[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 214 (Monday, November 4, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 56652-56656]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-28228]
[[Page 56652]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 571
[Docket No. 95-65; Notice 2]
RIN 2127-AF72
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Air Brake Systems,
Devices That Remove Moisture and Contaminants
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document proposes to amend Standard No. 121, Air brake
systems, to require that each air brake-equipped truck, truck tractor,
and bus be equipped with a means of automatically removing moisture and
contaminants from the air system. The purpose of this proposal is to
improve the safety of air-braked vehicles by improving the reliability
and durability of antilock braking system (ABS) modulator valves and
pneumatic control valves. This document also proposes to delete the
requirement for a supply reservoir since its function (i.e., the
elimination of moisture and contaminants) would be accomplished by the
addition of such automatic means. Accordingly, the deletion would not
adversely affect the safety of those vehicles.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 3, 1997.
ADDRESSES: Comments should refer to the docket and notice numbers above
and be submitted to: Docket Section, National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. Docket
hours are 9:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For non-legal issues: Mr. Richard
Carter, Office of Crash Avoidance, National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington DC 20590, (202)
366-5274. FAX (202) 366-4329.
For legal issues: Mr. Marvin L. Shaw, NCC-20, Rulemaking Division,
Office of Chief Counsel, National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590, (202)
366-2992.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
A. Current Regulations
B. Petition for Rulemaking
C. Notice Requesting Comments About Devices that Remove
Contaminants
D. Comments on the Notice
II. Agency Proposal
A. General Discussion
B. Cost Considerations
III. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
A. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
C. National Environmental Policy Act
D. Executive Order 12612 (Federalism)
E. Civil Justice Reform
I. Background
A. Current Regulations
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 121, Air Brake Systems,
requires air-braked vehicles to be equipped with certain equipment,
including one or more air service reservoir systems from which air is
delivered to the brake chambers. (See S5.1.2) In addition,
manufacturers are required to either (1) equip air-braked vehicles with
an additional supply reservoir 1 between the service reservoir(s)
and the compressor, or (2) equip each service reservoir with an
automatic condensate drain valve.2 Both options remove moisture.
The supply reservoir collects moisture and solid particulate matter
before it can enter the service reservoir or reservoirs. An automatic
condensate drain valve automatically removes moisture and certain solid
contaminants that become trapped in the bottom of a reservoir.
Regardless of which option is chosen, all air reservoirs must be fitted
with a condensate drain valve that can be manually operated.
Accordingly, an automatic condensate drain valve must also be manually
operable. (see S5.1.2.4 for trucks and buses and S5.2.1.3 for
trailers).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The colloquial term for a supply reservoir is ``wet'' tank.
\2\ The colloquial term for an automatic condensate drain valve
is ``spitter valve.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) require
drivers of commercial vehicles to inspect specified features on their
vehicles, including service brake system, prior to driving to ensure
those features are ``* * * in good working order.'' (49 CFR 392.7)
However, the FMCSRs do not require that air reservoirs be drained on
any fixed periodic basis.
B. Petition for Rulemaking
On July 28, 1994, Domenic F. Coletta, M.D. submitted a petition for
rulemaking requesting that Standard No. 121 be amended to require a
condensate drain valve that automatically purges the moisture and
contaminants from each reservoir tank on air-brake equipped vehicles.
Dr. Coletta claimed that automatic drain valves would better ensure
safety than manual valves since drivers frequently fail to remember to
manually purge moisture and contaminants from reservoirs. The
petitioner supplied a video showing New Jersey State police purging
significant amounts of liquid and contaminants from the air reservoirs
of heavy vehicles during roadside safety inspections.
C. Notice Requesting Comments About Devices That Remove Contaminants
On July 24, 1995, NHTSA issued a notice requesting information
about devices that remove moisture and other contaminants from air
brake systems (60 FR 37864). The agency explained that keeping air
brake systems clean and dry prevents degraded brake performance and
valve freezing, which can lead to brake failure. The agency was
especially concerned about potential problems with antilock brake
systems (ABS) malfunctioning, since their modulator valves have smaller
orifices and therefore are more sensitive to contaminants. NHTSA
explained that certain equipment such as automatic and manual drain
valves and air dryer systems can keep air brake systems, particularly
the air reservoirs, dry and free from contaminants. Drain valves purge
the reservoirs of liquid condensate and contaminants suspended in that
liquid. Manual drain valves must be opened by a truck driver or
maintenance person to drain the reservoir. While ideally this should be
done each morning before the vehicle is started, some drivers do not do
so. Automatic drain valves periodically drain the reservoir without the
need for human intervention.
There are a variety of devices that reduce the amount of moisture
and other contaminants in an air brake system by cleaning and drying
the air. Among the most common are desiccant style air dryers and
``after-cooler'' air dryers. In a typical desiccant style system, the
incoming air is routed into the bottom end of an air dryer, where a
large portion of the oil and water mist fall to its bottom. This
partially cleaned air then goes through an oil separator. Next the air,
which is still moist with both oil and water vapor, is passed through a
``drying bed'' of desiccant material that absorbs the remaining
moisture. These dryers are equipped with an automatic drain valve that
periodically purges moisture and contaminants from the air system. In
contrast, in a typical ``after-cooler''
[[Page 56653]]
system, which uses an air cleaner only, not all the moisture is
removed, since the air is not passed through a drying bed of desiccant
material.
NHTSA stated that according to AlliedSignal, over 80 percent of new
air braked heavy trucks are being built with air dryers and that more
than 90 percent of the dryers are the desiccant type. Moreover, that
company predicted that in five years almost all air braked vehicles
will be equipped with an air cleaning and drying system.
NHTSA posed several questions about whether it should nevertheless
initiate rulemaking to require devices to remove moisture and other
contaminants from air brake systems. These included questions whether
contaminants in air brake systems cause a significant safety problem,
whether devices such as automatic drain valves and air dryers are
effective in removing moisture and contaminants from air brake systems,
and whether requiring such devices would be cost effective.
D. Comments on the Notice
NHTSA received 34 comments from vehicle and equipment
manufacturers, a safety advocacy group (Advocates for Highway and Auto
Safety) (Advocates), the Truck Manufacturers Association (TMA), the
Heavy Duty Brake Maintenance Council (HDBMC), the Truck Trailer
Manufacturers Association (TTMA), the National Truck Equipment
Association (NTEA), the National School Transportation Association
(NSTA), the American Trucking Associations (ATA), individual truck
operators and fleets, Senator Frank R. Lautenberg, the petitioner, and
numerous private citizens.
The manufacturers and associations generally stated that a Federal
requirement was not necessary, claiming that the present use of air
dryers, and the trend towards their increased use, was sufficient to
maintain a safe level of performance. ATA, AlliedSignal, NTEA, NSTA,
Navistar, TTMA, and TMA stated that they had no records of any
accidents or crashes caused by contaminated air. TMA stated that while
contaminants in air brake systems can cause reliability problems in
specific components, they believe contamination does not result in a
significant safety problem. TMA, Penske Truck Leasing, and ATA stated
that a desiccant style air dryer with an integral automatic drain valve
more effectively removes moisture and other contaminants from an air
brake system than an automatic drain valve by itself. TMA requested
that instead of a supply reservoir, the agency should allow either an
automatic drain valve on each service reservoir or a desiccant style
air dryer. ATA also stated that desiccant air dryers were more
effective in keeping air in the brake system clean than automatic drain
valves. That organization stated that ``automatic drain valves have not
been found to be an effective device for removing contaminants.''
The petitioner (Dr. Coletta), manufacturers of automatic drain
valves, Advocates, and a number of private citizens commented that
significant safety problems result from moisture and contaminants in a
vehicle's air system. The petitioner stated that it is very important
to keep the air reservoir system dry and free of contaminants to
prevent the contamination and deterioration of the brake system, which
can result in serious safety problems. To support this claim, Dr.
Coletta referenced a National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) study
of 18 heavy vehicle crashes 3 in which NTSB investigated the
extent to which brake system performance caused or increased the
severity of heavy vehicle crashes. Inadequate brake system maintenance
and poor brake adjustment were either the primary or a contributory
causal factor in most of the crashes investigated. While not
specifically mentioned as a primary or direct contributory factor to
these crashes, the NTSB report noted that in 4 of the 18 cases (22
percent), significant amounts of moisture and sludge were found in the
air reservoirs, thereby contributing to the overall poor functioning of
the vehicles' brake system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Heavy Vehicle Air Brake Performance (NTSB/SS-92/01; 1992)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Coletta and others stated that the agency should require that
each service reservoir be equipped with an automatic drain valve
instead of a manual drain valve, because truck drivers typically do not
manually drain the reservoirs. They further claimed that air dryers are
not an effective way to solve the problem of contaminants and moisture
in air systems, since air dryers do not remove all moisture from the
system and are difficult to maintain. These commenters also stated that
truck drivers will not perform the routine maintenance necessary for
desiccant systems.
II. Agency Proposal
A. General Considerations
Based on the available information, NHTSA has decided to propose
amending Standard No. 121 to require that each air brake-equipped
truck, truck tractor, and bus be equipped with an automatic means of
removing moisture and contaminants from the air brake system. The term
``contaminants'' includes, but is not limited to, carbon and other
particulates, dirt, oil, soot, and sludge. The agency believes that
removing moisture and contaminants would increase the reliability and
durability of both ABS and pneumatic control valves of air brake
systems, thereby increasing the safety of these vehicles. This is so
because contaminants cause valves to stick, thereby preventing
sufficient air pressure from being delivered to the brake. The proper
functioning of ABS valves is especially important since heavy vehicles
will be required to be equipped with ABS, beginning in March 1997. In
addition, the proposed requirements would ensure that air supply lines
are clear and that maximum air reservoir capacity is available to
drivers when braking.
NHTSA is proposing to require air braked vehicles to be equipped
with a means of automatically removing moisture and contaminants from
the air brake system for the following reasons. First, according to
NHTSA's extensive fleet study 4 of ABS-equipped heavy vehicles,
ABS-equipped truck tractors that were also equipped with desiccant-
style air dryers performed better than truck tractors without these air
dryers. In particular, vehicles with desiccant-style air dryers did not
experience leaks in their relay valves. Second, the previously
mentioned NTSB study of heavy vehicle crashes found that in 4 of 18
cases (22 percent), significant amounts of moisture and contaminants
were found in the vehicles' air reservoirs. The agency emphasizes that
while the study is not a statistically representative sampling of all
heavy vehicle crashes, it suggests that air system contamination may be
a problem. Third, AlliedSignal recently conducted a voluntary recall
5 to address freezing relay valves because the valves failed due
to exposure to solvents and chemicals such as antifreeze and glycol.
Apparently, some drivers and mechanics attempted to unfreeze the valves
by pouring antifreeze into the trailer's air supply and control lines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Klusmeyer, L.F., Gray, A.W., Bishop, J.S., and Van Schoiack,
M. An In-Service Evaluation of the Performance, Reliability,
Maintainability, and Durability of Antilock Braking Systems (ABSs)
for Semitrailers, USDOT Report No. HS 808 059, October 1993.
\5\ Ref. Voluntary Recall No.94-E-027.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To achieve this rule's objective, i.e., keeping air brake systems
dry and free of contaminants, NHTSA considered a number of regulatory
approaches and decided to propose a broad-based
[[Page 56654]]
equipment requirement rather than specifying a specific device,
detailed design specifications, or general performance requirements.
This is the same approach the agency used in establishing S5.1.8 which
requires that ``wear of the service brakes on newly manufactured heavy
vehicles to be compensated for by means of a system of automatic
adjustment.'' (57 FR 47793, October 20, 1992). Moreover, the agency
believes today's proposal is consistent with the agency's desire to
avoid issuing regulations that are unnecessarily design specific. NHTSA
is wary of specifying a particular device, an action that might
preclude the development of new technologies, particularly in light of
a recent paper 6 by the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) that
discussed a number of devices and methods that can remove moisture and
other contaminants from compressed air systems. These methods include
filtration, desiccant absorption, coalescing, centrifugal force, or a
combination of these processes. The SAE paper stated that the most
effective device would employ a combination of these processes,
particularly filtration, coalescing, and desiccant. These devices would
be permitted by this proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Fitzsimmons, D. Synergy in Air Dryers, Multiple-State
Processes and Application Requirements, SAE Paper No. 952675,
November, 1995.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another device that would be permitted under this proposal is the
automatic condensate drain valve, the solution suggested in Dr.
Coletta's petition. These devices eliminate moisture (i.e., liquid
condensate) and solid contaminants suspended in that liquid that
collect at the bottom of the supply reservoir.
NHTSA has decided at this time not to develop a test procedure and
performance requirements to evaluate the dryness and cleanness of an
air brake system for several reasons. First, the practicality of
developing such a test procedure is unclear at this time. To ensure
that all (or substantially all) contaminants had been removed, it might
be necessary for the test procedure to assess the performance of the
entire air system, including all piping and valves. Such a test could
be expensive, since the piping and valves are very extensive. Moreover,
it might be necessary to develop different test set-ups to evaluate the
wide range of air systems. Second, to the agency's knowledge, criteria
for evaluating the amount of contamination removal do not currently
exist. Developing such a test procedure and criteria would have been
too time-consuming.
For these reasons, NHTSA has decided to propose an equipment
requirement at this time. Nevertheless, the agency would prefer
ultimately to establish performance requirements for this equipment.
Federal law generally requires Federal agencies to use technical
standards that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies when such technical standards are available; see
section 12(d) of Pub. L. 104-113. The subject of moisture and solid
contaminant removal from air brake systems appears to present an
opportunity for NHTSA to adopt consensus performance requirements
developed by an organization such as the Society of Automotive
Engineers (SAE). SAE would be performing a service to the public by
developing such consensus performance requirements, as well as
permitting a significant savings in resources for the government. NHTSA
is aware of and has been monitoring the efforts of the SAE to develop a
Recommended Practice for assessing the amount of airborne moisture and
solid particulate matter contaminant levels present at the output side
of the service reservoirs. If the SAE can reach consensus on some
performance requirements, NHTSA anticipates relying on those consensus
requirements in its further consideration of this issue.
NHTSA requests comments on its decision to propose requiring that
air-braked vehicles be equipped with a means of automatically removing
moisture and other contaminants rather than proposing a test procedure
and performance requirements. The agency also invites comments about
the proposed terminology used to describe the equipment that the
amendment would require, especially whether various devices would
comply with the proposal.
NHTSA has decided to propose deleting the requirement for a supply
reservoir since the service reservoirs in an air system would be
equipped with an automatic means of removing moisture and contaminants
from the air system. The agency believes that removing supply
reservoirs would not compromise air brake system performance, provided
that a means of automatically removing moisture and contaminants is
added. Nevertheless, the agency invites commenters to submit data and
test results comparing the durability and reliability of air brake
systems on vehicles that are equipped as follows: those vehicles
equipped with a supply reservoir but are not equipped with a means for
automatically removing moisture and contaminants versus those vehicles
that are not equipped with a supply reservoir but are equipped with a
means for automatically removing moisture and contaminants. Also, the
agency requests comments about the likelihood that a purchaser would
decide not to equip its vehicles with supply reservoirs, if the
proposed amendment were adopted.
NHTSA has decided to retain the requirement of S5.1.2.4 that each
reservoir be fitted with a manual draining capacity. The agency
believes this capability is needed as a supplemental means of verifying
that the primary means of automatically removing moisture and
contaminants is functioning properly. Periodic manual purging checks to
ascertain that liquids are not collecting in service reservoirs should
accomplish this function. Automatic condensate drain valves (or an air
dryer with an automatic drain valve) that can be manually actuated,
would comply with this requirement.
B. Cost Considerations
In its notice requesting comments, NHTSA estimated that devices
that would comply with requirements to keep the air system clean and
dry could range from $75-$400 per vehicle. The commenters generally
concurred with these estimates. The agency estimates that the annual
production of air braked vehicles is approximately 209,000 (148,000
truck tractors and approximately 61,000 single unit trucks and buses),
based on its earlier analysis in the Final Regulatory Evaluation for
the ABS final rule (60 FR 13216, March 10, 1995). NHTSA estimates that
90 percent of all currently manufactured truck tractors are already
equipped with a means of automatically removing moisture and
contaminants and that 75 percent of all single unit trucks and buses
are so equipped. This proposal would affect the remaining 30,000
vehicles (14,800 truck tractors + 15,200 single unit vehicles). They
would need to be equipped with these devices at a total annual cost of
between $2.25 million to $12 million.
NHTSA notes that some of these costs might be offset by savings if
manufacturers choose to eliminate the supply reservoirs from the
estimated 209,000 air brake equipped truck tractors, trucks and buses
that are manufactured each year. The amount of these offsetting savings
could vary appreciably, depending on a number of factors. First,
removing one of the three air reservoirs could necessitate increasing
the size of the remaining two service reservoirs to meet the reservoir
sizing requirements of S.5.2.1.1. Nevertheless, two larger reservoirs
[[Page 56655]]
would cost less than three reservoirs and their associated piping and
fittings. The agency estimates that there would be a savings of between
$10-$75 per vehicle. Second, the extent to which manufacturers and
heavy vehicle users decide to no longer equip their vehicles with a
supply reservoir is uncertain.
Accordingly, for the purposes of this analysis, the agency has
conservatively assumed that between 0-50 percent of newly manufactured
air-braked power units would no longer be equipped with supply
reservoirs. Based on this assumption, the agency estimates that no
longer equipping vehicles with supply reservoirs would offset the
proposal's costs by between $0-$7.8 million per year, with a
conservative estimate being $1 million. The agency invites comments on
these cost estimates. After reviewing this information, NHTSA will
factor in these cost savings in assessing the rulemaking's overall
cost.
Based on applying this $1 million cost savings to the costs
associated with requiring air-braked vehicles to be equipped with a
means of automatically removing moisture and contaminants, NHTSA
estimates that a total cost of $1.25 million to $11 million would be
incurred to comply with the proposed requirements. In addition, by
ensuring dry and clean air, today's rulemaking would contribute to more
fully achieving the anticipated benefits expected from equipping heavy
vehicles with ABS.
NHTSA decided not to propose requiring a means of automatically
removing moisture and contaminants separately on both towing and towed
units in a combination-unit vehicle. The agency reasoned that since the
air used on trailers is supplied by the towing unit, having the means
to automatically remove moisture and contaminants on the towing unit
would be sufficient to ensure dry and clean air on towed units as well.
The agency further reasoned that sufficient safety enhancement,
relative to the costs incurred, would be achieved by specifying such a
requirement only for the towing unit. The agency estimates that it
would cost an additional $13.9 million to $74 million per year to equip
the 186,100 heavy truck trailers that are manufactured each year. The
agency solicits additional data and comments on its decision not to
propose requiring that trailers be equipped with a means of
automatically removing moisture and contaminants.
Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
A. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures
This notice has not been reviewed under Executive Order 12866.
NHTSA has considered the impacts of this rulemaking action and
determined that it is not ``significant'' within the meaning of the
Department of Transportation's regulatory policies and procedures. The
agency's Final Economic Assessment of the final rules amending Standard
No. 105 and Standard No. 121 to require medium and heavy vehicles to be
equipped with ABS, concluded that the benefits associated with those
requirements exceeded the costs that would result. The additional costs
associated with adding a means of automatically removing moisture and
contaminants to those vehicles that would otherwise not be equipped
with them, would increase the costs of the ABS rule by 0.2 percent to
1.7 percent. This small increase does not alter the agency's original
determination. Based on the discussion above and this consideration,
NHTSA believes that the impacts are so minimal as not to warrant
preparation of an additional full regulatory evaluation.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
NHTSA has also considered the effects of this proposal under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act. I hereby certify that it would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Accordingly, the agency has not prepared a preliminary regulatory
flexibility analysis.
NHTSA concluded that the March 1995 final rule amending Standard
No. 121 did not have a significant impact on a substantial number of
small entities. The agency concluded then that a small number of
intermediate and final stage manufacturers that are small businesses
might be affected by the rule, but that the impact would not be
substantial. That conclusion is equally valid for this proposal, since
today's proposal addresses the same types of manufacturers as addressed
in the March 1995 action, and since the costs of this rulemaking are
much less.
C. National Environmental Policy Act
NHTSA has analyzed this rulemaking action for the purposes of the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. The agency has determined
that implementation of this action would not have any significant
impact on the quality of the human environment. No changes in existing
production or disposal processes would result.
D. Executive Order 12612 (Federalism)
NHTSA has analyzed this action under the principles and criteria in
Executive Order 12612. The agency believes that this rulemaking action
would not have sufficient Federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism Assessment. No State laws would be
affected.
E. Civil Justice Reform
This rulemaking would 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 rulemakings 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.
Public Comments
Interested persons are invited to submit comments on the proposal.
It is requested but not required 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
[[Page 56656]]
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 late for consideration in regard to
the final rule will be considered as suggestions for further rulemaking
action. 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.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571
Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Motor vehicles, Rubber and tires.
PART 571--[AMENDED]
In consideration of the foregoing, the agency proposes to amend
Standard No. 121, Air Brake Systems, in Title 49 of the Code of Federal
Regulations at Part 571 as follows:
PART 571--FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS
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. 571.121 Standard No. 121; Air Brake Systems
2. Sec. 571.121 would be amended by revising S5.1.2 and by adding a
new section S5.1.9, which would read as follows:
Sec. 571.121 Standard No. 121; Air Brake Systems
* * * * *
S5.1.2 Reservoirs. One or more service reservoir systems, from
which air is delivered to the brake chambers.
* * * * *
S5.1.9 Contamination Removal. Each truck, truck tractor and bus
shall be equipped with a means of automatically removing moisture and
contaminants from the air system.
Issued on: October 29, 1996.
L. Robert Shelton,
Associate Administrator for Safety Performance Standards.
[FR Doc. 96-28228 Filed 11-1-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P