This site displays a prototype of a “Web 2.0” version of the daily
Federal Register. It is not an official legal edition of the Federal
Register, and does not replace the official print version or the official
electronic version on GPO’s govinfo.gov.
The documents posted on this site are XML renditions of published Federal
Register documents. Each document posted on the site includes a link to the
corresponding official PDF file on govinfo.gov. This prototype edition of the
daily Federal Register on FederalRegister.gov will remain an unofficial
informational resource until the Administrative Committee of the Federal
Register (ACFR) issues a regulation granting it official legal status.
For complete information about, and access to, our official publications
and services, go to
About the Federal Register
on NARA's archives.gov.
The OFR/GPO partnership is committed to presenting accurate and reliable
regulatory information on FederalRegister.gov with the objective of
establishing the XML-based Federal Register as an ACFR-sanctioned
publication in the future. While every effort has been made to ensure that
the material on FederalRegister.gov is accurately displayed, consistent with
the official SGML-based PDF version on govinfo.gov, those relying on it for
legal research should verify their results against an official edition of
the Federal Register. Until the ACFR grants it official status, the XML
rendition of the daily Federal Register on FederalRegister.gov does not
provide legal notice to the public or judicial notice to the courts.
Notice
Enter a search term or FR citation e.g.
88 FR 38230 FR 78782024-13208USDA09/05/24RULE0503-AA39SORN
Choosing an item from
full text search results
will bring you to those results. Pressing enter in the search box
will also bring you to search results.
Choosing an item from
suggestions
will bring you directly to the content.
This table of contents is a navigational tool, processed from the
headings within the legal text of Federal Register documents.
This repetition of headings to form internal navigation links
has no substantive legal effect.
Comments are no longer being accepted.
See DATES for details.
Regulations.gov Data
Enhanced Content - Regulations.gov Data
FederalRegister.gov retrieves relevant information about this document
from Regulations.gov to provide users with additional context. This
information is not part of the official Federal Register document.
Document page views are updated periodically throughout the day and are
cumulative counts for this document. Counts are subject to sampling,
reprocessing and revision (up or down) throughout the day.
Page views
388
as of
10/09/2026 at 4:15 pm EDT
Other Formats
Enhanced Content - Other Formats
This document is also available in the following formats:
This PDF is FR Doc. 2017-10744 as it appeared on Public Inspection on
05/24/2017 at 8:45 am.
If you are using public inspection listings for legal research, you
should verify the contents of the documents against a final, official
edition of the Federal Register. Only official editions of the
Federal Register provide legal notice of publication to the public and judicial notice
to the courts under 44 U.S.C. 1503 & 1507.
Learn more here.
Published Document: 2017-10744 (82 FR 24204)
This document has been published in the Federal Register. Use the PDF linked in the document sidebar for the official electronic format.
AGENCY:
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION:
Denial of Petition.
SUMMARY:
DRV, LLC (DRV), a wholly owned subsidiary of Thor Industries, Inc., has determined that certain model year (MY) 2003-2016 DRV trailers do not fully comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108,
Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment.
DRV filed a noncompliance report dated July 31, 2015, that was later revised on August 18, 2015. DRV also petitioned NHTSA on August 14, 2015, for a decision that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
ADDRESSES:
For further information on this decision contact Michael Cole, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone (202) 366-5319, facsimile (202) 366-3081.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Overview
DRV, LLC (DRV), a wholly owned subsidiary of Thor Industries, Inc., has determined that certain model year (MY) 2003-2016 DRV trailers do not fully comply with paragraph S8.1 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108,
Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment.
DRV filed a noncompliance report dated July 31, 2015, that was later revised on August 18, 2015, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573,
Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports.
DRV also petitioned NHTSA on August 14, 2015, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) (see implementing rule at 49 CFR part 556), for an exemption from the notification and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the basis that this noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
Notice of receipt of the petition was published, with a 30-day public comment period, on October 8, 2015, in the
Federal Register
(80 FR 60955). No comments were received. To view the petition and all supporting documents, log onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Web site at:
http://www.regulations.gov/.
Follow the online search instructions to locate docket number “NHTSA-2015-0092.”
II. Trailers Involved
Affected are approximately 7,465 of the following trailers:
MY 2003-2016 DRV Mobile Suites (Manufactured between April 22, 2003 and July 22, 2015)
MY 2014-2015 DRV Traditions (Manufactured between April 1, 2013 and July 24, 2015)
MY 2013-2016 DRV Estates (Manufactured between April 1, 2012 and July 24, 2015)
MY 2006-2016 DRV Elite Suites (Manufactured April 1, 2005 and July 24, 2015)
MY 2014-2016 DRV Full House (Manufactured April 1, 2013 and July 24, 2015)
III. Noncompliance
DRV explained the noncompliance as the location of the front side reflex reflectors on the subject trailers at approximately 8″ and 10″ above the maximum 60″ height-above-road surface required by paragraph S8.1 of FMVSS No. 108.
IV. Rule Text
Paragraph S8.1 of FMVSS No. 108 requires in pertinent part:
S8.1
Reflex reflectors.
. . .
S8.1.4
Mounting Height.
See Tables I-a, I-b, I-c.
. . .
( printed page 24205)
Table I-
b
—Required Lamps and Reflective Devices
Lighting device
Number and color
Mounting location
Mounting height
Device activation
ALL TRAILERS
* * * * * * *
Reflex Reflectors. A trailer equipped with a conspicuity treatment in conformance with S8.2 of this standard need not be equipped with reflex reflectors if the conspicuity material is placed at the locations of the required reflex reflectors
2 Amber. None required on trailers less than 1829 mm [6 ft] in overall length including the trailer tongue
On each side as far to the front as practicable exclusive of the trailer tongue
Not less than 15 inches, nor more than 60 inches
Not applicable.
* * * * * * *
V. Summary of DRV's Arguments
DRV stated its belief that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety because a reflex reflector is present as required by FMVSS No. 108 but the reflector is located approximately 8″ to 10″ above the maximum allowable height for such reflectors.
DRV also stated that it has received no complaints, and does not know of any accidents that have occurred, due to the reflectors being in the non-compliant position.
In summation, DRV believes that the described noncompliance of the subject trailers is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. DRV asks NHTSA to grant a petition to exempt DRV from providing notification of a noncompliance recall as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118 and remedying the noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120.
NHTSA Decision
NHTSA's Analysis:
After review of DRV's petition, NHTSA has determined that the petitioner has not met the burden of persuasion that the noncompliance is inconsequential to safety. DRV failed to provide any data supporting its conclusion that the noncompliance is inconsequential and, except for stating it had not received any complaints about the location of the reflectors, did not address any of the potential safety risks associated with the noncompliance.
For the purposes of FMVSS No. 108, the primary function of a reflex reflector is to prevent crashes by permitting early detection of an unlighted motor vehicle at an intersection or when parked on or by the side of the road. Because reflex reflectors are not independent light sources, their performance is wholly reliant upon the amount of illumination they receive from vehicle headlamps. Ideally, a reflex reflector would achieve its highest performance when the reflex reflector is mounted at the height of another vehicle's lower beam “hot spot.” Due to the significant range of permissible mounting heights for headlamps (between 22 and 54 inches), achieving such ideal performance is impractical. FMVSS No. 108, which establishes minimum performance standards for reflex reflectors, specifies a range of acceptable reflector mounting heights (not less than 15 inches or more than 60 inches) to ensure that reflex reflectors are exposed to enough illumination to be effective. The standard also provides allowances in the fore and aft location of reflex reflectors (
e.g.,
as far to the front as practicable). This flexibility provides vehicle manufacturers with sufficient flexibility in mounting locations to ensure that the mounting height remains in the appropriate range to ensure adequate reflex reflector performance relative to headlamps that would illuminate them.
DRV also states that it was not aware of any complaints or accidents that occurred due to the positioning of the reflex reflector. In NHTSA's view, the absence of complaints does not provide persuasive evidence demonstrating a lack of a safety issue here, nor does it mean that there will not be safety issues in the future. As such, NHTSA does not consider this to be a determining factor that DRV's noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
NHTSA's Decision:
In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA finds that DRV has not met its burden of persuasion in support of the claim that the FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance in the subject trailers is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. DRV has not presented any data indicating that the performance of a reflex reflector mounted at a height of 68 to 70 inches above the ground provides a level of safety performance equivalent to that of a reflector mounted within the range of heights specified by FMVSS No. 108. Accordingly, DRV's petition is hereby denied and DRV is obligated to provide notification of, and a free remedy for, that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.