Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Burnish Procedures for Heavy Vehicles Publication: Federal Register Agency: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Byline: Barry Felrice Date: 15 May 1995 Subject: American Government • Safety • Trucking Topic: Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards

[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 93 (Monday, May 15, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 25880-25882]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-11927]



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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. 70-27, Notice 33 and Docket No. 83-07, Notice 7]
RIN 2127-AF13


Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Burnish Procedures for 
Heavy Vehicles

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

ACTION: Termination of rulemaking proceeding.

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

SUMMARY: This notice terminates rulemaking to amend Standard No. 105, 
Hydraulic Brake Systems, and Standard No. 121, Air Brake Systems, with 
respect to the burnish procedures for medium and heavy vehicles. The 
agency has determined that it would be unnecessary to extend the period 
during which a manufacturer may choose between two burnish procedures 
since manufacturers have been certifying compliance to the brake 
standards based on the ``new'' more representative burnish procedure 
since September 1994.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Richard C. Carter, Office of 
Vehicle Safety Standards, National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SA., Washington, DC 20590. (202-
366-5274).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Standard No. 105, Hydraulic Brake Systems, and Standard No. 121, 
Air Brake Systems (49 CFR 571.121), specify tests to measure whether 
medium and heavy vehicles 1 equipped with hydraulic or air brakes 
comply with the standards' performance requirements. These vehicles are 
subject to ``burnish'' procedures conducted at the outset of road 
testing and dynamometer testing. The burnish procedures serve to 
simulate the breaking-in of the brakes on new vehicles under normal 
driving conditions.

    \1\ Hereafter, referred to as heavy vehicles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Until September 1, 1994, the standards contained old and new 
burnish procedures, identified in the standards as option ``a'' and 
option ``b,'' respectively. The old burnish procedure consisted of a 
series of brake applications, known as ``snubs,'' that result in the 
brakes being heated to not more than the specified maximum temperature 
of 550  deg.F.
    In response to a petition from International Harvester, the agency 
amended the burnish procedures in a final rule published on March 14, 
1988 (49 FR 8191). The agency initiated rulemaking because the 
temperature limit, which was established with drum brake designs in 
mind, appeared inappropriate for disc brake designs. Disc brake systems 
are designed to operate at appreciably higher temperatures than are 
drum brake systems. As a result, it had been difficult to avoid 
exceeding the specified maximum temperature during the burnish of 
vehicles with disc brake systems.
    After issuing several notices, the agency added a new burnish 
procedure in 1988 providing that the brakes on heavy duty vehicles are 
to be burnished by 500 snubs slowing the vehicle from 40 mph to 20 mph, 
without regard to [[Page 25881]] brake temperatures generated during 
the burnish. NHTSA believes that under the new burnish procedure, 
brakes will be burnished in a manner that is more realistic and 
representative of the breaking-in that vehicle brakes actually receive 
in service without favoring drum brake designs over disc brake designs.
    NHTSA allowed a five-year transition period for implementing the 
new burnish procedure. The agency provided this longer than normal lead 
time to minimize the rulemaking's cost impact by allowing manufacturers 
to phase-in any required changes to brake systems as design changes 
were made. During the transition period, manufacturers could choose 
between the old and new burnish procedures. As established in the 1988 
final rule, the period lasted until September 1, 1993. On and after 
that date, the only burnish procedure in the standards was to be the 
new one.

II. Petitions

    NHTSA received petitions from Eaton Corporation and the American 
Automobile Manufacturers Association (AAMA) concerning the effective 
date for the new burnish procedure. Eaton petitioned the agency either 
to permit the old burnish procedure as an option indefinitely or at 
least to postpone the date on which the new procedure became the only 
procedure, to allow the agency to investigate problems associated with 
that procedure.
    The AAMA petitioned NHTSA to delete the effective date for the new 
brake burnish procedure. If AAMA's request were granted, a choice 
between the old and new burnish procedures would be allowed 
indefinitely. AAMA stated that specifying only the new procedure would 
result in increased variability that could adversely affect brake 
effectiveness. The petitioner also believed that the new procedure 
would increase the stringency of the parking brake requirements 
because, it claimed, braking performance generally degrades at lower 
burnish temperatures. In addition, AAMA stated that many current 
vehicles that comply with the brake standards after being subjected to 
the old burnish procedure will not comply when tested after being 
subjected to the new burnish procedure. It suggested that this 
noncompliance was not indicative of a safety problem, noting that it is 
not aware of any safety problem arising from the braking performance of 
vehicles tested after using the old procedure.
    After receiving these petitions, NHTSA staff met with 
representatives of Eaton, Freightliner, PACCAR, Navistar, Rockwell, 
Lucas, Carlisle, and Ford.2 According to these representatives of 
the heavy truck industry, the new burnish procedure would result in 
significant variability problems and potential compliance problems. 
Accordingly, they requested that NHTSA either (1) Delay the September 
1, 1993 effective date, (2) allow either procedure indefinitely, or (3) 
develop a new burnish procedure.

    \2\ A memo has been placed in the docket summarizing these 
meetings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Interim Final Rule and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    On August 30, 1993, NHTSA published two notices in response to the 
petitions for rulemaking from Eaton and AAMA: an interim final rule 
extending the period during which either the old or new burnish 
procedures could be used until September 1, 1994 (58 FR 45459); and a 
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) proposing to extend the optional 
period for the new burnish procedure an additional 18 months to March 
1, 1996. (58 FR 45476)
    In justifying these notices, NHTSA explained that the March 14, 
1988 final rule was not intended to impose additional or more stringent 
performance requirements for heavy vehicles. Instead, the adoption of 
the new burnish procedure was intended to ensure that the compliance 
tests are more representative of actual vehicle break-in and to 
eliminate the current burnish procedure's bias against new brake 
designs.
    NHTSA stated that the time period during which either burnish 
procedure may be used should be extended. The agency explained that 
without the delay to September 1, 1994, vehicle manufacturers would 
have faced a significant cost burden related to compliance testing and 
product development, without corresponding safety benefits. The agency 
further explained that, under a February 23, 1993 proposal to reinstate 
stopping distance requirements for heavy vehicles, manufacturers would 
have had to conduct two sets of compliance testing using both the old 
and new burnish procedures within the comment period. (58 FR 11003, 
11009). It further explained that the agency needed to assess the 
petitioners' contention that the new burnish procedures result in a 
more stringent requirement.
    In response to the proposal to extend the optional burnish 
procedure until March 1, 1996, the agency received comments from AAMA, 
the Heavy Duty Brake Manufacturers Council (HDBMC), Ford, General 
Motors (GM), Chrysler, and four brake manufacturers (Eaton, Rockwell 
International, Lucas, and Midland-Grau. The commenters requested that 
vehicle manufacturers be permitted to use either the old or new burnish 
procedure indefinitely.
    AAMA submitted test data on the braking performance of combination 
vehicles, including a vehicle tested at NHTSA's Vehicle Research 
Testing Center (VRTC). AAMA stated that these tests indicate that the 
proposed stopping distance requirements and braking-in-a-curve test 
could not be consistently met unless the initial brake temperature was 
reduced to between 150 deg.F and 200 deg.F from 250 deg. and 300 deg.F. 
Specifically, AAMA said that the proposed increase in initial brake 
temperature 3 would cause an increase in stopping distance, and 
thus would cause a vehicle to fail to comply with the proposed stopping 
distance requirements.

    \3\ In the stopping distance NPRM, NHTSA proposed an initial 
brake temperature of 250 deg.F to 300 deg.F. However, in the final 
rule the agency concluded that an initial brake temperature of 
between 150 deg.F to 200 deg.F is more appropriate. 60 FR 13292.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As explained above, the new burnish procedures took effect on 
September 1, 1994. Since that date, vehicle manufacturers have been 
required to certify compliance to the braking standards using the new 
burnish procedures and have not been permitted to burnish brakes using 
the old procedures. In proposing to extend optional compliance with the 
old procedure until March 1996, the agency sought to simplify 
compliance for vehicle manufacturers by only having them conduct the 
braking tests once if they relied on the old burnish procedures. 
However, this consideration became moot because the new burnish 
procedures went into effect in September and the agency was unable to 
issue the stopping distance and stability and control rulemakings prior 
to that date.
    Based on these considerations, NHTSA has decided to terminate the 
burnish rulemaking that would have permitted optional compliance to the 
old burnish procedures until March 1, 1996. As explained in the 
stopping distance final rule, ``vehicle manufacturers have had 
sufficient time to conduct any additional testing and to make any 
necessary design changes in order to meet the requirements of Standard 
No. 121, with the new burnish procedures.'' (60 FR 13286, 13292) As a 
result, vehicles must be burnished pursuant to the new brake burnish 
procedure set forth in S7.4.2.1(b) of Standard No. 105 and in 
S6.1.8.1(b) of Standard No. 121.
     [[Page 25882]] NHTSA believes that the new burnish procedure is 
more valid because it has a lower energy input level that is closer to 
the burnish achieved in actual use. Accordingly, it would be 
inappropriate to permit the old procedure indefinitely. The agency 
further believes that achieving compliance using the new burnish 
procedure is feasible given the industry's considerable progress in 
developing new brake linings that can meet the brake system performance 
requirements when using the new burnish procedures. The agency notes 
that the additional year allowed by the interim final rule, together 
with the initial five year transition period, provided ample time for 
vehicle and brake manufacturers to evaluate brake block materials.

    NHTSA believes that there is only very limited validity to the 
manufacturers' argument that the new burnish procedure is more 
stringent. The objections to the new burnish procedure come from those 
manufacturers whose existing brake systems have to be burnished to peak 
perfection in order to pass the minimum requirements. The new burnish 
procedure is more stringent only in the sense that it does not produce 
temperatures that are as high as the old procedure and in the sense 
that the lower temperature of the burnish reduces brake performance. 
NHTSA notes that brake manufacturers are continuing to develop brake 
block materials that are less sensitive to burnish and do not require 
high temperatures of the old burnish to complete the manufacturing 
process. As these materials are developed, the new procedure's already 
limited effect will become progressively smaller.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30162; delegations of authority 
at 49 CFR 1.50 and 501.8.

    Issued on: May 10, 1995.

Barry Felrice,

Associate Administrator for Safety Performance Standards.

[FR Doc. 95-11927 Filed 5-12-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P