Parts and Accessories Necessary for Safe Operation; Glazing and Window Construction; Petition for Waiver To Permit Use of Automatic Vehicle Identification Transponder

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Highway Administration

49 CFR Part 393

[FHWA Docket No. MC-94-28]

Parts and Accessories Necessary for Safe Operation; Glazing and

Window Construction; Petition for Waiver To Permit Use of Automatic

Vehicle Identification Transponder

AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of petition; request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: The Commonwealth of Kentucky, lead State for the ADVANTAGE I-

75 Program, and Heavy Vehicle Electronic License Plate, Inc. (HELP)

have requested, and the FHWA proposes to grant, a petition for a waiver

from the requirements of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations

(FMCSRs) to allow the use of an automatic vehicle identification (AVI)

transponder to be mounted near the upper border at the approximate

center of the windshields of commercial motor vehicles. The FHWA

proposes to grant the waiver to allow the use of the transponders in a

maximum of 30,000 commercial motor vehicles participating in the

ADVANTAGE I-75 ``beta tests'' and the HELP corridor programs during a

3-year period, subject to the proposed conditions described in this

notice.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before November 14,

1994.

ADDRESSES: Submit written, signed comments to FHWA Docket No. MC-94-28,

Room 4232, HCC-10, Office of the Chief Counsel, Federal Highway

Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, D.C. 20590. All

comments received will be available for examination at the above

address from 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday,

except Federal holidays. Those desiring notification of receipt of

comments must include a self-addressed, stamped postcard.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Deborah M. Freund, Office of Motor

Carrier Standards, (202) 366-2981, or Mr. Charles Medalen, Office of

the Chief Counsel, (202) 366-1354, Federal Highway Administration,

Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, D.C.

20590. Office hours are from 7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m., e.t., Monday

through Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) are required to stop at highway

ports of entry (POE), weigh stations, and other checkpoints to be

weighed and to have their regulatory credentials (e.g., registration,

operating permits) checked by State officials. A CMV may be stopped

many times in the course of a single trip. Each stop can add a minimum

of 15 to 20 minutes to the length of a trip because of the time needed

to decelerate, stop, be weighed, have paperwork reviewed, undergo a

safety inspection, reenter the highway, and accelerate to mainline

speed.

CMVs that are in compliance with safety and size and weight

regulations and have their administrative paperwork in order have an

opportunity to greatly increase inspection efficiency and

effectiveness. Information on the status of a CMV's registration,

safety inspection, and operating permits, can be encoded and

transmitted to the POE as an electronic signal via an automatic vehicle

identification (AVI) transponder carried in the CMV. The POE's receiver

would decode the signal, and officials would review the CMV's status on

the spot. Drivers whose CMVs' safety status or administrative records

needed to be reviewed would receive a signal to enter the POE or weigh

station. Drivers whose CMVs are in compliance may receive a signal to

bypass the site. However, they may still be required to enter for a

safety inspection.

The outcome would be a more selective review process which would

enable POE officials to focus their resources to deal with vehicles

with safety and size and weight infractions or vehicles that are not in

compliance with other administrative requirements. Use of AVI

transponders would also provide economic benefits by saving motor

carriers time, improving the efficiency and effectiveness of

enforcement, reducing paperwork, and increasing uniformity of

enforcement. Environmental benefits would be gained from fuel savings

and reduced CMV emissions.

The goals of the ADVANTAGE I-75 and the HELP programs are to reduce

congestion, increase efficiency, and enhance the safety of users of

major highway corridors through the application of a network of

advanced highway, vehicle, and communications technologies. Both

programs are multi-State partnerships of public and private sector

interests. ADVANTAGE I-75, currently in progress, and HELP/CRESCENT,

completed in late 1993, were two of the first in a planned series of

operational tests within the Commercial Vehicle Operations (CVO)

element of the Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) Program

(formerly known as the Intelligent Vehicle-Highway Systems (IVHS)

program). HELP builds on the foundation of the multistate,

multinational CRESCENT research effort to design and test a heavy

vehicle monitoring system that integrates automatic vehicle

identification, classification, and weigh-in-motion.

The ADVANTAGE I-75 and HELP programs will allow CMVs which are

equipped with transponders, and which are in compliance with safety and

administrative requirements, to travel any segment of their respective

instrumented highways at mainline speeds with minimal stopping at

weight/inspection checkpoints. For ADVANTAGE I-75, electronic clearance

decisions at points along the corridor will be based on the information

obtained at the point on the corridor where the vehicle first enters,

as well as on computerized checking of operating credentials and safety

records in each State. For HELP, the electronic clearance decisions

will be based on data collected from weigh-in-motion devices embedded

in the mainline highway pavement or on bypass ramps, as well as on

computerized checking of operating credentials and safety records.

ADVANTAGE I-75 covers the entire length of I-75 and Canadian

Highway 401 (Ontario). The HELP/CRESCENT demonstration operated along

the I-5 and I-10 corridors in several western States from Washington to

Texas. Under HELP, the former CRESCENT highway corridors are being

expanded to include segments in Utah and Colorado.

AVI Device

The AVI device proposed for use in both programs is an electronic

transponder designed to send and receive signals from a CMV to POEs and

safety inspection sites. The signals contain information such as the

identity of the motor carrier, the gross weight of the vehicle, and the

status of the vehicle's registration and fuel tax payments. The

transponder only transmits when it is in the immediate vicinity of a

licensed transmitter and is directed to do so by that licensed

transmitter under the provisions of 47 CFR 90.239.

When an inspection official decides whether the vehicle should

enter or bypass the POE, a signal is transmitted from the official's

workstation to the CMV. This is displayed to the CMV driver in the form

of a clearly visible signal from red and green lamps on the

transponder's face. The transponder also provides an audible signal to

the driver. The transponder measures 3.3 inches (84 mm) high by 4.4

inches (112 mm) wide by 1.5 inches (38 mm) deep.

In order to function effectively, the transponder must be able

properly to transmit and receive signals from the POE. The physical

location of the transponder is a critical factor in its operation

because CMVs are equipped with many other devices that transmit and

receive electronic signals of varying strengths and frequencies, such

as electronic engine monitors and citizens-band radios which could

affect the transponder's transmissions. In addition to these

internally-generated signals, there is also a possibility of external

interference from electrical power transmission lines running along

highway rights-of-way. Furthermore, the device must be placed to allow

drivers to read the enter/bypass indication displayed on the

transponder so they can respond appropriately.

Documentation of Device

The AVI transponder is clearly labelled in its lower right-hand

quadrant, on the side facing the driver, with the name of the

respective issuing program (``ADVANTAGE I-75 Driver Communications

Module'' and ``PRE-PASS, a transportation solution from HELP, Inc.'').

Two indicators, a red octagonal mark labeled ``STOP'' and a green

upward-pointing arrow labeled ``GO,'' also appear on that side. A nine-

pin RS-232 connector, not used for either the ADVANTAGE I-75 or the

HELP application, is on the bottom of the transponder. The device is

thus readily identifiable as a transponder issued by one of the two

programs, and no additional documentation need be carried on the

participating CMVs. The transponder's unique configuration and marking

distinguish it from other electronic devices, such as radar detectors.

Automotive Engineering Guidelines: Driver's Field of View

The Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) Recommended Practices are

the standard automotive design guidelines originally developed for use

by automotive manufacturers and their suppliers. They provide a common

language for vehicle and component design and the accommodation of

drivers. While the use of the SAE Recommended Practices is voluntary,

many, if not most, of them are adopted by automotive

manufacturers.1

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

\1\The SAE Technical Board for Rules and Regulations states:

``This report is published by SAE to advance the state of technical

and engineering sciences. The use of this report is entirely

voluntary, and its suitability for any particular use, including any

patent infringement arising therefrom, is the sole responsibility of

the user.''

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

A foundation reference for defining the ergonomic basis for cab

design is ``Motor Vehicle Driver's Eye Range,'' SAE Recommended

Practice (RP) J941, which establishes two-dimensional ``Eyellipses''

representing the 90th, 95th, and 99th percentile distributions of

driver eye locations for use in the design of the passenger cars,

trucks, buses, and multipurpose passenger vehicles. This RP was

initially approved in October 1965, and completely revised in October

1985. It has been recognized as an American National Standard by the

American National Standards Institute (ANSI). A method for describing

and measuring the driver's direct and indirect field of view, presented

in SAE RP J1050a, references RP J941.

Uniform test procedures for minimum performance of windshield wiper

systems for trucks, buses, and multipurpose vehicles are established in

SAE RP J198. This RP also references RP J941 for a statistical

representation of the driver's eye location, except for head-turn

considerations. The RP states that the specific areas on the windshield

glazing surface ``were developed as being compatible with viewing

requirements necessary to operate the types of vehicles listed in Table

1 [of the RP]''. The classification lists seven different types of

vehicles, and the corresponding areas described by the intersections of

planes defined by angles above, below, left, and right of the

horizontal axis of the Eyellipse. The RP defines 3 areas: a central

zone, Area C, an intermediate zone, Area B, and an outer zone, Area A;

all are delimited by the angles listed in Table 1.

The ``angle up'' for the outer zone of the windshield, Area A,

ranges from 10 degrees for a cab-behind-engine configuration with the

ground-to-H-point2 dimension of between 0 and 40 inches (0 to 1016

mm) to 5 degrees for a configuration with a ground-to-hinge-point

dimension of 50 inches (1270 mm) or greater. Angles-up for Area A in

other trucks, buses, and multipurpose vehicles listed ranges from 6 to

8 degrees. Angles-up for Areas B and C range from 1 to 5 degrees.

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

\2\H-point means hinge point: hip hinge point on an

anthropomorphic manikin, measured with the seat in the rearmost

position.

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

The upper, lower, extreme left, and extreme right borders of the

windshield are outside areas A, B, and C. The minimum percentage of

required wiped area described in the RP decreases from the central to

the outer zones. If installed as proposed, that is, within the upper

windshield border, the transponder should be located well outside Areas

A, B, and C.

The proposed transponder location would be near the top center of a

one-piece windshield or on the passenger side of a multipiece

windshield. This would place it well outside the area swept by wipers

pivoting from below the windshield.

SAE RP J382, Windshield Defrosting Systems Performance Guidelines--

Trucks, Buses, and Multi-Purpose Vehicles, provides a defrosting system

performance guideline. Among other things, it notes that the windshield

area to be defrosted ``was developed to be compatible with vision

requirements necessary to operate trucks, buses, and multi passenger

vehicles.'' This windshield area is based on SAE RP J941, March 1981

(Eyellipse), and SAE RP J826, April 1980 (Devices for Use in Defining

and Measuring Vehicle Seating Accommodation). In a fashion similar to

RP 198, this RP defines two areas: a central zone, Area C, and a

surrounding zone, Area A. Angles up, down, left, and right are also

defined, as in RP 198. The upper, lower, extreme left, and extreme

right borders of the windshield are outside both of these areas. If

installed as proposed, that is, within the upper windshield border, the

transponder should be located well outside Areas A and C, as defined in

this RP.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Standards

Two Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSSs) incorporate SAE

Recommended Practices similar to those discussed earlier in this

notice. FMVSS 103, Windshield defrosting and defogging systems,

references SAE RP J902, Passenger Car Windshield Defrosting Systems.

FMVSS 104, Windshield wiping and washing systems, references SAE RP

J903a, Passenger Car Windshield Wiper Systems. Both of the FMVSSs apply

to passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, and buses.

(While the FMVSSs themselves have this broad range of applicability,

they do not reference the truck and bus versions of the SAE RPs.)

Research on Driver's Field of View

Four recent research papers discuss the issue of a driver's useful

field of view (FOV). The first, ``A Study of Driver's Forward Fields of

Direct View for Large Trucks,'' (N. Nagaike and Y. Hoshino, JSAE

Review, January 1989, pages 74-76), reviewed factors governing the

visible area directly ahead of large trucks. The research determined

necessary visibility areas, depicted by vertical and lateral angles in

a driver's forward field of view. Factors for determining these areas

included locations of traffic lights and directional signs, the

driver's ability to recognize stationary and moving objects, and the

braking deceleration of large trucks. Data were collected from traffic

accident records in Japan and from direct observation. While the

visible area for traffic signals and road signs was recorded at angles

above the driver's eye level, stationary objects, moving objects in the

vicinity of intersections, and oncoming vehicles and vehicles in front

of the CMV were shown to be located in visible areas below the driver's

eye level.

A second paper, ``Research on Forward Field of View of Trucks,''

(Y. Siosaka and N. Nagaike, 14th Annual Technical Conference on

Enhanced Safety of Vehicles, Munich, Germany, May 1994), presented a

study undertaken to determine the minimum forward field of view

required for driving in a straight line, in order more clearly to

define the area swept by windshield wipers. Data on braking distance

and merging behavior (specifically, gap acceptance) were collected from

drivers driving on Japanese rural roads, urban streets, and

expressways. The results indicated a ``driveable field of view''

extending from 5 degrees above horizontal to 5 degrees below

horizontal, referenced to the driver's eye point centerline.

Design conflicts between the need for driver visual perspective and

windshield optical distortion were examined by Makiguchi, et al. (``A

Human Factors Analysis of Optical Distortion for Automotive

Windshields,'' SAE Paper 940390, 1994). Field data were gathered during

straight-line driving. Based on drivers' fixation frequency and the

type of objects observed, the windshield was divided into four zones.

The G1 zone, with the highest fixation frequency, extended

17 degrees laterally and 8 degrees vertically from the

driver's line of sight. It included crucial driving information, such

as pedestrians, road signs and signals, and oncoming and nearby

vehicles. The fixation frequency was reported as exceeding 95 percent.

The G3 and G4 zones, with the lowest fixation frequencies, were noted

at approximately 100 to 200 mm from the edge of the windshield's

visible area. Drivers observe pedestrians and buildings in the zone

below 8 degrees horizontal; in the zone above 8 degrees horizontal,

they see the sky. A zone of middle fixation frequency, G2, was defined

as the area outside the G1, G3, and G4 zones.

Finally, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety published a

report on accidents in four urban areas arising in part from visibility

problems in heavy trucks (``A Study of Fatal Crashes Involving

Pedestrians and Trucks in Four Cities,'' December 1992). It noted,

``Obstruction of truck driver visibility, caused by the design of

truck/tractor cabs, appears to be a major contributing factor in

crashes at intersections.'' However, the discussion of accident data

did not differentiate between conventional--cab behind engine--and cab-

over-engine tractor involvement. The report did not mention decals or

other items in CMV windshields as a potential concern.

After reviewing the reports on these studies, the FHWA believes

that the location of a transponder device near the upper margin of a

CMV's windshield is unlikely to have any effect on a driver's ability

to observe nearby objects, such as pedestrians.

Relationship to Sunvisors, Sunshades, and Rear-View Mirrors

Interior sunvisors are standard equipment in virtually every

vehicle on the road today. Exterior sunshades are available as optional

accessories from several truck manufacturers. Sunvisors are not

regulated by an FMVSS or an FMCSR, nor is there an SAE Recommended

Practice concerning their design. Sunvisors are not believed to have a

detrimental effect on a driver's safety-related vision. On the

contrary, blocking the sun's glare offers a clear safety benefit, and

the loss of a small visible area of the windshield, well outside the

range of the driver's field of view, is considered an acceptable

tradeoff.

Data obtained on 33 models of new Class 8 tractor cabs,

representing all seven of the major manufacturers serving the U.S.

market, indicate that sunvisors vary from 5.25 to 7.5 inches in height

and 19.75 to 34 inches in length.

The agency notes that the AVI transponder proposed to be used in

ADVANTAGE I-75 and HELP is roughly 2 inches smaller than the smallest

sunvisor (which was only found on one cab model). The agency therefore

believes that a transponder mounted within the region of the windshield

that the sunvisor would cover would be extremely unlikely to have an

adverse effect on safety. The audible indicator that accompanies the

visible signal for the driver to enter or to bypass a POE would provide

the necessary information in the event that a sunvisor were to block

the driver's view of the transponder.

For windshields equipped with exterior sunshades, the transponder

is likely to fall at or above the portion of the underside of the

sunshade visible from the cab interior. Furthermore, while exterior

sunshades may limit the uppermost range of the driver's available field

of view, that area is also well out of the useful field of view as

reported by the research cited above.

The agency also notes that the AVI transponder would be located in

approximately the same relative position in the windshield of a CMV as

that of a rear-view mirror in a passenger car. The agency believes that

the transponder would have no more impact on safety than the presence

of such a mirror and its mounting.

History: Rule on Vision-Reducing Matter

Section 393.60(c) of the FMCSRs requires that no motor vehicle be

operated with any label, sticker, decalcomania, or other vision-

reducing matter covering any portion of its windshield or windows at

either side of the driver's compartment, except that stickers required

by law may be affixed to the bottom of the windshield, provided that no

portion of any label, sticker, decalcomania, or other vision-reducing

matter may extend upward more than 4.5 inches from the bottom of the

windshield.

A regulation dealing with Glazing and Window Construction, issued

by order of the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) in 1952 [54 Motor

Carrier Cases 337, 7 FR 4422, May 15, 1952], required that glazing in

specified openings conform to the requirements contained in the

``American Standard Safety Code for Safety Glazing Materials for

Glazing Motor Vehicles Operating on Land Highways, Z26.1 1950'' of the

American Standards Association, now called the American National

Standards Institute (ANSI). (The Table of Glazing Requirements,

contained in Sec. 393.60(a)(2) of the FMCSRs, requires CMVs

manufactured on and after January 1, 1981, to comply with Z26.1-1966 as

supplemented by Z26.1a-1969.)

In December 1958 (23 FR 9608, December 11, 1958), the ICC proposed

to amend this rule, then codified at 49 CFR Sec. 193.60, by adding

paragraphs covering windshield condition (Sec. 193.60(b)) and use of

vision-reducing matter (Sec. 193.60(c)). The latter paragraph

prohibited the use of vision-reducing matter covering any portion of a

motor vehicle's windshield or windows at either side of the driver's

compartment, ``except 1 vehicle-inspection sticker issued by a State or

municipal authority, which shall be no larger than 3 inches by 5 inches

and shall be located in the lower right-hand corner of the

windshield.'' The ICC invited comment, but did not publish a report on

this proposal.

On December 3, 1959 (24 FR 9674), the ICC adopted a final rule

amending Sec. 193.60(c) to remove the maximum dimension requirement for

the sticker while setting a limit of one sticker indicating compliance

with official mechanical inspection requirements of the State in which

the title or certificate of ownership is registered. The permissible

location was changed to ``a lower corner of the windshield.''

The language of Sec. 193.60(c) was amended again on April 19, 1961

(26 FR 3309), based on petitions for reconsideration from the Virginia

State Police, the New York State Public Service Commission, and the

American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators. The resulting

amendment relaxed the rule to permit more than one label, sticker, or

decalcomania to be displayed, and added the requirement that no portion

of any label, sticker, decalcomania, or other vision-reducing matter

may extend upward more than 4.5 inches from the bottom of such

windshield. While the ICC did not provide an explanation for the

selection of a 4.5 inch dimension, most inspection decals range from

3.5 to 4 inches in size, and the dimension was apparently chosen to

allow for variations in the application of stickers and decalcomania.

(The water-activated adhesives used for decalcomania prior to the

availability of self-stick adhesives in the early 1960's tended to make

them somewhat difficult to position.)

The requirements of Sec. 393.60, particularly the 4.5 inch limit

specified Sec. 393.60(c), are independent of the physical dimensions of

windshields. CMV design has made significant strides since the time the

regulation was promulgated, in part because of research leading to a

better understanding of driver anthropometry and ergonomics. Improved

positioning of driving controls, availability of more effective

mirrors, enhanced adjustability of seats, and larger CMV windshields

are just a few of the design advances made since the 1950's and 1960's.

However, the requirements of Sec. 393.60(c) have not kept pace.

Advantage I-75 Alpha Test

To evaluate the performance and usability of the transponders, it

was necessary to assess various locations for mounting the devices

during an initial on-the-road ``alpha test.'' Plans called for the

transponders to be mounted near the upper and lower borders of the

windshields of CMV cabs. Approximately 200 vehicles, representing six

motor carriers' fleets, were to be equipped with electronic

transponders to transmit and receive information from CMV weigh

stations and ports of entry.

Although placing the transponders in the windshield was considered

the best solution from an engineering standpoint, some of the locations

would have conflicted with Sec. 393.60(c). The proposed lower-border

transponder location would have been just within the border area

permitted under this section. However, the upper-border location would

have been in violation.

On October 11, 1993, Don C. Kelly, Secretary of Transportation for

the Commonwealth of Kentucky and Chairman of the ADVANTAGE I-75 Policy

Committee, wrote to the FHWA, requesting a waiver of Sec. 393.60(c) for

the purpose of conducting the alpha test of these AVI transponders.

On November 15, 1993, the FHWA responded that the agency would not

apply, or require the States to apply, Sec. 393.60(c) to vehicles,

drivers and motor carriers participating in the alpha test from

November 15, 1993, to January 21, 1994, or whenever the test ended,

whichever was earlier. (The alpha test was originally scheduled to run

during this period. Because of poor weather and a number of engineering

changes to the transponder and the roadside communications devices, the

start of the test was delayed until March 7, 1994, and the agency's

enforcement moratorium was extended, first until August 31, 1994, and

eventually to March 31, 1995.

In granting temporary relief from the requirements of

Sec. 393.60(c), the FHWA expressly recognized the need for good

visibility, but acknowledged that the alpha test was a short-duration

trial involving a small number of trucks. The FHWA also noted that

participating motor carriers were volunteers that agreed to provide

their drivers with thorough orientation and training on the use of the

AVI devices, that the drivers had participated in focus groups in

preparation for these tests, and that they were made particularly aware

of the need for objective evaluations of any problems, including

reduced visibility, caused by the placement of the transponders.

Because there would have been no way to conduct a real-world evaluation

of AVI technology without operating in conflict with Sec. 393.60(c),

the FHWA decided not to require the enforcement of that provision for

the brief period needed to gather data in preparation for the

exhaustive beta phase of the test.

As a condition of this temporary relief from enforcement of the

provisions of Sec. 393.60(c), the FHWA required that the AVI

transponder be mounted outside the area swept by the vehicle's

windshield wipers, or outside the driver's sight lines to the road and

highway signs or signals. The following conditions also had to be met:

(1) a copy of the letter granting the temporary relief was to be

carried in each motor vehicle used in the AVI alpha test program; and

(2) a letter from the Commonwealth of Kentucky, on official letterhead,

clearly identifying any vehicle involved in the AVI alpha test program,

was to be carried in that vehicle. If any of the participating vehicles

were stopped for non-compliance with Sec. 393.60(c) during the test

period, the driver was to present a copy of both letters to the

enforcement official involved.

Although the test was run on an instrumented segment of I-75 in

Kentucky, the FHWA noted that the participating vehicles would also

operate elsewhere. Since the transponders could be damaged by

repeatedly removing and re-installing them, participants in the alpha

test were allowed to leave the transponders on the windshields, no

matter where the vehicles traveled.

The alpha test is anticipated to be completed on October 20, 1994.

ADVANTAGE I-75 has informed us that no drivers reported any

difficulties with their vision being obscured as a result of the

placement of the transponder.

ADVANTAGE I-75 Beta Test and HELP Program

Both the ADVANTAGE I-75 and the HELP programs are currently

planning to expand the geographic coverage and scope of their initial

activities. The ADVANTAGE I-75 beta test is expected to involve up to

5000 CMVs in the I-75 and Canadian Highway 401 corridor. The purpose of

the beta test is to evaluate the actual operation of the transponders

and to assess their potential to be used as a part of everyday motor

carrier operations on a nationwide basis. HELP will deploy an ITS

information network for CMVs in the original HELP/CRESCENT States, as

well as in several additional ones. HELP is planning to equip at least

25,000 CMVs in its fee-for-service system by the end of 1995, and at

least twice that many a year later.

Motor carriers participating in the programs have to meet stringent

prequalification criteria set by ADVANTAGE I-75 and HELP. For ADVANTAGE

I-75, these criteria include: (1) A Satisfactory safety rating from the

FHWA Office of Motor Carriers; (2) an acceptable record in all States

and/or Canadian Provinces in which the carrier intends to operate

(including registration and taxes, safety performance, and other

compliance items consistent with existing statutes); (3) agreement to

abide by the FMCSRs or the Canadian equivalent; (4) agreement to

participate in the project evaluation process; and (5) the carriers'

self-certification that their enrolled trucks will meet an inspection

protocol, at least quarterly, equivalent to the requirements of a

Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance Level 1 inspection. The beta test is

scheduled to commence in March 1995 and to continue for two years.

Criteria for participation in the HELP program differ slightly.

However, all States will require motor carriers to have a Satisfactory

safety rating from the FHWA Office of Motor Carriers and be in

compliance with administrative requirements (such as fuel tax and

registration). Inspectors in the HELP States can require that as many

as 5 percent of all electronically cleared CMVs enter inspection

stations to verify their safety and administrative status. The officer

at the inspection station can also override any bypass on a vehicle-by-

vehicle basis.

The FHWA received formal requests for a waiver of the requirements

of Sec. 393.60(c) from the Commonwealth of Kentucky on September 19,

1994, and from HELP on August 31, 1994.

Discussion of Proposal

The FHWA believes that both motor carriers and the travelling

public may derive substantial operational and safety benefits from the

use of ITS/CVO technologies. The Congress has made the ITS program the

centerpiece of a concerted effort to apply advanced technology to

America's highway transportation system. The ADVANTAGE I-75 and HELP

programs are the first in a series of field trials of AVI devices for

commercial motor vehicles. In the relatively short term, this

technology could improve the productivity of both the trucking industry

and State enforcement personnel by reducing the need for repeated

vehicle inspections. It would also reduce fuel consumption and air

pollution, and may improve highway safety by reducing congestion,

particularly around inspection stations. It would also enable POE

officials to target their resources to deal with vehicles more likely

to be operating in noncompliance with safety and administrative

regulations.

While members of the ADVANTAGE I-75 Policy Committee have

informally expressed interest in petitioning the FHWA to change the

requirements of Sec. 393.60(c), it is the agency's belief that this

section should be subject to a more detailed review than is possible in

the short time remaining before the ADVANTAGE I-75 beta test and the

HELP program commence. The FHWA is therefore proposing to provide a

waiver from the requirements of Sec. 393.60(c) to the vehicles

participating in the beta phase of the ADVANTAGE I-75 project. Because

the HELP program proposes to use the same transponders as ADVANTAGE I-

75, the FHWA also proposes to provide a waiver to those participating

vehicles.

The FHWA notes that no safety concerns or complaints have been

reported by alpha test participants, nor by any other parties.

The petition for a waiver is being considered under section 206(f)

of the Motor Carrier Safety Act of 1984 (49 U.S.C. 31136(e), formerly

49 U.S.C. app. 2505(f)) which authorizes waivers of any regulation

issued under the authority of that Act upon a determination that the

waiver is consistent with the public interest and the safe operation of

commercial motor vehicles.

Conditions of the Waiver

I. Location of the Transponder

As a condition of the waiver, the FHWA proposes that the

transponder be mounted at or near the top center of the windshield,

outside the area swept by the CMV's windshield wipers, or, at a

minimum, outside the driver's sight lines to the road and highway signs

or signals. The FHWA believes that this location would have no

discernable effect on a driver's ability to operate the vehicle safely.

The AVI device would be placed in a position that would be within the

portion of the windshield covered by a sunvisor. It is also in

approximately the same relative position in the windshield of a CMV as

that of a rear-view mirror in a passenger car. There is no evidence

that sunvisors or rear-view mirrors pose a threat to safety by

obstructing a driver's vision, and thus, we have no reason to believe

that a transponder of the type and dimensions to be used in the test

would have a negative effect on safety.

II. Compliance With Wiring Requirements of the FMCSRs

The installation of the transponder would be required to comply

with Sec. 393.27, Wiring specifications, and Sec. 393.33, Wiring [and]

installation.

III. Duration of Waiver; Accident and Incident Monitoring

Although the requests indicated a 2-year period for the beta test,

the FHWA notes that the alpha test was delayed several times to resolve

technical matters. Since all research in a field environment is likely

to experience some start-up delays, the FHWA proposes to make the term

of the waiver 3 years for HELP and 3 years for ADVANTAGE I-75, or until

the beta test is completed, whichever occurs first. This would allow

for a continuous period of data collection once the programs were fully

underway. If the waiver is granted, this period would begin when the

FHWA publishes the final conditions of the waiver in the Federal

Register. Motor carriers participating in ADVANTAGE I-75 and HELP would

be required to provide the FHWA's Office of Motor Carrier Standards

with information on accidents (as defined in Sec. 390.5 of the FMCSRs)

involving the vehicles equipped with the transponders. Accident reports

would be required to be submitted every 6 months, and would be required

to contain the information listed below:

1. A copy of all accident reports prepared and required by State or

other governmental entities or insurers.

2. Interview information with the driver and occupants of the CMV

involved. The information would be required to include specifically

whether the driver of the transponder-equipped vehicle believed that

the presence of the transponder was a factor in the accident. The

interview would be required to be conducted by a motor carrier employee

responsible for supervising the driver of the transponder-equipped

vehicle.

IV. State and Local Laws

The FHWA strongly encourages State and local authorities with

safety regulations that would prohibit the use of the proposed

transponders to accept the terms of the waiver.

V. Number of Vehicles To Be Equipped With Transponders

The number of straight trucks, tractors, and motorcoaches that may

be equipped with the transponders would be limited to no more than 5000

for ADVANTAGE I-75 and 25,000 for HELP. The names and USDOT numbers of

the motor carriers participating in the ADVANTAGE I-75 and HELP

programs, as well as the number of transponder-equipped CMVs operated

by each carrier, would be required to be provided to the FHWA.

VI. Termination of Waiver

The transponders would be required to be removed from the CMVs

participating in the ADVANTAGE I-75 and HELP projects (1) upon

completion of the 3-year period, or (2) upon completion of the project,

or (3) when required by the FHWA either at the completion of a semi-

annual review or at any time it is determined by the FHWA that the

continued use of the devices decreases the safe operation of the

vehicles on which they are used.

VII. Report

ADVANTAGE I-75 and HELP would be required to provide separate

reports at the conclusion of the program describing the transponder's

installation and use. The reports would be required to include

information obtained from the drivers on the device's effect on

visibility through the windshield.

Request for Public Comments

The FHWA requests public comment on the proposed waiver and on the

attendant conditions. Comments are also sought from State and local

enforcement officials relating to their experiences with windshield-

mounted electronic devices, such as those used in electronic toll-

collection systems.

The FHWA is also interested in comments on the projected impacts on

safety if windshield-mounted transponders were to be allowed under

Sec. 393.60(c) of the FMCSRs, without the conditions that would be

imposed under the waiver.

(49 U.S.C. 31136, 31502; 49 CFR 1.48)

Issued on: October 5, 1994

Rodney E. Slater,

Federal Highway Administrator.

[FR Doc. 94-25193 Filed 10-11-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910--22-P