Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Rear Impact Guards; Rear Impact Protection; Denial of Petition for Rulemaking
| Published date | 15 July 2024 |
| Record Number | 2024-13956 |
| Citation | 89 FR 57381 |
| Court | National Highway Traffic Safety Administration |
| Section | Proposed rules |
Federal Register, Volume 89 Issue 135 (Monday, July 15, 2024)
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 135 (Monday, July 15, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 57381-57383]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-13956]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 571
[Docket No. NHTSA-2024-0034]
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Rear Impact Guards; Rear
Impact Protection; Denial of Petition for Rulemaking
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Denial of petitions for rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document denies a petition for rulemaking from Jerry and
Marianne Karth, Eric Hein, and Lois Durso-Hawkins, requesting that
NHTSA amend Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) No. 223,
``Rear impact guards,'' and FMVSS No. 224, ``Rear impact protection,''
to include additional requirements. The agency is denying the petition
because it does not provide new or different information that would
warrant initiation of a rulemaking at this time. This document also
discusses NHTSA's consideration of a similar petition from the same
petitioners submitted to the docket of the July 15, 2022 final rule
amending FMVSS Nos. 223 and 224.
DATES: July 15, 2024.
ADDRESSES: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, West Building, Washington, DC 20590.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
[[Page 57382]]
For technical issues: Ms. Lina Valivullah, National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building,
Washington, DC 20590, (telephone) (202) 366-8786, (email)
[email protected].
For legal issues: Ms. Callie Roach, Office of the Chief Counsel,
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE, West Building, Washington, DC 20590, (telephone) (202) 366-2992,
(email) [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Petitions Received
III. Petitions To Initiate Rulemaking
IV. Agency Response
V. Conclusion
I. Background
The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (``Safety Act'')
(49 U.S.C. 30101 et seq.) authorizes the Secretary of Transportation
(NHTSA by delegation) \1\ to issue safety standards for new motor
vehicles and new items of motor vehicle equipment. The Safety Act
requires, at 49 U.S.C. 30111, motor vehicle safety standards to be
practicable, meet the need for motor vehicle safety, and be stated in
objective terms. Pursuant to this authority, NHTSA issued Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 223, ``Rear impact guards,'' and
FMVSS No. 224, ``Rear impact protection,'' which together provide
protection for occupants of passenger vehicles in crashes into the rear
of trailers and semitrailers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 49 CFR 1.95.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On July 15, 2022, NHTSA published a final rule in the Federal
Register upgrading FMVSS Nos. 223 and 224 by adopting requirements
similar to Transport Canada's standard for rear impact guards.\2\ The
updated safety standards require rear impact guards to provide
sufficient strength and energy absorption to protect occupants of
compact and subcompact passenger cars impacting the rear of trailers at
56 kilometers per hour (km/h) (35 miles per hour (mph)). This final
rule provides upgraded protection in crashes in which the passenger
motor vehicle hits the rear of the trailer or semitrailer such that 50
to 100 percent of the width of the passenger motor vehicle overlaps the
rear of the trailer or semitrailer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 87 FR 42339.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Petitions Received
NHTSA received a petition for rulemaking from Jerry and Marianne
Karth, Eric Hein, and Lois Durso-Hawkins dated August 18, 2022,
requesting that NHTSA initiate rulemaking ``to require that Rear Impact
Guards on van-type or box semitrailers are able to prevent underride by
passenger vehicles at 35 mph in 30% offset crashes.''
NHTSA received a similar submission from Jerry and Marianne Karth,
Eric Hein, Lois Durso-Hawkins, Aaron Kiefer, Andy Young, and Garrett
Mattos dated July 15, 2022, submitted as a petition for reconsideration
of the July 15, 2022 final rule.\3\ That petition requested revision of
the final rule to include additional requirements. The July 15, 2022
submission does not meet the requirements in 49 CFR part 553 for a
petition for reconsideration.\4\ For this reason, the agency has
decided to consider that submission as a petition for rulemaking. Due
to the similarities in the issues raised in the August 18, 2022
petition and the July 15, 2022 submission, NHTSA is responding to both
in this single document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Docket No. NHTSA-2022-0053-0003, document titled ``Petition
for Reconsideration of the Rear Impact Guard Rule (July 2022)'',
available at https://www.regulations.gov/document/NHTSA-2022-0053-0003.
\4\ While it was submitted as a petition for reconsideration,
the petition did not explain ``why compliance with the rule is not
practicable, is unreasonable, or is not in the public interest,'' as
required by 49 CFR part 553. In addition, the petitioners did not
assert that the requirements established by the final rule should be
stayed or revoked. For these reasons, the petition does not meet the
requirements in 49 CFR part 553 for a petition for reconsideration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Petitions To Initiate Rulemaking
In the August 18 petition, the petitioners requested that NHTSA
promptly initiate rulemaking to require that rear impact guards on
trailers provide protection in 30 percent overlap crashes at 35 mph.
The petitioners stated that this type of crash is known to result in
death and significant injuries, including in collisions with rear
impact guards designed to meet the requirements in the July 15, 2022
final rule. In support of their petition, the petitioners stated that
NHTSA had been directed by Congress to ``protect the safety of the
driving public against unreasonable risk of death or injury'' and
claimed that the agency had failed to fulfill these directives.\5\ They
noted NHTSA's ``acknowledg[ment] that [the final rule] is a minimum
standard'' but asserted that it ``lacks a genuine commitment to the
USDOT's National Roadway Safety Strategy.'' The petitioners stated that
there is much debate about the frequency of underride crashes,
including those at the 30 percent offset, that 30 percent overlap
crashes more often result in more severe injuries due to the failure of
the guard and passenger compartment intrusion, and that the agency's
reasons for not adding a requirement are incongruous and unfounded.
Citing rear impact guard testing by the Insurance Institute for Highway
Safety (IIHS) and existing guard designs that have received the
TOUGHGUARD award, the petitioners disagreed with NHTSA's decision that
additional research was needed before adding a 30 percent overlap
requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ The petition references report language accompanying the
2022 appropriations bill urging NHTSA to complete rulemaking to
improve rear guards that ultimately meet the Insurance Institute for
Highway Safety standards for Toughguard awards. House Report No.
117-99 at p. 53; see also the Joint Explanatory Statement
accompanying the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2022 (Division L--
Transportation, Housing and Urban Development and Related
Appropriations Act, 2022, Pub. L. 117-103). However, report language
must be read in the context of the specific statutory requirements
to which NHTSA is subject under the Safety Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The petitioners' July 15 submission advanced essentially the same
arguments, that NHTSA had failed to address the guard deficiencies for
30 percent overlap protection identified by IIHS and that the agency
had ``summarily dismissed'' IIHS's research in issuing the final rule.
The petitioners also argued that the 2022 final rule did not address
the concern that the attachments of the guards to the trailers were too
weak. The petitioners noted that some manufacturers offered their
redesigned guards as standard, while other manufacturers offered them
only as an option, and that NHTSA ``has demonstrated an unwillingness
to require that all manufacturers install these stronger guards as
Standard on new trailers'' and has continued to allow unreasonable risk
when there is ``available and proven technology.'' They asserted that
the Advisory Committee on Underride Protection (ACUP) should have been
able to provide input before the final rule was issued.
IV. Agency Response
All NHTSA rulemaking actions establishing an FMVSS must meet the
Safety Act's requirements. The FMVSS must be practicable, it must meet
the need for motor vehicle safety, and it must be objective,
reasonable, and appropriate for the motor vehicle type for which it is
prescribed. While a particular trailer model may include a more robust
guard as standard, the agency must consider the effect of a mandate on
all vehicles subject to
[[Page 57383]]
FMVSS No. 223 and FMVSS No. 224. As explained in the preamble to the
final rule (see 87 FR 42359-42360), analysis of the costs and weights
for currently available trailers and rear impact guard designs led to
the conclusion that a 30 percent overlap condition would not be
reasonable or practicable for this FMVSS and would not meet the
requirements of Sections 30111(a) and (b) of the Safety Act for
issuance of FMVSS. NHTSA continues to research potential cost-effective
rear impact guard designs that could improve protection in 30 percent
overlap crashes while enhancing protection in full and 50 percent
overlap crashes at higher speeds. Issuance of the final rule does not
preclude future rulemaking upon the completion of additional research.
The agency will consider all input from ACUP's complete report and will
consider all views in any future rulemaking.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ While Petitioners urged that the views of the ACUP should
have been considered before issuing a final rule, we note that they
do not seek revocation of the final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Conclusion
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 30162 and 49 CFR part 552, NHTSA is
denying two petitions for rulemaking requesting that NHTSA initiate
rulemaking to amend FMVSS No. 223, ``Rear impact guards,'' and FMVSS
No. 224, ``Rear impact protection,'' to include additional
requirements. NHTSA is denying these petitions because the petitioners
did not provide new or different information that would warrant
initiation of a rulemaking at this time.
Issued in Washington, DC, under authority delegated in 49 CFR
1.95 and 501.5.
Raymond R. Posten,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2024-13956 Filed 7-12-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
