Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 101 / Thursday, May 25, 1995 / Proposed Rules 27711

1The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations

(FMCSR) issued by the Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA) specify that ‘‘Adjustable

axle assemblies shall not have locking pins missing

or disengaged.’’ 49 CFR 393.207.

recordkeeping requirements subject to

the Paperwork Reduction Act.

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 1803,

1815 and 1852

Government procurement.

Deidre A. Lee,

Associate Administrator for Procurement.

Accordingly, 48 CFR Parts 1803, 1815

and 1852 are proposed to be amended

as follows:

PART 1803—IMPROPER BUSINESS

PRACTICES AND PERSONAL

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

1. The authority citation for 48 CFR

Parts 1803, 1815 and 1852 continue to

read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 2473(c)(1).

2. In section 1803.104–5, the

introductory text of paragraph (c) is

revised and paragraph (c)(11) is added

to read as follows:

1803.104–5 Disclosure, protection, and

marking of proprietary and source selection

information.

* * * * *

(c) Government employees serving in

the following positions are authorized

access to proprietary or source selection

information, but only to the extent

necessary to perform their official

duties:

* * * * *

(11) Duly designated ombudsman.

* * * * *

PART 1815—CONTRACTING BY

NEGOTIATION

3. Subpart 1815.70 is added to read as

follows:

Subpart 1815.70—Ombudsman

1815.7001 NASA Ombudsman Program.

1815.7002 Commerce Business Daily

announcements, solicitations and

contracts.

* * * * *

Subpart 1815.70—Ombudsman

1815.7001 NASA Ombudsman Program.

NASA’s implementation of an

ombudsman program is in NMI

1210.XX, NASA Ombudsman Program.

1815.7002 Commerce Business Daily

announcements, solicitations and

contracts.

The contracting officer shall include a

statement similar to that contained in

the clause at 1852.215–84, Ombudsman,

in Commerce Business Daily

announcements of competitive

procurements. Also, a clause

substantially the same as the one at

1852.215–84 shall be included in

Section L of solicitations, including

draft solicitations, and in all contracts.

3. Section 1852.215-84 is added to

read as follows:

1852.215–84 Ombudsman.

As prescribed in 1815.7002, insert the

following clause:

Ombudsman

(XXX 1995)

An ombudsman has been appointed to hear

concerns from offerors, potential offerors,

and contractors during the preaward and

postaward phases of this acquisition. The

purpose of the ombudsman is not to diminish

the authority of the contracting officer, the

Source Selection Board, or the selection

official, but to communicate concerns, issues,

disagreements, and recommendations of

interested parties to the appropriate

Government personnel and to work to resolve

them. When requested, the ombudsman will

maintain strict confidentiality as to the

source of the concern. The ombudsman does

not participate in the evaluation of proposals,

the source selection process, or the

arbitration of formal contract disputes.

Interested parties are invited to call the

installation ombudsman llllllll

[Insert name] at llllllll [Insert

telephone number]. Concerns, issues,

disagreements, and recommendations which

cannot be resolved at the installation may be

referred to the NASA ombudsman

llllllll [Insert name] at

llllllll [Insert telephone number].

(End of Clause)

[FR Doc. 95–12776 Filed 5–24–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7510–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration

49 CFR Part 571

Air Brake Systems; Denial of Petition

for Rulemaking

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration.

ACTION: Denial of petition for

rulemaking.

SUMMARY: This notice denies a petition

for rulemaking, submitted by Rocky

Mountain Technology Engineering

Corporation, to require that all air

braked trailers using adjustable axles be

equipped with an automatic pneumatic

locking device. According to the

petitioner, its device will ensure that the

adjustable axles are automatically

locked in place while the vehicle is in

motion. It will help prevent back

injuries now reportedly resulting from

the misuse of manual systems. After

conducting its review, the agency has

determined that the petition should not

be granted because measures designed

to prevent back injuries and the

unintended movement of adjustable

axles do not raise significant safety

problems.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Richard Carter, Office of Vehicle Safety

Standards, National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration, 400 Seventh

Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590,

(202) 366–65274.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Federal

Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS)

No. 121, Air Brake Systems (49 CFR

571.121), establishes performance

requirements for braking systems on

vehicles equipped with air brakes. The

purpose of the standard is to ensure safe

braking performance under normal and

emergency braking conditions.

Neither FMVSS No. 121 nor any other

FMVSS presently addresses the locking

of adjustable axles on trailers.1 Such

adjustable axles are also referred to as

slider axles. Adjustable axles can move

backward and forward on semi-trailers.

Such adjustability allows the axles to be

moved so as to balance the loading on

the various axles of the trailer. In this

way, users of semi-trailers can avoid

exceeding the weight limit on each axle.

The adjustability also allows the

distance between the coupling and the

rear axle to be limited in order to

improve trailer mobility. Currently,

most adjustable axles incorporate a

mechanical system for locking the axles

in place.

On September 30, 1994, Mr. Larry

Wessels, the president of Rocky

Mountain Technology Engineering

Corporation (Rocky Mountain),

submitted a petition for rulemaking

requesting that FMVSS No. 121 be

amended to require semitrailers with

adjustable axles to be equipped with an

automatic pneumatic locking system.

Such a system would be joined to the

air brake system and would allow

automatic retraction of the locking pins,

provided that the parking spring brakes

have been set. A video tape

accompanying the petition highlighted

two principle differences between

present adjustable axle systems and the

one described by the petitioner. First,

Rocky Mountain’s device uses four

locking pins instead of two. Second, its

device engages automatically through

the use of air pressure, rather than

manually through the use of lever arms.

The petitioner contended that its device

would replace manual locking systems,

which it claimed fail more readily and

frequently result in back injuries when
27712 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 101 / Thursday, May 25, 1995 / Proposed Rules

the driver tries to manually retract the

pin to adjust the sliding axle. The

petitioner also contended that its system

would more likely ensure that the

adjustable axles remain in place. Based

on its concern, Rocky Mountain

requested that the agency initiate

rulemaking to require this product.

After reviewing the petition and other

available information, NHTSA has

determined that requiring an automatic

locking pin system would not prevent

injuries and fatalities related to motor

vehicle accidents. In reviewing its recall

and defect investigation files, NHTSA

found only one agency Engineering

Analysis involving adjustable axle

assemblies: in 1980, the agency opened

an investigation based upon six

consumer complaints involving

accidents in which the adjustable

assembly completely separated from

Freuhauf flatbed trailers. The agency

conducted a number of laboratory and

field tests in an attempt to dislodge the

pins from the frame rails. In none of the

tests performed over a broad range of

conditions was the agency able to

dislodge the pins. The agency closed

this Engineering Analysis without

ordering a recall, redesign, or any other

changes to the manufacturer’s product.

The agency’s review of its Office of

Defect Investigation’s (ODI’s) Customer

Complaint file similarly found no safety

problems with respect to adjustable

axles.

NHTSA also is concerned that

requiring a system like Rocky

Mountain’s could potentially create

operational problems, given that it

would increase the complexity of

adjustable axle locking systems.

Specifically, Rocky Mountain’s

automatic locking system would add

approximately 20 additional air

couplings, 17 more separate air lines,

four additional air pistons, one fairly

complex control valve, and the

electrical support system to monitor the

position of the pistons along with the

wiring and lighting to the cab area. As

a result, the system’s reliability must be

very good. This is so because when

more components are added to a system,

each component must have a high

individual reliability rate to maintain

the same reliability for the total system

or vehicle. The mechanical systems are

less complex compared with the

automatic system because they have

many fewer parts. However, the agency

believes that they are capable of

performing their intended function.

NHTSA notes that requiring Rocky

Mountain’s product would result in

considerable costs. Rocky Mountain

indicated that its device would cost

approximately $100 more than the

present manual system. Given that the

average annual production of trailers is

approximately 186,000 units and that

between 85 percent and 90 percent of

trailers have adjustable axles, NHTSA

estimates that requiring the petitioner’s

device would cost approximately $16

million ($100 x 186,000 x 85 percent)

annually.

Rocky Mountain claimed that its

device would prevent injuries caused

both while the vehicle is in use and

while the stationary vehicle’s axle is

being adjusted. Based on its review of

safety data, NHTSA is aware of few

injuries caused by such situations.

Based on the above considerations,

NHTSA has determined that Rocky

Mountain’s petition should be denied.

This decision is based in part on the fact

that there are no test data, other

information or analyses to substantiate

the petitioner’s claim that the requested

amendment would reduce injuries and

fatalities associated with motor vehicle

accidents. Moreover, such a requirement

would result in significant costs without

corresponding benefits.

In accordance with 49 CFR Part 552,

the agency has completed its technical

review of the petition and determined

that there is no reasonable possibility

that the requested amendment would be

issued at the conclusion of a rulemaking

proceeding. Accordingly, the agency is

denying the petition.

Notwithstanding NHTSA’s decision to

deny Rocky Mountain’s petition, the

agency notes that neither the

requirements of FMVSS No. 121 nor

those of the agency’s underlying statute

under which the standard was issued,

prohibit the installation of the

petitioner’s product; provided that if it

is installed on a vehicle by a vehicle

manufacturer, dealer, distributor or

repair business, neither the act of

installation nor the operation of the

device makes inoperative any device or

element of design installed on that

vehicle in compliance with FMVSS No.

121.

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30103 and 30162;

delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.50 and

501.8.

Issued on: May 19, 1995.

Barry Felrice,

Associate Administrator for Safety

Performance Standards.

[FR Doc. 95–12831 Filed 5–24–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P