Parts and Accessories Necessary for Safe Operation; Warning Devices for Stopped Vehicles and Protection Against Shifting or Falling Cargo; Final Rules |
|---|
|
Rodney E. Slater
Federal Highway Administration
6 July 1994
[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 128 (Wednesday, July 6, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-16070]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: July 6, 1994]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part II
Department of Transportation
_______________________________________________________________________
Federal Highway Administration
_______________________________________________________________________
49 CFR Parts 392 and 393
Parts and Accessories Necessary for Safe Operation; Warning Devices for
Stopped Vehicles and Protection Against Shifting or Falling Cargo;
Final Rules
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
49 CFR Parts 392 and 393
[FHWA Docket No. MC-93-19]
RIN 2125-AD17
Parts and Accessories Necessary for Safe Operation; Warning
Devices for Stopped Vehicles
AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FHWA is amending the requirements for warning devices for
stopped commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) to allow the use of fusees and
liquid-burning flares in lieu of bidirectional reflective triangles,
unless the CMV is transporting certain hazardous materials or is
powered by compressed gas. It is the intent of this final rule to give
equal priority to fusees and liquid-burning flares with regard to use
as emergency warning devices. This action is required by the Intermodal
Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991.
DATES: Effective August 5, 1994. The incorporation by reference of the
publication listed in Sec. 393.95 of this final rule is approved by the
Director of the Federal Register as of August 5, 1994.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Larry W. Minor, Office of Motor
Carrier Standards, (202) 366-2981, or Mr. Charles E. Medalen, Office of
Chief Counsel, (202) 366-1354, Federal Highway Administration,
Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC
20590. Office hours are from 7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m., e.t., Monday
through Friday, except legal Federal holidays.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 1041(b) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency
Act of 1991 (ISTEA) (Pub. L. 102-240, 105 Stat. 1914, 1993), signed by
the President on December 18, 1991, requires that ``Section 393.95 of
title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations shall be applied so that
fusees and flares are given equal priority with regard to use as
reflecting signs.''
On July 14, 1993, the FHWA published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) to amend Sec. 393.95 to allow commercial motor
vehicles to be equipped with fusees and liquid-burning flares in lieu
of bidirectional reflective triangles, except CMVs transporting
explosives (Division 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3 hazardous materials), cargo tank
motor vehicles used for flammable and combustible liquids (Class 3
hazardous materials) or flammable gas (Division 2.1 hazardous
materials) (whether loaded or empty), or motor vehicles using
compressed gas as a motor fuel. The FHWA also proposed amending
Sec. 392.22(b), which sets forth requirements for the placement and use
of warning devices for stopped vehicles, because paragraph (b) did not
allow the use of fusees and liquid-burning flares in lieu of
bidirectional reflective triangles.
The FHWA proposed that vehicles be equipped with either (1) three
bidirectional reflective triangles or (2) six fusees or liquid-burning
flares. With regard to performance standards for fusees and liquid-
burning flares, the FHWA proposed to amend Sec. 393.95(j) to require
that these devices be capable of burning for at least 30 minutes, and
meet the standards of the Underwriters Laboratories, Inc., Highway
Emergency Signals (UL 912).
Discussion of Comments
The FHWA received 12 comments to the NPRM. The commenters were: 3M;
Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety (Advocates); the American
Trucking Associations (ATA); Chemical Waste Transportation Institute
(CWTI); Cortina Tool and Molding Company; James King and Company, Inc.;
Federal Mogul; National Tank Truck Carriers, Inc.; Ohio University,
College of Engineering and Technology, Department of Industrial and
Systems Engineering; Pyrotechnic Signal Manufacturers Association
(PSMA); Sate-Lite Manufacturing Company (Sate-Lite); and the
Transportation Safety Equipment Institute (TSEI). The commenters were
generally opposed to allowing the use of fusees and liquid-burning
flares in lieu of bidirectional reflective triangles. The CWTI did not
support or oppose the proposal but indicated that the FHWA should
retain its restrictions on flame producing devices on certain vehicles
and recommended that the FHWA use this rulemaking to amend
Sec. 393.95(g) to incorporate the use of the current hazardous
materials classifications (i.e., Divisions 1.1, 1.2, or 1.3, 2.1 and
Class 3). The PSMA provided the only comments in support of the
proposed amendments.
Interpretation of Section 1041(b) of the ISTEA
Several of the commenters questioned the FHWA's interpretation of
section 1041(b) of the ISTEA. Sate-Lite believes that section 1041(b)
is ambiguous and as such the FHWA has great latitude in the
implementation of the requirement. Sate-Lite stated:
By explicitly acknowledging the safety hazards associated with
fusees and flares and by specifically addressing these hazards by
prohibiting the use of fusees and flares in certain situations, the
FHWA has recognized that ISTEA granted the FHWA broad discretion in
implementing Section 1041(b).
Clearly Congress did not anticipate or intend to require that the
FHWA sacrifice motorist safety and the security of our federal highway
system on the altar of ``equal priority.'' As the FHWA has recognized,
on these issues of motorist safety, Congress must defer to the
expertise and judgment of the FHWA.
In light of the dangers and manifest deficiencies inherent in the
use of fusees and flares as a substitute for warning triangles * * *
Sate-Lite respectfully urges the FHWA to exercise its discretion by
amending the proposed rule change. Sate-Lite strongly believes that the
FHWA should continue to require motor carriers to carry three emergency
warning triangles in accordance with the current rule.
In its comments, the ATA stated:
The language of Section 1041(b) of the [ISTEA] strongly suggests
that its sponsor(s) believe[s] that a fusee and a liquid-burning flare
are essentially similar * * *. It should be made clear that fusees are
acceptable only as a short-term warning device for use while long-term
warning devices are put in place. In addition, it should be made clear
that the trucking industry abandoned the use of liquid-burning flares
(pot torches) as soon as the use of a superior type of warning device
(the ``dot-over-dot'' emergency reflectors) was authorized by federal
and state regulators.
For the reasons outline[d] above, liquid-burning flares have not
been manufactured for 30 years, or more. In our view, the current
effort to encourage a return to their use by the motor carrier industry
is a step backward.
Advocates did not believe that the ISTEA prohibits the FHWA from
continuing to require that each CMV be equipped with three
bidirectional reflective triangles.
The FHWA believes that section 1041(b) of ISTEA requires that
fusees and liquid-burning flares be allowed, but not mandated, in lieu
of bidirectional reflective triangles. The FHWA already allows the use
of fusees and other warning devices in addition to reflective
triangles.
With regard to the ATA's comments about liquid-burning flares, or
``pot torches,'' the ISTEA refers to ``fusees and flares.'' The FHWA
believes the term ``fusee'' refers to a solid material that is ignited
by friction and the term ``flare'' refers to a liquid-burning warning
device. These terms, as used in the ISTEA, are not interchangeable. As
such, the ISTEA allows the use of fusees and liquid-burning flares as
primary emergency warning devices. While the apparent lack of
availability of liquid-burning flares, as indicated by the ATA, might
preclude their use as an alternative to bidirectional reflective
triangles, the requirement of the ISTEA is not contingent upon the
availability of the warning device.
In response to the Advocates' concerns, the FHWA does not believe
it would be appropriate to require all CMVs to carry bidirectional
reflective triangles. For those cases in which the CMV is equipped only
with fusees or liquid-burning flares, the NPRM proposed, and this final
rule includes, an amendment to Sec. 392.22 stating that there shall be
at least one lighted fusee or liquid-burning flare at each of the
locations specified in Sec. 392.22(b)(1) for the entire period that the
vehicle is stopped. If a motor carrier chooses to rely solely upon
fusees or liquid-burning flares as emergency warning devices, the motor
carrier should not be penalized by being forced to carry an additional
warning device that, under these circumstances, it would not be
required to use.
Effectiveness of Fusees and Liquid-Burning Flares Versus Triangles
Many of the commenters opposed the use of fusees in lieu of
bidirectional reflective triangles because of concerns about the
effectiveness of fusees as emergency warning devices. The Advocates
stated:
Unfortunately, the elevation of fusees and liquid-burning flares to
the status of primary warning devices alongside triangles is a
regressive step that can have serious consequences in the potential for
additional truck and bus accidents. Although there are major
shortcomings with the design and performance of reflective triangles,
and with the criteria for deploying them set forth in the Federal Motor
Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSR), the selection of a single device
having priority in all circumstances appropriately fulfills the well-
known principle of traffic engineering that motorists should always be
reinforced in their traffic control expectations when negotiating roads
and streets. That is, it is important to educate motorists to the
unambiguous intent of traffic control devices by ensuring the use of
designs with unvarying shapes, sizes, colors, and messages. Despite the
fact that Advocates has serious misgivings over the retroreflective
performance and conspicuity of emergency triangles, there is little
question that their consistent use over the past two decades has
provided instant recognition by motorists that there is a disabled
commercial vehicle on or near the travelway. This important recognition
by motorists can now be threatened by the substitution of flares or
fusees to demarcate the area around a disabled truck or bus.
Several commenters cited an article published in the April 1992
issue of Consumer Reports magazine. For example, Sate-Lite stated:
A widely publicized recent study on the effectiveness of vehicle
warning devices, in Consumer Reports Magazine [sic] [Consumer Reports,
``Emergency! Handling Trouble on the Road,'' April 1992], concluded
without reservation that triangle reflectors are the best choice of
warning device for all vehicles.'' The Consumer Reports Study cites the
fact that triangles can be placed as far away from the vehicle as
needed and the fact that they do not require electric power. Moreover,
flares and fusees: (1) Flares do not command attention because ``their
light comes from one small source and isn't very conspicuous at a
distance''; (2) a flare's light may not last until help arrives; (3)
there is the obvious need for periodic replacement of flares; and (4)
flares will frequently roll or blow away from their initial site. These
problems and deficiencies should be obvious even to the casual observer
of highway conditions. The Consumer Reports study concluded that
``Triangles provided the clearest warning from 100 feet at night.''
Some commenters also referred to a National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration report entitled ``Study of Safety-Related Devices--
Emergency Warning Devices for Disabled Vehicles'' (August 19, 1986)
(NHTSA Report) to support their claims that bidirectional reflective
triangles are more effective than fusees as emergency warning devices.
While the FHWA understands the concerns of the commenters, it notes
that this rulemaking is in response to section 1041(b) of the ISTEA.
Section 1041(b) requires that Sec. 393.95 be applied so that fusees and
liquid-burning flares are given ``equal priority'' with bidirectional
reflective triangles as emergency warning devices. The congressional
mandate is not contingent upon an evaluation of the effectiveness of
fusees and liquid-burning flares relative to that of bidirectional
reflective triangles.
In addition, this rulemaking is not intended to require the use of
fusees and liquid-burning flares, but rather to allow their use as a
primary emergency warning device on certain CMVs. This final rule does
not require motor carriers to discontinue the use of bidirectional
reflective triangles in favor of warning devices they believe to be
less effective.
Mixtures of Warning Devices
The NPRM requested comments on whether or not motor carriers should
be allowed to use a mixture of fusees, liquid-burning flares, and
bidirectional reflective triangles (e.g., a bidirectional triangle at
one of the three locations warning devices are required to be deployed,
and fusees at the other locations). Sate-Lite and the TSEI believed
that allowing a mixture of warning devices would contribute to motorist
confusion and uncertainty in associating the warning devices with the
stopped CMV.
The FHWA agrees with the commenters concerns about motorist ability
to understand the warning devices. The FHWA believes that the
effectiveness of the three warning devices placed around the stopped
vehicle would be diminished by allowing a different type of device to
be used at each location. Therefore, Sec. 392.22 is being amended to
require that the same type(s) of warning devices be used at each of the
locations specified in Sec. 392.22.
Minimum Number of Fusees and Flares Required
The FHWA proposed that CMVs equipped with only fusees or liquid-
burning flares have a minimum of six of these warning devices at all
times. The ATA believed the proposed minimum was unrealistic. The ATA
believed that the one hour of protection provided by six 30-minute
fusees would not be sufficient based on what they considered the ``best
available information'' on the duration of CMV breakdown time under
``optimum'' conditions. The ATA also pointed out that UL 912 specifies
that each liquid-burning flare be capable of burning for 12 hours and
that three of these devices should be sufficient.
The FHWA believes that a requirement for six fusees is appropriate.
As stated in the NHTSA Report:
Roughly one-half of all emergency stops and disabled vehicle
situations last for more than 30 minutes * * *. Moreover, since the
distribution of emergency stop durations is highly positively skewed,
the total disabled vehicle exposure time for the time period of more
than 30 minutes is considerably greater than for the time period of
less than 30 minutes. No statistics are available to compare the
``total risk'' incurred after 30 minutes to that incurred before 30
minutes, but presumably the risk per minute is greatest soon after the
emergency stop * * *. However, the total exposure time of disabled
vehicles is greater after 30 minutes due to those vehicles left for
several hours or more.
The FHWA recognizes that a number of factors affect the amount of
time a vehicle remains disabled, including its location (e.g., urban
area versus a rural area) and the availability of maintenance personnel
and equipment. The FHWA believes that the performance-based requirement
that warning devices be in place for the entire period the vehicle is
stopped adequately addresses this issue. Motor carriers are responsible
for ensuring that a sufficient number of warning devices are provided
on their CMVs.
With regard to the ATA's comments about liquid-burning flares, the
FHWA agrees that the proposed requirement for six liquid-burning flares
was inconsistent with the UL 912 performance criteria which was
proposed for incorporation by reference. Because UL 912 requires that
liquid-burning flares be capable of burning for 12 hours, requiring
three liquid-burning flares for vehicles which are not equipped with
fusees or bidirectional reflective triangles is sufficient.
Incorporation by Reference of UL 912
The NPRM included a proposal that fusees and liquid-burning flares
meet UL 912. In the case of fusees, UL 912 would be used to replace the
Sec. 393.95(j) reference to the Association of American Railroads
(AAR), ``Specifications for Red Railway or Red Highway Fuses.'' The ATA
and the PSMA were the only commenters that addressed this issue. The
ATA believed the FHWA should allow the use of fusees meeting either UL
912 or the AAR standards. The PSMA believed the performance standards
of UL 912 are appropriate.
The FHWA has reviewed the UL and AAR standards. The two documents
have comparable performance criteria for fusees. However, the UL
document provides performance criteria for both fusees and liquid-
burning flares while the AAR document only covers fusees. The FHWA has
concluded the UL document is appropriate for incorporation by reference
because the ISTEA requires that both fusees and liquid-burning flares
be allowed for use as emergency warning devices.
In addition to the requirements contained in UL 912, the PSMA
suggested that all fusees be of the ``lay-down type'' with a ``no-roll
device.'' The PSMA did not provide any discussion of this suggestion.
A requirement that all fusees be of the ``lay-down type'' is
unnecessarily design restrictive in that it would prohibit, without
technical justification, the use of fusees that are provided with a
means to remain in an upright position.
With regard to a ``no-roll device,'' motor carriers must ensure
that warning devices are in place at the required locations. If certain
devices are necessary to keep fusees in place, the motor carrier is
responsible for providing them. Furthermore, a general requirement for
a ``no-roll device'' would not provide objective criteria as to what
constitutes an acceptable device. The FHWA has not adopted the PSMA's
suggestions.
Economic Impact of the Rulemaking
Both Sate-Lite and the TSEI submitted comments to the docket
expressing concern over possible adverse effects of the proposed
regulation on small entities. These comments are discussed below under
the heading ``Regulatory Flexibility Act.''
Discussion of Final Rule
The FHWA is amending Sec. 393.95 to allow CMVs to be equipped with
fusees and liquid-burning flares in lieu of bidirectional reflective
triangles, except CMVs transporting Division 1.1, 1.2, or 1.3 hazardous
materials (explosives), cargo tank motor vehicles used for Class 3
(flammable and combustible liquid) or Division 2.1 (flammable gas)
hazardous materials (whether loaded or empty), or motor vehicles using
compressed gas as a motor fuel. This prohibition is necessary to
minimize the risk of explosion or catastrophic fire involving cargoes
and fuels of these types. The FHWA believes the retention of this
provision is consistent with congressional intent.
The final rule amends Sec. 393.95(f)(2) to require that CMVs be
equipped with either (1) three bidirectional reflective triangles, (2)
six fusees (each capable of burning for 30 minutes), or (3) three
liquid-burning flares (filled with a sufficient amount of fuel to burn
continuously for at least one hour). Although the FHWA has specified a
minimum number of fusees and liquid burning flares, motor carriers
relying solely upon these devices are responsible for ensuring that
fusees or liquid-burning flares are in use for the entire time the
vehicle is stopped upon the traveled portion of a highway or the
shoulder of a highway.
The FHWA is amending Sec. 392.22(b)(1) to require that the same
type(s) of warning devices be used at each of the locations where
warning devices are placed around the CMV. Section 392.22(b)(2)(i)
Fusees and liquid-burning flares, is being amended to require that
motor carriers relying solely upon fusees or liquid-burning flares
ensure that those devices are in use for the entire time the vehicle is
stopped upon the traveled portion of a highway or the shoulder of a
highway. The driver of the vehicle is required to extinguish and remove
each fusee or liquid-burning flare before the stopped vehicle is moved.
In addition, the FHWA is amending Sec. 392.22(b)(2)(ii) Daylight
hours, to allow motor carriers to use fusees or liquid-burning flares
in lieu of bidirectional reflective triangles when their CMVs are
stopped during daylight hours in business or residential districts.
Section 392.22(b)(2)(ii) requires that if fusees or liquid-burning
flares are used, there must be at least one lighted fusee or flare at
each of the prescribed locations as long as the vehicle is stopped.
The FHWA is removing Sec. 392.22(b)(2)(vii) Exemption for
lightweight vehicles, and certain United States Code and CFR citations
at the end of Sec. 392.22. Although the NPRM did not address these
issues, the amendments are considered administrative in nature.
On May 19, 1988 (53 FR 18042), the FHWA published a final rule
implementing the requirements of the Motor Carrier Act of 1984. The May
19, 1988, final rule included a definition of commercial motor vehicle
which with certain exceptions, excluded lightweight vehicles (vehicles
with a gross vehicle weight rating of 10,000 pounds or less) from the
applicability of the FMCSRs. Therefore, the vehicles for which
paragraph (b)(2)(vii) was intended are generally not subject to the
FMCSRs and paragraph (b)(2)(vii) is obsolete.
With regard to performance standards for fusees and liquid-burning
flares, the FHWA is amending Sec. 393.95(j) to require that both fusees
and liquid-burning flares meet the standards of the Underwriters
Laboratories, Inc., Highway Emergency Signals (UL 912). The final rule
incorporates by reference UL 912 in Sec. 393.95.
The FHWA has created a new section, Sec. 393.7, Matter incorporated
by reference, to provide the language of incorporation required by 1
CFR 51 and to provide information on the availability of the
incorporated document. After a review of the comments to the July 14,
1993, NPRM and a determination that the incorporation by reference was
necessary for the final rule, the FHWA submitted UL 912 to the Director
of the Federal Register for approval in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 522(a)
and 1 CFR 51.
The FHWA recognizes that some motor carriers may wish to supplement
the required warning devices (reflective triangles or fusees and
flares) with other warning devices such as electric lanterns. The final
rule allows the use of other warning devices in addition to, but not in
lieu of, the required devices provided they do not decrease the
effectiveness of the required devices. The FHWA has added
Sec. 393.95(f)(3) to clearly indicate this intent.
Rulemaking Analysis and Notices
Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures
This final rule amends the requirements for warning devices for
stopped vehicles. The FHWA has determined that this is not a
significant regulatory action within the meaning of Executive Order
12866 or significant within the meaning of the Department of
Transportation policies and procedures. It is anticipated that the
economic impact of this rulemaking will be minimal. This final rule
allows motor carriers the option to use fusees and liquid-burning
flares in lieu of bidirectional reflective triangles. The rule does not
increase the cost of complying with the requirements for emergency
warning devices on commercial motor vehicles. Therefore, a full
regulatory evaluation is not required.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
In their comments to the docket, both Sate-Lite and the TSEI
expressed concern that the proposed regulation would have adverse
impacts on small manufacturers of bidirectional reflective triangles
and small motor carriers electing to deploy fusees or liquid-burning
flares in accordance with this final rule.
In light of these concerns, and in compliance with the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), the FHWA has evaluated the effects
of this rulemaking on small entities. As for small manufacturers of
bidirectional reflective triangles, the final rule does not prohibit or
restrict the manufacture, sale, or use of such devices. Furthermore,
this final rule does not require motor carriers to increase the number
and types of warning devices carried on their CMVs. Nor does the rule
mandate that CMVs be equipped with only one type of warning device.
Rather the rule fulfills the requirements of section 1041(b) of the
ISTEA by simply allowing, with few exceptions, the use of fusees and
liquid-burning flares as an alternative to bidirectional reflective
triangles.
Based on its evaluation of this rulemaking, the FHWA certifies that
this action will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
Executive Order 12612 (Federalism Assessment)
This action has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order 12612, and it has been determined
that the final rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to
warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
Executive Order 12372 (Intergovernmental Review)
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Number 20.217, Motor
Carrier Safety. The regulations implementing Executive Order 12372
regarding intergovernmental consultation on Federal programs and
activities apply to this program.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The proposal in this document does not contain information
collection requirements [44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.].
National Environmental Policy Act
The agency has analyzed this action for the purpose of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and has
determined that this action would not have any effect on the quality of
the environment.
Regulation Identification Number
A regulation identification number (RIN) is assigned to each
regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulations.
The Regulatory Information Service Center publishes the Unified Agenda
in April and October of each year. The RIN contained in the heading of
this document can be used to cross reference this action with the
Unified Agenda.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Parts 392 and 393
Highway safety, Highways and roads, Incorporation by reference,
Motor carriers, and Motor vehicle safety.
Issued on: June 23, 1994.
Rodney E. Slater,
Federal Highway Administrator.
In consideration of the foregoing, the FHWA hereby amends title 49,
Code of Federal Regulations, chapter III, subchapter B, by amending
parts 392 and 393 as set forth below:
PART 392--DRIVING OF MOTOR VEHICLES
1. The authority citation at the end of Sec. 392.22 is removed and
the authority citation for part 392 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: Section 1041(b) of Pub. L. 102-240, 105 Stat. 1914,
1993 (1991); 49 U.S.C. 3102; 49 U.S.C. app. 2505; 49 CFR 1.48.
2. Section 392.22 is amended by removing paragraph (b)(2)(vii),
revising paragraph (b)(1) introductory text, (b)(2)(i), and (b)(2)(ii),
and adding paragraph (b)(1)(iv) to read as follows:
Sec. 392.22 Emergency signals, stopped vehicles.
* * * * *
(b) Placement of warning devices--(1) General rule. Except as
provided in paragraph (b)(2) of this section, whenever a vehicle is
stopped on the traveled portion of a highway or the shoulder of a
highway for any cause other than necessary traffic stops, the driver
shall as soon as possible, but in any event within 10 minutes, place
the warning devices with which the vehicle is equipped in conformance
with the requirements of Sec. 393.95 of this subchapter, in the
following manner:
* * * * *
(iv) The same type of required emergency warning device [see
Sec. 393.95(f) (1) and (2)] shall be placed at each of the three
locations specified in paragraph (b)(1) (i) through (iii) of this
section. If supplemental warning devices are also used [see
Sec. 393.95(f)(3)], a device of the same type shall be placed at each
of those locations.
(2) Special Rules--(i) Fusees and liquid-burning flares. The driver
of a commercial motor vehicle equipped with only fusees or liquid-
burning flares shall place a lighted fusee or liquid-burning flare at
each of the locations specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section.
There shall be at least one lighted fusee or liquid-burning flare at
each of the prescribed locations, as long as the vehicle is stopped.
Before the stopped vehicle is moved, the driver shall extinguish and
remove each fusee or liquid-burning flare.
(ii) Daylight hours. Except as provided in paragraph (b)(2)(iii) of
this section, during the period lighted lamps are not required, three
bidirectional reflective triangles, or three lighted fusees or liquid-
burning flares shall be placed as specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this
section within a time of 10 minutes. In the event the driver elects to
use only fusees or liquid-burning flares in lieu of bidirectional
reflective triangles or red flags, the driver must ensure that at least
one fusee or liquid-burning flare remains lighted at each of the
prescribed locations as long as the vehicle is stopped or parked.
* * * * *
PART 393--PARTS AND ACCESSORIES NECESSARY FOR SAFE OPERATIONS
3. The authority citation for part 393 is revised to read as
follows:
Authority: Section 1041(b) of Pub. L. 102-240, 105 Stat. 1914,
1993 (1991); 49 U.S.C. 3102; 49 U.S.C. app. 2505; 49 CFR 1.48.
4. A new section 393.7 is added to subpart A of part 393 to read as
follows:
Sec. 393.7 Matter incorporated by reference.
(a) Incorporation by reference. Part 393 includes references to
certain matter or materials. The text of the materials is not included
in the regulations contained in part 393. The materials are hereby made
a part of the regulations in part 393. The Director of the Federal
Register has approved the materials incorporated by reference in
accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. For materials
subject to change, only the specific version approved by the Director
of the Federal Register and specified in the regulation are
incorporated. Material is incorporated as it exists on the date of the
approval and a notice of any change in these materials will be
published in the Federal Register.
(b) Availability. The materials incorporated by reference are
available as follows:
(1) Standards of the Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. Information
and copies may be obtained by writing to: Underwriters Laboratories,
Inc., 333 Pfingsten Road, Northbrook, Illinois 60062.
(2)-(9) [Reserved]
(10) All of the materials incorporated by reference are available
for inspection at:
(i) The Department of Transportation Library, 400 Seventh Street,
SW., Washington, DC 20590 in Room 2200. These documents are also
available for inspection and copying as provided in 49 CFR part 7,
appendix D; and
(ii) The Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street,
NW, Suite 700, Washington, DC.
5. Section 393.95 is amended by revising paragraphs (f)(2), (g),
and (j) and adding paragraph (f)(3) to read as follows:
Sec. 393.95 Emergency equipment on all power units.
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(2) Vehicles equipped with warning devices on and after January 1,
1974.
(i) Three bidirectional emergency reflective triangles that conform
to the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 125,
Sec. 571.125 of this title; or
(ii) At least 6 fusees or 3 liquid-burning flares. The vehicle must
have as many additional fusees or liquid-burning flares as are
necessary to satisfy the requirements of Sec. 392.22.
(3) Supplemental warning devices. Other warning devices may be used
in addition to, but not in lieu of, the required warning devices,
provided those warning devices do not decrease the effectiveness of the
required warning devices.
(g) Restrictions on the use of flame-producing devices. Liquid-
burning flares, fusees, oil lanterns, or any signal produced by a flame
shall not be carried on any commercial motor vehicle transporting
Division 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 (explosives) hazardous materials; any cargo tank
motor vehicle used for the transportation of Division 2.1 (flammable
gas) or Class 3 (flammable liquid) hazardous materials whether loaded
or empty; or any commercial motor vehicle using compressed gas as a
motor fuel.
* * * * *
(j) Requirements for fusees and liquid-burning flares. Each fusee
shall be capable of burning for 30 minutes, and each liquid-burning
flare shall contain enough fuel to burn continuously for at least 60
minutes. Fusees and liquid-burning flares shall conform to the
requirements of Underwriters Laboratories, Inc., UL No. 912, Highway
Emergency Signals, Fourth Edition, July 30, 1979, (with an amendment
dated November 9, 1981). (See Sec. 393.7(b) for information on the
incorporation by reference and availability of this document.) Each
fusee and liquid-burning flare shall be marked with the UL symbol in
accordance with the requirements of UL 912.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 94-16070 Filed 7-5-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-P