[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 196 (Wednesday, October 10, 2001)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 51629-51635]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-25428]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Parts 571 and 587

[Docket No. NHTSA-01-10435]

RIN 2127-AI05


Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Side Impact Protection; 
Fuel System Integrity

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the agency's grant of a petition for rulemaking 
from Mr. James E. Stocke, NHTSA proposes to update the Federal motor 
vehicle safety standards on side impact protection and fuel system 
integrity by requiring that radial tires of certain specifications, 
rather than bias ply tires, be used on the moving barriers specified in 
these standards. In conjunction with that proposal, NHTSA also proposes 
to delete certain outdated or incorrect specifications for the moving 
barriers in those standards.

DATES: You should submit your written comments so that they are 
received by December 10, 2001.

ADDRESSES: You may submit your comments in writing to: Docket 
Management, Room PL-401, 400 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC, 20590. 
Alternatively, you may submit your comments electronically by logging 
onto the Docket Management System (DMS) website at http://dms.dot.gov. 
Click on ``Help & Information'' or ``Help/Info'' to view instructions 
for filing your comments electronically. Regardless of how you submit 
your comments, you should mention the docket number of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    For technical and policy issues: Dr. William Fan, Office of 
Crashworthiness Standards, NPS-11, National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC 20590. 
Telephone: (202) 366-4922. Fax: (202) 366-4329.
    For legal issues: Nancy Bell, Attorney Advisor, Office of the Chief 
Counsel, NCC-20, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 
Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC 20590. Telephone: (202) 366-2992. 
Fax: (202) 366-3820.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 214, Side impact 
protection (49 CFR 571.214), and FMVSS No. 301, Fuel system integrity 
(49 CFR 571.301), specify impact tests using moving barriers. Paragraph 
S6.10 of FMVSS No. 214 contains specifications for a moving deformable 
barrier. FMVSS No. 301 contains specifications for two 1,814 kilogram 
(4,000 pound) rigid moving barriers, a flat rigid moving barrier 
(Paragraphs S7.2 and S7.3) \1\ and a contoured rigid

[[Page 51630]]

moving barrier (Paragraph S7.5). Both FMVSS No. 301 barriers are used 
to assess vehicle fuel system integrity. The FMVSS No. 301 flat rigid 
moving barrier is used for testing passenger cars, multipurpose 
passenger vehicles, trucks and buses with a gross vehicle weight rating 
(GVWR) of 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) or less, and the FMVSS No. 
301 contoured rigid barrier is used for testing large school buses with 
a GVWR greater than 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds). The FMVSS No. 214 
barrier is a 1,367 kilogram (3,000 pound) moving deformable barrier 
used for testing passenger cars, and multipurpose passenger vehicles, 
trucks and buses with a GVWR of 2,722 kilograms (6,000 pounds) or less 
in side impact crashes. G78-15 bias ply tires are currently specified 
for the FMVSS No. 301 barriers.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The FMVSS No. 301 flat rigid moving barrier is identical to 
the moving barrier specified for the lateral moving barrier test in 
paragraph S8.2 of FMVSS No. 208, Occupant crash protection (49 CFR 
571.208). At this time, the tire specifications in S8.2 of FMVSS No. 
208 will not be amended. FMVSS No. 208's lateral moving barrier 
crash test was part of an optional requirement for automatic 
restraint systems which can no longer be utilized by manufacturers 
to certify their vehicles. Vehicle manufacturers are currently 
required to fulfill a more stringent requirement by installing air 
bags and Type 2 seat belts in both front outboard designated seating 
positions.
    \2\ Paragraph S7.5.4 of FMVSS No. 301 specifies G78-15 bias ply 
tires for use on the contoured rigid moving barrier. The 
requirements for the FMVSS No. 301 flat rigid moving barrier do not 
specify bias ply tires, but, in practice, the flat rigid moving 
barrier utilizes the identical under-structure and G78-15 bias ply 
tires as the contoured rigid moving barrier.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The tire specifications for the FMVSS No. 214 moving barrier are 
not set out in FMVSS No. 214. Rather, S6.10 of FMVSS No. 214 refers to 
the moving barrier specified in 49 CFR Part 587, Side Impact Moving 
Deformable Barrier. The tire specifications for that barrier are 
contained in Drawing DSL-1278, Sheet 2 of 2, Item -11 and Note 8. Item 
-11 specifies ``Bias belted tire (BF Goodrich--G78-15 CLM).'' On 
October 1991, Note 8 was added to drawing DSL-1278 that states ``Bias 
belted tire, size P215/75B15, may be substituted for that specified in 
-11. Inflate to recommended pressure.''

II. Petition for Rulemaking

    On February 3, 2000, Mr. James E. Stocke, a retired automotive 
safety engineer, submitted a petition for rulemaking requesting that 
NHTSA amend FMVSS No. 301 to require that the moving barrier assembly 
be equipped with P205/75R15 radial tires inflated to 207 kPa (30 psi), 
replacing the currently required G78-15 bias ply tires inflated to 165 
kPa (24 psi).
    In his petition, Mr. Stocke stated that the bias tire size 
designation referenced in FMVSS No. 301 was outdated 15 years ago and 
that bias tires are no longer readily available because they have been 
replaced with radial tires. Mr. Stocke noted that the Society of 
Automotive Engineers, Inc. (SAE) J972 Recommended Practice ``Moving 
Barrier Collision Tests'' was revised (in August 1997) to specify both 
P205/75R15 radial tires and G78-15 bias ply tires for use on moving 
barriers.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ SAE is an organization which develops voluntary standards 
for aerospace, automotive and other industries. Many of SAE's 
recommended practices are developed using technical information 
supplied by vehicle manufacturers and automotive test laboratories.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, Mr. Stocke stated that a P205/75R15 tire inflated to 
207 kPa (30 psi) is equivalent to a G78-15 tire inflated to 165 kPa (24 
psi). Also, he asserted that the tread width specification for the bias 
ply tire would not be necessary for a radial tire specification because 
the radial tire size designation (width to height ratio) is sufficient 
to define the tread width. Accordingly, Mr. Stocke suggested amending 
FMVSS No. 301 to read as follows: ``The moving barrier assembly is 
equipped with P205/75R15 pneumatic tires inflated to 207 kPa.'' In a 
letter dated August 16, 2000, NHTSA granted Mr. Stocke's petition for 
rulemaking.

III. NHTSA's Response to Petition

    In reviewing Mr. Stocke's petition, we were guided by a number of 
considerations. First, with the increased use of the radial tire design 
over the past 30 years in the U.S., the bias ply tire design has become 
virtually obsolete.\4\ The manufacture and use of bias ply tires has 
largely been replaced by the manufacture and use of radial tires. 
Consequently, bias tires are not readily available to testing 
laboratories at present and will become even more difficult for the 
laboratories to obtain in the future. Also, as the petitioner points 
out, the SAE Recommended Practice for ``Moving Barrier Collision 
Tests'' now includes specifications for radial tires as well as for 
bias ply tires. Both P205/75R15 and P215/75R15 radial tires are readily 
available at present and are widely recommended for use by vehicle 
manufacturers on passenger cars, small passenger vans, and small sport 
utility vehicles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ According to the Rubber Manufacturers Association's 
``Factbook 2000,'' original equipment radial tires shipment sales 
surpassed those of bias ply tires by a wide margin in the early 
1970s. In 1999, radial tires shipments comprised 99.8% of the 
replacement market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Another consideration for the agency is the possible effect on ride 
height (the height at the center of gravity) and vertical motion 
(bounce) of a moving barrier if tires different from those currently 
specified in FMVSS Nos. 214 and 301 are used on those barriers. Bias 
ply tires and radial tires are different in design and construction, 
and they exhibit different performance characteristics. For instance, 
bias ply tires have their inner carcass cords laid at an angle of about 
50 degrees to the center line of the tread, and cords in successive 
plies (two or four) usually run in a criss-cross fashion--an 
arrangement which serves to equalize cord tensions. On the other hand, 
radial tires have cords which run at right angles to the center line of 
the tread and parallel to the radius of the tire. The radial 
construction creates a tread which is stiffer and a sidewall which is 
more flexible than that of a bias ply tire. These factors may affect 
the performance of moving barriers as discussed below.
    The moving barrier tests in FMVSS Nos. 214 and 301 specify a static 
barrier ride height, an important impact parameter measurement. 
Further, the Laboratory Test Procedure in FMVSS No. 214 provides a 
guideline for barrier vertical displacement. Because a radial tire has 
a lower profile and a more flexible sidewall than a bias ply tire, the 
use of radial tires, rather than bias ply tires, on the moving barriers 
specified in FMVSS Nos. 214 and 301 could affect the barrier ride 
height (the center of gravity height and/or barrier contact height). 
Additionally, if an improper tire inflation pressure is used, it may 
affect the barrier's vertical motion as it is being towed during the 
test.

IV. Related Barrier Tire Research

P215/75R15 Radial Tires

    Recently, Ford Motor Company (Ford) conducted a barrier tire study 
(Ford Study) to better understand the effect of tires on testing done 
pursuant to FMVSS No. 214 and 96/27/EC, the European Union side impact 
directive.\5\ This study included investigating vertical and horizontal 
displacements of the barriers, quantifying cart/barrier behavior at 
impact, and evaluating factors that may contribute to noncompliance 
with the requirements of the regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Ford engineers have provided a copy of their summary report 
to NHTSA. Test details are not currently available. A copy of the 
summary report is available in the docket for this Notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Ford Study was based on data derived from 34 U.S. side impact 
tests and 16 European side impact tests conducted in 1997.\6\ Three 
principal

[[Page 51631]]

variables in the study were (1) release mechanisms (pins/chains), (2) 
tire types (bias/radial) and (3) tire pressures (103 kPa (15 psi)/221 
kPa (32 psi)). The study indicated that all 34 U.S. side impact tests 
were within the horizontal displacement specification of +/-50 mm (2 
inches) and approximately three-fourths of the tests were within the 
vertical displacement guideline of +/-20 mm (0.8 inch). More 
specifically, the test data indicated that the barriers with the P215/
75R15 radial tires inflated to 221 kPa (32 psi) were able to meet the 
+/-20 mm (0.8 inch) guideline in almost 100% of the tests. After 
careful review of this extensive study, NHTSA has tentatively concluded 
that the P215/75R15 radial tire inflated to 221 kPa (32 psi) is an 
appropriate alternative to the G78-15 bias ply tire for use on the 
FMVSS No. 214 barrier.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The Ford Study recommended conducting eight additional tests 
to measure the barrier motion. Ford did not conduct the additional 
tests because it concluded that no new information would be derived 
from resulting data. NHTSA concurs with Ford's decision that the 34 
Ford side impact tests and the 16 European tests provide a 
sufficient data basis for analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

P205/75R15 Radial Tires

    As mentioned previously, SAE J972 was recently revised to specify 
that P205/75R15 radial tires inflated to 207 kPa (30 psi), as well as 
G78-15 bias ply tires inflated to 165 kPa (24 psi), may be used on all 
1,814 kilogram (4,000 pound) moving barriers. Because SAE will not 
issue a Recommended Practice that has not been approved by its test 
engineers and auto industry representatives, NHTSA believes that 
vehicle manufacturers and their test laboratories have already tested 
and accepted the revised SAE J972 Recommended Practice. NHTSA, 
following the SAE Recommended Practice, tentatively concludes that the 
P205/75R15 tires inflated to 207 kPa (30 psi) are appropriate for use 
on both of the 1,814 kilogram (4,000 pound) moving barriers specified 
in FMVSS No. 301. Accordingly, NHTSA has tentatively concluded that the 
P205/75R15 radial tires inflated to 207 kPa (30 psi) is an appropriate 
alternative to the G78-15 bias ply tire for use on the FMVSS No. 301 
barriers.

V. Agency Proposal

A. Radial Tire Size and Inflation Pressure

    While NHTSA has tentatively made conclusions concerning the use of 
one tire (the P215/75R15 tire inflated to 221 kPa (32 psi)) for the 
FMVSS No. 214 moving barrier and another tire (the P205/75R15 tire 
inflated to 207 kPa (30 psi)) for the FMVSS No. 301 moving barriers, 
the agency recognizes that it would be easier for test laboratories to 
use only one size tires for FMVSS Nos. 214 and 301 moving barriers. The 
agency therefore proposes specifying either P215/75R15 tires inflated 
to 221 kPa (32 psi) for use on FMVSS Nos. 214 and 301 moving barriers 
or P205/75R15 tires inflated to 207 kPa (30 psi) for use on FMVSS Nos. 
214 and 301 moving barriers. In other words, NHTSA plans to pick one of 
these tires and specify it in the final rule for both barriers.
    As discussed above, the ride height and vertical motion of a moving 
barrier determine the impact location and the height of the moving 
barrier can have an effect on test results. Prior to making a final 
decision, the agency will assess the extent to which the substitution 
of a single tire may have unintended effects on either (1) the ride 
height, or (2) the impact performance of the FMVSS Nos. 214 and 301 
moving barriers. For example, in attempting to find a set of 
appropriate radial tires (tire size and inflation pressure) for use on 
the FMVSS No. 214 barrier, NHTSA is concerned that a set of four 
incorrectly inflated tires could result in excessive barrier vertical 
motion during the towing process, which could make it difficult to stay 
within the +/-20 mm (0.8 inch) vertical displacement guideline.\7\ 
NHTSA solicits comments and laboratory test data concerning these 
matters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ To control the impact height in the impact test in FMVSS No. 
214, NHTSA's Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance specifies a 
vertical displacement guideline of +/-20 mm (0.8 inch) in its 
Laboratory Test Procedure. (This guideline only applies to NHTSA 
contractors conducting FMVSS No. 214 side impact compliance tests.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Other Issues

Tread Width
    NHTSA concurs with petitioner's comments that the tread width 
specification for radial tires is not necessary since the radial tire 
size designation is sufficient to define tread width. For instance, the 
first three numbers in the P205/75R15 radial tire designation indicate 
that the tire width is 205 mm. The Tire and Rim Association, Inc. 
Yearbooks contain a chart to define the maximum dimensions of grown 
tires in service.\8\ According to the chart, the maximum tire tread 
width of a 75 series aspect ratio tire is 80 percent of the overall 
width. Mr. Stocke is correct that the tread width of P205/75R15 tires 
(205 mm  x  0.8 = 164 mm) is within the specification in FMVSS No. 301 
for tire width of 152 mm +/-25 mm (6.0 in. +/-1.0 in.). Likewise, the 
P215/75R15 tires are within that specification (215 mm  x  0.8 = 172 
mm). In addition, FMVSS No. 214 does not specify any tire tread width. 
Therefore, NHTSA proposes that the tread width specification be deleted 
from the tire specifications in FMVSS No. 301.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ A ``grown'' tire means that a tire has experienced a growth 
or a stretch of its fabric during service. Some tire tables show an 
allowance on the maximum tire dimensions to compensate for this 
``growth.'' To prevent the tire from rubbing the vehicle, vehicle 
manufacturers use this maximum number in their vehicle designs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Moments of Inertia
    Data received from NHTSA's contractors and from the Vehicle 
Research and Test Center at East Liberty, Ohio (VTRC) indicate that it 
is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to construct the FMVSS No. 
301 contoured moving barrier in accordance with both the center of 
gravity and the moments of inertia specified in FMVSS No. 301.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The moment of inertia is the quantitative measure of the 
rotational inertia of a body, i.e., the opposition that the body 
exhibits to having its speed of rotation about an axis altered by 
the application of a torque (turning force).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FMVSS No. 301 moving contoured barrier test was initially based 
on an old SAE Recommended Practice which included specifications for 
moments of inertia, as well as dimensional drawings and a specified 
center of gravity. In its rulemaking for the FMVSS No. 301 contoured 
moving barrier (40 FR 18469, April 28, 1975; 40 FR 47790, October 15, 
1975), NHTSA retained the SAE Recommended Practice specifications of 
measurement, but made modifications to the original SAE design by 
lowering the front face of the barrier design by 178 mm (7 inches). 
With this modification, the moments of inertia derived from the SAE 
Recommended Practice are difficult to achieve. However, there has been 
no reason to believe that the actual barriers utilized by the agency 
and by manufacturers have yielded inappropriate results.
    Based on the current measurements, excepting the moments of 
inertia, the FMVSS No. 301 contoured moving barrier can be constructed 
to the barrier specifications with the dimensional drawings and the 
specified center of gravity. There are no moments of inertia specified 
for the FMVSS No. 301 flat moving barrier. Therefore, NHTSA proposes 
that the moment of inertia specifications for the contoured moving 
barrier be removed from FMVSS No. 301.

VI. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

Executive Order 12866 (Federal Regulation) and DOT Regulatory Policies 
and Procedures

    This notice has not been reviewed under E.O. 12866. After 
considering the

[[Page 51632]]

impacts of this rulemaking action, we have determined that the action 
is not significant within the meaning of the Department of 
Transportation regulatory policies and procedures. The intent of the 
rulemaking action is to update regulatory procedures that have been in 
effect for over 25 years. In most cases, the effect of the proposed 
amendments would be to relax or eliminate burdens on regulated 
entities. This action does not involve a substantial public interest or 
controversy. The rulemaking action would not have a substantial impact 
on any transportation safety program or on state and local governments. 
The impacts are so minimal as not to warrant the preparation of a full 
regulatory evaluation. The tires specified in the proposed rule are 
more readily available than those currently specified, and they are 
already widely recommended by voluntary standards organizations for use 
by vehicle manufacturers for testing. Accordingly, there will be no 
increase in the cost of tires used for testing, and we do not 
anticipate any impact on the ability to conduct valid tests or any 
other impact on the cost or ease of testing.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    In compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-
612), we have evaluated the effects of this rule on small entities. 
NHTSA certifies that this action would not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. This action merely 
replaces an outdated tire specification for testing devices with an 
equivalent current tire specification.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501, 
et. seq.), Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they 
conduct, sponsor, or require through regulations. NHTSA has reviewed 
this proposal and determined that it does not contain collection of 
information requirements.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    This rule would not impose a Federal mandate resulting in the 
expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, 
or by the private sector, of $ 100 million or more in any one year. (2 
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

Executive Order 12778 (Civil Justice Reform)

    This proposed rule would not have any retroactive effect. Under 
section 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 (Protection of Children)

    We have analyzed this action under Executive Order 13045, 
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and does not 
concern an environmental risk to health or safety that may 
disproportionately affect children.

Executive Order 12630 (Taking of Private Property)

    This rule will not effect a taking of private property or otherwise 
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental 
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property 
Rights.

National Environmental Policy Act

    The agency has analyzed this action for the purposes of the 
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 
et seq.) and has determined that this action would not have any effect 
on the quality of the environment.

Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    E.O. 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), revokes and replaces 
E.O.'s 12612 ``Federalism'' and 12875 ``Enhancing the Intergovernmental 
Partnership.'' E.O. 13132 requires NHTSA to develop an accountable 
process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input by State and local 
officials in the development of regulatory policies that have 
federalism implications.'' E.O. 13132 defines the term ``Policies that 
have federalism implications'' to include regulations that have 
``substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between 
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power 
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.'' Under 
E.O. 13132, NHTSA may not issue a regulation that has federalism 
implication, that imposes substantial direct compliance costs, and that 
is not required by statute, unless the Federal government provides the 
funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by State 
and local governments, or NHTSA consults with State and local officials 
early in the process of developing the proposed regulation.
    The proposed rule would not have substantial direct effects on the 
States, on the relationship between the national government and the 
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the 
various levels of government as specified in E.O. 13132. Thus, the 
requirements of section 6 of the Executive Order do not apply to this 
rule.

Plain Language

    E.O. 12866 requires each agency to write all rules in plain 
language. Application of the principles of plain language include 
consideration of the following questions:
    --Have we organized the material to suit the public's needs?
    --Are the requirements in the proposed rule clearly stated?
    --Does the proposed rule contain technical language or jargon that 
is unclear?
    --Would a different format (grouping and order of sections, use of 
heading, paragraphing) make the rule easier to understand?
    --Would more (but shorter) sections be better?
    --Could we improve clarity by adding tables, lists, or diagrams?
    --What else could we do to make the rule easier to understand?
    If you have any responses to these questions, please include them 
in your comments on this document.

VII. Comments

How Do I Prepare and Submit Comments?

    Your comments must be written and in English. To ensure that your 
comments are correctly filed in the Docket, please include the docket 
number of this document in your comments.
    Your comments must not be more than 15 pages long. (49 CFR 553.21). 
We established this limit to encourage you to write your primary 
comments in a concise fashion. However, you may attach necessary 
additional documents to your comments. There is no limit on the length 
of the attachments.
    Please submit two copies of your comments, including the 
attachments, to Docket Management at the address given above under 
ADDRESSES.

[[Page 51633]]

How Can I Be Sure That My Comments Were Received?

    If you wish Docket Management to notify you upon its receipt of 
your comments, enclose a self-addressed, stamped postcard in the 
envelope containing your comments. Upon receiving your comments, Docket 
Management will return the postcard by mail.

How Do I Submit Confidential Business Information?

    If you wish to submit any information under a claim of 
confidentiality, you should submit three copies of your complete 
submission, including the information you claim to be confidential 
business information, to the Chief Counsel, NHTSA, at the address given 
above under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. In addition, you should 
submit two copies, from which you have deleted the claimed confidential 
business information, to Docket Management at the address given above 
under ADDRESSES. When you send a comment containing information claimed 
to be confidential business information, you should include a cover 
letter setting forth the information specified in our confidential 
business information regulation. (49 CFR Part 512.)

Will the Agency Consider Late Comments?

    We will consider all comments that Docket Management receives 
before the close of business on the comment closing date indicated 
above under DATES. To the extent possible, we will also consider 
comments that Docket Management receives after that date.

How Can I Read the Comments Submitted by Other People?

    You may read the comments received by Docket Management at the 
address given above under ADDRESSES. The hours of the Docket are 
indicated above in the same location.
    You may also see the comments on the Internet. To read the comments 
on the Internet, take the following steps:
    (1) Go to the Docket Management System (DMS) Web page of the 
Department of Transportation (http://dms.dot.gov/).
    (2) On that page, click on ``search.''
    (3) On the next page (http://dms.dot.gov/search/), type in the 
four-digit docket number shown at the beginning of this document. 
Example: If the docket number were ``NHTSA-1999-1234,'' you would type 
``1234.'' After typing the docket number, click on ``search.''
    (4) On the next page, which contains docket summary information for 
the docket you selected, click on the desired comments.
    You may download the comments. However, since the comments are 
imaged documents, instead of word processing documents, the downloaded 
comments are not word searchable.
    Please note that even after the comment closing date, we will 
continue to file relevant information in the Docket as it becomes 
available. Further, some people may submit late comments. Accordingly, 
we recommend that you periodically check the Docket for new material.

List of Subjects

49 CFR Part 571

    Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Motor vehicles, Rubber and rubber 
products, Tires.

49 CFR Part 587

    Incorporation by reference, Motor vehicle safety.
    In consideration of the foregoing, we propose to amend 49 CFR parts 
571 and 587 as follows:

PART 571--FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS

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

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30166 and 30177; 
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.

    2. Section 571.301 would be amended by revising S7.5.2, S7.5.4 and 
S7.5.5; by removing S7.5.6; and by adding S7.6 to read as follows:


Sec. 571.301  Standard No. 301; Fuel system integrity.

* * * * *
    S7.5.2 The moving contoured barrier, including the impact surface, 
supporting structure, and carriage, has a mass of 1,814 kg  
23 kg with the mass distributed so that 408 kg  11 kg is at 
each rear wheel and 499 kg  11 kg is at each front wheel. 
The center of gravity is located 1,372 mm  38 mm rearward 
of the front wheel axis, in the vertical longitudinal plane of 
symmetry, 401 mm above the ground.
* * * * *
    S7.5.4 The concrete surface upon which the vehicle is tested is 
level, rigid, and of uniform construction, with a skid number of 75 
when measured in accordance with American Society of Testing and 
Materials Method E; 274-65T at 64 km/h, omitting water delivery as 
specified in paragraph 7.1 of that method.
    S7.5.5 The barrier assembly is released from the guidance mechanism 
immediately prior to impact with the vehicle.
    S7.6
[Alternative 1]
    The moving barrier assemblies specified in S7.2, S7.3 and S7.5 are 
equipped with P215/75R15 pneumatic tires inflated to 221 kPa.
[Alternative 2]
    The moving barrier assemblies specified in S7.2, S7.3 and S7.5 are 
equipped with P205/75R15 pneumatic tires inflated to 207 kPa.
* * * * *
    3. Figure 2 at the end of section 571.301 would be revised to read 
as follows: [blank page for figure 2]

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P

[[Page 51634]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10OC01.010

BILLING CODE 4910-59-C

[[Page 51635]]

PART 587--DEFORMABLE BARRIERS

    4. The authority citation for part 587 would continue to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117, 30166 and 30177; 
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.

    5. Section 587.6 would be amended by revising paragraph (b)(1) to 
read as follows:


Sec. 587.6  General description.

* * * * *
    (b)(1) The specifications for the final assembly of the moving 
deformable barrier are provided in the drawings shown in DSL-1278, 
dated [date of the final drawing change].
* * * * *

    Issued on: October 4, 2001.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Safety Performance Standards.
[FR Doc. 01-25428 Filed 10-9-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P