[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 135 (Friday, July 15, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 40917-40920]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-13960]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. NHTSA-2005-21826]
RIN 2127-AJ55


Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Platform Lifts for Motor 
Vehicles, Platform Lift Installations in Motor Vehicles

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

ACTION: Denial of petitions for reconsideration.

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

SUMMARY: This document responds to petitions for reconsideration of the 
October 1, 2004 final rule (69 FR 58843), which was in response to the 
initial petitions for reconsideration of the December 27, 2002 final 
rule (67 FR 79416) that established two new Federal motor vehicle 
safety standards (FMVSSs); FMVSS No. 403, Platform lift systems for 
motor vehicles, and FMVSS No. 404, Platform lift installations in motor 
vehicles. The purpose of these standards is to prevent injuries and 
fatalities during lift operation. In the October 2004 final rule the 
agency clarified the applicability of the standards as well as amended 
the definitions of certain operational functions, the requirements for 
lift lighting on public lifts, the interlock requirements, compliance 
procedures for lifts that manually deploy/stow, the environmental 
resistance requirements, the edge guard requirements, the wheelchair 
test device specifications, and the location requirements for public 
lift controls. The agency received petitions for reconsideration of the 
October 2004 final rule from a school bus manufacturer, a lift 
interlock/control manufacturer, a vehicle association, a school bus 
technical council and a dealer's association. The agency is denying the 
petitioners' request to require interlocks be designed to prevent 
``malicious'' release and to place responsibility for lighting 
requirements under FMVSS No. 403. The request to amend the lighting 
intensity requirements under FMVSS No. 404 will be addressed in a 
separate notice as a petition for rulemaking.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For non-legal issues, you may contact 
William Evans, Office of Crash Avoidance Safety Standards at (202) 366-
2272. For legal issues, you may contact Christopher Calamita, Office of 
Chief Counsel, at (202) 366-2992. You may send mail to these officials 
at the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh St., 
SW., Washington, DC 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. Petitions for Reconsideration
    A. Change the Wording in S6.10.2.1 of Federal Motor Vehicle 
Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 403 to State That the Design of the 
Interlock Should be Such That it Discourages ``Malicious'' Release 
Rather Than ``Accidental'' Release
    B. Move the Platform Lighting Requirements for Public Use Lifts 
From FMVSS No. 404 Where it is the Responsibility of Vehicle 
Manufacturers Back to FMVSS No. 403 Where it Would be the 
Responsibility of Lift Manufacturers
    C. Delay the Compliance Date of the Platform Lighting 
Requirements in FMVSS No. 404
    D. Clarify FMVSS Nos. 403 and 404 Relative to Modifiers 
Installing Used Non-403 Compliant Lifts Manufactured Before the 
FMVSS No. 403 Compliance Date in Vehicles Manufactured After the 
FMVSS No. 404 Compliance Date
    E. Reduce Platform Illumination Requirements of FMVSS No. 404

I. Background

December 27, 2002 Final Rule

    On December 27, 2002, the agency published in the Federal Register 
a final rule establishing FMVSS No. 403, Platform lift systems for 
motor vehicles, and FMVSS No. 404, Platform lift installations in motor 
vehicles (67 FR 79416). These standards provide practicable 
performance-based requirements and compliance procedures for the 
regulations promulgated by the DOT under the Americans with 
Disabilities Act (ADA) \1\. FMVSS Nos. 403 and 404 provide that lift 
systems and vehicles manufactured with lift systems must comply with 
objective safety requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Pub. L. 101-336, 42 U.S.C. 12101, et seq. The ADA directed 
the DOT to issue regulations to implement the transportation 
provisions that pertain to vehicles used by the public.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FMVSS No. 403 establishes requirements for platform lifts that are 
designed to carry passengers who rely on wheelchairs, scooters, canes, 
and other mobility aids into and out of motor vehicles. The standard 
requires that lifts meet requirements such as minimum platform 
dimensions, maximum platform velocity/acceleration/noise level, maximum 
size limits for platform protrusions and gaps, maximum platform 
deflection, environmental resistance (corrosion resistance), platform 
slip resistance, etc. The standard also includes requirements for 
handrails, a threshold-warning signal, retaining barriers, platform 
markings, platform lighting, fatigue endurance, strength, controls and 
interlocks. Performance tests are specified for most requirements.
    FMVSS No. 404 establishes requirements for vehicles that as 
manufactured, are equipped with platform lifts. The lifts must be 
certified as meeting FMVSS No. 403, must be installed according to the 
lift manufacturer's instructions and must continue to meet all of the 
applicable requirements of FMVSS No. 403 after installation. The 
standard also requires that specific information is made available to 
lift users.
    Recognizing the different usage patterns of platform lifts used in 
public transit versus those of platform lifts for individual use, the 
agency established separate requirements for public use lifts and 
private use lifts. FMVSS No. 404, S4.1.1 requires that lift-equipped 
buses, school buses and multipurpose passenger vehicles other than 
motor homes with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) greater than 
4,536 kg (10,000 lb) must be equipped with a lift certified to all 
applicable public use lift requirements set forth in FMVSS No. 403. 
Since lifts on these vehicles will generally be subject to more stress 
and cyclic loading and will be used by more and varied populations, 
additional requirements relative to platform size, controls, handrails, 
platform lighting, platform markings, noise level, etc. are 
appropriate.
    In order to provide manufacturers sufficient time to meet any new 
requirements established in FMVSS Nos. 403 and 404, the agency provided 
a two-year lead-time, which scheduled the standards to become effective 
on December 27, 2004.

Petitions for Reconsideration to the December 27, 2002 Final Rule

    In response to the December 27, 2002 final rule, the agency 
received six petitions for reconsideration from platform lift 
manufacturers, vehicle manufacturers, and a transportation safety 
research organization. The agency

[[Page 40918]]

responded to these petitions in a final rule published in the Federal 
Register on October 1, 2004 (69 FR 58843). In the October 2004 final 
rule the agency amended FMVSS Nos. 403 and 404 to clarify the 
applicability of the standards so that they do not apply to special 
purpose lifts and lifts installed on ambulances, redefined the terms 
``deploy'' and ``stow'' to be less design restrictive, established the 
lighting requirements as a vehicle requirement, permitted lift 
manufacturers to rely on existing vehicle components to comply with the 
interlock requirements, excluded lifts that manually deploy and stow 
from certain lift performance requirements, permitted a wider range of 
platform lift designs to comply with environmental resistance 
(corrosion resistance) requirements for internally stowed lifts, 
provided more flexibility in the degree of platform deflection between 
the unloaded platform and the vehicle floor, reduced the required 
extension of continuous edge guards to the inner platform edge, 
established a performance based alternative to the continuous edge 
guard requirement, established further specifications for the 
wheelchair test device, clarified the term ``control system,'' provided 
flexibility in the placement of the control system panel, and made 
several editorial corrections to the regulatory text adopted by the 
final rule.

Petitions for Reconsideration to the October 1, 2004 Final Rule

    In response to the October 2004 final rule, the agency received 
timely petitions from Safety Systems and Controls, Inc. (SSC), an 
interlock manufacturer; the Adaptive Driving Alliance, a dealer/
manufacturer industry organization; the School Bus Manufacturers 
Technical Council (SBMTC), a technical advisor to the school bus 
industry; the Manufacturers Council of Small School Buses (MCSSB), an 
affiliate of the National Truck Equipment Association; and Blue Bird, a 
bus manufacturer.
    The petitions requested (A) a change in the wording in S6.10.2.1 of 
FMVSS No. 403 to state that the design of the interlock should be such 
that it discourages ``malicious'' release rather than ``accidental'' 
release; (B) that the responsibility of platform lighting for public 
use lifts be moved from the vehicle manufacturer (FMVSS No. 404) back 
to the lift manufacturer (FMVSS No. 403); (C) a delay in the compliance 
date of the platform lighting requirements; (D) clarification of FMVSS 
Nos. 403 and 404 relative to modifiers installing used non-403 
compliant lifts manufactured before the FMVSS No. 403 compliance date 
in vehicles manufactured after the FMVSS No. 404 compliance date; and 
(E) that the platform illumination requirements be reduced from the 
NHTSA minimum of 54 lm/m2 or 54 Lux (5 lm/ft2 or 
5 foot-candles) to the ADA and Federal Transit Administration minimum 
\2\ of 22 lm/m2 or 22 Lux (2 lm/ft2 or 2 foot-
candles). This notice addresses these issues, which were included in 
the petitions for reconsideration to the October 1, 2004 final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Federal Transit Administration, Guideline Specifications for 
Passive Lifts, Active Lifts, Wheelchair Ramps and Securement 
Devices, September 1992, DOT-T-93-03.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

December 23, 2004 Interim Final Rule

    During the months preceding the scheduled December 27, 2004 
effective date of FMVSS Nos. 403 and 404, the agency received numerous 
communications and petitions for reconsideration to the October 1, 2004 
final rule requesting that the compliance date of the standards be 
delayed. Vehicle manufacturers stated that there would be a disruption 
in vehicle production lines due to the unavailability of lifts on the 
compliance date. Vehicle manufacturers also stated that the compliance 
dates for FMVSS Nos. 403 and 404 should have been staggered so that 
FMVSS No. 404 became effective after FMVSS No. 403. Vehicle 
manufacturers also indicated that lift manufacturers were not making 
several popular low-end and specialty lifts compliant with FMVSS No. 
403 and that the purchasers of these lifts needed time to find suitable 
FMVSS No. 403 compliant substitutes. Bus manufacturers requested a 
delay in the lighting requirements portion of FMVSS No. 404 as they 
felt that the minimum required platform illumination was too intense 
and the responsibility for the requirement should be shifted back to 
FMVSS No. 403, where it would again be the responsibility of lift 
manufacturers. Numerous inquiries and complaints indicated that there 
was significant confusion relative to the requirements, the test 
procedures, the application of the standards and how the compliance 
date applied to multi-stage vehicles. On December 23, 2004, NHTSA 
published an interim final rule in the Federal Register (69 FR 76865) 
delaying the compliance date of FMVSS No. 403 from December 27, 2004 to 
April 1, 2005 and delaying the compliance date of FMVSS No. 404 from 
December 27, 2004 to July 1, 2005.

II. Petitions for Reconsideration

A. Change the Wording in S6.10.2.1 of FMVSS No. 403 To State That the 
Design of the Interlock Should Be Such That It Discourages 
``Malicious'' Release Rather Than ``Accidental'' Release

    A petition for reconsideration was received from SSC, in which it 
requested that the interlock required by S6.10.2.1 of FMVSS No. 403 be 
designed in a way that discourages ``malicious'' release rather than 
``accidental'' release. S6.10.2.1 requires interlocks that prevent 
forward or rearward mobility of the vehicle unless the platform is 
stowed. SSC stated that if the interlock were designed to discourage 
``malicious'' release, the driver would be more likely to leave the 
engine running when leaving the drivers compartment to operate a lift 
or attend to passengers. SSC stated that leaving the engine running 
would allow the driver to keep the heat or air conditioning running 
which would provide passengers with a more stable and comfortable 
environment and that such a requirement would also support efforts in 
California to permit drivers to leave the engine running when they 
momentarily leave the driver's compartment to perform other duties. The 
petition provided an example of an interlock that meets the 
requirements of S6.10.2.1 and is designed to prevent ``malicious'' 
release. Such an interlock would be engaged with a key. If the driver's 
safety belt was unlatched and the interlock was disengaged (a position 
that would permit vehicle movement), a warning signal would alert the 
driver. As an attachment to a separate letter, SCC submitted an article 
to NHTSA that it claims supports the need to design the interlock in a 
way that discourages ``malicious'' release. The article describes a 
situation where a student got off the bus at the wrong stop. When the 
driver and attendant left the bus to retrieve the student, the student 
doubled-back, boarded the bus, locked the door and drove the bus for 
several blocks knocking down mailboxes and striking a pole. Apparently 
there were no injuries, just property damage. The article, however, did 
not mention anything about a lift being deployed, a lift interlock, 
etc.
    Agency response: The agency is denying petitioner's request to 
require that interlocks be designed to prevent ``malicious'' release. 
In the supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM) published on 
July 27, 2000 (65 FR 46228), the first interlock which inhibits forward 
or rearward mobility of the vehicle unless the platform is stowed 
(presently

[[Page 40919]]

S6.10.2.1) did not specify any special design characteristics. Public 
comments to the SNPRM, which the agency responded to in the preamble of 
the final rule published December 27, 2002 (67 FR 79416), suggested 
that the requirement specify that the interlock be designed in such a 
way as to prevent ``accidental'' or ``malicious'' release. In its 
response, the agency required that interlocks be designed to prevent 
``accidental'' release only. There was no data indicating that 
``malicious'' release of the interlock was a safety problem and 
requiring manufacturers to design for ``malicious'' release would 
impart additional costs. In responding to comments requesting that the 
standard require interlocks to be designed to prevent ``malicious'' 
release, the agency stated that the second interlock (presently 
S6.10.2.2), which prevents operation of the platform lift from the 
stowed position unless forward or rearward mobility of the vehicle is 
inhibited, already requires that the vehicle transmission be in Park or 
Neutral and either the parking brake or the service brakes be applied 
(the service brakes, if applied, must be applied by means other than 
the driver pressing the service brake pedal). The information supplied 
by SCC article did not include any descriptions of a deployed lift or 
the ``malicious'' release of an interlock designed to prevent vehicle 
movement when the lift is not stowed. Such a case would not be adequate 
justification to initiate a change in the regulation.

B. Move the Platform Lighting Requirements for Public Use Lifts From 
FMVSS No. 404 Where It Is the Responsibility of Vehicle Manufacturers 
Back to FMVSS No. 403 Where It Would Be the Responsibility of Lift 
Manufacturers

    Petitions from SBMTC, MCSSB and Blue Bird requested that the 
platform lighting requirement be moved from FMVSS No. 404 to FMVSS No. 
403, under which it would be the responsibility of lift manufacturers. 
The petitioners stated that the October 2004 final rule moved this 
requirement from FMVSS No. 403 to FMVSS No. 404 three months before the 
effective date, which gave vehicle manufacturers little time to react. 
The petitioners noted that while NHTSA stated in its October 1, 2004 
final rule that bus manufacturers already provide some lighting in 
order to comply with ADA requirements, school bus manufacturers are not 
obligated to comply with ADA. The petitioners explained that school bus 
manufacturers have not traditionally provided lighting. Petitioners 
stated that if the platform lighting requirements were not amended, 
then the compliance date of the platform lighting portion of FMVSS No. 
404 should be delayed.
    Agency response: NHTSA is denying the petitioners request to move 
the platform lighting requirements to FMVSS No. 403 and has determined 
that the December 2004 interim final rule has made the petitioners 
request for a delay of the compliance date moot.
    Under the December 27, 2002 final rule, manufacturers of public use 
platform lifts were required to either provide platform lighting 
incorporated into the lift or to provide separate platform lighting 
hardware along with the lift which includes detailed installation 
instructions that addressed the mounting, powering, location and 
positioning of platform lighting, as well as an operational test 
procedure. FMVSS No. 403 originally required that upon a lift being 
installed in accordance with the lift manufacturer's installation 
instructions, the illumination on all portions of the platform must be 
at least 54 lm/m\2\ or 54 Lux (5 lm/ft\2\ or 5 foot-candles) and the 
illumination on all portions of the passenger-unloading ramp would be 
at least 11 lm/m\2\ or 11 Lux (1 lm/ft\2\ or 1 foot-candle) throughout 
the range of passenger operation.
    A petition for reconsideration to the December 27, 2002 final rule 
was received from Braun Corporation. Braun stated that identical lift 
products might be installed on a wide variety of vehicles. Braun 
claimed that although lift manufacturers can easily provide the method 
of interfacing platform lighting with the lift, they would have 
difficulty in determining the amount of lighting that will be required 
for each lift/vehicle application. Braun stated that the level of light 
intensity required to meet the standard is application-specific and 
should be determined at the time of lift installation. Braun further 
stated that public use vehicle manufacturers have already accepted 
responsibility for complying with the lighting requirements of 36 CFR 
1192.31.\3\ Thus, Braun requested that the lighting requirements be the 
responsibility of vehicle manufacturers. NHTSA agreed with Braun and in 
the October 2004 final rule, moved the requirements for platform 
lighting from FMVSS No. 403 to FMVSS No. 404. Even though school buses 
are not required to comply with ADA requirements, there remains a large 
number of motor coaches and transit buses that already comply with ADA 
requirements and who routinely provide lighting for doorways, step 
wells, lifts and ramps.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Section 1192.31 of the ADA adopts the lighting standards set 
forth in the ATBCB's Accessibility Guidelines for Transportation 
Vehicles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under FMVSS Nos. 403 and 404 as established December 2002, vehicle 
manufacturers were responsible for installing lighting in accordance 
with the lighting requirements then in FMVSS No. 403. The difference 
under the October 2004 final rule is that lift manufacturers are not 
required to supply the lighting hardware.
    Despite removal of the lighting requirements from FMVSS No. 403, 
lifts currently are available with platform lighting incorporated on 
the lift. Vehicle manufacturers who traditionally have not provided 
lift lighting may purchase lifts that incorporate the lighting into the 
lift. By maintaining the platform lighting requirement in FMVSS No. 404 
bus manufacturers that are already required to supply lighting under 
the ADA requirements will not need to purchase lifts equipped with 
lighting hardware that may be redundant. We note that as the FMVSS No. 
404 lighting requirements are more stringent than the ADA requirements, 
existing vehicle lighting may need to be supplemented. Bus 
manufacturers that are not required to provide lighting under the ADA 
may purchase lifts that have lighting incorporated into the platform 
lift system, and thereby comply with FMVSS No. 404. In this respect, 
the cost of lighting for vehicle manufacturers should be the same as if 
the lighting requirement were under FMVSS No. 403.

C. Delay the Compliance Date of the Platform Lighting Requirements in 
FMVSS No. 404

    Petitions from the SBMTC, MCSSB and Blue Bird requested that NHTSA 
delay the compliance date of the portion of the standards relating to 
the platform lighting requirements on public use lifts. A delay was 
requested as the petitioners disagreed with the transfer of the 
platform lighting requirements for public use lifts that occurred in 
the October 2004 final rule. The petitioners stated that a delay in the 
platform lighting portions of the standards would provide the time 
needed to address the change in the responsibility for the lighting 
requirements as well as various other concerns, including the required 
intensity.
    Agency response: As explained above, NHTSA published an interim 
final rule in December 2004, which delayed the compliance date of FMVSS 
No. 403 from December 27, 2004 to April 1, 2005 and delayed the 
compliance date of FMVSS No. 404 from December 27, 2004 to July 1, 
2005. As the original

[[Page 40920]]

effective date was approaching, the delay requested by this petition 
was granted before the publication of this response to petitions for 
reconsideration. The agency believes that no additional delay is 
necessary, and that further delay could renew confusion within the 
industry.

D. Clarify FMVSS Nos. 403 and 404 Relative to Modifiers Installing Used 
Non-403 Compliant Lifts Manufactured Before the FMVSS No. 403 Effective 
Date in Vehicles Manufactured After the FMVSS No. 404 Effective Date

    The Adaptive Driving Alliance submitted a request for clarification 
regarding the applicability of FMVSS Nos. 403 and 404 as applied to 
modifiers \4\ installing lifts manufactured before the FMVSS No. 403 
effective date on vehicles manufactured after the FMVSS No. 404 
effective date. The request stated that such clarification is needed to 
address the situation where vehicle owners want to transfer existing 
non-403 compliant lifts from their old vehicles to new vehicles that 
were manufactured after the FMVSS No. 404 effective date. The Adaptive 
Driving Alliance also requested clarification as to the applicability 
of FMVSS Nos. 403 and 404 to modifiers installing their existing 
inventory of non-403 compliant lifts into vehicles manufactured both 
before and after the FMVSS No. 404 effective date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ A modifier under NHTSA regulations is an auto repair 
business that alters a vehicle after first retail sale.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Agency response: In general, on and after April 1, 2005, all 
platform lifts manufactured for installation in motor vehicles that are 
intended to assist persons with limited mobility in entering and 
exiting a vehicle must comply with FMVSS No. 403. All vehicles 
manufactured on and after July 1, 2005 that are equipped with such 
lifts at first retail sale must comply with FMVSS No. 404. At any time 
a new or used non-403 compliant lift manufactured before April 1, 2005 
may be installed on any vehicle manufactured before July 1, 2005 and on 
vehicles manufactured on or after July 1, 2005 provided that the 
vehicle was not equipped with a Standard No. 403-compliant lift at 
first retail sale.
    The clarifications requested by the Adaptive Driving Alliance have 
been addressed in detail through interpretation letters issued by the 
agency. These documents may be obtained by searching the interpretation 
files (key words: platform lift) at http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov. 
Specifically, interpretations provided to The Braun Corporation, 
Prevost Car, Inc. and Mr. Jacques Bolduc address the issues raised in 
the Adaptive Driving Alliance's request.

E. Reduce Platform Illumination Requirements of FMVSS No. 404

    Petition for reconsideration of the October 2004 final rule from 
Blue Bird, SBMTC, and MCSSB also requested that the required intensity 
of the platform lighting be reduced to the levels specified by the ADA 
and FTA. However, the issue of the required level of luminance on the 
lift platforms was not raised in the October 2004 final rule or the 
petitions that prompted the October 2004 final rule. With regard to the 
lighting requirements, the October 2004 final rule only addressed under 
which standard the lighting requirements would be established. In the 
December 23, 2004 interim final rule the agency recognized the 
petitioners concern with lighting levels and noted that this concern 
was outside the scope of the October 2004 final rule. The agency has 
decided to address this issue as a petition for rulemaking in a 
separate notice.

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

    Issued on: July 11, 2005.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 05-13960 Filed 7-14-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P