=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
23 CFR Part 658
[FHWA Docket No. 1997-2234 (formerly 87-5 and 89-12)]
RIN 2125-AC30
Truck Length and Width Exclusive Devices
AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action amends the regulations that concern the exclusion
of devices from the measurement of vehicle length and width. All
previous interpretations related to exclusions from measurements of
vehicle length and width are superseded to the extent they are
inconsistent with these regulations. Also, a technical correction is
being made to the information on length limitations for multiple cargo
carrying units in appendix C for the State of Michigan. The primary
goal of this proceeding is to consolidate the basic information from
all previous policy notices on the topic, and to provide regulatory
standards for making future judgments on the length and/or width
exclusion status of specific devices.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule is effective April 29, 2002.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Tom Klimek, Office of Freight
Management and Operations, (202-366-2212); or Mr. Raymond Cuprill,
Office of the Chief Counsel (202-366-0791), Federal Highway
Administration, 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 Federal holidays.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Electronic Access
Internet users may access all comments received by the U.S. DOT
Dockets, Room PL-401 by using the universal resource locator (URL):
http://dmses.dot.gov. It is available 24 hours each day, 365 days each
year. Electronic submission and retrieval help and guidelines are
available under the help section of the web site.
An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded by using a
computer, modem and suitable communications software from the
Government Printing Office's Electronic Bulletin Board Service at (202)
512-1661. Internet users may reach the Office of the Federal Register's
home page at: http://www.nara.gov/fedreg and the Government Printing
Office's web page at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara.
Background
The first Federal legislation to cover maximum vehicle dimensions,
involved establishing a maximum width of 96 inches for vehicles using
the Interstate System. This occurred in 1956 as part of the landmark
legislation that accelerated construction of the Interstate System. The
1956 law included a ``grandfather'' clause that enabled States to
retain regulations in effect on July 1, 1956, if they allowed a vehicle
width greater than 96 inches. The grandfather clause also covered any
items a State may have excluded from width measurement.
The practice of excluding certain devices from width measurement,
however, did not develop as an issue until States were required to
begin certifying enforcement of size and weight laws annually to the
FHWA in 1975. Certification was the result of the enactment of what is
now 23 U.S.C. 141, as part of the Federal-aid Highway Amendments of
1974.
As a result of the expansion of size and weight enforcement brought
on by the certification requirement, it came to the attention of the
FHWA that only half of the States had a grandfather right to exclude
certain devices from width measurement. The remaining States were
allowing the exclusions based largely on a definition of vehicle width
originally developed by the American Association of State Highway
Officials (AASHO)\1\ in 1963, and included in AASHO's 1963 ``Policy on
Maximum Dimensions and Weights of Motor Vehicles to be Operated Over
the Highways of the United States.''\2\ The definition read, ``Width:
The total outside transverse dimension of a vehicle including any load
or load-holding devices thereon, but excluding approved safety devices
and tire bulge due to load.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Now the American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials (AASHTO).
\2\ The current version of this policy titled ``Guide For
Maximum Vehicle Weight and Dimensions'' is available from AASHTO by
telephone (800) 231-3475, facsimile (800) 525-3362, mail at AASHTO,
P.O. Box 96716, Washington, DC 20090-6716, or online at http://
www.transportation.org/publications/bookstore.nsf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The differences between the AASHO policy and the FHWA's
interpretation of the applicability of grandfather rights, resulted in
significant confusion not only for the States, but also for the
trucking industry. Since the AASHO policy from 1946 provided the basis
for the original 96-inch width legislation, the FHWA determined that
the subsequently issued AASHO definition was an acceptable basis on
which to revise agency policy. Accordingly, the FHWA adopted the AASHTO
definition of vehicle width on June 28, 1979 (44 FR 37710). In taking
this action, the FHWA also determined that the only ``approved safety
devices'' permitted to exceed 96 inches would be rear-view mirrors,
turn signal lamps, and hand-holds for cab entry/egress.
The next significant legislative action on vehicle size was the
Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (STAA) (Pub. L. 97-424,
96 Stat. 2097). In order to avoid a repeat of the interpretation
problems regarding vehicle width, section 411(h) of the STAA gave the
Secretary of Transportation the authority to exclude from the
measurement of vehicle length any safety and energy conservation
devices found necessary for the safe and efficient operation of
commercial motor vehicles (CMVs). That authority is now codified at 49
U. S. C. 31111(d). Section 416(b) of the STAA, now 49 U.S.C. 31113(b),
authorized similar exclusions when measuring vehicle width. Section
411(h) also provided that no device excluded from length measurement by
the Secretary could have, by design or use, the capability to carry
cargo.
Since enactment of the STAA, the FHWA has issued three policy
notices in the Federal Register that identified some 55 devices as
length or width exclusive. Copies of the notices are available on-line
under the FHWA docket number cited at the beginning of this document.
(See 49 FR 23302, June 5, 1984; 51 FR 1367, January 13, 1986; and 52 FR
7834, March 13, 1987.) The
[[Page 15103]]
FHWA has also handled a number of questions concerning specific pieces
of equipment over the years.
This action completes a rulemaking process originally initiated
through an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) issued on
December 26, 1989 (54 FR 52951). The primary goal of this proceeding is
to consolidate the basic information from all previous policy notices
on the topic, and to provide regulatory standards for making future
judgments on the length and/or width exclusion status of specific
devices.
A notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend the appropriate
sections of 23 CFR part 658 was published on August 18, 2000 (65 FR
50471). In response to the NPRM, 57 additional entries were made to the
docket. These entries represent 49 sets of comments, as some of the
entries were duplicates, or multiple submissions from the same entity.
Comments were provided by 12 companies involved in the manufacture or
shipping of vehicles and/or related equipment, 11 commercial-vehicle-
related industry associations, 10 different State transportation or
police agencies, 10 motor carriers, two organizations of State
officials, two individuals, one safety advocacy group, and one
congressional committee.
Scope and Applicability
The final rule published today applies to vehicles authorized by
the provisions of the STAA while operating on the National Network
(NN)\3\ and routes giving reasonable access to and from the NN. Nothing
in this rule, however, would prohibit States from applying the rule to
other vehicles and/or highway systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ As defined 23 CFR part 658, The National Network is the
composite of the individual network of highways in each State on
which vehicles authorized by the provisions of the STAA are allowed
to operate. The network in each State includes the Interstate
System, exclusive of those portions excepted under Sec. 658.11(f) or
deleted under Sec. 658.11(d), and those portions of the Federal-aid
Primary System in existence on June 1, 1991, set out by the FHWA in
appendix A to this part.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The primary goal of this rulemaking is to establish a simplified
manner of determining what devices attached to a commercial vehicle are
included or excluded when measuring vehicle dimensions for compliance
with applicable length and width laws. As noted earlier, this
rulemaking began in 1989. As the NPRM explained, however, the FHWA has
been issuing interpretations on this subject since the 1970's. The
equipment and enforcement practices in use today have evolved over the
last quarter century in response to these directives. The intent of
this proceeding is to continue to allow virtually all of the equipment
and devices the FHWA has previously indicated are, or should be,
excludable from the measurement of vehicle length or width. Included
are the devices listed in previous Federal Register notices, provided
they meet the detailed requirements of the rules promulgated today,
specifically:
(1) Notice of interpretation (NOI) at 51 FR 1367 (January 13,
1986).
A device up to 8 inches long at the front of a trailer
chassis the purpose of which is to secure containers and prevent
movement in transit.
(2) NOI at 52 FR 7834 (March 13, 1987).
Non-load carrying tie-down devices on automobile
transporters;
Non-load carrying devices falling within the swing radius
of the trailer as measured from the kingpin to the front corner of the
trailer;
Any add-on equipment such as lift gates, winches, etc., at
the rear of a trailer that do not extend more than 24 inches from the
rear of a trailer in the up position;
Non-rigid aerodynamic devices that do not extend more than
5 feet from the rear of a trailer in the operational position. Such
devices shall not obscure tail lamps, turn signals, marker lamps,
identification lamps, license plates, hazardous material placards, or
any other required safety device;
A front coupler device on a semitrailer or trailer used in
road and rail intermodal operations.
Other devices at the front of a semitrailer or trailer including:
Aerodynamic device, air deflector;
Air compressor;
Certificate holder (manifest box);
Door vent hardware;
Electrical connector;
Gladhand;
Handhold;
Hazardous material placard;
Heater;
Ladder;
Pickup plate lip;
Pump offline on tank trailer;
Refrigeration unit;
Removable bulkhead;
Removable stakes;
Stabilizing jack (anti-nosedive device);
Stake pockets;
Step;
Tarp basket;
Tire carrier; and
Uppercoupler.
Devices at the rear of a semitrailer or trailer including:
Air compressor;
Handhold;
Hazardous material placard;
Ladder;
Lift gate;
Pintle hook;
Removable stakes;
Resilient bumper block;
Splash and spray suppression device;
Stake pockets; and
Step.
Devices excluded from width determination, not to exceed 3 inches
from the side of the vehicle including:
Corner caps;
Hazardous materials placards;
Lift pads for trailer on flatcar (piggyback) operation;
Rain gutters;
Rear and side door hinges and their protective hardware;
Side marker lamps;
Tarp and tarp hardware;
Tie-down assembly on platform trailers;
Wall variation from true flat; and
Weevil pins and sockets on low-bed trailers.
Discussion of Comments
The National Truck Equipment Association (NTEA) requested that
straight trucks be included in the final rule coverage. Because the
STAA is silent with respect to straight trucks, the authority to
regulate their operation remains with the States.
The Morgan Corporation, a manufacturer of truck bodies and related
equipment, posed several questions:
1. Will changes in the length and width measurements in the Federal
regulations supersede the States' rules for length and/or width
exclusions, or will the States be empowered to change, add, or delete
exclusions as they see fit?
State regulations for STAA vehicles operating on the NN, or routes
providing reasonable access to and from the NN, must be in accord with
this final rule. States, however, retain the authority to determine the
rules that apply to other, non-STAA vehicles wherever they operate.
2. Where is the 3-inch exclusion located? If the vehicle is 96-
inches wide, is the allowance 6-inches on each side and front of the
vehicle? If the vehicle is 102-inches wide is the allowance 3-inches on
each side and the front of the vehicle? Where will the 12-inch
allowance for rearview mirrors be measured? If stake pockets, rub
rails, and stake racks are present and the total width of the vehicle
is 108-inches, will this be legal?
As mentioned earlier, the final rule published today applies to
vehicles authorized by the provisions of the
[[Page 15104]]
STAA while operating on the National Network NN and routes giving
reasonable access to and from the NN. A 96-inch wide vehicle is not a
STAA vehicle at least with respect to its width. The decision as to
width of an exclusion zone is a State determination.
As will be explained later in this document, the 12-inch maximum
mirror extension proposed in the NPRM is not being adopted. The safe
placement of mirrors will be a decision left to the vehicle
manufacturers so that the most advantageous designs can be adopted for
the various types of commercial vehicles.
If the stake pockets, sub-rails, and stake racks on a 102-inch wide
vehicle are located within 3-inches of the side of the cargo-carrying
platform, they are legal.
3. The proposed rule discussed a 24-inch lift gate and a 6-inch
resilient bumper. Does this mean that a trailer may have a 24-inch wide
lift gate that is exempt from length measurement plus a 6-inch
resilient bumper attached to the lift gate? Will these extensions be
legal?
No, under Sec. 658.16(c) of the final rule, exclusions are specific
and may not be added to other excludable devices. Therefore, a vehicle
can have the lift gate or the bumper, but not both.
The Western Association of State Highway Transportation Officials
(WASHTO) Committee on Highway Transport expressed several concerns.
First is a need for clear regulatory language, so that the
transportation industry and enforcement community will know which
devices are excluded from the length and width determinations. Second,
WASHTO believes the NPRM allowed too much room for interpretation which
may result in longer and wider trailers. And third, specific items such
as roof structures, sidewalls, taillight assemblies, and undercarriage
devices should be included in all measurements.
The regulation issued today restates practices that have been
widely, though not universally, accepted since the 1970's. It does not
authorize incremental expansion of vehicle size. Most of the devices
listed in previous Federal Register notices on this issue are included
in this rule. Devices developed in the future will be covered, as long
they meet the dimensional requirements of this final rule, and do not
carry cargo.
The Illinois DOT requested publication of a list of ``efficiency
enhancing devices'' as part of the final rule. Virtually all of the
devices included in the previous Federal Register notices on this issue
(the NOI's from 1986 and 1987) are listed in this final rule, as well
as any additional devices developed since then that the FHWA has
indicated should also be excluded from vehicle measurement. Some of
these are safety, rather than efficiency-enhancing devices but we see
no need to list them separately.
The Oregon DOT expressed concern regarding specific devices, but
chief among the State's issues was that the NPRM was too broad in its
scope and could easily result in unintentional increases in vehicle
width and length. The State's primary example involved use of the
rolling tarp systems that have been developed in recent years. In the
context of this discussion, a ``tarp system'' or ``rolling tarp
system'' refers to the aftermarket system that encloses the cargo area
of a flatbed semitrailer. Such systems are designed to be stowed
accordion-style at either end of the trailer during loading, and then
rolled out and locked in place. To accommodate this type of operation,
a two- to three-inch rail is added to the side edge of the flatbed,
extending the full length of the trailer. Ribs that provide internal
support for the closed system slide or roll along the side rail,
depending on the specific design of the system. A bulkhead at the front
of the unit and doors at the rear are also generally a part of these
systems, and are used to support the tarp in the operational position.
Tarp systems will be more fully discussed later in this document. The
Oregon position is that even though these systems may have some safety
benefit for the operator, the resulting vehicle is in fact 108 inches
wide. The State contends that the NOI of 1987 did not intend to allow
108-inch wide trailers under any circumstances.
Trailers may, in fact, be up to 108 inches wide, measured from the
outermost points of two 3-inch width exclusive devices. That is neither
new nor illegal. It has been the policy of the FHWA since the 1970's to
allow a 3-inch width exclusion on either side of a trailer. There is no
difference in principle between exclusions for tarp systems and for
stake pockets, which have been used on flatbeds for well over half a
century. Congress clearly knew of the FHWA policy, and approved it in
the STAA.
An ancillary argument of the Oregon DOT to the allowance of tarp
systems is that such an action will cause the State to reconsider the
availability of several routes from its list of approved reasonable
access routes. Again, this final rule does not change existing
practice. Any route currently included on the NN, or used for
reasonable access, can be reviewed for continuing use under procedures
available in this part.
The Wisconsin DOT expressed a general concern similar to that from
the Oregon DOT that the NPRM was too expansive about what could be
excluded from measurement and that the ultimate result would be wider
and longer vehicles. Specifically, Wisconsin is apprehensive that a
motor carrier may try to carry additional equipment such as tools, or
even decorations, outside of a vehicle to increase the cargo-carrying
capability. The exclusion of lifts, bumpers, forklifts and loading
dollies would create potential safety problems around the vehicle. The
State also commented that the title of the definition ``safety devices-
width exclusive'' is misleading as well as vague, and would allow the
exclusion of any non-cargo carrying device, including advertising and
decorations.
This final rule changes the title of the definition to ``width
exclusive devices'' for consistency with length exclusive definition.
Both definitions, however, have been changed to clarify that only
devices that contribute to a vehicle's safe operation or energy
conservation, can be excluded from the length or width of a vehicle.
Fork lifts and loading dollies are not excluded from length
measurement, as they do not directly contribute to the safe operation
of a vehicle, or help to conserve energy. They are carried as needed
and if not carried directly on the vehicle, would be considered cargo
overhang, subject to State determinations on acceptability.
The Massachusetts State Police also would like to have a list of
excludable items published as part of the rule, as the list would then
automatically be incorporated into State statutes and make it easier
for a magistrate to adjudicate any citations. They also believe that
the State should have the basic authority to decide if an appurtenance
should be excluded from width measurement.
As stated previously, the list of excludable items previously
published as part of earlier NOI's is part of the final rule published
today. Each State must have uniform rules with respect to measurement
of STAA vehicles. The goal of this final rule is to provide that
uniformity and minimize the opportunities for non-uniform treatment
among States.
The Truck Trailer Manufacturers Association (TTMA) is an
organization that develops and publishes position papers used by the
industry to maintain uniform standards in trailer construction and
repair. While generally supporting the NPRM, the TTMA
[[Page 15105]]
wanted two specific items included in the rule: (1) A one-inch
exclusion for structural repairs and reinforcements on side doors, and
(2) a reference to a TTMA ``Recommended Practice'' bulletin
incorporating all length and width exclusive guidance.
As discussed in the Supplementary Information section of the NPRM,
the one-inch exclusion for structural repairs, etc., will continue to
be allowed, but within the 3-inch general exclusion. It is not
additive, i.e., it does not allow a 3-inch plus a 1-inch width
exclusion in the area of the reinforced sections. This exclusion is
limited to van (box) semitrailers. Weld-on or bolt-on repairs may be
necessary during the life of the unit to maintain the operational
safety of the trailer. Vehicles needn't be discarded or completely
rebuilt to original specifications when damaged on one side.
This final rule is clear on what is and is not to be excluded from
width measurement. The TTMA is free to include the regulatory language
as part of its bulletin service for members, but referring to a TTMA
bulletin in a regulation could restrict availability of the regulatory
information to organization members and/or bulletin subscribers.
Multinational discussions on harmonization of vehicle weights and
dimensions have been under way between the United States, Canada, and
Mexico since ratification of the North American Free Trade Agreement
(NAFTA) in 1994. In recognition of this activity the FHWA is preparing
an NPRM to consider an extension from three to four inches of the
distance that non-property carrying devices may protrude from the side
of a commercial vehicle.
Tarp Systems
As described earlier in this document, a ``tarp system'' or
``rolling tarp system'' refers to the aftermarket system that encloses
the cargo area of a flatbed semitrailer. Such systems are designed to
be stowed accordion-style at either end of the trailer during loading,
and then rolled out and locked in place.
The Illinois, Maryland, and Oregon DOT's oppose rolling tarp
systems as they believe these systems result in wider vehicles, i.e.,
up to 108-inches wide. They claim that the 108-inch bulkheads at the
front of the trailer and 108-inch metal doors at the rear, necessary
components of certain designs, further support their argument regarding
width. Illinois and Maryland also oppose the tarp systems because they
provide increased efficiency for only one portion of an industry, an
action that these States consider potentially discriminatory in a
business sense.
On the other hand, eight motor carriers, seven manufactures, two
national associations, one leasing company, and one individual driver,
provided support for the continued exclusion of these systems from
width enforcement measurement. They argued that (1) national uniformity
on treatment of these systems is needed; (2) the tarp systems improve
accessibility and safe and efficient loading/unloading; (3) the systems
drastically reduce the risk of injury since drivers do not have to
climb onto the load to spread and secure heavy tarps; and (4) the
systems protect cargo from weather and road debris, as well as
protecting surrounding traffic from small bits of the cargo that may
work loose. The importance of the driver safety factor has quickly
grown to the point where some carriers now use the availability of
these systems as a driver recruitment tool.
Rolling tarp systems eliminate the injuries that occur when drivers
fall while climbing atop a load to spread and tie down a conventional
tarp. This is a very worthwhile improvement in safety. At the same time
the agency is cognizant of the potential for misuse of these systems,
as the typical design does provide an extra area of flat space, between
the support ribs, that could be used to carry cargo. There are several
obstacles to loading a flatbed in a manner that would use the extra
area provided by the internal rib support rails for cargo. Such a
practice would be very time consuming, could damage the tarp fabric and
would very likely interfere with the proper operation of the cargo tie
down assemblies required for load securement. In addition, once loaded
in such a fashion, the support ribs would not slide, thus defeating the
efficiency of the system. While we cannot rule out the occasional
deliberate misuse of the system, even though that would defeat the
purpose of investing in it, the potential for occasional misuse should
not disqualify these systems from width-exclusive status, especially in
light of the safety advantages accruing daily to the driver/operators
using these systems.
These tarp systems qualify as width exclusive if: (1) When the
vehicle is in operation, no component of the tarp system extends more
than 3-inches laterally beyond the cargo carrying portion of the
vehicle, and (2) the only function of the headerboard, a necessary
component of these systems, is to provide structural support for the
system, and not to comply with the ``front end structure'' cargo
support requirements of 49 CFR 393.106. If a tarp system includes rear
doors as part of the design, their exclusion from width measurement is
based on the same principles as for the headerboard. If the only
function of the doors is to complete a seal of the cargo area and
anchor the sliding walls, then they would be excluded from width
measurement. If however, they are also used to support cargo at the
rear, i.e., restrain otherwise unsecured cargo, then they are limited
to 102-inches in width. Any wider, and the excludablity of the entire
system would be nullified. Any cargo being carried on a flatbed
equipped with a tarping system must be secured in compliance with the
requirements of 49 CFR part 393, subpart I. Any use of these tarping
systems for purposes of cargo securement would disqualify the system as
width exclusive.
Recreational Vehicles
When recreational vehicles (RV's) are being moved to the point of
customer delivery, e.g., from a manufacturing location to a dealer, or
between a dealer and a tradeshow, they are commercial vehicles under
the definition of Part 658 (the vehicle itself is the merchandise being
transported), with the most pertinent issue being the 102-inch vehicle
width limitation. When a customer takes possession, however, their
status changes. Unless they are clearly being used in a commercial
enterprise, they become private, personal property and are no longer
subject to Part 658. Items such as allowable vehicle width become State
determinations. RV's often include items that are attached to the sides
of the unit for use when it is parked. When the RV's are moving, these
devices either fold up or roll up against the body. As long as they
remain within the 3-inch zone, States have generally moved to exclude
the devices from vehicle width (as long as they do not carry cargo),
while the unit is in a commercial status.
Recently, however, more RV's are coming equipped with roll up
awnings for use when parked. For stability and strength, more of these
awnings are being built into the structure of the RV's. However, when
rolled up in the traveling position the awning extends up to 6-inches
from the side of the unit. Under current regulation when an RV so
equipped is moving as a commercial vehicle, it must be covered by an
overwidth special permit, as it has an appurtenance that extends more
than 3-inches from the side of the unit. Once a customer takes
possession, again assuming private personal use, there is
[[Page 15106]]
no Federal requirement that States issue permits, and, in fact, in
recent years many States have enacted legislation specifically
exempting roll-up awnings from any width requirements for personal use
vehicles.
The Wisconsin DOT, Recreational Vehicle Industry Association (RVIA)
and Representative Bud Shuster, then chairman of the House Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure, all commented that this ``one-time''
requirement is not in the public interest. All three commented that for
the short time and distance (relative to its eventual use) these units
are commercial, they should be exempted from any permit requirements.
These requirements simply add to the transportation (and eventually
buyer) cost, and create unnecessary administrative burdens on State
permitting offices already stretched thin with increased commercial
needs. What the commenters are proposing would require an amendment of
the definition of commercial vehicle used in this part. Such an action
is beyond the scope of this rulemaking. However, in deference to these
comments, as well as language contained in the Senate Committee on
Appropriations report on S. 1178 (a bill making appropriations for DOT
for FY 2002 and other purposes), the FHWA will proceed with a separate
NPRM to consider appropriate regulatory changes in this area. (See S.
Rep. No. 107-38, at 66 (2001)).
Comments on Specific Features of the NPRM
Turn Signals
The Utah DOT, American Trucking Associations (ATA), Commercial
Vehicle Safety Alliance (CVSA), the Truck Manufacturer's Association
(TMA), Specialized Carriers and Rigging Association (SC&RA), the
National Automobile Dealers Association (NADA), and Grote Industries
Inc. (a manufacturer of safety equipment), all opposed the 6-inch
maximum extension for turn signals. The basis for their opposition was
essentially the same: Given the variation in design of tractors, a 6-
inch limit is too restrictive and may well make them invisible to other
traffic, thus defeating the purpose of turn signals. These commenters
also raised the issue of uniform enforcement, questioning where the 6-
inches would be measured from, given the designs of truck tractors in
use today.
The 6-inch limit was included in the NPRM in response to earlier
comments in this rulemaking that some limit was needed to prevent
equipment from extending so far that it would interfere with adjacent
or oncoming traffic. However, based on the comments received to the
NPRM, the final rule simply exempts turn signals from width and length
measurement regardless of their dimensions. A no-limit position on
signals has been implied in the AASHTO policy \4\ since at least 1963,
and has been part of the Federal policy since 1979. As no support was
provided for a limit, and several good arguments were presented in
opposition, the current regulatory language remains in place and turn
signals may be located wherever necessary to fulfill their purpose.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Footnote #1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rearview Mirrors
Seven commenters--the ATA, NADA, SC&RA, NATA, TMA, Grote
Industries, Inc., and the Colorado State Patrol--opposed the 12-inch
maximum extension limit on rearview mirrors. The main theme of this
opposition was similar to that expressed against a limit on turn
signals. Twelve inches would be too restrictive. Many truck tractors
are 96-inches wide while trailers are up to 102-inches wide with a 3-
inch allowance for non cargo-carrying devices. A 12-inch limit could
make it impossible to comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard
(FMVSS) number 111,\5\ which requires that ``mirrors shall be located
so as to provide the driver a view to the rear along both sides of the
vehicle * * *'' [49 CFR 571.111 (S8.1)]. Enforcement would be a problem
due to the varying designs of truck tractors. As with turn signals, the
12-inch limit was included in the NPRM in response to earlier comments
in this proceeding that some limit was needed to prevent equipment from
extending so far that it would interfere with adjacent or opposing
traffic. However, based on the comments received to the NPRM, the final
rule simply exempts rearview mirrors from width and length measurement
regardless of their dimensions. The no-limit position on mirrors has
been implied in the AASHTO policy since at least 1963, and has been
part of Federal regulation since 1984. As no support was provided for a
limit, and several good arguments were presented in opposition, as with
turn signals the current regulatory wording remains in effect. Rearview
mirrors may extend as far as necessary to fulfill their function.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) number 111 (49
CFR 571.111) can be obtained through the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, Publication Orders and Distribution, Suite
6123, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. The standard
may also be located through the Government Printing Office's
website. The URL is http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-
retrieve.html. Simply type 49 CFR part 571 Section 111 in the
appropriate boxes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Swing Radius Concept
The ATA commented that the swing radius language in the NPRM for
exclusions at the front of a semitrailer or trailer, along with the
additional definition, was not necessary, because the mechanics of
articulated vehicle operation make any regulatory intervention in this
area unnecessary. Swing radius language goes back to the language in
the 1987 NOI, wherein any non-load carrying item within the swing
radius of a trailer (or semitrailer) was excluded from length or width
measurement. Swing radius is the radius from the kingpin to both front
corners of the unit, and the area within that radius at the front end
of the trailer. The ATA indicated that any devices included on the
front of a trailing unit would have to remain within this ``swing
radius'' area or run the risk of not clearing the corner of the cab on
a turn. Such a situation would obviously cause damage not only to the
device, but the cab as well.
A swing radius rule appears to be unnecessary. Accordingly, the
language of this final rule simply exempts any non-load carrying device
at the front of a trailer or semitrailer from length measurement. No
limit is placed on the length of the item as the swing radius of the
combination will generally control its size. The FHWA is prepared,
however, to re-visit this issue if application of this rule results in
vehicle designs or operational conditions that create potential safety
problems for adjacent or oncoming traffic.
Three Inch Exclusion at the Front of a Vehicle
The Oregon DOT opposes application of the 3-inch allowance for non-
load carrying devices to the front of a vehicle, i.e., the power unit.
It indicates that implementation of this provision will simply allow
vehicles to be 3 inches longer, by no longer including any type of
bumper in the overall measurement of a vehicle until it would extend
more than 3 inches.
As we have stated throughout this discussion, the purpose of this
rulemaking is to consolidate in a single location the regulatory
language for length and width exclusive determinations. Our goal in
issuing this final rule is essentially to maintain the status quo with
respect to length and width exclusive devices. Insofar as the front of
a vehicle is concerned, the NPRM obviously violated the stated intent
of maintaining the status quo.
[[Page 15107]]
Except for front overhang allowed on automobile transporters, the
existing regulatory language in part 658, and other guidance issued by
the FHWA over time, does not allow the exclusion from length
measurement of any devices at the front of a vehicle. Clearly the NPRM
language for proposed Sec. 658.16(b) should not have included the
phrase ``the front or'' in referring to the 3-inch exclusion zone. That
has been corrected in this final rule; the 3-inch general exclusion for
non-load carrying devices does not apply to the front of a commercial
vehicle. The only item at the front of a commercial vehicle that is
excluded from measurement of the vehicle length is a resilient bumper
that may extend up to 6-inches from the front.
The 24-Inch Rear Exclusion
The Oregon DOT commented that the 24-inch exclusion zone at the
rear of a vehicle should be explicitly limited to those devices that
are needed for loading and unloading the unit, and that any other non-
cargo carrying devices should be limited to no more than a 3-inch
exclusion. They are concerned that a general 24-inch exclusion zone
will be used by industry to extend or locate equipment that is required
on a vehicle (such as mud flaps, bumpers, and tail light assemblies)
but that is non-load bearing, essentially resulting in a 24-inch longer
trailer.
The State's concern is accommodated by this rule. The regulatory
language regarding exclusions from length measurement of items at the
rear of a vehicle includes the following: ``that do not extend more
than 24-inches beyond the rear of the vehicle and are needed for
loading or unloading.'' Such devices (and the additional items listed
in new appendix D to part 658), aerodynamic devices and resilient
bumpers are the only items that are excluded from length measurement at
the rear of a semitrailer or trailer. Except for the loading/unloading
and aerodynamic devices, and the resilient bumpers, all other excluded
devices at the rear of the semitrailer or trailer are limited to a
maximum extension of 3-inches from the rear of the unit.
Aerodynamic Devices
The Oregon DOT opposes the allowance of rigid aerodynamic devices
at the rear of a vehicle, because its experience has been that carriers
often use the interior space to conceal cargo that extends beyond the
limit of the vehicle.
Aerodynamic devices on the rear of a vehicle pose a vexing problem.
Maximizing fuel economy during vehicle operation is once again becoming
an increasingly important factor in the trucking industry, not to
mention its importance in managing of the nation's fuel supply. On the
other hand, through the development of standardized rear impact guards,
the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) have provided a
significantly improved degree of rear underride protection to reduce
the often violent results of crashes where an automobile impacts the
rear of a truck or semitrailer. In addition, there is, as Oregon points
out, the potential for deliberate misuse in order to gain a competitive
edge with respect to cargo hauling.
The NPRM included language that would allow flexible aerodynamic
devices to extend up to 8 feet. This language was based on a request
the FHWA received in 1993 from the developer of such a device. At that
time we could not make a determination on the implications for highway
safety of allowing this device and indicated that further consideration
would be part of this rulemaking. Comments on this aspect of the NPRM
were received from two State DOTs (Utah and Maryland) and the
Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance (CVSA). All three comments asked why
the FHWA was considering the device, and the State DOTs had concerns
over the safety implications for following vehicles of an 8-foot
flexible device that might sway or oscillate due to cross winds. Since
the original correspondence was received by the FHWA, no additional
information has been provided by the developer of the device to
indicate any operational experience, or that it has even been allowed
to operate in any State. As with tarping systems discussed earlier, the
potential for deliberate misuse of these devices should not rule out
their use unless widespread deliberate violation becomes endemic with
certain types of aerodynamic devices.
The final rule issued today allows certain aerodynamic devices to
extend up to 5 feet beyond the rear of a commercial vehicle. A 5-foot
device was included in the 1987 NOI. However, because of the need to
make such devices compatible with the rear-underride provisions of the
NHTSA and FMCSA safety regulations, the rule requires that aerodynamic
devices ``have neither the strength, rigidity nor mass to damage a
vehicle, or injure a passenger in a vehicle, that strikes a trailer so
equipped from the rear.'' The NPRM mentioned aerodynamic devices ``made
of flexible material which are inflated by air pressure and lack a
rigid structure.'' Such devices would most likely meet the requirements
of Sec. 658.16(b)(iv), but other aerodynamic designs may also be
consistent with the rule. To repeat, developers of aerodynamic devices
should keep in mind that this rule does not exempt motor carriers from
complying with the FMCSA's rule (49 CFR 393.86).
The Agency is not in any way minimizing the critical importance of
achieving the maximum possible fuel economy in the Nation's
transportation system. But we cannot allow a device with the potential
of negating the safety gains achieved by the rear underride protection
rules.
Inadvertent Restrictions Imposed by a General 3-Inch Exclusion Zone
The TMA comments highlighted two areas where the general 3-inch
exclusion zone created by the language of the NPRM would be too
restrictive: Steps and handholds for cab entry/egress, and equipment
such as winches that are often included at the front of a vehicle for
certain vocational applications. As discussed above, the AASHTO has had
a ``no limit'' policy on steps and hand holds for cab entry/egress
since at least 1963. That policy has been included in part 658 since
its initial publication on June 5, 1984 (49 FR 23302). Given that the
intention of this rulemaking is essentially to maintain the status quo
with respect to length and width exclusive devices, this final rule
continues to allow these items, without dimensional limit. The TMA
comment concerning the front of the vehicles was the only mention of
winches and related equipment. The power units of the STAA vehicles, to
which this final rule applies, typically are only used to transport
trailers and semitrailers, and for no other function. The TMA comment
would appear to be directed to special use single unit vehicles such as
tow trucks. Single unit vehicles are not STAA vehicles, and are not
covered by these rules. States have complete discretion whether to
include or exclude such devices from the length of straight trucks.
Automobile Transporter Support Ramps or ``Flippers'''
The Maryland DOT expressed opposition to treating as length
exclusive devices the extendable ramps or ``flippers'' on automobile
transporters. The State argued that this proposal was inconsistent with
the principle that length exclusive devices not be cargo carrying.
``Flippers'' are used for supporting vehicles that overhang the
front or rear
[[Page 15108]]
of an automobile transporter. The vehicle overhang provisions of 23 CFR
658.13(e)(1)(ii) are based on the STAA's specialized equipment
authority [49 U.S.C. 31111(g)], not its length-exclusive provision [49
U.S.C. 31111(d)]. Congress explicitly designated automobile
transporters as specialized equipment, and the FHWA adopted rules that
conform to industry practice. For the last decade, the agency has
consistently interpreted Sec. 658.13(e)(1)(ii) as allowing the use of
retractable platforms to position and secure vehicles. When auto
transporters are empty, however, we concluded that these platforms
should be included in any length measurement if not retracted. This
enables vehicle transporters to maximize the capacity of their
equipment, while requiring them to minimize vehicle length when the
flippers are not needed. This rule codifies that policy.
Support for the NPRM
Several commenters offered general support for the concept of the
NPRM but had additional comments.
The National Automobile Transporters Association (NATA) supported
the proposed language regarding retractable platforms or ``flippers''
on automobile transporters. As discussed above, this rule codifies what
had previously been FHWA policy on this issue.
The American Bus Association (ABA) supported the overall concept of
the NPRM, but would also like to see a separate commercial vehicle
designation for motor coaches with its own size and weight rules. Such
an action is beyond the scope of this rulemaking.
The National Automobile Dealers Association (NADA) also generally
supported the NPRM, but asked that the dimensions of mirrors and turn
signals not be limited. As discussed earlier, the final rule adopts
that position.
Other Requests
Auto Transporter Bumper Step
The Supplementary Information section of the NPRM discussed the
issue of allowing a step across the full width of the front bumper of
an automobile transporter, extending outward from the front bumper. The
operator would use the step in the loading/unloading process to secure
the vehicle being transported at the front of the head rack. A
commenter to the ANPRM asked for a 4-inch wide step, while the NPRM
indicated that the 3-inch exclusion provided enough room, and if an
additional inch was needed, that the step could be recessed in some
manner into the front of the unit. The ATA and the NATA provided
similar comments on this issue. They contend that in order to avoid
regulatory conflict with 49 CFR 399.207(b)(4),\6\ the step should be 5-
inches deep, extending across the width of the front bumper. As an
alternative to the step, the NATA proposed the FHWA consider excluding
the front bumper of an auto transporter from length measurement and
allow the step to be incorporated, i.e., allow a 5-inch wide bumper to
be length excluded.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ 49 CFR part 399, Employee Safety and Health Standards,
Subpart L, Step, Handhold, and Deck Requirements for Commercial
Motor Vehicles, is available online from the URL: http://
www.access.gpo.gov/nara.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neither the specialized equipment rules in Sec. 658.13(e)(1) nor
the general length provisions in Sec. 658.13(a)-(d) authorize steps
that extend beyond the front bumper of automobile transporters, nor
have FHWA interpretations allowed any such devices. The FMCSA's step
regulations apply only to ``high profile COE [cab-over-engine] trucks
or truck tractors,'' which are rarely used for auto transporters, and
they require steps ``on each side of the vehicle where a seat is
located * * *'' [49 CFR 399.207(b) (emphasis added)], not at the front
of the vehicle. All previous Federal statements on length exclusive
devices have referred to the trailer or semitrailer.
Allowance of a 5-inch straight edge across the width of a power
unit may at times help an operator with vehicle securement on the
headrack, although a shorter operator may not be able to reach the
equipment. However, that edge could at all times pose a safety threat
to any person or object that may come in contact with it, depending on
the speed of the vehicle. In addition, the existence of such a step may
also be in conflict with 49 CFR 393.203(e), which reads `` The front
bumper must not be missing, loosely attached, or protruding beyond the
confines of the vehicle so as to create a hazard.''
Earlier in this section, a 3-inch exclusion zone at the front of
the vehicle was discussed and rejected. For the same basic reasons,
this final rule does not allow any type of step at the front of a
vehicle (which for STAA vehicles means the power unit) to be length
exclusive. There are alternatives available, if auto transporters must
contain a capability for the operator to reach the bottom of the
headrack with something other than a ladder.
The only item at the front of a commercial vehicle that is excluded
from length measurement by this final rule is a resilient bumper up to
6 inches deep. In order to avoid undue hardship for operators of auto
transporters that already include a step, the FHWA will allow a period
of 3 years from the effective date of this rule for existing vehicles
to comply with this rule. It will be the responsibility of the operator
of the unit to show proof of the existence of the step prior to the
effective date of this rule. Such proof can be in the form of a work
order for equipment modification, a receipt for purchase and
installation of the piece, or any similar type of documentation.
However, three years after the effective date of this rule, anything
other than a resilient bumper will be included in the vehicle's length.
Dromedary Boxes
The ATA suggested that the agency use this rulemaking as an
opportunity to designate truck tractors with dromedary equipment used
by the munitions hauling industry as specialized equipment. That is
beyond the scope of this rulemaking.
Equipment Grandfathers
The TTMA raised the issue of grandfathering equipment that has been
in use since publication of the 1987 NOI, if this final rule were to
change application of the length and width exclusive concepts. As we
have noted several times throughout this section, the intent of this
proceeding is to continue to allow virtually all of the equipment and
devices that up to now the FHWA has indicated are, or should be,
excludable from the measurement of vehicle length or width. The only
equipment grandfathering included in this final rule involves
automobile transporters with a step on the front bumper to assist the
operator in reaching the headrack, which also causes the unit to exceed
the 65- or 75-foot length limits that apply to these transporters.
Multi-Cargo Carrying Limitation Information--Michigan
Information provided by the State of Michigan has shown that the
operation of a truck-trailer combination with an overall length of 70
feet used to haul saw logs, pulpwood, and tree length poles, has been
legal under State law since May 1990. In bringing this fact to our
attention, the State has also provided information in the form of
affidavits to show that truck-trailer combinations at the 70-foot
length were in operation in the State prior to June 1, 1991. These
affidavits are from both State officials and private operators.
Appendix C is being revised today to correct this oversight.
[[Page 15109]]
Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures
We have determined that this action is not a significant regulatory
action within the meaning of Executive Order 12866 or significant
within the meaning of Department of Transportation regulatory policies
and procedures. This final rule will not adversely affect, in a
material way, any sector of the economy. There will not be any
additional costs incurred by any affected group as a result of this
rule. In addition, this final rule will not interfere with any action
taken or planned by another agency and will not materially alter the
budgetary impact of any entitlements, grants, user fees or loan
programs. Therefore a regulatory evaluation is not required.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
In compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-
612), we have evaluated the effects of this rule on small entities. The
FHWA certifies that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. This action merely
replaces previous policy guidance on specific devices that may extend
beyond the structural members of a vehicle with a general rule covering
how far devices may extend beyond the structural members of vehicles.
Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
This action has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in Executive order 13132, dated August 4, 1999, and
it has been determined that this action does not have a substantial
direct effect or significant federalism implications on States that
would limit the policymaking discretion of the States.
Executive Order 12372 (Intergovernmental Review)
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Number 20.205,
Highway Planning and Construction. The regulations implementing
Executive order 12372 regarding intergovernmental consultation on
Federal programs and activities apply to this program.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
This action does not contain a collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
This rule does not impose unfunded mandates as defined by the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4, March 22, 1995,
109 Stat. 48). This rule will not result in the expenditure by State,
local and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private
sector, of $100 million or more in any one year.
Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)
This action meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.
Executive Order 13045 (Protection of Children)
We have analyzed this action under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and does not
concern an environmental risk to health or safety that may
disproportionately affect children.
Executive Order 12630 (Taking of Private Property)
This rule will not effect a taking of private property of otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 125630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.
National Environmental Policy Act
The Agency has analyzed this section for the purposes of the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321
et seq.) and has determined that this action will not have any effect
on the quality of the environment.
Executive Order 13175 (Tribal Consultation)
The FHWA has analyzed this final rule under Executive Order 13175,
dated November 6, 2000, and believes that the rule will not have
substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes; will not
impose substantial direct compliance costs on Indian tribal
governments; and will not preempt tribal law. Therefore, a tribal
summary impact statement is not required.
Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects)
We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a significant
energy action under that order because it is not a significant
regulatory action under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to have
a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution or use of
energy. Therefore, a Statement of Energy Effects under Executive Order
13211 is not required.
Regulation Identification Number
A regulation identification number (RIN) is assigned to each
regulatory section 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 section with the
Unified Agenda.
List of Subjects in 23 CFR Part 658
Grants Program--transportation, Highways and roads, Motor carriers.
Issued on: March 21, 2002.
Mary E. Peters,
Federal Highway Administrator.
In consideration of the foregoing, the FHWA amends 23 CFR part 658
as follows:
PART 658--TRUCK SIZE AND WEIGHT, ROUTE DESIGNATIONS--LENGTH, WIDTH
AND WEIGHT LIMITATIONS
1. Revise the authority citation for part 658 to read as follows:
Authority: 23 U.S.C. 127 and 315; 49 U.S.C. 31111, 31112, and
31114; 49 CFR 1.48(b)(19) and (c)(19).
2. Amend Sec. 658.5 by revising the definition of ``Length
Exclusive Ddevices'', removing the definition of ``Safety Devices-Width
Exclusion'' and adding the definition of ``Width Exclusive Devices'' in
alphabetical order, to read as follows:
Sec. 658.5 Definitions.
* * * * *
Length Exclusive Devices. Devices excluded from the measurement of
vehicle length. Such devices shall not be designed or used to carry
cargo.
* * * * *
Width Exclusive Devices. Devices excluded from the measurement of
vehicle width. Such devices shall not be designed or used to carry
cargo.
3. In Sec. 658.13, revise paragraph (e)(1)(ii), remove paragraph
(f), and redesignate paragraphs (g) and (h) as paragraphs (f) and (g),
respectively, to read as follows:
Sec. 658.13 Length.
* * * * *
[[Page 15110]]
(e) * * * (1) * * *
(ii) All length provisions regarding automobile transporters are
exclusive of front and rear cargo overhang. No State shall impose a
front overhang limitation of less than 3 feet or a rear overhang
limitation of less than 4 feet. Extendable ramps or ``flippers'' on
automobile transporters that are used to achieve the allowable 3-foot
front and 4-foot rear cargo overhangs are excluded from the measurement
of vehicle length, but must be retracted when not supporting vehicles.
* * * * *
Sec. 658.15 [Amended]
4. Amend Sec. 658.15 by removing paragraph (c) and redesignating
paragraph (d) as paragraph (c).
5. Add Sec. 658.16 to read as follows:
Sec. 658.16 Exclusions from length and width determinations.
(a) Vehicle components not excluded by law or regulation shall be
included in the measurement of the length and width of commercial motor
vehicles.
(b) The following shall be excluded from either the measured length
or width of commercial motor vehicles, as applicable:
(1) Rear view mirrors, turn signal lamps, handholds for cab entry/
egress, splash and spray suppressant devices, load induced tire bulge;
(2) All non-property-carrying devices, or components thereof--
(i) At the front of a semitrailer or trailer, or
(ii) That do not extend more than 3 inches beyond each side or the
rear of the vehicle, or
(iii) That do not extend more than 24 inches beyond the rear of the
vehicle and are needed for loading or unloading, or
(vi) Listed in appendix D to this part;
(3) Resilient bumpers that do not extend more than 6 inches beyond
the front or rear of the vehicle;
(4) Aerodynamic devices that extend a maximum of 5 feet beyond the
rear of the vehicle, provided such devices have neither the strength,
rigidity nor mass to damage a vehicle, or injure a passenger in a
vehicle, that strikes a trailer so equipped from the rear, and provided
also that they do not obscure tail lamps, turn signals, marker lamps,
identification lamps, or any other required safety devices, such as
hazardous materials placards or conspicuity markings; and
(5) A fixed step up to 3 inches deep at the front of an existing
automobile transporter until April 29, 2005. It will be the
responsibility of the operator of the unit to prove that the step
existed prior to April 29, 2002. Such proof can be in the form of a
work order for equipment modification, a receipt for purchase and
installation of the piece, or any similar type of documentation.
However, after April 29, 2005, the step shall no longer be excluded
from a vehicle's length.
(c) Each exclusion allowance is specific and may not be combined
with other excluded devices.
(d) Measurements are to be made from a point on one side or end of
a commercial motor vehicle to the same point on the opposite side or
end of the vehicle.
6. Amend appendix C to part 658 by revising the entry for the State
of Michigan in the table entitled ``Vehicle Combinations Subject to
Pub. L. 102-240'', and by adding a listing for the State of Michigan
for a truck-trailer combination vehicle after the existing listing for
truck tractor. The amended and added portions of appendix C read as
follows:
Appendix C to Part 658--Trucks Over 80,000 Pounds on the Interstate
System and Trucks Over STAA Lengths on the National Network
* * * * *
Vehicle Combinations Subject to Pub. L. 102-240
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 2 3
----------------------------------------------------------------------
State Truck tractor and 2 Truck tractor and 3
trailing units trailing units Other
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * *
*
Michigan................................. 58' 164K................... No.........................
63'
* * * * * *
*
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
State: Michigan
Combination: Truck-trailer
Length of Cargo-Carrying Units: 63 feet
Operational Conditions:
Weight: This combination must operate in compliance with State
laws and regulations. Because it is not an LCV, it is not subject to
the ISTEA freeze as it applies to maximum weight.
Driver: The driver must have a commercial driver's license with
appropriate endorsement.
Vehicle: The overall length of this combination is limited to 70
feet. The only cargo that may be carried is saw logs, pulpwood, and
tree length poles.
Permit: None required.
Access: All NN routes.
Routes: All NN routes.
Legal Citations: Michigan Public Act 300, section 257.719.
* * * * *
7. Part 658 is amended by adding appendix D to read as follows:
Appendix D to Part 658--Devices That Are Excluded From Measurement
of the Length or Width of a Commercial Motor Vehicle
The following devices are excluded from measurement of the
length or width of a commercial motor vehicle, as long as they do
not carry property and do not exceed the dimensional limitations
included in Sec. 658.16. This list is not exhaustive.
1. All devices at the front of a semitrailer or trailer
including, but not limited to, the following:
(a) A device at the front of a trailer chassis to secure
containers and prevent movement in transit;
(b) A front coupler device on a semitrailer or trailer used in
road and rail intermodal operations;
(c) Aerodynamic devices, air deflector;
(d) Air compressor;
(e) Certificate holder (manifest box);
(f) Door vent hardware;
(g) Electrical connector;
(h) Gladhand;
(i) Handhold;
(j) Hazardous materials placards and holders;
(k) Heater;
(l) Ladder;
(m) Non-load carrying tie-down devices on automobile
transporters;
(n) Pickup plate lip;
(o) Pump offline on tank trailer;
(p) Refrigeration unit;
(q) Removable bulkhead;
(r) Removable stakes;
(s) Stabilizing jack (anti-nosedive device);
(t) Stake pockets;
(u) Step;
(v) Tarp basket;
(w) Tire carrier; and
(x) Uppercoupler.
[[Page 15111]]
2. Devices excluded from length measurement at the rear of a
semitrailer or trailer including, but not limited to, the following:
(a) Handhold;
(b) Hazardous materials placards and holders;
(c) Ladder;
(d) Pintle hook;
(e) Removable stakes;
(f) Splash and spray suppression device;
(g) Stake pockets; and
(h) Step.
3. Devices excluded from width determination, not to exceed 3
inches from the side of the vehicle including, but not limited to,
the following:
(a) Corner caps;
(b) Hazardous materials placards and holders;
(c) Lift pads for trailer on flatcar (piggyback) operation;
(d) Rain gutters;
(e) Rear and side door hinges and their protective hardware;
(f) Side marker lamps;
(g) Structural reinforcement for side doors or intermodal
operation (limited to 1 inch from the side within the 3 inch maximum
extension);
(h) Tarping systems for open-top trailers;
(i) Movable devices to enclose the cargo area of flatbed
semitrailers or trailers, usually called tarping systems, where no
component part of the system extends more than 3 inches from the
sides or back of the vehicle when the vehicle is in operation. This
exclusion applies to all component parts of tarping systems,
including the transverse structure at the front of the vehicle to
which the sliding walls and roof of the tarp mechanism are attached,
provided the structure is not also intended or designed to comply
with 49 CFR 393.106, which requires a headerboard strong enough to
prevent cargo from penetrating or crushing the cab; the transverse
structure may be up to 108 inches wide if properly centered so that
neither side extends more than 3 inches beyond the structural edge
of the vehicle. Also excluded from measurement are side rails
running the length of the vehicle and rear doors, provided the only
function of the latter, like that of the transverse structure at the
front of the vehicle, is to seal the cargo area and anchor the
sliding walls and roof. On the other hand, a headerboard designed to
comply with 49 CFR 393.106 is load bearing and thus limited to 102
inches in width. However, the ``wings'' designed to close the gap
between such a headerboard and the movable walls and roof of a
tarping system are width exclusive, provided they are add-on pieces
designed to bear only the load of the tarping system itself and are
not integral parts of the load-bearing headerboard structure;
(j) Tie-down assembly on platform trailers;
(k) Wall variation from true flat; and
(l) Weevil pins and sockets on low-bed trailers.
[FR Doc. 02-7359 Filed 3-28-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-P