[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 222 (Friday, November 15, 1996)] [Notices] [Pages 58604-58605] From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov] [FR Doc No: 96-29362] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION [Docket No. 96-116, Notice 1] Capacity of Texas, Inc.; Receipt of Application for Temporary Exemption From Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 121 Collins Industries of Hutchinson, Kansas, on behalf of its subsidiary, Capacity of Texas, Inc., of Longview, Texas, has applied for a temporary exemption from paragraph S5.1.6 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 121 Air Brake Systems. The basis of the application is that compliance will cause substantial economic hardship to a manufacturer that has tried to comply with the standard in good faith. This notice of receipt of the application is published in accordance with the requirements of 49 U.S.C. 30113(b)(2) and does not represent any judgment of the agency on the merits of the application. Paragraph S5.1.6 (which includes S5.1.6.1-S5.1.6.3) of Standard No. 121 requires in pertinent part that each truck tractor manufactured on and after March 1, 1997, be equipped with an antilock brake system. Capacity of Texas (``Capacity'') has asked that one of its truck tractors be exempted for three months from the provisions of S5.1.6 that will apply to it effective March 1, 1997. Capacity manufactures the Trailer Jockey ``Model TJ-5000 (Off Highway)'' truck tractor. Terming it a ``yard [[Page 58605]] tractor'', Capacity states that ``this type of truck is designed to operate in a freight yard moving trailers from one terminal entrance to another * * * geared to limited speed [45 mph maximum] and to provide start-up torque for repeated stopping and starting.'' The tractors generally operate at 25 mph. Because these terminal tractors do not appear manufactured primarily for use on the public roads, ordinarily NHTSA would not consider them to be ``motor vehicles'' to which Standard No. 121 applies. However, Capacity is currently working to fill its third contract with the U.S. Postal Service. Unlike the other two contracts, the present Postal Service contract specifies that the truck tractors be certified to comply with all Federal motor vehicle safety standards applicable to on-road truck tractors, even though Capacity estimates that the tractors will spend ``approximately 5% or less of their life in operation on the public highways.'' Capacity's contract is for 210 vehicles, to be produced between September 1996 and June 1997, and it estimates that the final 60 under the order will be completed by the end of May 1997. It thus seeks an exemption until June 1, 1997, from the antilock brake requirements for the 60 tractors. One option that it has examined is acceleration of its production schedule so that manufacture of all vehicles could be completed by March 1, 1997. However, this would require an increase in production rates ``by at least 33% two months prior to the March 1, 1997 date.'' The work in part would have to be performed by newly hired and trained employes, increasing its overtime costs by 100%. It estimates that total costs would be greater by far than its net income for the fiscal year ending October 31, 1996. In addition, it would have to lessen its efforts to fill other orders, with a consequent loss of business. This means that, at the completion of the order as of March 1, 1997, it would have to lay off 50% of its work force until more orders were received and an orderly production schedule established. For these reasons, acceleration of the production schedule would cause it substantial economic hardship. A further option is to delay production of the 60 vehicles until compliance with Standard No. 121 is achieved. Capacity states that ``it will be possible to delay delivery of other customer trucks until testing of ABS truck systems is complete.'' However, delay for conformance is not acceptable to the Postal Service because it would result in a fleet of dissimilar vehicles requiring different spare parts. As Capacity further argues, identical vehicles are desired by the Postal Service because ``all drivers in the fleet can be trained to the same operating procedures'' and ``Fleet maintenance people will be working on these trucks and will be able to maintain all 270 using the same procedures.'' Even if a delay were acceptable to the Postal Service, Capacity would have to absorb the increase in costs since ``the price is fixed by contract and no upward price relief is available.'' In the year preceding the filing of its petition, Capacity produced and certified 47 vehicles for on-road use other than those produced under the postal contract. It also produced less than 500 off-road vehicles. In the same period, its parent corporation, Collins, Inc., manufactured less than 2,000 school buses and less than 2,000 ambulance conversions. Capacity's net income has declined over the past three fiscal years and, in its fiscal year ending October 31, 1996, is far less than $1,000,000. Capacity argues that a temporary exemption would be in the public interest because the vehicles are produced for the U.S. Postal Service. It believes that an exemption is also consistent with motor vehicle safety because ``NHTSA is using a staggered effectivity date for addition of antilock brakes to tractors, trucks, and buses.'' It points out that ``[t]here will be many vehicles built during the 3 months of this petition that are built under the old standard * * *. The only reason tractors are involved is because they got the first effectivity date instead of buses.'' Interested persons are invited to submit comments on the application described above. Comments should refer to the docket number and notice number, and be submitted to: Docket Section, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, room 5109, 400 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC, 20590. It is requested but not required that 10 copies be submitted. All comments received before the close of business on the comment closing date indicated below 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. Notice of final action on the application will be published in the Federal Register pursuant to the authority indicated below. Comment closing date: December 16, 1996. (49 U.S.C. 30113; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50, 501.8) Issued on November 8, 1996. L. Robert Shelton, Associate Administrator for Safety Performance Standards. [FR Doc. 96-29362 Filed 11-14-96; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-59-P