Quiero saber acerca de...

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 165 / Monday, August 30, 2021 / Notices telltale requirement is not consequential to safety due to driver familiarity with the ISO brake symbol.

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES

FMVSS No. 118, Power-Operated Window, Partition, and Roof Panel Systems The purpose of FMVSS No. 118 is to reduce the likelihood of death or injury due to accidental operation of a vehicles power-operated window, partition, and roof paneled systems.
NHTSA established the standard primarily to address the particular safety concern of child strangulation due to accidental operation of powered windows. The petitioners have requested an exemption from S6c of the standard, which specifies that the actuation device for closing a poweroperated window must operate by pulling away from the surface on which it is mounted.
The petitioners provide several reasons that an exemption from FMVSS
No. 118 would not unreasonably lower the safety of the Picnic-G6. First, the petitioners explain that Picnic intends to prohibit children below the age of 16
from riding in the Picnic-G6. The petitioners also argue that most of the exempted vehicles would be used for Picnics delivery service, and so would be unlikely to be occupied be people other than Picnic employees. The petitioners also state that the power window controls are located on the center console, away from the windows, which makes accidental activation of the controls unlikely. Finally, the petitioners note that only 10 of the Picnic-G6 vehicles would have a front passenger seat, and those are used for training purposes, so it is unlikely that an adult or child would be present to accidentally activate the power window controls.
FMVSS No. 126, Electronic Stability Control Systems To reduce the risk of deaths due to rollover crashes, FMVSS No. 126
requires that all vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating of 4,536 kilograms kg 10,000 pounds or less be equipped with an electronic stability control ESC system. ESC systems use automatic computer-controlled braking of individual wheels to address critical situations in which a driver may lose control of the vehicle. Preventing singlevehicle loss-of-control crashes is the most effective way to reduce deaths resulting from rollover crashes because most loss-of-control crashes culminate in the vehicle leaving the roadway, which dramatically increases the probability of a rollover. NHTSAs crash data study of existing vehicles equipped
VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:40 Aug 27, 2021

Jkt 253001

with ESC demonstrated that these systems reduce fatal single-vehicle crashes of passenger cars by 55 percent and fatal single-vehicle crashes of light trucks and vans LTVs by 50 percent.10
NHTSA estimates that ESC has the potential to prevent 56 percent of the fatal passenger car rollovers and 74
percent of the fatal LTV first-event rollovers that would otherwise occur in single-vehicle crashes.
The petitioners have requested an exemption from FMVSS No. 126 in its entirety. According to the petitioners, an exemption would not unreasonably lower the safety of the Picnic-G6
because the vehicle has similar handling and stability as comparable vehicles equipped with ESC, and there are mitigating factors that reduce the likelihood that the Picnic-G6 would be involved in a loss-of-control crash.
To demonstrate that the Picnic-G6
would have similar handling and stability to a comparable vehicle that is equipped with ESC, the petitioners have provided a dynamic test report Exhibit 6 to the petition comparing the performance of the Picnic-G6, which is not equipped with anti-lock brakes or ESC, with a Nissan e-NV200, which the petitioners state is a comparable vehicle that is equipped with these features.
The petitioners state that the report found that there were small differences in performance between the two vehicles that could be explained by the absence of anti-lock brake and ESC
systems on the Picnic-G6. However, the petitioners state that both vehicles had same behavior with understeer chassis balance, non-surprising behavior during weight transfer maneuvers and were easy to control at the limit. In addition, the petitioners provided a static stability test report Exhibit 7 that the petitioners claim shows that the Picnic-G6 has a static stability that is comparable to pickup trucks and passenger vans. NHTSA notes that the petitioners have requested that the entirety of both of these reports be withheld from public view because they contain confidential business information.
The petitioners also state that the Picnic-G6s limited speed and range reduce the risk of loss-of-control events, which, petitioners argue, were relevant factors to NHTSA in the past in making the findings needed to grant an exemption from FMVSS No. 126 under the LEV basis. The petitioners also argue that, unlike other light trucks and 10 Sivinski, R., Crash Prevention Effectiveness of Light-Vehicle Electronic Stability Control: An Update of the 2007 NHTSA Evaluation; DOT HS
811 486 June 2011.

PO 00000

Frm 00089

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

48473

delivery vehicles, the Picnic-G6 would not be operated at high speeds or over moderate and long distance, so the risk of a loss-of-control crash would be relatively lower, and should such a crash occur, the risk of injury would also be lower. Finally, the petitioners state that drivers would be trained to operate the exempted vehicle without ESC.
FMVSS No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection To reduce the number of fatalities due to crashes, FMVSS No. 208 sets minimum performance requirements relating to protection of occupants inside the vehicle, which includes the requirements that most vehicles be equipped with seat belts and advanced air bags. Per FMVSS No. 208, passenger cars and light trucks are required to provide protection using air bags for both belted and unbelted front outboard seated occupants of all sizes, including protections for out-of-position children in the front outboard passenger seat.
The petitioners request an exemption from the entire standard, because the Picnic-G6 is not equipped with air bags of any type.11
The petitioners provide the following rationale for their request. First, according to the petitioners, the PicnicG6 is compliant with the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe UNECE regulation 12 for the protection of the driver against the steering mechanism in the event of impact, and UNECE regulation 29 for the protection of the occupants of the cab of a commercial vehicle.12
Moreover, the petitioners state that, despite the Picnic-G6s lack of air bags, an exemption would not lower the safety risk of the vehicle for several reasons. First, they argue that the Picnic-G6 would be able to meet the S6
11 We note that the petitioners have requested an exemption from the entire standard, not just the requirement that the vehicle be equipped with air bags. However, it appears from the petition that the Picnic-G6 would be equipped with some occupant protection features, including seat belts. The petitioner has not sought exemptions from FMVSS
No. 209, Seat belt assemblies, or FMVSS No. 210, Seat belt assembly anchorages.
12 UNECE standards established under the 1958
UN ECE Agreement Concerning the Adoption of Uniform Conditions of Approval and Reciprocal Recognition of Approval for Motor Vehicle Equipment and Parts the 1958 Agreement are type approval standards. The 1958 Agreement is an international agreement that provides procedures for establishing uniform regulations regarding new motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment and for reciprocal acceptance of type-approvals issued under these regulations by contracting countries.
While the United States is a member of the UN ECE, it is not a contracting party to the 1958 Agreement, and thus is not bound by standards established under the 1958 Agreement.

E:FRFM30AUN1.SGM

30AUN1