Consumer Information Regulations; Utility Vehicle Label

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Parts 571 and 575

[Docket No. NHTSA-98-3381, Notice 2]

RIN 2127-AG53

Consumer Information Regulations; Utility Vehicle Label

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This final rule modifies the rollover warning currently

required for small and mid-sized utility vehicles. Utility vehicles,

which have features for off-road use, are often referred to in the

media as sport utility vehicles. In place of the current, text-only

warning label containing a paragraph of information, this rule requires

a new label that uses graphics, bright colors, and short bulleted text

messages. This rule also requires that additional information related

to rollover risks be included in the owners' manuals of these vehicles.

These changes make the rollover warning more attention-getting and

understandable to consumers. They will thereby increase the chance that

the warning will persuade drivers to modify their behavior and reduce

the likelihood of rollovers.

DATES: This final rule is effective September 1, 1999. Petitions for

reconsideration must be received by April 23, 1999.

ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration should refer to the docket and

notice number of this final rule and be submitted to: Administrator,

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW,

Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The following persons at the National

Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW,

Washington, DC 20590:

For labeling issues: Mary Versailles, Office of Planning and

Consumer Programs, NPS-31, telephone (202) 366-2057, facsimile (202)

366-4329.

For general rollover issues: Gayle Dalrymple, Office of Crash

Avoidance Standards, NPS-20, telephone (202) 366-5559, facsimile (202)

366-4329.

For legal issues: Nicole Fradette, Office of Chief Counsel, NCC-20,

telephone (202) 366-2992, facsimile (202) 366-3820.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Summary of Today's Rule

In an effort to reduce the rollover rate of utility vehicles

1, today's rule modifies the existing requirements for

rollover warning labels for those vehicles. The new labels will more

effectively alert their drivers to the risk the vehicles will roll

over, the steps they can take to avoid that risk, and the steps they

can take to reduce the chance of injury in the event of a rollover. The

new label uses bright colors, graphics, and short bulleted text

messages in lieu of the current text-only format. The rule requires the

label's header to have an alert symbol (a triangle containing an

exclamation point) followed by the statement ``WARNING: Higher Rollover

Risk'' in black text on a yellow background. The following three

statements must appear below the header in the center of the label:

``Avoid Abrupt Maneuvers and Excessive Speed,'' ``Always Buckle Up,''

and ``See Owner's Manual For Further Information.'' The rule specifies

that the label must contain two pictograms: one showing a tilting

utility vehicle on the left of the label, and the other showing a

seated vehicle occupant with a secured three-point belt system on the

right. The pictograms and the statement must be in black on a white

background. The rule requires the label to be placed on either the

driver's sun visor or the driver's side window. If the label is placed

on the back of the driver's sun visor, the rule requires an alert label

to be placed on the front of the visor urging the person to flip the

visor over and read the information on the other side. The new label is

required on utility vehicles with a wheelbase of 110 inches or less.

The rule also requires additional information on rollover be included

in the owner's manuals of these vehicles. The new requirements are

effective September 1, 1999.

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

\1\ ``Utility vehicles'' are defined in 49 CFR Part 575 as

multipurpose passenger vehicles (other than those which are

passenger car derivatives) with a wheelbase of 110 inches or less

and with special features for off-road operation. 49 CFR Part

575.105. These vehicles are commonly referred to as sport utility

vehicles in the media.

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

II. Background

A. The Rollover Crash Problem 2

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

\2\ A complete summary of the statistics used in this section

can be found in the document titled ``Status Report for Rollover

Prevention and Injury Mitigation, May 1996,'' in Docket 91-68-N05.

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

The agency has focused its rollover consumer information efforts on

utility vehicles because this type of vehicle is involved in rollover-

related occupant deaths more often (on a per-vehicle basis) than other

vehicle types. Utility vehicles experience 98 rollover fatalities for

every million vehicles registered.3 This is more than twice

the rate of all other light vehicle types combined--44 deaths per

million registered vehicles (although small pickup trucks have a

similar fatal rollover rate--93 deaths per million registered

vehicles).4

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

\3\ Fatality rates given are averages of 1991-1994 rates, using

fatality data from FARS and vehicle registration data from R.L. Polk

and Company, which was limited to the 14 most recent model years at

the time of the Status Report.

\4\ According to a review of the National Automotive Sampling

System (NASS), rollover crashes accounted for over 28 percent of all

light duty vehicles fatalities in 1997. Light duty vehicles are

passenger cars, pickup trucks, vans, and sport utility vehicles with

a gross vehicle weight rating of 10,000 pounds or less. Vans and

sport utility vehicles are both considered multipurpose passenger

vehicles for purposes of NHTSA regulations. From 1991 through 1994,

an average of 8,857 occupants of light duty vehicles died in

rollover crashes annually. (1991-1994 average from Fatality Analysis

Reporting System (FARS)) These fatal rollover crashes occurred with

all types of vehicles; the greatest number occurred in small

passenger cars, followed by small pickup trucks.

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

This does not mean, however, that utility vehicles are unsafe

overall compared to other vehicle types. The overall fatality rate (for

crashes of all types, i.e., front, rear, side and rollover crashes) for

utility vehicles is 163 fatalities per million registered vehicles,

compared to 169 for all light duty vehicles combined. Small pickup

trucks have the highest overall fatality rate, at 217 fatalities per

million registered vehicles, followed by small cars, at 200.

B. Existing Utility Vehicle Rollover Warning Label

Currently, utility vehicles are required to have a label advising

drivers that the handling and maneuvering characteristics of these

vehicles require special driving practices (49 CFR 575.105). The label

must be permanently affixed in a location in the vehicle which is

``prominent and visible to the driver.'' A common location used by

manufacturers is the sun visor. No minimum size requirements are

specified for the label or lettering. The label must be ``printed in a

typeface and color which are clear and conspicuous.'' The label must

include the following or similar language:

This is a multipurpose passenger vehicle which will handle and

maneuver differently from an ordinary passenger car, in driving

conditions which may occur on streets and highways and off road. As

with other vehicles of this type, if you make sharp turns or abrupt

maneuvers, the vehicle may roll over or may go out of control and

crash. You should read driving guidelines and instructions in the

Owner's Manual, and WEAR YOUR SEAT BELTS AT ALL TIMES.

Utility vehicles are also required to have information in the vehicle

owner's

[[Page 11725]]

manual. The current requirement specifies the following or similar

language:

Utility vehicles have higher ground clearance and a narrower

track to make them capable of performing in a wide variety of off-

road applications. Specific design characteristics give them a

higher center of gravity than ordinary cars. An advantage of the

higher ground clearance is a better view of the road allowing you to

anticipate problems. They are not designed for cornering at the same

speeds as conventional 2-wheel drive vehicles any more than low-

slung sports cars are designed to perform satisfactorily under off-

road conditions. If at all possible, avoid sharp turns or abrupt

maneuvers. As with other vehicles of this type, failure to operate

this vehicle correctly may result in loss of control or vehicle

rollover.

C. Summary of NPRM

On April 13, 1998, the agency published an NPRM proposing to modify

this labeling requirement. The proposed changes were based on the

results of a series of focus groups conducted in June 1996 as well as

the agency's experience in the rulemaking to improve the air bag

warning labels.5 The proposed changes included use of bright

colors, graphics, and short bulleted text messages, instead of the

current text-only format. The rollover focus groups and other focus

groups formed by the agency have consistently concluded that labels

like the existing utility vehicle label (long unbroken passages of text

and no graphics) are less likely to be read than labels with minimal

wording and graphics.

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

\5\ Copies of the Focus Group Report, dated August 1996, as well

as the three potential labels proposed in the NPRM are in docket

NHTSA 98-3381.

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

NHTSA explained in the NPRM that the American National Standard

Institute (ANSI) has a standard 6 for product safety signs

and labels (ANSI Z535.4) that identifies a hierarchy of hazard levels

ranging from extremely serious to moderately serious and specifies

corresponding hierarchies of signal words, i.e., ``danger,''

``warning,'' and ``caution,'' and of colors. For the header, the ANSI

standard specifies a red background with white text for ``danger,'' an

orange background with black text for ``warning,'' and a yellow

background with black text for ``caution.''

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

\6\ This standard was not considered by the June 1996 rollover

focus groups in their deliberations, however the standard was

considered in a series of air bag label focus groups in October

1996.

ANSI Requirements for Color Coded Header Messages for the Different

Levels of Hazard

[Listed in declining level of hazard]

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

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

Imminently hazardous situation ``Danger''........... Red background

which will result in death or with white

serious injury if not avoided. text.

Potentially hazardous situation ``Warning''.......... Orange

which could result in death or background with

serious injury. black text.

Potentially hazardous situation ``Caution''.......... Yellow

which could result in minor or background with

moderate injury. black text.

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

The ANSI standard specifies that pictograms should be black on white,

with occasional uses of color for emphasis, and that message text

should be black on white.

The NPRM proposed three different labels for comment. Proposed

label 1 used the ANSI color format with the heading background in

orange with the words in black. The remainder of the label had a white

background with black text and drawings. Proposed label 2 used a color

scheme like the air bag warning labels, which is the same as the ANSI

color format except that the background color for the heading in the

label is yellow. Proposed label 3 employed the color scheme used in the

focus groups--the heading area had a red background with white text.

The graphic areas had a yellow background with black and white

drawings. The text area had a black background with yellow text.

Proposed label 1 used two graphics to the left of the areas with

heading and text. Proposed labels 2 and 3 had a heading area across the

top of the label, with two graphics surrounding a text area below. All

three proposed labels had a graphic of the area on a seat belt where

the buckle is, with the belt not fully buckled. Proposed labels 1 and 2

had a graphic with a vehicle on a curved road that was tipping.

Proposed label 3 had a graphic of a tipped vehicle with a curved arrow

under it and a person being ejected from the vehicle.

Despite focus group preference for the signal word ``danger,'' the

agency proposed the use of the word ``warning'' as more appropriate to

the level of risk. The agency also noted that the word ``warning'' is

used in the air bag warning label. NHTSA sought comment on whether to

use the phrases ``High Risk of Rollover'' or ``Higher Rollover Risk''

in the label. Proposed labels 1 and 2 used the phrase ``High Risk of

Rollover'' in the text and heading areas respectively. Proposed label 3

used the phrase ``Higher Rollover Risk.'' Proposed label 3 also used

the phrase ``Always Buckle Up.'' Proposed labels 1 and 2 included the

phrase ``Avoid Sudden Stops and Sharp Turns.''

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P

[[Page 11726]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09MR99.053

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09MR99.054

[[Page 11727]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09MR99.055

BILLING CODE 4910-59-C

Prior to publication of the NPRM, NHTSA had received a petition for

reconsideration from the American Automobile Manufacturers Association

(AAMA) of a provision in the air bag warning label requirements that

prohibits the utility vehicle rollover warning label and the air bag

label from being on the same side of the sun visor. Currently, the

utility vehicle rollover warning label must be permanently affixed to

the instrument panel, windshield frame, driver's side sun visor, or

some other location on the vehicle interior visible from the driver's

position. Under current requirements, if the utility vehicle rollover

warning label is placed on the sun visor, it must be on the front side.

Thus, a manufacturer which chooses this popular location must place the

air bag warning label on the back side of the sun visor with the air

bag alert label on the front. In the April 1998 NPRM, NHTSA sought

comments on whether it should: (1) retain the current location

requirements; (2) retain the current utility vehicle warning label

location requirements and remove the prohibition from the air bag

warning label location requirements; or (3) amend the utility vehicle

rollover warning label requirements to prohibit its placement on the

driver's side sun visor. As part of the last possibility, NHTSA sought

comment on an additional possible location, i.e., the lower, rear

corner of the driver's side door window visible from the vehicle

exterior. NHTSA also sought comment on whether a size should be

specified for the label.

NHTSA also asked for comments on possible changes to the owner's

manual requirement. NHTSA proposed three possible approaches to an

owner's manual information requirement: (1) retain the current owner's

manual information requirement, (2) specify that information on design

features which may make a vehicle more likely to rollover (e.g., higher

center of gravity) and driving practices which can reduce the risk that

a rollover will occur (e.g., avoiding sharp turns) or which can reduce

the likelihood of death or serious injury if a rollover occurs (e.g.,

wearing seat belts) be included in the owner's manual without

specifying the exact content of such information, or (3) specify the

inclusion of information beyond what is now specified. The agency

explained that this additional information could include: statistical

information comparing the rollover risk of utility vehicles with other

light passenger vehicles, statistical information demonstrating the

lower risk of fatality or injury if seat belts are worn, information on

the types of situations that can result in a rollover, and information

on how to properly recover from a driving scenario that could result in

rollover.

On May 15, 1997, American Suzuki Motor Corporation (Suzuki)

petitioned NHTSA to modify the existing utility vehicle label to

include additional language on the circumstances which may lead to

rollovers and the specific actions a driver can take to reduce the risk

of rollovers in those circumstances.7 Suzuki also asked the

agency to amend the requirement to require the label in all light

trucks, not just utility vehicles. The agency explained that it

considered the Suzuki petition moot, since the requested actions were

under consideration in several open rulemakings, including this

rulemaking, regarding consumer information on rollover prevention, and

in other agency consumer information activities and sought comment on

whether to extend the utility vehicle label requirement to all light

trucks (trucks, buses, and MPVs) or to any subset of this category

(e.g., all utility vehicles). The agency proposed a lead time of 180

days between the final rule and its implementation.

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

\7\ Suzuki suggested the following language in its petition:

If, for any reason, your vehicle slides sideways or spins out of

control at highway speeds, the risk of rollover is greatly

increased. This condition can be created when two or more wheels

drop off onto the shoulder and the driver steers sharply in an

attempt to reenter the roadway. To reduce the risk of rollover in

these circumstances, if conditions permit, hold the steering wheel

firmly and slow down before pulling back into the travel lanes with

controlled steering movements.

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

III. Summary of the Comments

NHTSA received 19 comments on the NPRM from six manufacturers, two

consumer interest groups, three trade associations, six business

students, and two other organizations.

[[Page 11728]]

A. Revision and Upgrade of the Label

Only one commenter, Exponent Failure Analysis, explicitly opposed

the new label, based on a belief that it could lead consumers to

purchase vehicles that are overall less safe.8 Advocates for

Highway and Auto Safety (Advocates) reiterated its long-standing belief

that a rollover standard is needed and expressed skepticism about

whether a new label can reduce rollovers. Consumers Union also stated

that additional activities are needed to reduce rollovers. Mercedes-

Benz, who currently does not produce any vehicles that are subject to

the requirement, believes that the current label should be sufficient

to inform its customers of the special driving characteristics of

utility vehicles.9 Honda Motor Corporation (Honda) agreed

that the new label might be more effective, but stated that NHTSA

should set performance requirements for labels instead of mandating

specific designs. Honda did not, however, suggest any method that could

be used to measure performance for a label. All other commenters either

did not object to changing the label or explicitly supported the

change.

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

\8\ NHTSA notes that the rationale given for this opposition

applies equally to the current label.

\9\ NHTSA notes that any voluntary label would not have to

comply with the Federal requirement.

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

Most of the commenters who expressed a particular preference for

one of the proposed labels supported label number 2, citing as bases

for their support both the color scheme and layout. With respect to the

color of the label's header, commenters expressed strong support for a

yellow background. The Association of International Automobile

Manufacturers (AIAM) and AAMA stated that NHTSA should allow the choice

of yellow or orange.

Except for Consumers Union which supports any message encouraging

belt use, most commenters objected to the graphic depicting the rider

being thrown from the vehicle. They believed this graphic shifted

emphasis away from rollover prevention to belt use. Commenters also

objected to graphics showing a curved road as implying that rollovers

only occur on curves. AIAM disliked the arrow in the graphic without a

road because it believed it was redundant of the depicted vehicle

attitude. AIAM, AAMA, and Honda all preferred the standard belt use

graphic, the three-point seat belt symbol (see 49 CFR 571.101), to the

graphic used on the proposed labels. Honda also suggested retesting the

graphics using ANSI's protocol for safety symbols (ANSI Z535.3-1991,

Criteria for Safety Symbols).

Overall, commenters expressed strong support for the word

``warning.'' Only one comment supported using the word ``danger'' for

the warning label. Three business students, Felix Bonet, Jeana Jewett

and Yuladys Sanchez, submitted a survey they conducted in which 70

percent of respondents said that the word ``danger'' would attract

attention more. AAMA stated that either ``Warning'' or ``Caution''

should be allowed since there is no evidence that consumers would react

differently to the two words. Some of the commenters preferred label 2

because the reason for the warning (rollover) was stated on the same

line as the word ``warning.'' Finally, AAMA, AIAM, and Honda asked that

the use of the safety alert symbol (triangle with an exclamation point)

be allowed on the label.

None of the commenters expressed explicit support for or opposition

to using either the phrase ``High Rollover Risk'' or the phrase

``Higher Risk of Rollover.'' Instead, commenters suggested other

alternative statements such as: ``Reduce Rollover Risk,'' ``To Avoid

Rollovers . . .,'' and ``This vehicle handles differently than a car.''

Those commenters who addressed the issue of what seat belt phrase

to use preferred the phrase ``Always Buckle Up,'' which was used on

proposed label 3. Honda stated that any belt use message should be

secondary since there are already numerous belt use messages. With

respect to the phrase ``Avoid Sudden Stops and Sharp Turns,'' which was

included on proposed labels 1 and 2, commenters stated that they

disliked both maneuver statements because these maneuvers are often

used to avoid crashes. The commenters suggested adding a statement

regarding speed and alcohol use since these are common factors in

rollover crashes. Commenters also suggested adding a statement to the

label to see the owner's manual and allowing foreign language

translations of the label.

B. Location and Size of the Label in the Vehicle

With respect to the label's location, only one commenter, the

Insurance Institute for Highway (IIHS), stated that NHTSA should

prohibit the utility vehicle label from being placed on the sun visor.

IIHS believed that the utility label's presence on the sun visor would

diminish the effect of the air bag label. IIHS, along with Consumers

Union, preferred the location of the driver's side window. Advocates

stated that it did not have a strong position on the location of the

label, except that it believed that safety labels (including air bag

labels) should be visible at all times and should not be located on the

back of the sun visor. Many commenters believe the agency should allow

flexibility on the label's location, including allowing both the air

bag label and the utility vehicle label to be on the same side of the

sun visor.

In general, commenters supported giving manufacturers flexibility

on the size of the label. One commenter suggested specifying a specific

minimum font size so that manufacturers would not be tempted to make

the labels too small. Other commenters opposed specifying a minimum

size and supported maintaining the current ``prominent and visible to

the driver'' language.

C. Inclusion of New Rollover Statement in the Owner's Manual

AIAM believes that NHTSA should specify the exact wording of the

discussion in the owner's manual, but that it should not be the

currently required discussion. Several of the commenters stated that

the current requirement should be changed. Advocates stated that

statistical information should not be required because it can change

from year to year. Finally, several commenters expressed support for

option two (specifying topics to cover but not exact language) because

it provides manufacturers with more flexibility.

D. Vehicle Applicability and Effective Date

In the April 1998 NPRM, NHTSA asked for comments on extending the

utility vehicle rollover requirement to all light trucks (trucks,

buses, and MPVs) or to any subset of this category (such as all utility

vehicles). The commenters were split on whether NHTSA should extend

this requirement to other vehicles. Some commenters stated that this

should be the subject of a separate rulemaking, while others said that

the agency should wait to determine the effectiveness of a new label

before extending the requirement to other vehicles. There were no

comments on extending the labeling requirement to all utility vehicles.

With regard to the issue of leadtime, all commenters said 180 days

was adequate for label changes. However, commenters said that they

would need at least one year if changes were made to the owner's

manual, as these manuals are often ordered at one time for the entire

model year.

E. Additional Issues

In its comments on the NPRM, AAMA asked NHTSA to write the rule so

that

[[Page 11729]]

individual manufacturers could change the language and graphics on the

label upon seeking and receiving the Administrator's permission to

allow for changes in technology without the need for rulemaking.

IV. Agency's Decision and Response to Comments

A. Revision and Upgrade of the Label

NHTSA has decided to amend the existing utility vehicle rollover

warning labeling requirement. The agency believes the modifications

made by this final rule will make the information more noticeable and

understandable to consumers and, therefore, increase the chance that

the labels can affect driver behavior to reduce rollovers and thus

reduce fatalities and injuries. NHTSA has decided to use the format in

label 2 with two graphics surrounding the label's text and a heading

above. The rule requires the graphic depicting the use of a seat belt

to be on the right and the rollover graphic to be on the left.

The agency has decided to use the color yellow in the header. The

agency recognizes that the use of the color yellow is inconsistent with

the ANSI standard, which specifies the use of orange for headers

relating to potentially hazardous situations, such as the ones

addressed by this final rule, which could result in death or serious

injury. However, the use of yellow is consistent with the color chosen

by the agency for the header of the air bag label. NHTSA specified the

use of yellow for air bag warning labels because of an overwhelming

focus group preference for that color and the meaning associated with

that color (focus groups associated the word ``caution'' with yellow

and associated no meaning with the word orange).10 The

agency believes that the use of orange for rollover warning labels and

yellow for air bar warning labels could create confusion. In addition,

commenters expressed strong support for the color yellow. The rule does

not allow the use of orange in the header. This prohibition is

consistent with the air bag warning label.

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

\10\ Only two of the 53 focus group participants preferred

orange. Participants generally stated that yellow was more eye-

catching than orange. Participants also noted that red (stop) and

yellow (caution) had meaning to them, but not orange.

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

The agency agrees with the comments of AIAM, AAMA, and Honda and

has decided to adopt the standard belt use graphic, the three-point

seat belt symbol (see 49 CFR 571.101), instead of the buckle graphic

used on the three proposed labels. NHTSA believes that consistency in

graphics will prevent any confusion about the meaning of a particular

pictogram. NHTSA understands the commenters' belief that a curved road

in the vehicle graphic might lead consumers to believe that rollovers

can only occur on a curved road and should be removed. In addition, the

agency agrees that the arrow underneath the tilting vehicle clutters

the graphic and should also be removed. The agency believes, however,

that some frame of reference is needed so that people will not be

confused and conclude either that the graphic was misprinted on the

label or that the label was placed on the vehicle crooked. NHTSA has,

therefore, decided to change the vehicle graphic to show a tilting

vehicle on a horizontal plane.

In response to Honda's comment and to determine which graphics

would be most effective, NHTSA conducted additional consumer testing of

the recommended graphics in accordance with the ANSI protocol for

evaluating symbol comprehension. Focus group testing was done on the

tilting vehicle graphic and on the two alternate seat belt graphics

(the graphic used in Standard No. 101, Controls and displays, and a

graphic like the one used in the NPRM except depicting a 3-point belt

instead of a lap belt). In addition, to test the overall comprehension

of the graphics, NHTSA tested the label with all text deleted except

the word ``warning''.

Participants were shown the three graphics (the tilting vehicle

graphic and the two seat belt graphics), asked to identify what the

graphic meant or was trying to tell them, and asked to choose from four

possible responses. Of the four responses provided, one was correct,

two were incorrect, and one indicated ``critical confusion.''

11 With respect to the two seat belt graphics, 95 percent of

the participants chose the correct response for the seat belt graphic

used in Standard No. 101, Controls and displays, 1 percent chose the

incorrect response and 4 percent chose the critical confusion response.

For the 3-point seat belt graphic, 86 percent chose the correct

response, 5 percent chose incorrectly and 7 percent chose the critical

confusion response. With respect to the tilting vehicle graphic, 81

percent of the participants chose the correct response, 18 percent

chose the incorrect response and 1 percent chose the critical confusion

response. Participants were also shown the new label with all text

deleted except the word ``warning'' and asked to identify what the

label as a whole meant or was trying to tell them. Ninety-four percent

of the participants chose the correct meaning of the label (5 percent

chose the incorrect meaning and 1 percent chose the critical confusion

response). NHTSA believes the addition of the seat belt graphic along

with the word ``warning'' provided a context for the tilting vehicle

graphic so that participants understood the overall meaning of the

label.

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

\11\ ``Critical confusion'' is the term used to describe the

situation in which a participant concludes that the meaning of the

graphic is the opposite of the meaning intended by the graphic's

designer.

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

NHTSA believes that these results demonstrate that the label is

readily understandable to the vast majority of people. The ANSI

standard calls for at least 85 percent of correct responses and not

more than 5 percent critical confusion. The seat belt graphic used in

Standard No. 101, Controls and displays, (with 95 percent of the

responses correct and only 1 percent critical confusion) is well within

the requirements of ANSI's standard. While the tilting vehicle graphic

did not receive a correct response of 85 percent when it was viewed in

isolation, the ANSI standard indicates that a label's graphic judged

unacceptable when so viewed may nevertheless become acceptable if

explanatory text is added. The new rollover label has such explanatory

text. In addition, the tilting vehicle graphic had a critical confusion

response of only 1 percent. Further, the overall recognition level of

the label as a whole was high, with 94 percent of the participants

correctly identifying the meaning of the label.

The agency does not have any evidence that any of the suggested

signal words, i.e., ``danger'', ``warning'' or ``caution,'' would be

more effective than the others. It also does not have any information

showing that ``danger'' would be more appropriate than ``warning'' for

labels regarding the particular hazard addressed by this rulemaking.

The agency, therefore, sees no reason to depart from the voluntary

industry standard and has decided to use the word ``warning'' to comply

with the ANSI standard. The final rule also mandates the use of the

safety alert symbol. Manufacturers asked that the use of the alert

symbol be permitted instead of required. The agency believes that this

requirement will make the label more attention getting and will,

therefore, increase the effectiveness of the label. In addition,

requiring the safety alert symbol will also make the label's appearance

uniform with that of the air bag label.

With respect to the use of the phrases ``Higher Rollover Risk'' and

``High Risk of Rollover,'' NHTSA believes that the alternatives

suggested by the

[[Page 11730]]

commenters, ``Reduce Rollover Risk * * *'' and ``To Avoid Rollovers * *

*'', are less appropriate. While the proposed phrases invite the reader

to respond by taking both crash avoidance measures (i.e., more careful

driving) and injury reduction measures (i.e., seat belt use), the

alternative phrases invite crash avoidance measures only. Further, the

agency believes the phrase ``This vehicle handles differently than a

car'' is too wordy. One of the reasons the agency is modifying the

label is because the current one is too wordy. NHTSA also notes that

focus groups emphasized that statements should be short.

NHTSA is aware that the rollover risk is not ``high'' in absolute

terms, but it is higher for SUVs than other vehicle types.

Consequently, the final rule requires the label to include the phrase

``Higher Rollover Risk.'' In addition, the rule requires that this

phrase be placed on the first line of the label following the signal

word ``Warning.'' NHTSA believes that the placement of this phrase at

the top of the label is important to highlight the purpose of the label

and to help alert the driver to the importance of heeding its warnings.

NHTSA chose to delete the ``sudden stops'' statement from the label

since both the focus group and the commenters expressed concern that

these maneuvers are often used to avoid crashes. The final rule

requires the statement: AVOID ABRUPT MANEUVERS AND EXCESSIVE SPEED.

NHTSA believes that this statement makes the driver aware of particular

practices that should be avoided. The final rule also requires the use

of the phrase ``Always Buckle Up'', which was preferred by commenters,

and specifies that it be placed as the second statement on the label.

The agency believes that this message is easily understood and

effectively conveys the importance of wearing a seat belt. The agency

has decided not to adopt an alcohol use statement as suggested by the

commenters as it believes this issue is better addressed in other ways.

NHTSA agrees with the commenters that the label should include a

statement urging the driver to look in the vehicle owner's manual for

further information. NHTSA recognizes that it did not adopt a similar

statement proposed for the air bag warning labels. It did not do so

because some members of the air bag focus groups expressly objected to

it, and indicated they wanted the label itself to tell them what they

need to know about air bag dangers and how to avoid them. The agency

believes that it is harder, within the practical limitations imposed by

a relatively small warning label, to provide the basic information

necessary for avoiding rollover dangers than it is to provide

information necessary for avoiding air bag dangers. These limitations

make it necessary to place much of the basic information about rollover

dangers in the owner's manual. The owner's manual will include a

discussion of the vehicle design features which cause this type of

vehicle to be more likely to rollover (e.g., higher center of gravity),

a discussion of the driving practices that can reduce the risk of a

rollover (e.g., avoiding sharp turns at excessive speed), and an

explanation of why it is important to wear a seat belt (i.e., that

unbelted occupants are significantly more likely to die in a rollover

crash than belted occupants). The agency believes that it is both

important and appropriate to have a statement on the label reminding

the driver to read the information in the owner's manual and is

requiring that it be included.

B. Location and Size of the Label in the Vehicle

NHTSA conducted a literature search for information on warning

placement to assist the agency in determining the most appropriate

location for the label. The agency found a number of sources of

guidance. ANSI Z535.4 (1991) permits multiple hazard warnings in the

same location if more than one hazard exists for a product and either

the sources of the hazards are in close proximity to each other or the

hazards are preventable from a common location. However, the standard

recommends that individual messages have sufficient space around them

to prevent them from visually blending together. The Westinghouse

Electric Corporation (1981) guidelines recommend against placing

multiple hazard warnings in the same location. In cases in which

multiple warnings are provided, the guidelines prohibit placing

warnings concerning hazards with different levels of seriousness in

close proximity to each other. Further, according to a study done for

the Consumer Product Safety Commission, label recognition decreases as

the number of labels increases. This was a limited study (10 subjects

for each condition) done on all terrain vehicles (ATV) warnings. It

tested label recognition when there were different numbers (4, 7, 9, or

11) of warning labels present.

In response to comments and in light of the results of its

literature review, the agency is allowing the utility vehicle label to

be placed on either (1) the driver's sun visor (either side) or (2) the

driver's side window. The agency believes that this will allow

manufacturers two alternatives if it is not possible to place both the

air bag label and the utility vehicle label on the same side of the sun

visor. Allowing manufacturers to put the utility vehicle label on

either side of the sun visor, they could choose to put the air bag

label on the front, increasing its prominence, if it is not possible to

put both labels on the front. Based on the research, allowing both

labels on the sun visor should not result in information overload

because: (1) There are only 2 hazards being warned about; (2) actions

that would avoid both rollover and air bag hazards can be avoided from

the driver's seating position; and (3) both hazards have the same

degree of seriousness.

However, to maintain the separateness of the labels and their

messages, the agency is specifying that the labels cannot be

contiguous. Further, to keep the pictograms of the two labels from

running together visually, the final rule also specifies that the air

bag warning label must be to the left of the utility vehicle rollover

warning label when both labels are placed on the same side of the sun

visor. Since the pictogram on the air bag warning label is on its left

side, placing that label to the left of the rollover warning label puts

that pictogram far from the pictograms on the rollover warning label.

Finally, the final rule requires that a rollover alert label, similar

to the air bag alert label, must be placed on the front of the sun

visor if the utility vehicle label is put on the back of the sun visor.

With respect to specifying a particular size for the label, NHTSA

believes that concerns over liability make it unlikely that

manufacturers would make the label, or its contents, too small.

Further, despite the absence of any current requirement about label

size, no commenter gave an example of a rollover warning label that the

commenter regarded as too small. As to lettering size, NHTSA believes

that specifying a minimum font size is unnecessary at this time. NHTSA

has not required any particular font face or size for the air bag

warning label. Manufacturers, particularly those which choose to place

both the air bag warning label and the rollover warning label on the

same side of the sunvisor, may wish to use the same font face and size

in both labels. Today's rule allows them the flexibility to do so.

NHTSA, therefore, decided not to specify either a particular font face

or font size for the rollover label. As the label size has not been a

problem in the past, the final rule retains the current requirement

that the

[[Page 11731]]

label be ``legible, visible and prominent'' to the driver. If the

agency becomes aware of cases in which the size of the label or label's

text is too small, we will revise the rule to specify label and font

size.

C. Inclusion of New Rollover Statement in the Owner's Manual

Today's rule requires owner's manuals to include the following

statements and information:

(1) The statement ``Utility vehicles have a significantly higher

rollover rate than other types of vehicles.''

(2) A discussion of the vehicle design features which cause this

type of vehicles to be more likely to rollover (e.g., higher center of

gravity);

(3) A discussion of the driving practices that can reduce the risk

of a rollover (e.g., avoiding sharp turns at excessive speed); and

(4) The statement: ``In a rollover crash, an unbelted person is

significantly more likely to die than a person wearing a seat belt.''

The agency believes that the general nature of the requirements

about discussions of design features and driving practices will allow

manufacturers to tailor language to their specific vehicles. At the

same time, the requirements are specific enough to ensure that critical

topics are included. NHTSA believes that uniformity in the two required

statements is important in order to underscore the message contained on

the label. The agency believes that uniformity is not needed with

respect to the discussion of vehicle design features which make these

vehicles more prone to rollover or the driving practices that can

reduce the risk of rollover. The agency believes that manufacturers are

in a better position to advise drivers as to which particular features

of their vehicles are most relevant.

D. Vehicle Applicability and Effective Date

In light of the lack of comments on the issue of extending the

requirement to all utility vehicles, NHTSA analyzed the statistics for

percent rollovers per single vehicle crashes (%RO/SVC) for vehicles

with a wheelbase of 110 inches compared to the %RO/SVC for

vehicles with a wheelbase of >110 inches to determine the rollover rate

for different vehicle types. The rollover rate for utility vehicles

with a wheelbase of 110 inches was 57.5 percent, the highest

of all the types. The rollover rate was 9.5 percent for utility

vehicles with a wheelbase of >110 inches and 48.9 percent for all

utility vehicles.12 Small pickup trucks (those with a

wheelbase of 110 inches) had the next highest rollover rate,

with 41.4 percent. The results are summarized in Table 1.

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

\12\ Utility vehicles with a wheelbase 110 inches had

a rollover rate of only 9.5 percent. These statistics were generated

from 1997 National Automotive Sampling System data.

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

In light of these numbers, NHTSA has decided not to extend the

requirement to other vehicles at this time. The vehicles with the

highest rollover rate are already required to have a rollover warning

label. Therefore, the costs associated with the new labeling

requirement should be minimal.

The agency notes that it is undertaking a research program to

examine various measurements to determine susceptibility to rollover on

an individual vehicle basis instead of on a vehicle type basis.

Depending on the results of this research, NHTSA may revisit the issue

of what vehicles should be required to have a rollover warning label.

Table 1.--Percent Rollover per Single Vehicle Crashes (% RO/SVC)

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

110'' >110''

All wheelbase wheelbase

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

Car........................... 17.4 20.1 11.0

Utility Vehicle............... 48.9 57.5 9.5

Van........................... 22.2 \1\ 8.3 30.4

Pickup........................ 37.5 41.4 25.6

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

\1\ This number may not be reliable. It reflects a very small number of

vans with wheelbases 110 inches. This is because the most

popular minivans have wheelbases longer than 110 inches.

The new label and owner's manual requirements contain important

information that more effectively alerts drivers to the risk the

vehicles will roll over, the steps to take to avoid that risk, and the

steps to take to reduce the chance of injury in the event of a

rollover. NHTSA, therefore, believes that a September 1, 1999 effective

date for the label and owner's manual requirements is appropriate.

NHTSA believes that manufacturers will have sufficient leadtime to

design new labels and revise owner's manuals to include the information

required by today's rule. With respect to the labeling requirement, all

of the commenters agreed that a leadtime of 180 days was sufficient to

design, produce and install a new label. In addition, the new label

directs the driver to consult the owner's manual for further

information, as the agency believes that drivers and passengers should

be aware of the information contained in the owner's manual. Although

commenters said that they would need at least one year to make any

changes to the owner's manual as these manuals are often ordered at one

time for the entire model year, the agency believes that any changes

can be made within 180 days. Manufacturers generally order owner's

manuals three to four months (in June or July) before the start of the

new model year of production. NHTSA believes that a September 1, 1999,

effective date will provide manufacturers with sufficient lead time to

make all the changes required by today's rule prior to publication of

the new owner's manuals. Further, the agency notes that if for any

reason a manufacturer is unable to make the changes before the new

manual is published, the manufacturer may place an insert with the

required information in the owner's manual.

E. Additional Issues

Today's rule does not permit manufacturers to make changes to the

label upon seeking and receiving special permission from the

Administrator. NHTSA believes it is important that people see the same

message in all utility vehicles subject to this final rule. The agency

believes that inconsistency in the content of the label could cause

confusion and undermine the

[[Page 11732]]

effectiveness of the label's safety message.

V. Policy on Use of Standards vs. Focus Groups

In the NPRM, NHTSA also raised the issue of the circumstances in

which it is appropriate in its rulemaking not to follow standards

established by voluntary consensus standards organizations. The agency

explained that under the National Technology Transfer and Advancement

Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Federal agencies must consider and adopt the use

of ``voluntary consensus standards'' to implement their ``policy

objectives or activities,'' unless doing so would be ``inconsistent

with applicable law or otherwise impractical.'' A ``voluntary consensus

standard'' is defined as a technical standard developed or adopted by a

legitimate standards-developing organization (``voluntary consensus

standards body''). According to NTTAA's legislative history, a

``technical standard'' pertains to ``products and processes, such as

the size, strength, or technical performance of a product, process or

material.'' Further, a voluntary consensus standards organization under

the NTTAA is one that produces standards by consensus and observes the

principles of due process, openness, and balance of interests.

Consistent with the NTTAA, NHTSA requested comments on the extent

to which any final choice regarding colors and signal words should be

guided by the focus group preferences instead of the ANSI standard.

NHTSA also requested comments on the broader issue of the circumstances

in which it would be appropriate for agency rulemaking decisions to be

guided by focus group results or other information when such

information is contrary to a voluntary consensus standard such as the

ANSI standard.

The agency received little comment on this issue. In general, both

manufacturers and consumer groups stated that while NHTSA should seek

and consider input from focus groups and voluntary standards, the

agency should rely on its own expertise and judgment when making any

regulatory or policy decisions. Advocates and Honda were concerned that

focus groups preferences were unscientific and unreliable and

therefore, did not believe too much emphasis should be placed upon

them.

NHTSA recognizes that the ANSI's mission in developing and issuing

its standard for communicating information about a comprehensive

hierarchy of hazards differs somewhat from that of the agency's focus

groups in designing an effective label for a specific hazard and that

their conclusions about the manner of communication may therefore

differ. Given that agency labeling decisions are highly dependent on

the facts regarding the specific hazard being addressed, the agency

will make case-by-case determinations of the extent to which NHTSA

should follow voluntary standards versus information from focus groups

and other sources. As it has in this rulemaking, NHTSA will rely on its

own expertise and judgement in making its determinations under the

NTTAA and the statutory provisions regarding vehicle safety standards.

VI. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' (58 FR

51735, October 4, 1993), provides for making determinations whether a

regulatory action is ``significant'' and therefore subject to Office of

Management and Budget (OMB) review and to the requirements of the

Executive Order. The Order defines a ``significant regulatory action''

as one that is likely to result in a rule that may:

(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or

adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the

economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public

health or safety, or State, local, or Tribal governments or

communities;

(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an

action taken or planned by another agency;

(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,

user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients

thereof; or

(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal

mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in

the Executive Order.

NHTSA has considered the impact of this rulemaking action under

E.O. 12866 and the Department of Transportation's regulatory policies

and procedures. This rulemaking document was not reviewed under E.O.

12866. Further, this action has been determined to be not

``significant'' under the Department of Transportation's regulatory

policies and procedures.

NHTSA believes that this rule will result in a minimal cost to

manufacturers and consumers of utility vehicles with a wheel base of

less than 110 inches since this rule only changes the format of an

existing label and involves a minor modification of existing text in

the owner's manual.

The consumer cost of the new modified rollover warning label with

two pictograms, short bulleted text and bright colors is dependent upon

the type of label used, the size of the label and the number of colors

used. The agency did not specify a print font face or size requirement

for the new label, but instead retained the current requirement that

the label be ``legible, visible and prominent'' to the driver. Thus,

the agency believes that manufacturer changes in label size will not

add an incremental cost to the present label. However, the requirement

for the new label to have black text on a yellow background and two

black pictograms on a white background requires the use of three

colors, and will add an incremental cost to the present requirement

dependent upon the type of label used by the manufacturer. The agency

estimates that incremental cost of the additional label colors could be

as little as $0.01 and as much as $0.10 per label, dependent upon the

type of label applied by the manufacturer.

Since new owner's manuals are printed for each production year, the

agency believes minor changes to the manual text will not increase its

cost.

Therefore, the total annual incremental cost of the new warning

rollover labels is estimated to be between $15,000 to $200,000. These

figures are based on the assumption that average number of utility

vehicles with wheelbases less than 110 inches sold per year in the U.S.

will continue to be between 1.5 and 2 million per year. Since these

costs are so minimal, a separate regulatory evaluation has not been

prepared.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.,

as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

(SBREFA) of 1996) whenever an agency is required to publish a notice of

rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it must prepare and make

available for public comment a regulatory flexibility analysis that

describes the effect of the rule on small entities (i.e., small

businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions).

However, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required if the head of

an agency certifies the rule will not have a significant economic

impact on a substantial number of small entities. SBREFA amended the

Regulatory Flexibility Act to require Federal agencies to provide a

statement of the factual basis for certifying that a rule will not have

a significant

[[Page 11733]]

economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

NHTSA has considered the impacts of this rule under the Regulatory

Flexibility Act. I hereby certify that this rule will not have a

significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

As explained above, NHTSA believes this rule will have minimal economic

impact.

Paperwork Reduction Act

Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a person is not required

to respond to a collection of information by a Federal agency unless

the collection displays a valid OMB control number. The OMB Clearance

number for the utility vehicle label (49 CFR 575.105) is 2127-0049.

NHTSA has considered the impact of the changes required by today's rule

and determined that they will not have any affect on the total burden

hours imposed on the public by 49 CFR 575.105.

National Environmental Policy Act

NHTSA has also analyzed this rule under the National Environmental

Policy Act and determined that it will not have a significant impact on

the human environment.

Executive Order 12612 (Federalism)

NHTSA has analyzed this rule in accordance with the principles and

criteria contained in E.O. 12612, and has determined that this rule

will not have significant federalism implications to warrant the

preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

Civil Justice Reform

This rule will 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.

Executive Order 13045

Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any

rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' as

defined under E.O. 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental, health or

safety risk that NHTSA has reason to believe may have a

disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets

both criteria, we must evaluate the environmental health or safety

effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned

regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably

feasible alternatives considered by us.

This rule is not subject to the Executive Order because it is not

economically significant as defined in E.O. 12866, and does not have a

disproportionate effect on children.

National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement

Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272)

directs us to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory

activities unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or

otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical

standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling

procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by

voluntary consensus standards bodies, such as the Society of Automotive

Engineers (SAE). The NTTAA directs us to provide Congress, through OMB,

explanations when we decide not to use available and applicable

voluntary consensus standards.

We reviewed all relevant American National Standards Institute

(ANSI) standards as part of developing the labeling and information

requirements that are the subject of this document. To the extent

consistent with our authorizing legislation, we used the following

voluntary consensus standard in developing the labeling and information

requirements:

American National Standard Institute (ANSI) standard for

product safety signs and labels (ANSI Z535.4).

List of Subjects

49 CFR Part 571

Motor vehicle safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,

Tires.

49 CFR Part 575

Consumer protection, Labeling, Motor vehicle safety, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements, Tires.

In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA amends chapter V of Title

49 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 571--FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS

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

follows:

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

delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.

2. In Sec. 571.208, in S4.5.1, revise the heading for paragraph (b)

and revise paragraph (b)(3) to read as follows:

Sec. 571.208 Standard No. 208; Occupant crash protection.

* * * * *

S4.5.1 * * *

(b) Sun visor air bag warning label.

* * * * *

(3) Except for the information on an air bag maintenance label

placed on the visor pursuant to S4.5.1(a) of this standard, or on a

utility vehicle label placed on the visor pursuant to 49 CFR

575.105(d)(1), no other information shall appear on the same side of

the sun visor to which the sun visor air bag warning label is affixed.

Except for the information in an air bag alert label placed on the

visor pursuant to S4.5.1(c) of this standard, no other information

about air bags or the need to wear seat belts shall appear anywhere on

the sun visor.

* * * * *

PART 575--CONSUMER INFORMATION REGULATIONS

3. The authority citation for part 575 continues to read as

follows:

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

delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.

4. Section 575.105 is revised to read as follows:

Sec. 575.105 Vehicle rollover.

(a) Purpose and scope. This section requires manufacturers of

utility vehicles to alert the drivers of those vehicles that they have

a higher possibility of rollover than other vehicle types and to advise

them of steps that can be taken to reduce the possibility of rollover

and/or to reduce the likelihood of injury in a rollover.

(b) Application. This section applies to utility vehicles.

(c) Definitions.

Utility vehicles means multipurpose passenger vehicles (other than

those which are passenger car derivatives) which have a wheelbase of

110 inches or less and special features for occasional off-road

operation.

(d) Required information. (1) Rollover Warning Label. (i) Except as

provided in paragraph (d)(2) of this section, each

[[Page 11734]]

vehicle must have a label permanently affixed to either side of the sun

visor, at the manufacturer's option, at the driver's seating position.

The label must conform in content, form and sequence to the label shown

in Figure 1 of this section, and must comply with the following

requirements:

(A) The heading area must be yellow, with the text and the alert

symbol in black.

(B) The message area must be white with black text.

(C) The pictograms must be black with a white background.

(D) The label must be appropriately sized so that it is legible,

visible and prominent to the driver.

(ii) When the rollover warning label required by paragraph

(d)(1)(i) of this section and the air bag warning label required by

paragraph S4.5.1(b) of 49 CFR 571.208 are affixed to the same side of

the driver side sun visor, the rollover warning label must be affixed

to the right (as viewed from the driver's seat) of the air bag warning

label and the labels may not be contiguous.

(2) Alternate location for warning label. As an alternative to

affixing the warning label required by paragraph (d)(1)(i) of this

section to the driver's sun visor, a manufacturer may permanently affix

the label to the lower rear corner of the forwardmost driver's side

window. The label must be legible, visible and prominent to a person

next to the exterior of the driver's door.

(3) Rollover Alert Label. If the label required by paragraph (d)(1)

of this section and affixed to the driver side sun visor is not visible

when the sun visor is in the stowed position, an alert label must be

permanently affixed to that visor so that the label is visible when the

visor is in that position. The alert label must comply with the

following requirements:

(i) The label must read:

ROLLOVER WARNING

Flip Visor Over

(ii) The label must be black with yellow text.

(iii) The label must be no less than 20 square cm.

(4) Owner's Manual. The owner's manual must include the following

statements and discussions:

(i) The statement ``Utility vehicles have a significantly higher

rollover rate than other types of vehicles.''

(ii) A discussion of the vehicle design features which cause this

type of vehicles to be more likely to rollover (e.g., higher center of

gravity);

(iii) A discussion of the driving practices that can reduce the

risk of a rollover (e.g., avoiding sharp turns at excessive speed); and

(iv) The statement: ``In a rollover crash, an unbelted person is

significantly more likely to die than a person wearing a seat belt.''

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P

Figure 1 to Sec. 575.105

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09MR99.056

Issued: March 3, 1999.

Ricardo Martinez,

Administrator.

[FR Doc. 99-5735 Filed 3-5-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-59-C