[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 18 (Friday, January 27, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 5336-5337]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-2117]



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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. 90-01; Notice 5]
RIN 2127-AF32


Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; School Bus Pedestrian 
Safety Devices

agency: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.

action: Final rule.

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

summary: This notice adopts as final the amendments made by an interim 
final rule to the flash rate requirement for stop signal arm lamps in 
Standard No. 131, School Bus Pedestrian Safety Devices. The interim 
final rule, which responded to a petition for rulemaking submitted by 
Blue Bird Bus Company, removed design restrictive language that had the 
effect of prohibiting strobe lamps on stop signal arms.

dates: Effective Date: January 27, 1995.
    Petitions for reconsideration: Any petition for reconsideration of 
this rule must be received by the agency not later than February 27, 
1995.

addresses: Petitions for reconsideration should refer to Docket No. 90-
01; Notice 5 and be submitted to the following: Administrator, National 
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., 
Washington, DC 20590.

for further information contact: Mr. Charles Hott, Office of Vehicle 
Safety Standards, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 
Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590 (202) 366-0247.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Federal motor vehicle safety standard (FMVSS) No. 131, School Bus 
Pedestrian Safety Devices, requires each new school bus to be equipped 
with a stop signal arm. A stop signal arm is an item of school bus 
equipment designed to alert motorists that a school bus is stopping or 
has stopped. The stop signal arm is patterned after a conventional 
``STOP'' sign and attached to the exterior of the driver's side of a 
school bus. When the school bus stops, the stop signal arm 
automatically extends outward from the bus. The standard specifies 
requirements for the stop signal arm's appearance, size, conspicuity, 
operation and location. To enhance the conspicuity of a stop signal 
arm, Standard No. 131 specifies that the device must be either 
reflectorized or be illuminated with flashing lamps.
    On February 22, 1994, Blue Bird Body Company (Blue Bird) petitioned 
the agency to amend the flash rate requirements in S6.2.2 of Standard 
No. 131 to allow the use of strobe lamps on stop signal arms. At the 
time, S6.2.2 stated:

S6.2.2  Flash Rate. The lamps on each side of the stop signal arm, 
when operated at the manufacturer's design load, shall flash at a 
rate of 60 to 120 flashes per minute with a current ``on'' time of 
30 to 75 percent. The total of the percent current ``on'' time for 
the two terminals shall be between 90 and 110.

    Blue Bird argued that the requirement had the effect of prohibiting 
the use of strobe lamps. Citing previous agency notices, Blue Bird 
stated its belief that NHTSA had not intended, in issuing its stop 
signal arm requirements, to prohibit the use of strobe lamps on stop 
signal arms. For instance, it stated that, in the advance notice of 
proposed rulemaking (ANPRM), the agency had solicited comments about 
whether the agency should require strobe lamps.\1\

    \1\The agency notes that there was no ANPRM addressing stop 
signal arms. The discussion described by Blue Bird was contained in 
the NPRM (55 FR 3624, February 2, 1990).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to Blue Bird, its petition was precipitated by a letter 
that it received from NHTSA's Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance 
addressing an apparent non-compliance of school buses manufactured with 
stop signal arms equipped with strobe lamps. Blue Bird stated that the 
apparent non-compliance results from the fact that S6.2.2 sets forth 
restrictive design requirements based on the operating characteristics 
of incandescent lamps instead of more performance-oriented requirements 
based on visual effectiveness. The petitioner alleged that the 
requirement prevents the use of strobe lamps. Based on these 
allegations, Blue Bird stated that the apparent noncompliance results 
from a deficiency in the Standard and not a deficiency in its school 
buses. Blue Bird requested that the agency amend S6.2.2 to allow the 
use of strobe lamps, stating that this would be in the interests of 
safety and consistent with the Standard's intent.
    Blue Bird also stated that four states (Alaska, New Mexico, 
Washington, and West Virginia) as well as some local school districts 
require stop signal arms to be equipped with strobe lamps. This 
consideration prompted Blue Bird to request that this rulemaking take 
effect immediately, claiming that the production and delivery of school 
buses with strobe lamp equipped stop signal arms needed to continue 
without disruption.
    On May 24, 1994, NHTSA published an interim final rule that amended 
the flash rate requirements to remove design restrictive language that 
acted to prohibit strobe lamps (59 FR 26759). The agency explained 
that, in establishing the flash rate requirements, the agency intended 
to assure the conspicuity of stop signal arms and did not intend to 
prohibit manufacturers from installing strobe lamps on stop signal arms 
to provide such conspicuity. The requirements in effect prior to the 
interim final rule were based upon filament type lamps, which need an 
extended current-on-time of 90 to 110 percent of the total flash cycle 
for the two terminals. This time period is needed to allow this type of 
lamp to come to full brilliance. In contrast, strobe lamps come to full 
brilliance almost immediately and could not meet the current-on-time 
requirements for filament type lamps. The interim final rule resolved 
this problem by modifying the flash rate requirements to reflect 
changes made to the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE's) Recommended 
Practice J1133, July 1989, School Bus Stop Arms, to allow the use of 
strobe lights on stop arms.
    NHTSA received comments about the interim final rule from the 
National School Transportation Association (NSTA) and Specialty 
Manufacturing Company (Specialty) which manufactures stop signal arms. 
NSTA stated that the interim final rule should be made permanent.
    Specialty also stated that the interim final rule should be made 
permanent, provided that the agency adopts an industry practice which 
treats a double flash strobe pattern to be a single flash cycle. It 
explained that both single and double flash strobe lamps are available, 
but that the secondary flash of a double strobe pattern will occur 
approximately 0.17 seconds after the initial flash. According to the 
commenter, the industry considers this double flash pattern to be a 
single flash since they occur in rapid succession.
    NHTSA agrees with Specialty that multiple flash patterns that occur 
[[Page 5337]] rapidly should be considered to be a single flash. In a 
March 29, 1994 interpretation letter to the Connecticut Department of 
Motor Vehicles, NHTSA stated that the light emanating from a strobe 
lamp that flashes repeatedly in rapid succession will be considered a 
single flash of varying intensity and not as multiple flashes, when 
determining the flash rate and flash cycle for alternatively flashing 
lights required by Standard No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and 
Associated Equipment, for school buses. The agency believes that it is 
appropriate to apply the same principle to school bus stop arms 
equipped with multiple flash strobe lamps on stop arms. Accordingly, 
NHTSA considers strobe lamps on school bus stop arms that have multiple 
flashes of a single lamp and then remain off while the other lamp 
flashes to be a single flash cycle.
    Based on the reasons set forth in the interim final rule and those 
set forth above, NHTSA has decided to adopt the amendments in the 
interim final rule on a permanent basis. NHTSA determined that there is 
good cause to establish an immediate effective date for the final rule 
to avoid disrupting compliance with the Standard as explained in the 
interim final rule.

Regulatory Analyses and Notices

A. Executive Order 12866 (Federal Regulation) and DOT Regulatory 
Policies and Procedures
    This notice was not reviewed under E.O. 12866. NHTSA has analyzed 
this rulemaking and determined that it is not significant within the 
meaning of the Department of Transportation regulatory policies and 
procedures. The agency has determined that the economic effects of the 
amendment are so minimal that a full regulatory evaluation is not 
required. Since the amendment imposes no new requirement but simply 
allows for an alternative design, any cost impacts will be in the 
nature of slight, nonquantifiable cost savings.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, NHTSA has 
evaluated the effects of this rulemaking on small entities. Based on 
this evaluation, I hereby certify that the amendments will not have 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
Few of the school bus manufacturers qualify as small entities. In 
addition, manufacturers of motor vehicles, small businesses, small 
organizations, and small governmental units that purchase motor 
vehicles will not be significantly affected by the slight cost savings 
resulting from the amendments. Accordingly, a regulatory flexibility 
analysis has not been performed.
C. Federalism Assessment
    This action has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and 
criteria contained in Executive Order 12612. NHTSA has determined that 
the rulemaking does not have sufficient federalism implications to 
warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment. Nevertheless, NHTSA 
notes that the laws of various local jurisdictions and four States 
(Alaska, New Mexico, Washington, and West Virginia) require stop signal 
arms to be equipped with strobe lamps and thus would have been 
preempted without this amendment.
D. Environmental Impacts
    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 
NHTSA has considered the environmental impacts of this rule. The agency 
has determined that this rule will not have a significant effect on the 
quality of the human environment.
E. Civil Justice Reform
    This final rule does not have any retroactive effect. Under 49 
U.S.C. 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. 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.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571

    Imports, Incorporation by reference, Motor vehicle safety, Motor 
vehicles, Rubber and rubber products, Tires.

    Accordingly, the interim rule amending 49 CFR part 571 which was 
published at 59 FR 26759 on May 24, 1994, is adopted as a final rule 
without change.

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

    Issued on: January 23, 1995.
Ricardo Martinez,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 95-2117 Filed 1-26-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-M