Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Rear Impact Guards; Rear Impact Protection; Denial of Petition for Rulemaking Publication: Federal Register Agency: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Byline: Raymond R. Posten Date: 15 July 2024 Subject: American Government , Safety, Trucking Topic: Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards

[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) 
Lina.Valivullah@dot.gov.
    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) Callie.Roach@dot.gov.

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