[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 95 (Tuesday, May 18, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27032-27034]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-12467]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-98-4430; Notice 1]


Application for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance Federal 
Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 108--Lamps, Reflective Devices and 
Associated Equipment

    General Motors Corporation (GM), has determined that approximately 
15,300 1998 GMC Sonoma and Chevrolet S-10 pickup trucks, and GMC Jimmy 
and Chevrolet Blazer sport utility vehicles, equipped with the ``ZR2'' 
option package, fail to meet a requirement of Federal Motor Vehicle 
Safety Standard (FMVSS) 108--Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated 
Equipment. Specifically, these vehicles are equipped with daytime 
running lamps (DRLs) mounted higher than the maximum height allowed by 
S5.5.11(a)(1)(ii) of FMVSS 108. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120, 
GM has applied to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 
(NHTSA) for a decision that the noncompliance is inconsequential to 
motor vehicle safety.
    GM has also submitted a 49 CFR Part 573 noncompliance notification 
to the agency in accordance with 49 CFR 556.4(b)(6).
    This notice of receipt of an application is published under 49 
U.S.C. 30118 and 30120 and does not represent any agency decision or 
other exercise of judgment concerning the merits of the application.
    The DRLs on the noncompliant vehicles are provided by the upper 
beam headlamps operating at reduced intensity, with a maximum output of 
approximately 6,700 candela per lamp. As such, FMVSS 108 requires the 
DRL be mounted not higher than 34 inches (864 mm) from the road 
surface. Base-level GMC Sonomas and Jimmys and Chevrolet S-10 pickups 
and Blazers comply with the DRL height limitation of FMVSS 108. 
However, the ZR2 option package gives the vehicles a stiffer suspension 
and larger tires, which results in an over-all increase in the height 
of the vehicle, including the DRL mounting height. The mean mounting 
height of DRLs on the noncompliant vehicles is 36 inches above the 
ground, with a maximum height of 37 inches. As a result, they fail to 
meet S5.5.11(a)(1)(ii) of FMVSS 108.
    GM believes that this noncompliance is inconsequential to motor 
vehicle safety for the following reasons:
    1. Research conducted by the University of Michigan Transportation 
Research Institute (UMTRI) on the changes in glare caused by varying 
mounting height of high beam DRLs confirms that the DRLs on the subject 
vehicles do not produce significantly more glare than compliant DRLs. 
In a report published in November of 1995 (UMTRI-95-40), the 
researchers concluded glare is not appreciably affected by mounting 
height. In other words, vehicles equipped with DRL lamps not meeting 
the maximum height restriction do not cause any more glare than 
vehicles that meet the height restriction. This is true even though the 
research was conducted on lamps mounted as high as 54 inches above the 
ground.
    2. In addition to the UMTRI research, GM conducted subjective 
evaluations that confirm the DRLs on the non-complying vehicles do not 
cause a consequential increase in glare. Vehicles representative of the 
subject vehicles were modified to create DRLs with mounting heights of 
32, 34, 36 and 38 inches above the ground. Subjects were asked to 
evaluate the glare in their rearview mirror from the DRLs. The results 
indicate that there is no significant difference in glare rating when 
the subject lamps are mounted at 32, 34, 36 or 38 inches above the 
ground (see chart below). While a final research report is not yet 
available, a summary of the research can be found in Appendix 2, to the 
petition. The subject lamps received favorable ratings when evaluated 
for glare. In the chart above, the lamps mounted at 36 and 38 inches 
above the ground received an overall rating of 6.4, which is just below 
a rating of 7 (``lamps are satisfactory'') and well above a rating of 5 
(`` lamps are just acceptable'').

BILLING CODE 4910-59-p

[[Page 27033]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN18MY99.024



BILLING CODE 4910-59-C
    3. The driver of a preceding vehicle will not see more light in the 
rearview mirror than NHTSA intended when it adopted the DRL 
requirements. In the preamble to the final rule allowing DRLs (Docket 
No. 87-6; Notice 5 published January 11, 1993), the agency summarized a 
study it conducted to help establish the height requirement. One of the 
purposes of the study was to assure that a mirror of a vehicle in front 
of a DRL-equipped vehicle would not be exposed to light intensities 
greater than 2600 cd. In justifying the 2600 cd limit, the agency 
explained,

    ``There are two kinds of glare: That which discomforts and that 
which disables. The agency proposed 2,600 candela to limit 
discomfort glare from the rear view mirror caused by vehicles with 
DRLs following closely behind.''

    The agency assures the glare will be below a level that could 
interfere with motor vehicle safety by limiting the value to 2600 cd.
    To establish the height where a DRL might generate 2600 cd in the 
mirror of a preceding vehicle, the agency measured the mirror height 
(44 inches) of a representative small vehicle and calculated the light 
that would strike the mirror from a DRL lamp mounted on a vehicle 20 
feet behind it. Based on this analysis, the agency concluded a maximum 
high beam DRL mounting height of 34 inches would assure that light 
striking the mirror of a preceding vehicle would not exceed 2600 cd.
    GM evaluated light from the noncomplying vehicles with the DRL 
mounted at 37 inches, which is in the most extreme build condition and 
worst case, for purposes of this analysis. The light from this 
condition striking a mirror mounted 44 inches above the ground and 20 
feet in front of the DRL, would be below the 2600 candela limit 
established by the agency in the final DRL rule.
    4. The DRLs of the non complying vehicles form a very compact beam 
pattern. Iso-candela curves show the intensity of the beam pattern 
quickly drops off as values are measured further from the center of the 
beam pattern. At approximately 1\1/2\ degrees above horizontal, the 
beam pattern intensity falls below 2600 candela. Therefore, the driver 
of a preceding vehicles will not see significant light in the rear view 
mirror (see diagram below).

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN18MY99.025



[[Page 27034]]


BILLING CODE 4910-59-C
    5. The mounting height of the DRLs on the non complying vehicles 
complies with the requirements of Canada Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 
(CMVSS) 108.
    6. GM has not identified any accidents, injuries or warranty 
reports that are associated with this condition on the non complying 
vehicles.
    For all of the above reasons, GM argues that this noncompliance is 
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. In consideration of the 
foregoing, GM has applied for a decision that it be exempted from the 
notification and remedy provisions of 49 USC 30118 and 30120 for this 
specific noncompliance with FMVSS No.108.
    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and 
arguments on the application described above. Comments should refer to 
the docket number and be submitted to: Docket Management, Room PL-401, 
400 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC 20590. It is requested but not 
required that six copies be submitted. Docket hours are 10:00 A.M. to 
5:00 P.M.
    All comments received before the close of business on the closing 
date indicated below will be considered. The application and supporting 
materials, and all comments received after the closing date, will also 
be filed and will be considered to the extent practicable. When the 
application is granted or denied, the notice will be published in the 
Federal Register pursuant to the authority indicated below.
    Comment closing date: June 17, 1999.

(49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120; delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.50 
and 501.8)

    Issued on: May 12, 1999.
L. Robert Shelton,
Associate Administrator for Safety Performance Standards.
[FR Doc. 99-12467 Filed 5-17-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P