[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 107 (Thursday, June 4, 1998)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30449-30453]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-14832]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. NHTSA-98-3881; Notice 01]
RIN 2127-AH21


Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Transmission Shift Lever 
Sequence, Starter Interlock, and Transmission Braking Effect

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 
Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: NHTSA is considering whether to issue a proposal to amend the 
Federal motor vehicle safety standard on transmission shift lever 
sequence to add requirements for vehicles without conventional 
mechanical transmission shift levers. This is in response to a petition 
received from BMW of North America, Inc. (BMW). BMW has been exploring 
the possibility of producing vehicles with electronically-controlled 
transmissions that do not use the conventional mechanical lever that, 
when engaged, places the transmission in the desired gear. Rather than 
conventional shift levers, these systems would employ shift mechanisms 
such as a rotary switch, keypad, touch screen, joystick, voice 
activation, or some other method. Some of these designs, however, do 
not comply with requirements in Standard No. 102.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 2, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Comments must refer to the docket and notice numbers cited 
at the beginning of this notice and be submitted to: Docket Management, 
Room PL-401, 400 Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC 20590. It is 
requested, but not required, that two copies of the comments be 
provided. The Docket Section is open on weekdays from 10:00 a.m. to 5 
p.m.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For non-legal issues: Mr. Chris 
Flanigan, Office of Safety Performance Standards, NHTSA, 400 Seventh 
Street, SW, Washington, DC 20590. Mr. Flanigan's telephone number is 
(202) 366-4918 and his facsimile number is (202) 366-4329.
    For legal issues: Ms. Dorothy Nakama, Rulemaking Division, Office 
of Chief Counsel, NHTSA, 400 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC 20590. 
Ms. Nakama's telephone number is (202)

[[Page 30450]]

366-2992 and her facsimile number is (202) 366-3820.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background of Standard No. 102

    Standard No. 102's purpose is to reduce deaths and injuries 
resulting from misshifting. Since 1968, the standard has ensured 
against misshifting by specifying the sequence in which gears for 
automatic transmissions must be selected. Paragraph S3.1.1 of the 
standard, ``Location of transmission shift lever positions on passenger 
cars,'' requires that ``[a] neutral position shall be located between 
forward drive and reverse drive positions. If a steering-column-mounted 
transmission shift lever is used, movement from neutral position to 
forward drive position shall be clockwise. If the transmission shift 
lever sequence includes a park position, it shall be located at the 
end, adjacent to the reverse drive position.'' That is, the gear 
selection is required to be in the park, reverse, neutral, drive, and 
low (PRNDL) sequence.
    Under these requirements, the driver must shift serially to get 
from one position to another. For instance, if a vehicle is in park, to 
get to drive, the driver must move the shift lever serially through two 
positions: reverse, neutral, and then to drive. Moreover, with the 
neutral position required to be between reverse and drive, this further 
ensures that no mistakes in selection will be made. The neutral 
position provides a buffer zone between forward and reverse. Therefore, 
if there was a mistake in shifting, it is more than likely that the 
vehicle would end up in neutral instead of drive or reverse.
    The main type of misshifting the standard seeks to prevent is when 
a driver initiates forward or rearward motion from a standstill. For 
example, if a driver intends to leave a parking space by placing a 
vehicle in reverse and accidentally places the vehicle in drive, there 
is a potential for pedestrians or other vehicles to be struck. Because 
of the required shift lever sequence, it becomes less likely due to the 
standardized sequence of gear positions a driver must always follow to 
get to the desired gear. Further, the vast majority of gear changes are 
performed while the vehicle is not in motion.

BMW's Petition

    BMW petitioned the agency to amend Standard No. 102 on November 19, 
1997. As stated above, it is considering manufacturing electronically-
controlled transmissions that would not use the conventional mechanical 
shift lever as current vehicles with both electronically-controlled and 
mechanically-controlled transmissions do. The systems could use 
unconventional methods of initiating shift changes (rotary switches, 
keypads, touch screens, joysticks, voice activation, or other methods). 
For a mechanically-controlled transmission, a shift lever is moved, 
which activates a linkage or cable that positions the transmission's 
linkage in the desired gear. When the shift mechanism on an 
electronically controlled system is moved, it sends an electric signal 
to a control on the transmission to place the transmission in the 
desired gear.
    Standard No. 102 establishes four primary requirements for vehicles 
with automatic transmissions. First, it specifies a shift lever 
sequence for automatic transmissions and requires a neutral position to 
be located between forward drive and reverse drive positions. Second, 
it requires a transmission braking effect for vehicles having more than 
one forward transmission gear ratio. Third, it requires that the engine 
starter be inoperative when the transmission is in a forward or reverse 
drive position. Fourth, it requires that, for shift lever sequences 
with a park position, identification of shift lever positions shall be 
displayed in view of the driver.
    BMW stated in its petition that the requirements to provide a 
transmission braking effect and a starter interlock when the 
transmission is in a forward or reverse drive position do not pose any 
problems for their newer design. Thus, the focus of BMW's petition and 
this request for comments is on the first and fourth requirements 
identified above--the shift lever sequence for automatic transmissions 
and the requirement that the shift lever sequence be displayed in view 
of the driver.
    With respect to the shift lever sequence, BMW indicated that future 
shifting designs, especially joysticks, could move along two axes, 
instead of the single axis associated with conventional shift levers. 
That is, instead of moving around the steering column or forward and 
backward like conventional shift levers, joysticks and keypads shift by 
moving forward and backward and left and right. Adding this second axis 
of movement would make compliance with the shift lever sequence 
requirement and the requirement to display the shift lever sequence, in 
the words of BMW's petition, ``inappropriate, impracticable, and 
sometimes impossible.''
    BMW also believes that because the shift lever sequence 
requirements refer to shift ``levers,'' Standard No. 102 would not 
apply to shifting mechanisms that do not employ a mechanical lever. It 
asserts that the standard was based on mechanical shift levers and its 
requirements were written to endorse the then-current industry practice 
of using a shift lever even though other means of gear selection (e.g., 
push buttons) had existed in the past and could likely be reintroduced 
in the future. It states that, ``to avoid `out-lawing' such other 
designs, the wording in these requirements was intentionally chosen to 
clearly apply only to transmissions with mechanical shift levers.''
    BMW asked that three requirements be added to Standard No. 102 that 
relate to systems without mechanical transmission levers. Its suggested 
regulatory text is as follows:
    S3.1.5  Systems without mechanical transmission levers.
    S3.1.5.1  The engine starter shall be inoperative whenever a 
forward or reverse drive gear is engaged.
    S3.1.5.2  Each transmission gear available for selection, how each 
available transmission gear can be selected, and which gear has been 
selected shall be displayed in view of the driver whenever any of the 
following conditions exist:
    (a) The ignition is in a position where the transmission can be 
shifted.
    (b) The transmission is not in park.
    S3.1.5.3  Each system shall prohibit the following:
    (a) shifting from drive to reverse and from reverse to drive at any 
speed above five kilometers per hour (km/h) (3.1 miles per hour (mph)).
    (b) shifting into park from any gear at any speed above three km/h 
(1.9 mph).
    NHTSA welcomes this petition to reexamine whether there is a 
continuing need for the shift lever sequence in Standard No. 102. This 
was one of the original safety standards which took effect on January 
1, 1968. The agency believes it is useful to consider carefully in 1998 
whether the changes over the past 30 years have eliminated the need for 
the shift lever sequence requirement, or whether that requirement is 
now imposing a needless burden on new technologies. To facilitate this 
review, NHTSA has carefully looked at the purpose of the shift lever 
sequence. The agency would now like to have a public dialogue to gather 
additional information and opinions about whether the shift lever 
sequence requirements in Standard No. 102 impose unforeseen design 
burdens on manufacturers' efforts to use new technologies and whether 
there is a continuing safety benefit for the public from the shift 
lever sequence requirements.

[[Page 30451]]

Standard No. 102's Applicability

    Although the standard mentions only shift ``levers,'' the agency's 
intention was not to have the standard apply only to systems with 
mechanical levers such as BMW asserts. The standard specifies shift 
levers because they were the conventional type of shift mechanism at 
the time the standard was established in the late 1960's. The agency's 
intent was to reduce the likelihood of shifting errors by standardizing 
the shift lever sequence. As with other standards, the agency's goal is 
not to limit innovations in vehicular systems by establishing 
requirements or to establish design restrictive requirements unless 
that is necessary for establishing the required safety goal.
    For example, Standard No. 124, Accelerator control systems, was 
written with respect to mechanical accelerator control systems. This is 
because at the time Standard No. 124 was established, the only type of 
accelerator controls that existed were of a mechanical type. When 
promulgated, the definitions and requirements were easy to understand 
and apply because their language was strongly influenced by the design 
of mechanical systems. However, with the advent of electronic 
accelerator control systems, it did not mean that the standard did not 
apply to them. In the case of Standard No. 124, the purpose was to 
provide a means for reducing deaths and injuries resulting from a loss 
of control of a moving vehicle's engine, due to malfunctions in the 
accelerator control system. That is, the system should return a 
vehicle's throttle to the idle position if the driver removes the 
actuating force (removes foot from accelerator pedal or disengages 
cruise control) and when there is a severance or disconnection in the 
system. This can be accomplished whether the system is electronic or 
mechanical.
    The same is true for Standard No. 102. The standard does not 
differentiate between whether a transmission is mechanically- or 
electronically-controlled. There are a number of vehicles on the market 
today that have electronically-controlled transmissions that employ 
conventional mechanical shift levers to which the standard applies. The 
sequence and mechanism of gear selection is the issue at hand and 
whether this means should remain standardized as is, or whether other 
aspects need to be standardized. Further, if the agency determines that 
the existing standardization is no longer appropriate and amends the 
standard to accommodate other types of shift mechanisms, a decision 
needs to be made as to what other requirements, if any, need to be 
established to maintain the level of safety that has existed with the 
current requirements for the last thirty years.

Discussion of Issues

Shift Lever Sequence

    Having these requirements in place for over thirty years has 
ingrained them in the minds of the vast majority of drivers. Because of 
the familiarity with the required gear positions, it is not uncommon 
for a driver of a vehicle with an automatic transmission to shift into 
a desired gear without looking at the shift lever or display. The 
universality of these controls allows this behavior without necessarily 
degrading motor vehicle safety. Drivers know where certain gear 
positions are in relation to the others. As stated above, to get from 
the park position to the drive position, a driver would move the 
control in a clockwise or rearward, serial sequence to go through the 
reverse and neutral positions. However, if shift levers were allowed to 
be significantly different as in some of the designs BMW has outlined, 
it is possible that a significant amount of misshifting would occur.
    Other than the rotary switch, the shift mechanisms that BMW has 
outlined would allow non-serial selection of gears. Shift mechanisms 
such as joysticks, push buttons, keypads, and touch screens would allow 
the driver to shift from gear to gear in any sequence. For example, if 
a vehicle is equipped with push buttons, a keypad, or a touch screen 
for gear selection, the driver would simply depress a button or touch a 
screen at the position for the desired gear, regardless of the 
currently selected gear position. Therefore, one could change gears in 
any sequence. Regarding the joystick design, the driver must move a 
mechanical lever from its center position either up for drive, down for 
reverse, left for park, or right for neutral. After the lever is moved 
toward the desired gear selection, it returns back to its center 
position.
    Some of the systems BMW mentioned could theoretically be changed so 
that they comply with the standard. For systems employing push button, 
keypad, or touch screen shift mechanisms, it is possible to envision a 
series of interlocking buttons or touch screen positions which would 
operate only in a specific serial sequence. That is, to place the 
vehicle in drive from park, first one would have to push the reverse 
button, neutral button, and the drive button in sequence. While we 
believe this would meet the standard, we understand it is unlikely a 
manufacturer would opt for such a cumbersome shift mechanism.
    These non-serial methods of shifting could increase the likelihood 
of misshifting. In situations where the vehicle is being operated at 
night or if the driver's attention is focused on a more critical area, 
the driver may change gears without looking at the shift lever or 
display. Some drivers may shift gears without looking for no other 
reason than their familiarity with the system. Because the gear 
positions could be selected randomly in most of the systems BMW has 
outlined, not looking at the shift mechanism or display when shifting 
would allow less room for error than with conventional systems.
    Another scenario which could increase the likelihood of misshifting 
is when a driver is operating a rental car. In this situation, the 
driver may not be familiar with the vehicle's controls and displays. If 
the driver was not accustomed to an unconventional shift mechanism, 
misshifting could occur. Also, the agency has received numerous letters 
regarding confusion with the placement of controls and displays on 
rental cars. These letters express some of the public's frustration 
with the lack in standardization of placement of controls and displays. 
Allowing unconventional shift mechanisms could add to already existing 
confusion among some drivers.
    One possible method to lessen the likelihood of misshifting is to 
require that the brake pedal be depressed to initiate a change in 
gears. In this case, the only gear changes that could be made without 
depressing the brake would be when switching between drive and the 
lower forward gears. This may eliminate many potential problems with 
drivers not looking at the shift mechanisms while changing gears. Even 
if a driver did not look at the shift mechanism or display while 
changing gears, after completing this action while the brake pedal is 
depressed, the driver would feel a vehicle ``tug'' towards the selected 
gear's direction. Therefore, if a driver intended to place the 
transmission in the drive position and the vehicle tugged in the 
reverse direction, the driver probably would immediately know a mistake 
had been made. Further, it could eliminate potential problems with 
voice activated systems. Saying key words such as ``drive'' or 
``reverse'' would not change the gear without the driver depressing the 
brake and thus being in control of the vehicle. Brake pedal application 
while shifting might, however, be problematic under certain driving

[[Page 30452]]

conditions such as rocking a vehicle stuck in snow.
    BMW briefly mentions voice activated gear selection in its 
petition. There would be a multitude of safety issues if these systems 
were used. For example, if some of the activating words were used in 
conversation while driving, an undesired shift could take place. Also, 
if someone were to shout out a command outside of a parked, idling 
vehicle, the transmission could be shifted into a forward or reverse 
gear which would cause the vehicle to move. BMW did not suggest any 
requirements to forestall such an event.
    BMW did describe a non-lever shift mechanism that would meet the 
current requirements of the standard. The rotary switch would be 
acceptable because the driver would have to turn a dial-like mechanism 
through the PRNDL sequence to get to the desired gear. To get the 
transmission into the drive position, one would have to turn the rotary 
switch through the reverse and neutral positions. This serial selection 
of gears would allow the driver to shift through the standardized gear 
sequence.
    As stated above, the type of misshifting that the standard seeks to 
prevent is when a vehicle is at a standstill. BMW suggests requirements 
to deter shifting while the vehicle is in motion. The requirements that 
BMW suggests appear to center mainly on the protection of the 
transmission. However, BMW's suggested requirements do not appear to 
address how misshifting could be prevented if the vehicle is not in 
motion, the main purpose of the standard.

Display of Shift Lever Sequence

    Standard No. 102 also specifies requirements for the display of the 
shift lever sequence. It requires that identification of the shift 
lever positions including the positions in relation to each other and 
the position selected be displayed in view of the driver when either 
the ignition is in a position where the transmission can be shifted or 
when the transmission is not in the park position. If the vehicle does 
not have a park position, identification of the shift lever positions, 
including the positions in relation to each other and the position 
selected, shall be displayed in view of the driver whenever the 
ignition is in a position in which the engine is capable of operation. 
The purpose of these requirements is to ensure that the vehicle 
operator is aware of which gear has been selected as well as its 
relation to the other shift positions. This reduces the likelihood of 
misshifting.
    BMW stated in its petition that, because of the physical nature of 
future transmissions, meeting the aforementioned display requirements 
could be ``inappropriate, impracticable, and sometimes impossible.'' 
BMW does not elaborate further on why the display requirements would be 
difficult to comply with. However, BMW believes the future transmission 
designs can satisfy the standard's intended purpose: to reduce the 
likelihood of shifting errors.
    As stated previously, the shift lever requirements in the standard 
have been around for 30 years. Drivers are accustomed to the 
requirements for the display of the shift lever sequence. The agency 
believes that, if the currently-required display was changed, drivers 
could become confused. This could lead to them making a mistake in 
selecting the desired gear. Further, this problem could be exacerbated 
in rental cars where the driver is not familiar with the controls and 
displays.

Starter Interlock

    Paragraph S3.1.3 of the standard states that ``[t]he engine starter 
shall be inoperative when the transmission shift lever is in a forward 
or reverse drive position'' (emphasis added). Because the purpose of 
this notice is to seek comments on permitting other types of shift 
mechanisms, some of which are not considered shift ``levers,'' the 
agency would like to clarify that our intention is not to remove the 
requirement for a starter interlock on vehicles which do not have shift 
lever. If some type of shift mechanism other than a shift lever, such 
as a rotary switch, is permitted, the starter interlock requirements 
would have to be amended to incorporate this change.

Questions for Comment

    In determining the merits of BMW's petition and discussion of the 
issues, the comments should not focus on the type of transmission that 
is involved, i.e., whether it is electronically- or mechanically-
controlled. This is irrelevant because it does not affect the ability 
to comply with the standard. There are compliant vehicles on the road 
today which have both types of transmissions. The issue we are 
interested in receiving comments on is the effect on motor vehicle 
safety of a change in standardization of the shift lever sequence 
(PRNDL) to a non-serial type of gear selection.
    1. Should Standard No. 102 be amended to permit transmission shift 
mechanisms which allow changing gears in a non-serial manner, e.g., 
keypads, touch screens, push buttons, voice activation, etc.? If these 
non-serial shift mechanisms were allowed, what types of restrictions, 
if any, should be placed on them to reduce the likelihood of 
misshifting? Please be specific.
    2. Should the standard specify maximum speeds at which the 
transmission can be shifted, (except when switching between drive and 
lower forward gears) presuming that additional safety concerns exist 
that could be resolved by preventing shifting while a vehicle is in 
motion? If so, are the maximum speeds and the vehicle conditions that 
BMW has suggested in its petition appropriate? If not, what speeds and 
conditions would be appropriate?
    3. Should there be a requirement that the brake pedal be depressed, 
or any other action, to achieve a failsafe condition to occur in order 
to initiate a change in gears (except when switching between drive and 
lower forward gears)?
    4. If non-serial shift mechanisms were allowed, how should the 
display requirements be altered to accommodate them?
    5. Although BMW did not raise any issues regarding transmission 
braking effect, the agency would like to get comments on this 
requirement. The standard states that ``[i]n vehicles having more than 
one forward transmission gear ratio, one forward drive position shall 
provide a greater degree of engine braking than the highest speed 
transmission ratio at vehicle speeds below 40 kilometers per hour.'' 
The only way the standard permits this requirement to be met is through 
the transmission braking effect. Should the requirement be less 
specific by allowing other means of slowing down the vehicle when the 
transmission is shifted into a lower forward gear? This could be 
accomplished when downshifting the transmission by controlling the 
vehicle's brake system via a traction control system, using a drive 
line retarder, using regenerative braking, or some other method.

Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    This request for comment was not reviewed under Executive Order 
12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review). NHTSA has analyzed the impact 
of this request for comment and determined that it is not 
``significant'' within the meaning of the Department of 
Transportation's regulatory policies and procedures. The agency 
anticipates if a proposal and ultimately a final rule should result 
from this request for comment, new requirements would not be imposed on 
manufacturers with respect to currently regulated systems.

[[Page 30453]]

The request for comment seeks to determine whether shift mechanisms 
that employ a non-serial method of gear selection would degrade safety, 
and if so, could the standard be amended so as to allow for their safe 
inclusion in motor vehicles. If NHTSA decides to initiate rulemaking, 
it is NHTSA's intent that the rulemaking not impose any additional 
costs.

Procedures for Filing Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments on this request 
for comment. It is requested but not required that two copies be 
submitted.
    All comments must not exceed 15 pages in length. (49 CFR 553.21). 
Necessary attachments may be appended to these submissions without 
regard to the 15-page limit. This limitation is intended to encourage 
commenters to detail their primary arguments in a concise fashion.
    If a commenter wishes to submit certain information under a claim 
of confidentiality, three copies of the complete submission, including 
purportedly confidential business information, should be submitted to 
the Docket Section. A request for confidentiality should be accompanied 
by a cover letter setting forth the information specified in the 
agency's confidential information regulation. 49 CFR part 512.
    All comments received before the close of business on the comment 
closing date indicated above for the proposal will be considered, and 
will be available for examination in the docket at the above address 
both before and after that date. To the extent possible, comments filed 
after the closing date will also be considered. Comments received after 
the comment due date will be considered as suggestions for any future 
rulemaking action. Comments on the request for comment will be 
available for inspection in the docket. NHTSA will continue to file 
relevant information as it becomes available in the docket after the 
closing date, and it is recommended that interested persons continue to 
examine the docket for new material.
    Those persons desiring to be notified upon receipt of their 
comments in the rules docket should enclose a self-addressed, stamped 
postcard in the envelope with their comments. Upon receiving the 
comments, the docket supervisor will return the postcard by mail.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117, and 30166; 
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.

    Issued on: May 29, 1998.
L. Robert Shelton,
Associate Administrator for Safety Performance Standards.
[FR Doc. 98-14832 Filed 6-3-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P