[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 196 (Wednesday, October 12, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-25193]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: October 12, 1994]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Highway Administration

49 CFR Part 393

[FHWA Docket No. MC-94-28]

 

Parts and Accessories Necessary for Safe Operation; Glazing and 
Window Construction; Petition for Waiver To Permit Use of Automatic 
Vehicle Identification Transponder

AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of petition; request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: The Commonwealth of Kentucky, lead State for the ADVANTAGE I-
75 Program, and Heavy Vehicle Electronic License Plate, Inc. (HELP) 
have requested, and the FHWA proposes to grant, a petition for a waiver 
from the requirements of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations 
(FMCSRs) to allow the use of an automatic vehicle identification (AVI) 
transponder to be mounted near the upper border at the approximate 
center of the windshields of commercial motor vehicles. The FHWA 
proposes to grant the waiver to allow the use of the transponders in a 
maximum of 30,000 commercial motor vehicles participating in the 
ADVANTAGE I-75 ``beta tests'' and the HELP corridor programs during a 
3-year period, subject to the proposed conditions described in this 
notice.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before November 14, 
1994.

ADDRESSES: Submit written, signed comments to FHWA Docket No. MC-94-28, 
Room 4232, HCC-10, Office of the Chief Counsel, Federal Highway 
Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, D.C. 20590. All 
comments received will be available for examination at the above 
address from 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, 
except Federal holidays. Those desiring notification of receipt of 
comments must include a self-addressed, stamped postcard.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Deborah M. Freund, Office of Motor 
Carrier Standards, (202) 366-2981, or Mr. Charles Medalen, Office of 
the Chief Counsel, (202) 366-1354, Federal Highway Administration, 
Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, D.C. 
20590. Office hours are from 7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m., e.t., Monday 
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) are required to stop at highway 
ports of entry (POE), weigh stations, and other checkpoints to be 
weighed and to have their regulatory credentials (e.g., registration, 
operating permits) checked by State officials. A CMV may be stopped 
many times in the course of a single trip. Each stop can add a minimum 
of 15 to 20 minutes to the length of a trip because of the time needed 
to decelerate, stop, be weighed, have paperwork reviewed, undergo a 
safety inspection, reenter the highway, and accelerate to mainline 
speed.
    CMVs that are in compliance with safety and size and weight 
regulations and have their administrative paperwork in order have an 
opportunity to greatly increase inspection efficiency and 
effectiveness. Information on the status of a CMV's registration, 
safety inspection, and operating permits, can be encoded and 
transmitted to the POE as an electronic signal via an automatic vehicle 
identification (AVI) transponder carried in the CMV. The POE's receiver 
would decode the signal, and officials would review the CMV's status on 
the spot. Drivers whose CMVs' safety status or administrative records 
needed to be reviewed would receive a signal to enter the POE or weigh 
station. Drivers whose CMVs are in compliance may receive a signal to 
bypass the site. However, they may still be required to enter for a 
safety inspection.
    The outcome would be a more selective review process which would 
enable POE officials to focus their resources to deal with vehicles 
with safety and size and weight infractions or vehicles that are not in 
compliance with other administrative requirements. Use of AVI 
transponders would also provide economic benefits by saving motor 
carriers time, improving the efficiency and effectiveness of 
enforcement, reducing paperwork, and increasing uniformity of 
enforcement. Environmental benefits would be gained from fuel savings 
and reduced CMV emissions.
    The goals of the ADVANTAGE I-75 and the HELP programs are to reduce 
congestion, increase efficiency, and enhance the safety of users of 
major highway corridors through the application of a network of 
advanced highway, vehicle, and communications technologies. Both 
programs are multi-State partnerships of public and private sector 
interests. ADVANTAGE I-75, currently in progress, and HELP/CRESCENT, 
completed in late 1993, were two of the first in a planned series of 
operational tests within the Commercial Vehicle Operations (CVO) 
element of the Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) Program 
(formerly known as the Intelligent Vehicle-Highway Systems (IVHS) 
program). HELP builds on the foundation of the multistate, 
multinational CRESCENT research effort to design and test a heavy 
vehicle monitoring system that integrates automatic vehicle 
identification, classification, and weigh-in-motion.
    The ADVANTAGE I-75 and HELP programs will allow CMVs which are 
equipped with transponders, and which are in compliance with safety and 
administrative requirements, to travel any segment of their respective 
instrumented highways at mainline speeds with minimal stopping at 
weight/inspection checkpoints. For ADVANTAGE I-75, electronic clearance 
decisions at points along the corridor will be based on the information 
obtained at the point on the corridor where the vehicle first enters, 
as well as on computerized checking of operating credentials and safety 
records in each State. For HELP, the electronic clearance decisions 
will be based on data collected from weigh-in-motion devices embedded 
in the mainline highway pavement or on bypass ramps, as well as on 
computerized checking of operating credentials and safety records.
    ADVANTAGE I-75 covers the entire length of I-75 and Canadian 
Highway 401 (Ontario). The HELP/CRESCENT demonstration operated along 
the I-5 and I-10 corridors in several western States from Washington to 
Texas. Under HELP, the former CRESCENT highway corridors are being 
expanded to include segments in Utah and Colorado.

AVI Device

    The AVI device proposed for use in both programs is an electronic 
transponder designed to send and receive signals from a CMV to POEs and 
safety inspection sites. The signals contain information such as the 
identity of the motor carrier, the gross weight of the vehicle, and the 
status of the vehicle's registration and fuel tax payments. The 
transponder only transmits when it is in the immediate vicinity of a 
licensed transmitter and is directed to do so by that licensed 
transmitter under the provisions of 47 CFR 90.239.
    When an inspection official decides whether the vehicle should 
enter or bypass the POE, a signal is transmitted from the official's 
workstation to the CMV. This is displayed to the CMV driver in the form 
of a clearly visible signal from red and green lamps on the 
transponder's face. The transponder also provides an audible signal to 
the driver. The transponder measures 3.3 inches (84 mm) high by 4.4 
inches (112 mm) wide by 1.5 inches (38 mm) deep.
    In order to function effectively, the transponder must be able 
properly to transmit and receive signals from the POE. The physical 
location of the transponder is a critical factor in its operation 
because CMVs are equipped with many other devices that transmit and 
receive electronic signals of varying strengths and frequencies, such 
as electronic engine monitors and citizens-band radios which could 
affect the transponder's transmissions. In addition to these 
internally-generated signals, there is also a possibility of external 
interference from electrical power transmission lines running along 
highway rights-of-way. Furthermore, the device must be placed to allow 
drivers to read the enter/bypass indication displayed on the 
transponder so they can respond appropriately.

Documentation of Device

    The AVI transponder is clearly labelled in its lower right-hand 
quadrant, on the side facing the driver, with the name of the 
respective issuing program (``ADVANTAGE I-75 Driver Communications 
Module'' and ``PRE-PASS, a transportation solution from HELP, Inc.''). 
Two indicators, a red octagonal mark labeled ``STOP'' and a green 
upward-pointing arrow labeled ``GO,'' also appear on that side. A nine-
pin RS-232 connector, not used for either the ADVANTAGE I-75 or the 
HELP application, is on the bottom of the transponder. The device is 
thus readily identifiable as a transponder issued by one of the two 
programs, and no additional documentation need be carried on the 
participating CMVs. The transponder's unique configuration and marking 
distinguish it from other electronic devices, such as radar detectors.

Automotive Engineering Guidelines: Driver's Field of View

    The Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) Recommended Practices are 
the standard automotive design guidelines originally developed for use 
by automotive manufacturers and their suppliers. They provide a common 
language for vehicle and component design and the accommodation of 
drivers. While the use of the SAE Recommended Practices is voluntary, 
many, if not most, of them are adopted by automotive 
manufacturers.1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\The SAE Technical Board for Rules and Regulations states: 
``This report is published by SAE to advance the state of technical 
and engineering sciences. The use of this report is entirely 
voluntary, and its suitability for any particular use, including any 
patent infringement arising therefrom, is the sole responsibility of 
the user.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A foundation reference for defining the ergonomic basis for cab 
design is ``Motor Vehicle Driver's Eye Range,'' SAE Recommended 
Practice (RP) J941, which establishes two-dimensional ``Eyellipses'' 
representing the 90th, 95th, and 99th percentile distributions of 
driver eye locations for use in the design of the passenger cars, 
trucks, buses, and multipurpose passenger vehicles. This RP was 
initially approved in October 1965, and completely revised in October 
1985. It has been recognized as an American National Standard by the 
American National Standards Institute (ANSI). A method for describing 
and measuring the driver's direct and indirect field of view, presented 
in SAE RP J1050a, references RP J941.
    Uniform test procedures for minimum performance of windshield wiper 
systems for trucks, buses, and multipurpose vehicles are established in 
SAE RP J198. This RP also references RP J941 for a statistical 
representation of the driver's eye location, except for head-turn 
considerations. The RP states that the specific areas on the windshield 
glazing surface ``were developed as being compatible with viewing 
requirements necessary to operate the types of vehicles listed in Table 
1 [of the RP]''. The classification lists seven different types of 
vehicles, and the corresponding areas described by the intersections of 
planes defined by angles above, below, left, and right of the 
horizontal axis of the Eyellipse. The RP defines 3 areas: a central 
zone, Area C, an intermediate zone, Area B, and an outer zone, Area A; 
all are delimited by the angles listed in Table 1.
    The ``angle up'' for the outer zone of the windshield, Area A, 
ranges from 10 degrees for a cab-behind-engine configuration with the 
ground-to-H-point2 dimension of between 0 and 40 inches (0 to 1016 
mm) to 5 degrees for a configuration with a ground-to-hinge-point 
dimension of 50 inches (1270 mm) or greater. Angles-up for Area A in 
other trucks, buses, and multipurpose vehicles listed ranges from 6 to 
8 degrees. Angles-up for Areas B and C range from 1 to 5 degrees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\H-point means hinge point: hip hinge point on an 
anthropomorphic manikin, measured with the seat in the rearmost 
position.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The upper, lower, extreme left, and extreme right borders of the 
windshield are outside areas A, B, and C. The minimum percentage of 
required wiped area described in the RP decreases from the central to 
the outer zones. If installed as proposed, that is, within the upper 
windshield border, the transponder should be located well outside Areas 
A, B, and C.
    The proposed transponder location would be near the top center of a 
one-piece windshield or on the passenger side of a multipiece 
windshield. This would place it well outside the area swept by wipers 
pivoting from below the windshield.
    SAE RP J382, Windshield Defrosting Systems Performance Guidelines--
Trucks, Buses, and Multi-Purpose Vehicles, provides a defrosting system 
performance guideline. Among other things, it notes that the windshield 
area to be defrosted ``was developed to be compatible with vision 
requirements necessary to operate trucks, buses, and multi passenger 
vehicles.'' This windshield area is based on SAE RP J941, March 1981 
(Eyellipse), and SAE RP J826, April 1980 (Devices for Use in Defining 
and Measuring Vehicle Seating Accommodation). In a fashion similar to 
RP 198, this RP defines two areas: a central zone, Area C, and a 
surrounding zone, Area A. Angles up, down, left, and right are also 
defined, as in RP 198. The upper, lower, extreme left, and extreme 
right borders of the windshield are outside both of these areas. If 
installed as proposed, that is, within the upper windshield border, the 
transponder should be located well outside Areas A and C, as defined in 
this RP.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Standards

    Two Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSSs) incorporate SAE 
Recommended Practices similar to those discussed earlier in this 
notice. FMVSS 103, Windshield defrosting and defogging systems, 
references SAE RP J902, Passenger Car Windshield Defrosting Systems. 
FMVSS 104, Windshield wiping and washing systems, references SAE RP 
J903a, Passenger Car Windshield Wiper Systems. Both of the FMVSSs apply 
to passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, and buses. 
(While the FMVSSs themselves have this broad range of applicability, 
they do not reference the truck and bus versions of the SAE RPs.)

Research on Driver's Field of View

    Four recent research papers discuss the issue of a driver's useful 
field of view (FOV). The first, ``A Study of Driver's Forward Fields of 
Direct View for Large Trucks,'' (N. Nagaike and Y. Hoshino, JSAE 
Review, January 1989, pages 74-76), reviewed factors governing the 
visible area directly ahead of large trucks. The research determined 
necessary visibility areas, depicted by vertical and lateral angles in 
a driver's forward field of view. Factors for determining these areas 
included locations of traffic lights and directional signs, the 
driver's ability to recognize stationary and moving objects, and the 
braking deceleration of large trucks. Data were collected from traffic 
accident records in Japan and from direct observation. While the 
visible area for traffic signals and road signs was recorded at angles 
above the driver's eye level, stationary objects, moving objects in the 
vicinity of intersections, and oncoming vehicles and vehicles in front 
of the CMV were shown to be located in visible areas below the driver's 
eye level.
    A second paper, ``Research on Forward Field of View of Trucks,'' 
(Y. Siosaka and N. Nagaike, 14th Annual Technical Conference on 
Enhanced Safety of Vehicles, Munich, Germany, May 1994), presented a 
study undertaken to determine the minimum forward field of view 
required for driving in a straight line, in order more clearly to 
define the area swept by windshield wipers. Data on braking distance 
and merging behavior (specifically, gap acceptance) were collected from 
drivers driving on Japanese rural roads, urban streets, and 
expressways. The results indicated a ``driveable field of view'' 
extending from 5 degrees above horizontal to 5 degrees below 
horizontal, referenced to the driver's eye point centerline.
    Design conflicts between the need for driver visual perspective and 
windshield optical distortion were examined by Makiguchi, et al. (``A 
Human Factors Analysis of Optical Distortion for Automotive 
Windshields,'' SAE Paper 940390, 1994). Field data were gathered during 
straight-line driving. Based on drivers' fixation frequency and the 
type of objects observed, the windshield was divided into four zones. 
The G1 zone, with the highest fixation frequency, extended  
17 degrees laterally and  8 degrees vertically from the 
driver's line of sight. It included crucial driving information, such 
as pedestrians, road signs and signals, and oncoming and nearby 
vehicles. The fixation frequency was reported as exceeding 95 percent. 
The G3 and G4 zones, with the lowest fixation frequencies, were noted 
at approximately 100 to 200 mm from the edge of the windshield's 
visible area. Drivers observe pedestrians and buildings in the zone 
below 8 degrees horizontal; in the zone above 8 degrees horizontal, 
they see the sky. A zone of middle fixation frequency, G2, was defined 
as the area outside the G1, G3, and G4 zones.
    Finally, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety published a 
report on accidents in four urban areas arising in part from visibility 
problems in heavy trucks (``A Study of Fatal Crashes Involving 
Pedestrians and Trucks in Four Cities,'' December 1992). It noted, 
``Obstruction of truck driver visibility, caused by the design of 
truck/tractor cabs, appears to be a major contributing factor in 
crashes at intersections.'' However, the discussion of accident data 
did not differentiate between conventional--cab behind engine--and cab-
over-engine tractor involvement. The report did not mention decals or 
other items in CMV windshields as a potential concern.
    After reviewing the reports on these studies, the FHWA believes 
that the location of a transponder device near the upper margin of a 
CMV's windshield is unlikely to have any effect on a driver's ability 
to observe nearby objects, such as pedestrians.

Relationship to Sunvisors, Sunshades, and Rear-View Mirrors

    Interior sunvisors are standard equipment in virtually every 
vehicle on the road today. Exterior sunshades are available as optional 
accessories from several truck manufacturers. Sunvisors are not 
regulated by an FMVSS or an FMCSR, nor is there an SAE Recommended 
Practice concerning their design. Sunvisors are not believed to have a 
detrimental effect on a driver's safety-related vision. On the 
contrary, blocking the sun's glare offers a clear safety benefit, and 
the loss of a small visible area of the windshield, well outside the 
range of the driver's field of view, is considered an acceptable 
tradeoff.
    Data obtained on 33 models of new Class 8 tractor cabs, 
representing all seven of the major manufacturers serving the U.S. 
market, indicate that sunvisors vary from 5.25 to 7.5 inches in height 
and 19.75 to 34 inches in length.
    The agency notes that the AVI transponder proposed to be used in 
ADVANTAGE I-75 and HELP is roughly 2 inches smaller than the smallest 
sunvisor (which was only found on one cab model). The agency therefore 
believes that a transponder mounted within the region of the windshield 
that the sunvisor would cover would be extremely unlikely to have an 
adverse effect on safety. The audible indicator that accompanies the 
visible signal for the driver to enter or to bypass a POE would provide 
the necessary information in the event that a sunvisor were to block 
the driver's view of the transponder.
    For windshields equipped with exterior sunshades, the transponder 
is likely to fall at or above the portion of the underside of the 
sunshade visible from the cab interior. Furthermore, while exterior 
sunshades may limit the uppermost range of the driver's available field 
of view, that area is also well out of the useful field of view as 
reported by the research cited above.
    The agency also notes that the AVI transponder would be located in 
approximately the same relative position in the windshield of a CMV as 
that of a rear-view mirror in a passenger car. The agency believes that 
the transponder would have no more impact on safety than the presence 
of such a mirror and its mounting.

History: Rule on Vision-Reducing Matter

    Section 393.60(c) of the FMCSRs requires that no motor vehicle be 
operated with any label, sticker, decalcomania, or other vision-
reducing matter covering any portion of its windshield or windows at 
either side of the driver's compartment, except that stickers required 
by law may be affixed to the bottom of the windshield, provided that no 
portion of any label, sticker, decalcomania, or other vision-reducing 
matter may extend upward more than 4.5 inches from the bottom of the 
windshield.
    A regulation dealing with Glazing and Window Construction, issued 
by order of the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) in 1952 [54 Motor 
Carrier Cases 337, 7 FR 4422, May 15, 1952], required that glazing in 
specified openings conform to the requirements contained in the 
``American Standard Safety Code for Safety Glazing Materials for 
Glazing Motor Vehicles Operating on Land Highways, Z26.1 1950'' of the 
American Standards Association, now called the American National 
Standards Institute (ANSI). (The Table of Glazing Requirements, 
contained in Sec. 393.60(a)(2) of the FMCSRs, requires CMVs 
manufactured on and after January 1, 1981, to comply with Z26.1-1966 as 
supplemented by Z26.1a-1969.)
    In December 1958 (23 FR 9608, December 11, 1958), the ICC proposed 
to amend this rule, then codified at 49 CFR Sec. 193.60, by adding 
paragraphs covering windshield condition (Sec. 193.60(b)) and use of 
vision-reducing matter (Sec. 193.60(c)). The latter paragraph 
prohibited the use of vision-reducing matter covering any portion of a 
motor vehicle's windshield or windows at either side of the driver's 
compartment, ``except 1 vehicle-inspection sticker issued by a State or 
municipal authority, which shall be no larger than 3 inches by 5 inches 
and shall be located in the lower right-hand corner of the 
windshield.'' The ICC invited comment, but did not publish a report on 
this proposal.
    On December 3, 1959 (24 FR 9674), the ICC adopted a final rule 
amending Sec. 193.60(c) to remove the maximum dimension requirement for 
the sticker while setting a limit of one sticker indicating compliance 
with official mechanical inspection requirements of the State in which 
the title or certificate of ownership is registered. The permissible 
location was changed to ``a lower corner of the windshield.''
    The language of Sec. 193.60(c) was amended again on April 19, 1961 
(26 FR 3309), based on petitions for reconsideration from the Virginia 
State Police, the New York State Public Service Commission, and the 
American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators. The resulting 
amendment relaxed the rule to permit more than one label, sticker, or 
decalcomania to be displayed, and added the requirement that no portion 
of any label, sticker, decalcomania, or other vision-reducing matter 
may extend upward more than 4.5 inches from the bottom of such 
windshield. While the ICC did not provide an explanation for the 
selection of a 4.5 inch dimension, most inspection decals range from 
3.5 to 4 inches in size, and the dimension was apparently chosen to 
allow for variations in the application of stickers and decalcomania. 
(The water-activated adhesives used for decalcomania prior to the 
availability of self-stick adhesives in the early 1960's tended to make 
them somewhat difficult to position.)
    The requirements of Sec. 393.60, particularly the 4.5 inch limit 
specified Sec. 393.60(c), are independent of the physical dimensions of 
windshields. CMV design has made significant strides since the time the 
regulation was promulgated, in part because of research leading to a 
better understanding of driver anthropometry and ergonomics. Improved 
positioning of driving controls, availability of more effective 
mirrors, enhanced adjustability of seats, and larger CMV windshields 
are just a few of the design advances made since the 1950's and 1960's. 
However, the requirements of Sec. 393.60(c) have not kept pace.

Advantage I-75 Alpha Test

    To evaluate the performance and usability of the transponders, it 
was necessary to assess various locations for mounting the devices 
during an initial on-the-road ``alpha test.'' Plans called for the 
transponders to be mounted near the upper and lower borders of the 
windshields of CMV cabs. Approximately 200 vehicles, representing six 
motor carriers' fleets, were to be equipped with electronic 
transponders to transmit and receive information from CMV weigh 
stations and ports of entry.
    Although placing the transponders in the windshield was considered 
the best solution from an engineering standpoint, some of the locations 
would have conflicted with Sec. 393.60(c). The proposed lower-border 
transponder location would have been just within the border area 
permitted under this section. However, the upper-border location would 
have been in violation.
    On October 11, 1993, Don C. Kelly, Secretary of Transportation for 
the Commonwealth of Kentucky and Chairman of the ADVANTAGE I-75 Policy 
Committee, wrote to the FHWA, requesting a waiver of Sec. 393.60(c) for 
the purpose of conducting the alpha test of these AVI transponders.
    On November 15, 1993, the FHWA responded that the agency would not 
apply, or require the States to apply, Sec. 393.60(c) to vehicles, 
drivers and motor carriers participating in the alpha test from 
November 15, 1993, to January 21, 1994, or whenever the test ended, 
whichever was earlier. (The alpha test was originally scheduled to run 
during this period. Because of poor weather and a number of engineering 
changes to the transponder and the roadside communications devices, the 
start of the test was delayed until March 7, 1994, and the agency's 
enforcement moratorium was extended, first until August 31, 1994, and 
eventually to March 31, 1995.
    In granting temporary relief from the requirements of 
Sec. 393.60(c), the FHWA expressly recognized the need for good 
visibility, but acknowledged that the alpha test was a short-duration 
trial involving a small number of trucks. The FHWA also noted that 
participating motor carriers were volunteers that agreed to provide 
their drivers with thorough orientation and training on the use of the 
AVI devices, that the drivers had participated in focus groups in 
preparation for these tests, and that they were made particularly aware 
of the need for objective evaluations of any problems, including 
reduced visibility, caused by the placement of the transponders. 
Because there would have been no way to conduct a real-world evaluation 
of AVI technology without operating in conflict with Sec. 393.60(c), 
the FHWA decided not to require the enforcement of that provision for 
the brief period needed to gather data in preparation for the 
exhaustive beta phase of the test.
    As a condition of this temporary relief from enforcement of the 
provisions of Sec. 393.60(c), the FHWA required that the AVI 
transponder be mounted outside the area swept by the vehicle's 
windshield wipers, or outside the driver's sight lines to the road and 
highway signs or signals. The following conditions also had to be met: 
(1) a copy of the letter granting the temporary relief was to be 
carried in each motor vehicle used in the AVI alpha test program; and 
(2) a letter from the Commonwealth of Kentucky, on official letterhead, 
clearly identifying any vehicle involved in the AVI alpha test program, 
was to be carried in that vehicle. If any of the participating vehicles 
were stopped for non-compliance with Sec. 393.60(c) during the test 
period, the driver was to present a copy of both letters to the 
enforcement official involved.
    Although the test was run on an instrumented segment of I-75 in 
Kentucky, the FHWA noted that the participating vehicles would also 
operate elsewhere. Since the transponders could be damaged by 
repeatedly removing and re-installing them, participants in the alpha 
test were allowed to leave the transponders on the windshields, no 
matter where the vehicles traveled.
    The alpha test is anticipated to be completed on October 20, 1994. 
ADVANTAGE I-75 has informed us that no drivers reported any 
difficulties with their vision being obscured as a result of the 
placement of the transponder.

ADVANTAGE I-75 Beta Test and HELP Program

    Both the ADVANTAGE I-75 and the HELP programs are currently 
planning to expand the geographic coverage and scope of their initial 
activities. The ADVANTAGE I-75 beta test is expected to involve up to 
5000 CMVs in the I-75 and Canadian Highway 401 corridor. The purpose of 
the beta test is to evaluate the actual operation of the transponders 
and to assess their potential to be used as a part of everyday motor 
carrier operations on a nationwide basis. HELP will deploy an ITS 
information network for CMVs in the original HELP/CRESCENT States, as 
well as in several additional ones. HELP is planning to equip at least 
25,000 CMVs in its fee-for-service system by the end of 1995, and at 
least twice that many a year later.
    Motor carriers participating in the programs have to meet stringent 
prequalification criteria set by ADVANTAGE I-75 and HELP. For ADVANTAGE 
I-75, these criteria include: (1) A Satisfactory safety rating from the 
FHWA Office of Motor Carriers; (2) an acceptable record in all States 
and/or Canadian Provinces in which the carrier intends to operate 
(including registration and taxes, safety performance, and other 
compliance items consistent with existing statutes); (3) agreement to 
abide by the FMCSRs or the Canadian equivalent; (4) agreement to 
participate in the project evaluation process; and (5) the carriers' 
self-certification that their enrolled trucks will meet an inspection 
protocol, at least quarterly, equivalent to the requirements of a 
Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance Level 1 inspection. The beta test is 
scheduled to commence in March 1995 and to continue for two years.
    Criteria for participation in the HELP program differ slightly. 
However, all States will require motor carriers to have a Satisfactory 
safety rating from the FHWA Office of Motor Carriers and be in 
compliance with administrative requirements (such as fuel tax and 
registration). Inspectors in the HELP States can require that as many 
as 5 percent of all electronically cleared CMVs enter inspection 
stations to verify their safety and administrative status. The officer 
at the inspection station can also override any bypass on a vehicle-by-
vehicle basis.
    The FHWA received formal requests for a waiver of the requirements 
of Sec. 393.60(c) from the Commonwealth of Kentucky on September 19, 
1994, and from HELP on August 31, 1994.

Discussion of Proposal

    The FHWA believes that both motor carriers and the travelling 
public may derive substantial operational and safety benefits from the 
use of ITS/CVO technologies. The Congress has made the ITS program the 
centerpiece of a concerted effort to apply advanced technology to 
America's highway transportation system. The ADVANTAGE I-75 and HELP 
programs are the first in a series of field trials of AVI devices for 
commercial motor vehicles. In the relatively short term, this 
technology could improve the productivity of both the trucking industry 
and State enforcement personnel by reducing the need for repeated 
vehicle inspections. It would also reduce fuel consumption and air 
pollution, and may improve highway safety by reducing congestion, 
particularly around inspection stations. It would also enable POE 
officials to target their resources to deal with vehicles more likely 
to be operating in noncompliance with safety and administrative 
regulations.
    While members of the ADVANTAGE I-75 Policy Committee have 
informally expressed interest in petitioning the FHWA to change the 
requirements of Sec. 393.60(c), it is the agency's belief that this 
section should be subject to a more detailed review than is possible in 
the short time remaining before the ADVANTAGE I-75 beta test and the 
HELP program commence. The FHWA is therefore proposing to provide a 
waiver from the requirements of Sec. 393.60(c) to the vehicles 
participating in the beta phase of the ADVANTAGE I-75 project. Because 
the HELP program proposes to use the same transponders as ADVANTAGE I-
75, the FHWA also proposes to provide a waiver to those participating 
vehicles.
    The FHWA notes that no safety concerns or complaints have been 
reported by alpha test participants, nor by any other parties.
    The petition for a waiver is being considered under section 206(f) 
of the Motor Carrier Safety Act of 1984 (49 U.S.C. 31136(e), formerly 
49 U.S.C. app. 2505(f)) which authorizes waivers of any regulation 
issued under the authority of that Act upon a determination that the 
waiver is consistent with the public interest and the safe operation of 
commercial motor vehicles.

Conditions of the Waiver

I. Location of the Transponder

    As a condition of the waiver, the FHWA proposes that the 
transponder be mounted at or near the top center of the windshield, 
outside the area swept by the CMV's windshield wipers, or, at a 
minimum, outside the driver's sight lines to the road and highway signs 
or signals. The FHWA believes that this location would have no 
discernable effect on a driver's ability to operate the vehicle safely. 
The AVI device would be placed in a position that would be within the 
portion of the windshield covered by a sunvisor. It is also in 
approximately the same relative position in the windshield of a CMV as 
that of a rear-view mirror in a passenger car. There is no evidence 
that sunvisors or rear-view mirrors pose a threat to safety by 
obstructing a driver's vision, and thus, we have no reason to believe 
that a transponder of the type and dimensions to be used in the test 
would have a negative effect on safety.

II. Compliance With Wiring Requirements of the FMCSRs

    The installation of the transponder would be required to comply 
with Sec. 393.27, Wiring specifications, and Sec. 393.33, Wiring [and] 
installation.

III. Duration of Waiver; Accident and Incident Monitoring

    Although the requests indicated a 2-year period for the beta test, 
the FHWA notes that the alpha test was delayed several times to resolve 
technical matters. Since all research in a field environment is likely 
to experience some start-up delays, the FHWA proposes to make the term 
of the waiver 3 years for HELP and 3 years for ADVANTAGE I-75, or until 
the beta test is completed, whichever occurs first. This would allow 
for a continuous period of data collection once the programs were fully 
underway. If the waiver is granted, this period would begin when the 
FHWA publishes the final conditions of the waiver in the Federal 
Register. Motor carriers participating in ADVANTAGE I-75 and HELP would 
be required to provide the FHWA's Office of Motor Carrier Standards 
with information on accidents (as defined in Sec. 390.5 of the FMCSRs) 
involving the vehicles equipped with the transponders. Accident reports 
would be required to be submitted every 6 months, and would be required 
to contain the information listed below:
    1. A copy of all accident reports prepared and required by State or 
other governmental entities or insurers.
    2. Interview information with the driver and occupants of the CMV 
involved. The information would be required to include specifically 
whether the driver of the transponder-equipped vehicle believed that 
the presence of the transponder was a factor in the accident. The 
interview would be required to be conducted by a motor carrier employee 
responsible for supervising the driver of the transponder-equipped 
vehicle.

IV. State and Local Laws

    The FHWA strongly encourages State and local authorities with 
safety regulations that would prohibit the use of the proposed 
transponders to accept the terms of the waiver.

V. Number of Vehicles To Be Equipped With Transponders

    The number of straight trucks, tractors, and motorcoaches that may 
be equipped with the transponders would be limited to no more than 5000 
for ADVANTAGE I-75 and 25,000 for HELP. The names and USDOT numbers of 
the motor carriers participating in the ADVANTAGE I-75 and HELP 
programs, as well as the number of transponder-equipped CMVs operated 
by each carrier, would be required to be provided to the FHWA.

VI. Termination of Waiver

    The transponders would be required to be removed from the CMVs 
participating in the ADVANTAGE I-75 and HELP projects (1) upon 
completion of the 3-year period, or (2) upon completion of the project, 
or (3) when required by the FHWA either at the completion of a semi-
annual review or at any time it is determined by the FHWA that the 
continued use of the devices decreases the safe operation of the 
vehicles on which they are used.

VII. Report

    ADVANTAGE I-75 and HELP would be required to provide separate 
reports at the conclusion of the program describing the transponder's 
installation and use. The reports would be required to include 
information obtained from the drivers on the device's effect on 
visibility through the windshield.

Request for Public Comments

    The FHWA requests public comment on the proposed waiver and on the 
attendant conditions. Comments are also sought from State and local 
enforcement officials relating to their experiences with windshield-
mounted electronic devices, such as those used in electronic toll-
collection systems.
    The FHWA is also interested in comments on the projected impacts on 
safety if windshield-mounted transponders were to be allowed under 
Sec. 393.60(c) of the FMCSRs, without the conditions that would be 
imposed under the waiver.

(49 U.S.C. 31136, 31502; 49 CFR 1.48)

    Issued on: October 5, 1994
Rodney E. Slater,
Federal Highway Administrator.
[FR Doc. 94-25193 Filed 10-11-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910--22-P