Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. 94-23; Notice 1]

RIN 2127-AE97

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards Lamps, Reflective Devices,

and Associated Equipment

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: This notice proposes an amendment to the Federal motor vehicle

safety standard on lighting that would relieve design restrictions that

may inadvertently prevent the implementation of certain new-technology

light sources in signal lamps. These are light emitting diodes (LEDs)

and miniature halogen bulbs. This action responds in part to a petition

for rulemaking from Hewlett-Packard, a manufacturer of LEDs. NHTSA also

seeks comment on performance requirements that would be appropriate for

long and short arc discharge bulb systems so that Standard No. 108 can

be amended in a manner that does not inhibit their introduction on

motor vehicles.

DATES: The comment closing date for the proposal is June 7, 1994. The

proposed effective date for the final rule is 30 days after its

publication in the Federal Register. Any request for an extension of

time to comment must be received not later than 10 days before the

published expiration date of the comment period.

ADDRESSES: Comments should refer to the docket number and notice

number, and be submitted to: Docket Section, room 5109, 400 Seventh

Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590 (Docket hours are from 9:30 a.m. to 4

p.m.)

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Van Iderstine, Office of

Rulemaking (202-366-5280).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle

Safety Standard No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated

Equipment, for signal lamps are based upon SAE Standards and

Recommended Practices that were developed to accommodate incandescent

bulbs, i.e., those with filaments. Four new technologies have arisen

that are being or will be used in signal lamps subject to Standard No.

108. These new signal lamp technologies are light-emitting diodes

(LEDs), miniature halogen bulbs, long arc discharge bulb systems (e.g.,

neon and other gas filled tubular lamps), and short arc discharge bulb

systems. It is likely that the latter will be used in headlamps, too.

In some instances, the specifications of Standard No. 108 have created

ambiguities and inconsistencies with the design and method of

performance of the new technologies. NHTSA seeks to resolve these

through rulemaking that would amend Standard No. 108 to adopt

equivalent performance specifications for the new light source

technologies as used in signal lamps and headlamps. This notice is a

response, also, to a petition for rulemaking to amend Standard No. 108

in a manner to accommodate LEDs, submitted by Hewlett-Packard

Corporation. The technologies, associated problems, and suggested

resolutions are discussed below.

I. LEDs and Miniature Halogen Bulbs

The advent of the center high mounted stop lamp (CHMSL) in 1985 has

resulted in some creative solutions of the problem of integration of

the lamp into the overall vehicle design. To reduce the size and

obtrusiveness of the lamp while maintaining the photometric conformance

called for by the standard, manufacturers began to resort to smaller

light sources. For example, the 1986 Chevrolet Corvette used a low

profile lamp incorporating four miniature halogen bulbs 7.5 mm in

diameter and 25 mm long. Other CHMSLs have used similar bulbs since.

LEDs appeared as CHMSL light sources shortly after the first miniature

halogen bulbs. Typically, a single LED is 6 mm in diameter and less

than 25 mm long. Because Standard No. 108 contains no light source

specifications for CHMSLs, LEDs and miniature light sources were

permissible.

However, certain terminology of Standard No. 108 is not entirely

appropriate for the new technologies. For example, paragraph

S5.1.1.27(a)(5) still contains the original requirement that the CHMSL

``shall provide for convenient replacement of the bulb without the use

of special tools.'' Since an LED is not a ``bulb,'' a more appropriate

phrase would be ``light source(s)'' as a substitute for ``bulb.''

Accordingly, NHTSA is proposing this modification for both

subparagraphs (a)(5) and (b)(5).

Manufacturers have been puzzled by the status of LEDs and miniature

bulbs under Standard No. 108's requirements. Since August 1990, NHTSA

has provided six interpretations to Hella AG, Stanley Electric Co.

Ltd., Koito Mfg. Co. Ltd., and Valeo of France. In view of these

interpretations, NHTSA has concluded that ameliorative rulemaking is

desirable.

In the first of these letters, dated August 22, 1990, NHTSA

responded to Hella's desire to use miniature bulbs in a lamp that was

the size of a conventional lamp with one lighted section. Hella asked

how the requirements for multiple compartment lamps were to be met when

more than three light sources were provided. Hella appeared to assume

that Standard No. 108 is to be interpreted in a manner that equates the

number of lighted sections specified in Figure 1b (one, two, or three

sections) with the number of bulbs providing the light. NHTSA

implicitly agreed with Hella's assumption, but ``concluded that any

device that contains more than three lighted sections need only comply

with the requirements prescribed for three lighted sections.'' NHTSA

confirmed this interpretation to Valeo on July 7, 1992.

On August 29, 1990, NHTSA responded to a request from Stanley for

an interpretation regarding a lamp with three light sources. Stanley's

letter seemed to assume that requirements for three lighted sections

were to be met, but the lamp consisted of a compartment in which all

three bulbs contributed to the illumination of the lens, without

interruption by a divider or other light-directing feature. NHTSA

advised that this was a lamp with a single lighted section, even though

it contained three light sources.

Late in 1990, Koito requested an interpretation with respect to

procedures for photometric measurements of a CHMSL with LEDs. It

pointed out that LEDs decrease in photometric output after they are

activated such that after 20 minutes, the output is only slightly more

than 60 per cent of its original output. On December 17, 1990, NHTSA

advised that the CHMSL should conform upon each application of the

brake pedal, regardless of the length of the previous brake application

and the interval between brake applications. When Stanley reported that

it would energize a LED CHMSL for 5 minutes before testing, NHTSA

replied on December 1, 1992, that this was unnecessarily severe.

In 1993, Stanley asked for an interpretation of a design in which a

panel of LEDs was flanked by two incandescent bulbs. NHTSA advised on

April 23, 1993, that the requirements for three lighted sections would

apply when the panel was operated alone, or in conjunction with one or

both of the incandescent bulbs.

NHTSA has also been asked about the appropriateness of following

for compliance purposes SAE Recommended Practice J1889 JUN88, L.E.D.

Lighting Devices, now revised as of OCT93. The agency has replied that

this would be inappropriate because the SAE J1889 is not incorporated

by reference into Standard No. 108.

In addition to allowing the use of lamps of smaller size, LEDs

offer substantial power efficiency over filament lamps, thus reducing

the amount of wire in the lighting circuits. The major impediment to

introducing new technology for signal lamps is that Standard No. 108's

SAE specifications for signal lamps reference SAE Technical Reports.

Since those Reports are based upon filament-type light sources and the

expectation that only one light source is needed for a viable lamp,

they are inappropriate as a basis for requirements for light sources

such as LEDs and miniature bulbs where many are necessary in a lamp. As

indicated above in the discussion of past interpretations, the

performance of a single incandescent bulb can be matched by a cluster

of LEDs or miniature bulbs. However, the standard appears to equate

lighted sections of lamps with single light sources. Therefore, in

designing a signal lamp to use LEDs or miniature light sources which

typically need more than three each to achieve sufficient intensity,

the manufacturer must design to the ``three or more'' compartment

requirement, even though the lamp may be the size of a single bulb

(compartment) lamp, or even smaller. This can result in a lamp that is

larger (and more costly) than is necessary for safety.

SAE J1889 addresses this problem. Paragraph 4.1.5.1 notes that LED

arrays ``typically cannot be defined in terms of lighted sections like

those in incandescent lighting devices with multiple bulb

compartments.'' What SAE J1889 does is to divide the LED-equipped lamp

into equivalent lighted sections in terms of its maximum projected

linear dimension. A dimension of 150 mm or less becomes the equivalent

of a single lighted section, 151 mm to 300 mm, the equivalent of two,

and anything greater than 300 mm, the equivalent of three. There

appears to be no technical reason why this concept cannot be applied to

miniature halogen bulbs as well. Thus, NHTSA's adoption of the SAE

specification would appear to relieve an unintended design restriction.

While NHTSA was deliberating this matter, Hewlett-Packard, a

manufacturer of LEDs, petitioned the agency for rulemaking to amend

Standard No. 108 in a manner that would accommodate LEDs but in a

substantially different way than the SAE. The petition argued that

section 4.1.5.1 of SAE J1889 is far too limiting from standpoints of

cost and styling. Under this section, LED-equipped lighting devices are

considered to have more than one lighted section if either the maximum

horizontal or vertical lighted linear dimensions exceeds 150 mm.

Instead, Hewlett-Packard would adopt exceptions to the SAE

specifications incorporated by reference in Standard No. 108 for signal

lamps that use LED light sources. New language would clarify multiple

compartment specifications for LED-equipped lamps. With respect to the

number of lighted sections in such lamps, the petition suggested the

following language:

Photometric requirements specified in SAE technical reports

which are based on the number of lighted sections shall exempt LED

lighting devices from considerations as multiple compartment lamps

because of the number of light sources employed in the design.

Instead, all LED lighting devices shall meet the intensity

specifications for single compartment lamps provided: (a) The LED

lamp is designed such that the maximum horizontal or vertical

distance between the apparent optical centers of the closest

adjacent LEDs within a lighted section of the lamp is no greater

than 2.0 cm, (b) if there is more than one lighted section, there

shall be no more than 2.0 cm from the edge of the closest adjacent

lighted sections.

Hewlett-Packard's rationale for this language was:

SAE's higher intensity requirements for multiple compartment

lighting devices stems from the fact that the apparent

``brightness'' of any light emitting area is not solely dependent on

the intensity measured, but also the area of the emitter. Any two

light sources can exhibit the same intensity measurement, while the

source with the smaller light emitting area will appear brighter to

the human eye. This is due to the nature of the human eye's

perception of light, and is frequently taken into account in the

design of ``sterance matched'' displays in the information display

industry. This effect is also demonstrated by the response of

consumers who mention that LED high mount stop lamps are very

bright, when in fact they are designed to meet the same intensity

requirements as incandescent high mount stop lamps. The difference

is in the light emitting area. The smaller the light emitting area

for a given intensity, the brighter the appearance to the human eye.

With this in mind, the proposed change to FMVSS 571.108 will

guarantee that at least a minimum level of brightness, or sterance,

will be maintained regardless of the length, area, or shape of the

lighting device. This will allow lighting designers to fully realize

all of the benefits of styling and flexibility of LED lighting and

provide a conspicuous and understandable signal device whether it be

in tail, stop, or turn mode.

NHTSA believes that a responsive amendment to Standard No. 108 must

take into consideration the views of both SAE J1889 and Hewlett-

Packard, whether the amendment be based on either, or both, or some

third way. Therefore, the agency invites comment on the appropriateness

of the SAE and Hewlett-Packard viewpoints for resolving the apparent

design restrictions as they relate to LEDs and other miniature light

sources.

As noted also in the interpretations, the luminous flux of LED

light sources, unlike filament light sources, drops rapidly as their

temperature increases. NHTSA stated that photometric conformance should

be judged immediately upon application of the LED signal lamp. Left

unstated, but implied, is that conformance should be demonstrated at

any temperature in the motoring environment.

Paragraphs 3.1.5.2 and 3.1.5.3 of SAE J1889, respectively, state a

temperature condition for testing to photometric maxima and minima. For

measurements to the maximum requirements, the test device, unenergized,

is stabilized at the laboratory's ambient temperature, 23+/5 degrees C.

It is then energized and the maximum values within 60 seconds of the

initial ``on'' time are recorded. For measurements to the minimum

requirements, the device is also stabilized within the same temperature

range but in an energized condition until either heat buildup

saturation has occurred, or 30 minutes has elapsed, whichever first

occurs. Measurements are then taken of the already energized lamp.

Although this demonstration procedure is clear, it does not replicate

the environment in which real lamps must produce correct signals for

the transmission of safety information. However, it may be the only

practicable demonstration procedure given the characteristics in use of

LEDs. The question for NHTSA is whether it should adopt a procedure

that does not directly correlate to the real world use of a lamp with

LEDs.

NHTSA has decided not to propose the adoption of paragraphs 3.1.5.2

and 3.1.5.3 in the hope that industry will adopt a more representative

procedure. Arguably, the point in time at which it is most important

that a signal lamp convey its message is upon its activation. Further,

NHTSA believes that activation of a stop signal is likely to be

momentary in nature, that is to say, less than a minute per brake

application, and that of a turn signal, less than two minutes. NHTSA is

concerned, however, about the effect of photometric degradation upon

hazard warning signals and other signal lamps that remain energized for

long periods. Hazard warning lamps are frequently operated for extended

periods of time, some State laws requiring their use to indicate

vehicles moving at speeds less than 40 mph. Of course, they are used to

indicate as well the presence of a vehicle which may have been disabled

in the roadway or adjacent to it. NHTSA has tentatively concluded that,

until there is further rulemaking on the subject, LED-equipped lamps

(other than those used for hazard warning signals) and those required

to be energized during headlamp use are to be tested for photometrics

in the same manner as conventional ones, that is to say, at ambient

laboratory temperature and upon activation of the signal. With respect

to LEDs used to provide the hazard warning signal, NHTSA is following

the procedure of J1889 and proposing that such lamps meet photometric

requirements of the SAE standards on turn signals that are incorporated

by reference in Standard No. 108 when the lamp is stabilized at 23+/-5

degrees C and allowed to operate continuously until either the internal

heat buildup has stabilized or for 30 minutes, whichever occurs first.

II. Long and Short Arc Discharge Systems

Long and short arc discharge light sources will soon become part of

the design of future lighting systems. Long arc light sources, such as

neon tubes, appear to be intended for signal lamp use, initially as a

CHMSL that will surround the rear window glazing or be within it. These

sources are permitted because Standard No. 108 does not specify

requirements for signal light sources. Short arc light sources will be

used initially in headlamp systems, and NHTSA anticipates their

eventual use in signal lamps.

Arc light sources do not operate at voltages specified in Standard

No. 108 for compliance testing, those normally found on contemporary

vehicles. This incompatibility with Standard No. 108 must be resolved

before arc light sources are introduced on motor vehicles.

Specifically, long arcs operate at a hundred volts or more,

depending on the arc length and the gas employed. For battery-powered

lamps, such as those on motor vehicles, this means that the lamps must

have electronic ballasts that provide electric power in accordance with

the needs of the lamp. There is no standardized manner in which to test

the light sources, absent the ballasts. Thus, to establish a compliance

test for lamps using long arcs will be difficult, if not impossible.

Some time ago, NHTSA amended Standard No. 108 to adopt

specifications for integral beam headlamps. Short arcs (including their

ballast systems) are permissible non-replaceable light sources for this

type of headlighting system. For short arc lamps, the light source, and

its necessary electronic ballast and high voltage wiring are an

integral part of the headlamp assembly, and the lamp can be tested for

photometrics at the 12.8 volts specified by the Standard. However, this

is the only part of Standard No. 108 that has been developed and

promulgated with short arc-type lighting in mind. To allow short arcs

for other lamp applications, NHTSA believes that industry must codify

interchangeability taking into account the desire of the industry to

have replaceable ballasts. The SAE appears to be close to beginning

this effort, as it is nearing completion of a Recommended Practice for

use of short arc light sources on motor vehicles.

With the thought of developing appropriate amendments to Standard

No. 108 to facilitate the introduction of long and short arc discharge

technology, NHTSA would like to have comments on the following:

A. Identification of the performance requirements and/or test

procedures specified, or incorporated by reference, in Standard No. 108

that should be modified to accommodate the installation of arc

discharge light sources in lamps required by the standard.

B. Specification of the performance requirements and/or test

procedures that should be added to Standard No. 108 to accommodate the

installation of arc discharge light sources while maintaining the

present level of safety achieved by incandescent filament light

sources.

C. Identification of any special considerations that should be made

to accommodate the concept of a single light source whose light is

distributed to the vehicle's lamps by lamp pipes, and an opinion as to

whether it is premature to consider regulation of this concept.

D. An opinion of when Standard No. 108 should be amended to

accommodate the use of arc light sources in production motor vehicles.

Proposed Effective Date

Because the proposed amendments would not impose any additional

burden and are intended to clarify application of existing

requirements, it is hereby tentatively found that an effective date

earlier than 180 days after issuance of the final rule would be in the

public interest. The final rule would be effective 30 days after its

publication in the Federal Register.

Rulemaking Analyses

Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

The Office of Management and Budget has informed NHTSA that it will

not review this rulemaking action under Executive Order 12866. It has

been determined that the rulemaking action is not significant under

Department of Transportation regulatory policies and procedures. The

effect of the rulemaking action would be to adopt terminology more

suitable to new technologies, and would not impose any additional

burden upon any person. Impacts of the proposal would, therefore, be so

minimal as not to warrant preparation of a full regulatory evaluation.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The agency has also considered the effects of this rulemaking

action in relation to the Regulatory Flexibility Act. I certify that

this rulemaking action would not have a significant economic effect

upon a substantial number of small entities. Motor vehicle and lighting

equipment manufacturers are generally not small businesses within the

meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Further, small organizations

and governmental jurisdictions would not be significantly affected as

the price of new motor vehicles should not be impacted. Accordingly, no

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis has been prepared.

Executive Order 12612 (Federalism)

This action has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and

criteria contained in Executive Order 12612 on ``Federalism.'' It has

been determined that the rulemaking action does not have sufficient

federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism

Assessment.

National Environmental Policy Act

NHTSA has analyzed this rulemaking action for purposes of the

National Environmental Policy Act. The rulemaking action would not have

a significant effect upon the environment as it does not affect the

present method of manufacturing motor vehicle lighting equipment.

Civil Justice Reform

This proposed rule would not have any retroactive effect. Under

section 103(d) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15

U.S.C. 1392(d)), whenever a Federal motor vehicle safety standard is in

effect, a state may not adopt or maintain a safety standard applicable

to the same aspect of performance which is not identical to the Federal

standard. Section 105 of the Act (15 U.S.C. 1394) sets forth a

procedure for judicial review of final rules establishing, amending, or

revoking Federal motor vehicle safety standards. That section does not

require submission of a petition for reconsideration or other

administrative proceedings before parties may file suit in court.

Comments

Interested persons are invited to submit comments on the proposal

and questions presented. It is requested but not required that 10

copies be submitted.

All comments must not exceed 15 pages in length. (49 CFR 553.21).

Necessary attachments may be appended to these submissions without

regard to the 15-page limit. This limitation is intended to encourage

commenters to detail their primary arguments in a concise fashion.

If a commenter wishes to submit certain information under a claim

of confidentiality, three copies of the complete submission, including

purportedly confidential business information, should be submitted to

the Chief Counsel, NHTSA, at the street address given above, and seven

copies from which the purportedly confidential information has been

deleted should be submitted to the Docket Section. A request for

confidentiality should be accompanied by a cover letter setting forth

the information specified in the agency's confidential business

information regulation. 49 CFR part 512.

All comments received before the close of business on the comment

closing date indicated above for the proposal will be considered, and

will be available for examination in the docket at the above address

both before and after that date. To the extent possible, comments filed

after the closing date will also be considered. Comments received too

late for consideration in regard to the final rule will be considered

as suggestions for further rulemaking action. Comments on the proposal

will be available for inspection in the docket. NHTSA will continue to

file relevant information as it becomes available in the docket after

the closing date, and it is recommended that interested persons

continue to examine the docket for new material.

Those persons desiring to be notified upon receipt of their

comments in the rules docket should enclose a self-addressed, stamped

postcard in the envelope with their comments. Upon receiving the

comments, the docket supervisor will return the postcard by mail.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571

Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Motor vehicles.

PART 571--FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS

In consideration of the foregoing, it is proposed that 49 CFR part

571 be amended as follows:

1. The authority citation would continue to read as follows:

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 1392, 1401, 1403, 1407; delegation of

authority at 49 CFR 1.50.

2. Section 571.108 would be amended by revising paragraphs

S5.1.1.27(a)(5) and S5.1.1.27(b)(5), and by adding paragraphs S5.1.1.33

and S5.1.1.34 to read as follows:

Sec. 571.108 Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective

Devices, and Associated Equipment.

* * * * *

S5.1.1.27(a) * * *

(5) Shall provide for convenient replacement of the light source(s)

without special tools.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(5) Shall provide for convenient replacement of the light source(s)

without special tools.

* * * * *

S5.1.1.33 Instead of being designed to conform to photometric

requirements based on the number of lighted sections (compartments),

each stop lamp and turn signal lamp that is equipped with light-

emitting diodes or other miniature light sources where more than one

light source is necessary for achieving photometric compliance shall be

designed to conform to photometric requirements based on the dimension

of the function of the lamp that is tested. The equivalent of one

lighted section is a maximum horizontal or vertical linear dimension of

the effective projected luminous lens area that is less than 150 mm; of

two lighted sections, 150 mm-300 mm; and of three lighted sections,

more than 300 mm.

or

S5.1.1.33 Instead of being designed to conform to photometric

requirements based on the number of lighted sections (compartments),

each stop lamp and turn signal lamp that is equipped with light-

emitting diodes or other miniature light sources where more than one

light source is necessary for achieving photometric compliance with

this standard shall be considered to be a single compartment provided

that the lamp is designed such that the maximum horizontal or vertical

distance between the apparent optical centers of the closest adjacent

light sources within a lighted section of the lamp is not greater than

2.0 cm, and that if there is more than one lighted section, there shall

be not more than 2.0 cm between the edge of the closest adjacent

lighted section and the apparent optical center.

* * * * *

S5.1.1.34 Each lamp that provides a hazard warning signal, and, if

equipped with light-emitting diodes, each tail, license plate, side

marker, backup, identification, clearance, and parking lamp, shall be

designed to conform to the photometric requirements appropriate for its

type when the lamp is stabilized at 23+/-5 degrees C and allowed to

operate continuously until either the internal heat buildup has

stabilized or for 30 minutes, whichever occurs first.

Issued on: April 4, 1994.

Barry Felrice,

Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.

[FR Doc. 94-8347 Filed 4-7-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P