[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 172 (Tuesday, September 7, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 48562-48564]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-23226]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. NHTSA-99-6185]
RIN 2127-AH70


Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Stopping Distance Table

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 
Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Final rule; technical amendment.

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

SUMMARY: On March 10, 1995, we published in the Federal Register (60 FR 
13297) a final rule establishing

[[Page 48563]]

stopping distance requirements for hydraulically-braked vehicles with 
gross vehicle weight ratings (GVWR) greater than 10,000 pounds. The 
requirements specified the distances in which different types of medium 
and heavy vehicles must come to a stop from 60 mph. There was an error 
in that rule with regard to Table II--Stopping Distances, which 
contains the applicable stopping distance requirements. The 
superscripts in the table identifying specifications for school buses 
were misplaced. This rule amends the hydraulic brake standard to 
correct the location of the superscripts in Table II.

DATES: The correcting amendments to Table II are effective October 7, 
1999.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    For non-legal issues: Mr. Samuel Daniel, Jr., Office of Crash 
Avoidance Standards, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 
400 Seventh Street SW., Washington, D.C. 20590 (202) 366-4921.
    For legal issues: Mr. Edward Glancy, Office of Chief Counsel, 
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street SW., 
Washington D.C. 20590 (202) 366-2992.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Background
    A. March 10, 1995, Final Rule, Stopping Distance Requirements 
for Vehicles Equipped With Hydraulic Brake Systems
    B. Petition for Reconsideration of the March 10, 1995, Final 
Rule
II. December 13, 1995, Final Rule, Petitions for Reconsideration
III. Discussion
    A. School bus Stopping Distance for 30-mph Test
    B. Correction of Table II
    C. Good Cause
IV. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

I. Background

A. March 10, 1995, Final Rule, Stopping Distance Requirements for 
Vehicles Equipped With Hydraulic Brake Systems

    On March 10, 1995, we published a final rule, Docket No. 93-07, 
Notice 3, which, among other things, established stopping distance 
requirements in Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 105, 
Hydraulic Brake Systems,1 for hydraulically-braked vehicles 
with GVWRs of over 10,000 pounds (60 FR 13297). The rule specified the 
distances in which different types of medium and heavy vehicles must 
come to a stop from a speed of 60 miles per hour (mph) on a high 
coefficient of friction surface. The rule also established a stopping 
distance requirement of 70 feet (ft.) for a 30-mph second effectiveness 
test applicable to school buses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Standard No. 105 has since been renamed Hydraulic and 
Electric Brake Systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Petition for Reconsideration of the March 10, 1995, Final Rule

    Navistar International Transportation Corporation (Navistar) filed 
a Petition for Reconsideration on April 5, 1995, requesting that we 
increase the stopping distance requirement for the 30-mph second 
effectiveness test for school buses from 70 ft to 78 ft or in the 
alternative, to delete the requirement altogether. Navistar indicated 
in its petition that ``significant development work would be required'' 
to bring school buses into compliance with the 70-ft. stopping 
requirement. Single unit vehicles other than school buses are allowed a 
distance of 78 ft. for the 30 mph second effectiveness test, although 
at this time the standard does not require a 30 mph second 
effectiveness test for non-school bus vehicles with GVWRs greater than 
10,000 pounds.

II. December 13, 1995, Final Rule, Petitions for Reconsideration

    NHTSA published a Final Rule, Petitions for Reconsideration, on 
December 13, 1995 (60 FR 63965), responding to the petitions received 
in response to the Final Rule of March 10, 1995. We stated in Section X 
D. of the preamble that Table II, which contains the stopping distance 
requirements for Standard No. 105, would be corrected in that notice. 
However, a correction to Table II was inadvertently omitted from the 
December 1995 final rule.

III. Discussion

A. School Bus Stopping Distance for 30-mph Test

    Navistar again petitioned us on September 18, 1998, to correct the 
errors in Table II of Standard No. 105. Specifically, that company 
stated that the 30-mph stopping distance in the second effectiveness 
test for school buses should be changed from 70 feet to 78 feet. 
Additionally, Navistar cited the errors in the location of the 
superscripts that designate the test applicability and vehicle type for 
the 30-mph second effectiveness test stopping distances.
    We believe that Navistar did not provide sufficient justification 
for the economic hardship cited and also continue to believe that the 
70-ft. stopping distance requirement for school buses can be achieved 
without significant economic burden for manufacturers. No other school 
bus manufacturer has reported any hardship in meeting the 70-ft. 
stopping distance requirement. When we contacted Navistar to ask for 
some additional information about the hardship, that company indicated 
it was withdrawing its request that the stopping distance be increased. 
Therefore, no change is being made to the existing school bus stopping 
distance requirements.

B. Correction of Table II

    This document corrects Table II of Standard No. 105 to move the 
superscripts 1 and 2 from column d to column e in the second 
effectiveness test for school buses. As previously stated, the agency 
inadvertently omitted this change to the standard in the December 13, 
1995, final rule.

C. Good Cause

    We find for good cause that notice and the opportunity to comment 
on this correction are unnecessary and contrary to the public interest. 
This document corrects an obvious error that was not corrected three 
years ago. The erroneous superscripts that currently appear in Table II 
can only confuse and mislead the public about the requirements for 
school bus braking performance.

IV. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

A. Executive Order 12866 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. In 
connection with the March 1995 final rules, the agency prepared a Final 
Regulatory Evaluation (FRE) describing the economic and other effects 
of this rulemaking action. For persons wishing to examine the full 
analysis, a copy is in the agency's public docket.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    NHTSA has also considered the effects of this correction notice 
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act. I hereby certify that it will not 
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. Accordingly, the agency has not prepared a final regulatory 
flexibility analysis.
    NHTSA concluded that the March 1995 final rule had no significant 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. Today's correction 
notice also will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities.

[[Page 48564]]

C. National Environmental Policy Act

    NHTSA has analyzed this rulemaking action for the purposes of the 
National Environmental Policy Act. The agency has determined that 
implementation of this action will not have any significant impact on 
the quality of the human environment.

D. Executive Order 12612 (Federalism)

    NHTSA has analyzed this action under the principles and criteria in 
Executive Order 12612. The agency has determined that this notice does 
not have sufficient Federalism implications to warrant the preparation 
of a Federalism Assessment. No State laws will be affected.

E. Civil Justice Reform

    This final rule does not have any retroactive effect. Under 49 
U.S.C. 30103, whenever a Federal motor vehicle safety standard is in 
effect, a State may not adopt or maintain a safety standard applicable 
to the same aspect of performance which is not identical to the Federal 
standard, except to the extent that the State requirement imposes a 
higher level of performance and applies only to vehicles procured for 
the State's use. 49 U.S.C. 30161 sets forth a procedure for judicial 
review of final rules establishing, amending or revoking Federal motor 
vehicle safety standards. That section does not require submission of a 
petition for reconsideration or other administrative proceedings before 
parties may file suit in court.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571

    Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Motor vehicles, Rubber and rubber 
products, Tires.
    In consideration of the foregoing, the agency amends 49 CFR, Part 
571, as follows:

PART 571--[AMENDED]

    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.


Sec. 571.105  [Amended]

    2. Section 571.105 is amended by revising Table II to read as 
follows:
* * * * *

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07SE99.007


* * * * *
    Issued on: August 30, 1999.
L. Robert Shelton,
Associate Administrator for Safety Performance Standards.
[FR Doc. 99-23226 Filed 9-3-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-C