[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 112 (Monday, June 10, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 29337-29339]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-14256]




[[Page 29337]]

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. 96-56, Notice 01]
RIN 2127-AF77


Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Warning Devices

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: In this document, NHTSA proposes to rescind the Federal Motor 
Vehicle Safety Standard that regulates triangular warning devices 
intended to be placed on the roadway behind disabled buses and trucks 
that have a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) greater than 10,000 lbs. 
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) requires commercial carriers 
to carry and use one of three types of warning devices: triangular 
devices meeting Standard No. 125, fusees or flares. NHTSA is proposing 
to rescind the Standard because FHWA can readily specify the carrying 
and using of triangular warning devices meeting requirements other than 
those in Standard No. 125. This proposal is part of the agency's 
efforts to implement the President's Regulatory Reform Initiative to 
remove unnecessary regulations.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 25, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Comments must refer to the docket and notice numbers cited 
at the beginning of this notice and be submitted to: Docket Section, 
Room 5109, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 400 
Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. It is requested that 10 
copies of the comments be submitted.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical issues: Mr. Richard Van 
Iderstine, Office of Vehicle Safety Standards, NPS-21, telephone (202) 
366-5280, FAX (202) 366-4329.
    For legal issues: Ms. Dorothy Nakama, Office of Chief Counsel, NCC-
20, telephone (202) 366-2992, FAX (202) 366-3820.
    Both may be reached at NHTSA, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, 
DC 20590. Comments should not be faxed to these persons, but should be 
sent to the Docket Section.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

President's Regulatory Reinvention Initiative

    Pursuant to the March 4, 1995 directive ``Regulatory Reinvention 
Initiative'' from the President to the heads of departments and 
agencies, NHTSA undertook a review of its regulations and directives. 
During the course of this review, NHTSA identified regulations that it 
could propose to rescind as unnecessary or to amend to improve their 
comprehensibility, application, or appropriateness. Among the 
regulations identified for potential rescission is Federal Motor 
Vehicle Safety Standard No. 125, Warning devices (49 CFR Sec. 571.125).

Background of Standard No. 125

    Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 125, Warning 
devices, specifies requirements for warning devices that do not have 
self-contained energy sources (unpowered warning devices) and that are 
designed to be carried in buses and trucks that have a gross vehicle 
weight rating (GVWR) greater than 10,000 lbs. The unpowered warning 
devices are intended to be placed on the roadway behind a disabled 
vehicle to warn approaching traffic of its presence. The Standard does 
not apply to unpowered warning devices designed to be permanently 
affixed to the vehicle. The purpose of the Standard is to reduce deaths 
and injuries due to rear-end collisions between moving traffic and 
stopped vehicles.
    The standard requires that the unpowered warning devices be 
triangular, covered with orange fluorescent and red reflex reflective 
material, and open in the center. These characteristics are intended to 
assure that the warning device has a standardized shape for quick 
message recognition and can be readily observed during both daytime and 
nighttime, and does not blow over when deployed.
    NHTSA has never required that any new vehicle be equipped with the 
Standard No. 125 warning device or any other warning device. However, 
as explained below, FHWA, which has authority to regulate interstate 
commercial vehicles-in-use, mandates that operators of those vehicles 
carry and use unpowered warning devices meeting Standard No. 125, 
fusees or flares.

Previous Changes to Standard No. 125

    Before 1994, Standard No. 125 applied to unpowered warning devices 
that are designed to be carried in any type of motor vehicle. On May 
10, 1993 (58 FR 27314), NHTSA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking to 
amend Standard No. 125 so that the Standard applies only to warning 
devices that are designed to be carried in buses and trucks that have a 
gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) greater than 10,000 lbs.
    NHTSA proposed to limit the scope of Standard No. 125 in order to 
provide manufacturers of unpowered warning devices with greater design 
freedom and to relieve an unnecessary regulatory burden on industry. At 
the same time, the agency proposed to retain the requirements for 
warning devices for buses and trucks with a GVWR greater than 10,000 
lbs., primarily to support FHWA's regulation of commercial motor 
vehicles under the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSR) (49 
CFR parts 350-399). Section 393.95 of the FMCSR requires either that 
three Standard No. 125 warning devices or specified numbers of fusees 
or flares be carried on all trucks and buses used in interstate 
commerce. In a final rule published on September 29, 1994 (59 FR 
49586), NHTSA limited the applicability of Standard No. 125 as 
proposed.

Proposed Rescission of Standard No. 125

    In the September 1994 final rule limiting Standard No. 125 to 
unpowered warning devices designed to be carried in buses and trucks 
with a GVWR greater than 10,000 lbs., NHTSA stated that it was 
retaining Standard No. 125 in its narrowed form largely to ensure the 
continued availability of standardized unpowered warning devices which 
FHWA could specify as a means of complying with its warning device 
requirements for commercial vehicle operators. After reviewing Standard 
No. 125 in light of the President's Regulatory Review Initiative, NHTSA 
tentatively has determined that the retention of Standard No. 125 is 
not necessary to ensure the continued availability of unpowered warning 
devices.
    If Standard No. 125 were rescinded, FHWA would have two options. 
First, it could adopt the current manufacturing standards for the 
warning devices as an appendix to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 
Regulations. Section 393.95 would be revised to reference the newly 
created appendix as opposed to Section 571.125.
    Second, it could work with an industry voluntary standards setting 
organization such as the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) to 
develop an industry standard on unpowered warning devices containing 
requirements similar to those in Standard No. 125. Once those 
requirements were developed, FHWA could incorporate them by reference 
in Section 393.95.

[[Page 29338]]

    NHTSA notes that it has a pending petition from the Transportation 
Safety Equipment Institute (TSEI) requesting that NHTSA's testing 
protocol for Standard No. 125, Laboratory Test Procedure for Warning 
Devices (TP-125-00, April 1, 1977) be amended to reflect the TSEI's 
recommended changes. If NHTSA were to rescind Standard No. 125, 
equipment manufacturers could work with an industry standard setting 
organization to specify the testing protocol that it deems appropriate.

Proposed Effective Date

    Because the proposed removal of Standard No. 125 would relieve 
regulatory restrictions without compromising safety, the agency has 
tentatively determined that there is good cause for concluding that an 
effective date earlier than 180 days after issuance is in the public 
interest. Accordingly, the agency proposes that, if adopted, the 
effective date for the final rule be 45 days after its publication in 
the Federal Register.

Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

1. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    This proposed rule was not reviewed under E.O. 12866, Regulatory 
Planning and Review. NHTSA has analyzed the impact of this rulemaking 
action under the Department of Transportation's regulatory policies and 
procedures and determined that it is not ``significant.'' If made 
final, this rulemaking action would remove an unnecessary regulation 
from the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards.
    This action is not expected to have any economic impact on 
manufacturers of unpowered warning devices designed to be carried in 
motor vehicles with a GVWR of 10,000 lbs. or less since the agency does 
not currently regulate the manufacture of those devices.
    Based on its assumption that there would continue to be performance 
requirements similar to those currently in Standard No. 125, NHTSA 
tentatively concludes that the rescission of the Standard would, at 
most, have only slight, nonquantifiable economic effects on 
manufacturers of unpowered warning devices designed to be carried in 
buses and trucks over 10,000 lbs. GVWR.
    For these reasons, the agency has concluded that the economic 
effects of this proposal would be so minimal that a full regulatory 
evaluation is not required.

2. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The agency has also considered the effects of this rulemaking under 
the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) I certify that 
this proposal would not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. If FHWA continued to specify an 
unpowered warning device for buses and trucks that have a GVWR greater 
than 10,000 lbs. that meets requirements similar or identical to those 
in Standard No. 125, and to require operators of such vehicles to carry 
the devices or other types of warning devices, the cost of the 
unpowered warning devices should not change. Further, manufacturers of 
those unpowered warning devices would continue to have essentially the 
same market that they currently have. Accordingly, the agency has not 
prepared an initial regulatory flexibility analysis.

3. Executive Order 12612 (Federalism)

    This proposed rule has been analyzed in accordance with the 
principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 12612. The agency 
has determined that the proposed rule does not have sufficient 
federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism 
Assessment.

4. National Environmental Policy Act

    The agency has also analyzed this proposed rule for the purpose of 
the National Environmental Policy Act. NHTSA has determined that the 
proposed rule would not significantly affect the human environment.

5. Paperwork Reduction Act

    Standard No. 125 specifies that the warning devices be marked with 
certain information, that is considered to be an information collection 
requirement, as that term is defined by the Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB) in 5 CFR Part 1320. This collection of information has 
been assigned OMB Control No. 2127-0506, (Warning Devices (Labeling)) 
and has been approved for use through March 31, 1996. Whether NHTSA 
decides to ask for a reinstatement of this collection of information 
will depend on the final action for this rulemaking.

6. Executive Order 12866 (Civil Justice Reform)

    This proposed rule would not have any retroactive effect. Under 49 
U.S.C. section 30103, whenever a Federal motor vehicle safety standard 
is in effect, a State may not adopt or maintain a safety standard 
applicable to the same aspect of performance which is not identical to 
the Federal standard, except to the extent that the State requirement 
imposes a higher level of performance and applies only to vehicles 
procured for the State's use. 49 U.S.C. section 30161 sets forth a 
procedure for judicial review of final rules establishing, amending or 
revoking Federal motor vehicle safety standards. That section does not 
require submission of a petition for reconsideration or other 
administrative proceedings before parties may file suit in court.

Procedures for Filing Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments on the proposal. 
It is requested that 10 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 Chief Counsel, NHTSA, at the street address given above, and seven 
copies from which the purportedly confidential information has been 
deleted 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 business 
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 too 
for consideration in regard to the final rule will be considered as 
suggestions for further rulemaking action. Comments on the proposal 
will be available for inspection in the docket. The 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.

[[Page 29339]]

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571

    Imports, Incorporation by reference, Motor vehicle safety, Motor 
vehicles, Rubber and rubber products, Tires.
    In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA proposes to amend 49 CFR 
part 571 as follows:

PART 571--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 571 would continue to read as 
follows:

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


Sec. 571.125  [Removed and reserved]

    2. Sec. 571.125 would be removed, and reserved.

    Issued on: May 31, 1996.
Barry Felrice,
Associate Administrator for Safety Performance Standards.
[FR Doc. 96-14256 Filed 6-7-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P