| Home > 1994 Unified Agenda > ua14no94 DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY (TREAS)...
ua14no94 DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY (TREAS)...
fuel economy standards for model years after 1997 and is requesting comments to assist the agency in developing the proposal. This action is considered significant because of the impact on manufacturers, the interest shown by consumers, and the potential significant effects on the automotive marketplace. Statement of Need: The agency has tentatively determined that it is necessary to change the way it has been setting light-truck corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards and establish them far enough in advance to require significant fuel economy improvements. The reasons are: first, the need of the Nation to conserve energy is increasing; second, there is a current lack of consumer demand or other market pressure for manufacturers to improve light-truck fuel economy; third, the continued growth in market share of those vehicles means more of these relatively low-fuel-economy vehicles are being driven; and fourth, there is increased concern in recent years about the impact of cars, light trucks, and other personal vehicles on global warming. Summary of the Legal Basis: Under 15 U.S.C. 2002, NHTSA is required to establish light truck CAFE standards for each model year. The standards are required to be established at least 18 months before the beginning of each model year. Alternatives: No specific alternative levels of light-truck fuel economy standards were proposed in an ANPRM published April 6, 1994. The ANPRM did discuss estimates made by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) in its April 1992 report, ``Automotive Fuel Economy--How Far Should We Go?'' The NAS report's estimates of the costs and benefits of ``technically achievable'' levels of fuel economy should not be taken as NAS' recommendation as to what future fuel economy standards should be. NAS offered two estimates of the ``technically achievable'' levels of fuel economy for both MYs 2001 and 2006. The lower estimate was given with a high degree of confidence that the light truck fleet could achieve such a level. The higher CAFE level was given with a lower degree of confidence that the fleet could achieve that level due to unidentified uncertainties. The range of values are: Model Year NAS Technically Achievable: 2001: 24 - 25 mpg; 2006: 26 - 28 mpg. These estimates did not include large vans and large utility vehicles. While large vans and large utility vehicles combined make up only 7.9 percent of current sales, they represent heavier vehicles with lower fuel economy than the average vehicle considered by NAS. Also, the fleet fuel economy averages do not represent any particular manufacturer's capability, which the agency must consider in setting fuel economy standards. Anticipated Costs and Benefits: The NAS committee estimated the likely increases in costs to consumers of improved fuel economy. The agency calculated the expected increases in the average price of new light trucks in MY 2006 associated with the technically achievable levels, using the data contained in the NAS study. The agency estimates that, at a higher-confidence fuel economy level, the incremental retail price equivalent for improved fuel economy ranges from $573 to $1,331 per vehicle, and at a lower- confidence fuel economy level, the range is from $1,205 to $2,443 per vehicle. Relative to the MY 1997 standard of 20.7 mpg, at the 24 mpg and 25 mpg levels described in the NAS report as ``technically achievable'' for light trucks in MY 2001, the per-truck lifetime fuel consumption would be reduced by 1,002 to 1,253 gallons, respectively. At the 26 mpg and 28 mpg levels described in the NAS report as ``technically achievable'' for light trucks in MY 2006, the per-truck lifetime fuel consumption would be reduced by 1,485 and 1,899 gallons, respectively. Using recent DOE fuel price projections (and a 7 percent annual discount rate), the present values of the above fuel savings per vehicle would be $963-$1,204 at the 24-25 mpg fuel economy levels and $1,427-$1,826 at the 26-28 mpg levels. Risks: If such higher fuel economy levels are attained, there would be substantial petroleum savings for the nation as a whole. A 5-million units/year light truck fleet with an average fuel economy rating of 20.7 mpg would consume about 867 million barrels of petroleum over its operating life. At average fuel economy levels of 24.0-25.0 mpg, this figure would be reduced by 14-17 percent, respectively. At 26.0-28.0 mpg, this figure would be reduced by 20-26 percent, respectively. Timetable: _______________________________________________________________________ Action DFR Cite _______________________________________________________________________ ANPRM 59 FR 16324 04/06/94 ANPRM Comment Period End 08/04/94 NPRM 02/00/95 Small Entities Affected: None Government Levels Affected: None Agency Contact: Orron Kee Chief, Motor Vehicle Requirements Office of Market Incentives Department of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 400 Seventh Street SW. Washington, DC 20590 202 366-0846 RIN: 2127-AF16 _______________________________________________________________________ DOT--NHTSA ___________________________________________________________ FINAL RULE STAGE ___________________________________________________________ 128. +REDUCE HEAD INJURIES DUE TO CONTACT WITH UPPER VEHICLE INTERIOR Legal Authority: 15 USC 1392; 15 USC 1407 CFR Citation: 49 CFR 571.201; 49 CFR 571.205; 49 CFR 571.206; 49 CFR 571.214 Legal Deadline: NPRM, Statutory, January 31, 1993. Final, Statutory, February 28, 1995. Abstract: This action concerns improved head impact protection from interior components of passenger cars, that is, from roof rails, pillars, and front headers. This rulemaking action and notice of a publication date for the NPRM are required by the NHTSA Authorization Act of 1991. This action is considered significant because of safety and cost implications. Statement of Need: This rulemaking is undertaken to alleviate the problem that head impacts with the pillars, roof side rails, windshield header, and rear header result in nearly 3,400 passenger car and light truck occupant fatalities and 26,000 moderate-to-critical passenger car and light truck occupant injuries annually. The vast majority of these fatalities and serious injuries are attributable to impacts with upper interior components in the front of the vehicle, that is, components from the B- pillar forward. Although airbags decrease the number of head impacts with the front header and A-pillars, the agency has found a number of cases with front header and A-pillar strikes even though the air bag deployed. Summary of the Legal Basis: Many occupant injuries and fatalities result from head impacts with upper vehicle interiors. In 1980, the agency initiated a research program to support upgrading the current interior impact standard to provide occupant protection in these impacts. The agency was then directed by the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) to improve head-impact protection from interior components of passenger cars, that is, from roof rails, pillars, and front headers. A final rule is to be published within 24 months of the NPRM (2/8/93 58 FR 7506). Alternatives: Two sets of alternatives were analyzed. The first relates to the injury criteria. The injury criteria are known as Head Injury Criteria (HICs). The higher the HIC, the greater the possibility of serious injury. The first set of alternatives is whether an HIC of 1,000 would be applicable to all components or whether an HIC of 1,000 would be applicable to all components except side components, and an HIC of 800 would apply to side components. A lower HIC for side components may be appropriate since research shows the side of the head is more susceptible to injury than the front of the head. The second set of alternatives relates to whether the amendments would be applicable to both the front and rear seating areas of passenger cars and light trucks. Anticipated Costs and Benefits: At an HIC of 1,000, costs were estimated at $29 per passenger car and $45 per light truck. At HICs of 800/1,000, costs were estimated at $49 per passenger car and $68 per light trucks. Benefits were estimated for the injury-level alternatives. The Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) is used to rank injuries by level of severity. An AIS 1 injury is a minor one, while an AIS 6 injury is one that is currently untreatable and fatal. The benefits were estimated as follows: If an HIC of 1,000 is required, injuries resulting from head impacts in passenger cars per year would be reduced between 862 and 1,114 fatalities and between 575 and 708 AIS 2-5 injuries; injuries in light trucks would be reduced between 276 and 281 fatalities and between 108 to 116 AIS 2-5 injuries. If an HIC of 800/1,000 is required, head-impact injuries would be reduced for passenger cars between 1,054 and 1,323 fatalities and between 572 and 1,188 AIS 2-5 injuries; injuries in light trucks would be reduced between 291 and 311 fatalities and between 269 and 290 AIS 2-5 injuries. Risks: Estimated annual head/face injuries from contacting upper interior components are 2,942 fatalities and 22,844 AIS 2-5 injuries in passenger cars and 409 fatalities and 3,162 AIS 2-5 injuries in light trucks; a total of 3,351 fatalities and 26,006 AIS 2-5 injuries. Timetable: _______________________________________________________________________ Action DFR Cite _______________________________________________________________________ ANPRM 53 FR 31712 08/19/88 ANPRM Comment Period End 10/18/88 Notice of Intent57 FR 24008 06/05/92 NPRM 58 FR 7506 02/08/93 NPRM Comment Period End 04/09/93 Final Action 11/00/94 Small Entities Affected: None Government Levels Affected: None
Other Popular 1994 Unified Agenda Documents:
|GovRecords.org presents information on various agencies of the United States Government. Even though all information is believed to be credible and accurate, no guarantees are made on the complete accuracy of our government records archive. Care should be taken to verify the information presented by responsible parties. Please see our reference page for congressional, presidential, and judicial branch contact information. GovRecords.org values visitor privacy. Please see the privacy page for more information.|
Supreme Court Decisions
104th Congressional Documents
105th Congressional Documents
106th Congressional Documents
107th Congressional Documents
108th Congressional Documents
1994 Presidential Documents