[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 143 (Friday, July 25, 2003)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43964-43972]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-18924]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 571
[Docket No. NHTSA-03-15712]
RIN 2127-AH08
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Glazing Materials; Low
Speed Vehicles
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This rule updates the Federal motor vehicle safety standard on
glazing materials so that it incorporates by reference the 1996 version
of the industry standard on motor vehicle glazing. Currently, the
Federal standard references the 1977 version of the industry standard
and the 1980 supplement to that standard.
Today's final rule also simplifies understanding the Federal
glazing performance requirements. The amendments of the past 20 years
have resulted in a patchwork of requirements in the Federal standard
that must be read alongside the industry standard in order to gain a
comprehensive understanding of the overall requirements of the Federal
standard. The incorporation by reference of the 1996 version of the
industry standard permits the deletion of most of the existing text of
the Federal standard. This change to the Federal standard means that
the industry standard will henceforth provide a single source of
Federal glazing performance requirements for most purposes.
In addition, this final rule addresses several issues not covered
by the 1996 American National Standards Institute (ANSI) standard. For
example, this action limits the size of the shade band that glazing
manufacturers place at the top of windshields and clarifies the meaning
of the phrase ``the most difficult part or pattern'' for the fracture
test in the 1996 ANSI standard. This action also makes minor conforming
amendments to the standard on low speed vehicles.
DATES: Effective date: This final rule is effective September 23, 2003.
The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this
rule is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of
September 23, 2003. If you wish to submit a petition for
reconsideration of this rule, your petition must be received by
September 8, 2003.
ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration should refer to the docket
number and be submitted to: Administrator, Room 5220, National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC
20590.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical and policy issues: Mr.
John Lee, Office of Crashworthiness Standards, NVS-112, National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20590. Telephone: (202) 366-4924. Fax: (202) 366-4329.
For legal issues: Nancy Bell, Attorney Advisor, Office of the Chief
Counsel, NCC-112, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400
Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. Telephone: (202) 366-2992.
Fax: (202) 366-3820.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Summary of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)
A. Benefits of Incorporating ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996
1. Improved Safety
2. Harmonization with Foreign Glazing Standards
3. Streamlining and Clarification
B. Proposed Revisions to FMVSS No. 205
III. Summary of Comments to the NPRM
A. Meaning of the ``Most Difficult Part or Pattern'' for the
Fracture Test
B. Xenon Light Source for the Weathering Test
C. Limiting the Width of the Shade Band
D. Certification and Verification of DOT Numbers
E. Other Issues
1. Applicability of Proposal to MPVs
2. Edge Treatment for Automotive Safety Glass
3. Labeling
4. Additional Tests
IV. Agency Discussion of Issues and Response to Comments
A. Summary of Changes from the NPRM
B. Meaning of the ``Most Difficult Part or Pattern'' for the
Fracture Test
C. Xenon Light Source for the Weathering Test
D. Limiting the Width of the Shade Band
E. Certification and Verification of DOT Numbers
F. Other Issues
1. Applicability of Standard to MPVs
2. Edge Treatment for Automotive Safety Glass
3. Labeling
4. Additional Tests
V. Effective Date
VI. Plain Language
VII. Rulemaking Analyses
VIII. Regulatory Text
I. Background
By letter dated August 12, 1997, the American Automobile
Manufacturers Association (AAMA) (which has since evolved into the
Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers) petitioned us to amend Federal
Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 205, ``Glazing Materials''
(49 CFR 571.205), to incorporate the most recent update of the American
National Standards Institute (ANSI)
[[Page 43965]]
standard: American National Standard for Safety Glazing Materials for
Glazing Motor Vehicles and Motor Vehicle Equipment Operating on Land
Highways--ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996 (``ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996''). AAMA stated in
its petition that incorporating ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996 would improve
safety, achieve international harmonization, streamline and clarify
FMVSS No. 205, and eliminate wire glass as an approved safety glazing
option. On January 2, 1998, we granted the AAMA's petition.
FMVSS No. 205 specifies performance requirements for the types of
glazing that may be installed in motor vehicles. It also specifies the
vehicle locations in which the various types of glazing may be
installed. The standard incorporates by reference ANSI Standard Z26.1,
``Safety Code for Safety Glazing Materials for Glazing Motor Vehicles
Operating on Land Highways,'' as amended through 1980 (``ANS
Z26.1'').\1\ The requirements in ANS Z26.1 are specified in terms of
performance tests that the various types or ``items'' of glazing must
pass. There are 21 ``items'' of glazing for which requirements are
currently specified in FMVSS No. 205.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The most recent revision we incorporated into FMVSS No. 205
was ANSI Z26.1a-1980, which supplemented the 1977 version. It was
incorporated by a final rule published on February 23, 1984 (49 FR
6732).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) Glazing Materials
Standards Committee, acting under the sponsorship of ANSI, has revised
the ANSI standard periodically. However, since the FMVSS cannot be
changed except through rulemaking, revisions to the ANSI standard do
not become part of FMVSS No. 205 unless we expressly identify and
incorporate them through a rulemaking. SAE previously petitioned us to
upgrade ANS Z26.1 with 1983 and 1990 revisions. However, we denied
those petitions.
In addition to incorporating some of the revisions of the ANSI
standard, we have occasionally updated FMVSS No. 205 directly by adding
provisions similar or identical to those in various revisions of the
ANSI standard.
II. Summary of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)
On August 4, 1999, NHTSA published a NPRM (64 FR 42330) proposing
to amend FMVSS No. 205 by incorporating by reference ANSI/SAE Z26.1-
1996. In this notice, NHTSA discussed the benefits of incorporating
ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996, and proposed revisions to FMVSS No. 205.
A. Benefits of Incorporating ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996
NHTSA tentatively concluded that incorporating ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996
would be beneficial for (1) improved safety, (2) harmonization with
foreign glazing standards, and (3) streamlining and clarification.
1. Improved Safety
ANSI Z26.1 requires a fracture test (Test No. 7) of a 305 mm (12
in.) square, flat sample of glazing. In contrast, ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996
requires the use of a full-size production piece of vehicle window
glass. Paragraph 5.7.2 of ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996 states that the specimens
of glazing selected for testing ``'shall be of the most difficult part
or pattern designation within the model number.'' NHTSA stated that it
interpreted this to mean the portion of glazing which we consider most
likely to fail the test.
ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996 also improves safety by eliminating wire glass
as an approved glazing material. Wire glass is flat-rolled glass
reinforced with wire mesh. Wire glass is known to shatter more readily
at lower impact speeds and is more lacerative than laminated glass.
Wire glass was used in past automotive applications. However, this
practice has been discontinued and, to our knowledge, no company
currently produces wire glass for vehicle use.
2. Harmonization with Foreign Glazing Standards
Incorporating ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996 will improve harmonization
between US, Canadian, and European glazing standards in the following
ways:
[sbull] The test fixture for the impact, fracture and penetration
resistance tests (Tests 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 26) is
identical to the support frame required in Economic Commission for
Europe (ECE) Regulation R43.
[sbull] The equipment used for the abrasion test (Tests 17 and 18)
is similar to that used under ECE R43.
[sbull] The Weathering Test (Test 16) is similar to International
Organization for Standardization (``ISO'') Standard 3917, which
requires a xenon light source, instead of the carbon arc light source
currently specified in FMVSS No. 205.
[sbull] The solvents specified in the chemical resistance test
(Test 20) have been revised to conform to the requirements of the
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) and Occupant Safety
and Health Administration (OSHA). These are the same solvents specified
in ECE R43. This will also result in consistency with the NTTAA
(National Technology Transfer Advancement Act), which requires use of
voluntary consensus standards unless such use is infeasible or
otherwise inconsistent with law.
[sbull] Canadian Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 205, ``Glazing
Materials,'' already incorporates ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996. Therefore, we
would achieve closer harmonization of our Standard No. 205 and Canadian
Standard No. 205.
3. Streamlining and Clarification
The proposed incorporation by reference of ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996
would permit the deletion of most of the existing text of FMVSS No.
205. The amendments of the past 20 years have resulted in a patchwork
of requirements that must be read in conjunction with the ANSI Z26.1 in
order to gain a comprehensive understanding of the overall requirements
of FMVSS No. 205. Adoption of the proposal would simplify FMVSS No.
205, consistent with our regulatory reform efforts.
B. Proposed Revisions to FMVSS No. 205
NHTSA discussed some proposed revisions to FMVSS No. 205, as
described below.
First, NHTSA discussed the general nature of the textual changes to
ANSI Z26.1. We stated that our substitution of the 1996 version for the
1980 version of the ANSI standard would not make many substantive
changes to our standard since our current standard already contains
many provisions of the 1996 version. They were directly added to our
standard in various rulemaking proceedings between 1977 and 1996 to
supplement the 1977 version of the ANSI standard.\2\ Therefore, the
practical effect of our incorporation by reference of the 1996 ANSI
standard is that it would enable us to eliminate the provisions added
to our standard between 1977 and 1996.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The 1996 provisions include new types of glazing, e.g. items
4A, 11C, 12, 13, 14, 15A, 15B, 16A, and 16B. ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996
also includes numerous editorial and minor substantive changes made
to be consistent with FMVSS No. 205 or to be internally consistent.
We have listed these changes in a table submitted to the docket for
the NPRM (Docket No. NHTSA 99-6024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second, NHTSA proposed to modify the application section of FMVSS
No. 205 so that the standard explicitly applied to vehicles.
Third, NHTSA proposed that ``the most difficult part or pattern''
for the Fracture Test means that all portions of the glazing surface
must be able to pass the test requirements.\3\ We explained
[[Page 43966]]
that we believe ``the most difficult part or pattern'' was intended to
mean the part of the glazing that provides for ``worst case'' testing,
not the type of difficulty contemplated or how we select the most
difficult part or pattern in our compliance testing. Therefore, all
portions of the glazing surface must be able to pass the test
requirements. NHTSA proposed that this interpretation would be made
explicit in the regulatory text of FMVSS No. 205.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The requirement for specimens to be tested for the fracture
test in section 5.7.2 of ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996 states, ``[t]he number
of specimens selected from each model number of glazing shall be six
(6) and shall all be of the most difficult part or pattern
designation within the model number.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fourth, NHTSA tentatively concluded that a xenon arc light source
produces a spectral power distribution closer to that of sunlight than
the carbon arc lamp currently utilized in the weathering test
procedures of ANSI Z26.1 and requested comment on this issue.\4\ We
said that carbon arc technology, which was developed in 1919 for
textile and printing industries, is no longer the best light source for
simulating sunlight because the spectral power distribution of carbon
arc is unlike that of natural sunlight.\5\ Further, we noted that most
of the testing industry is currently using xenon-arc lamp test devices
to simulate weathering.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Laboratory-accelerated weathering tests are used to test the
durability of glazing materials by simulating the damaging effects
of sunlight over an extended period of time. The weathering tests
are used to identify materials that are more susceptible to sun
damage, such as rigid plastics, flexible plastics and glass-plastics
(annealed and tempered). Currently, the weathering test procedures
of ANSI Z26.1 simulate sunlight using a carbon arc lamp.
\5\ Narrow spikes of energy in the ultraviolet range of the
electromagnetic spectrum (wavelengths of 400 nm and below) can
affect how some materials will degrade.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fifth, NHTSA proposed to modify FMVSS No. 205 to incorporate the
June 1995 version of the Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc. (SAE),
Recommended Practice J100, ``Class `A' Vehicle Glazing Shade Bands''
(SAE J100) and requested comments on the appropriateness of that shade
band standard or any alternative shade band standard that should be
considered. NHTSA said that a visibility requirement needs to be set to
establish boundaries for shade bands on glazed surfaces since we need
to be able, for the purposes of compliance testing, to differentiate
between those areas of a window that are intended to meet the 70
percent transmittance requirements and those areas that are not so
intended.\6\ Currently, neither FMVSS No. 205 nor the updated ANSI/SAE
Z26.1-1996 set boundaries for the area of glazing that does not have to
meet the 70 percent light transmittance requirement. SAE J100 sets
limits for the shade band on the windshield, rear window and fixed side
windows based upon the eyellipse of the 95th percentile male driver's
eye positions in a vehicle.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ ANSI Z26.1 requires most passenger car windows to pass a
light transmittance test that assures that they transmit 70 percent
of the incident light. While all windows in passenger cars are
considered requisite for driving visibility, certain areas of the
glazing that are not at levels requisite for driving visibility may
be tinted. The most familiar location for the tinted areas is the
upper region of the windshield. This area is typically called a
``shade band.''
\7\ As defined in SAE's Recommended Practices, an eyellipse is a
statistical representation of driver eye locations in road vehicles.
It is an eye movement/position survey designed to identify vision
and field of view contours. The 95th percentile male eyellipse is
specified in SAE J100 because it is the highest eyellipse, and
therefore is the eyellipse most likely to be blocked by the shade
band.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sixth, NHTSA proposed modifying S5(b)(8) of FMVSS No. 500, ``Low-
speed vehicles'' (49 CFR 571.500), to eliminate the incorporation by
reference of ANSI Z26.1 and any reference to the permitted types of
glazing.\8\ Instead, S5(b)(8) would simply state that low speed
vehicles must have windshield glazing that meets the requirements of
FMVSS No. 205.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ On June 17, 1998, we published (63 FR 33194) a new standard
for ``low-speed vehicles'' (49 CFR 571.500). The rule defines low-
speed vehicles as a separate vehicle type, and S5(b)(8) of the rule
specifies the use of either AS-1 or AS-5 glazing for the windshield
of these vehicles. The rule also separately incorporates by
reference the 1977/1980 version of ANSI Z26.1, rather than cross-
referencing FMVSS No. 205.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NHTSA also proposed to revise the applicability paragraph of FMVSS
No. 205 to add low speed vehicles to the list of vehicles to which the
standard applies. This would assure that manufacturers of glazing
materials in low speed vehicles certify compliance with FMVSS No. 205.
In addition, we proposed adding a paragraph to the requirements
specifying the use of AS-1 or AS-4 glazing in the windshields of low
speed vehicles. This section is necessary because the descriptions of
the locations of glazing specified by the ANSI standard would not
otherwise allow AS-5 glazing.
Also, NHTSA proposed to correct a technical error in FMVSS No. 500.
We replaced AS-5 glazing with AS-4 glazing as a permitted glazing type
in low speed vehicles. AS-4 is equivalent glazing to AS-5 but contains
a light transmittance requirement so that it can be used in
windshields, since the windshield is a location considered requisite
for driving visibility.
Finally, NHTSA requested comments on the need to verify DOT numbers
based on the concern of SAE's Glazing Materials Standards Committee
regarding the accuracy of our Glazing Manufacturer list.\9\ SAE has
contended that only 25 percent of the manufacturers listed with DOT
numbers are currently active; some of the manufacturers have gone out
of business without notifying us, and many other manufacturers have
moved or merged.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Paragraph S6.2 of FMVSS No. 205 requires that the prime
glazing manufacturer mark the glazing with, among other things, a
manufacturer's mark. We assign the mark upon written request of the
manufacturer. We maintain a list of glazing manufacturers and the
marks assigned to them. One use of these code marks (often referred
to as a ``DOT number'') is during an enforcement action to identify
the manufacturer that produced a particular piece of glazing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Summary of Public Comments to the NPRM
NHTSA received eight comments on the August 1999 NPRM. Three
glazing manufacturers, three vehicle manufacturers, one glazing
manufacturers association, and one automotive standards organization
submitted the eight comments. The comments are summarized below.
A. Meaning of the ``Most Difficult Part or Pattern'' for the Fracture
Test
Several manufacturers stated that NHTSA had misinterpreted the
meaning of ``most difficult part or pattern'' and that the fracture
test could be interpreted to have many fracture points, instead of a
single point 25 mm (1 in.) in-bound along the center of the longest
edge.
Sekurit Saint-Gobain (Sekurit), a glazing manufacturer, suggested
that NHTSA adopt ISO 3537. ISO 3537 has several fracture points [(point
1, 30 mm (1.2 in.) from the edge in one corner; point 2, 30 mm (1.2
in.) from the nearest edge; point 3 at the geometric center, and for
curved materials, point 4 on the longest median at a point of maximum
curvature)] and allows for fracture of the windshield.
SAE encouraged NHTSA to revise S5.1.2 to read as follows: ``NHTSA
may conduct the Fracture Test as specified in ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996
Section 5.7 on any piece of glazing material that is required to comply
with Section 5.7.''
B. Xenon Light Source for Weathering Test
Ford Motor Company (Ford) and SAE both commented that a xenon arc
light source more closely simulates sunlight than does a carbon arc and
that the xenon arc is a much-improved light source for the weathering
tests. Ford also said that a xenon arc lamp would meet the requirement
of ECE R43 stating that any source of radiation which produces the same
effect as a mercury
[[Page 43967]]
vapor lamp may be used for the test procedure.
C. Limiting the Width of the Shade Band
DaimlerChrysler (DC) and SAE supported the adoption of SAE J100 to
identify areas of glazing not requisite for driving visibility. DC also
urged the agency to clarify the definition of shade band to mean any
obscuration band on a glazing because of the variations in band
application to laminated safety glass (dye or pigment added to
interlayer material prior to application) and tempered safety glass
(pattern of lines and dots printed onto the glass surface).
Toyota Motor Corporation (Toyota) and the Flat Glass Manufacturers
Association of Japan (FGMAJ), however, suggested incorporating ``area
B,'' specified in ECE R43 92/22EC to establish boundaries for the shade
band instead of incorporating SAE J100 because it would harmonize FMVSS
No. 205 with the requirements adopted in Europe and Japan and because
application of the ``area B'' requirement of ECE R43 is current
practice for Toyota. More specifically, Toyota stated that FMVSS No.
205 should ``prescribe that the area of the windshield other than the
`area B' may be tinted'' and FGMAJ stated that the ``[d]etermination of
the top boundary of windshield for driving visibility should be the
upper edge of Zone B, which is drawn in accordance with V1 prescribed
in ECE R43.''
Additionally, on the issue of whether shade band requirements
should be applied to side and rear windows, FGMAJ stated, ``[t]his non-
requirement provision for driving visibility should be limited to the
windshield, which would harmonize with the international standard.''
D. Certification and Verification of DOT Numbers
Pilkington Libbey Owens Ford (LOF), and Glassig Inc. (Glassig),
both glazing manufacturers, commented that DOT numbers should be kept
current and suggested notification to the agency or re-certification
every five years so that separate active and non-active manufacturer
lists can be prepared. SAE suggested that NHTSA avoid reassigning DOT
numbers and also supported the use of separate active and non-active
manufacturer lists. Sekurit said that the confusion that results from
the reassigning of DOT numbers could be avoided if glass manufacturers
were required to apply their trade names to their products. FGMAJ
suggested that a manufacturer who simply cuts sections of glazing for
use in a motor vehicle application obtain a separate DOT code number
from that of the prime glazing manufacturer who produces the glazing.
Additionally, FGMAJ suggested that the definition of ``prime glazing
manufacturer'' should specify the inclusion of aftermarket
manufacturers.
E. Other Issues
1. Applicability of Proposal to MPVs
DC and SAE encouraged NHTSA not to delete paragraph S5.1.1.6 of
FMVSS No. 205, which states that glazing intended for use in
multipurpose passenger vehicles (MPVs) is treated identically to
glazing used in trucks. ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996 expressly prohibits the use
of deep tinted windows adjacent to the driver in trucks but is silent
with regard to tinting in MPVs.
2. Edge Treatment for Automotive Safety Glass
The SAE recommended that NHTSA eliminate paragraph S5.2 of FMVSS
No. 205 because it incorporates by reference the edge treatment
requirements (SAE Recommended Practice J673, ``Automotive Safety
Glasses'') that are already incorporated by reference in ANSI/SAE
Z26.1-1996.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ SAE Recommended Practice J673 provides several mechanical
treatments that shape the edge of the finished glazing for either
laminated glazing or tempered glass glazing. The intent of these
treatments is to reduce the risk of a lacerative injury due to an
exposed sharp edge or corner in the finished glazing product.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Labeling
Toyota suggested that FMVSS No. 205 specify that the cleaning
instruction label currently required for Items 12, 13, 16A and 16B not
be required for these items of glazing because these items of glazing
are not required to meet the 70% light transmittance requirement (Test
2 of the ANSI standard). The NPRM proposed deleting S5.1.2.2 and
S5.1.2.10, which contains cleaning instruction label requirements from
FMVSS No. 205. Since ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996 contains the cleaning
instruction label requirements for the aforementioned Items, FMVSS No.
205 would incorporate them by reference.
4. Additional Tests
Sekurit expressed the view that additional tests, not included in
ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996, could have been added to FMVSS No. 205. These
tests include a head-impact test for windshields (ISO 3537), a
requirement for testing of optical properties of a windshield according
to ISO 3538, and a mechanical strength test using a 227 g (0.5 lb.)
ball at high and low temperatures. According to Sekurit, ISO 3538 takes
windscreen design, rake angle, and field of vision into account while
ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996 tests optical properties by an obsolete method that
does not take into account the current design of windshields.
Additionally, Sekurit argued that a mechanical strength test using a
227 g (0.5 lb.) ball would more closely proximate real-life conditions
than the strength test in ANSI.
IV. Agency Discussion of Issues and Response to Comments
A. Summary of Changes from the NPRM
In response to the comments, the agency is modifying the approach
it proposed in the NPRM. The major deviations from the proposal are
summarized below.
[sbull] The fracture test of ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996 is clarified to
indicate that any piece of glazing subject to the fracture test may be
tested, and that the test procedure is a single fracture origin or
break point 25 mm (1 in.) inboard at the edge of the midpoint of the
longest edge of the specimen as specified in ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996.
[sbull] Shade band areas are required to conform with the SAE J100
recommended practice. However, a substitution of the ECE R43 procedure
``up angle'' of 7 degrees, instead of the SAE procedure ``up angle'' of
5 degrees, will be used to determine the upper limit of the area for
driving visibility.
B. Meaning of the ``Most Difficult Part or Pattern'' for the Fracture
Test
Currently, Fracture Test No. 7 specifies dropping a 227 g (0.5 lb)
ball onto 305 mm x 305 mm (12 in. x 12 in.) laboratory samples of
glazing. The drop height starts at ten feet and increases until the
samples break. To pass the test, the largest fractured particle must
weigh 4.3 g (0.15 oz.) or less.
The proposed fracture test in S5.7.2 specified six production parts
representing each construction type model number. Fracture Test No. 7
stated, ``[T]he number of specimens selected from each model number of
glazing shall be six (6) and shall all be of the most difficult part or
pattern (emphasis added) designation within the model number.'' The
fracture origin or break point is 25 mm (1 in.) inboard of the edge at
the midpoint of the longest edge of the specimen. If the specimen has
two long edges of equal length, the edge nearer the manufacturer's
trademark is chosen. To obtain fracture, a spring loaded center punch
or a hammer of about 75 g (2.65 oz.), each with a point having a radius
[[Page 43968]]
of curvature of 0.2 mm +/- 0.05 mm (0.0008 in. +/- 0.002 in.), is used.
To pass the test, the largest fractured particle must weigh 4.3g (0.15
oz.) or less.
In the NPRM, NHTSA stated ``we believe that the phrase ``most
difficult part or pattern'' was intended to mean the part of the
glazing that provides for `worst-case' testing.'' After consideration
of the comments, NHTSA now agrees that this interpretation of the
phrase was not the intent of the authors of ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996. In the
context of ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996, as clarified by SAE in its comment to
the NPRM, the ``most difficult part or pattern'' refers to the most
difficult application or component with respect to the fracture
performance for a given glazing model number. In other words, ANSI/SAE
Z26.1 calls for fracture testing on the ``worst-case'' use, rather than
on the worst case target area. It does not refer to the fracture
location on a given piece of glazing, nor does it refer to the part of
the glazing that provides for ``worst-case'' testing.
For the purposes of FMVSS No. 205, the phrase ``the most difficult
part or pattern'' means the worst-case component with respect to
fracture performance, not the worst-case test location on that
component. The worst-case component could be picked from the grouping
of such articles that are described by a common manufacturer's model
number. For instance, using the example cited by SAE in its comments to
the NPRM,\11\ if a manufacturer produces side and rear windows with the
same model number and the rear window performs worse in the fracture
performance test, then the rear window must pass the fracture
performance test. The difficulty referred to is in regard to meeting
the particle weight requirement of the fracture test.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Docket No. NHTSA-99-6024-10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sekurit suggested requiring multiple fracture points and other
manufacturers have objected to conducting fracture testing on
production parts with a single fracture origin or breakpoint 25 mm (1
in.) inboard at the edge of the midpoint of the longest edge of the
specimen. They stated that the fracture test could be interpreted to
have many fracture points. These manufacturers, however, have not
demonstrated a safety need to deviate from the testing specified in
ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996. For this reason, NHSTA believes that the test
procedures need not be revised at this time. However, as suggested by
Sekurit, NHTSA will continue to explore the desirability of extending
the test procedures to multiple break points in the future, through
participation in the UN/ECE Working Party 29's Working Party on General
Safety Provisions (GRSG).
In retaining the ``most difficult part or pattern'' requirement,
NHTSA agrees with the SAE and has decided to clarify that any piece of
glazing subject to the fracture test may be tested, and that the test
procedure will be a single fracture origin or break point 25 mm (1 in.)
inboard at the edge of the midpoint of the longest edge of the specimen
as specified in ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996.
C. Xenon Light Source for the Weathering Test
As noted above, Ford and SAE concurred with the agency's tentative
conclusion that a xenon arc produces a spectral power distribution
closer to that of sunlight than carbon arc lamps and that it is an
improved light source for the weathering tests. As in the NPRM, we also
note that most of the testing industry is currently using xenon arc
lamp test devices to simulate weathering. For these reasons, the agency
has decided to adopt the use of the xenon arc lamp test device for the
weathering tests as specified in ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996.
D. Limiting the Width of the Shade Band
In response to comments by DaimlerChrysler, Toyota, and FGMAJ,
NHTSA commissioned a study at General Test Laboratories (GTL) of
current industry practices (SAE J100 and ECE R43) concerning shade band
areas.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ GTL is a test facility used by NHTSA to evaluate vehicle
equipment for compliance with the FMVSSs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As a preliminary matter, NHTSA collected data for a series of five
windshields from current production vehicles to evaluate the lower
boundary of actual windshield shade bands in comparison to the SAE J100
recommendations. The vehicle manufacturers supplied full size templates
for each windshield. On these templates, NHTSA engineers measured the
difference between the AS-1 line and the boundary of the shade band
zone defined in Section 4.1 of SAE J100 for forward glazing (J100
line). The boundary value for the upper limit of level of visibility in
SAE J100 is defined as the intersection of the windshield's centerline
with an inclined plane tangent to the upper edge of the 95th eyellipse.
The AS-1 line marked on the upper edge of the windshield equipped with
a shade band shows the current shade band practice by the
manufacturer.\13\ NHTSA's limited survey of vehicles found that the
manufacturer-provided shade bands did not extend as far downward as
permitted by SAE J100, and the distance between the lower boundary of
the shade bands and the boundary limit recommended in SAE J100 ranged
from 45 mm (1.8 in.) for the Chevrolet Camaro to about 191 mm (7.5 in.)
for the Pontiac Grand Am (Table 1). Based on these measurements, all
vehicles tested exceeded the recommendations set forth in SAE J100.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ FMVSS No. 205 requires that manufacturers mark the
windshields to show the limits of the area having a luminous
transmittance of less than 70%. For example, if a manufacturer
chooses to install a shade band at the upper edge of the windshield,
the windshield must be permanently marked with a line indicating the
line of demarcation. An arrow and ``AS-1'' must also be marked on
the glazing which points to the area compliant with the visibility
requirements [minimum level of light transmittance required for a
windshield in the area indicated by the direction of the arrow] of
FMVSS No. 205.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Next, NHTSA determined the extent to which the ECE R43 requirement
(ECE R43 line) was exceeded. It then compared the extent to which the
ECE R43 line was exceeded with the extent to which the J100 line was
exceeded. These comparisons are shown in Table 1.
Table 1.--Comparison of Estimated Shade Band Compliance with SAE J100 and ECE-R43
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) AS-1 line, (b) AS-1 line,
SAE Pass SAE ECE-R43
Manufacturer Model exceedance*, J100? exceedance*, Pass ECE 43?
inches inches
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Motors................. Chevrolet Camaro.. 1.8 Yes -0.8 No
General Motors................. Saturn LS2........ 4 Yes 2.4 Yes
General Motors................. Pontiac Grand Am.. 7.5 Yes 5 Yes
Mitsubishi..................... Galant............ N/A** N/A** N/A** N/A**
[[Page 43969]]
Ford........................... Focus............. 6.1 Yes 4.3 Yes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Linear distance measured on the windshield surface between the location of the AS-1 line indicated on the
windshield and the lowest allowable AS-1 line in accordance with SAE J100 or ECE R43. A positive value
indicates that the AS-1 line lies above the lowest allowable AS-1 line. A negative value indicates
noncompliance with the requirement, i.e., it represents a hypothetical test failure.
** Not applicable. There was no AS-1 line on the windshield because it had no shade band.
As demonstrated in Table 1, not all tested vehicles comply with ECE
R43, and differing results occur for the SAE J100 procedure and the ECE
R43 procedure. The SAE procedure uses an ``up angle'' of 5 degrees to
determine the lower limit of the shade band area and the ECE R43
procedure uses an ``up angle'' of 7 degrees to determine the upper
limit of the area for driving visibility. Other minor factors
distinguish the SAE method from the ECE method, but these differences
are due only to the method by which the point of origin for the 5
degree and 7 degree lines is established.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ The test zones used by each standard are generated using
different methods. The European test zone uses the ISO ``V'' points
(coordinates related to seat back angle) while the U.S. zones are
based on the SAE J941 eyellipse. However, the ISO ``V'' points are a
derivative of the SAE eyellipse, and generate substantially similar
zones. While the zones are not identical, the differences in
practice account for only slight variations in calculated outcomes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As stated in the NPRM, NHTSA believes that establishing a lower
boundary for windshield shade bands is a necessary component of the
amended glazing standard. Further, no negative comments were received
on the proposal to institute a requirement for the lower boundary for a
shade band on a windshield.
The net safety benefit from the slight differences in allowable
shade band design between SAE J100 and ECE R43 is negligible. While the
SAE procedure offers slightly greater glare protection, the ECE R43
procedure allows a greater daylight opening for visibility at luminous
transmittance values of 70% or greater. NHTSA believes that the
approaches set forth in both ECE R43 and SAE J100 represent reasonable
approaches to determining the limits of a windshield shade band.
However, each procedure is dependent upon the location of a seating
design point defined by the vehicle manufacturer. The ECE method relies
upon the location of the European ``R-point'' whereas the SAE method
relies upon the SAE seating reference point (SgRP). Due to the
existence of only slight technical differences between the two methods
and the use of SgRP in other FMVSS, NHTSA has decided to adopt the SAE
J100 recommended practice. This adoption includes, however, a
substitution of the ECE R43 procedure ``up angle'' of 7 degrees,
instead of the SAE procedure ``up angle'' of 5 degrees, to determine
the upper limit of the area for driving visibility.
Using the 7 degree ``up angle'' method for determining the location
of the AS-1 line increases the total windshield visibility.
Additionally, manufacturers that presently manufacture their shade
bands in accordance with SAE J100 can continue using the same testing
conditions and procedures defined in SAE J100, except for the ``up
angle.'' However, due to the substantial similarity between the
provisions of SAE J100 and ECE R43, except for the degree of the ``up
angle,'' the agency anticipates the shade band boundary line under the
new rule would more closely approximate the ECE R43 line due to the 7
degree ``up angle'' for most vehicles. Therefore, we believe
manufacturers would be able to market vehicles with the same AS-1 line
in both Europe and the United States.
Agency testing indicates that most manufacturers do not use all of
the potential available windshield shade band area available under ECE
R43 for shade band coverage. However, as demonstrated above in Table 1,
not all tested vehicles complied with ECE R43 (one out of four did not
comply). Therefore, a small percentage of current production vehicles
may not comply with the new shade band requirement. However, as with
the 2000 Chevrolet Camaro, the anticipated extent of failure for this
small percentage of vehicles is slight. The agency believes that
modifying the shade band location by 25 mm (1 inch) or less on most
vehicles represents a reasonable undertaking that should not be costly
for manufacturers and that can be accomplished within a short lead
time. Based on the results of the agency's testing, manufacturers
should have no difficulty adjusting shade bands to meet the new
requirement.
With regard to shade band requirements for glazing areas other than
the upper edge of the windshield, SAE J100 does not address driver
visibility for the bottom edge of the windshield or for the side of the
windshield. SAE J100 does include shade band requirements for fixed
side and rear windows. While SAE J100 includes this requirement for
side and rear windows, the majority of side and rear windows are
tempered glass. Shade bands can only be applied to laminated glazing
(by tinting the inner layer). Laminated glazing is required only for
windshield applications. Therefore, shade bands rarely exist on fixed
side and rear windows. Further, ECE R43 does not contain shade band
requirements for side or rear windows. Because of the limited number of
fixed side and rear windows containing shade bands and because of
harmonization concerns, as commented by FGMAJ, the agency has decided
to apply the provisions of SAE J100 exclusively to windshield
applications. However, the light transmittance requirements for side
and rear windows contained in FMVSS No. 205 and ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996
will continue to apply to side and rear windows.
E. Certification and Verification of DOT Numbers
Comments concerning the certification and verification of DOT
numbers suggest that NHTSA's DOT registry process should require
additional certification and verification activities such as the re-
certification of numbers every 5 years and the maintenance of active
and non-active manufacturer lists. Commenters did not, however, provide
evidence that the additional certification and verification activities
would yield safety benefits. Further, the agency believes that
additional certification and verification activities would require
additional resources and manpower which would, in turn, adversely
impact the agency's use of its resources to upgrade its safety
[[Page 43970]]
standards. Due to the absence of apparent safety benefits and because
additional registry and certification activities would detract
resources from its safety mission, the agency is not amending the
current DOT registry process at this time.
As stated above, FGMAJ suggested that a manufacturer who cuts
glazing should be required to obtain a separate DOT code number from
the one used by the prime glazing manufacturer who produces the
glazing. NHTSA is unaware of any safety benefits associated with this
suggestion. Additionally, this suggested action would create an
additional resource burden for the agency.\15\ Therefore, NHTSA is not
adopting the suggested requirement. NHTSA, however, is aware of the
need for clarification regarding certification responsibilities and is
adopting the language proposed in the NPRM for S6 of FMVSS No. 205.
This revised section provides a more straightforward and clearer
statement of the certification and marking responsibilities of a
manufacturer who fabricates, laminates, or tempers glazing material and
distinguishes those responsibilities from those of a manufacturer who
cuts a section of glazing material for subsequent use in a motor
vehicle application. This text also makes clear that the requirement to
affix a manufacturer's code mark to the glazing applies only to the
prime glazing manufacturer \16\ and not to a manufacturer or
distributor who simply cuts a piece of glazing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ The Automotive Manufacturers Equipment Compliance Agency
(AMECA) and AP Technoglass Company estimate that there are in excess
of 700 prime glazing manufacturers. They further estimate that the
number of manufacturers that cut glass is the same or slightly more
than the number of prime glazing manufacturers.
\16\ A ``prime glazing manufacturer'' is defined as one who
``fabricates, laminates, or tempers the glazing material.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed regulatory text in the NPRM included a definition of
``prime glazing manufacturer'' as ``a manufacturer that fabricates,
laminates, or tempers glazing materials.'' FGMAJ commented that this
definition should also include a reference to aftermarket
manufacturers. The agency considers it unnecessary to add a reference
to aftermarket manufacturers in the definition of ``prime glazing
manufacturer.'' FMVSS No. 205 applies to all glazing for use in motor
vehicles, whether it is supplied as original equipment in a vehicle or
as an aftermarket product. Besides this suggestion by FGMAJ, the agency
received no other comments concerning the definition of ``prime glazing
manufacturer.'' Therefore, the agency has decided to adopt the
definition of ``prime glazing manufacturer'' as proposed in the NPRM.
D. Other Issues
1. Applicability of Standard to MPVs
Today's rule retains S5.1.1.6 in the regulatory text of FMVSS 205.
Paragraph S5.1.1.6 ensures that MPVs must meet the same glazing
requirements as those required for trucks. NHTSA agrees with DC and SAE
that the requirements for glazing to be used in trucks should be
applied to glazing for use in MPVs. This approach of applying identical
requirements to both trucks and MPVs is consistent with the treatment
of trucks and MPVs in past interpretations (57 FR 2496; 63 FR 37820).
2. Edge Treatment for Automotive Safety Glass
NHTSA agrees with SAE that the requirements of S5.2 of FMVSS No.
205 are redundant with the edge treatment provisions of Section 6 of
ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996, which requires that exposed edges in vehicles
other than school buses shall be treated in accordance with SAE J673
(April 1993 version) and that exposed edges in school buses shall be
banded. Section 6 of ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996 is identical to the current
requirements for edge treatment in FMVSS No. 205, except that FMVSS No.
205 incorporates by reference an outdated (1967) version of SAE J673.
Due to the redundancy between FMVSS No. 205 and ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996
concerning the requirements for edge treatment and because ANSI/SAE
Z26.1-1996 contains a more recent version of SAE J673, the agency will
delete S5.2 from FMVSS No. 205 and revise the regulatory text
accordingly.
3. Labeling
Toyota has requested that FMVSS No. 205 state that the cleaning
instruction label requirement in ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996 is not applicable
to Items 12, 13, 16A and 16 B. With the deletion of S5.1.2.2 and
S5.1.2.10, the cleaning instruction requirements for these items would
be found in ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996.
Toyota is correct that Items 12, 13, 16A and 16B are not required
to meet the light transmittance test in ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996. However,
ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996 does include tests, e.g., the weathering test,
which ensure that they maintain a luminous transmittance that closely
approximates the transmittance found in their original manufactured
state. This indicates to NHTSA that, while Items 12, 13, 16A and 16B
need not meet the 70% light transmittance test, it is important for
these items of glazing to maintain a luminous transmittance which is
achieved, in part, by proper maintenance and cleaning indicated on the
cleaning instruction label on the glazing. Additionally, ANSI/SAE
Z26.1-1996 provides manufacturers with the option of placing cleaning
instructions in the vehicle's owner's manual rather than on a label
affixed to the glazing for Items 16A and 16B. The agency believes that
the option of placing the cleaning instructions in the owner's manual
rather than on a cleaning instruction label on the glazing partially
alleviates Toyota's concern.
4. Additional Tests
As discussed above, Sekurit suggested that the agency incorporate
additional tests for head impact into windscreens, optical properties,
and mechanical strength into FMVSS No. 205. Currently, the agency,
through participation in GRSG meetings on the proposed Global Glazing
Regulation, is evaluating the tests recommended by Sekurit. If NHTSA
tentatively concludes that these tests would have a safety benefit, the
agency may propose adoption of one or more of these tests in a future
rulemaking.
V. Effective Date
The agency proposed a leadtime of 45 days. AP Technoglass, a
glazing manufacturer, commented that the new requirements, including
shade band, glass fracture test, and weathering test requirements, may
affect glazing currently under production that does not conform to the
new requirements. For instance, manufacturers may need to purchase new
equipment to perform the weathering test with a xenon arc lamp. NHTSA
agrees that these new requirements may take longer than 45 days to
incorporate. In NHTSA's judgment, these changes can be accomplished
within 180 days. Consequently, the changes to FMVSS No. 205 will become
effective, and compliance will be required, 180 days following the
publication of the final rule. However, manufacturers may voluntarily
comply with this rule earlier.
VI. Plain Language
In accordance with Executive Order 12866, we have rewritten or
reorganized portions of the regulatory text for clarity and conformance
to Plain Language practices. These include portions of the regulatory
text that are not being
[[Page 43971]]
substantively changed by this rule. For example, we have replaced
passive verbs with active verbs, replaced ``shall'' with ``must,'' and
made explicitly clear who has the responsibility for acting.
Rewriting is especially apparent in the certification and marking
requirements of section 6. We eliminated the marking requirement of
former S6.1 because it is already incorporated in section 7 of ANSI/SAE
Z26.1-1996. We moved the definition of prime glazing manufacturer in
S6.1 into the S4 definitions section. To eliminate redundancy, former
S6.2 and S6.3 have been combined in S6.1, and former S6.4 and S6.5 have
been combined in S6.3. We do not intend by this rule to make any
substantive changes in S6.
VII. Rulemaking Analyses
Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
This rulemaking action was not reviewed under Executive Order
12866. The rulemaking action is not significant under Department of
Transportation regulatory policies and procedures. The effect of the
rulemaking action is to clarify existing requirements. It will not
impose any additional burden upon any person. Impacts of the final rule
are, therefore, so minimal that preparation of a full regulatory
evaluation is not warranted.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
We have considered the impacts of this rulemaking action in
relation to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). I
certify that this rulemaking action will not have a significant
economic impact upon a substantial number of small entities.
The following is our statement providing the factual basis for the
certification (5 U.S.C. 605(b)). The final rule affects manufacturers
of motor vehicles and motor vehicle glazing. According to the size
standards of the Small Business Association (at 13 CFR part 121.601),
manufacturers of glazing are considered manufacturers of ``Motor
Vehicle Parts and Accessories'' (SIC Code 3714). The size standard for
SIC Code 3714 is 750 employees or fewer. The size standard for
manufacturers of ``Motor Vehicles and Passenger Car Bodies'' (SIC Code
3711) is 1,000 employees or fewer. This Final Rule will not have any
significant economic impact on a small business in these industries
because it makes no significant substantive change to requirements
currently specified in FMVSS No. 205. Small organizations and
governmental jurisdictions that purchase glazing will not be
significantly affected because this rulemaking will not cause price
increases. Accordingly, we have not prepared a Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis.
Federalism
Executive Order 13132 requires us 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.'' ``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 will not have any 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 rule.
Civil Justice Reform
This rule does not have any retroactive effect. According to 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. 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.
National Technology and Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA)
Under the National Technology and Transfer and Advancement Act of
1995 (NTTAA) (Public Law 104-113), ``all Federal agencies and
departments shall use technical standards that are developed or adopted
by voluntary consensus standards bodies, using such technical standards
as a means to carry out policy objectives or activities determined by
the agencies and departments.'' Certain technical standards developed
by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) and Society of
Automotive Engineers (SAE) have been considered and incorporated by
reference in the formulation of these requirements.
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 does 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.).
VIII. Regulatory Text
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571
Imports, Incorporation by reference, Motor vehicle safety,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Tires.
0
In consideration of the foregoing, 49 CFR Part 571 is amended as
follows:
PART 571--FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS
0
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.
0
2. Section 571.205 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph S3,
0
b. Amending S4 by adding a new definition in alphabetical order,
0
c. Revising paragraph S5.1,
0
d. Revising paragraph S5.2,
0
e. Adding paragraph S5.3,
0
f. Adding paragraph S5.4,
0
g. Revising paragraphs S6.1 through S6.3,
0
h. Removing paragraphs S6.4 and S6.5, and
[[Page 43972]]
0
i. Removing Figure 1, at the end of the section.
The additions and revisions read as follows:
Sec. 571.205 Standard No. 205, Glazing materials.
* * * * *
S3. Application and Incorporation by Reference.
S3.1 Application. This standard applies to passenger cars,
multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, buses, motorcycles, slide-in
campers, pickup covers designed to carry persons while in motion, and
low speed vehicles, and to glazing materials for use in those vehicles.
S3.2 Incorporation by Reference.
(a) ``American National Standard for Safety Glazing Materials for
Glazing Motor Vehicles and Motor Vehicle Equipment Operating on Land
Highways-Safety Standard'' ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996, Approved by American
National Standards Institute August 11, 1997 (ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996) is
incorporated by reference in Section 5.1 and is hereby made part of
this Standard. The Director of the Federal Register approved the
material incorporated by reference in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a)
and 1 CFR part 51 (see Sec. 571.5 of this part). A copy of ANSI/SAE
Z26.1-1996 may be obtained from the Society of Automotive Engineers,
Inc., 400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096-0007. A copy of
ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996 may be inspected at NHTSA's technical reference
library, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Room 5109, Washington, DC or at the
Office of the Federal Register, 900 North Capitol Street, NW., Suite
700, Washington, DC.
(b) The Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) Recommended Practice
J673, revised April 1993, ``Automotive Safety Glasses'' (SAE J673, rev.
April 93) is incorporated by reference in Section S5.1, and is hereby
made part of this Standard. The Director of the Federal Register
approved the material incorporated by reference in accordance with 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51 (see Sec. 571.5 of this part). A copy
of SAE J673, rev. April 93 may be obtained from SAE at the Society of
Automotive Engineers, Inc., 400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA
15096. A copy of SAE J673, rev. April 93 may be inspected at NHTSA's
technical reference library, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Room 5109,
Washington, DC, or at the Office of the Federal Register, 900 North
Capitol Street, NW., Suite 700, Washington, DC.
(c) The Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) Recommended Practice
J100, revised June 1995, ``Class `A' Vehicle Glazing Shade Bands'' (SAE
J100, rev. June 95) is incorporated by reference in Section S5.3, and
is hereby made part of this Standard. The Director of the Federal
Register approved the material incorporated by reference in accordance
with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51 (see Sec. 571.5 of this part).
A copy of SAE J100, rev. June 95 may be obtained from SAE at the
Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc., 400 Commonwealth Drive,
Warrendale, PA 15096. A copy of SAE J100, rev. 95 may be inspected at
NHTSA's technical reference library, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Room
5109, Washington, DC, or at the Office of the Federal Register, 900
North Capitol Street, NW., Suite 700, Washington, DC.
S4. Definitions.
* * *
Prime glazing manufacturer means a manufacturer that fabricates,
laminates, or tempers glazing materials.
* * * * *
S5. Requirements.
S5.1 Glazing materials for use in motor vehicles must conform to
ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996 unless this standard provides otherwise.
S5.2 NHTSA may test any portion of the glazing when doing the
fracture test (Test No. 7) described in section 5.7 of ANSI/SAE Z26.1-
1996.
S5.3 Shade bands. Shade band areas for windshields shall comply
with SAE J100, rev. June 95 except that the value of 7 degrees must be
used in place of the value of 5 degrees specified in Section 4, Shade
Band Boundary Requirements, of SAE J100, rev. June 95.
S5.4 Low speed vehicles. Windshields of low speed vehicles must
meet the ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996 specifications for either AS-1 or AS-4
glazing.
S6. Certification and marking.
S6.1 A prime glazing material manufacturer must certify, in
accordance with 49 U.S.C. 30115, each piece of glazing material to
which this standard applies that is designed--
(a) As a component of any specific motor vehicle or camper; or
(b) To be cut into components for use in motor vehicles or items of
motor vehicle equipment.
S6.2 A prime glazing manufacturer certifies its glazing by adding
to the marks required by section 7 of ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996, in letters
and numerals of the same size, the symbol ``DOT'' and a manufacturer's
code mark that NHTSA assigns to the manufacturer. NHTSA will assign a
code mark to a manufacturer after the manufacturer submits a written
request to the Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC
20590. The request must include the company name, address, and a
statement from the manufacturer certifying its status as a prime
glazing manufacturer as defined in S4.
S6.3 A manufacturer or distributor who cuts a section of glazing
material to which this standard applies, for use in a motor vehicle or
camper, must--
(a) Mark that material in accordance with section 7 of ANSI/SAE
Z26.1-1996; and
(b) Certify that its product complies with this standard in
accordance with 49 U.S.C. 30115.
0
3. Section 571.500 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(8) of S5, to
read as follows:
Sec. 571.500 Standard No. 500; Low-speed vehicles.
S5. Requirements
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(8) A windshield that conforms to the Federal motor vehicle safety
standard on glazing materials (49 CFR 571.205).
* * * * *
Issued on: July 21, 2003.
Jeffrey W. Runge,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 03-18924 Filed 7-24-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P