Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
118568812
label
Regulatory Reform Issue [1981] (5)
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
118568812
contentType
document
title
Regulatory Reform Issue [1981] (5)
citationUrl
identifierLocal
94
collections
Records of the Office of the Chief of Staff (Reagan Administration)
James Cicconi's Subject Files
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
118568812
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1985-12-31
year
1985
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1981-01-01
year
1981
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
6c54d0d83a1af591
ocrText
JAB
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OFFICE
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
DECUTIVE
STATES
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20503
VANK
April 10, 1981
MEMORANDUM FOR THE VICE PRESIDENT AND THE DIRECTOR
FROM:
Jin Miller
File RC9 Retorm
SUBJECT:
Status Report on Regulatory Relief
Automobile Package: On Monday, April 6 the Vice President,
joined by Secretary of Transportation Lewis and several other
Administration officials, announced a package of aid to the
U.S. auto industry which included 34 specific regulatory re-
lief measures to be taken by EPA and NHTSA. (See Attachment
1.) Reaction to the package has generally been quite positive.
(For example, see Attachment 2.)
Section 504 Handicap Legislation: Task Force and OMB staff
reviewed legislation proposed by the Department of Transporta-
tion that would significantly lessen the burden on state and
local governments of providing transportation for handicapped
persons. We are circulating the DOT draft to Members of the
Task Force Working Group and will work with DOT staff to coordi-
nate and further refine DOT's approach.
Congressional Testimony: On Tuesday, I testified before the
Senate Commerce Committee's Subcommittee on Consumer Protec-
tion regarding the Consumer Product Safety Commission's re-
authorization. (See Attachment 3.) On Wednesday, Peter Petkas,
who continues (at our request) to direct the Regulatory Calendar
project, testified on his group's budget for FY 1981 and
FY 1982. (See Attachment 4.) The appropriations subcommittee,
led by Senator Garn, seemed satisfied that this staff function
should continue through FY 1982.
Regulatory Action Officers: We have now received the names
of regulatory action officers from all but two of the Cabinet
departments. These individuals will serve as contacts with the
private sector on specific issues involving their agencies,
and report directly to the Task Force contacts. (See Attach-
ment 5.)
ACTIONS TO
HELP THE
U.S. AUTO
INDUSTRY
APRIL 6, 1981
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
April 6, 1981
FACT SHEET
President Reagan's Program for the U.S. Automobile Industry
Promptly after taking office, President Reagan appointed a
Cabinet-level Task Force to examine the problems of the U.S. auto
industry. Based on the advice of the Task Force and other
Presidential advisers, he has adopted a positive program to
address directly the immediate problems of depressed sales,
record losses, and severe unemployment. The program also
addresses the industry's critical longer term needs to offer new
competitive models and to reduce unit costs.
BACKGROUND ON THE AUTO INDUSTRY
The Situation is Serious
o In 1980 a stagnant and inflationary economy reduced
sales of U.S.-made cars to the lowest point in 19
years. Compared with only three years earlier, total
auto sales (domestic and imported) were down 20 percent,
and sales of light trucks and vans were down 35 percent.
o
The domestic companies incurred unprecedented losses of
$4.3 billion in 1980.
o
The downturn in auto sales has exacted a severe human
toll. Over 180,000 auto workers are on indefinite
layoff, 300,000 more are estimated to be unemployed in
supplier industries, and another 100,000 are out of work
in the dealer network.
The Problems are Longer Term as well as Cyclical
o Not only are sales depressed because of the stagnant
economy, but the U.S. auto industry has experienced a
dramatic change in its markets, induced by escalating
energy prices. As gasoline increased from 70c per
gallon in January 1979 to $1.35 per gallon in February
1981, consumer demand shifted dramatically to small
cars. Partly as a result, imports increased from 18
percent to 28 percent of all auto sales during that same
period.
-2-
o The auto industry is also burdened with stringent
regulatory requirements which add hundreds of dollars to
the cost of each vehicle and billions to the industry's
capital requirements. Regulation also diverts
engineering and managerial talent from the industry's
adjustment problems.
The Industry Retains Tremendous Strengths
O Despite its unprecedented problems, the U.S. auto
industry has tremendous economic and competitive
strengths. It is now engaged in a $70-$80 billion
program of new investment to modernize its plants and
make its products more competitive. This program has
already resulted in lower production costs and the
introduction of technologically advanced, fuel-
efficient, front-wheel drive models.
To address the problems and exploit the strengths of this
important sector of our economy, the President has adopted a
program of economic recovery, regulatory relief, and other
important measures.
THE ECONOMIC RECOVERY PROGRAM
The cornerstone of the President's initiative for the auto
industry is his Economic Recovery Program, including spending
cuts, tax reforms, and general regulatory relief. There is
simply no doubt that revitalization of the economy is the single
most important remedy for the auto industry's problems.
Stimulating Sales, Profits, and Jobs
The Economic Recovery Program will provide immediate relief
to the industry by stimulating the sales of new cars and trucks:
o Renewed growth in real incomes and higher employment
will give consumers added income to buy new cars.
Reduced interest rates will lower the costs of
automobile financing, further encouraging new car sales.
The investment tax credit provided under the Accelerated
Cost Recovery System will increase commercial and fleet
purchases of new cars and trucks.
A stable economic environment will renew consumer
confidence and encourage individuals who have deferred
purchases in recent years to buy new cars and trucks.
-3-
The sales recovery induced by the President's program will
improve the industry's financial condition and restore job
opportunities:
o
Sales of new cars (foreign and domestic) should rise
from approximately 9 million units in 1980 to 11 million
units by 1982 and 12 million by 1983; truck sales should
show similar growth.
o
Since every 500,000 units of additional car or truck
sales generate nearly $1 billion in additional net
operating income, by 1983 this should amount to an
additional $6 billion per year (before taxes) for U.S.
auto makers.
o
Increased production should permit the rehiring of most
unemployed auto workers by the end of 1982.
Improving Productivity and Lowering Unit Costs
Over the longer term, the most important effect of the
Economic Recovery Program will be to reduce production costs,
thereby improving the industry's international competitive
position:
o
Higher production volumes will mean lower unit costs due
to economies of scale.
o
Lower inflation rates and reduced federal borrowing will
lower the cost to the industry of capital necessary for
plant modernization.
o
Tax reductions for individual taxpayers and lower rates
of inflation should also moderate pressures for costly
wage settlements and contribute to a more stable
environment for collective bargaining and labor
relations.
REGULATORY RELIEF
President Reagan is committed to reducing the excessive
burdens of regulation throughout the economy and has established
a Task Force on Regulatory Relief, chaired by the Vice President,
to oversee that process. The Presidential Task Force and the
Executive branch regulatory agencies will give high priority to
relief for the auto industry. These measures will result in
considerable savings in capital costs to the industry and even
greater savings to consumers.
-4-
The President recognizes the importance of protecting
health, safety, and the environment. Nevertheless, some of the
regulations governing the auto industry's plants and products are
unnecessarily stringent, and can be relaxed or rescinded with
little or no cost to worthwhile regulatory goals. Other
regulations now pending may be needed over the long run, but can
be safely postponed until the industry has completed its
structural adaptation.
Regulatory relief will benefit the auto industry and its
customers by:
o
Reducing substantially the cost of producing and
operating a new car or truck. This will not only
benefit consumers but further stimulate sales.
o
Freeing capital needed for essential investments in new
plant and equipment.
o Improving U.S. manufacturers' international competitive
position.
Working together, the Auto Industry Task Force, the
Presidential Task Force on Regulatory Relief, and the major
regulatory agencies have developed a four-part program:
(1) 34 Specific Regulatory Actions
The Acting Administrators of the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) and the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA) have today submitted to the Federal
Register notices of intent to rescind, revise, or repropose a
total of 34 specific regulations. EPA and NHTSA estimate that
over the next five years these actions would save the auto
industry more than $1.3 billion in capital that can be used
instead for needed plant modernization. In addition, these
actions will save consumers more than $8.0 billion over the next
five years. The actions are described in considerable detail in
the attachment.
(2) Statutory Requirements for High Altitude Emissions
As part of the proposed amendments to the Clean Air Act, EPA
will ask Congress to eliminate the requirement that all passenger
cars meet 1984 emissions standards at high altitudes. This
action alone would save $38 million in capital costs and $1.3
billion in consumer costs over five years.
As shown in the table below, the combined savings generated
by this legislative change and by the 34 specific regulatory
actions just described amount to $1.4 billion in capital costs
and $9.3 billion in consumer costs, or about $150 per car or
truck.
-5-
Savings from Actions to be Taken by EPA and NHTSA
($ billions over 5 years)
Agency
Capital
Consumer
EPA
$0.8
$4.3
NHTSA
0.6
5.0
Total
$1.4
$9.3
(Estimates include savings for high altitude requirements
and for 27 of 34 regulatory actions; estimated savings on
remaining 7 actions are not available. Source of estimates: EPA
and NHTSA (industry estimates typically run much higher).
(3) Regulations Earmarked for More Intensive Review
EPA and NHTSA have identified additional regulations on
which immediate action is not possible, but which are important
candidates for regulatory relief. These regulations, also listed
in the attachment, will be reviewed to see whether they should be
revised or rescinded.
(4) Longer Range Reforms
The President's program to reduce the regulatory burden on
the auto industry will be expanded to include:
O
Regulations administered by executive agencies other
than EPA and NHTSA.
O
Regulations where potential cost savings are not as
immediate as the other announced actions.
O
Additional changes in the Clean Air Act and other basic
regulatory statutes.
OTHER POLICY INITIATIVES
The President's program of economic recovery and regulatory
relief will materially improve the condition of the U.S. auto
industry, but more can--and will--be done to reinvigorate this
industry:
-6-
Antitrust
o
The President has asked the Attorney General to expedite
consideration of the industry's request to vacate the
1969 "smog decree" as soon as a pending appeal has been
concluded. The decree prohibits certain joint
statements by the industry to governmental agencies
concerned with auto emission and safety standards and
exchanges of certain technical information on emission
control devices.
The Department of Transportation (NHTSA) will waive the
prohibition on joint submissions on all of its future
regulatory initiatives.
EPA will adopt a liberal waiver policy and consider
requests to make joint statements on a case-by-case
basis.
O
The Federal Trade Commission has on its own initiative
withdrawn subpoenas for records in its long-standing
investigation of the auto industry. The FTC has
concluded that substantial changes in the industry have
occurred since the investigation began in 1976.
Labor
o
The Department of Labor is proposing to provide
increased assistance to displaced auto workers by
restructuring Federal programs for retraining and
relocation through the existing employment and training
delivery system.
Accelerated Federal Procurements
o The Administration is proposing to accelerate the
Federal procurement of motor vehicles by $100 million in
the current fiscal year, an action which would also
reduce operating costs of the federal automobile fleet.
In summary, the President's program addresses those
fundamental problems of the industry fostered by the Government
itself, thereby restoring needed sales, jobs, and profitability
in the short term, while also encouraging the retooling,
productivity improvements, and cost reductions that are critical
for the industry over the longer term.
ATTACHMENT:
REGULATORY RELIEF FOR THE AUTO INDUSTRY
Page
Actions Taken by the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA)
Notice of Intent Transmitted to
Federal Register
A-2
Fact Sheets on Individual Actions
A-9
List of Items for Further Study
A-27
Actions Taken by the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)
Notice of Intent Transmitted to
Federal Register
A-29
Fact Sheets on Individual Actions
A-39
List of Items for Further Study
A-58
Summary Table on Individual Actions
A-59
A-2
NOTICE OF INTENT TRANSMITTED
TO FEDERAL REGISTER ON APRIL 6, 1981
BY ACTING EPA ADMINISTRATOR
WALTER C. BARBER, JR.
A-3
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 50, 51, 60, 85, 86
National Primary and Secondary
Ambient Air Quality Standards
Requirements for Preparation, Adoption,
and Submittal of Implementation Plans
Standards of Performance for New
Stationary Sources
Control of Air Pollution from Motor
Vehicles and Motor Vehicle Engines
Control of Air Pollution from New
Motor Vehicles and New Motor
Vehicles Engines: Certification
and Test Procedures
AGENCY:
Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION:
Notice of Intent.
Summary: This notice describes a number of actions the
Environmental Protection Agency intends to implement in an effort
to reduce the regulatory burden on the motor vehicle industry.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Gregory J. Dana
Mobile Source Air Pollution
Control (ANR-455)
Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
Telephone: (202) 755-0596
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION:
In light of the serious financial problems facing the motor
vehicle industry, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has
reviewed its regulations to identify administrative changes which
could reduce the regulatory burden on the industry without
significantly affecting air quality. The purpose of this notice
is to describe the immediate and long-term actions EPA intends to
take to reduce regulatory pressures on the industry.
Rulemaking or other administrative proceedings will be
necessary to implement many of these actions. Where rulemaking
and other actions are necessary, EPA intends to initiate them by
the dates specified for items described below.
A-4
EPA estimates that these actions will result in savings to
the motor vehicle industry of $817 million and a consumer cost
savings of $4.3 billion over the next five years.
Following are descriptions of the actions EPA intends to
take:
1. Revise the statutory HC and CO standards for heavy-duty
trucks to a level that would not require catalysts.
EPA intends to revise the 1984 model-year hydrocarbon and
carbon monoxide standards for heavy-duty trucks to a level that
would not require the manufacturers to use catalysts on their
gasoline-powered heavy trucks.
EPA will publish a notice of proposed rulemaking on this
action by September 1981.
2. Relax the 10 percent Acceptable Quality Level to 40 percent
for assembly-line testing of light and heavy trucks.
Exhaust emission regulations for light and heavy trucks,
respectively, specify that light trucks and heavy-duty engines
must not exceed a failure rate of 10 percent during assembly-line
testing. 45 Fed. Reg. 63734 (September 25, 1980); 45 Fed. Reg.
4136 (January 21, 1980). This was a new requirement for heavy-
duty engines and a change from the 40 percent AQL for light
trucks. Automobiles are required to meet only a 40 percent
AQL. EPA intends to revise its rules for both light and heavy
trucks to require a 40 percent AQL, making the allowed failure
rate consistent with that for automobiles.
EPA will propose these amendments by September 1981.
3. Delay assembly-line testing for heavy-duty engines.
EPA intends to delay for two years all assembly line testing
(called selective enforcement audits) of 1984 and later model
year heavy-duty engines for exhaust emissions. This will allow
the manufacturers additional time to phase in the new transient
test equipment required by the 1984 heavy-duty engine
regulations.
EPA will propose this delay in the notice of proposed
rulemaking for revision of the HC and CO standards for heavy-duty
engines, to be published by September 1981.
4. Relax the statutory NO, emissions limits for heavy-duty
engines.
Section 202 (a) of the Clean Air Act requires a 75 percent
reduction in heavy-duty NO. X emissions from 1969 levels emitted
from gasoline engines; however, this requirement is subject to
revision by the Administrator after determining the maximum
A-5
degree of emission reduction that can reasonably be expected to
be available for production.
Studies indicate that there are major technological problems
for diesel-powered heavy-duty engines in meeting the statutory
NO X limit. EPA intends to propose a NOₓ standard for all heavy-
duty vehicles that represents the level that can be achieved by
diesel engines. This standard would apply for three years.
The Agency will publish a notice this month announcing that
the public hearing on this matter will be delayed at the request
of the industry. Because of the industry-requested delay, EPA
will not propose the heavy-duty NOₓ emission standard until May
1982.
5. Institute NO, emission averaging for light and heavy trucks.
EPA will propose to adopt an emission averaging scheme for
manufacturers to meet the NO. X emission reduction requirement for
light-duty trucks and heavy-duty engines. Averaging should
provide manufacturers with additional flexibility without
significantly increasing total emissions.
The Agency has published an advance notice of proposed
rulemaking for NOX averaging, 45 Fed. Reg. 79382 (November 28,
1980), and intends to propose an averaging scheme by May 1982,
concurrent with the proposed NOₓ standard for heavy-duty engines.
6.
Institute emission averaging for diesel particulate
emissions.
EPA will propose alternative diesel particulate averaging
schemes to replace the individual-vehicle standards currently in
place for 1985. Averaging should allow manufacturers to employ
the most cost-effective control technology strategies for their
diesel models, while assuring that total particulate levels will
not significantly increase beyond those allowable under the
current regulations.
EPA intends to propose alternative averaging schemes by
September 1981.
7. Eliminate the 1984 high-altitude requirement.
The Clean Air Act currently requires that 1984 model-year
cars meet applicable emission standards at all altitudes.
Section 202 (f) of the Clean Air Act. EPA will request that
Congress eliminate this requirement. This change will be
included as part of the Administration's coordinated effort on
revisions to the Clean Air Act.
A-6
8. Adopt a self-certification program for vehicles to be sold at
high altitude.
Under existing regulations, vehicles to be sold at
designated high-altitude areas must undergo prescribed high-
altitude certification testing. 45 Fed. Reg. 66984 (October 8,
1980). EPA intends to substitute a program under which
manufacturers self-certify that their vehicles will meet
applicable standards. As an alternative to certification EPA
will increase its emphasis on monitoring in-use vehicles at high
altitudes to verify compliance with standards.
EPA will promulgate regulations accomplishing these changes
by April 15, 1981, effective for model year 1982.
9. Forgo assembly-line testing at high altitudes.
Assembly-line testing for compliance with high-altitude
emission standards currently requires testing under high-altitude
conditions. 45 Fed. Reg. 66984 (October 8, 1980). Accordingly,
to perform selective enforcement audit tests, manufacturers would
be required either to construct test facilities in high-altitude
areas or to contract with high-altitude commercial test
facilities with limited capacity. EPA has decided not to direct
manufacturers to perform assembly-line testing for high-altitude
standards. Manufacturers will thus be able to avoid the costs
associated with such tests, including the costs of shipping
vehicles to high-altitude test facilities.
EPA will announce this action on April 6.
10. Initiate consolidated NO, waiver proceedings for light-duty
diesel-powered vehicles.
EPA will initiate consolidated proceedings to waive the
statutory NO. X standard from 1.0 to 1.5 gpm (to the maximum extent
permitted by law) for all diesel-powered light-duty vehicles
through the 1984 model year. This will provide manufacturers of
vehicles qualifying for waivers additional flexibility to meet
particulate standards, because more stringent NOₓ control often
increases particulate levels.
A notice has been sent to the Federal Register for
publication announcing the date by which applications must be
submitted for consideration in the consolidated proceedings and
the date of the hearing on the applications.
A-7
11. Initiate consolidated CO waiver proceedings for light-duty
vehicles.
EPA will initiate consolidated proceedings to waive the
statutory CO standard from 3.4 to 7.0 gpm (to the maximum extent
permitted by law) for classes of 1982 model-year light-duty
vehicles not previously produced to meet the 3.4 gpm standard.
A notice has been sent to the Federal Register for
publication announcing the date by which applications must be
submitted for consideration in the consolidated proceedings and
the date of the hearings on the applications.
12. Adopt equivalent non-methane hydrocarbon standards as an
option for all vehicles.
Current emission standards for hydrocarbons limit total
hydrocarbon emissions including methane, a non-reactive
hydrocarbon. Methane does not react with other pollutants to
form smog. State-of-the-art measurement technology permits
separate measurement of the non-methane component of hydrocarbon
emissions. EPA intends to develop non-methane hydrocarbon
standards equivalent to current total hydrocarbon standards as an
option for all vehicles.
EPA will propose a rule establishing equivalent non-methane
hydrocarbon standards by November 1, 1981.
13. Do not require use of onboard technology for the control of
hydrocarbon emissions resulting from the fueling of motor
vehicles.
EPA is charged with determining the feasibility and
desirability of requiring motor vehicles to be equipped to
control hydrocarbon emissions during motor vehicle fueling.
Section 202 (a) (6) of the Clean Air Act. EPA has decided not to
require motor vehicles to be equipped with this technology.
The Agency's findings will be published in the Federal
Register in June 1981.
14. Further streamline the motor vehicle certification program.
EPA will make changes in the administrative process by which
motor vehicles and motor vehicle engines are certified for
compliance with applicable exhaust emission standards. 40 C.F.R.
Part 86, Subpart A. This effort will focus on reducing paperwork
and increasing industry flexibility but will include steps to
assure that in-use compliance will not suffer.
EPA will promulgate regulations effecting these changes in
the certification program by October 1, 1981, effective for the
1983 model year.
A-8
15. Relax test vehicle exemption requirements.
Manufacturers desiring to operate uncertified prototype
vehicles under bona fide test programs must first receive
temporary exemptions from certification requirements. 40 C.F.R.
Part 85. EPA intends to review and revise existing exemption
requirements to reduce administrative burdens presently
associated with this program.
The Agency will propose amendments to the applicable
regulations by May 30, 1981.
16. Reduce the annual number of assembly line test orders.
EPA will reduce the number of selective enforcement audit
(i.e., assembly line) test orders to the maximum degree
consistent with maintaining approximately the current level of
compliance. EPA has already implemented a schedule reducing the
number of test orders by 22 percent for model year 1981, and 25
percent for model year 1982, assuming no significant increase in
industry noncompliance with exhaust emissions standards.
17. Explore deferring standards for paint shops.
EPA will discuss with the states changes in their State
Implementation Plans (SIPs) which, subject to their willingness
to submit revisions of plans, would have the effect of not
requiring electrostatic deposition of undercoat in the next two
years. Additionally, SIP requirements in those states which now
require electrostatic high transfer efficiency in topcoat
application would be deferred until 1984.
EPA is also reviewing the recently-promulgated new source
performance standard (NSPS) for auto body painting to consider
the effects of increased use of clear coat.
EPA will discuss changes in SIPs with the states by May
1981, with timing of subsequent changes dependent on the
states. EPA plans to complete its review of the NSPS for auto
body painting by July 1981.
18. Provide sufficient leadtime for compliance with emission
regulations.
EPA will assure, in future rulemakings, that there is
sufficient leadtime for compliance with automobile emission
regulations, as measured from the date of promulgation of
regulations.
April 6, 1981
s/s
Date
Walter C. Barber, Jr.
Acting Administrator
A-9
FACT SHEETS ON
INDIVIDUAL EPA ACTIONS
A-10
EPA ACTION #1:
EPA will propose to revise the 1984 model year
HC and CO standards to a level that would not
require the manufacturers to use catalysts on
their gasoline-powered heavy trucks.
DISCUSSION:
The regulations that have been adopted for the 1984 model
year require emission reductions of 90 percent for HC and CO
emissions. A new test procedure that measures emission in a
"transient" mode (i.e., constantly changing speed) has also been
adopted. This procedure is more appropriate for measuring
emissions as the service experienced by vehicles in use is
transient in nature, instead of long periods of use at constant
speeds. A full-time useful-life, which means that vehicles must
meet emission standards for their full useful lives rather than
for a shorter period (as is the case for passenger cars), was
adopted in this rulemaking.
Relaxation of the standards would allow substantial cost
savings. Emissions from this class of vehicles would still be
reduced significantly even with the relaxation of standards.
BENEFITS:
EPA estimates that this change will result in a $108 million
cost savings to the industry, with cost savings to consumers of
about $536 million over a five year period. Based on industry
estimates, this change would save $110 million in industry costs;
$900 per-engine cost savings to the consumer according to General
Motors and $370 per-engine according to International Harvester.
IMPLEMENTATION:
EPA will publish a notice of proposed rulemaking by
September 1981.
A-11
EPA ACTION #2:
Relax the 10 percent Acceptable Quality Level
(AQL) to 40 percent for assembly line testing
of light trucks and heavy-duty engines.
DISCUSSION:
Exhaust emission regulations that take effect in the 1984
model year specify that light trucks and heavy-duty engines must
not exceed a failure rate of 10 percent during assembly-line
testing. This is more stringent than the 40 percent failure rate
that is allowed for passenger cars. Experience with the
passenger car program shows that manufacturers are actually
producing vehicles with approximately a 20 percent failure
rate. While it is unclear at this point to what degree this same
benefit would occur for light trucks and heavy-duty engines, the
Agency believes that it would be prudent to give the industry the
opportunity to demonstrate its commitment to meet the emission
standards before assessing whether a 10 percent AQL is indeed
necessary.
BENEFITS:
EPA estimates that relaxation of this requirement will save
the industry $19 million in capital costs over a five year
period. Savings to consumers over the same period should amount
to about $129 million.
IMPLEMENTATION:
EPA will publish a notice of proposed rulemaking by
September 1981.
A-12
EPA ACTION #3: EPA will delay the implementation of the
Selective Enforcement Auditing (SEA) program
for heavy-duty engines for two years.
DISCUSSION:
Another component of the 1984 heavy truck regulations is the
adoption of an assembly-line testing program for heavy-duty
engines. In this program, production engines will be tested to
assure that engines produced on the assembly line meet the
emission standards they were designed to meet. The action taken
here would delay implementation of this program for two years to
reduce the burden on the manufacturers of acquiring new test
facilities to perform the transient test. Manufacturers will be
able to spread the costs of the new equipment over a longer
period by purchasing the equipment needed for certification
testing first and the equipment needed for SEA testing at a later
date.
BENEFITS:
EPA estimates that this delay will defer $57 million from
industry's capital needs during 1980-85. Savings to consumers
over the same period should amount to $64 million. Chrysler has
said that such a change would save it $3 million; General Motors
estimates it would save $44 million; and International Harvester
estimates it would save $22 million.
IMPLEMENTATION:
A notice of proposed rulemaking will be published by
September 1981.
A-13
EPA ACTION #4:
Affirm EPA's intention to relax the statutory
NO, emission limits for heavy-duty engines for
three years to the level which can be achieved
by diesel engines.
DISCUSSION:
In developing regulations to implement the 75 percent
reduction in NO, emissions for heavy-duty vehicles mandated by
the Act, EPA realized that diesel engines would have difficulty
meeting such a requirement. EPA, therefore, published an advance
notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) early this year seeking
more data regarding the appropriate level of a standard that
could be achieved by diesel engines. A 75 percent reduction
translates into 1.7 grams per brake horsepower-hour (g/bhp-hr).
EPA projects that a standard achievable by diesels would be no
lower than 4.0 g/bhp-hr. EPA asked for comments on such a
standard and alternatives to it in its ANPRM.
BENEFITS:
EPA estimates that this action would save the industry about
$150 million in capital costs, with savings to the consumer
amounting to $563 million over a five year period.
IMPLEMENTATION:
A Federal Register notice announcing a delay of the public
hearing at the request of the industry will be published this
month. Because of the delay, EPA will not be able to propose the
heavy-duty NOₓ emission standard until May 1982.
A-14
EPA ACTION #5:
EPA will propose to adopt an
emission averaging scheme for manufacturers to
meet the NO, emission requirement for light
and heavy trucks.
DISCUSSION:
EPA has been investigating the possibility of allowing
manufacturers to meet the NOₓ standards for trucks "on the
average," rather than requiring each vehicle to meet a specific
standard. This should give manufacturers more flexibility in
designing control systems for the wide range of models that are
produced.
BENEFITS:
No estimates of cost savings are available at this time.
However, EPA predicts manufacturers would be able to meet the NOₓ
standards at a lower cost if an averaging scheme were adopted.
IMPLEMENTATION:
The Agency has published an advance notice of proposed
rulemaking for NOₓ averaging (45 FR 79382, November 28, 1980) and
intends to propose an averaging scheme by May 1982, in
conjunction with the NOₓ rulemaking.
A-15
EPA ACTION #6:
EPA will propose alternative
diesel particulate "averaging" schemes to
replace the individual vehicle standard
currently in place for 1985 model year
passenger cars and light trucks.
DISCUSSION:
The regulations currently in effect establish a standard of
0.6 grams per mile for 1982 model year cars and light trucks.
For the 1985 model year, these are tightened to 0.2 grams per
mile (gpm) for cars and 0.26 gpm for light trucks. These
standards will require the use of a new technology known as a
trap oxidizer. If averaging is allowed in place of the per-
vehicle standard, some models should not have to use the trap
oxidizer, which will save the industry money without any
significant air quality risk.
BENEFIT:
EPA estimates that this approach could save industry $40
million over the 1980-85 time frame. Consumer savings from this
action could amount to $523 million over a five year period.
IMPLEMENTATION:
EPA will publish a notice of proposed rulemaking in
September 1981.
A-16
EPA ACTION #7:
Request that Congress eliminate
the requirement that passenger cars meet 1984
emission standards at all altitudes while
preserving EPA's authority to require
proportional standards for light and heavy
trucks, as well as passenger cars.
DISCUSSION:
The Clean Air Act specifies that in 1984 passenger cars
shall meet applicable emission standards regardless of the
altitude at which they are sold. Since hydrocarbon (HC) and
carbon monoxide (CO) emissions increase at higher altitudes due
to the thinner air in these regions, cars would have to reduce
emissions by a greater percentage at high altitude than at low
altitude.
Regulations currently in effect for the 1982 and 1983 model
years require passenger cars and light trucks sold at high
altitude to meet standards that represent the same proportional
reduction in emissions as those sold at low altitude. EPA will
ask Congress to continue this authority for all vehicle classes
for 1984 and later model years.
Although this change will be handled in concert with the
Administration's Clean Air Act initiatives, it is mentioned here
because of its importance to the automobile industry.
BENEFIT:
Elimination of the 1984 requirement should save the industry
$38 million in capital costs over five years with savings to
consumers of $1.3 billion.
IMPLEMENTATION:
The legislative recommendation will be included in the Clean
Air Act proposals being developed for submission to the Congress.
A-17
EPA ACTION #8:
Adopt a self-certification program
for vehicles to be sold at high altitudes
while continuing to monitor in-use emissions
at high-altitude.
DISCUSSION:
Certification of vehicles for sale at designated high-
altitude areas can be difficult for the industry because it
requires additional certification effort for a very small portion
of total sales. Some of the burden is due to the logistics of
the certification process. Manufacturers must ship vehicles to a
high-altitude area to be tested to determine compliance with
high-altitude standards.
EPA intends to reduce this burden in keeping with the
direction being taken in the overall certification program.
Manufacturers are being given more responsibility to run their
own certification programs which reduces the required resources
for both EPA and the industry. EPA will allow manufacturer self-
certification, rather than requiring specific testing, and will
continue to monitor in-use emissions at high altitude to assure
that the standards are being met.
BENEFITS:
EPA estimates that this reform will save the manufacturers
$700,000. Consumers should also benefit by savings of $700,000
over the next two years as compared to the current requirement.
IMPLEMENTATION:
An interim-final rule on the self-certification program will
be published by April 15, 1981, effective for 1982 and later
model years.
A-18
EPA ACTION #9:
Forgo assembly line testing at high
altitudes.
DISCUSSION:
Manufacturers have expressed concern about the testing of
production vehicles at high altitudes under the Selective
Enforcement Audit program. These concerns have related mostly to
the availability of testing facilities at high altitudes and the
ability to secure a large enough sample of vehicles for testing
at a high-altitude facility. While these concerns are not
insurmountable, EPA believes that resources could be better spent
in concentrating efforts on the identification and repair of
nonconforming in-use vehicles.
BENEFITS:
EPA estimates that this decision will save the manufacturers
$175,000 over a five year period. Most of these savings should
be passed on to the consumer.
IMPLEMENTATION:
This decision is effective immediately.
A-19
EPA ACTION #10: Initiate consolidated proceedings to waive the
statutory NO. standard from 1.0 to 1.5 gpm to
the maximum extent permitted by law for all
light-duty diesels through the 1984 model year.
DISCUSSION:
The Act allows the Administrator to waive the statutory NO X
level for diesel vehicles to 1.5 gpm, in certain cases, after
consideration of public health, air quality, and fuel economy
impacts. Control of NO, emissions to the statutory level for
diesels is somewhat more difficult than controlling NO. emissions
to the same level for gasoline-powered vehicles. Waiver of the
standard to 1.5 gpm for qualifying vehicles will give the
industry more time to develop appropriate technology while
allowing fuel-efficient diesel vehicles to be sold.
BENEFITS:
Some emission control hardware costs may be saved, but no
firm estimates of savings are available. This will allow
manufacturers more flexibility in meeting the particulate
standard for diesels and should improve fuel economy and
driveability of diesel vehicles.
IMPLEMENTATION:
A notice has been sent to the Federal Register for
publication informing industry of EPA's plans to accept waiver
applications for 1982-1984 model year diesel passenger cars and
to conduct consolidated waiver proceedings.
A-20
EPA ACTION #11: Initiate consolidated proceedings to waive the
statutory CO standard from 3.4 to 7.0 gpm to the
maximum extent permitted by law for classes of
1982 model year light-duty vehicles not
previously produced to meet the 3.4 gpm
standard.
DISCUSSION:
The Act permits the Administrator to waive the statutory CO
standard to 7.0 gpm if certain findings regarding public health,
good faith efforts to meet the standards, feasibility, cost, and
fuel economy have been made. Waiving the standard for qualifying
classes of vehicles for one year should not have significant
adverse effects on air quality and may give the industry more
flexibility in calibrating vehicles for better driveability and
fuel economy.
BENEFITS:
No capital costs would be saved by this action, but hardware
costs, which are passed on to the consumer, would be saved. No
firm estimates of savings are available, but as an example of the
savings, one recent waiver saved $35 per vehicle for one
manufacturer. This could amount to sizeable savings for
consumers.
IMPLEMENTATION:
A notice has been sent to the Federal Register for
publication informing industry of EPA's plans to accept waiver
applications and to conduct consolidated waiver proceedings.
A-21
EPA ACTION #12: Adopt equivalent non-methane hydrocarbon
standards as an option for all vehicles.
DISCUSSION:
HC emissions are regulated because some hydrocarbon
emissions interact with other pollutants in the atmosphere to
cause smog. Industry has always contended that methane, a non-
reactive hydrocarbon, should not be included when measuring the
level of pollutants that may be emitted. Since the equipment
exists to exclude measurement of methane and since there is no
debate concerning the non-reactivity of methane, EPA will seek to
adopt equivalent non-methane hydrocarbon standards as an option
for all vehicle classes.
BENEFITS:
Capital savings to industry are negligible. Depending on
how manufacturers calibrate various models, small savings to
consumers could occur.
IMPLEMENTATION:
Non-methane HC standards will be developed and a notice of
proposed rulemaking will be published by November 1, 1981.
A-22
EPA ACTION #13:
EPA will not require the use of onboard
control technology for the control of
hydrocarbon emissions resulting from
refueling motor vehicles.
DISCUSSION:
The Act directs the EPA Administrator to consider the
feasibility and desirability of requiring new motor vehicles to
be equipped with control technology to reduce uncontrolled
emissions from the refueling of motor vehicles. Also, the
Administrator is to compare the costs and effectiveness of such
technology to that of implementing and maintaining vapor recovery
systems at retail gasoline outlets. Pursuant to these
provisions, the Agency has decided not to require onboard
controls to control hydrocarbon emissions during refueling.
BENEFITS:
EPA estimates that this decision will save the industry
about $103 million in potential capital costs and could save
consumers as much as $1.2 billion in potential price increases
for automobiles.
IMPLEMENTATION:
The Administrator's findings will be published in the
Federal Register in June 1981.
A-23
EPA ACTION #14: Further streamline the motor vehicle
certification program. This effort should
focus on reducing paperwork and increasing
industry flexibility, but should include
steps to assure that in-use compliance will
not suffer.
DISCUSSION:
Over the past few years, EPA has taken steps to streamline
the certification program, giving manufacturers more
responsibility for running their own certification programs. The
resource intensive program that did exist was necessary at a time
when standards were first implemented and new technologies were
being developed. Now that most passenger cars are meeting the
statutory standards and manufacturers have become familiar with
the testing program, such intense involvement by EPA is not
necessary. EPA intends to continue this streamlining process and
instead concentrate more on the problem of in-use emissions where
more serious emission problems exist.
BENEFITS:
It is difficult to estimate the magnitude of cost savings
which can be attributed to this ongoing program; however,
manufacturers gain flexibility when administering their own
program. This flexibility may allow industry to better allocate
its resources and reduce the administrative burdens that have
existed in the past.
IMPLEMENTATION:
An interim-final rulemaking to streamline the certification
program will be published by October 1, 1981, effective for the
1983 model year.
A-24
EPA ACTION #15:
Relax test vehicle exemption requirements to
reduce administrative burdens presently
associated with this program.
DISCUSSION:
EPA regulations permit manufacturers to apply for exemptions
from the prohibition on the introduction into commerce of an
uncertified vehicle. These exemptions are necessary as
uncertified vehicles are frequently used in development and
testing programs. The reporting requirements for these
regulations were designed to assure EPA that these vehicles were
only being used for testing purposes.
The Agency believes, based on its experience in monitoring
this program, that it can achieve its objective of assuring a
valid use of the exemptions without many of the administrative
burdens presently associated with this program for both the
manufacturers and EPA. Accordingly, EPA will relax both the
reporting requirements and the requirements for qualificatons for
an exemption.
BENEFITS:
This action would reduce the administrative burden on the
manufacturers, but no specific estimate of savings is available.
IMPLEMENTATION:
A notice of proposed rulemaking to relax test vehicle
exemption requirements will be published by May 30, 1981.
A-25
EPA ACTION #16: Reduce the annual number of Selective
Enforcement Audit test orders to the maximum
degree consistent with maintainng
approximately the current level of
compliance.
DISCUSSION:
To avoid failing an assembly-line audit, the manufacturers
have voluntarily tested about 20,000 vehicles annually (as
compared to 300 to 350 cars annually tested during EPA audits) to
identify and remedy emission problems. This response by the
industry has resulted in a declining failure rate which should be
expected to continue as emission standards stabilize. Since the
industry has taken the initiative, EPA can reduce its assembly
line compliance efforts to a level which will still elicit the
same level of compliance by the industry.
BENEFITS:
EPA estimates that this decision will save the industry
$750,000. Most of these savings should be passed along to
consumers.
IMPLEMENTATION:
A schedule reflecting a reduced rate of test orders has
already been implemented resulting in an annual reduction of
these tests of 22 percent for model year 1981 and 25 percent for
model year 1982.
A-26
EPA ACTION #17:
Explore deferral of standards for automobile
industry paint shop operations.
DISCUSSION:
EPA will discuss with the States changes in their State
Implementation Plans (SIPs) which, subject to their willingness
to submit revisions of plans, would have the effect of not
requiring electro-static deposition of undercoat in the next two
years. Additionally, SIP requirements in those States which now
require electro-static high transfer efficiency in top coat
application would be deferred until 1984.
EPA is also reviewing the recently promulgated new source
performance standard (NSPS) for auto body painting to consider
the effects of increased use of clear coat.
BENEFITS:
Adoption of these changes would result in the deferral of
approximately $300 million in capital investment over the next
two to three years.
IMPLEMENTATION:
EPA will discuss with the States changes to their SIPs by
May 1981. Timing of changes in the SIPs will be dependent on the
States. EPA will complete review of the NSPS for auto body
painting by July 1981.
A-27
EPA ACTION #18:
Affirm EPA's intention to provide sufficient
leadtime for compliance with emission
regulations, as measured from the date of
promulgation of regulations.
DISCUSSION:
In setting various emission standards, EPA must take into
account the time that the industry will need to either develop
the necessary control technology or to make other changes in
order to meet the standards. EPA intends to provide this
necessary leadtime, as measured from the date of promulgation of
regulations.
BENEFITS:
This policy will reduce uncertainty for the manufacturers,
but specific savings cannot be estimated.
IMPLEMENTATION:
This position will be made clear in future notices and
appropriate contacts with the manufacturers. An initial
opportunity will be the Federal Register notice to be published
this month, announcing delay of the heavy-duty NOx and
particulate hearings.
A-28
ITEMS FOR FURTHER EPA STUDY
In addition to the actions EPA has committed to take to
reduce the regulatory burden on the auto industry, EPA is also
performing studies and reviews that could lead to further changes
in the following areas (some of which would require statutory
change):
o
Whether to reduce reliance on (or even phase out)
certification and selective enforcement auditing, linked
to adoption of a stronger program for identifyng and
resolving poor in-use performance. EPA will also
consider use of emission fees paid by the manufacturer
as an alternative to recall for vehicle classes which do
not meet in-use requirements.
Whether to apply emissions averaging to all compliance
programs.
Whether to make administrative and legislative changes
in the "design and defect" and "performance" warranties.
Whether the 80 dB noise standard that is effective
January 1, 1983, for medium and heavy trucks should be
deferred beyond that date or rescinded.
o
Whether to eliminate the testing requirement for meeting
the heavy-duty evaporative emission standard, requiring
instead that manufacturers attest to EPA that vehicles,
as designed, comply with the standard.
Whether there is a need for the passenger car CO
standard of 3.4 gpm and NOx standard of 1.0 gpm. This
review will allow the Administrator to make appropriate
recommendations to Congress.
Whether the 1985 particulate standard for diesel cars
and light trucks is technologically feasible and whether
the timing and level of the standard is appropriate.
o
Whether the National Ambient Air Quality Standards
should be revised. EPA's review, which is ongoing for
most of the standards, will give consideration to the
issue of multiple exceedances and will include peer
review of the scientific and technical bases for these
standards. EPA is also currently developing and
refining methodologies for assessing health risks.
Whether
future
additional
regulation
of
chloroflurocarbon emissions is needed and how the
automotive industry would or should be affected by such
requirements.
A-29
Whether the 1984 heavy-duty truck requirements should be
further revised based on the results of manufacturers'
current heavy-duty transient test programs.
Whether heavy-duty engines and light trucks should meet
standards for their full useful life or just for their
half life as is the case with passenger cars.
Whether the current requirements relating to unregulated
pollutants impose unnecessary reporting burdens and
should be revised.
o
Whether the general pretreatment program and categorical
standards adequately consider costs and environmental
impacts and properly divide Federal, State, and local
responsibilities. This review, which has a broader
focus than just the auto industry, was announced by the
Vice President as part of his regulatory review
announcement last week.
A-30
NOTICE OF INTENT TRANSMITTED
TO FEDERAL REGISTER ON APRIL 6, 1981
BY ACTING NHTSA ADMINISTRATOR DIANE K. STEED
A-31
NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION, DOT
49 CFR Parts 571, 575
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards
Uniform Tire Quality Grading Standards
Tire Reserve Load Consumer Information Requirements
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Notice of Intent.
SUMMARY: This notice describes a number of actions the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration intends to take to reduce
unnecessary regulatory burdens upon the motor vehicle and related
manufacturing industries.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mr. Michael Finkelstein
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
400-7th Street, S.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20590
Telephone: (202) 426-1810
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
At the request of the Secretary of Transportation, the
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has
undertaken a review of its existing and proposed regulations to
identify potential administrative changes which could reduce the
regulatory burdens imposed upon the motor vehicle and related
industries without jeopardizing the goals of vehicle and highway
safety. The purpose of this notice is to describe the efforts
which NHTSA has undertaken and the specific immediate and longer
term actions by which NHTSA intends to reduce unnecessary
regulatory pressures upon these industries.
This notice is not a notice of proposed rulemaking.
Appropriate administrative proceedings will be separately taken
to implement the actions described in this notice. In accordance
with the requirements of Title 5 of the U.S. Code (the
Administrative Procedures Act) and regulations of the Department
of Transportation, appropriate notices of proposed rulemaking,
hearings and opportunities for public comment will be provided
with respect to administrative actions involving adoption or
modification of NHTSA standards or regulations.
A-32
BACKGROUND
The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966
(15 U.S.C. 1392, 1407, hereinafter "the Act") requires that the
Secretary issue Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS)
that meet the need for motor vehicle safety and are objective,
practicable performance standards. There are currently more than
50 standards and regulations in force covering motor vehicles and
equipment.
In addition, the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings
Act of 1966 (15 U.S.C. 1401) authorizes certain consumer-related
regulations and standards of NHTSA.
Standards and regulations issued under these and other
statutory authorities impose significant economic burdens upon
the motor vehicle and related industries.
Many of the requirements of NHTSA standards and regulations
have led directly to a substantial improvement in motor vehicle
safety and have resulted in the reduction of fatalities and
serious injuries. In some cases, however, such standards and
requirements deal with relatively minor issues or relate only
indirectly to the legislative goals of the Congress. Some
standards and regulations have produced relatively insubstantial
benefits, either because they represent no significant change in
industry practice, or because after evaluation and review,
resulting changes in performance of motor vehicles do not appear
to be significantly superior to pre-regulation performance.
Finally, some standards or regulations may have been adopted
which upon later evaluation, involve costs which bear no
reasonable relationship to the actual benefits derived, whether
or not an adverse cost/benefit relationship was foreseen or
foreseeable at the time of adoption.
SCOPE OF AGENCY REVIEW
NHTSA has undertaken a comprehensive review of: (1) its
existing standards and regulations, (2) those standards or
regulations (or modifications thereof) which have been adopted in
final form but the effective date of which has not yet been
resolved, and (3) those pending proposals to adopt or modify
standards or regulations which are currently subject to notices
or advance notices of proposed rulemaking but which have not been
adopted in final form.
In addition, NHTSA has reviewed those ongoing rulemaking
efforts which have been subject to public notifications of
intended rulemaking, or with respect to which specific comment or
advice has been requested from the public by the Agency.
A-33
PURPOSE OF REVIEW
NHTSA has undertaken this review to determine what, if any,
modifications to its standards and regulations may be appropriate
to reduce regulatory burdens upon the regulated industries
without jeopardizing the safety or consumer-related goals and
policies established by Congress in its related legislation.
In undertaking this review, each standard, regulation or
proposed rulemaking or modification was examined to determine
(1) the direct or indirect relationship of the rulemaking in
question to the safety or consumer goals of the Agency; (2) the
relative importance of the rulemaking in achieving such goals;
(3) whether the performance addressed by the rulemaking would be
expected to continue at comparable levels in the absence of the
rulemaking (taking into account such factors as the size and
competitive characteristics of the specific regulated entities,
any economic or market pressures or enforceable standards of care
established by common or statutory law which might influence
maintenance or deterioration of levels of performance, and
whether regulated entities are subject to external pressures
which would tend to insure achievement of the intended goals
e.g., voluntary standards of compliance adopted by industry or
professional societies); (4) the costs, benefits and burdens
created or imposed by the rulemaking, (taking into account such
factors as the difficulty of quantifying in economic terms the
value of human life; the amount of consumer information
sufficient to allow the public to make free choices in the
marketplace; and the availability of specific data to support
regulatory determinations); (5) the effects of the rulemaking on
innovation and productivity in the industry and any associated
administrative costs or burdens; and (6) whether in the absence
or withdrawal of Federal regulation, the States would be able or
encouraged to regulate independently, thereby making motor
vehicle regulation more complex and costly.
In addition to the specific criteria enumerated above, NHTSA
is taking into account the type and number of complaints or
suggestions received from the industry, public interest groups or
special constituencies, and private individuals. The Agency has
attempted to identify overlapping, duplicate or inconsistent
aspects of its standards or regulations.
Finally, NHTSA has taken into account the length of time
which has passed since each standard or regulation has been
internally reviewed; changing safety, economic or other factors
which may have affected the need or impact of the standard or
regulation; and, in this light, the relevance of the policy of
the new Administration strongly to prefer the operation of market
or individual consumer choices to define and achieve societal
goals.
A-34
The following are brief descriptions of actions NHTSA has
taken or is proposing:
1. Delay implementation of first phase of "208 Standard".
NHTSA is elsewhere publishing in the Federal Register a
final rulemaking to grant a one year delay in the
implementation of the first phase of Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety Standard 208 relating to automatic
occupant protection requirements for large cars (see
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 46 Federal Register
12033, February 12, 1981).
2. Review requirement that manufacturers install automatic
occupant restraints, e.g., air bags or automatic belt
systems to protect all front seat occupants beginning
in Model Year 1983.
The "208 Standard," issued in 1977, requires
automatic occupant restraints to be installed in
passenger cars according to the following
schedule: large cars in model year 1982 (now
deferred), intermediates and compacts in 1983, and
small cars in 1984. NHTSA is also completing a
notice of proposed rulemaking on what further
action to amend standard 208 might be appropriate.
3. Modify the existing bumper standard to meet the
statutory requirements that such a standard be as cost
effective as possible.
By statute, NHTSA is required to promulgate a
bumper standard which achieves "the maximum
feasible reduction of cost to the public and to
the consumer" in low speed collisions. Existing
standards now require uniform bumper heights and
protection from damage to the vehicle and both
front and rear bumper systems at speeds up to 5
mph of impact. A major cost benefit study taking
into account such things as higher fuel cost and
bumper weight has at this writing concluded that
rear bumper systems would not meet the statutory
test of "maximum feasible reduction of cost.
NHTSA will propose amendments to the bumper
standard in April 1981, which will propose
eliminating the rear standard completely and
either eliminating or modifying the front bumper
standard, as appropriate.
A-35
4. Rescind the "Fields of Direct View" requirements for
passenger cars.
This rule, published on January 2, 1981, deals
with design requirements for driver vision. At
present, no significant safety problems have been
identified in long term design plans. Moreover,
automobile manufacturers' design lead-times may
not permit compliance without substantial costly
redesign. Any serious obstruction of the drivers'
field of view could be addressed by NHTSA by use
of its defect enforcement authority. Accordingly,
NHTSA will initiate rulemaking on or about July 1
to rescind Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard
No. 128.
5. Terminate rulemaking on "Fields of Direct View" for
trucks, buses and multipurpose passenger vehicles
(MPVs).
NHTSA will also withdraw a 1978 NPRM related to
the preceding item limiting the size of
obstructions in the driver's line of sight and
specifying unobstructed critical viewing area for
trucks, buses and MPVs. Because of the lack of an
identified safety problem, NHTSA will issue a
notice rescinding the 1978 NPRM on or before June
1, 1981.
6.
Withdraw the ANPRM on post-1985 fuel economy standards.
The Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act
required passenger cars fleet average mileage
rates to meet or exceed 27.5 mpg by 1985 and
authorized NHTSA to set post-1985 fuel economy
standards. Because strong market demand for fuel-
efficient vehicles is expected to continue, NHTSA
believes the initiation of rulemaking on post-1985
fuel economy standards to be unnecessary.
A
notice to withdraw the ANPRM will be published on
or before April 15, 1981, and NHTSA will monitor
future developments.
7. Amend the regulation creating the Uniform Tire Quality
Grading System.
NHTSA's current regulation requires manufacturers
to test and grade tires for three characteristics:
treadwear, traction, and heat resistance. NHTSA
is conducting an evaluation to determine whether
meaningful consumer information is provided by
this complicated grading system. NHTSA will
propose an advance notice of proposed rulemaking
or or before June 1, 1981, seeking comment upon a
A-36
substantial simplification and revision of the
tire quality grading system.
8. Amend the regulation on Safety Belt Comfort and
Convenience.
The purpose of this regulation is to encourage
seat belt use by requiring systems to be more
comfortable and convenient. It addresses such
things as shoulder belt tension, accessibility of
buckles and latch plates, belt retraction and
convenience hooks. NHTSA has received petitions
for reconsideration from all major domestic and
some foreign automobile manufacturers. After
reviewing these petitions, NHTSA is unable to
conclude that the detailed design and locational
requirements in this regulation would increase
seat belt usage. Accordingly, on or about July 1
NHTSA will propose substantive changes to
eliminate all requirements except belt tension,
and to defer the effective date of this regulation
for one year.
9. Terminate rulemaking on safety problems associated with
Multipiece Rims.
In March 1979, NHTSA issued an ANPRM regarding
performance levels for multipiece tire rims to
prevent explosive separations. Since that time,
introduction of the problematic multipiece rims
has virtually ceased and occupational hazards in
service facilities for commercial tires have come
under regulations of the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration. Accordingly, NHTSA will
issue a notice on or about July 1 that further
rulemaking in this area will be terminated.
10. Rescind the Standard on Speedometers and Odometers.
This standard requires that speedometers be
calibrated in both miles-per-hour (MPH) and
kilometers-per-hour (KM/H) and that they display
speeds of no more than 85 MPH or 140 KM/H. It
also requires that odometers be tamper-resistant
and indicate whether or not a car has been driven
more than 100 thousand miles. Because there
appear to be no direct safety benefits to be
gained from the regulation and in view of the
potential for significant consumer savings, NHTSA
will issue an NPRM to rescind the standard.
A-37
11. Propose a one-year deferral of the effective date of
the Theft Protection Standard and deletion of the key
removal provisions.
This regulation extended key locking steering
column requirements in existence now for passenger
cars to light trucks and vans and required
ignition locking systems for all vehicles that
prohibited the key from being removed while the
vehicle is in motion. In response to petitions
for reconsideration, NHTSA will consider a delay
in the effective dates for these provisions, that
is September 1, 1982, for passenger cars and
September 1, 1983, for light trucks and vans, and
rescinding the key removal provisions.
12. Propose modifications to the recently issued Hydraulic
Brake Performance Standard for light trucks, buses and
vans.
By September 1, 1983, this standard would require
upgrading the braking performance of about 20
percent of new light trucks, buses and vans. This
standard addresses such things as high-speed
stopping distances, fade performance, pedal force
levels, parking brake performance, and partial
brake system failure performance requirements.
Numerous petitions have questioned whether all
elements of this complicated standard are relevant
or necessary for safe operation of these
vehicles. NHTSA will publish final decisions on
these petitions for reconsideration on or before
June 1, 1981.
13. Propose termination of the rulemaking on Low Tire
Pressure Warning Indicators.
NHTSA recently issued an ANPRM regarding a
requirement that certain motor vehicles be
equipped with a device to automatically indicate
when tire pressure dropped four pounds per-square-
inch (psi) below recommended pressures in order to
maximize tire treadwear and fuel economy. Because
this objective might be more directly and
efficiently addressed as a consumer information
issue, NHTSA will continue contracted research and
publish on or before June 1, 1981, a notice that
rulemaking in this area has been terminated at
this time.
A-38
14. Propose eliminating information requirments on Tire
Reserve Load, and reducing the minimum advance notice
required before tire production may start.
Manufacturers are now required to provide
consumers with information on "tire reserve load"
capacity and to submit this and other information
to NHTSA 90 days before model introduction. This
requirement for a 90-day notice tends to inhibit
or prevent any last minute changes to new models
including possible consumer or safety improve-
ments. A proposal to reduce this reporting
requirement from 90 to 30 days prior to market
introduction and to eliminate the requirement for
complex tire reserve load information will be
published in April 1981.
15. Terminate rulemaking on design testing and labelling of
batteries.
Since January 1977, NHTSA has been considering a
regulation to prevent explosions and resulting
injuries from automobile batteries. Since then,
industry has adopted batteries with significantly
less explosive potential, thus lessening or
eliminating the need for regulation. Accordingly,
NHTSA will publish notice in the Federal Register
on or about July 1 that rulemaking on batteries is
terminated in view of market developments which
have mitigated the problem.
16. Streamline and reduce fuel economy reporting
requirements.
NHTSA regulations now require semi-annual
reporting of complicated data on manufacturers'
progress in meeting fuel economy standards.
Because manufacturers are now substantially
exceeding current standards and will most probably
exceed the statutory 1985 goal of 27.5 mpg, NHTSA
will publish in the Federal Register on or before
June 1, 1981, a proposal to reduce the fuel
economy reporting requirements which are either
duplicative or not needed to NHTSA's monitoring
responsibilities.
17. Propose changing Federal Vehicle Identification Number
requirements from a Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standard to an administrative regulation.
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 115
requires each motor vehicle to carry a unique 17
digit vehicle identification number which
identifies the manufacturer, make, type, size,
A-39
place of manufacturer, and individual sequential
number of manufacture. This number aids law
enforcement, theft protection, and accident
investigation. Manufacturers must provide NHTSA
60 days advance notification of all information
needed to decode a vehicle identification number
before the vehicles are manufactured. Errors
constitute a violation of the standard and are
grounds for recall proceedings. To ease this
requirement, NHTSA will propose on or before
June 1, 1981, to change its vehicle identification
number regulation from that of a safety standard
to an administrative regulation to reduce the
administrative burdens upon manufacturers and
NHTSA.
April 6, 1981
s/s
Date
Diane K. Steed
Acting Administrator
A-40
FACT SHEETS ON
INDIVIDUAL NHTSA ACTIONS
A-41
NHTSA Actions #1 & #2: Final Administrative Action to Delay for
One Year Implementation of the First
Phase of the "208 Standard"; and Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking Adressing Alter-
natives for Automatic Occupant Protection
(49 CFR 571.208)
DISCUSSION:
The "208 Standard" as issued in 1977 required manufacturers
to install automatic (or "passive") occupant restraints in
passenger car front seats. As SO adopted the rule would become
effective in three stages: in Model Year 1982 for large cars,
1983 for intermediates and compacts, and 1984 for small cars.
Compliance would require using either air cushion restraints
(airbags) or automatic belt systems.
The basis for this rulemaking was the extremely low rate of
usage of available "active" seatbelt systems. Wearing seat belts
could save thousands of lives annually in automobile accidents.
NHTSA wll be undertaking an extensive campaign to inform and
encourage the public on the need for increased active seatbelt
usage.
This rule has the largest capital cost impact of any current
safety standard. Smaller cars are inherently less safe, and the
current phasing in from large cars to small cars reverses the
order in which occupant protection would be most needed.
In 1977, NHTSA assumed that all MY 1982 cars covered by this
rule would comply by using airbags. Manufacturers now plan to
comply by using passive belt systems instead.
In 1977, NHTSA also assumed that where in later years
passive belt systems were employed, there would be high usage
rates of such systems. Current usage rates for active belt
systems in similar large cars are about 7 percent. For safety
reasons, even automatic belt systems must be detachable. Some
question now thus exists as to the actual usage rates that would
apply to the passive restraint systems called for by the first
year of the 208 standard.
Finally, in 1977 NHTSA assumed no significant increase in
active belt usage, and no major Federal Government effort to
increase such usage. Any positive effects of NHTSA's current
plans in this regard, which are not quantifiable at this time,
would be factors in assessing the adverse impacts of a one year
delay in the current 208 standard.
A-42
BENEFITS:
According to current NHTSA estimates, total cost savings to
consumers from the proposed one-year delay will be $105
million. Capital investment savings for the industry will be
about $30 million. Over 13,000 automobile manufacturer and
supplier industry jobs will be saved.
Further changes to automatic restraint requirements for
later model years could save hundreds of millions of dollars in
industry investments. A reversal of the order of phasing in
protection could save thousands of more lives as smaller cars
become covered earlier. If usage rates for the automatic belts
otherwise required for MY 1982 were to be 15 percent, or more
than double those of current active belt systems, retention of
this standard as now drafted might save a total of 75 lives over
the projected 10 year life of the large cars involved. If usage
rates were to occur at the level of 60 percent, this number could
increase to as many as 490 over the same 10 year period.
IMPLEMENTATION:
(1) NHTSA is announcing today a one year delay in the
application of the 208 standard to large cars.
(2) NHTSA is proposing several alternatives to further amend
standard 208.
A-43
NHTSA ACTION #3: Proposal to modify the bumper standard to meet
statutory requirements of the most cost-
effective bumper system (49 CFR 581)
DISCUSSION:
The Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act requires
a bumper standard which achieves "the maximum feasible reduction
of costs to the public and to the consumer" in low-speed
collisions. The standard now requires uniform bumper heights and
protection from damage at speeds up to 5 mph, for both front and
rear bumper systems. (49 CFR 581)
In 1979, NHTSA concluded that while the 5 mph standard
offers substantially greater net benefits to the consumer than
did prestandard bumper systems, it offered only narrowly greater
net benefits over 2.5 mph bumper systems. A recent cost benefit
study taking into account such things as higher fuel costs and
bumper weight now concludes that rear bumper systems would not
meet the statutory test of "maximum feasible reduction of costs"
even at the lower speed.
Uniform height requirements would be retained but NHTSA is
now preparing to propose to (1) eliminate the rear standard
completely, and (2) either eliminate the front bumper standard or
reduce its level to 2.5 mph of impact.
BENEFITS:
Savings of up to $650 million per year would be achieved,
depending upon the final outcome of rulemaking.
IMPLEMENTATION:
A notice of proposed rulemaking will be published in April
1981. This notice will report on the findings of NHTSA's bumper
standard evaluation, and will propose changes to the current
standard.
A-44
NHTSA ACTION #4: Proposal to rescind "Fields of Direct View"
Requirements (49 CFR 571.128)
DISCUSSION:
This rule deals with design requirements for driver
vision. The rule was published on January 2, 1981, and sets
performance requirements for: (1) the maximum permissible size
of obstructions (e.g., roof pillars) in the driver's field of
view; (2) a minimum field of view for the driver through the
windshield, and (3) light transmittance through the windshield as
installed.
No significant safety differences have been identified
between current long term design plans and general compliance
with the standard. However, manufacturers' design leadtimes may
not permit compliance without substantial and costly redesign.
Should a problem arise over impairment of driver field of
view, it could be addressed and corrected by NHTSA in a defect
enforcement proceeding.
BENEFITS:
It is estimated that compliance with the standard as drafted
would cost GM and Ford alone over $150 million in redesign and
retooling costs. This will provide consumer savings in the
amount of $85 million. Some additional fuel economy and cost
savings may be realized where lighter, less expensive metal may
be used in place of glass.
IMPLEMENTATION:
NHTSA will initiate rulemaking on or about July 1, 1981, to
rescind FMVSS NO. 128.
A-45
NHTSA ACTION #5: NHTSA will terminate rulemaking on "Fields of
Direct View" for trucks, buses, and
multipurpose passenger vehicles
DISCUSSION:
A 1978 NPRM on "Fields of Direct View" dealt with the size
of obstructions in the driver's line of sight, and other design
requirements for driver vision. Final rulemaking in 1981 (see
separate fact sheet) covered only passenger cars, because of the
complex compliance problems related to commercial vehicles,
particularly school buses.
BENEFITS:
Formally terminating rulemaking as to these vehicles will
eliminate uncertainty and potential redesign and compliance
testing costs.
IMPLEMENTATION:
The NHTSA will issue a Notice in the Federal Register
informing industry that the 1978 NPRM is rescinded, on or before
June 1, 1981.
A-46
NHTSA ACTION #6: Withdraw the ANPRM published on January 26,
1981, relating to Post-1985 Fuel Economy
Standards
DISCUSSION:
The Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act requires
auto fleet average mileage rates to meet or exceed 27.5 mpg by
1985. It requires NHTSA to set annual increments to reach this
1985 level, and authorized the Agency to set fuel economy
standards after 1985.
The industry is now exceeding all interim standards, and all
manufacturers will achieve actual fleet averages in excess of 30
mpg by 1985. Fuel economy is now a major market force, which is
compelling industry achievement at maximum levels of tech-
nology. This has involved unprecedented capital investment ($70
billion by 1985), and the imposition of further mandatory
requirements on the same scale would be beyond the investment
capacity of the industry.
Market forces are expected to continue to force improvement
at the maximum technologically achievable rates as fuel prices
continue to escalate. There is no apparent need at this time for
the lengthy, complicated and expensive Federal procedures and
technological efforts which would be required independently to
determine in advance the limits which might be set in additional
standards. To assure that these conditions continue to prevail,
NHTSA will continue its detailed analyses of the economic and
technological capacity of the industry, and of the economic
consequences of introducing substantially larger fuel economy
requirements.
BENEFITS:
Withdrawal of the ANPRM will resolve existing uncertainties
at this time, and reduce the current burdens on industry to
respond to very detailed inquiries and requests for information.
IMPLEMENTATION:
A notice to withdraw the ANPRM will be published on or
before June 1, 1981.
A-47
NHTSA ACTION #7: Proposal to amend regulation creating Uniform
Tire Quality Grading System, to retain
treadwear requirements but delete and reserve
for future possible rulemaking grading based
upon traction and heat resistance
DISCUSSION:
The Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act required
NHTSA to publish a Uniform Tire Quality Grading System (UTQGS).
NHTSA's current regulation requires that tires be tested and
graded by manufacturers for three characteristics: treadwear,
traction and heat resistance. Treadwear is graded upon a
numerical scale and the other two qualities upon an alphabetical
scale.
It is questionable as to whether the intent of the Congress
to provide meaningful consumer information is being met by this
complicated system. The UTQGS is subject to abuse by deliberate
under-grading of tires to promote marketing of other models.
Consumers may have difficulty understanding a 3-grade system.
Also, dealers may emphasize the relative importance of one graded
characteristic over another, thus creating sales pressure
inconsistent with actual consumer needs.
The most meaningful characteristic from a consumer
standpoint would appear to be treadwear. The characteristic of
traction involves a safety aspect, and is perhaps better
addressed in a separate safety standard. The characteristic of
heat resistance involves primarily fuel economy consumer savings
considerations, with some safety aspects.
NHTSA has accelerated completion of a detailed study of
actual consumer information effectiveness of the UTQGS. The
Agency will publish an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking
addressing the considerations set forth herein, and requesting
further data and information on each issue raised.
BENEFITS:
Simplification of the UTQGS could significantly enhance the
availability of relevant consumer information. The existing
regulation imposes manufacturers' testing costs of $37 million
per year, and significant reporting and paperwork burdens
associated with each aspect of the regulation.
IMPLE 1ENTATION:
NHTSA will publish on or before June 1, 1981, an advance
notice of proposed rulemaking seeking data and public comment
upon a substantial revision of this regulation.
A-48
NHTSA ACTION #8: Proposal to amend regulation on Safety Belt
Comfort and Convenience (49 CFR 571.208)
DISCUSSION:
This regulation was proposed as a means of encouraging seat
belt use. The rationale was: if seat belts were more
comfortable and convenient, more people would use them. The
regulation specified such things as shoulder belt tension,
accessibility of buckles and convenience hooks. All major
domestic and some foreign manufacturers submitted Petitions for
Reconsideration of the final rule.
After review of these petitions, NHTSA is unable now to
conclude that usage and therefore safety would be enhanced by the
requirements. Physical and psychological characteristics of each
individual occupant (height, weight, dexterity, preferences and
sensitivities to perceived inconvenience, etc.) are a major
variable in the impact of the detailed requirements. NHTSA now
believes that only the tension aspect of this regulation can be
expected materially to enhance comfort for all users.
BENEFITS:
NHTSA estimates that this rule would cost consumers $4
million a year. Industry estimated that costs could be several
dollars per vehicle, with multi-million dollar tooling costs.
IMPLEMENTATION:
Based upon the petitions for reconsideration, NHTSA will
propose substantive changes to eliminate all requirements except
belt tension and to defer the effective date for one year.
A-49
NHTSA ACTION #9: Cessation of pending rulemaking on safety
problems associated with the use of multipiece
rims. Occupational hazards would remain
subject to regulation by other agencies.
DISCUSSION:
NHTSA issued an ANPRM in March 1979, indicating that the
Agency was considering rulemaking requiring certain performance
levels of multipiece tire rims to prevent explosive
separations. The Agency also indicated that it was investigating
the need to ban production of the multipiece rims.
Since the issuance of the ANPRM, introduction of the
problematic multipiece rims has virtually ceased. Occupational
hazards in service facilities for commercial tires have become
controlled by regulations of OSHA. NHTSA has now conducted a
cost analysis that indicates an annual cost of $75 million to the
consumer for implementation and $300 million to the tire and
wheel industry for providing the necessary changeover equipment.
BENEFITS:
Decision to decline to regulate in this area would save the
tire and wheel industry a capital investment of $300 million, and
the transportation industry as much as $400 million over the next
five years.
IMPLEMENTATION:
The NHTSA will issue a notice on or about July 1, 1981,
indicating that rulemaking will be terminated in this area.
A-50
NHTSA ACTION #10: Proposal to rescind FMVSS No.
127, Speedometers and Odometers
DISCUSSION:
Standard No. 127 was issued on June 16, 1980, and would
become effective September 1, 1981. It requires that
speedometers be calibrated in mph and km/h, with top speed
displays of 85 mph and 140 km/h, and that odometers be tamper-
resistant and display (1) mileage from 0 to 99,999 and (2)
whether or not 100,000 miles has been exceeded. The major
objection to this standard was the absence of safety benefits.
BENEFITS:
GM has indicated per vehicle costs of $1.50. NHTSA
estimates that recission would result in a savings of
approximately $1.00 to $1.50 per vehicle manufactured. This
would reduce manufacturers' costs by approximately $11 million
per year.
IMPLEMENTATION:
NHTSA will issue an NPRM on or about July 1, 1981, to
rescind the standard.
A-51
NHTSA ACTION #11: Propose to defer for at least one year the
effective date of Standard No. 114, Theft
Protection, and delete the key removal
provisions
DISCUSSION:
The final rule for Standard No. 114 was issued December 22,
1980. It extended to light trucks and vans the antitheft and key
locking steering column requirements previously applicable only
to passenger cars. In addition, it requires that all ignition
locking systems be designed so that the key could not be removed
while the vehicle is in motion. These requirements are to become
effective September 1, 1982, for passenger cars and September 1,
1983, for light trucks and vans.
The NHTSA will propose to delete the key removal
requirements for a possible savings of redesign and retooling
costs.
BENEFITS:
There will be minor benefits from the extension of the
leadtime of the antitheft provisions for light trucks and vans.
An annual consumer benefit of $10 million will be realized from
deletion of the key removal requirements.
IMPLEMENTATION:
NHTSA will respond to petitions for reconsideration on or
before June 1, 1981.
A-52
NHTSA ACTION #12: Proposal to modify recently issued hydraulic
brake performance standard for light trucks,
buses, and vans
DISCUSSION:
Effective on September 1, 1983 for 1984 MY vehicles, NHTSA's
recently issued rule would require upgrading the braking
performance of about 20 percent of new light trucks, buses, and
vans. The standard addresses a number of performance
characteristics, including high speed stopping distances, fade
performance, pedal force levels, parking brake performance and
partial system failure performance requirements. The last
requirement would now apply to heavy trucks and buses as well.
Serious questions have been raised as to whether all
elements of this complicated standard are relevant or necessary
to secure intended safety benefits, in light of current industry
practices which achieve virtually equivalent results.
BENEFITS:
Rescinding the rule could save the consumer about 18 million
dollars per year, in testing and arguably unnecessary redesign
costs.
IMPLEMENTATION:
NHTSA will publish its final decision on numerous pending
petitions for reconsideration and any necessary proposed
rulemakings on or before June 1, 1981.
A-53
NHTSA ACTION #13: Proposal to terminate rulemaking on Low Tire
Pressure Warning Indicators
DISCUSSION:
On January 26, 1981, NHTSA issued an ANPRM to initiate
rulemaking to require that all passenger cars, trucks and buses
be equipped with a low tire pressure warning device (LTPWD) which
would automatically indicate when tire pressure has dropped four
pounds per square inch (psi) below recommended pressures for
maximum load. Such devices could be "active" and consist of
attachments to the tire to signal low pressure visible warning
within the field of view of the driver.
The principle basis for this proposal is maximization of
tire treadwear and fuel economy resulting from optimum inflation
levels and corresponding minimization of rolling resistance.
This basis is arguably more directly and efficiently addressed as
a public/consumer information issue.
BENEFITS:
NHTSA estimates a consumer cost per regulated automobile of
$5 and per regulated truck or bus of $20, for a total consumer
cost of implementation of at least $130 million per year.
IMPLEMENTATION:
NHTSA will continue with contracted research addressed to
potential new development of devices, but will publish in the
Federal Register on or before June 1, 1981, a notice that
rulemaking in this area has been terminated at this time.
A-54
NHTSA ACTION #14:
Proposal to eliminate information
requirements on tire reserve load,
and reduce the minimum advance notice
which must be given before production
may start
DISCUSSION:
Under NHTSA regulation published in July 1980, manufacturers
are required to identify to consumers/purchasers the "tire
reserve load" capacity, and submit this and other consumer
information data to NHTSA 90 days before model introduction.
Reserve load capacity differs by tire model, and is a
function of the final actual weight of the standard vehicle.
These factors are usually among the facts to be identified for
each new model.
The requirement that all consumer information data be
submitted to NHTSA at least 90 days before model introduction
tends to inhibit or prevent any last minute changes, including
those which might be desirable from a consumer or safety
standpoint.
NHTSA wil propose to permit manufacturers to furnish
consumer information as to last minute design changes as late as
30 days prior to market introduction, for good cause shown and to
eliminate the requirement for tire reserve load information as
unnecessary and excessively complex.
BENEFITS:
Changing reporting requirements from 90 days to 30 days
advance notice when vehicle changes occur allows manufacturers
greater flexibility both in preparing and disseminating consumer
information material and in product planning. Elimination of
tire reserve load information requirements will reduce reporting,
testing and recordkeeping requirements.
IMPLEMENTATION:
A proposal to amend consumer information reporting
requirements will be published in April 1981.
A-55
NHTSA ACTION #15: Cessation of rulemaking action on design,
testing and labelling of batteries
DISCUSSION:
Since January 1977, NHTSA has been considering rulemaking to
establish a standard and prescribe test procedures applicable to
new and replacement auto batteries to prevent explosions and
resulting injuries. The standard under development would require
design and vent systems, instruction manuals and labelling, and
laboratory compliance tests to determine battery capability to
minimize the potential of explosions.
Since NHTSA and the Consumer Product Safety Commission
started this effort, industry changeover to superior,
maintenance-free batteries with significantly less explosive
potential has lessened, if not eliminated, the need for
regulation in this area.
BENEFITS:
Discontinuation of rulemaking will save battery
manufacturers the expense of design and compliance testing,
including the capital investment in testing equipment, and the
costs associated with printing and affixing manuals and labels.
IMPLEMENTATION:
NHTSA will publish notice in the Federal Register on or
about July 1, 1981, that rulemaking on batteries is being
terminated in view of the market developments which have
mitigated the problem.
A-56
NHTSA ACTION #16: Proposal to streamline and reduce fuel economy
reporting requirements not necessary to NHTSA
monitoring of compliance
DISCUSSION:
By regulation NHTSA now requires semi-annual reporting of
extremely complicated data on manufacturers' progress in meeting
interim fuel economy standards leading to the statutory 1985 goal
of 27.5 mpg.
All manufacturers are now substantially exceeding such
interim goals, and independent NHTSA monitoring of industry
efforts makes separate reporting by manufacturers largely
unnecessary. NHTSA resources are at present inadequate to review
the voluminous submissions currently required, and no meaningful
purpose appears to be served by the detailed submissions in
question.
BENEFITS:
Significant paperwork and reporting burdens are imposed upon
industry and NHTSA in the preparation, submission and handling of
the required fuel economy information.
IMPLEMENTATION:
NHTSA will publish in the Federal Register on or before
June 1, 1981, a proposal substantially to reduce the reporting
requirements associated with fuel economy achievements which are
duplicative or unnecessary to the performance of NHTSA's
monitoring duties.
A-57
NHTSA ACTION #17: Proposal to change the Federal requirements
applicable to vehicle identification number
from Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard to
regulation and to modify advance notice
requirements
DISCUSSION:
FMVSS 115 requires that each motor vehicle have affixed to
it a 17 digit vehicle identification number (VIN) which must be
unique to that vehicle and which consists of combinations of
characters which identify the manufacturer, make, type, size,
place of manufacture and individual sequential number of
manufacture.
Specific identification numbers similar to the VIN have been
required since 1946, as an aid to law enforcement, theft
protection and accident investigation. Although initially
controversial, NHTSA's final rulemaking is now in force and
engineering and recurring costs have stabilized.
The standard also requires, however, that 60 days advance
notification of all information necessary to decode a VIN be
provided before date of manufacture. Manufacturing errors would
constitute a violation of the standard and be grounds for recall
proceedings.
NHTSA will propose to modify the form of its VIN regulation
from that of a safety standard to that of an administrative
regulation to reduce administrative burdens upon manufacturers
and NHTSA.
BENEFITS:
Minimal cost savings reflecting marginally reduced
recordkeeping and reporting requirements might be incurred, but
significant potential costs in the event of a recall and remedy
proceeding for inconsequential violation of the standard would be
avoided.
IMPLEMENTATION:
NHTSA will publish in the Federal Register on or before
June 1, 1981, a proposed rulemaking which would rescind FMVSS 115
and impose similar substantive requirements for affixing the VIN
as an administrative regulation of the Agency.
A-58
ITEMS FOR FURTHER NHTSA STUDY
In addition to the 17 items specifically identified for
action, NHTSA has a number of other standards and regulations
under intensive review. Some of these are the subject of the
agency's formal evaluation process. These items are candidates
for possible reform action in the future. They include such
action as:
o
Evaluation of the comments received on the NPRM
proposing requirements for new car crashworthiness
performance. Ratings of this performance would be made
available to the public. NHTSA will evaluate public
comments on the notice, the findings of an inter-
national symposium on automotive ratings, and the
results of a consumer survey.
O
Review of the public comments on a proposal to modify
passenger car bumpers to reduce impacts causing
pedestrian injuries.
Review of the public comments on a proposed standard
for a rear protection device for trucks to reduce the
severity of crashes in which cars run into the rear
ends of trucks.
o
Evaluation of the costs and effectiveness of a
regulation requiring standardization of markings and
placement of the controls on the dashboards and
steering columns of vehicles.
Consideration of the costs and benefits of a rule that
requires each motor vehicle to have a hood latch. The
rule requires some vehicles to have one latch and
others to have two latches.
O
Evaluation of the comments received on a proposed
change to the rearview mirror standard. The current
rule specifies a number of precise requirements for
mirror size and location. NHTSA will look at the costs
and benefits of the rule.
O
Review of the rule which requires a "fail safe"
mechanism on headlamp concealment devices. The rule
also specifies several aspects of the lamp operation,
such as operating temperature. NHTSA will examine the
costs and benefits of the rule.
Summary Table
Potential Savings From Proposed Actions
Five Year Savings*
Agency Action
Capital Consumer
Comments
(millions of dollars)
EPA
Relax the statutory HC and CO
108
536
Industry says that this action would save $110
standards for heavy trucks
million. General Motors estimates $900 per
engine in consumer savings.
Relax the 10 percent AQL to 40
19
129
International Harvester estimates it will save
percent for light and heavy trucks
$14 million by this action.
Delay assembly line testing for
57
64
Chrysler claims a savings of $3 million for this
heavy trucks
change; General Motors $44 million, International
Harvester $22 million.
Relax the NOX level for heavy trucks
150
563
Emissions averaging for diesel
40
523
A-60
particulate emissions
Eliminate 1984 high altitude auto
38
1,300
Requires amendment to Clean Air Act. Ford estimates
emission standards
that this change will save them about $56 million
with a savings to consumers of $500 million.
Adopt self-certification for
1
1
Would save manufacturers the time and expense of
vehicles sold at high altitude
transporting test cars to high altitude areas and
eliminate scheduling problems.
Not requiring use of onboard control
103
1,200
Industry says that this action would save consumers
technology for refueling emissions
$1.5 billion.
Reduce the annual number of
1
1
assembly ! e test orders
Explore deferring standards for
300
-----
Unable to estimate savings to consumer as action by
paint shops
states is unknown.
Savings from EPA Actions
817
4,317
Five Year Savings
Agency Action
Capital Consumer
Comments
(millions of dollars)
NHTSA
Delay First Year Implementation
30
105
Additional savings of as much as $600 million in
of Passive Restraint Standard
investments and $1 billion annually in consumer
costs are possible, depending on subsequent action
taken by the Department.
Modify bumper standard
---
3,250
Some capital costs required to modify standard.
Rescind fields of direct view
174
85
Capital investment estimates are by GM and Ford.
All Other NHTSA Actions
352
1,540
Savings from NHTSA Actions
556
4,980
A-61
Total Savings (EPA and NHTSA)
1,373
9,297
About $150 per car and truck in potential consumer
savings.
*In addition to these savings, the notices of intent identify 7 other actions (plus a number of other longer
term initiatives) that will result in further regulatory relief but for which estimates of savings are not
available. The savings estimates shown in this table are in 1981 dollars and are undiscounted 5-year
cumulative totals.