Parts and Accessories Necessary for Safe Operation; Sleeper Berths on Motorcoaches

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Highway Administration

49 CFR Part 393

[FHWA Docket No. MC-93-34]

RIN 2125-AD25

Parts and Accessories Necessary for Safe Operation; Sleeper

Berths on Motorcoaches

AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.

ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FHWA requests public comment on the use and design of

driver sleeper berths in the motorcoach industry. Existing sleeper

berth regulations were written with commercial trucks and truck-

tractors in mind. The agency seeks comments on the suitability of these

regulations for motorcoaches and the possibility of amending them to

account for design differences between trucks and motorcoaches. This

action is being taken in response to comments received at the

motorcoach industry Zero-Base Review hearing held in Miami, Florida, on

January 20, 1993, and written requests from the motorcoach industry.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 14, 1994.

ADDRESSES: All signed, written comments should refer to the docket

number that appears at the top of this document and must be submitted

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

Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington DC 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 legal Federal holidays. Those desiring notification of receipt

of comments must include a self-addressed stamped postcard or envelope.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Bryan L. Price, Office of Motor

Carrier Standards, (202) 366-5720, or Mr. Charles Medalen, Office of

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

Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC

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

through Friday, except legal Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On January 20, 1993, the FHWA held a public

hearing in Miami, FL, as part of our Zero-Base Review of the Federal

Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) to obtain information, views,

and opinions from representatives of the motorcoach industry (see 57 FR

60784). Four out of ten industry representatives who testified at the

hearing voiced concerns about the suitability of existing sleeper berth

regulations for motorcoaches. A common theme among those who testified

on this subject was that the current sleeper berth regulations were

written specifically for trucks and truck-tractors without considering

the unique design characteristics of motorcoaches. A complete

transcript of this hearing is on file and available for review in the

FHWA docket room under FHWA Docket No. MC-92-33-182.

Both the American Bus Association and the United Bus Owners of

America have also indicated to the FHWA that the suitability of

existing sleeper berth regulations for motorcoaches is a concern of

their members.

The FHWA has also received written requests from the motorcoach

industry to revise the current sleeper berth regulations to account for

design differences between motorcoaches and trucks. (Copies of these

letters are included in FHWA Docket No. MC-93-34.)

In response to these concerns and as part of the FHWA's efforts to

eliminate unnecessarily design-restrictive regulations, a review of the

rulemaking history of the current sleeper berth requirements was

completed. The review indicated that sleeper berths on motorcoaches may

not have been considered when the existing sleeper berth regulations

were promulgated.

In a final rule published on May 15, 1952 (17 FR 4422), the

Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) revised most of the existing

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) and created a number

of new regulations. One new regulation set forth detailed

specifications for sleeper berths. The rule required that every sleeper

berth installed in or on a truck or truck-tractor after December 31,

1952, be located within or immediately adjacent to the cab, or within

the cargo space of a truck, and be provided with a direct and ready

means of exit into the driver's compartment (17 FR 4443). These

requirements are now codified at 49 CFR 393.76(b)(2) and 393.76(c)(1),

respectively.

In addition, the regulations also required that any sleeper berth

which could not meet this standard, in essence those installed on

trucks or truck-tractors before December 31, 1952, be provided with

means of communication between the occupant of the berth and the

driver. The berth also had to be designed, constructed, and maintained

to provide the occupant, without the assistance of other persons, at

least two means of ready exit from the motor vehicle. These

requirements are now codified at 49 CFR 393.76(d) and 393.76(c)(2)(ii),

respectively.

Because motorcoach operators rarely used sleeper berths forty years

ago, the ICC drafted a rule for trucks and truck-tractors. Practices in

the motorcoach industry have changed, however, and some operators would

like to use sleeper berths to reduce driver fatigue and to help comply

with driver's hours of service regulations. The 1952 regulations did

not address sleeper berths on motorcoaches, nor have any subsequent

rulemakings done so.

On July 3, 1970, the FHWA published a final rule relating to seat

belts and restraint of sleeper berth occupants (35 FR 10859). That rule

differentiated between trucks and buses with regard to seats, seat belt

assemblies, and seat belt assembly anchorage requirements, but not with

regard to sleeper berth restraint requirements.

Another rule on sleeper berth specifications was published on April

26, 1974 (39 FR 14710). It amended Sec. 393.76 by increasing the

minimum interior dimensions required for sleeper berths. The rule

omitted specific references to trucks and truck-tractors but made no

substantive changes to adapt the regulation to the different design

configurations of motorcoaches.

Available information indicates that many sleeper berths installed

on motorcoaches today are located in the baggage area. This area is

modified to allow the doors to be opened from inside the compartment,

and by adding a mattress, air conditioning, heat, and a means of

communication with the driver. In order to meet the current requirement

of Sec. 393.76(c)(1) for direct and ready means of exit from the

sleeper berth into the driver's seat or compartment, an aperture that

meets the exit dimensional requirements must be cut into the floor of

the motorcoach. This reduces the seating capacity of the motorcoach.

The FHWA would like to know about other motorcoach sleeper berth

designs which may or may not meet the current requirements of

Sec. 393.76.

The FHWA is requesting public comment on the question of whether,

and if so how, existing sleeper berth regulations should be amended to

address design differences between motorcoaches and commercial trucks.

Questions

The FHWA would appreciate comments on the following questions.

Commenters are also encouraged to discuss any other matters related to

sleeper berths on motorcoaches which they believe the FHWA should

address.

1. Should existing sleeper berth regulations be amended to account

for design differences between motorcoaches and trucks? If so, what

changes should be made and why?

2. What is the current extent of sleeper berth usage within the

motorcoach industry?

3. How many motorcoaches have been manufactured with sleeper berths

as part of their original equipment? How and where are these sleeper

berths installed? How many comply with Sec. 393.76? How many do not?

4. How many motorcoaches have been retrofitted with sleeper berths?

How and where are these sleeper berths installed? How many comply with

Sec. 393.76? How many do not?

5. Do after-market changes, such as cutting holes in the floor or

modifying the cargo compartment, affect the structural integrity of the

motorcoach?

6. The FHWA notes that if a driver sleeper berth is located within

the baggage area and occupied while the motorcoach is in operation, the

occupant could be vulnerable to a side impact collision. Are special

requirements needed to ensure the occupants' safety?

7. If a driver sleeper berth is located in the baggage area of a

motorcoach, should its location be restricted (e.g., only the forward-

most portion of the baggage area)? If the sleeper berth is used while

the vehicle is in operation, would having the sleeper berth near the

rear of the motorcoach subject persons occupying the berth to excessive

heat, noise, or exhaust?

8. The current requirements of Sec. 393.76 for a direct and ready

means of exit from the sleeper berth into the driver's seat or

compartment may be design-restrictive for motorcoaches. Should the exit

requirements allow a ready means of exit into the passenger compartment

of the motorcoach instead of the driver's seat or compartment?

9. Would separate motorcoach sleeper berth regulations enhance

motorcoach safety or benefit the motorcoach industry? If yes, how?

Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

All comments received before the close of business on the comment

closing date indicated above will be considered and will be available

for examination in the docket at the above address. Comments received

after the comment closing date will be filed in the docket and will be

considered to the extent practical. In addition to late comments, the

FHWA will also continue to file relevant information in the docket as

it becomes available after the comment closing date, and interested

persons should continue to examine the docket for new material.

Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures

The FHWA has determined that this document does not contain a

``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 or a

``significant'' regulation under the regulatory policies and procedures

of the DOT. Due to the preliminary nature of this document and lack of

necessary information on costs, however, the FHWA is unable to evaluate

the economic impact of potential changes to regulatory requirements

concerning the use and design of driver sleeper berths in the

motorcoach industry. Based on the information received in response to

this notice, the FHWA intends to carefully consider the costs and

benefits associated with possible amendments to the regulations.

Comments, information, and data are solicited on the economic impact of

the potential changes.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

Due to the preliminary nature of this document and lack of

necessary information on costs, the FHWA is unable to evaluate the

effects of the potential regulatory changes on small entities. Based on

the information received in response to this notice, the FHWA intends,

in compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612),

to carefully consider the economic impacts of these potential changes

on small entities. The FHWA solicits comments, information, and data on

these impacts.

Executive Order 12612 (Federalism Assessment)

This action has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and

criteria contained in Executive Order 12612, and it has been determined

that this action does not have sufficient federalism implications to

warrant the preparation of a federalism assessment.

Executive Order 12372 (Intergovernmental Review)

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Number 20.217, Motor

Carrier Safety. The regulations implementing Executive Order 12372

regarding intergovernmental consultation on Federal programs and

activities apply to this program.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This action does not contain a collection of information

requirement for purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)

National Environmental Policy Act

This agency has analyzed this action for the purpose of the

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and

has determined that this action would not have any effect on the

quality of the environment.

Regulation Identification Number

A regulatory identification number (RIN) is assigned to each

regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulations.

The Regulatory Information Service Center publishes the Unified Agenda

in April and October of each year. The RIN contained in the heading of

this document can be used to cross reference this action with the

Unified Agenda.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 393

Freight transportation, Highway safety, Highways and roads, Motor

carriers, Motor vehicle safety.

Authority: 49 U.S.C. app. 2505; 49 U.S.C. 3102; 49 CFR 1.48.

Issued on January 5, 1994.

Rodney E. Slater,

Federal Highway Administrator.

[FR Doc. 94-738 Filed 1-11-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-22-P