Interpretation ID: nht75-5.7

DATE: 11/28/75

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Frank A. Berndt; NHTSA

TO: Bucyrus-Erie Company

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This responds to Bucyrus-Erie's October 8, 1975, suggestion that the terms "unloaded vehicle weight and "passenger-carrying capacity" be defined in 49 CFR @ 571.3 to reflect explanations of them that appeared in the preamble of recent NHTSA rulemaking on Standard No. 121, Air Brake Systems. (40 FR 38160, August 27, 1975). You believe that removable portions of a vehicle that are essential to its function (e.g., the boom on a mobile crane) should not be considered part of the vehicle's "cargo" as that term is used in the present definition of unloaded vehicle weight.

The NHTSA explained in the preamble to which you refer that the unloaded vehicle weight is easily determined by, in most cases, subtracting the weight of cargo and occupants from the gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) assigned to the vehicle by the manufacturer. We believe that the term "cargo" clearly indicates that the manufacturer must only subtract the weight of commodities or freight that the vehicle is designed to carry as a transportation function. Presumably the manufacturer of a mobile crane would have no difficulty in concluding under the present definition of "unloaded vehicle weight" that its vehicle does not transport "cargo" and that no value must be subtracted from the GVWR on this account.

It does appear that the term "passenger-carrying capacity" used in Standard No. 121 could be expanded to reflect the exclusion of the operating crew from consideration as passengers. In response to your request we are considering an amendment of S3 to make this concept clearer.

SINCERELY,

BUCYRUS-ERIE COMPANY

October 8, 1975

Docket Section National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

This letter is in response to Docket No. 75-16 Notice 02, which appeared on Page 38160 of the August 27th, Federal Register.

In this article the NHTSA responded to the concern of specialized equipment manufacturers over the terms "unloaded vehicle weight" and "passenger-carrying capacity." After reviewing the explanation issued by the NHTSA, we understand that a mobile crane could be exempt from MVSS 121 if it meets the following conditions.

1. Its maximum attainable speed in two miles is not more than 45 mph.

2. It has an unloaded vehicle weight that is not less than 95 percent of the vehicle GVWR. Example: equipment which is essential to the crane's function, such as, boom, counterweight, etc., may be removed and transported separately. This essential equipment can be subtracted (as cargo) from the GVWR when determining the unloaded vehicle weight.

Note: We do not believe that the term cargo correctly describes the essential equipment which is removed from a mobile crane and transported by alternate means to the next working site for reassembly.

3. It has seating capacity for the driver and essential operating crew, but not passengers.

The NHSTA's explanation prior to amending Section 571.121 implies the above. Our concern is that this explanation is not contained within 49 CFR Section 571.3, and therefore this important qualification would not be available to one referring only to the CFR.

We would like to suggest that the NHSTA clarify within CFR Title 49, the terms "Passenger" and "unloaded vehicle weight," which would reflect the views expressed in the aforementioned Federal Register Article.

Bruce J. Smith Engineering Services Dept.