly, Groendyke also involved a technology 
installed on a number of one carrier's CMVs, which allowed the Agency 
more realistically to monitor the exemptee's compliance with other 
applicable regulations. When granting the exemption, FMCSA found 
Groendyke's experience with brake-activated pulsating warning lamps, 
which resulted in a 33.7 percent reduction in rear-end crashes, to be 
compelling. Through the granting of the Groendyke exemption, the Agency 
was able to collect additional real-world data about the operation of 
the module at issue. Similarly, limited exemptions with narrowly 
tailored terms and conditions permitting the use of the Intellistop 
module will allow the Agency to collect data about the reliability and 
safety benefits of an integrated alternative rear-signaling system.
    FMCSA notes that Encore failed to provide any evidence beyond what 
is publicly available about the integration of the Intellistop module 
with its CMVs' existing systems or to support the claim that a 
malfunction of the device would result in the brake lights returning to 
OEM functionality. Nonetheless, based on the Agency's understanding of 
the device's design and assertions made in publicly available 
materials, FMCSA believes concerns about both the reliability and 
integration of the device are sufficiently alleviated in this instance 
because of the narrow scope of the exemption and the stringent 
requirements imposed by the Agency in the terms and conditions. Any 
evidence that module failure results in anything less than a return to 
brake light OEM functionality will result in revocation of the 
exemption.
    Likewise, granting this exemption to an easily identifiable carrier 
alleviates concerns the Agency previously articulated about its 
inability to monitor compliance with NHTSA's ``make inoperative'' 
prohibition. FMCSA can monitor compliance with this exemption and 
ensure that only Encore installs the module on its own CMVs.
    Notwithstanding the promise the Agency sees in this technology, 
exemptions are warranted only if the applicant can demonstrate that an 
equivalent level of safety likely will be maintained. For this reason, 
the Agency believes it is important to consider the safety record of 
the applicant motor carrier. The Agency carefully considered Encore's 
existing on-road safety performance record prior to granting this 
exemption. While Encore's out-of-service (OOS) rate exceeds the 
national average, with a vehicle out-of-service (VOOS) rate of 33.3 
percent (national average--21.4 percent), FMCSA believes this to be a 
statistical aberration based on a small sample size. Encore's 
relatively small fleet had few inspections during the sampling period. 
Thus, Encore's VOOS rate scored abnormally high. When compared to their 
VOOS when Encore initially applied (66.6%), it is clear that one or two 
inspections of the small fleet are affecting their VOOS rate. In 
addition, Encore had no driver OOS incidents (national average 6 
percent) and no hazardous materials OOS incidents (national average 4.5 
percent). Encore maintains a Satisfactory safety rating.
    FMCSA has authority to grant temporary exemptions to the FMCSRs 
only to motor carriers and not to CMV manufacturers or vehicle 
alterers. FMCSA acknowledges that the research described above did not 
fully address all of the implications of allowing pulsating stop lamps, 
especially by automobiles where stop lamp design is stylized and often 
brand-specific, and that it remains unclear whether deviation from the 
uniform brake-light patterns of CMVs may cause confusion among highway 
users when the lamps are pulsated during braking. When Intellistop 
sought an industry-wide exemption, FMCSA concluded that the potential 
risks of widespread adoption outweighed the potential benefits. But 
FMCSA reaches a different conclusion here, where any risks will be more 
limited and easier to monitor. FMCSA notes, moreover, that the research 
suggests that the use of rear-signaling systems may be a means to 
reduce the frequency and severity of rear-end crashes involving CMVs, 
as do the reductions in rear-end crashes reported by Groendyke (84 FR 
17910, April 26, 2019) utilizing an auxiliary flashing rear-signaling 
system. These facts and the specific safety record of the applicant 
motor carrier support the conclusion that permitting the use of 
Intellistop's pulsating-lamp module among a limited and known 
population of vehicles of a single motor carrier, subject to terms and 
conditions for monitoring, is likely to achieve a level of safety that 
is equivalent to, or greater than, the level of safety achieved without 
the exemption.

VI. Exemption Decision

a. Grant of Exemption

    FMCSA has evaluated Encore's exemption application and the comments 
received. The Agency believes that granting a temporary exemption to 
section 393.25(e), and temporary limited exemptions to the requirements 
of 49 CFR 393.11(a) and 393.25(c) to allow Encore to operate a limited 
number of CMVs equipped with Intellistop's pulsating-brake module will 
likely achieve a level of safety that is equivalent to, or greater 
than, the level of safety achieved without the exemption.
    This exemption is restricted to vehicles in Encore's fleet and 
provides relief from the steady burning requirement for rear clearance, 
identification, and brake lamp activation for 2 seconds following brake 
activation. All other FMVSS No. 108 requirements cross-referenced or 
incorporated within the FMCSRs remain in effect, with a limited 
exception to the requirement exempted here in sections 393.11(a) and 
393.25(c) for only the first two seconds of brake engagement. In

[[Page 77579]]

addition, through the terms and conditions, FMCSA will be able to 
monitor to performance of these CMVs to determine whether they were 
involved in a crash and whether they appear to be overrepresented in 
crashes compared to a control group (Encore vehicles that are not 
equipped with the Intellistop unit but are operating on similar routes 
with similar schedules, etc.).
    The Agency has evaluated the application and hereby grants the 
exemption for a 5-year period, beginning September 23, 2024 and ending 
September 24, 2029. During the temporary exemption period, Encore 
(Applicant) may operate CMVs, equipped with Intellistop's module that 
pulses the rear brake, clearance, and identification lamps from a 
lower-level lighting intensity to a higher-level lighting intensity 4 
times in 2 seconds. This grant applies only to the ``steady-burning'' 
requirement as specified in FMVSS 108 S7.3, and Tables I-a, I-b, and I-
c. All other photometric and requirements for stop lamps specified in 
FMVSS 108 must still be met.

b. Terms and Conditions of the Exemption

    (i). Installation of the Intellistop module. The Applicant is 
responsible for installing the Intellistop module. This exemption 
applies only to CMVs owned and operated by the Applicant. THE PRODUCT 
MUST BE INSTALLED ONLY BY THE OWNER OF THE VEHICLE. IN ACCORDANCE WITH 
FEDERAL LAW (49 U.S.C. 30112(a)(1) AND 49 U.S.C. 30122), THE PRODUCT 
MAY NOT BE INSTALLED BY ANY MANUFACTURER, DISTRIBUTOR, DEALER, RENTAL 
COMPANY, OR MOTOR VEHICLE REPAIR BUSINESS.
    The Applicant may not install the Intellistop module on more than 
50% of its power units, and 50% of its trailers during the first year 
of operation under the exemption. The Applicant shall provide the 
vehicle identification numbers for the power units and trailers that 
will be operating under the exemption.
    The Applicant must maintain a control group of equal size to the 
group of power units and trailers equipped with the Intellistop unit 
during the first year of the exemption. And the CMVs in the control 
group must operate on routes with schedules that are similar to those 
of the Intellistop-equipped vehicles.
    Installed modules may be used only to modulate rear clearance, 
identification, and stop lamps.
    Within 30 business days of its first installation of the 
Intellistop module, the Applicant must notify the Agency via email at 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#92dfd1c2c1c4d2f6fde6bcf5fde4"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="165b554645405672796238717960">[email protected]</span></a> of the number and type of CMVs it is operating, or 
intends to operate, with the Intellistop module installed; the module 
type and/or sub-type; and any trouble-shooting, repair, or other use of 
an Intellistop module covered by this exemption. Amended installation 
information, including CMVs on which the device is installed or 
uninstalled, may then be submitted via the quarterly submission 
specified in sub-paragraph (iv) Recurring Reporting Requirements below.
    If the Applicant sells or transfers ownership of any CMV equipped 
with an Intellistop module under this exemption, or if the exemption is 
terminated for any reason, the Applicant must remove the module and 
restore the CMV to full compliance with the FMCSRs and FMVSSs prior to 
the transfer of ownership, or upon termination of the exemption. The 
Applicant must also certify in writing to the purchaser/transferee and 
FMCSA that the CMV has been restored to compliance with the FMCSRs and 
FMVSSs.
    (ii). Driver Pre-Trip Vehicle Inspections. The Applicant must 
ensure that each driver of an Intellistop-equipped CMV performs a pre-
trip inspection to confirm that the Intellistop module operates only 
for 2 seconds and does not interfere with the normal operation of lamps 
after 2 seconds. If the lamps are not steady burning after 2 seconds, 
the CMV must not be dispatched until repairs are made. At the end of 
each work shift, drivers must note any problems observed by or reported 
to them concerning the Intellistop module on a driver vehicle 
inspection report (see 49 CFR 396.11), and the motor carrier must 
correct the problem before the vehicle is dispatched again.
    (iii). Safety Notification to FMCSA. The Applicant must notify 
FMCSA within 5 business days after it becomes aware, or otherwise 
determines, that the continued use of a module or entire type or 
subtype of module covered by this exemption is no longer likely to 
maintain a level of safety that is at least equivalent to the level 
that would be achieved absent this exemption. Notification must be made 
by sending an email to FMCSA at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#7a37392a293e3a1e150e541d150c"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="7d303e2d2e393d191209531a120b">[email protected]</span></a>.
    (iv). Recurring Reporting Requirements. During the exemption 
period, the Applicant must provide quarterly submissions to FMCSA of 
the data described below. The Applicant's first quarterly submission is 
due on December 23, 2024, and thereafter will be due every 3 months, on 
the first business day of the month. The first quarterly submission 
must include the required data beginning 60 days prior to the date of 
module installation. All quarterly submissions must include data 
through at least the 14th day (inclusive) of the month immediately 
preceding the submission. Unless otherwise agreed to by FMCSA, 
quarterly submissions must be sent via email to FMCSA at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#fbb6b8aba8bfbb9f948fd59c948d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="cb86889b988f8bafa4bfe5aca4bd">[email protected]</span></a>. 
If the Applicant does not have one or more categories of information 
described below, it must, within 20 days of the effective date of this 
exemption, discuss with FMCSA other available information. If the 
Agency accepts such alternative information, the Applicant must submit 
that data in lieu of the information specified below.
    In the quarterly submission, the Applicant must provide FMCSA the 
following information known to the Applicant regarding all crashes and 
other incidents (``crash or incident'') involving a CMV equipped with 
an Intellistop module covered by this exemption where the Intellistop 
module is potentially implicated. Crashes involving a CMV equipped with 
an Intellistop module that are ``head-on'' or otherwise involve only 
the front of the Intellistop-equipped CMV impacting some other object 
(such that the Intellistop module, without question, could not be 
implicated) are not subject to this condition. For the first quarterly 
submission, data must include any crash or incident occurring in the 60 
days prior to installation of the Intellistop module that would have 
been contained in this reporting category had the module been installed 
at the time of the crash or incident. The Applicant's knowledge 
includes, but is not limited to: (1) outreach from a consumer, lawyer, 
or any other person or organization (via letter, email, fax, telephone 
call, social media, or any other medium); (2) lawsuits to which the 
Applicant is a party, or otherwise knows exist where an Intellistop 
module covered by this exemption is an issue in the litigation; and (3) 
insurance claims against the Applicant related to use of the 
Intellistop module. When in the Applicant's possession, information 
provided to FMCSA shall include:
    1. The date of first contact regarding, or the Applicant's first 
awareness of, the crash or incident;
    2. The date of the most recent follow-up contact, if any, between 
the Applicant and the other party;
    3. The date, time, and location of the crash or incident;
    4. A brief description of the crash or incident; and

[[Page 77580]]

    5. The Intellistop module type and/or subtype(s) involved in the 
crash or incident.
    6. Information, if any, indicating that the Intellistop module is, 
or was, not working as intended, or caused confusion or a roadway 
hazard for either the consumer or other motorists.
    Annual data. At the end of each 12-month period this exemption is 
in effect, the Applicant shall, within 60 days, submit a report 
detailing all information in its possession regarding crash rates and 
vehicle miles traveled by CMVs equipped with a module covered by this 
exemption. Additionally, the report shall specify the number and type 
of CMVs the Applicant is operating under the exemption, the module type 
or sub-type installed on each CMV, the affected lamps (rear clearance, 
identification, and/or brake lamps), the number of covered vehicles 
sold or transferred in ownership during the 12-month reporting period, 
and a statement certifying that any sold/transferred vehicle(s) have 
been restored to compliance with applicable FMVSSs and FMCSRs.
    Meetings. The Applicant shall, at FMCSA's request, meet with FMCSA 
to answer questions regarding data and information provided by the 
Applicant under this exemption.
    (v). Early Termination. The exemption is valid for 5 years from the 
date of issuance unless rescinded earlier by FMCSA. FMCSA will 
terminate the exemption if: (1) the Applicant fails to comply with the 
terms and conditions; (2) the exemption results 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).
    (vi). Notification from the Public. Interested parties possessing 
information that would demonstrate that Encore's CMVs equipped with 
Intellistop's pulsating rear-light module may not be achieving the 
requisite statutory level of 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.
    (vii). Non-Endorsement. This limited and conditional exemption does 
not constitute an endorsement of the Intellistop product by FMCSA, 
NHTSA, the U.S. DOT, or any of their components, or by any of these 
agencies' employees or agents. As a condition of the continued 
effectiveness of this exemption, Intellistop is expressly prohibited 
from describing its product as approved by, endorsed by, or otherwise 
authorized by FMCSA, NHTSA, or U.S. DOT, or as compliant with Federal 
safety regulations.

VII. Preemption

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315(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. States may, but 
are not required to, adopt the same exemption with respect to 
operations in intrastate commerce.

Vincent G. White,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2024-21681 Filed 9-20-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>