[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 45 (Tuesday, March 9, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 11724-11734]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-5735]



[[Page 11723]]

_______________________________________________________________________

Part V





Department of Transportation





_______________________________________________________________________



National Highway Traffic Safety Administration



_______________________________________________________________________



49 CFR Parts 571 and 575



Consumer Information Regulations: Utility Vehicle Label; Final Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 45 / Tuesday, March 9, 1999 / Rules 
and Regulations  

[[Page 11724]]


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


DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Parts 571 and 575

[Docket No. NHTSA-98-3381, Notice 2]
RIN 2127-AG53


Consumer Information Regulations; Utility Vehicle Label

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This final rule modifies the rollover warning currently 
required for small and mid-sized utility vehicles. Utility vehicles, 
which have features for off-road use, are often referred to in the 
media as sport utility vehicles. In place of the current, text-only 
warning label containing a paragraph of information, this rule requires 
a new label that uses graphics, bright colors, and short bulleted text 
messages. This rule also requires that additional information related 
to rollover risks be included in the owners' manuals of these vehicles. 
These changes make the rollover warning more attention-getting and 
understandable to consumers. They will thereby increase the chance that 
the warning will persuade drivers to modify their behavior and reduce 
the likelihood of rollovers.

DATES: This final rule is effective September 1, 1999. Petitions for 
reconsideration must be received by April 23, 1999.

ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration should refer to the docket and 
notice number of this final rule and be submitted to: Administrator, 
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW, 
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The following persons at the National 
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW, 
Washington, DC 20590:
    For labeling issues: Mary Versailles, Office of Planning and 
Consumer Programs, NPS-31, telephone (202) 366-2057, facsimile (202) 
366-4329.
    For general rollover issues: Gayle Dalrymple, Office of Crash 
Avoidance Standards, NPS-20, telephone (202) 366-5559, facsimile (202) 
366-4329.
    For legal issues: Nicole Fradette, Office of Chief Counsel, NCC-20, 
telephone (202) 366-2992, facsimile (202) 366-3820.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Summary of Today's Rule

    In an effort to reduce the rollover rate of utility vehicles 
1, today's rule modifies the existing requirements for 
rollover warning labels for those vehicles. The new labels will more 
effectively alert their drivers to the risk the vehicles will roll 
over, the steps they can take to avoid that risk, and the steps they 
can take to reduce the chance of injury in the event of a rollover. The 
new label uses bright colors, graphics, and short bulleted text 
messages in lieu of the current text-only format. The rule requires the 
label's header to have an alert symbol (a triangle containing an 
exclamation point) followed by the statement ``WARNING: Higher Rollover 
Risk'' in black text on a yellow background. The following three 
statements must appear below the header in the center of the label: 
``Avoid Abrupt Maneuvers and Excessive Speed,'' ``Always Buckle Up,'' 
and ``See Owner's Manual For Further Information.'' The rule specifies 
that the label must contain two pictograms: one showing a tilting 
utility vehicle on the left of the label, and the other showing a 
seated vehicle occupant with a secured three-point belt system on the 
right. The pictograms and the statement must be in black on a white 
background. The rule requires the label to be placed on either the 
driver's sun visor or the driver's side window. If the label is placed 
on the back of the driver's sun visor, the rule requires an alert label 
to be placed on the front of the visor urging the person to flip the 
visor over and read the information on the other side. The new label is 
required on utility vehicles with a wheelbase of 110 inches or less. 
The rule also requires additional information on rollover be included 
in the owner's manuals of these vehicles. The new requirements are 
effective September 1, 1999.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ ``Utility vehicles'' are defined in 49 CFR Part 575 as 
multipurpose passenger vehicles (other than those which are 
passenger car derivatives) with a wheelbase of 110 inches or less 
and with special features for off-road operation. 49 CFR Part 
575.105. These vehicles are commonly referred to as sport utility 
vehicles in the media.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Background

A. The Rollover Crash Problem 2
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ A complete summary of the statistics used in this section 
can be found in the document titled ``Status Report for Rollover 
Prevention and Injury Mitigation, May 1996,'' in Docket 91-68-N05.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The agency has focused its rollover consumer information efforts on 
utility vehicles because this type of vehicle is involved in rollover-
related occupant deaths more often (on a per-vehicle basis) than other 
vehicle types. Utility vehicles experience 98 rollover fatalities for 
every million vehicles registered.3 This is more than twice 
the rate of all other light vehicle types combined--44 deaths per 
million registered vehicles (although small pickup trucks have a 
similar fatal rollover rate--93 deaths per million registered 
vehicles).4
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Fatality rates given are averages of 1991-1994 rates, using 
fatality data from FARS and vehicle registration data from R.L. Polk 
and Company, which was limited to the 14 most recent model years at 
the time of the Status Report.
    \4\ According to a review of the National Automotive Sampling 
System (NASS), rollover crashes accounted for over 28 percent of all 
light duty vehicles fatalities in 1997. Light duty vehicles are 
passenger cars, pickup trucks, vans, and sport utility vehicles with 
a gross vehicle weight rating of 10,000 pounds or less. Vans and 
sport utility vehicles are both considered multipurpose passenger 
vehicles for purposes of NHTSA regulations. From 1991 through 1994, 
an average of 8,857 occupants of light duty vehicles died in 
rollover crashes annually. (1991-1994 average from Fatality Analysis 
Reporting System (FARS)) These fatal rollover crashes occurred with 
all types of vehicles; the greatest number occurred in small 
passenger cars, followed by small pickup trucks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This does not mean, however, that utility vehicles are unsafe 
overall compared to other vehicle types. The overall fatality rate (for 
crashes of all types, i.e., front, rear, side and rollover crashes) for 
utility vehicles is 163 fatalities per million registered vehicles, 
compared to 169 for all light duty vehicles combined. Small pickup 
trucks have the highest overall fatality rate, at 217 fatalities per 
million registered vehicles, followed by small cars, at 200.

B. Existing Utility Vehicle Rollover Warning Label

    Currently, utility vehicles are required to have a label advising 
drivers that the handling and maneuvering characteristics of these 
vehicles require special driving practices (49 CFR 575.105). The label 
must be permanently affixed in a location in the vehicle which is 
``prominent and visible to the driver.'' A common location used by 
manufacturers is the sun visor. No minimum size requirements are 
specified for the label or lettering. The label must be ``printed in a 
typeface and color which are clear and conspicuous.'' The label must 
include the following or similar language:

    This is a multipurpose passenger vehicle which will handle and 
maneuver differently from an ordinary passenger car, in driving 
conditions which may occur on streets and highways and off road. As 
with other vehicles of this type, if you make sharp turns or abrupt 
maneuvers, the vehicle may roll over or may go out of control and 
crash. You should read driving guidelines and instructions in the 
Owner's Manual, and WEAR YOUR SEAT BELTS AT ALL TIMES.

Utility vehicles are also required to have information in the vehicle 
owner's

[[Page 11725]]

manual. The current requirement specifies the following or similar 
language:

    Utility vehicles have higher ground clearance and a narrower 
track to make them capable of performing in a wide variety of off-
road applications. Specific design characteristics give them a 
higher center of gravity than ordinary cars. An advantage of the 
higher ground clearance is a better view of the road allowing you to 
anticipate problems. They are not designed for cornering at the same 
speeds as conventional 2-wheel drive vehicles any more than low-
slung sports cars are designed to perform satisfactorily under off-
road conditions. If at all possible, avoid sharp turns or abrupt 
maneuvers. As with other vehicles of this type, failure to operate 
this vehicle correctly may result in loss of control or vehicle 
rollover.

C. Summary of NPRM

    On April 13, 1998, the agency published an NPRM proposing to modify 
this labeling requirement. The proposed changes were based on the 
results of a series of focus groups conducted in June 1996 as well as 
the agency's experience in the rulemaking to improve the air bag 
warning labels.5 The proposed changes included use of bright 
colors, graphics, and short bulleted text messages, instead of the 
current text-only format. The rollover focus groups and other focus 
groups formed by the agency have consistently concluded that labels 
like the existing utility vehicle label (long unbroken passages of text 
and no graphics) are less likely to be read than labels with minimal 
wording and graphics.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Copies of the Focus Group Report, dated August 1996, as well 
as the three potential labels proposed in the NPRM are in docket 
NHTSA 98-3381.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NHTSA explained in the NPRM that the American National Standard 
Institute (ANSI) has a standard 6 for product safety signs 
and labels (ANSI Z535.4) that identifies a hierarchy of hazard levels 
ranging from extremely serious to moderately serious and specifies 
corresponding hierarchies of signal words, i.e., ``danger,'' 
``warning,'' and ``caution,'' and of colors. For the header, the ANSI 
standard specifies a red background with white text for ``danger,'' an 
orange background with black text for ``warning,'' and a yellow 
background with black text for ``caution.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ This standard was not considered by the June 1996 rollover 
focus groups in their deliberations, however the standard was 
considered in a series of air bag label focus groups in October 
1996.

   ANSI Requirements for Color Coded Header Messages for the Different
                            Levels of Hazard
                  [Listed in declining level of hazard]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Imminently hazardous situation   ``Danger''...........  Red background
 which will result in death or                           with white
 serious injury if not avoided.                          text.
Potentially hazardous situation  ``Warning''..........  Orange
 which could result in death or                          background with
 serious injury.                                         black text.
Potentially hazardous situation  ``Caution''..........  Yellow
 which could result in minor or                          background with
 moderate injury.                                        black text.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

The ANSI standard specifies that pictograms should be black on white, 
with occasional uses of color for emphasis, and that message text 
should be black on white.
    The NPRM proposed three different labels for comment. Proposed 
label 1 used the ANSI color format with the heading background in 
orange with the words in black. The remainder of the label had a white 
background with black text and drawings. Proposed label 2 used a color 
scheme like the air bag warning labels, which is the same as the ANSI 
color format except that the background color for the heading in the 
label is yellow. Proposed label 3 employed the color scheme used in the 
focus groups--the heading area had a red background with white text. 
The graphic areas had a yellow background with black and white 
drawings. The text area had a black background with yellow text.
    Proposed label 1 used two graphics to the left of the areas with 
heading and text. Proposed labels 2 and 3 had a heading area across the 
top of the label, with two graphics surrounding a text area below. All 
three proposed labels had a graphic of the area on a seat belt where 
the buckle is, with the belt not fully buckled. Proposed labels 1 and 2 
had a graphic with a vehicle on a curved road that was tipping. 
Proposed label 3 had a graphic of a tipped vehicle with a curved arrow 
under it and a person being ejected from the vehicle.
    Despite focus group preference for the signal word ``danger,'' the 
agency proposed the use of the word ``warning'' as more appropriate to 
the level of risk. The agency also noted that the word ``warning'' is 
used in the air bag warning label. NHTSA sought comment on whether to 
use the phrases ``High Risk of Rollover'' or ``Higher Rollover Risk'' 
in the label. Proposed labels 1 and 2 used the phrase ``High Risk of 
Rollover'' in the text and heading areas respectively. Proposed label 3 
used the phrase ``Higher Rollover Risk.'' Proposed label 3 also used 
the phrase ``Always Buckle Up.'' Proposed labels 1 and 2 included the 
phrase ``Avoid Sudden Stops and Sharp Turns.''

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P

[[Page 11726]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09MR99.053


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09MR99.054


[[Page 11727]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09MR99.055



BILLING CODE 4910-59-C
    Prior to publication of the NPRM, NHTSA had received a petition for 
reconsideration from the American Automobile Manufacturers Association 
(AAMA) of a provision in the air bag warning label requirements that 
prohibits the utility vehicle rollover warning label and the air bag 
label from being on the same side of the sun visor. Currently, the 
utility vehicle rollover warning label must be permanently affixed to 
the instrument panel, windshield frame, driver's side sun visor, or 
some other location on the vehicle interior visible from the driver's 
position. Under current requirements, if the utility vehicle rollover 
warning label is placed on the sun visor, it must be on the front side. 
Thus, a manufacturer which chooses this popular location must place the 
air bag warning label on the back side of the sun visor with the air 
bag alert label on the front. In the April 1998 NPRM, NHTSA sought 
comments on whether it should: (1) retain the current location 
requirements; (2) retain the current utility vehicle warning label 
location requirements and remove the prohibition from the air bag 
warning label location requirements; or (3) amend the utility vehicle 
rollover warning label requirements to prohibit its placement on the 
driver's side sun visor. As part of the last possibility, NHTSA sought 
comment on an additional possible location, i.e., the lower, rear 
corner of the driver's side door window visible from the vehicle 
exterior. NHTSA also sought comment on whether a size should be 
specified for the label.
    NHTSA also asked for comments on possible changes to the owner's 
manual requirement. NHTSA proposed three possible approaches to an 
owner's manual information requirement: (1) retain the current owner's 
manual information requirement, (2) specify that information on design 
features which may make a vehicle more likely to rollover (e.g., higher 
center of gravity) and driving practices which can reduce the risk that 
a rollover will occur (e.g., avoiding sharp turns) or which can reduce 
the likelihood of death or serious injury if a rollover occurs (e.g., 
wearing seat belts) be included in the owner's manual without 
specifying the exact content of such information, or (3) specify the 
inclusion of information beyond what is now specified. The agency 
explained that this additional information could include: statistical 
information comparing the rollover risk of utility vehicles with other 
light passenger vehicles, statistical information demonstrating the 
lower risk of fatality or injury if seat belts are worn, information on 
the types of situations that can result in a rollover, and information 
on how to properly recover from a driving scenario that could result in 
rollover.
    On May 15, 1997, American Suzuki Motor Corporation (Suzuki) 
petitioned NHTSA to modify the existing utility vehicle label to 
include additional language on the circumstances which may lead to 
rollovers and the specific actions a driver can take to reduce the risk 
of rollovers in those circumstances.7 Suzuki also asked the 
agency to amend the requirement to require the label in all light 
trucks, not just utility vehicles. The agency explained that it 
considered the Suzuki petition moot, since the requested actions were 
under consideration in several open rulemakings, including this 
rulemaking, regarding consumer information on rollover prevention, and 
in other agency consumer information activities and sought comment on 
whether to extend the utility vehicle label requirement to all light 
trucks (trucks, buses, and MPVs) or to any subset of this category 
(e.g., all utility vehicles). The agency proposed a lead time of 180 
days between the final rule and its implementation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Suzuki suggested the following language in its petition:
    If, for any reason, your vehicle slides sideways or spins out of 
control at highway speeds, the risk of rollover is greatly 
increased. This condition can be created when two or more wheels 
drop off onto the shoulder and the driver steers sharply in an 
attempt to reenter the roadway. To reduce the risk of rollover in 
these circumstances, if conditions permit, hold the steering wheel 
firmly and slow down before pulling back into the travel lanes with 
controlled steering movements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Summary of the Comments

    NHTSA received 19 comments on the NPRM from six manufacturers, two 
consumer interest groups, three trade associations, six business 
students, and two other organizations.

[[Page 11728]]

A. Revision and Upgrade of the Label

    Only one commenter, Exponent Failure Analysis, explicitly opposed 
the new label, based on a belief that it could lead consumers to 
purchase vehicles that are overall less safe.8 Advocates for 
Highway and Auto Safety (Advocates) reiterated its long-standing belief 
that a rollover standard is needed and expressed skepticism about 
whether a new label can reduce rollovers. Consumers Union also stated 
that additional activities are needed to reduce rollovers. Mercedes-
Benz, who currently does not produce any vehicles that are subject to 
the requirement, believes that the current label should be sufficient 
to inform its customers of the special driving characteristics of 
utility vehicles.9 Honda Motor Corporation (Honda) agreed 
that the new label might be more effective, but stated that NHTSA 
should set performance requirements for labels instead of mandating 
specific designs. Honda did not, however, suggest any method that could 
be used to measure performance for a label. All other commenters either 
did not object to changing the label or explicitly supported the 
change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ NHTSA notes that the rationale given for this opposition 
applies equally to the current label.
    \9\ NHTSA notes that any voluntary label would not have to 
comply with the Federal requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Most of the commenters who expressed a particular preference for 
one of the proposed labels supported label number 2, citing as bases 
for their support both the color scheme and layout. With respect to the 
color of the label's header, commenters expressed strong support for a 
yellow background. The Association of International Automobile 
Manufacturers (AIAM) and AAMA stated that NHTSA should allow the choice 
of yellow or orange.
    Except for Consumers Union which supports any message encouraging 
belt use, most commenters objected to the graphic depicting the rider 
being thrown from the vehicle. They believed this graphic shifted 
emphasis away from rollover prevention to belt use. Commenters also 
objected to graphics showing a curved road as implying that rollovers 
only occur on curves. AIAM disliked the arrow in the graphic without a 
road because it believed it was redundant of the depicted vehicle 
attitude. AIAM, AAMA, and Honda all preferred the standard belt use 
graphic, the three-point seat belt symbol (see 49 CFR 571.101), to the 
graphic used on the proposed labels. Honda also suggested retesting the 
graphics using ANSI's protocol for safety symbols (ANSI Z535.3-1991, 
Criteria for Safety Symbols).
    Overall, commenters expressed strong support for the word 
``warning.'' Only one comment supported using the word ``danger'' for 
the warning label. Three business students, Felix Bonet, Jeana Jewett 
and Yuladys Sanchez, submitted a survey they conducted in which 70 
percent of respondents said that the word ``danger'' would attract 
attention more. AAMA stated that either ``Warning'' or ``Caution'' 
should be allowed since there is no evidence that consumers would react 
differently to the two words. Some of the commenters preferred label 2 
because the reason for the warning (rollover) was stated on the same 
line as the word ``warning.'' Finally, AAMA, AIAM, and Honda asked that 
the use of the safety alert symbol (triangle with an exclamation point) 
be allowed on the label.
    None of the commenters expressed explicit support for or opposition 
to using either the phrase ``High Rollover Risk'' or the phrase 
``Higher Risk of Rollover.'' Instead, commenters suggested other 
alternative statements such as: ``Reduce Rollover Risk,'' ``To Avoid 
Rollovers . . .,'' and ``This vehicle handles differently than a car.''
    Those commenters who addressed the issue of what seat belt phrase 
to use preferred the phrase ``Always Buckle Up,'' which was used on 
proposed label 3. Honda stated that any belt use message should be 
secondary since there are already numerous belt use messages. With 
respect to the phrase ``Avoid Sudden Stops and Sharp Turns,'' which was 
included on proposed labels 1 and 2, commenters stated that they 
disliked both maneuver statements because these maneuvers are often 
used to avoid crashes. The commenters suggested adding a statement 
regarding speed and alcohol use since these are common factors in 
rollover crashes. Commenters also suggested adding a statement to the 
label to see the owner's manual and allowing foreign language 
translations of the label.

B. Location and Size of the Label in the Vehicle

    With respect to the label's location, only one commenter, the 
Insurance Institute for Highway (IIHS), stated that NHTSA should 
prohibit the utility vehicle label from being placed on the sun visor. 
IIHS believed that the utility label's presence on the sun visor would 
diminish the effect of the air bag label. IIHS, along with Consumers 
Union, preferred the location of the driver's side window. Advocates 
stated that it did not have a strong position on the location of the 
label, except that it believed that safety labels (including air bag 
labels) should be visible at all times and should not be located on the 
back of the sun visor. Many commenters believe the agency should allow 
flexibility on the label's location, including allowing both the air 
bag label and the utility vehicle label to be on the same side of the 
sun visor.
    In general, commenters supported giving manufacturers flexibility 
on the size of the label. One commenter suggested specifying a specific 
minimum font size so that manufacturers would not be tempted to make 
the labels too small. Other commenters opposed specifying a minimum 
size and supported maintaining the current ``prominent and visible to 
the driver'' language.

C. Inclusion of New Rollover Statement in the Owner's Manual

    AIAM believes that NHTSA should specify the exact wording of the 
discussion in the owner's manual, but that it should not be the 
currently required discussion. Several of the commenters stated that 
the current requirement should be changed. Advocates stated that 
statistical information should not be required because it can change 
from year to year. Finally, several commenters expressed support for 
option two (specifying topics to cover but not exact language) because 
it provides manufacturers with more flexibility.

D. Vehicle Applicability and Effective Date

    In the April 1998 NPRM, NHTSA asked for comments on extending the 
utility vehicle rollover requirement to all light trucks (trucks, 
buses, and MPVs) or to any subset of this category (such as all utility 
vehicles). The commenters were split on whether NHTSA should extend 
this requirement to other vehicles. Some commenters stated that this 
should be the subject of a separate rulemaking, while others said that 
the agency should wait to determine the effectiveness of a new label 
before extending the requirement to other vehicles. There were no 
comments on extending the labeling requirement to all utility vehicles.
    With regard to the issue of leadtime, all commenters said 180 days 
was adequate for label changes. However, commenters said that they 
would need at least one year if changes were made to the owner's 
manual, as these manuals are often ordered at one time for the entire 
model year.

E. Additional Issues

    In its comments on the NPRM, AAMA asked NHTSA to write the rule so 
that

[[Page 11729]]

individual manufacturers could change the language and graphics on the 
label upon seeking and receiving the Administrator's permission to 
allow for changes in technology without the need for rulemaking.

IV. Agency's Decision and Response to Comments

A. Revision and Upgrade of the Label

    NHTSA has decided to amend the existing utility vehicle rollover 
warning labeling requirement. The agency believes the modifications 
made by this final rule will make the information more noticeable and 
understandable to consumers and, therefore, increase the chance that 
the labels can affect driver behavior to reduce rollovers and thus 
reduce fatalities and injuries. NHTSA has decided to use the format in 
label 2 with two graphics surrounding the label's text and a heading 
above. The rule requires the graphic depicting the use of a seat belt 
to be on the right and the rollover graphic to be on the left.
    The agency has decided to use the color yellow in the header. The 
agency recognizes that the use of the color yellow is inconsistent with 
the ANSI standard, which specifies the use of orange for headers 
relating to potentially hazardous situations, such as the ones 
addressed by this final rule, which could result in death or serious 
injury. However, the use of yellow is consistent with the color chosen 
by the agency for the header of the air bag label. NHTSA specified the 
use of yellow for air bag warning labels because of an overwhelming 
focus group preference for that color and the meaning associated with 
that color (focus groups associated the word ``caution'' with yellow 
and associated no meaning with the word orange).10 The 
agency believes that the use of orange for rollover warning labels and 
yellow for air bar warning labels could create confusion. In addition, 
commenters expressed strong support for the color yellow. The rule does 
not allow the use of orange in the header. This prohibition is 
consistent with the air bag warning label.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Only two of the 53 focus group participants preferred 
orange. Participants generally stated that yellow was more eye-
catching than orange. Participants also noted that red (stop) and 
yellow (caution) had meaning to them, but not orange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The agency agrees with the comments of AIAM, AAMA, and Honda and 
has decided to adopt the standard belt use graphic, the three-point 
seat belt symbol (see 49 CFR 571.101), instead of the buckle graphic 
used on the three proposed labels. NHTSA believes that consistency in 
graphics will prevent any confusion about the meaning of a particular 
pictogram. NHTSA understands the commenters' belief that a curved road 
in the vehicle graphic might lead consumers to believe that rollovers 
can only occur on a curved road and should be removed. In addition, the 
agency agrees that the arrow underneath the tilting vehicle clutters 
the graphic and should also be removed. The agency believes, however, 
that some frame of reference is needed so that people will not be 
confused and conclude either that the graphic was misprinted on the 
label or that the label was placed on the vehicle crooked. NHTSA has, 
therefore, decided to change the vehicle graphic to show a tilting 
vehicle on a horizontal plane.
    In response to Honda's comment and to determine which graphics 
would be most effective, NHTSA conducted additional consumer testing of 
the recommended graphics in accordance with the ANSI protocol for 
evaluating symbol comprehension. Focus group testing was done on the 
tilting vehicle graphic and on the two alternate seat belt graphics 
(the graphic used in Standard No. 101, Controls and displays, and a 
graphic like the one used in the NPRM except depicting a 3-point belt 
instead of a lap belt). In addition, to test the overall comprehension 
of the graphics, NHTSA tested the label with all text deleted except 
the word ``warning''.
    Participants were shown the three graphics (the tilting vehicle 
graphic and the two seat belt graphics), asked to identify what the 
graphic meant or was trying to tell them, and asked to choose from four 
possible responses. Of the four responses provided, one was correct, 
two were incorrect, and one indicated ``critical confusion.'' 
11 With respect to the two seat belt graphics, 95 percent of 
the participants chose the correct response for the seat belt graphic 
used in Standard No. 101, Controls and displays, 1 percent chose the 
incorrect response and 4 percent chose the critical confusion response. 
For the 3-point seat belt graphic, 86 percent chose the correct 
response, 5 percent chose incorrectly and 7 percent chose the critical 
confusion response. With respect to the tilting vehicle graphic, 81 
percent of the participants chose the correct response, 18 percent 
chose the incorrect response and 1 percent chose the critical confusion 
response. Participants were also shown the new label with all text 
deleted except the word ``warning'' and asked to identify what the 
label as a whole meant or was trying to tell them. Ninety-four percent 
of the participants chose the correct meaning of the label (5 percent 
chose the incorrect meaning and 1 percent chose the critical confusion 
response). NHTSA believes the addition of the seat belt graphic along 
with the word ``warning'' provided a context for the tilting vehicle 
graphic so that participants understood the overall meaning of the 
label.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ ``Critical confusion'' is the term used to describe the 
situation in which a participant concludes that the meaning of the 
graphic is the opposite of the meaning intended by the graphic's 
designer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NHTSA believes that these results demonstrate that the label is 
readily understandable to the vast majority of people. The ANSI 
standard calls for at least 85 percent of correct responses and not 
more than 5 percent critical confusion. The seat belt graphic used in 
Standard No. 101, Controls and displays, (with 95 percent of the 
responses correct and only 1 percent critical confusion) is well within 
the requirements of ANSI's standard. While the tilting vehicle graphic 
did not receive a correct response of 85 percent when it was viewed in 
isolation, the ANSI standard indicates that a label's graphic judged 
unacceptable when so viewed may nevertheless become acceptable if 
explanatory text is added. The new rollover label has such explanatory 
text. In addition, the tilting vehicle graphic had a critical confusion 
response of only 1 percent. Further, the overall recognition level of 
the label as a whole was high, with 94 percent of the participants 
correctly identifying the meaning of the label.
    The agency does not have any evidence that any of the suggested 
signal words, i.e., ``danger'', ``warning'' or ``caution,'' would be 
more effective than the others. It also does not have any information 
showing that ``danger'' would be more appropriate than ``warning'' for 
labels regarding the particular hazard addressed by this rulemaking. 
The agency, therefore, sees no reason to depart from the voluntary 
industry standard and has decided to use the word ``warning'' to comply 
with the ANSI standard. The final rule also mandates the use of the 
safety alert symbol. Manufacturers asked that the use of the alert 
symbol be permitted instead of required. The agency believes that this 
requirement will make the label more attention getting and will, 
therefore, increase the effectiveness of the label. In addition, 
requiring the safety alert symbol will also make the label's appearance 
uniform with that of the air bag label.
    With respect to the use of the phrases ``Higher Rollover Risk'' and 
``High Risk of Rollover,'' NHTSA believes that the alternatives 
suggested by the

[[Page 11730]]

commenters, ``Reduce Rollover Risk * * *'' and ``To Avoid Rollovers * * 
*'', are less appropriate. While the proposed phrases invite the reader 
to respond by taking both crash avoidance measures (i.e., more careful 
driving) and injury reduction measures (i.e., seat belt use), the 
alternative phrases invite crash avoidance measures only. Further, the 
agency believes the phrase ``This vehicle handles differently than a 
car'' is too wordy. One of the reasons the agency is modifying the 
label is because the current one is too wordy. NHTSA also notes that 
focus groups emphasized that statements should be short.
    NHTSA is aware that the rollover risk is not ``high'' in absolute 
terms, but it is higher for SUVs than other vehicle types. 
Consequently, the final rule requires the label to include the phrase 
``Higher Rollover Risk.'' In addition, the rule requires that this 
phrase be placed on the first line of the label following the signal 
word ``Warning.'' NHTSA believes that the placement of this phrase at 
the top of the label is important to highlight the purpose of the label 
and to help alert the driver to the importance of heeding its warnings.
    NHTSA chose to delete the ``sudden stops'' statement from the label 
since both the focus group and the commenters expressed concern that 
these maneuvers are often used to avoid crashes. The final rule 
requires the statement: AVOID ABRUPT MANEUVERS AND EXCESSIVE SPEED. 
NHTSA believes that this statement makes the driver aware of particular 
practices that should be avoided. The final rule also requires the use 
of the phrase ``Always Buckle Up'', which was preferred by commenters, 
and specifies that it be placed as the second statement on the label. 
The agency believes that this message is easily understood and 
effectively conveys the importance of wearing a seat belt. The agency 
has decided not to adopt an alcohol use statement as suggested by the 
commenters as it believes this issue is better addressed in other ways.
    NHTSA agrees with the commenters that the label should include a 
statement urging the driver to look in the vehicle owner's manual for 
further information. NHTSA recognizes that it did not adopt a similar 
statement proposed for the air bag warning labels. It did not do so 
because some members of the air bag focus groups expressly objected to 
it, and indicated they wanted the label itself to tell them what they 
need to know about air bag dangers and how to avoid them. The agency 
believes that it is harder, within the practical limitations imposed by 
a relatively small warning label, to provide the basic information 
necessary for avoiding rollover dangers than it is to provide 
information necessary for avoiding air bag dangers. These limitations 
make it necessary to place much of the basic information about rollover 
dangers in the owner's manual. The owner's manual will include a 
discussion of the vehicle design features which cause this type of 
vehicle to be more likely to rollover (e.g., higher center of gravity), 
a discussion of the driving practices that can reduce the risk of a 
rollover (e.g., avoiding sharp turns at excessive speed), and an 
explanation of why it is important to wear a seat belt (i.e., that 
unbelted occupants are significantly more likely to die in a rollover 
crash than belted occupants). The agency believes that it is both 
important and appropriate to have a statement on the label reminding 
the driver to read the information in the owner's manual and is 
requiring that it be included.

B. Location and Size of the Label in the Vehicle

    NHTSA conducted a literature search for information on warning 
placement to assist the agency in determining the most appropriate 
location for the label. The agency found a number of sources of 
guidance. ANSI Z535.4 (1991) permits multiple hazard warnings in the 
same location if more than one hazard exists for a product and either 
the sources of the hazards are in close proximity to each other or the 
hazards are preventable from a common location. However, the standard 
recommends that individual messages have sufficient space around them 
to prevent them from visually blending together. The Westinghouse 
Electric Corporation (1981) guidelines recommend against placing 
multiple hazard warnings in the same location. In cases in which 
multiple warnings are provided, the guidelines prohibit placing 
warnings concerning hazards with different levels of seriousness in 
close proximity to each other. Further, according to a study done for 
the Consumer Product Safety Commission, label recognition decreases as 
the number of labels increases. This was a limited study (10 subjects 
for each condition) done on all terrain vehicles (ATV) warnings. It 
tested label recognition when there were different numbers (4, 7, 9, or 
11) of warning labels present.
    In response to comments and in light of the results of its 
literature review, the agency is allowing the utility vehicle label to 
be placed on either (1) the driver's sun visor (either side) or (2) the 
driver's side window. The agency believes that this will allow 
manufacturers two alternatives if it is not possible to place both the 
air bag label and the utility vehicle label on the same side of the sun 
visor. Allowing manufacturers to put the utility vehicle label on 
either side of the sun visor, they could choose to put the air bag 
label on the front, increasing its prominence, if it is not possible to 
put both labels on the front. Based on the research, allowing both 
labels on the sun visor should not result in information overload 
because: (1) There are only 2 hazards being warned about; (2) actions 
that would avoid both rollover and air bag hazards can be avoided from 
the driver's seating position; and (3) both hazards have the same 
degree of seriousness.
    However, to maintain the separateness of the labels and their 
messages, the agency is specifying that the labels cannot be 
contiguous. Further, to keep the pictograms of the two labels from 
running together visually, the final rule also specifies that the air 
bag warning label must be to the left of the utility vehicle rollover 
warning label when both labels are placed on the same side of the sun 
visor. Since the pictogram on the air bag warning label is on its left 
side, placing that label to the left of the rollover warning label puts 
that pictogram far from the pictograms on the rollover warning label. 
Finally, the final rule requires that a rollover alert label, similar 
to the air bag alert label, must be placed on the front of the sun 
visor if the utility vehicle label is put on the back of the sun visor.
    With respect to specifying a particular size for the label, NHTSA 
believes that concerns over liability make it unlikely that 
manufacturers would make the label, or its contents, too small. 
Further, despite the absence of any current requirement about label 
size, no commenter gave an example of a rollover warning label that the 
commenter regarded as too small. As to lettering size, NHTSA believes 
that specifying a minimum font size is unnecessary at this time. NHTSA 
has not required any particular font face or size for the air bag 
warning label. Manufacturers, particularly those which choose to place 
both the air bag warning label and the rollover warning label on the 
same side of the sunvisor, may wish to use the same font face and size 
in both labels. Today's rule allows them the flexibility to do so. 
NHTSA, therefore, decided not to specify either a particular font face 
or font size for the rollover label. As the label size has not been a 
problem in the past, the final rule retains the current requirement 
that the

[[Page 11731]]

label be ``legible, visible and prominent'' to the driver. If the 
agency becomes aware of cases in which the size of the label or label's 
text is too small, we will revise the rule to specify label and font 
size.

C. Inclusion of New Rollover Statement in the Owner's Manual

    Today's rule requires owner's manuals to include the following 
statements and information:
    (1) The statement ``Utility vehicles have a significantly higher 
rollover rate than other types of vehicles.''
    (2) A discussion of the vehicle design features which cause this 
type of vehicles to be more likely to rollover (e.g., higher center of 
gravity);
    (3) A discussion of the driving practices that can reduce the risk 
of a rollover (e.g., avoiding sharp turns at excessive speed); and
    (4) The statement: ``In a rollover crash, an unbelted person is 
significantly more likely to die than a person wearing a seat belt.''
    The agency believes that the general nature of the requirements 
about discussions of design features and driving practices will allow 
manufacturers to tailor language to their specific vehicles. At the 
same time, the requirements are specific enough to ensure that critical 
topics are included. NHTSA believes that uniformity in the two required 
statements is important in order to underscore the message contained on 
the label. The agency believes that uniformity is not needed with 
respect to the discussion of vehicle design features which make these 
vehicles more prone to rollover or the driving practices that can 
reduce the risk of rollover. The agency believes that manufacturers are 
in a better position to advise drivers as to which particular features 
of their vehicles are most relevant.

D. Vehicle Applicability and Effective Date

    In light of the lack of comments on the issue of extending the 
requirement to all utility vehicles, NHTSA analyzed the statistics for 
percent rollovers per single vehicle crashes (%RO/SVC) for vehicles 
with a wheelbase of 110 inches compared to the %RO/SVC for 
vehicles with a wheelbase of >110 inches to determine the rollover rate 
for different vehicle types. The rollover rate for utility vehicles 
with a wheelbase of 110 inches was 57.5 percent, the highest 
of all the types. The rollover rate was 9.5 percent for utility 
vehicles with a wheelbase of >110 inches and 48.9 percent for all 
utility vehicles.12 Small pickup trucks (those with a 
wheelbase of 110 inches) had the next highest rollover rate, 
with 41.4 percent. The results are summarized in Table 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Utility vehicles with a wheelbase 110 inches had 
a rollover rate of only 9.5 percent. These statistics were generated 
from 1997 National Automotive Sampling System data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In light of these numbers, NHTSA has decided not to extend the 
requirement to other vehicles at this time. The vehicles with the 
highest rollover rate are already required to have a rollover warning 
label. Therefore, the costs associated with the new labeling 
requirement should be minimal.
    The agency notes that it is undertaking a research program to 
examine various measurements to determine susceptibility to rollover on 
an individual vehicle basis instead of on a vehicle type basis. 
Depending on the results of this research, NHTSA may revisit the issue 
of what vehicles should be required to have a rollover warning label.

    Table 1.--Percent Rollover per Single Vehicle Crashes (% RO/SVC)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            110''    >110''
                                    All         wheelbase      wheelbase
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Car...........................        17.4           20.1           11.0
Utility Vehicle...............        48.9           57.5            9.5
Van...........................        22.2        \1\ 8.3           30.4
Pickup........................        37.5           41.4          25.6
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This number may not be reliable. It reflects a very small number of
  vans with wheelbases 110 inches. This is because the most
  popular minivans have wheelbases longer than 110 inches.

    The new label and owner's manual requirements contain important 
information that more effectively alerts drivers to the risk the 
vehicles will roll over, the steps to take to avoid that risk, and the 
steps to take to reduce the chance of injury in the event of a 
rollover. NHTSA, therefore, believes that a September 1, 1999 effective 
date for the label and owner's manual requirements is appropriate. 
NHTSA believes that manufacturers will have sufficient leadtime to 
design new labels and revise owner's manuals to include the information 
required by today's rule. With respect to the labeling requirement, all 
of the commenters agreed that a leadtime of 180 days was sufficient to 
design, produce and install a new label. In addition, the new label 
directs the driver to consult the owner's manual for further 
information, as the agency believes that drivers and passengers should 
be aware of the information contained in the owner's manual. Although 
commenters said that they would need at least one year to make any 
changes to the owner's manual as these manuals are often ordered at one 
time for the entire model year, the agency believes that any changes 
can be made within 180 days. Manufacturers generally order owner's 
manuals three to four months (in June or July) before the start of the 
new model year of production. NHTSA believes that a September 1, 1999, 
effective date will provide manufacturers with sufficient lead time to 
make all the changes required by today's rule prior to publication of 
the new owner's manuals. Further, the agency notes that if for any 
reason a manufacturer is unable to make the changes before the new 
manual is published, the manufacturer may place an insert with the 
required information in the owner's manual.

E. Additional Issues

    Today's rule does not permit manufacturers to make changes to the 
label upon seeking and receiving special permission from the 
Administrator. NHTSA believes it is important that people see the same 
message in all utility vehicles subject to this final rule. The agency 
believes that inconsistency in the content of the label could cause 
confusion and undermine the

[[Page 11732]]

effectiveness of the label's safety message.

V. Policy on Use of Standards vs. Focus Groups

    In the NPRM, NHTSA also raised the issue of the circumstances in 
which it is appropriate in its rulemaking not to follow standards 
established by voluntary consensus standards organizations. The agency 
explained that under the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Federal agencies must consider and adopt the use 
of ``voluntary consensus standards'' to implement their ``policy 
objectives or activities,'' unless doing so would be ``inconsistent 
with applicable law or otherwise impractical.'' A ``voluntary consensus 
standard'' is defined as a technical standard developed or adopted by a 
legitimate standards-developing organization (``voluntary consensus 
standards body''). According to NTTAA's legislative history, a 
``technical standard'' pertains to ``products and processes, such as 
the size, strength, or technical performance of a product, process or 
material.'' Further, a voluntary consensus standards organization under 
the NTTAA is one that produces standards by consensus and observes the 
principles of due process, openness, and balance of interests.
    Consistent with the NTTAA, NHTSA requested comments on the extent 
to which any final choice regarding colors and signal words should be 
guided by the focus group preferences instead of the ANSI standard. 
NHTSA also requested comments on the broader issue of the circumstances 
in which it would be appropriate for agency rulemaking decisions to be 
guided by focus group results or other information when such 
information is contrary to a voluntary consensus standard such as the 
ANSI standard.
    The agency received little comment on this issue. In general, both 
manufacturers and consumer groups stated that while NHTSA should seek 
and consider input from focus groups and voluntary standards, the 
agency should rely on its own expertise and judgment when making any 
regulatory or policy decisions. Advocates and Honda were concerned that 
focus groups preferences were unscientific and unreliable and 
therefore, did not believe too much emphasis should be placed upon 
them.
    NHTSA recognizes that the ANSI's mission in developing and issuing 
its standard for communicating information about a comprehensive 
hierarchy of hazards differs somewhat from that of the agency's focus 
groups in designing an effective label for a specific hazard and that 
their conclusions about the manner of communication may therefore 
differ. Given that agency labeling decisions are highly dependent on 
the facts regarding the specific hazard being addressed, the agency 
will make case-by-case determinations of the extent to which NHTSA 
should follow voluntary standards versus information from focus groups 
and other sources. As it has in this rulemaking, NHTSA will rely on its 
own expertise and judgement in making its determinations under the 
NTTAA and the statutory provisions regarding vehicle safety standards.

VI. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' (58 FR 
51735, October 4, 1993), provides for making determinations whether a 
regulatory action is ``significant'' and therefore subject to Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) review and to the requirements of the 
Executive Order. The Order defines a ``significant regulatory action'' 
as one that is likely to result in a rule that may:
    (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or 
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the 
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public 
health or safety, or State, local, or Tribal governments or 
communities;
    (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an 
action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, 
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients 
thereof; or
    (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal 
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in 
the Executive Order.
    NHTSA has considered the impact of this rulemaking action under 
E.O. 12866 and the Department of Transportation's regulatory policies 
and procedures. This rulemaking document was not reviewed under E.O. 
12866. Further, this action has been determined to be not 
``significant'' under the Department of Transportation's regulatory 
policies and procedures.
    NHTSA believes that this rule will result in a minimal cost to 
manufacturers and consumers of utility vehicles with a wheel base of 
less than 110 inches since this rule only changes the format of an 
existing label and involves a minor modification of existing text in 
the owner's manual.
    The consumer cost of the new modified rollover warning label with 
two pictograms, short bulleted text and bright colors is dependent upon 
the type of label used, the size of the label and the number of colors 
used. The agency did not specify a print font face or size requirement 
for the new label, but instead retained the current requirement that 
the label be ``legible, visible and prominent'' to the driver. Thus, 
the agency believes that manufacturer changes in label size will not 
add an incremental cost to the present label. However, the requirement 
for the new label to have black text on a yellow background and two 
black pictograms on a white background requires the use of three 
colors, and will add an incremental cost to the present requirement 
dependent upon the type of label used by the manufacturer. The agency 
estimates that incremental cost of the additional label colors could be 
as little as $0.01 and as much as $0.10 per label, dependent upon the 
type of label applied by the manufacturer.
    Since new owner's manuals are printed for each production year, the 
agency believes minor changes to the manual text will not increase its 
cost.
    Therefore, the total annual incremental cost of the new warning 
rollover labels is estimated to be between $15,000 to $200,000. These 
figures are based on the assumption that average number of utility 
vehicles with wheelbases less than 110 inches sold per year in the U.S. 
will continue to be between 1.5 and 2 million per year. Since these 
costs are so minimal, a separate regulatory evaluation has not been 
prepared.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., 
as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act 
(SBREFA) of 1996) whenever an agency is required to publish a notice of 
rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it must prepare and make 
available for public comment a regulatory flexibility analysis that 
describes the effect of the rule on small entities (i.e., small 
businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions). 
However, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required if the head of 
an agency certifies the rule will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. SBREFA amended the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act to require Federal agencies to provide a 
statement of the factual basis for certifying that a rule will not have 
a significant

[[Page 11733]]

economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    NHTSA has considered the impacts of this rule under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act. I hereby certify that this rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
As explained above, NHTSA believes this rule will have minimal economic 
impact.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a person is not required 
to respond to a collection of information by a Federal agency unless 
the collection displays a valid OMB control number. The OMB Clearance 
number for the utility vehicle label (49 CFR 575.105) is 2127-0049. 
NHTSA has considered the impact of the changes required by today's rule 
and determined that they will not have any affect on the total burden 
hours imposed on the public by 49 CFR 575.105.

National Environmental Policy Act

    NHTSA has also analyzed this rule under the National Environmental 
Policy Act and determined that it will not have a significant impact on 
the human environment.

Executive Order 12612 (Federalism)

    NHTSA has analyzed this rule in accordance with the principles and 
criteria contained in E.O. 12612, and has determined that this rule 
will not have significant federalism implications to warrant the 
preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

Civil Justice Reform

    This rule will 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.

Executive Order 13045

    Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any 
rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' as 
defined under E.O. 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental, health or 
safety risk that NHTSA has reason to believe may have a 
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets 
both criteria, we must evaluate the environmental health or safety 
effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned 
regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably 
feasible alternatives considered by us.
    This rule is not subject to the Executive Order because it is not 
economically significant as defined in E.O. 12866, and does not have a 
disproportionate effect on children.

National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272) 
directs us to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory 
activities unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or 
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical 
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling 
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by 
voluntary consensus standards bodies, such as the Society of Automotive 
Engineers (SAE). The NTTAA directs us to provide Congress, through OMB, 
explanations when we decide not to use available and applicable 
voluntary consensus standards.
    We reviewed all relevant American National Standards Institute 
(ANSI) standards as part of developing the labeling and information 
requirements that are the subject of this document. To the extent 
consistent with our authorizing legislation, we used the following 
voluntary consensus standard in developing the labeling and information 
requirements:
     American National Standard Institute (ANSI) standard for 
product safety signs and labels (ANSI Z535.4).

List of Subjects

49 CFR Part 571

    Motor vehicle safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, 
Tires.

49 CFR Part 575

    Consumer protection, Labeling, Motor vehicle safety, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Tires.

    In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA amends chapter V of Title 
49 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 571--FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS

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

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

    2. In Sec. 571.208, in S4.5.1, revise the heading for paragraph (b) 
and revise paragraph (b)(3) to read as follows:


Sec. 571.208  Standard No. 208; Occupant crash protection.

* * * * *
S4.5.1 * * *
    (b) Sun visor air bag warning label.
* * * * *
    (3) Except for the information on an air bag maintenance label 
placed on the visor pursuant to S4.5.1(a) of this standard, or on a 
utility vehicle label placed on the visor pursuant to 49 CFR 
575.105(d)(1), no other information shall appear on the same side of 
the sun visor to which the sun visor air bag warning label is affixed. 
Except for the information in an air bag alert label placed on the 
visor pursuant to S4.5.1(c) of this standard, no other information 
about air bags or the need to wear seat belts shall appear anywhere on 
the sun visor.
* * * * *

PART 575--CONSUMER INFORMATION REGULATIONS

    3. The authority citation for part 575 continues to read as 
follows:

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

    4. Section 575.105 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 575.105  Vehicle rollover.

    (a) Purpose and scope. This section requires manufacturers of 
utility vehicles to alert the drivers of those vehicles that they have 
a higher possibility of rollover than other vehicle types and to advise 
them of steps that can be taken to reduce the possibility of rollover 
and/or to reduce the likelihood of injury in a rollover.
    (b) Application. This section applies to utility vehicles.
    (c) Definitions.
    Utility vehicles means multipurpose passenger vehicles (other than 
those which are passenger car derivatives) which have a wheelbase of 
110 inches or less and special features for occasional off-road 
operation.
    (d) Required information. (1) Rollover Warning Label. (i) Except as 
provided in paragraph (d)(2) of this section, each

[[Page 11734]]

vehicle must have a label permanently affixed to either side of the sun 
visor, at the manufacturer's option, at the driver's seating position. 
The label must conform in content, form and sequence to the label shown 
in Figure 1 of this section, and must comply with the following 
requirements:
    (A) The heading area must be yellow, with the text and the alert 
symbol in black.
    (B) The message area must be white with black text.
    (C) The pictograms must be black with a white background.
    (D) The label must be appropriately sized so that it is legible, 
visible and prominent to the driver.
    (ii) When the rollover warning label required by paragraph 
(d)(1)(i) of this section and the air bag warning label required by 
paragraph S4.5.1(b) of 49 CFR 571.208 are affixed to the same side of 
the driver side sun visor, the rollover warning label must be affixed 
to the right (as viewed from the driver's seat) of the air bag warning 
label and the labels may not be contiguous.
    (2) Alternate location for warning label. As an alternative to 
affixing the warning label required by paragraph (d)(1)(i) of this 
section to the driver's sun visor, a manufacturer may permanently affix 
the label to the lower rear corner of the forwardmost driver's side 
window. The label must be legible, visible and prominent to a person 
next to the exterior of the driver's door.
    (3) Rollover Alert Label. If the label required by paragraph (d)(1) 
of this section and affixed to the driver side sun visor is not visible 
when the sun visor is in the stowed position, an alert label must be 
permanently affixed to that visor so that the label is visible when the 
visor is in that position. The alert label must comply with the 
following requirements:
    (i) The label must read:

ROLLOVER WARNING

Flip Visor Over

    (ii) The label must be black with yellow text.
    (iii) The label must be no less than 20 square cm.
    (4) Owner's Manual. The owner's manual must include the following 
statements and discussions:
    (i) The statement ``Utility vehicles have a significantly higher 
rollover rate than other types of vehicles.''
    (ii) A discussion of the vehicle design features which cause this 
type of vehicles to be more likely to rollover (e.g., higher center of 
gravity);
    (iii) A discussion of the driving practices that can reduce the 
risk of a rollover (e.g., avoiding sharp turns at excessive speed); and
    (iv) The statement: ``In a rollover crash, an unbelted person is 
significantly more likely to die than a person wearing a seat belt.''

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P

Figure 1 to Sec. 575.105
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09MR99.056


    Issued: March 3, 1999.
Ricardo Martinez,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 99-5735 Filed 3-5-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-C