[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 76 (Friday, April 19, 2002)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 19343-19356]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-9676]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[DOT Docket No. NHTSA-99-5157]
RIN: 2127-AH03


Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Bus Emergency Exits and 
Window Retention and Release

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this document, NHTSA amends the Federal Motor Vehicle 
Safety Standard on bus emergency exits and window retention and release 
to reduce the likelihood that wheelchair securement anchorages will be 
installed in locations that permit wheelchairs to be secured where they 
block access to emergency exit doors. Among other provisions, the final 
rule restricts, on new school buses, wheelchair securement anchorages 
from being placed in an area bounded by 305 mm (12 inches) forward and 
rearward of the center of the side emergency exit door aisle; and for 
the rear emergency exit door, an area bounded by a horizontal plane 
1,145 mm (45 inches) above the bus floor and 305 mm (12 inches) forward 
of the bottom edge of the door opening (for school buses with a gross 
vehicle weight rating over 4,536 kg (10,000 lb)) and 150 mm (6 inches) 
forward of the bottom edge of the door opening (for school buses with a 
GVWR of 4,536 kg or less). Warning labels are specified for emergency 
exit doors and emergency exit windows not to block the exits.
    This final rule applies to school buses equipped with wheelchair 
securement anchorages. Nothing in this final rule requires school buses 
to be so equipped.

DATES: This rule is effective April 21, 2003. Optional early compliance 
with the changes made in this final rule is permitted beginning April 
19, 2002. Any petitions for reconsideration of this final rule must be 
received by NHTSA not later than June 3, 2002.

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For non-legal issues, you may call Mr. 
Charles Hott, Office of Crashworthiness

[[Page 19344]]

Standards at (202) 366-0247. His FAX number is (202) 493-2739.
    For legal issues, you may call Ms. Dorothy Nakama, Office of the 
Chief Counsel at (202) 366-2992. Her FAX number is (202) 366-3820.
    You may send mail to both of these officials at the National 
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh St., SW., 
Washington, DC, 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background
II. Access to Side Door Emergency Exits and Rear Door Emergency 
Exits
III. 1999 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
IV. Public Comments and NHTSA's Response; Final Rule
    A. Summary of Final Rule Provisions
    1. Measurements in S5.4.2.(a)(1)
    2. Restrictions on Location of Wheelchair Securement Anchorages 
Near Side Emergency Exit Doors
    3. Restrictions on Location of Wheelchair Securement Anchorages 
Near Rear Emergency Exit Doors
    4. Restrictions Do Not Apply to Tracks or Track-Type Devices
    5. Warning Labels for Emergency Exit Doors and Emergency Exit 
Windows
    B. School Bus Wheelchair Anchorages at Present
    C. Effectiveness of Regulatory Text in Limiting the Location of 
Anchorages So as to Prevent the Positioning of Wheelchairs Where 
They Could Block Emergency Exit Doors
    D. Can the Regulatory Text Limiting the Location of Anchorages 
Be More Narrowly Crafted, and Still Prevent Wheelchairs from Being 
Positioned Where They Could Block Emergency Exit Doors?
    E. Effect of the Final Rule on School Bus Seating Capacity
    F. Warning Labels Instead of Limitations on Anchorage Locations
    G. Adopting Limitations on Anchorage Locations and Requiring 
Warning Labels
    H. Application to Buses Other than School Buses
V. Regulatory Analyses and Notices
    A. Executive Order 12866; and DOT Regulatory Policies and 
Procedures
    B. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
    C. Executive Order 13045 (Economically Significant Rules 
Disproportionately Affecting Children)
    D. Executive Order 12778 (Civil Justice Reform)
    E. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    F. National Environmental Policy Act
    G. Paperwork Reduction Act
    H. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    I. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
    J. Plain Language
    K. Regulation Identifier Number
Regulatory Text of the Final Rule

I. Background

    NHTSA has long recognized the safety need for means of readily 
accessible emergency egress from a school bus in the event of a crash 
or other emergency. The agency addressed this safety need by issuing 
Safety Standard No. 217, Bus Emergency Exits and Window Retention 
Release (49 CFR 571.217).
    As a result of incidents like the 1988 Carrollton, Kentucky 
tragedy, in which 27 persons died in a school bus fire following a 
crash,\1\ NHTSA issued a final rule amending Standard No. 217 (November 
2, 1992, 57 FR 49413) by revising the minimum requirements for school 
bus emergency exits, requiring additional emergency exit doors on 
school buses, and improving access to school bus emergency doors. In 
that final rule, the agency stated that the preferred method of 
providing access to side emergency exit doors was by creating a 
dedicated aisle. Thus, S5.4.2.1(2) and Figures 5B and 5C were added to 
the standard to require a 30 centimeter (12 inch) wide restricted area 
to provide access to side emergency exit doors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In that incident, the ability of the bus occupants to exit 
from the burning bus was hampered by cargo that had been placed in 
front of the rear emergency exit door.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In a final rule published on January 15, 1993 (58 FR 4586), NHTSA 
amended Standard No. 222, School bus passenger seating and crash 
protection (49 CFR 571.222), by establishing minimum safety 
requirements for school buses equipped with wheelchair securement 
devices and occupant restraint systems. If a school bus is equipped 
with those devices and systems, they must meet specified performance 
requirements. One requirement is that the wheelchair securement 
anchorages at each wheelchair securement location must be situated so 
that a wheelchair can be secured in a forward-facing position. Another 
is that wheelchair securement devices must secure wheelchairs at two 
points on the front of each wheelchair and two points on the rear (see 
S5.4.1.2). The amendments to Standard No. 222 did not address the 
location of wheelchair securement anchorages within the school bus 
itself.
    In April 1996, the State of New York's Department of Transportation 
(NYDOT) asked whether wheelchair positions must meet the clearance 
specifications in S5.4.2.1 (School bus emergency exit opening) of 
Standard No. 217. According to NYDOT, some school districts in New York 
had requested permission to purchase school buses whose wheelchair 
anchorages are placed in front of emergency exits. This is done 
apparently to maximize the number of seating positions on the school 
bus. The alternative would be to remove school bus seats to make room 
for the anchorages in locations away from the exits. Use of wheelchair 
anchorages near the exits could result in wheelchairs being placed 
where they would block the aisle to the emergency exit. New York's 
regulations do not prohibit a school bus emergency exit from being 
blocked with a wheelchair while the bus is in motion. NYDOT officials 
provided schematics from three different bus manufacturers showing 
wheelchair anchorages placed in front of emergency exits.
    The agency has interpreted the existing requirements in Standard 
No. 217 as not prohibiting locating wheelchair anchorages adjacent to 
emergency exits. In response to a letter from Thomas Built Buses asking 
if it would be a violation of Standard No. 217 to place a wheelchair 
anchorage within the clearance area specified by S5.4.2.1 for the rear 
emergency exit door, NHTSA stated, in a letter of October 28, 1977, 
that the sufficiency of the size of the exit opening would be 
determined without first installing a wheelchair at that anchorage 
location:

    NHTSA will measure the opening using the prescribed 
parallelepiped device as the vehicle is constructed in its unloaded 
condition. Since the wheelchair would not be present when the 
vehicle was in its unloaded condition, your location of the 
wheelchair would not violate the standard.

II. Access to Side Door Emergency Exits and Rear Door Emergency 
Exits

    NHTSA has conducted rulemaking on two separate occasions to promote 
the availability and accessibility of school bus exits.
    Rear Emergency Exit Door--Access to the rear emergency exit door 
was addressed in a final rule published on January 27, 1976 (41 FR 
3871)(there is no DMS Docket No.). The rule required that there be a 45 
inch x 25 inch x 12 inch (1,143 mm x 610 mm x 305 mm) space adjacent to 
the rear emergency exit door for school buses with a gross vehicle 
weight rating over 4,536 kg (10,000 lb.).
    Side Emergency Exit Doors--Side door emergency access requirements 
were established in a final rule published on November 2, 1992 (57 FR 
49413)(there is no DMS Docket No.). In specifying a minimum dedicated 
restricted area of at least 305 mm (12 inches), the rule prohibited the 
placement of any seats within the aisle unless the seats have bottoms 
that automatically flip up when unoccupied and assume a vertical 
position outside the aisle.
    In the March 15, 1991 NPRM (56 FR 11153)(there is no DMS Docket 
No.) that preceded the November 1992 final rule, NHTSA had considered 
the alternative

[[Page 19345]]

of establishing a dedicated aisle for side doors similar to that 
established for rear emergency exit doors. It would have created a 
dedicated aisle by requiring that a parallelepiped\2\ be able to pass 
unobstructed 305 mm (12 inches) into the passenger compartment. NHTSA 
recognized in the NPRM that that requirement would improve access to 
the side emergency exit door, but noted that it would eliminate two 
seating positions, one next to the side door, and the one immediately 
behind that position. Further, under Standard No. 222, School bus 
passenger seating and crash protection, it would have been necessary to 
provide a barrier in front of the first seating position located next 
to the side of the bus and to the rear of the side door. NHTSA 
expressed its belief that the cost of implementing the alternative 
would be ``considerable.'' (56 FR at 11160)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The parallelpiped must be identical in size (45 inch x 25 
inch x 12 inch) (1143 mm x 610 mm x 305 mm) to the one used for the 
rear door opening.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although some public commenters supported adopting the alternative 
for the side emergency exit door, the agency decided not to adopt it, 
concluding in the November 1992 final rule that ``there is not 
sufficient justification or experience to require dedicated aisles.'' 
(57 FR at 49419).

III. 1999 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    The information supplied by NYDOT suggested that an amendment to 
Standard No. 217 was needed to ensure that wheelchairs cannot be 
secured in locations where they interfere with access to safety exits. 
Therefore, in the Federal Register publication of March 5, 1999 (64 FR 
10604)(DOT Docket No. NHTSA-99-5157), NHTSA proposed amending Standard 
No. 217 to prohibit the placement of wheelchair securement anchorages 
in the aisle of an emergency exit. In addition, for any side emergency 
exit door, NHTSA proposed to prohibit placement of any anchorage within 
685 mm (25 inches) (in typographical errors, in the regulatory text, 
the number ``17 inches'' was used, and the draft Figure 6A showed 435 
mm, or 17 inches) on either side from the center of the school bus side 
emergency exit door aisle. One of the agency's concerns was that if 
anchorages were on either side of an aisle, they could be used to 
secure a wheelchair directly in front of the emergency exit. NHTSA 
expressed its belief that, taken together, these proposed prohibitions 
would prevent wheelchair securement anchorages and devices from being 
installed, and wheelchairs from being secured, in locations that could 
result in the blocking of access to an emergency exit.
    As an alternative to a prohibition against installing any 
wheelchair securement anchorages in a zone on either side of an exit, 
NHTSA requested comments on whether a requirement for information 
labels would achieve the same result. NHTSA proposed the following 
regulatory text for the warning label to be placed next to each 
emergency exit:

Warning: It Is Unsafe To Secure a Wheelchair in a Location Where 
the Wheelchair Blocks the Aisle to an Exit

    NHTSA emphasized that the proposals in the NPRM would only apply to 
those school buses in which wheelchair securement locations are 
provided. Nothing in the proposal would have required that a 
manufacturer provide a wheelchair securement location on a school bus. 
The proposal did not apply to wheelchair lift doors that are not 
considered emergency exits.

    NHTSA raised the following issues for public comment--
    1. The extent to which school buses have been or are being 
designed so that wheelchairs can be secured so as to hinder access 
to any emergency exit.
    2. Whether the proposed regulatory language would achieve the 
desired result of preventing wheelchair securement anchorages and 
devices and wheelchairs from being positioned so that they block 
access to the emergency exit.
    3. Whether the proposed regulatory language could be more 
narrowly crafted so that, for instance, it would not prohibit 
wheelchair securement anchorages from being installed just forward 
of a side emergency exit if the wheelchair securement devices 
attached to those anchorages could be used only for the purpose of 
installing a wheelchair forward of those anchorages, and thus 
forward of the exit aisle as well. An example of such language is 
set forth below:
    A school bus shall not have a wheelchair securement device that 
can be used, in combination with other wheelchair securement devices 
installed in the bus, to secure a wheelchair so that any portion of 
the wheelchair is located within the area defined--
    (a) on the front side, by a transverse vertical plane tangent to 
the front edge of a side exit door,
    (b) on the back side, by a transverse vertical plane tangent to 
the rear edge of that door,
    (c) on the outboard side, by the plane of the doorway opening, 
and
    (d) on the inboard side, by a longitudinal vertical plane 
passing through the longitudinal centerline of the bus.
    4. The extent to which seating capacity (both wheelchair and 
non-wheelchair) would be reduced in any school buses produced in the 
future if this proposal were made final.
    5. Whether the need for safety would be met if, in lieu of the 
restrictions on wheelchair anchorages proposed in this NPRM, NHTSA 
were to require placing labels on schoolbuses with wheelchair 
locations that state it is unsafe to use a wheelchair securement 
device to secure a wheelchair in a location where the wheelchair 
blocks the aisle to an exit. Would the possibility of tort actions 
based on those labels effectively discourage the securing of 
wheelchairs in emergency exit aisles?
    6. Should NHTSA both require a warning label and prohibit the 
installation of wheelchair securement devices that make it possible 
to secure a wheelchair in an area where it will block access to an 
emergency exit?
    7. NHTSA seeks comment on whether these requirements should 
apply to all buses. If so, how can this be incorporated into the 
regulatory text? NHTSA is not aware of any other bus types that are 
manufactured with devices designed to secure wheelchairs that will 
block access to an emergency exit.

    In addition to the above, NHTSA also proposed to amend the 
regulatory text in S5.4.2.1(a)(1) to clarify that the lower surface of 
the parallelepiped be in contact with the floor of the bus until the 
lower edge of the rear surface is tangent to the plane at the bottom of 
the rear emergency exit door opening. This clarification modifies that 
paragraph to reflect previous agency interpretations that the rearmost 
surface of the parallelepiped be tangent to the plane of the rear 
emergency door opening.
    Leadtime--In the NPRM, NHTSA proposed that the amendments would 
take effect one year after the publication of the final rule. NHTSA 
stated its belief that one year is enough lead time for industry to 
make any necessary change. The agency proposed also that manufacturers 
of school buses with wheelchair positions be given the option of 
complying immediately with the new requirements.

IV. Public Comments and NHTSA's Response; Final Rule

A. Summary of Final Rule Provisions

    The following is a summary of the final rule's provisions. Where 
necessary, the changes between the NPRM and the final rule are 
outlined. Rationales for the final rule's provisions, many of which 
were adopted in response to public comments, are provided in the 
following sections of Part IV.
    1. Measurements in S5.4.2.1(a)(1)--In the NPRM, NHTSA proposed to 
nonsubstantively amend S5.4.2.1(a)(1) by converting metric measurements 
specified in centimeters to metric measurements specified in 
millimeters. In this final rule, the millimeter measurements are 
adopted, except for the proposal that the parallelepiped be

[[Page 19346]]

1,143 millimeters high. NHTSA is committed to thinking in metric 
measurements as we develop new procedures. In keeping with this, we try 
to specify our metric requirements in a number of millimeters that ends 
in 0 or 5. Thus, our parallelepiped is specified as 1,145 millimeters. 
S5.4.2.1(a)(1) includes, in parentheses, the English measurement 
equivalent for the metric measurements.
    2. Restrictions on Location of Wheelchair Securement Anchorages 
Near Side Emergency Exit Doors--In the NPRM, NHTSA proposed to restrict 
wheelchair securement locations in an area bounded by 685 mm (25 
inches) forward and rearward of the center of the side emergency exit 
door restricted area. In the final rule, the restriction is on 
wheelchair securement locations in an area bounded by 305 mm (12 
inches) forward and rearward of the center of the side emergency exit 
door restricted area.
    3. Restrictions on Location of Wheelchair Securement Anchorages 
Near Rear Emergency Exit Doors--In the NPRM, NHTSA proposed to specify 
the space ``bounded by a rectangular parallelepiped'' in which any 
portion of the wheelchair securement anchorage shall not be located. 
One space was proposed for all school buses. In the final rule, after 
reconsideration, NHTSA has decided to define the space where wheelchair 
securement anchorages shall not be located by using transverse vertical 
planes and longitudinal vertical planes. NHTSA has determined that 
defining the space by using planes better meets NHTSA's intention in 
restricting spaces where the wheel chair securement may not be placed, 
as the space defined by planes would explicitly include the floor near 
the school bus rear emergency exit door. In the final rule, NHTSA 
defines two restricted spaces, depending on the size of the school bus. 
For school buses with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) over 4,536 
kg (10,000 lb), the restricted space is

bounded by longitudinal vertical planes tangent to the left and 
right sides of the [rear] door opening, a transverse vertical plane 
305 mm (12 inches) forward of the bottom edge of the door opening, 
and a horizontal plane 1,145 mm (45 inches) above the floor of the 
bus * * *

    The restricted space adopted for over 4,536 kg GVWR school buses is 
the same as NPRM's proposed size of the parallelepiped used to measure 
the space where wheelchair securement anchorages would not be placed, 
that was proposed for all school buses. In the final rule, for school 
buses with a GVWR of 4,536 kg or less, the restricted space is

bounded by longitudinal vertical planes tangent to the left and 
right sides of the [rear] door opening, a transverse vertical plane 
150 mm (6 inches) forward of the bottom edge of the door opening, 
and a horizontal plane 1,145 mm (45 inches) above the floor of the 
bus * * *

    NHTSA adopted the separate definitions of restricted space for 
different sized school buses to minimize the number of wheelchair and 
nonwheelchair seating positions that would be lost as a result of this 
final rule.
    4. Restrictions Do Not Apply to Tracks or Track-Type Devices. In 
the final rule, the restricted space where wheelchair securement 
anchorages shall not be placed, does not apply to tracks or track-type 
devices that can be used for mounting seats and/or for wheelchair 
securement devices. Although NHTSA could prohibit seats from being 
adjustable to locations in which they could block an emergency exit 
(adjustment of seats to such positions are facilitated by tracks), 
NHTSA has decided to mitigate any potential seat configurations that 
may block access to the emergency exit door by the use of warning 
labels. We believe that communities and school bus operators will do 
the right thing if they are given appropriate warnings.
    5. Warning Labels For Emergency Exit Doors and Emergency Exit 
Windows. In the final rule, NHTSA specifies that on the inside surface 
of each school bus, there shall be a label directly beneath or above 
each ``Emergency Door'' or ``Emergency Exit'' designation for an 
emergency exit door or window. The label shall state, in letters at 
least 25 mm (one inch) high, the words ``DO NOT BLOCK'' in a color that 
contrasts with the background of the label. Although proposed 
regulatory text for the label was not proposed in the NPRM, in the 
NPRM, NHTSA raised the possibility that warning labels of some sort 
would be specified in the final rule.
    In response to the notice of proposed rulemaking, NHTSA received 
comments from American Transportation Corporation (AmTran), the 
Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT), the National Association 
of State Directors of Pupil Transportation Services (NASDPTS), the 
National School Transportation Association (NSTA), and Thomas Built 
Buses, Inc. In the following sections are set forth the public 
comments, and NHTSA's response to them.

B. School Bus Wheelchair Anchorages at Present

    No commenter provided information on the number of school buses 
that are currently manufactured with wheelchair anchorages that would 
make it possible to secure a wheelchair in a location where it would 
block access to an emergency exit door. The two school bus 
manufacturers, AmTran and Thomas Built, commented on wheelchair 
anchorages in their school buses. AmTran stated that when it locates 
wheelchair anchorages near the side emergency exit door, it provides a 
minimum dedicated aisle of at least 305 mm (12 inches). However, if 
buses are ordered with full length tracks on which seats can be moved, 
AmTran cannot prevent the school bus user from removing the flip seat 
located at the emergency door and securing a wheelchair in its place. 
AmTran further stated that if the track did not pass in front of the 
emergency door, or up the aisle of the emergency door, seating capacity 
would be reduced in school buses that do not have wheelchair locations.
    Thomas Built stated that its current practice is to allow a 305 mm 
(12 inches) clear aisle to side emergency access doors, even though 
``the specification'' does not require it. Thomas stated that some 
school buses are being designed such that when wheelchairs are secured, 
they can hinder access to side emergency exit doors. Thomas Built 
stated that providing the 305 mm (12 inches) clear aisle places Thomas 
Built's products at a disadvantage to competitors that do not provide 
the clear aisle, and therefore have buses with greater seating 
capacity. Thomas stated that the present Standard No. 217 requirement 
for a 305 mm (12 inches) clear aisle to the side emergency exit door 
should result in equal accessibility to the exit in the event a 
wheelchair is placed at that location.
    IDOT stated that school buses manufactured for use in Illinois may 
have wheelchair securement anchorages located in the center aisle, 
usually towards the front of the bus. IDOT has standards for bus safety 
inspection to ensure that there is a minimum 305 mm (12 inches) center 
aisle opening but noted that the buses are empty when inspected. IDOT 
standards also allow for interior modifications to school buses in 
order to meet the needs of any special education student. The school 
bus owner must declare that the modifications were made pursuant to a 
child's Individualized Education Program (IEP). IDOT did not state 
whether any school bus modifications

[[Page 19347]]

made pursuant to an IEP resulted in wheelchairs being located in such a 
way as to block access to emergency exit doors.
    NHTSA is concerned about the possibility of wheelchairs blocking 
access to side exit doors in school buses that have track seating 
systems. Easily adjustable seats that glide on tracks can result in 
non-wheelchair seats located in such a way as to block access to 
emergency exit doors. Because the configuration of the seats will be 
determined by the user, not the school bus manufacturer, NHTSA cannot 
specify how the non-wheelchair seats must be placed, or prohibit 
placement of the seats in such a fashion that access to any emergency 
exit door is blocked. However, NHTSA has authority to prohibit the 
tracks from running through the side emergency exit aisle. In this 
final rule, NHTSA is not exercising that authority. Instead, we believe 
we can address potential seat configurations that may block access to 
the emergency exit door by requiring school bus manufacturers to place 
a warning label stating: ``DO NOT BLOCK'' in 25 mm (one inch) high 
letters to be located just beneath or above the emergency exit label on 
school bus emergency exit doors or windows. The warning label issue is 
more fully discussed in this final rule in Section F, ``Warning Labels 
Instead of Limitations on Anchorage Locations.'' NHTSA will revisit 
this decision if the warning labels are not effective.

C. Effectiveness of Regulatory Text in Limiting the Location of 
Anchorages so as To Prevent the Positioning of Wheelchairs Where They 
Could Block Emergency Exit Doors

    The public commenters that addressed this issue stated that the 
regulatory text proposed in the NPRM would prevent wheelchair 
securement anchorages from being installed in locations that would make 
it possible to position wheelchairs where they would block emergency 
exit doors. Thomas Built stated that the proposed regulatory language 
would achieve the desired result of preventing wheelchair securement 
anchorages and devices and wheelchairs from being positioned so that 
they block access to the side emergency exit door. Thomas Built 
recommended that additional references to ``any exit'' or ``each 
emergency exit'' be amended to ``emergency exit door'' to make it 
explicit that the requirements apply to emergency exit doors only, and 
not to all emergency exits.
    AmTran stated that NHTSA's proposal to prohibit placement of any 
anchorage within 635 mm (25 inches) on either side from the center of 
the school bus aisle would not necessarily prevent the wheelchair from 
being secured adjacent to the emergency door. AmTran went on to state 
that there are different types of anchorages used to secure wheelchairs 
and that some of the anchorages could be placed as proposed in the NPRM 
and allow the securement of the wheelchair adjacent to the emergency 
exit. NHTSA believes that what AmTran refers to is that the only type 
of wheelchair securement device offered by school bus manufacturers is 
a 4-point tie-down, and the designs of the different types of 4-point 
tie-downs offered may still result in wheelchair placement that blocks 
access to the side emergency exit door.
    AmTran noted that the current aisle width requirement to the 
emergency door is 305 mm (12 inches). AmTran stated that the NPRM would 
add 965 mm (38 inches) to the spacing for school buses equipped with 
wheelchair securement devices. AmTran suggested adding an 
``informational requirement'' for a warning stating: ``Warning: It is 
unsafe to secure a wheelchair in a location where the wheelchair blocks 
the aisle to an exit'' would help prevent locating a wheelchair 
adjacent to the emergency door. In addition to the warning, AmTran 
suggested marking the inside of the bus wall and emergency exit door 
with a zone to indicate where wheelchairs and wheelchair ties (straps) 
cannot be placed.
    The National Association of State Directors of Pupil Transportation 
Services (NASDPTS) stated its belief that the proposed regulatory text 
at S5.4.3 would ensure that a wheelchair location would not block 
access to rear and side emergency exit doors. NASDPTS asked that 
similar regulatory text be adopted to prohibit wheelchair locations 
that would block access to emergency exit windows and roof exits, and 
urged the agency to seek comment on including roof exits and emergency 
exit windows in this rulemaking. NASDPTS stated that if able-bodied 
students needed to use a school bus emergency exit window, a wheelchair 
that partially or completely blocks access to the window creates risks 
to both the students attempting to leave through the window and to the 
student in the wheelchair. NASDPTS stated that since emergency roof 
hatches are most likely to be used in the event the school bus has 
rolled on its side, the proximity of a wheelchair location to the 
emergency exit roof hatch appears to have potentially fewer negative 
safety consequences.
    NASDPTS also stated that it may not be possible to prohibit the 
placement of wheelchairs so that they do not block access to emergency 
exit doors and emergency exit windows in small (under 4,536 kg (10,000 
lb)) Type A school buses. As an example, NASDPTS noted that prohibiting 
wheel chair anchorages near emergency exit doors and emergency exit 
windows on a small school bus equipped with optional (not required by 
Standard No. 217) emergency exit windows on each side would make the 
vehicle unusable for transporting children in wheelchairs. NASDPTS 
stated that it does not have data on the degree to which small school 
buses are equipped with more emergency exits than required by Standard 
No. 217. IDOT stated its belief that the proposed regulatory text would 
probably Aachieve the desired result.'' IDOT stated its preference that 
the amendment prohibit securement anchorages and devices from being 
located in any part of the center aisle, extending the entire length of 
the vehicle.
    In this final rule, NHTSA is not amending the regulatory text to 
prohibit wheelchair anchorages from being placed in front of emergency 
exit windows, and is not prohibiting securement anchorages and devices 
from being located in any part of the center aisle. Regarding access to 
emergency exit windows, Standard No. 217 presently does not specify a 
clear aisle requirement for emergency exit windows in buses or school 
buses, but does specify a clearance requirement for emergency exit 
opening to allow for unobstructed passage of a 50 cm by 33 cm 
ellipsoid. (See S5.4.1.) We further note that since location of 
wheelchair securement anchorages (as long as they are not in the 
restricted zones specified in this final rule) may be in the front, 
center or rear of the school bus, it would be difficult to restrict 
locations of wheelchair securement anchorages with respect to the 
location of side emergency exit windows. For this reason, as explained 
in Section F., ``Warning Labels Instead of Limitations on Anchorage 
Locations,'' we are requiring warning labels to not block emergency 
exit windows.
    The figures specified in the final rule designate the zones (as 
suggested by AmTran) in which wheelchair securement anchorages should 
not be placed. Nothing in this final rule prevents a school bus 
manufacturer from marking school bus interiors to designate zones where 
wheelchair anchorages or wheelchairs should not be placed.

[[Page 19348]]

D. Can the Regulatory Text Limiting the Location of Anchorages Be More 
Narrowly Crafted, and Still Prevent Wheelchairs From Being Positioned 
Where They Could Block Emergency Exit Doors?

    NASDPTS, Thomas Built, and IDOT commented that S5.4.3 should be 
altered to clearly state that a 305 mm (12 inches) clear aisle is 
required for access to the side emergency door and that no part of a 
wheelchair or wheelchair securement can extend into the 305 mm clear 
aisle. The commenters stated their belief that their suggestion offers 
the most flexibility and achieves the objective of not having 
wheelchairs secured where they would block access to an emergency exit 
door.
    NASDPTS commented that the proposed regulatory language for 
S5.4.3.(1) would make it impossible to have more than one wheelchair 
location forward of the rear wheel-well on all but the largest (4,536 
kg (10,000 lb) and over gross vehicle weight rating) Type C and D 
school buses and that such reductions in wheelchair locations would 
affect the usefulness of the school buses. NASDPTS further stated that 
the NPRM's proposal to prohibit placement of wheelchair anchorages 
within 635 mm (25 inches) from each side of the centerline of side 
emergency exits on school buses (which would result in a 1270 mm (50 
inches) wide aisle to side emergency exit doors) could adversely affect 
the ability of school buses to transport children in wheelchairs, even 
more so than the proposed 430 mm (17 inches) from the centerline.
    NADPTS added that, theoretically, the alternative regulatory 
language could be interpreted in such a way as to encourage States to 
develop school bus specifications that include narrower emergency exit 
doors. NASDPTS stated its belief that for school bus evacuation, the 
width of the aisle space leading to the emergency exit door is the true 
controlling factor in the effectiveness of emergency exit doors. 
NASDPTS stated that it is not aware of any data correlating the width 
of the emergency exit door and the speed of a school bus evacuation, 
e.g., that a 760 mm (30 inches) wide door results in a faster 
evacuation than a 610 mm (24 inches) wide door. NASDPTS's implicit 
point was that, when leaving through either the 760 mm or the 610 mm 
wide door, only one child at a time can go through.
    NHTSA concurs with the public comments that 635 mm (25 inches) as 
measured from the center of the required side emergency exit door aisle 
is too design restrictive because it would unduly restrict the capacity 
of the school bus. NHTSA believes that 305 mm (12 inches) clearance on 
either side of the center of the aisle would provide adequate clearance 
to ensure that wheelchair anchors are not placed so that a wheelchair 
would block access to side emergency exit doors. The 305 mm (12 inches) 
clearance is adopted because NHTSA believes that the approximately 
twelve inches of space (in addition to the already specified 305 mm (12 
inches) clearance in S5.4.2.1(a)(2)(i)) is needed to accommodate items 
such as extended foot rests or other parts that extend from the 
wheelchair.

E. Effect of the Final Rule on School Bus Seating Capacity

    AmTran, NASDPTS, and Thomas Built stated that if the proposal were 
made final, seating capacity (for non-wheelchair school bus seats) 
would be reduced by at least two, and possibly three positions. AmTran 
commented that for larger school buses at the ``maximum overall 
length,'' the loss of non-wheelchair seating capacity could be as many 
as six positions. Thomas stated that the intent of the wheelchair 
restriction is best achieved by the requirement of a clear aisle to the 
door. AmTran commented that if only a warning label were used and the 
aisle width for the emergency door aisle were kept at 305 mm (12 
inches), the seating capacity would not change. NASDPTS stated that it 
does not have quantitative information on the potential loss of school 
bus seating capacity due to the proposed rulemaking, but stated the 
view that it appears the real-world impact is most likely less (than 
what the estimated seating capacity loss would be), since not all 
school buses are operated at full capacity on every trip.
    As previously stated, in this final rule, NHTSA is adopting the 305 
mm (12 inches) clearance requirements for wheelchair anchorages next to 
side emergency exit doors on school buses. NHTSA arrived at its 
decision after weighing the potentially catastrophic effect of a 
blocked access to a side emergency exit door versus the loss of about 
two (regular, non-wheelchair) seating positions per school bus and has 
concluded that the 305 mm (12 inches) clearance requirement will meet 
the need for safety.

F. Warning Labels Instead of Limitations on Anchorage Locations

    None of the public commenters said that warning labels alone, in 
lieu of restrictions on the placement of wheelchair securement 
anchorages, would meet the need for safety. AmTran, IDOT, NASDPTS, 
NSTA, and Thomas Built argued that the agency should require both 
wheelchair securement location restrictions imposed by the regulatory 
text of Standard No. 217, and warning labels. Some commenters said that 
the adjustable floor track designs make it easy and convenient to 
reconfigure the seating locations within a school bus, and a warning 
label not to place seats on certain portions of the floor track would 
appear to have some safety benefit.
    Commenters noted that some designs of school buses have mounting 
tracks that run the entire length of the school bus. The mounting 
tracks make it possible to easily change a school bus configuration to 
install either a school bus seat or a wheelchair anchorage or 
securement device. AmTran stated its belief that an informational 
requirement would help prevent locating a wheelchair adjacent to the 
emergency door. AmTran and Thomas Built commented that a warning label 
should state that track mounted seats should not be routed through the 
clear aisle of a side emergency door. NASDPTS stated that the location 
of the warning labels is an important issue since it would most likely 
be a school bus mechanic who changes the seating positions on school 
buses with adjustable floor tracks. NASDPTS stated that it is not clear 
where to place a label so that the mechanic would see it, and suggested 
several options. However, NASDPTS suggested that the warning/
information labels not be placed at the emergency exit itself, to 
ensure that critical information specified in Standard No. 217 on 
emergency exit operation is not confused by the presence of other 
warning/information labels.
    NASDPTS further stated it is not unusual for a school bus to be 
retrofitted with a wheelchair location years after the bus was first 
purchased. In such cases, information on where wheelchair anchorages 
should not be located would be beneficial to the retrofitter. NASDPTS 
said that a wheelchair securement anchorage system is an item of motor 
vehicle safety equipment. Accordingly, the commenter said, it appears 
that NHTSA has authority to specify a safety warning/information label 
to be provided with new wheelchair securement anchorage equipment, 
including when the equipment is retrofitted to an existing school bus. 
NASDPTS went on to state that if NHTSA were to require a warning label, 
the label should refer to the wheelchair and its securement devices/
anchorages, not just the wheelchair. NASDPTS suggested the warning 
could read: ``WARNING: It is unsafe to secure

[[Page 19349]]

a wheelchair in a location where the wheelchair and/or its securement 
devices/anchorages block access to the emergency exit.''
    NHTSA agrees with the commenters that warning labels alone should 
not be used in lieu of regulatory restrictions on the locations of 
wheelchair securement anchorages. NHTSA also agrees with NASDPTS that 
the warning labels or information could be required to be provided with 
aftermarket wheelchair securement equipment. NHTSA further notes that 
nothing in this final rule prevents equipment manufacturers from 
voluntarily providing warnings, tailored for specific motor vehicle 
types, about where the wheelchair anchorage or securement locations 
should or should not be placed. However, NHTSA did not, in the NPRM, 
raise the possibility of requiring labels on wheelchair securement 
equipment. Thus, imposing a labeling requirement on manufacturers of 
wheelchair securement equipment is outside the scope of this 
rulemaking.

G. Adopting Limitations on Anchorage Locations and Requiring Warning 
Labels

    As noted above, all commenters stated that warning labels alone 
will not accomplish the goals of this rulemaking. NHTSA agrees. 
However, in conjunction with regulatory requirements that prohibit 
wheelchair securement anchorages in certain locations on school buses, 
a label will serve to remind users of school buses with adjustable seat 
tracks and aftermarket retrofitters that access to emergency exit doors 
should not be blocked by wheelchairs or other items.
    Earlier in this notice, NHTSA has discussed its concern about track 
seating that may result in non-wheelchair seats being placed where they 
block access to an emergency exit door. While NHTSA has authority to 
regulate where and how the track seating is installed in new school 
buses, we have determined that requiring a label to specify clear aisle 
access would meet the need for safety at this time. We believe that 
people will heed this warning label. NHTSA encourages the States, 
schools, school districts, and other school bus users to ensure that 
seats on tracks are not adjusted in such a way that clear access to the 
emergency exit door is blocked. At the same time, NHTSA believes that 
in school buses, the warning label specified in this final rule will 
caution against installing track seat configurations that permit 
blocking access to an emergency exit door.
    NHTSA notes that none of the commenters suggested a location for 
the warning label. However, NASDPTS argued that the warning label 
should not be placed on the emergency exit door because it is important 
to ensure that the critical information on how to operate the emergency 
exit is not confused with the presence of other warning/information 
labels. NHTSA agrees that warning labels should not be placed near the 
area that provides the operating instructions for emergency exits. In 
this final rule, NHTSA specifies the words: ``DO NOT BLOCK'' in 25 mm 
(one inch) high letters to be located just beneath or above the already 
required emergency exit label that is 50 mm (two inches) high on the 
school bus emergency exit doors and windows. NHTSA believes that a 
label stating that emergency exits should not be blocked will inform 
school bus users and aftermarket wheelchair securement retrofitters 
that emergency exits are for egress in an emergency and that access 
should never be blocked with wheel chairs or other items, such as book 
bags, knapsacks, sports equipment or band equipment.
    Regarding a warning label specifically for adjustable floor track 
designs, NASDPTS suggested that since it would likely be a school bus 
mechanic who changes the seating locations on school buses with 
adjustable floor tracks, a label could be placed in an area such as the 
floor area where the adjustable tracks are near emergency exits, where 
the mechanic would see it. NHTSA is not requiring such a label. The 
agency believes that the ``DO NOT BLOCK'' label adopted in this final 
rule will serve the same general function as a special warning label on 
the floor near adjustable tracks near emergency exit doors. However, 
NHTSA notes that nothing in this final rule prevents school bus 
manufacturers or school bus users from voluntarily placing such warning 
labels on the floor near the adjustable tracks.

H. Application to Buses Other Than School Buses

    AmTran, NASDPTS, and Thomas Built stated that all buses should be 
required to meet any new restrictions on wheelchair securement 
anchorage locations. NASDPTS noted that many of the school bus federal 
motor vehicle safety standards would have potential safety benefits if 
applied to other types of buses. NASDPTS commented that the application 
of the proposed regulatory language to other bus types may not be 
possible since most, if not all, other bus types only use emergency 
exit windows and roof exits. In many cases, every bus side window is 
designated as an emergency exit. NASDPTS concluded that if NHTSA 
proposed to prohibit the location of a wheelchair securement anchorage 
location within certain distances from emergency exits (including 
emergency exit windows), the result might be that it would become 
impracticable or even impossible to have a wheelchair location on some 
bus types.
    NHTSA agrees with NASDPTS that, in buses other than school buses, 
windows and roof exits generally serve as emergency exits. For the 
reasons stated earlier, NHTSA does not believe that the restrictions on 
wheelchair securement anchorage locations near emergency exit doors 
should be imposed on wheelchair securement anchorage locations near 
emergency exit windows. No commenter provided information on how this 
rulemaking action would apply to buses other than school buses. NHTSA 
is not aware that buses other than school buses are equipped with 
wheelchair securement anchorages that are placed or can be placed in 
locations that will result in blocking access to emergency exit doors. 
For these reasons, NHTSA is not applying the amendments made in this 
rulemaking to buses other than school buses.

V. Regulatory Analyses and Notices

A. 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.
    We have considered the impact of this rulemaking action under 
Executive Order 12866 and the Department of Transportation's regulatory 
policies and

[[Page 19350]]

procedures. This rule is not considered a significant regulatory action 
under section 3(f) of the Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning 
and Review.'' Consequently, it was not reviewed by the Office of 
Management and Budget. The rulemaking action is also not considered to 
be significant under the Department's Regulatory Policies and 
Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979).
    For the following reasons, NHTSA believes that this final rule will 
not have any cost effects on school bus manufacturers. When it amended 
Standard No. 222 to specify requirements for wheelchair securement 
anchorages and devices, NHTSA did not envision that the anchorages 
would be placed so that wheelchair securement anchorages and devices or 
secured wheelchairs would block access to any exit door. In analyzing 
the potential impacts of that rulemaking, NHTSA anticipated that 
vehicle manufacturers would, if necessary, remove seats to make room 
for securing wheelchairs in a forward-facing position and that, if 
necessary, additional buses would be purchased to offset the lost 
seating capacity. To the extent that vehicle manufacturers have not 
removed any seats and have instead installed wheelchair securement 
anchorages and devices in locations where the securing of wheelchairs 
will result in the blocking of exits, the agency overestimated the 
costs of that earlier rulemaking. If securement devices were being so 
installed, the impact of adopting the amendments proposed in this 
notice would be to conform vehicle manufacturer practices to the 
assumptions made in the analysis of that earlier rulemaking.
    Because the economic impacts of this final rule are so minimal, no 
further regulatory evaluation is required.

B. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    Executive Order 13132 requires us to develop an accountable process 
to ensure Ameaningful and timely input by State and local officials in 
the development of regulatory policies that have federalism 
implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism implications'' is 
defined in the Executive Order 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 
Executive Order 13132, we may not issue a regulation with Federalism 
implications, 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 unless we consult with State and local 
governments, or unless we consult with State and local officials early 
in the process of developing the proposed regulation. We also may not 
issue a regulation with Federalism implications and that preempts State 
law unless we consult with State and local officials early in the 
process of developing the proposed regulation.
    This final 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 Executive Order 13132. 
Thus, the requirements of Section 6 of the Executive Order do not apply 
to this final rule.

C. Executive Order 13045 (Economically Significant Rules 
Disproportionately Affecting Children

    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. It does involve 
decisions based on health risks that disproportionately affect children 
on schoolbuses. However, this rulemaking serves to reduce, rather than 
increase, that risk.

D. Executive Order 12778 (Civil Justice Reform)

    Pursuant to Executive Order 12778, ``Civil Justice Reform,'' we 
have considered whether this final rule would have any retroactive 
effect. We conclude that it would not have such an 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.

E. 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 economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities.
    The Administrator has considered the effects of this rulemaking 
action under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) and 
certifies that this final rule will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The rationale for 
this certification is that, as noted immediately above, NHTSA is not 
aware that any school bus manufacturer, or any small school bus 
manufacturer, is presently manufacturing school buses with wheelchair 
securement anchorages or devices that may result in blocking access to 
an emergency exit, or that any small school or school district has 
school buses with wheelchair securement anchorages or devices that may 
result in blocking access to an emergency door. Accordingly, the agency 
believes that this final rule will not affect the costs of the 
manufacturers of school buses considered to be small business entities. 
A small manufacturer could meet the new requirements by placing a 
wheelchair securement anchorage or device in a location other than in 
an exit aisle. Changing the placement of a wheelchair securement 
anchorage or device in this fashion might necessitate the removal of a 
seat in some cases. In those instances, there

[[Page 19351]]

will be a small net loss of passenger capacity.
    The Regulatory Flexibility Act does not, therefore, require a 
regulatory flexibility analysis.

F. National Environmental Policy Act

    We have analyzed this final rule for the purposes of the National 
Environmental Policy Act and determined that it will not have any 
significant impact on the quality of the human environment.

G. Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), 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. This final 
rule does not impose any new collection of information requirements for 
which a 5 CFR part 1320 clearance must be obtained. The term 
``collection of information'' does not include the Apublic disclosure 
of information originally supplied by the Federal government to the 
recipient for the purpose of disclosure to the public.'' (See 5 CFR 
1320.3(c)(2).) Since NHTSA is specifying the exact language with which 
schoolbus manufacturers must label their emergency exit doors and 
emergency exit windows, the labels are not collections of information 
and do not need clearance from OMB.

H. 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 our 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.
    After conducting a search of available sources, we have determined 
that there are no available and applicable voluntary consensus 
standards that we can use in this final rule. We have searched the 
SAE's Recommended Practices applicable to buses, and have not found any 
standards prohibiting placement of wheelchairs in front of emergency 
exit doors. We have also reviewed the National Standards for School 
Buses and School Bus Operations (NSSBSBO) (1995 Revised Edition). The 
NSSBSBO includes a subsection under ``Standards for Specially Equipped 
School Buses'' called ``Securement and Restraint System for Wheelchair/
Mobility Aid and Occupant.'' Paragraph 1.k. of this provision (on page 
61) states: ``The securement and restraint system shall be located and 
installed such that when an occupied wheelchair/mobility aid is 
secured, it does not block access to the lift door.'' Since this 
provision does not address blocking access to an emergency exit, we 
have decided not to use it in the rulemaking at issue.

I. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) 
requires Federal agencies to prepare a written assessment of the costs, 
benefits and other effects of proposed or final rules that include a 
Federal mandate likely to result in the expenditure by State, local or 
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of more 
than $100 million in any one year (adjusted for inflation with base 
year of 1995). Before promulgating a NHTSA rule for which a written 
statement is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires us to 
identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives 
and adopt the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome 
alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of 
section 205 do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable 
law. Moreover, section 205 allows us to adopt an alternative other than 
the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative 
if we publish with the final rule an explanation why that alternative 
was not adopted.
    This final rule would not result in costs of $100 million or more 
to either State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or to 
the private sector. Thus, this final rule is not subject to the 
requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.

J. Plain Language

    Executive Order 12866 requires each agency to write all rules in 
plain language. Application of the principles of plain language 
includes consideration of the following questions:

--Have we organized the material to suit the public's needs?
--Are the requirements in the rule clearly stated?
--Does the rule contain technical language or jargon that is not clear?
--Would a different format (grouping and order of sections, use of 
headings, 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 this rulemaking easier to understand?

    In the March 5, 1999 (64 FR 10604)(DOT Docket No. NHTSA-99-5157) 
NPRM, we raised the plain language issues stated above. None of the 
public commenters addressed plain language concerns in their NPRM 
comments.

K. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)

    The Department of Transportation assigns a regulation identifier 
number (RIN) to each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of 
Federal Regulations. The Regulatory Information Service Center 
publishes the Unified Agenda in April and October of each year. You may 
use the RIN contained in the heading at the beginning of this document 
to find this action in the Unified Agenda.

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 Federal Motor Vehicle Safety 
Standards (49 CFR part 571), are amended as set forth below.

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. Section 571.217 is amended by adding in S4, in alphabetical 
order, the definitions of ``wheelchair,'' ``wheelchair securement 
anchorage'', and ``wheelchair securement device'' , by revising 
S5.4.2.1(a)(1) by adding S5.4.3 and S5.5.3(d) to read as follows:


Sec. 571.217  Standard No. 217; Bus emergency exits and window 
retention and release.

* * * * *
    S4. * * *
    Wheelchair means a wheeled seat frame for the support and 
conveyance of a physically disabled person, comprising at least a 
frame, seat, and wheels.

[[Page 19352]]

    Wheelchair securement anchorage means the provision for 
transferring wheelchair securement device loads to the vehicle 
structure.
    Wheelchair securement device means a strap, webbing or other device 
used for securing a wheelchair to the school bus, including all 
necessary buckles and other fasteners.
* * * * *
    S5.4.2.1 * * *
    (a) * * *
    (1) In the case of a rear emergency exit door, an opening large 
enough to permit unobstructed passage into the bus of a rectangular 
parallelepiped 1,145 millimeters (45 inches) high, 610 millimeters (24 
inches) wide, and 305 millimeters (12 inches) deep, keeping the 1,145 
millimeter (45 inch) dimension vertical, the 610 (24 inch) millimeter 
dimension parallel to the opening, and the lower surface in contact 
with the floor of the bus at all times, until the bottom edge of the 
rearmost surface of the parallelepiped is tangent to the plane of the 
door opening; and
* * * * *
    S5.4.3 Restriction on wheelchair anchorage location.
    S5.4.3.1 Except as provided in paragraph S5.4.3.2 of this section, 
no portion of a wheelchair securement anchorage shall be located in a 
school bus such that:
    (a) In the case of side emergency exit doors, any portion of the 
wheelchair securement anchorage is within the space bounded by the 
interior side wall and emergency exit door opening, transverse vertical 
planes 305 mm (12 inches) forward and rearward of the center of any 
side emergency exit door restricted area, and a longitudinal vertical 
plane through the longitudinal centerline of the school bus, as shown 
in Figure 6A and Figure 6B.
    (b) In the case of rear emergency exit doors in school buses with a 
gross vehicle weight rating greater than 4,536 kg (10,000 lb), any 
portion of the wheelchair securement anchorage is within the space 
bounded by longitudinal vertical planes tangent to the left and right 
sides of the door opening, a transverse vertical plane 305 mm (12 
inches) forward of the bottom edge of the door opening, and a 
horizontal plane 1,145 mm (45 inches) above the floor of the bus, as 
shown in Figure 6C and Figure 6D.
    (c) In the case of rear emergency exit doors in school buses with a 
gross vehicle weight rating of 4,536 kg (10,000 lb) or less, any 
portion of the wheelchair securement anchorage is within the space 
bounded by longitudinal vertical planes tangent to the left and right 
sides of the door opening, a transverse vertical plane 150 mm (6 
inches) forward of the bottom edge of the door opening, and a 
horizontal plane 1,145 mm (45 inches) above the floor of the bus, as 
shown in Figure 6C and Figure 6D.
    S5.4.3.2 The restriction in S5.4.3.1(a) of this section does not 
apply to tracks or track-type devices that are used for mounting seats 
and/or for wheelchair securement devices.
* * * * *
    S5.5.3 School Bus.
* * * * *
    (d) On the inside surface of each school bus, there shall be a 
label directly beneath or above each ``Emergency Door'' or ``Emergency 
Exit'' designation required by paragraph (a) of S5.5.3 of this standard 
for an emergency exit door or window. The label shall state, in letters 
at least 25 mm (one inch) high, the words ``DO NOT BLOCK'' in a color 
that contrasts with the background of the label.
* * * * *

    3. Section 571.217 is amended by adding after Figure 5C, Figure 6A, 
Figure 6B, Figure 6C, and Figure 6D, to read as follows:
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P

[[Page 19353]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR19AP02.000


[[Page 19354]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR19AP02.001


[[Page 19355]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR19AP02.002


[[Page 19356]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR19AP02.003


    Issued on: April 16, 2002.
Jeffrey W. Runge,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 02-9676 Filed 4-18-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-C