Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Glazing Materials

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. 95-13, Notice 02]

RIN 2127-AF28

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Glazing Materials

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),

Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this final rule, NHTSA permits the installation of a new

item of motor vehicle glazing, Item 4A--Rigid Plastic for Use in Side

Windows, in motor vehicles. In issuing the final rule, the agency seeks

to provide greater flexibility for manufacturers to develop and use

more aerodynamic, lighter weight glazing designs, resulting in lower

fuel consumption.

DATES: Effective date: This final rule is effective September 11, 1996.

Petitions for reconsideration: Any petitions for reconsideration of

this final rule must be received by NHTSA no later than September 30,

1996.

ADDRESSES: Any petition for reconsideration of this final rule should

refer to the docket and notice number set forth in the heading of this

document and be submitted to:

[[Page 41740]]

Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400

Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC, 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical information: Mr. John

Lee, Office of Crashworthiness, NHTSA, telephone (202) 366-4924, FAX

number (202) 366-4329. Mr. Lee's e-mail address is: [email protected].

For legal information: Ms. Dorothy Nakama, Office of the Chief

Counsel, NHTSA, telephone (202) 366-2992, FAX number (202) 366-3820.

Both may be reached at: National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC 20590. Petitions

should not be sent or faxed to these persons.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 205, Glazing

Materials (49 CFR 571.205), specifies performance requirements for the

types of glazing that may be installed in motor vehicles. It also

specifies the vehicle locations in which the various types of glazing

may be installed. The standard incorporates, by reference, American

National Standards Institute (ANS) Standard Z26.1, ``Safety Code for

Safety Glazing Materials for Glazing Motor Vehicles Operating on Land

Highways,'' as amended through 1980 (Z26). The requirements in ANS

Z26.1 are specified in terms of performance tests that the various

types or ``items'' of glazing must pass. There are 20 ``items'' of

glazing (not including the item that is the subject of this final rule)

for which requirements are currently specified in Standard No. 205.

To ensure the safety performance of vehicle glazing, Standard No.

205 includes a total of 31 specific tests. Each item of glazing is

subjected to an appropriate selection of these tests. It is the

particular combination of tests that dictates the requisite properties

of a particular item of glazing, and where in a motor vehicle the

glazing may be installed.

Rigid plastic materials, such as those referenced in this

rulemaking, are considered to be Items 4 and 5 glazing. Prior to the

issuance of this final rule, no rigid plastics were permitted to be

installed in those areas requisite for driving visibility because rigid

plastics are more susceptible to abrasion than glass. All windows in a

passenger car are considered requisite for driving visibility.

GM Petition

By letter dated December 15, 1993, General Motors (GM) petitioned

NHTSA to amend Standard No. 205 to relax the limitations on the

installation of Items 4 and 5 rigid plastic glazing so that they can be

installed in the side windows of station wagons and hatchbacks to the

rear of all designated seating positions. GM subsequently amended its

petition, limiting it to Item 4 glazing. (Item 4 glazing is required to

transmit at least 70 percent of the light striking it; Item 5 glazing

has no such requirement.)

In support of its petition, GM stated that the potential benefits

of permitting plastic glazing in side windows would be reduced mass and

greater design flexibility. GM further asserted plastics, while

retaining good optical quality, can be molded into more complex shapes

than glass. GM concluded that the combined effect of the more

aerodynamic designs possible with plastic glazing and the reduced

weight will lower a vehicle's fuel consumption.

GM acknowledged that Tests 17, Abrasion Resistance (Plastics), and

18, Abrasion Resistance (Safety Glass), of ANS Z26 indicate that

plastics are not as abrasion resistant as glass. However, GM suggested

that concerns about the abrasion resistance of plastic glazing may not

be well founded, asserting that some evidence shows that Tests 17 and

18 ``are not necessarily predictive'' of how glazing will perform under

actual use conditions. In support of its assertion, GM attached a

summary of a study performed by a plastics supplier on a 1988 GM

Pontiac Fiero GT sail panel. (A discussion of the sail panel study is

provided at 60 FR 13688, March 14, 1995).

GM further asserted that permitting rigid plastic in side windows

would not affect visibility because it believed that some side windows

are not used for visibility. GM analogized station wagon and hatchback

side windows rearward of the ``C'' pillar to light truck windows

rearward of the ``B'' pillar and argued that station wagon and

hatchback side windows rearward of the ``C'' pillar provide no more

than auxiliary visibility. Thus, GM argued station wagon side windows

rearward of the ``C'' pillar should no longer be considered requisite

for driving visibility if the driver is provided other means, such as

outside rearview mirrors, of viewing the highway to the side and rear

of the vehicle.

On March 14, 1994, NHTSA granted GM's petition for rulemaking.

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

On March 14, 1995, NHTSA published in the Federal Register (60 FR

13688) a notice of proposed rulemaking to amend Standard No. 205 by

permitting a new item of glazing, Item 4A. The most salient

characteristic of the glazing would be an abrasion resistant outer

coating. NHTSA proposed to permit Item 4A glazing in all areas where

Item 4 glazing is permitted. In addition, the agency proposed to permit

item 4A glazing to be installed in the side windows, rearward of the

``C'' pillar and forward of the ``D'' pillar, of station wagons and

hatchbacks, if those windows are not ``laterally adjacent to an

outboard designated seating position.'' NHTSA proposed these changes to

Standard No. 205 to provide greater flexibility to manufacturers in

selecting and shaping glazing. Use of the new glazing would permit more

aerodynamic and lighter weight designs and, in turn, would enhance fuel

economy.

NHTSA proposed to make Item 4A glazing subject to all the tests

applicable to Item 4 glazing: tests nos. 2 (Luminous Transmittance); 10

(Dart Test); 13 (Ball Test); 16 (Weathering); 17 Abrasion Resistance

(Plastics) (as modified); 19 Chemical Resistance (Nonstressed); 20

Chemical Resistance (Stressed); 21 Dimensional Stability (Warpage); and

24 Flammability.

Since Item 4A glazing was proposed for a location requisite for

driving visibility, the agency proposed to supplement Test No. 17

Abrasion Resistance (Plastics). NHTSA tentatively concluded that

additional requirements regarding abrasion were necessary because the

agency did not concur with GM's suggestion that the rearmost side

windows in station wagons and hatchback vehicles are not requisite for

driving safety. Since the agency was proposing a more stringent

abrasion test, it concluded that it was not necessary to propose the

adoption of GM's suggestion that use of the rigid plastic glazing be

limited to vehicles that provide means (e.g., exterior passenger-side

mirrors) of affording visibility of the highway to the side and rear of

the vehicle.

Test 17 specifies that after measuring the initial or pre-abrasion

haze of three specimens of plastic glazing, those specimens are

subjected to an abrader for 100 cycles. The initial haze is subtracted

from the amount of haze measured after abrasion. The incremental haze

caused by the abrasion must not exceed 15 percent.

NHTSA proposed that the interior side of Item 4A glazing be

subjected to Test 17, as modified in Standard No. 205 for the interior

side of glass-plastic glazing. As modified for that glazing, Test 17

does not regulate incremental

[[Page 41741]]

haze separately. For that reason, it does not provide for measuring the

initial haze and subtracting that haze from the post-abrasion haze.

Instead, modified Test 17 regulates the total amount of post-abrasion

haze. NHTSA proposed that total post abrasion haze must not exceed 4

percent.

As to the exterior side of Item 4A glazing, NHTSA proposed that it

be subjected to Test 17, as modified for the interior side of glass-

plastic glazing, except that the haze on the exterior side must not

exceed 4.0 percent after 100 cycles and must not exceed 10.0 percent

after 500 cycles. Specimens used for testing the exterior side of the

glazing would not be used for testing the interior side.

The agency proposed to regulate total haze and not just incremental

haze because of its concern that the initial haze of the plastic

glazing would not be so low as it is for glass. In the case of glass-

plastic glazing and the Fiero panel cited by GM as an example of viable

plastic glazing, the initial haze is very low. However, other plastic

glazing may have sufficiently higher levels of initial haze that the

total amount of haze after abrasion would be unacceptably high for

visibility purposes.

Since the 4 percent haze limitation may not ensure that Item 4A

glazing has the hard, abrasion resistant coating used by GM to achieve

good performance in its Fiero GT sail panel example, NHTSA believed it

is also necessary to test at least the exterior side of fixed glazing

for longer term resistance to abrasion. NHTSA therefore proposed to

subject the exterior side of item 4A glazing test specimens to an

additional 400 cycles of abrasion. Based in part on information from

the American Automobile Manufacturers Association, NHTSA proposed 10

percent as the maximum permissible haze after those additional cycles.

This level of performance is thought to be indicative of hard coated

products. GM submitted data on the performance of the coated glazing in

the Fiero, but did not premise its request regarding plastic glazing

upon the use of coated plastic glazing. Instead, it simply sought

permission to use uncoated Item 4 glazing. The hard coating

necessitated by the additional cycles of abrasion would ensure that

Item 4A glazing would have the level of abrasion resistance

demonstrated by the Fiero GT sail panel. No such assurance exists for

Item 4 glazing. The value of hard coatings has been demonstrated in

headlamp applications where plastic lenses have been allowed to replace

glass lenses. The agency stated its belief that coating technology

should be equally suitable for glazing applications. NHTSA also stated

its belief that since windows to the rear of the ``C'' pillar do not

roll down, coating only the exterior side should be sufficient.

Since NHTSA proposed to permit a rigid plastic in a passenger car

side window for the first time, the agency solicited comments on the

sufficiency of the proposed provisions for supplementing Test 17. The

agency also said that it would welcome any comments on the advisability

of permitting rigid plastics in station wagon side windows rearward of

the ``C'' pillar and forward of the ``D'' pillar.

Public Comments on the NPRM and NHTSA Response

In response to the NPRM, NHTSA received comments from the American

Automobile Manufacturers Association, Bayer Corporation, Chrysler

Corporation, Ford Motor Company, General Motors, Libbey-Owens-Ford,

Perrone Forensic Consulting, Inc., S & S/Superior of Ohio, Inc., Safety

Systems Company, and Sekurit. Each commenter either supported or did

not oppose the proposed changes to Standard No. 205. The commenters

raised issues that are addressed below.

Locations for Item 4A Glazing

In response to the NPRM, Ford asked that Standard No. 205 be

amended to permit rigid plastics ``in the ``C'' pillar of vehicles for

ornamental/decorative purposes * * * in all vehicles.'' Adoption of

Ford's suggestion would permit a portion of a vehicle's ``C'' pillar

sheet metal to be replaced with a decorative applique or window made

from rigid plastic. Ford stated that with the small surface area of the

``C'' pillar and the rigid plastic surface affixed to the sheet metal

structure, ``the resistance to fracture of a polycarbonate should not

involve any unreasonable risk for safety.''

S & S/Superior of Ohio, Inc. suggested NHTSA permit Item 4A glazing

in hearses (funeral coaches) between the ``B'' pillar and ``D'' pillar.

S & S stated that hearses ``are manufactured with a partition at the

``B'' pillars--separating the driver's compartment from the rear

compartment'' and noted there is no seating behind the ``B'' pillar.

It has always been NHTSA's intent that Item 4A glazing not be

permitted in areas where it may come into contact with an occupant's

head. To accomplish this goal, NHTSA proposed that Item 4A be limited

to glazing areas in station wagons and hatchbacks that are behind the

``C'' pillar and behind the ``D'' pillar, if those areas are not

``laterally adjacent to an outboard designated seating position.''

NHTSA did not discuss how much overlap between a window and a seating

position is necessary before they are said to be laterally adjacent.

The agency needs to provide guidance regarding the dividing line

between windows that are laterally adjacent to a seat and windows that

are behind a seat. The determination of lateral adjacency is

particularly important to ensure proper classification of a window that

is located largely, but not totally to the rear of the rearmost seat on

the same side of the vehicle. An example of such a window is the window

between the ``C'' and ``D'' pillars in some station wagons. The ``C''

pillar on those vehicles slants forward so that its upper end is

forwardmost. The leading edge of the window is not laterally adjacent

to the seat cushion of the rearmost seating position, but is laterally

adjacent to the leading surface of the upper seat back of that

position. Such a window is contactable by an occupant seated in that

position, particularly in a crash in which the vehicle is struck in the

rear at an angle.

After considering several alternatives for giving more definitive

guidance on determining which windows are eligible for Item 4A

installation, NHTSA has decided to adopt an approach that, unlike the

proposal, does not refer to any particular vehicle type. Instead, the

approach is based on the relative location of a window in any vehicle

and the occupant seats in that vehicle. The approach is further based

on the procedure in Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 210, Seat

Belt Assembly Anchorages, and in Figure 1 thereof for locating the

shoulder reference point. That point is used under that Standard to

locate the acceptable range for the location of the upper torso

anchorage for a type 2 safety belt.

NHTSA is amending S5.1.2.11 of Standard No. 205 to permit Item 4A

glazing in a motor vehicle window if the forwardmost point of the

visible interior surface of the window is rearward of the vertical

transverse plane that passes through the shoulder reference point (as

described in Figure 1 of Standard No. 210) of the rearmost seating

position in the vehicle, provided that that position is forward-facing

and cannot be adjusted so that it is side or rear-facing. In this final

rule, NHTSA has decided not to permit Item 4A glazing near rear-facing

seats or side-facing seats in any motor vehicle because it is concerned

that occupants (particularly unbelted ones) riding in those seating

locations may be able to contact their heads against Item 4A glazing.

Adoption of this approach has the advantage of permitting Item 4A

glazing

[[Page 41742]]

in vehicles other than station wagons and hatchbacks, while assuring

that it is very unlikely that the rigid plastic glazing will be

contacted by any occupant's head. Since the adopted criteria do not

limit Item 4A installation to locations between the ``C'' and ``D''

pillars in station wagons and hatchbacks, they permit Item 4A glazing

installation in any vehicle location that can meet that approach. Thus,

Item 4A glazing could be installed in the ``C'' pillar of vehicles and

between the ``B'' and ``D'' pillars in hearses (funeral coaches) if

those locations met the criteria.

Ejection Resistance Issues and Rigid Plastic Glazing

Several commenters stated that rigid plastic windows have the

potential to keep occupants in the vehicle in the event of a crash,

rather than permitting their ejection through the window opening.

Repeating an earlier comment, Sekurit urged NHTSA to adopt ``an overall

policy and plan to address the role of glazing, including glass, glass-

plastic, and plastic, in crash prevention and crash injury

prevention.'' Safety Systems Company noted that if, in the future,

NHTSA should specify a head impact test and an ejection resistance test

in Standard No. 205, that both tests be made applicable to Item 4A

glazing.

Perrone recommended that Item 4A be subject to an ejection

resistance test in conjunction with the other tests (such as abrasion

resistance) that would be used to define the item of glazing. This

recommendation was based on Perrone's belief that plastic glazing can

potentially keep ``occupants in the vehicle rather than permitting

dangerous ejection.'' It cited a need to establish a test procedure to

ensure ``that the end fixity of these various glazing materials is

adequate around the periphery.''

NHTSA agrees that there may be benefit in further investigating the

ejection mitigation potential of plastic and other types of glazing.

However, NHTSA does not yet have the necessary data to propose the

changes that Perrone, Safety Systems, and Sekurit recommend. NHTSA

intends to continue to examine the ejection mitigation potential of

various types of glazing. NHTSA will consider the commenters'

recommendations in any future rulemakings on the ejection resistance

issue.

Haze and Abrasion Issues

Libbey-Owens-Ford (LOF) recommended that Test No. 17, Abrasion

Resistance, be modified to limit initial total haze to 1.0 percent, not

just the amount of haze after completion of the abrasion test. LOF

stated that initial haze should not exceed 1.0 percent to guarantee

that the initial haze of the glazing is ``at an acceptable level.'' In

support of the suggested 1.0 level, LOF stated that it reviewed its

test records over 20 years and has not found any AS-1, AS-2, or AS-14

products with an initial haze level over 1.0 percent. It further stated

that studies done in Europe ``strongly suggested that high haze levels

in windshields interfere with night driving visibility,'' and that some

plastic materials have relatively high initial haze levels.

NHTSA concurs with LOF's comment insofar as it applies to Item 4A

glazing. Limiting the initial haze level would enhance safety by

ensuring a maximum acceptable haze level that the unused rigid plastic

glazing must meet. In light of the fact that the Pontiac Fiero sail

panel cited in GM's test (see 60 FR 13688, March 14, 1995) had an

initial haze level of 0.49 percent, and after testing (over six years,

when the Fiero was driven ``over 41,000 miles''), had a 0.87 percent

haze level, NHTSA believes that meeting an initial haze level limit of

1.0 percent is practicable and appropriate. In the final rule, NHTSA

amends the language of S5.1.2.11(b)(1) to establish an initial maximum

haze level of 1.0 percent for Item 4A glazing.

LOF also commented that since the long term durability of abrasion

resistant exterior coatings, and of the adhesion between the coating

and the substrate are a potential concern, a single sample of Item 4A

glazing should be subjected to a weathering test and then an abrasion

test. NHTSA believes it has addressed LOF's concerns in part by making

Test 16 Weathering and Test 17, Abrasion Resistance applicable to Item

4A glazing. NHTSA made changes to Test 17 to ensure that Test 17

regulates total haze and to test the exterior side of plastic glazing

to ensure longer term resistance to abrasion.

However, NHTSA acknowledges that in this final rule, Tests 16 and

17 would not be applied to the same sample of glazing. NHTSA does not

have data to indicate that applying Tests 16 and 17 to the same piece

of glazing would significantly enhance safety. However, NHTSA intends

to monitor the performance of Item 4A glazing installed in motor

vehicles. If NHTSA should obtain data indicating a safety value in

performing Tests 16 and 17 (or other tests for weathering and abrasion

resistance of plastics) on the same sample of glazing, NHTSA will

consider initiating rulemaking to establish such tests.

Statistical Data on Item 4A Glazing

Safety Systems Company recommended that the proposed rule be

amended to require manufacturers to provide NHTSA with the makes,

models and Vehicle Identification Numbers (VINs) of vehicles using the

Item 4A glazing so that statistical data on Item 4A glazing can be

collected. Safety Systems further recommended that the National

Accident Sampling System crash data collection procedures be amended to

provide for recording this new vehicle glazing element, and detect

injuries due to possible fracture patterns of the glazing or other

glazing problems.

NHTSA believes there may be merit in adopting Safety System's

suggestion for obtaining glazing information from vehicle

manufacturers. However, adopting that suggestion would not necessitate

changes in Standard No. 205, or any other NHTSA regulation. NHTSA

intends to find means to collect the suggested information without

imposing an undue collection of information burden on manufacturers.

Characterization of the New Item of Glazing

Bayer Corporation objected to NHTSA's calling the new item of

glazing ``Rigid Plastic'', since in its opinion, it ``sends an

unfortunate message based on a misinterpretation of FMVSS 205 and

creates a monopoly for glass in other items.'' NHTSA does not believe

that the name of the new item of glazing will have the effect

anticipated by Bayer. The opportunity to use rigid plastic in other

areas of a passenger car is not limited by the names of the items of

glazing that may be used in those areas but by the performance tests

applicable to those items. Other glazing items for use in passenger car

windows are not described with the term ``glass.'' Item 1 glazing is

``Safety Material for Use Anywhere in Motor Vehicle'' and Item 2 is

``Safety Material for Use Anywhere in Motor Vehicle Except

Windshields.'' Naming Item 4A glazing ``Rigid Plastic'' simply calls

attention to the fact that for the first time, there is an item of

glazing permitted in passenger car side windows which is defined by

tests that can be met by rigid plastic. Accordingly, NHTSA is calling

Item 4A ``Rigid Plastics for Use in Side Windows.''

Final Rule

With the exception that it adopts Standard No. 210's shoulder

reference point as the basis for determining the windows in which Item

4A glazing may be installed, restricts placement of Item 4A glazing

near rear-facing and side-

[[Page 41743]]

facing seats, and establishes an initial maximum haze level of 1.0

percent, NHTSA adopts its proposal without change.

Effective Date

In response to the NPRM, Chrysler suggested that the agency

establish an early effective date for the new glazing requirements so

that vehicle manufacturers may take immediate advantage of Item 4A

glazing. NHTSA agrees it would be beneficial for industry and consumers

if Item 4A glazing is permitted in the near future.

NHTSA finds that there is good cause for concluding that an

effective date earlier than 180 days is in the public interest. The

final rule will take effect 30 days after its publication in the

Federal Register.

Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

1. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

This final rule was not reviewed under Executive Order 12866

(Regulatory Planning and Review). NHTSA has analyzed the impact of this

rulemaking action and determined that it is not ``significant'' within

the meaning of the Department of Transportation's regulatory policies

and procedures. Installation of the new item of glazing is not

required. This final rule gives manufacturers more flexibility in the

selection of motor vehicle glazing. NHTSA believes that installation of

this new item of glazing makes possible reduced weight and better

aerodynamic design of vehicles resulting in the use of less fuel.

However, the fuel savings may be slight. For these reasons, NHTSA

believes that this final rule does not impose any additional costs and

does not yield any significant savings for vehicle manufacturers,

glazing manufacturers, or consumers. The impacts are so minimal as not

to warrant preparation of a full regulatory evaluation.

2. Regulatory Flexibility Act

In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, NHTSA has

evaluated the effects of this action on small entities. Based upon this

evaluation, I certify that the final rule will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This final

rule does not require use of any particular type of glazing, but

provides manufacturers more flexibility in the choice of glazing

primarily for station wagons and hatchbacks. This final rule will not

affect the price of new motor vehicles. Accordingly, the agency has not

prepared a regulatory flexibility analysis.

3. Executive Order 12612 (Federalism)

This action has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and

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

that the final rule does not have sufficient Federalism implications to

warrant preparation of a Federalism Assessment. No State laws are

affected.

4. National Environmental Policy Act

The agency has considered the environmental implications of this

final rule in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of

1969 and determines that the rule does not significantly affect the

human environment.

5. Executive Order 12778 (Civil Justice Reform)

This final rule does not have any retroactive effect. Under 49

U.S.C. 30103, 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, except to the extent that the State requirement imposes a

higher level of performance and applies only to vehicles procured for

the State's use. 49 U.S.C. 30161 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.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571

Motor vehicle safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,

Tires.

In consideration of the foregoing, the agency amends part 571 of

title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 571--[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 571 continues to read as

follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117, 30166; delegation

of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.

2. Section 571.205, is amended by revising S5.1.2; revising the

first sentence of paragraph (a) of S5.1.2.10, adding S5.1.2.11, and

revising S6.1, to read as follows:

Sec. 571.205 Standard No. 205, Glazing materials.

* * * * *

S5.1.2 In addition to the glazing materials specified in ANS Z26,

materials conforming to S5.1.2.1, S5.1.2.2, S5.1.2.3, S5.1.2.4,

S5.1.2.5, S5.1.2.6, S5.1.2.7, S5.1.2.8 and S5.1.2.11 may be used in the

locations of motor vehicles specified in those sections.

* * * * *

S5.1.2.10 Cleaning instructions. (a) Each manufacturer of glazing

materials designed to meet the requirements of S5.1.2.1, S5.1.2.2,

S5.1.2.3, S5.1.2.4, S5.1.2.5, S5.1.2.6, S5.1.2.7, S5.1.2.8, or

S5.1.2.11 shall affix a label, removable by hand without tools, to each

item of glazing materials. * * *

* * * * *

S5.1.2.11 Test procedures for Item 4A--Rigid Plastic for Use in

Side Windows Rearward of the ``C'' pillar. (a) Glazing materials that

comply with Tests Nos. 2, 10, 13, 16, 17, as that test is modified in

S5.1.2.9(c) (on the interior side only), 17, as that test is modified

in paragraph (b) of this section (on the exterior side only), 19, 20,

21, and 24 of ANS Z26.1, may be used in the following specific

locations:

(1) All areas in which Item 4 safety glazing may be used.

(2) Any side window that meets the criteria in S5.1.2.11(a)(2)(i)

and (ii):

(i) Is in a vehicle whose rearmost designated seating position is

forward-facing and cannot be adjusted so that it is side or rear-

facing; and

(ii) The forwardmost point on its visible interior surface is

rearward of the vertical transverse plane that passes through the

shoulder reference point (as described in Figure 1 of Sec. 571.210 Seat

belt assembly anchorages) of that rearmost seating position.

(b)(1) The initial maximum haze level shall not exceed 1.0 percent.

The specimens are subjected to abrasion for 100 cycles and then

carefully wiped with dry lens paper (or its equivalent). The light

scattered by the abraded track is measured in accordance with Test 17.

The arithmetic mean of the percentages of light scattered by the three

specimens shall not exceed 4.0 percent after being subjected to

abrasion for 100 cycles.

(2) The specimen is remounted on the specimen holder so that it

rotates substantially in a plane and subjected to abrasion for an

additional 400 cycles on the same track already abraded for 100 cycles.

Specimens are carefully wiped after abrasion with dry lens paper (or

its equivalent). The light scattered by the abraded track is then

measured as specified in Test 17. The arithmetic mean of the

percentages of light scattered by the three specimens shall not exceed

10.0 percent after being subjected to abrasion for 500 cycles.

* * * * *

[[Page 41744]]

S6.1 Each prime glazing material manufacturer, except as specified

below, shall mark the glazing materials it manufactures in accordance

with section 6 of ANS Z26. The materials specified in S5.1.2.1,

S5.1.2.2, S5.1.2.3, S5.1.2.4, S5.1.2.5, S5.1.2.6, S5.1.2.7, S5.1.2.8,

and S5.1.2.11 shall be identified by the marks ``AS 11C'', ``AS 12'',

``AS 13'', ``AS 14'', ``AS 15A'', ``AS 15B'', ``AS 16A'', ``AS 16B'',

and ``AS 4A'', respectively. A prime glazing material manufacturer is

one which fabricates, laminates, or tempers the glazing material.

* * * * *

Issued on: August 7, 1996.

Ricardo Martinez,

Administrator.

[FR Doc. 96-20517 Filed 8-9-96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P