Occupant Protection Incentive Grants

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

23 CAR Part 1345

[Docket No. NHTSA-98-4496]

RIN 2127-AH40

Occupant Protection Incentive Grants

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

ACTION: Interim final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: This interim final rule implements a new program established

by the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21), under

which States can qualify for incentive grant funds if they adopt and

implement effective programs to reduce highway deaths and injuries

resulting from individuals riding unrestrained or improperly restrained

in motor vehicles. This interim final rule solicits public comment.

Dates: This interim final rule becomes effective November 2, 1998.

Comments on this interim final rule are due no later than November 30,

1998.

Addresses: Written comments should refer to the docket number for this

notice, and be submitted (preferably in two copies) to: Docket

Management, Room PL-401, National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration, Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, S.W., Washington,

D.C. 20590. (Docket hours are Monday-Friday, 10 a.m. to 5 p.m.,

excluding Federal holidays.)

For further information contact: Ms. Joan Tetrault, State and Community

Services, NSC-01, NHTSA, 400 Seventh Street, S.W., Washington, D.C.

20590; telephone (202) 366-2121, or Ms. Heidi L. Coleman, Assistant

Chief Counsel for General Law, NCC-30, NHTSA, 400 Seventh Street, S.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20590; telephone (202) 366-1834.

Supplementary information: The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st

Century (TEA-21), Pub. L. 105-178, was signed into law on June 9, 1998.

Section 2003 of the Act established a new incentive grant program under

Section 405 of Title 23, United States Code (Section 405). Under this

new program, States may qualify for incentive grant funds by adopting

and implementing effective programs to reduce highway deaths and

injuries resulting from individuals riding unrestrained or improperly

restrained in motor vehicles. The program was designed to stimulate

increased safety belt and child safety seat use.

Background

Effectiveness of Occupant Protection Systems

Injuries caused by motor vehicle traffic crashes in America are a

major health care problem and are the leading cause of death for people

aged 6 to 27. Each year injuries caused by traffic crashes in the

United States claim approximately 42,000 lives and cost Americans an

estimated $150 billion. Safety belts are an effective means of reducing

fatalities and serious injuries when traffic crashes occur. Safety

belts are estimated to save nearly 11,000 lives each year. Lap and

shoulder belts reduce the risk of fatal injury to front seat passenger

car occupants by 45 percent and the risk of moderate to critical injury

by 50 percent. For light truck occupants, safety belts reduce the risk

of fatal injury by 60 percent and moderate to critical injury by 65

percent.

Child safety seats reduce the risk of fatal injury in a crash by 69

percent for infants (less than 1 year old) and by 47 percent for

toddlers (1-4 years old). In 1997, there were 593 occupant fatalities

among children under 5 years of age. Of those 593 fatalities, an

estimated 298 (54 percent) were totally unrestrained. From 1975 through

1997, an estimated 3,894 lives were saved by the use of child

restraints (child safety seats or adult belts). In 1997, an estimated

312 children under age 5 were saved as a result of child restraint use.

America's Experience With Safety Belts and Child Safety Seats

While the first safety belts were installed by automobile

manufacturers in the 1950s, safety belt use was very low--only 10 to 15

percent nationwide--until the early 1980s. From 1984 through 1987, belt

use increased from 14 percent to 42 percent, as a result of the passage

of safety belt use laws in 31 States. Belt use is now mandated in 49

States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Territories

(which include the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa and the

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands), but only 13 States, the

District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Territories allow police

to stop a vehicle solely on the basis of observing a safety belt

violation. Most States require that another violation must first be

observed (i.e., secondary enforcement) before safety belt law violators

can be stopped and issued a citation. Under these conditions, national

safety belt usage seems to have reached a plateau of 69 percent.

The first law requiring children to be in safety seats was enacted

in 1978 in Tennessee. By 1985, all 50 States and the District of

Columbia had passed child passenger laws. Statewide reported usage

rates currently range between 60 and 90 percent, depending on the age

of the child. Most safety seats, however, are used improperly to some

degree.

The President's Call To Increase Safety Belt and Child Safety Seat

Usage

In 1997, President Clinton established the Presidential Initiative

to Increase Seat Belt Usage Nationwide (Presidential Initiative),

setting goals of achieving a safety belt use rate of 85% by the year

2000 and a 90 percent safety belt use rate by 2005. The President also

seeks to reduce child occupant fatalities (0-4 years) by 15 percent in

the year 2000 and by 25 percent in 2005. The Presidential Initiative

contained a four point strategy to meet its goals of increasing safety

belt and child safety seat use.

The first point in the strategy is to build public/private

partnerships to address the issue of safety belt and child safety seat

use. In addition, the strategy calls for States to enact strong laws

and to embrace active, high-visibility enforcement. Finally, the

strategy calls for public and private partners to conduct well-

coordinated, effective public education. The occupant protection

incentive grant program enacted by Congress as part of TEA-21

reinforces key elements of the President's national strategy, by

encouraging States to adopt and strengthen safety belt use laws

(including laws that provide for primary enforcement) and child safety

seat use laws, conduct high visibility enforcement, and establish

education programs.

Grant Criteria

To be eligible for a grant under the new Section 405 statute, a

State must adopt or demonstrate at least four of the following six

criteria: a safety belt use law; a primary safety belt use law; minimum

fines or penalty points against the driver license of an individual for

a violation of the State's safety belt use law or a violation of the

State's child passenger protection law; a special traffic enforcement

program; a child passenger protection education program; and a child

passenger protection law. The elements of these grant criteria and the

manner in which States must demonstrate compliance are explained fully

below:

[[Page 52593]]

1. Safety Belt Use Law

To qualify under this criterion, a State must have in effect a

safety belt use law that makes unlawful throughout the State the

operation of a passenger motor vehicle whenever an individual (other

than a child who is secured in a child restraint system) in the front

seat of the vehicle (and, beginning in fiscal year 2001, in any seat in

the vehicle) does not have a safety belt properly secured about the

individual's body.

Based on the definitions contained in the statute, NHTSA has

determined that the term ``passenger motor vehicle'' means passenger

car, pickup truck, van, minivan, or sport utility vehicle. The statute

did not contain a definition of the term ``child restraint system.''

NHTSA has determined that this term shall have the same meaning as the

term ``child safety seat.'' The term ``child safety seat'' was defined

by the statute. The definitions are reflected in Sec. 1345.3 of the

regulation.

Except for children in child restraint systems, the statute does

not provide for any exemptions from application. However, NHTSA

understands that all States have exemptions written into their safety

belt laws. The agency believes that Congress' intent to aid States in

their efforts to achieve higher belt use rates would not be served by

reading the statute so literally as to deny an incentive grant to

States whose laws contain any exemptions. On the other hand, some

exemptions would either be incompatible with the language of the

statute or would so severely undermine the safety considerations

underlying the statute so as to render a State whose law contains the

exemption ineligible for the incentive grant program.

NHTSA has reviewed existing safety belt laws and has decided to

permit exemptions covering persons with medical excuses; postal,

utility and other commercial drivers who make frequent stops in the

course of their business; emergency vehicle operators and passengers;

persons riding in positions not equipped with safety belts; persons in

public and livery conveyances; persons riding in parade vehicles and

persons in the custody of police. Any State considering an exemption

other than those identified as acceptable should anticipate that the

agency would review the exemption to determine whether it is in

accordance with the intent of the statute and applies to situations in

which the risk to occupants is very low or in which there are exigent

circumstances. For example, the agency would consider an exemption for

persons in vehicles equipped with air bags to be wholly unacceptable.

To demonstrate compliance with this criterion, the State is

required to submit a copy of its law, regulation or binding policy

directive interpreting or implementing the law or regulation that

provides for each element of the safety belt use law criterion. The

State is required to identify any exemptions to its safety belt use

law.

2. Primary Safety Belt Use Law

To qualify under this criterion, a State must provide for primary

enforcement of its safety belt use law. Under a primary enforcement

law, law enforcement officials have the authority to enforce the law

without the need to show that they have probable cause to believe that

another violation had been committed. Any State that provides for

secondary enforcement of its safety belt use law will not qualify for

funds under this criterion. A review of State laws indicates that

currently, 13 States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and all the

U.S. Territories have primary enforcement laws and 36 States have

secondary enforcement laws.

To demonstrate compliance with this criterion, the State is

required to submit a copy of its law, regulation or binding policy

directive interpreting or implementing the law or regulation, that

provides for each element of the primary safety belt use law criterion.

3. Minimum Fine or Penalty Points

To qualify under this criterion, a State must impose a minimum fine

or provide for the imposition of penalty points against the driver's

license of an individual for a violation of the safety belt use law of

the State and for a violation of the child passenger protection law of

the State. In other words, a violation of either the safety belt use

law or the child passenger protection law must trigger the imposition

of a minimum fine or penalty points.

Although the statute does not set a specific monetary amount as a

``minimum fine,'' NHTSA believes it would be inconsistent for Congress

to set a statutory requirement for a minimum fine level, but leave open

the possibility that there would be no monetary penalty or one that is

nominal and insignificant. Accordingly, NHTSA has determined that the

term ``minimum fine'' shall mean a total monetary penalty of at least

$25.00, which may include fines, fees, court costs, or any other

additional monetary assessments collected. The definition of ``minimum

fine'' is contained in Sec. 1345.3 of the regulation.

States will be permitted to meet this grant criterion as either

``Law States'' or ``Data States.'' To qualify as a Law State, the State

must have a law, regulation, or binding policy directive interpreting

or implementing such law or regulation that provides for each element

of the minimum fine/penalty points criterion. A Law State may

demonstrate compliance with this criterion by submitting a copy of its

conforming law, regulation or binding policy directive.

A State that does not have a law, regulation or binding policy

directive that conforms to each element of this criterion may qualify

instead as a Data State. A Data State may show compliance with this

criterion by submitting data covering at least a three-month period

within the last twelve months showing the total number of persons

convicted of a safety belt use or child passenger protection law

violation and that 80% of all such persons were required to pay a fine

of at least $25.00 or had one or more penalty points assessed against

their driver's license. The total number of persons convicted must be

sufficient to show that the State is conducting meaningful enforcement

and adjudication of its safety belt use and child passenger protection

laws.

A State is permitted to submit data based on a representative

sample. By representative sample, the agency means that data should be

obtained from all communities in the State or from a sample of

communities representative of the State as a whole. The agency notes

that a State may qualify as a Law State with respect to its safety belt

use law and as a Data State with respect to its child passenger

protection law, or vice versa.

4. Special Traffic Enforcement Program

To qualify under this criterion, a State must provide for a

statewide Special Traffic Enforcement Program for occupant protection

that emphasizes publicity for the program.

The term ``Special Traffic Enforcement Program'' (STEP) references

a model program that NHTSA recommends for State and community

implementation because it has proven effective in increasing safety

belt use at both statewide and community levels. STEPs combine public

education, publicity and intensified enforcement to increase safety

belt and child safety seat use rates.

Several States have already developed and employed effective STEPs.

In 1993, North Carolina launched a statewide campaign to increase

safety belt use. The ``Click It or Ticket'' program combined law

enforcement blitzes with extensive publicity. North Carolina law

[[Page 52594]]

enforcement agencies conducted 3,425 checkpoints across the State which

resulted in nearly 34,000 safety belt and nearly 2,300 child safety

seat citations. Safety belt use in the State rose from 63 percent to 80

percent.

Georgia is currently conducting a STEP operation called ``Operation

Strap n' Snap.'' This two-year program, which began in August 1997, is

scheduled to include eight enforcement waves. After the first

enforcement wave, Georgia's safety belt use rate climbed to its highest

level ever at 67.75 percent, up from 62 percent.

To qualify under this criterion, a State must plan to implement a

STEP that provides for periodic enforcement efforts. Each enforcement

effort must include the following five elements in chronological order:

(1) A pre-wave seat belt observed use survey; (2) A statewide media

campaign to inform the public about the risks and costs of traffic

crashes, the benefits of increased occupant protection use, and the

need for traffic enforcement as a way to manage those risks and costs;

(3) Local media events announcing the pending enforcement wave; (4) A

wave of enforcement effort consisting of checkpoints, saturation

patrols or other enforcement tactics; and (5) A post-wave observed use

survey coupled with a post-wave media event announcing the results of

the survey and the enforcement effort.

By requiring that States conduct observed use surveys, NHTSA does

not mean to require States to conduct scientifically based surveys with

representative sample sizes. It will be sufficient if pre-wave and

post-wave surveys are based on observed use and conducted at the same

times (day and hour) and locations so that the measures are comparable.

The State's program must provide for at least 2 enforcement efforts

each year and must require the participation of both State and local

law enforcement agencies in each enforcement effort. In addition,

States must demonstrate that their program covers at least 70% of the

State's population.

Coverage can be accomplished by an area-wide or corridor approach,

or a combination of those approaches. Under the area-wide approach, the

population covered by the program is estimated based on the populations

covered by each of the participating local law enforcement

jurisdictions and the total State population. Under the corridor

approach, the population covered is estimated based on traffic volumes

over specified transportation routes, with concentrated enforcement/

education efforts focused on that ``mobile'' population, and the total

traffic volumes statewide on comparable roadways.

To demonstrate compliance in the first year the State receives a

grant based on this criterion, the State must submit a plan to conduct

a program that includes the elements described above. The plan must

provide the approximate dates, durations and locations of the

enforcement efforts planned in the upcoming year and must specify the

types of enforcement methods that will be used during each enforcement

effort. The State must also provide a listing of the law enforcement

agencies that will participate in the enforcement efforts along with an

estimate of the approximate cumulative percentage of the State's

population served by those agencies or the approximate percentage of

the traffic volume on roadways covered by the enforcement program.

In addition, the State must document the activities it plans to

conduct to provide the public with information on the importance of

occupant restraints and to publicize each enforcement effort and its

results. This information should include a sample or synopsis of the

content of the public information messages that will accompany the

enforcement efforts and the strategy the State intends to use to

deliver each message to its target audience.

To qualify for funding in subsequent years, the State must submit

an updated plan for conducting its STEP and information documenting

that the prior year's plan was effectively implemented. The information

shall document that enforcement efforts were conducted; which police

agencies were involved; and the dates, duration and location of each

enforcement effort. The State must also submit samples of materials

used, and document activities that took place to reach the target

population. For example, the State may submit copies of news articles

about the program or document press events, television and radio

coverage or other publicity about the program and the enforcement

efforts.

5. Child Passenger Protection Education Program

To qualify under this criterion, a State must plan to implement a

statewide comprehensive child passenger protection education program

that includes education programs about proper seating positions for

children in air bag equipped motor vehicles and instruction on how to

reduce the improper use of child restraint systems.

To qualify under this criterion, State child passenger protection

education programs must meet the following four elements: (1) The

program must provide information to the public about proper seating

positions for children in air bag equipped motor vehicles, the

importance of restraint use, and instruction on how to reduce the

improper use of child restraint systems; (2) The program must provide

for child passenger safety (CPS) training and retraining to establish

or update child passenger safety technicians, police officers, fire and

emergency personnel and other educators to function at the community

level for the purpose of educating the public about proper restraint

use and to teach child care givers how to install a child safety seat

correctly. The training should encompass the goals and objectives of

NHTSA's Standardized Child Passenger Safety technician curriculum; (3)

The program must provide for child safety seat clinics conducted by

State and or local agencies (health, medical, hospital, enforcement,

etc.); and (4) Each of the State's program activities (with the

exception of the training and retraining activities) must cover at

least 70% of the State's population; that is, the public information

and clinic components of State programs must reach counties or other

subdivisions of the State that collectively contain at least 70% of the

State's population.

To demonstrate compliance in the first fiscal year a State receives

a grant based on this criterion, the State shall submit a comprehensive

plan to conduct a statewide comprehensive child passenger protection

education program that meets the elements set forth above. In its plan,

the State must include a sample or synopsis of the content of the

planned public information program and the strategy that will be used

to reach 70% of the targeted population.

Also, the State must describe the activities that will be used to

train and retrain child passenger safety technicians, police officers,

fire and emergency personnel and other educators and provide the

durations and locations of such training activities. In addition, the

State must provide information on the approximate number of people who

will participate in the training and retraining activities. The State

must also describe its plan to conduct clinics that will serve at least

70% of the targeted population.

To qualify for funding in subsequent years, the State must submit

an updated plan for conducting a child passenger protection education

program and information documenting that the prior year's plan was

effectively implemented. The information shall document that a public

information program, training and child safety seat

[[Page 52595]]

clinics were conducted; which agencies were involved; and the dates,

durations and locations of these programs.

6. Child Passenger Protection Law

To qualify under this criterion, a State must have in effect a law

that requires minors who are riding in a passenger motor vehicle to be

properly secured in a child safety seat or other appropriate restraint

system.

The terms ``passenger motor vehicle'' and ``child safety seat''

which are used to describe this criterion are defined by statute. The

statutory definitions are reflected in Sec. 1345.3 of the regulation.

The statute did not define the term ``minor.''

NHTSA has determined that, to comply with this grant criterion, a

State must make unlawful the operation of a passenger motor vehicle

whenever an individual who is less than 16 years of age is not properly

secured in a child safety seat or other appropriate restraint system in

any seating position of the vehicle. NHTSA believes that Congress'

intent to aid the States in their efforts to achieve higher child

safety seat and safety belt use would not be served if children under

age 16 were allowed to ride unrestrained in a passenger motor vehicle.

NHTSA's review of State laws indicates that some States currently allow

some children under age 16 to ride unrestrained if they are in the rear

seat of passenger vehicles. Other States' laws allow some children

under 16 who ride in certain types of excepted vehicles to be

unrestrained. NHTSA believes that the intent of the legislation was to

eliminate these gaps in coverage. In addition, the agency believes that

defining minor to mean under age 16 is consistent with the majority of

State driver licensing laws that allow individuals at ages 16 and

higher to obtain driver's licenses.

To demonstrate compliance, a State must submit a copy of its law,

regulation, or binding policy directive interpreting or implementing

such law or regulation adopting each element of the child passenger

protection law requirement. In addition, the State is required to

identify any exemptions to its child passenger protection law.

The agency notes that children age 12 and under should always sit

in the back seat of a motor vehicle. Frontal crashes are the most

serious types of crashes. The back seat is the safest seat because it

is farthest away from the impact of such a crash. In addition, people

sitting in the back seat have the soft back of the front seat in front

of them, instead of hard surfaces like the windshield, mirror or

dashboard.

Children should also sit in the back seat to guard against injuries

from air bags. Air bags can seriously injure or kill children who are

in the front seat. In a crash, the air bag must deploy in a fraction of

a second. The energy of the air bag's deployment can harm anyone in the

front seat who is too close to the air bag. Children age 12 and under

who are not properly restrained are particularly at risk.

In addition, the agency wishes to stress the importance of placing

children under age 4 in child safety seats. Specifically, the agency

recommends that children less than 20 pounds, or less than one year

old, be placed in a rear facing infant seat secured in the rear seat of

the vehicle by the safety belts. Children from about 20 to 40 pounds

and at least one year old should be placed in a forward-facing child

seat secured in the rear seat of the vehicle by a safety belt. Children

more than 40 pounds should sit in a booster seat secured in the rear

seat of the vehicle with both portions of a lap/shoulder belt (except

only the lap portion is used with some booster seats equipped with a

front shield). Finally, the agency recommends that children whose

sitting height is high enough so that they can, without the aid of a

booster seat, wear the shoulder belt comfortably across their shoulder

and secure the lap belt across their pelvis and whose legs are long

enough to bend over the front of the seat when their backs are against

the vehicle seat back be secured with both portions of a lap/shoulder

belt.

Certifications in Subsequent Years

NHTSA believes that if a State has qualified under a criterion

based on its laws and there have been no changes in the laws since the

time of the original application, there is little reason to require the

State to resubmit its laws in its application for subsequent year

funds. In lieu of resubmitting its laws to demonstrate compliance in

subsequent years the State receives a grant based on its compliance

with Criterion No. 1 (Safety Belt Use Law), Criterion No. 2 (Primary

Safety Belt Use Law), Criterion No. 3 (Minimum Fine or Penalty Points)

or Criterion No. 6 (Child Passenger Protection Law), the State may

submit a statement certifying that there have been no changes in the

State's laws. A State demonstrating compliance as a Data State under

Criterion No. 3 would still be required to submit all necessary data.

Limitations on Grant Amounts

Section 405 provides, in subsection (c), that an eligible State may

receive as a grant an amount that shall not exceed 25 percent of its

fiscal year 1997 highway safety grant (Section 402) apportionment under

23 U.S.C. 402.

No State may receive a grant in more than six fiscal years. A total

of $68 million has been authorized for the Section 405 program over a

period of five years. Specifically TEA-21 authorizes $10 million for

fiscal year 1999, $10 million for fiscal year 2000, $13 million for

fiscal year 2001, $15 million for fiscal year 2002 and $20 million for

fiscal year 2003. Under Section 405, States are required to match the

grant funds they receive as follows: the Federal share can not exceed

75 percent of the cost of implementing and enforcing the occupant

protection program adopted to qualify for these funds in the first and

second fiscal years the State receives funds; 50 percent in the third

and fourth fiscal years it receives funds; and 25 percent in the fifth

and sixth fiscal years.

No grant may be made to a State unless the State certifies that it

will maintain its aggregate expenditures from all other sources for its

occupant protection programs at or above the average level of such

expenditures in fiscal years 1996 and 1997 (either State or Federal

fiscal year 1996 and 1997 can be used).

The agency will accept a ``soft'' match in Section 405's

administration, as it has for the agency's Section 402 and 410

programs. By this, NHTSA means the State's share may be satisfied by

the use of either allowable costs incurred by the State or the value of

in-kind contributions applicable to the period to which the matching

requirement applies. A State could not, however, use any Federal funds,

such as its Section 402 funds, to satisfy the matching requirements. In

addition, a State can use each non-Federal expenditure only once for

matching purposes.

Award Procedures

To receive a grant in any fiscal year, the State is required to

submit an application to NHTSA, through the appropriate NHTSA Regional

Administrator, which demonstrates that the State meets the requirements

of the grant being requested. The particular requirements of these

grants are defined in detail in Sec. 1345.5 of the regulation. The

State also must submit certifications that: (1) it has an occupant

protection program that meets the grant requirements; (2) it will use

the funds awarded only for the implementation and enforcement of

occupant protection programs; (3) it will administer the funds in

accordance with relevant regulations and OMB Circulars; and (4)

[[Page 52596]]

it will maintain its aggregate expenditures from all other sources for

its occupant protection programs at or above the average level of such

expenditures in fiscal years 1996 and 1997. State or Federal fiscal

years may be used.

In both the first and in subsequent years, once a State has been

informed that it is eligible for a grant, the State must include

documentation in the State's Highway Safety Plan, prepared under

Section 402, that indicates how it intends to use the grant funds. The

documentation must include a Program Cost Summary (HS Form 217)

obligating the section 405 funds to occupant protection programs.

To be eligible for grant funds in fiscal year 1999, States must

submit their applications no later than August 1, 1999. To be eligible

for grant funds in any subsequent fiscal years, States must submit

their applications no later than August 1 of the fiscal year in which

they are applying for funds. The agency will permit (and strongly

encourages) States to submit all of these materials in advance of the

regulatory deadlines.

Upon receipt and subsequent approval of a State's application,

NHTSA will award grant funds to the State and will authorize the State

to incur costs after receipt of an HS Form 217. Vouchers must be

submitted to the appropriate NHTSA Regional Administrator and

reimbursement will be made to States for authorized expenditures. The

funding guidelines applicable to the Section 402 Highway Safety Program

will be used to determine reimbursable expenditures under the Section

405 program. As with requests for reimbursement under the Section 402

program, States should indicate on the vouchers what amount of the

funds expended are eligible for reimbursement under Section 405.

The release of the full grant amounts shall be subject to the

availability of funding for that fiscal year. If there are expected to

be insufficient funds to award full grant amounts to all eligible

States in any fiscal year, NHTSA may release less than the full grant

amounts upon initial approval of the State's application and

documentation and the remainder of the full grant amounts, up to the

State's proportionate share of available funds, before the end of that

fiscal year. Project approval, and the contractual obligation of the

Federal government to provide grant funds, shall be limited to the

amount of funds released.

The Secretary may transfer any amounts remaining available under

Sections 405, 410 and 411 to the amounts made available under any other

of these programs to ensure, to the maximum extent possible, that each

State receives the maximum incentive funding for which it is eligible.

Interim Final Rule

These regulations are being published as an interim final rule.

Accordingly, the new regulations in Part 1345 are fully in effect 30

days after the date of the document's publication. No further

regulatory action by the agency is necessary to make these regulations

effective.

These regulations have been published as an interim final rule

because insufficient time was available to provide for prior notice and

opportunity for comment. Grants will be available beginning in FY 1999.

Many of the grant criteria require States to enact legislation in order

to comply. States are preparing their legislative agendas now for their

1999 legislative sessions. The States have a need to know what the

criteria for grants under this program will be as soon as possible so

they can enact conforming legislation.

In the agency's view, the States will not be impeded by the use of

an interim final rule. The procedures that States must follow under

this new program are similar to procedures that States have followed in

other grant programs administered by NHTSA. These procedures were

established by rulemaking and were subject to prior notice and

opportunity for comment.

Moreover, the criteria are derived from the Federal statute and

their implementation does not involve a significant amount of

discretion on the part of the agency. For these reasons, the agency

believes that there is good cause for finding that providing notice and

comment in connection with this rulemaking action is impracticable,

unnecessary, and contrary to the public interest.

The agency requests written comments on these new regulations. All

comments submitted in response to this document will be considered by

the agency. Following the close of the comment period, the agency will

publish a document in the Federal Register responding to the comments

and, if appropriate, will make revisions to the provisions of Part

1345.

Written Comments

Interested persons are invited to comment on this interim final

rule. It is requested, but not required, that two copies be submitted.

All comments must be limited to 15 pages in length. Necessary

attachments may be appended to those submissions without regard to the

15 page limit. (49 CFR 553.21.) This limitation is intended to

encourage commenters to detail their primary arguments in a concise

fashion.

Written comments to the public docket must be received by November

30, 1998. All comments received before the close of business on the

comment closing date will be considered and will be available for

examination in the docket at the above address before and after that

date. To the extent possible, comments received after the closing date

will also be considered. However, the rulemaking action may proceed at

any time after that date. NHTSA will continue to file relevant material

in the docket as they become available after the closing date, and it

is recommended that interested persons continue to examine the docket

for new materials.

Those persons desiring to be notified upon receipt of their

comments in the docket should enclose, in the envelope with their

comments, a self-addressed stamped postcard. Upon receiving the

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

Copies of all documents will be placed in Docket No. NHTSA-98-4496;

in Docket Management, Room PL-401, Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street,

SW, Washington, DC 20590.

Regulatory Analyses and Notice

Executive Order 12778 (Civil Justice Reform)

This interim final rule will not have any preemptive or retroactive

effect. The enabling legislation does not establish a procedure for

judicial review of rules promulgated under its provisions. There is no

requirement that individuals submit a petition for reconsideration or

other administrative proceedings before they may file suit.

Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures

The agency has examined the impact of this action and has

determined that it is not significant under Executive Order 12866 and

the Department of Transportation's Regulatory Policies and Procedures.

The action will not have an annual effect on the economy of $100

million or more or adversely affect in a material way a sector of the

economy, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety,

or State, local or tribal governments or communities. It will not

create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action

taken or planned by another agency, and it will not materially alter

the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan

programs or the rights and

[[Page 52597]]

obligations of recipients thereof. Nor does it raise novel legal or

policy issues.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

In compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96-354,

5 U.S.C. 601-612), the agency has evaluated the effects of this action

on small entities. Based on the evaluation, we certify that this action

will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small

entities. States are the recipients of any funds awarded under the

Section 405 program, and they are not considered to be small entities,

as that term is defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This interim final rule contains information collection

requirements. As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44

U.S.C. 3507(d)), the agency has submitted a copy of this section to the

Office of Management and Budget for its review.

The public information and recordkeeping burden for this collection

of information is estimated to be 1736 hours annually. The total number

of respondents is estimated to be up to 56. The average number of hours

per respondent is 31 (1736 hours/56 = 31 hours).

Organizations and individuals desiring to submit comments on the

information collection requirements should submit them to Docket

Management, Room PL-401, National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration, Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, S.W., Washington,

D.C. 20590. Comments should refer to the docket number for this notice

and should be sent within 30 days of the publication of this interim

final rule.

The agency considers comments by the public on this collection of

information in: evaluating whether the collection of information is

necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency,

including whether the information will have a practical use; evaluating

the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the collection

of information, including the validity of the methodology and

assumptions used; enhancing the quality, usefulness, and clarity of the

information to be collected; and minimizing the burden of collection of

information on those who are to respond, including through the use of

appropriate automated electronic, mechanical, or other technological

collection techniques or other forms of information technology; e.g.,

permitting electronic submission of responses.

According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are

required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a

valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for this

information collection will be published in the Federal Register after

it is approved by the OMB.

For more details see the Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis available

for copying and review in the public docket.

The title, description, and respondent description of the

information collection are shown below with an estimate of the annual

burden.

Title: Occupant Protection Incentive Grants.

OMB Clearance number: Not assigned.

Description of the need for the information and proposed use of the

information: To determine whether States comply with grant criteria,

NHTSA is requiring States to submit copies of relevant safety belt and

child passenger protection statutes, plans and/or reports on statewide

special traffic enforcement and child passenger protection education

programs and possibly some traffic court records. In addition, to allow

the agency to track grant funds, NHTSA is requiring States to submit a

Program Cost Summary (Form 217), allocating the section 405 funds to

occupant protection programs.

Description of likely respondents (including estimate of frequency

of response to the collection of information): The respondents are the

States. All respondents would submit an application and Form 217 to

NHTSA in each year they seek to qualify for incentive grant funds.

Estimate of total annual reporting and record keeping burden

resulting from the collection of information: NHTSA estimates that each

respondent will take 30 hours to prepare and submit the grant

application and one hour to prepare and submit a Program Cost Summary

(Form 217) for an estimated total hour burden on all respondents of

1736 hours (31 hours x 56 respondents). Based on an estimated cost of

$50.00 per hour employee cost, each response is estimated to cost a

State $1550. If every jurisdiction considered a ``State'' under this

program were to apply, the total cost on all respondents per year would

be $86,800. It is not anticipated, however, that all 56 jurisdictions

will apply each year.

National Environmental Policy Act

The 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 it will not have any significant impact on the quality

of the human environment.

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4)

requires agencies to prepare a written assessment of the costs,

benefits and other affects of final rules that include a Federal

mandate likely to result in the expenditure by State, local or tribal

governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of more than

$100 million annually. This interim final rule does not meet the

definition of a Federal mandate, because the resulting annual

expenditures will not exceed the $100 million threshold. In addition,

this incentive grant program is completely voluntary and States that

choose to apply and qualify will receive incentive grant funds.

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 this action will not have sufficient federalism implications to

warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment. Accordingly, a

Federalism Assessment has not been prepared.

List of Subjects in 23 CFR Part 1345

Grant programs--Transportation, Highway safety, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

In consideration of the foregoing, a new Part 1345 is added to

Chapter III of Title 23 of the Code of Federal Regulations to read as

follows:

PART 1345--INCENTIVE GRANT CRITERIA FOR OCCUPANT PROTECTION

PROGRAMS

Sec.

1345.1 Scope.

1345.2 Purpose.

1345.3 Definitions.

Sec. 1345.4 General requirements.

1345.5 Requirements for a grant.

1345.6 Award procedures.

Authority: Pub. L. 105-178; 23 U.S.C. 405; delegation of

authority at 49 CFR 1.50.

Sec. 1345.1 Scope.

This part establishes criteria, in accordance with section 2003 of

the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, for awarding

incentive grants to States that adopt and implement effective programs

to reduce highway deaths and injuries resulting from individuals riding

unrestrained or improperly restrained in motor vehicles.

Sec. 1345.2 Purpose.

The purpose of this part is to implement the provisions of section

[[Page 52598]]

2003 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, 23 U.S.C.

405, and to encourage States to adopt effective occupant protection

programs.

Sec. 1345.3 Definitions.

(a) Child restraint system means child safety seat.

(b) Child safety seat means any device (except safety belts)

designed for use in a motor vehicle to restrain, seat, or position a

child who weighs 50 pounds or less.

(c) Minimum fine means a total monetary penalty which may include

fines, fees, court costs, or any other additional monetary assessments

collected.

(d) Passenger motor vehicle means a passenger car, pickup truck,

van, minivan, or sport utility vehicle.

(e) State means any of the fifty States, the District of Columbia,

Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa or the

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.

Sec. 1345.4 General requirements.

(a) Qualification requirements. To qualify for a grant under 23

U.S.C. 405, a State must, for each year it seeks to qualify:

(1) Submit an application to the appropriate NHTSA Regional

Administrator demonstrating that it meets the requirements of

Sec. 1345.5 and include certifications that:

(i) It has an occupant protection program that meets the

requirements of 23 U.S.C. 405;

(ii) It will use the funds awarded under 23 U.S.C. 405 only for the

implementation and enforcement of occupant protection programs;

(iii) It will administer the funds in accordance with 49 CFR part

18 and OMB Circulars A-102 and A-87 and

(iv) It will maintain its aggregate expenditures from all other

sources for its occupant protection programs at or above the average

level of such expenditures in fiscal years 1996 and 1997 (either State

or Federal fiscal year 1996 and 1997 can be used); and

(2) After being informed by NHTSA that it is eligible for a grant,

submit to the agency, within 30 days, a Program Cost Summary (HS Form

217) obligating the section 405 funds to occupant protection programs.

(3) The State's Highway Safety Plan, which is required to be

submitted by September 1 of each year, pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 402 and 23

CFR 1200, should document how it intends to use the Section 405 grant

funds.

(4) To qualify for grant funds in any fiscal year, the application

must be received by the agency not later than August 1 of the fiscal

year in which the State is applying for funds.

(b) Limitation on grants. A State may receive a grant for up to six

fiscal years beginning after September 30, 1998, subject to the

following limitations:

(1) The amount of a grant, under Sec. 1345.5 shall equal up to 25

percent of the State's 23 U.S.C. 402 apportionment for fiscal year

1997, subject to availability of funds.

(2) In the first and second fiscal years a State receives a grant,

it shall be reimbursed for up to 75 percent of the cost of its occupant

protection program adopted pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 405.

(3) In the third and fourth fiscal years a State receives a grant,

it shall be reimbursed for up to 50 percent of the cost of its occupant

protection program adopted pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 405.

(4) In the fifth and sixth fiscal years a State receives a grant,

it shall be reimbursed for up to 25 percent of the cost of its occupant

protection program adopted pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 405.

Sec. 1345.5 Requirements for a grant.

To qualify for an incentive grant, a State must adopt and implement

effective programs to reduce highway deaths and injuries resulting from

individuals riding unrestrained or improperly restrained in motor

vehicles. A State must adopt and implement at least four of the

following criteria:

(a) Safety belt use law. (1) In fiscal years 1999 and 2000, a State

must make unlawful throughout the State the operation of a passenger

motor vehicle whenever an individual (other than a child who is secured

in a child restraint system) in the front seat of the vehicle does not

have a safety belt properly secured about the individual's body.

(2) Beginning in fiscal year 2001, a State must make unlawful

throughout the State the operation of a passenger motor vehicle

whenever an individual (other than a child who is secured in a child

restraint system) in any seating position in the vehicle does not have

a safety belt properly secured about the individual's body.

(3) To demonstrate compliance with this criterion, a State shall

submit a copy of the State's safety belt use law, regulation or binding

policy directive interpreting or implementing the law or regulation

that provides for each element of paragraphs (a)(1) or (a)(2), as

appropriate, of this section. The State is also required to identify

any exemptions to its safety belt use law.

(b) Primary safety belt use law. (1) A State must provide for

primary enforcement of its safety belt use law.

(2) To demonstrate compliance with this criterion, the State shall

submit a copy of its law, regulation or binding policy directive

interpreting or implementing the law or regulation that provides for

each element of paragraph (b)(1) of this section.

(c) Minimum fine or penalty points. (1) A State must provide for

the imposition of a minimum fine of not less than $25.00 or one or more

penalty points on the driver's license of an individual:

(i) For a violation of the State's safety belt use law; and

(ii) for a violation of the State's child passenger protection law.

(2)(i) To demonstrate compliance with this criterion, a Law State

shall submit a copy of the law, regulation or binding policy directive

interpreting or implementing the law or regulation that provides for

each element of paragraph (c)(1) of this section.

(ii) For purposes of this paragraph, a ``Law State'' means a State

that has a law, regulation or binding policy directive interpreting or

implementing the law or regulation that provides for each element of

the minimum fines or penalty points criterion including the imposition

of a minimum fine of not less than $25.00 or one or more penalty points

for a violation of the State's safety belt use and child passenger

protection laws.

(3)(i) To demonstrate compliance with this criterion, a Data State

shall submit data covering a period of at least three months during the

past twelve months showing the total number of persons who were

convicted of a safety belt use or child passenger protection law

violation and that 80 percent or more of all such persons were required

to pay at least $25 in fines, fees or court costs or had one or more

penalty points assessed against their driver's license. The State can

provide the necessary data based on a representative sample.

(ii) For purposes of this paragraph, a ``Data State'' means a State

that does not require the mandatory imposition of a minimum fine of not

less than $25.00 or one or more penalty points for a violation of the

State's safety belt use and child passenger protection laws.

(d) Special traffic enforcement program. (1) A State must establish

a statewide Special Traffic Enforcement Program for occupant protection

that emphasizes publicity for the program. The program must provide for

periodic enforcement efforts. Each enforcement effort must include the

following five elements, in chronological order:

(i) A seat belt observed use survey conducted before any

enforcement wave;

(ii) A media campaign to inform the public about the risks and

costs of traffic

[[Page 52599]]

crashes, the benefits of increased occupant protection use, and the

need for traffic enforcement as a way to manage those risks and costs.

(iii) Local media events announcing a pending enforcement wave;

(iv) A wave of enforcement effort consisting of checkpoints,

saturation patrols or other enforcement tactics.

(v) A post-wave observed use survey coupled with a post-wave media

event announcing the results of the survey and the enforcement effort.

(2) The State's program must provide for at least two enforcement

efforts each year and must require the participation of State and local

police in each effort.

(3) The State's program must cover at least 70% of the State's

population.

(4) To demonstrate compliance with this criterion in the first year

the State receives a grant based on this criterion, the State shall

submit a plan to conduct a program that covers each element identified

in paragraphs (d)(1) through (d)(3) of this section. Specifically, the

plan shall:

(i) Provide the approximate dates, durations and locations of the

efforts planned in the upcoming year;

(ii) Specify the types of enforcement methods that will be used

during each enforcement effort and provide a listing of the law

enforcement agencies that will participate in the enforcement efforts

along with an estimate of the approximate cumulative percentage of the

State's population served by those agencies or the approximate

percentage of the traffic volume on roadways covered by the enforcement

program; and

(iii) Document the activities the State plans to conduct to provide

the public with information on the importance of occupant restraints

and to publicize each enforcement effort and its results. This

information should include a sample or synopsis of the content of the

public information messages that will accompany the enforcement efforts

and the strategy that the State intends to use to deliver each message

to its target audience.

(5) To demonstrate compliance with this criterion in subsequent

fiscal years the State receives a grant based on this criterion, the

State shall submit an updated plan for conducting a special traffic

enforcement program in the following year and information documenting

that the prior year's plan was effectively implemented. The information

shall document that enforcement efforts were conducted; which police

agencies were involved; and the dates, duration and location of each

enforcement effort. The State must also submit samples of materials

used, and document activities that took place to reach the target

population.

(e) Child passenger protection education program. (1) A State must

provide an effective system for educating the public about the proper

use of child safety seats. The program must, at a minimum:

(i) Provide information to the public about proper seating

positions for children in air bag equipped motor vehicles, the

importance of restraint use, and instruction on how to reduce the

improper use of child restraint systems;

(ii) Provide for child passenger safety (CPS) training and

retraining to establish or update child passenger safety technicians,

police officers, fire and emergency personnel and other educators to

function at the community level for the purpose of educating the public

about proper restraint use and to teach child care givers how to

install a child safety seat correctly. The training should encompass

the goals and objectives of NHTSA's Standardized Child Passenger Safety

Technician Curriculum;

(iii) Provide periodic child safety seat clinics conducted by State

and local agencies (health, medical, hospital, enforcement, etc.); and

(iv) The State's program activities (with the exception of the

training and retraining activities) must cover at least 70% of the

State's population; that is, the program activities must take place in

counties or other subdivisions of the State that collectively contain

at least 70% of the State's population.

(2) To demonstrate compliance with this criterion in the first

fiscal year the State receives a grant based on this criterion, the

State shall submit a plan to conduct a child passenger protection

education program that covers each element identified in paragraph (e)

(1) of this section. The information shall include:

(i) A sample or synopsis of the content of the planned public

information program and the strategy that will be used to reach 70% of

the targeted population;

(ii) A description of the activities that will be used to train and

retrain child passenger safety technicians, police officers, fire and

emergency personnel and other educators and provide the durations and

locations of such training activities;

(iii) An estimate of the approximate number of people who will

participate in the training and retraining activities; and

(iv) A plan to conduct clinics that will serve at least 70% of the

targeted population.

(3) To demonstrate compliance with this criterion in subsequent

fiscal years the State receives a grant based on this criterion, the

State shall submit an updated plan for conducting a child passenger

protection education program in the following year and information

documenting that the prior year's plan was effectively implemented. The

information shall document that a public information program, training

and child safety seat clinics were conducted; which agencies were

involved; and the dates, durations and locations of these programs.

(f) Child passenger protection law. (1) The State must make

unlawful the operation of a passenger motor vehicle whenever an

individual who is less than 16 years of age is not properly secured in

a child safety seat or other appropriate restraint system.

(2) To demonstrate compliance with this criterion, a State shall

submit a copy of the law(s), regulation or binding policy directive

interpreting or implementing the law or regulation that provides for

each element of paragraph (f)(1) of this section. In addition, the

State must identify any exemptions to its child passenger protection

law(s).

(g) Certifications in subsequent years. (1) To demonstrate

compliance in subsequent years the State receives a grant based on

criteria in paragraphs (a), (b), (c) or (f) of this section, if the

State's law, regulation or binding policy directive has not changed,

the State, in lieu of resubmitting its law, regulation or binding

policy directive as provided in paragraphs (a)(3), (b)(2), (c)(2)(i) or

(f)(2) of this section, may submit a statement certifying that there

have been no substantive changes in the State's laws, regulations or

binding policy directives.

(2) The certifying statement shall be worded as follows:

(Name of certifying official), (position title), of the (State or

Commonwealth) of ____________________, do hereby certify that the

(State or Commonwealth) of ____________________ has not changed and

is enforcing a law, that conforms to 23 U.S.C. 405 and 23 CFR 1345.5

(insert reference to section and paragraph), (citations to State

law).

Sec. 1345.6 Award procedures.

(a) In each Federal fiscal year, grants will be made to eligible

States upon submission and approval of the application required by

Sec. 1345.4(a) and subject to the limitation in Sec. 1345.4(b). The

release of grant funds under this part shall be subject to the

availability of funding for that fiscal year. If there are expected to

be insufficient funds to award full grant amounts to all eligible

[[Page 52600]]

States in any fiscal year, NHTSA may release less than the full grant

amounts upon initial approval of the State's application and

documentation and the remainder of the full grant amounts, up to the

State's proportionate share of available funds, before the end of that

fiscal year. Project approval, and the contractual obligation of the

Federal government to provide grant funds, shall be limited to the

amount of funds released.

(b) If any amounts authorized for grants under this part for a

fiscal year are expected to remain unobligated in that fiscal year, the

Administrator may transfer such amounts to the programs authorized

under 23 U.S.C. 410 and 23 U.S.C. 411, to ensure to the extent possible

that each State receives the maximum incentive funding for which it is

eligible.

(c) If any amounts authorized for grants under 23 U.S.C. 410 and 23

U.S.C. 411 are transferred to the grant program under this part in a

fiscal year, the Administrator shall distribute the transferred amounts

so that each eligible State receives a proportionate share of these

amounts, subject to the conditions specified in Sec. 1345.4.

Issued on: September 25, 1998.

Ricardo Martinez,

Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

[FR Doc. 98-26243 Filed 9-28-98; 12:12 pm]

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P