Interpretation ID: nht74-4.14

DATE: 07/11/74

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; L. R. Schneider; NHTSA

TO: Automobile Importers of America

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in reply to your letter of June 24, 1974, asking that the NHTSA reconsider its decision to extend the time period within which it will normally respond to petitions for reconsideration. You also suggest that public meetings be held following the deadline for receipt of petitions.

Although the NHTSA appreciates the need for expeditious handling of petitions for reconsideration, it has become clear through the years that a shorter deadline for action than 90 days after the closing date for receipt of petitions is not practicable. In order to give full consideration to the points raised in the petitions, a period of 90 days from the closing date for petitions is often necessary and in the public interest. Every attempt will be made to remain within this limitation.

With regard to your suggestion that a public proceeding be held after the receipt of petitions, in general such proceedings have been found unnecessary at this stage in the rulemaking process. Written submissions have proven more helpful than oral discussion during this phase, since they tend to provide more constructive information and "hard data." In cases where a public meeting appears advisable, we will of course not hesitate to hold one.

Thank you for your comments.

AUTOMOBILE IMPORTERS OF AMERICA

June 24, 1974

James B. Gregory Administrator National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

On April 25, 1974, a notice was published in the Federal Register extending from 90 days to 120 days from publication of a final rule, the time period during which the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) will normally respond to petitions for reconsideration. It is the unanimous view of the member companies of the Automobile Importers of America (AIA) that this extension of the NHTSA response time is not in the public interest and that you should reconsider this policy change in light of the following:

(a) With few exceptions, manufacturers must initiate changes in production tooling and order appropriate materials from suppliers promptly after issuance of a new or revised standard in order to meet the specified effective date. Since the deadlines for such production decisions are often short, delay on the part of NHTSA in responding to a petition can serve, in effect, as a denial of the petition.

(b) Manufacturers are allowed a 30-day period after publication of a standard to transmit the text to the factory, translate it to a foreign language (in most instances), construct and perform tests on special prototype vehicles or components, determine the conformance, producibility, and cost of an appropriate design, and, if significant problems are encountered, prepare a Petition for Reconsideration to the NHTSA. In view of this, it does not seem unreasonable to expect NHTSA personnel to respond to the petition within 60 days - double the time allowed for preparation of the petition by manufacturers

It is recognized that rule making decisions are often difficult since they are complex technically and since to serve the public interest, many points of view must be considered. Accordingly, we would suggest that if petitions for reconsideration are received, a public proceeding be scheduled closely following the deadline for such petitions. This would facilitate understanding of the problem and possible solutions and assure consideration of all points of view. In addition it would assure the consideration of the petitions on a timely basis, and provide a forum for the presentation of information adverse to as well as in support of the petitions. Finally, the record of the proceeding would, we believe, be of considerable use to your staff in facilitating and expediting the disposition of petitions.

Ralph T. Millet President