Rule2026-00728
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards: Anti-Ejection Glazing for Bus Portals; Mandatory Applicability Beginning October 30, 2027
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
January 15, 2026
Effective
January 15, 2026
Issuing agencies
Transportation DepartmentNational Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Abstract
This document partially grants a petition for reconsideration of the October 30, 2024 final rule that established Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 217a, "Anti-ejection glazing for bus portals; Mandatory applicability beginning October 30, 2027." The standard intends to drive installation of advanced glazing in over-the- road buses (motorcoaches) and other large buses to reduce occupant ejections. This final rule revises the minimum size requirement for applicable portals, adds a figure to illustrate a daylight opening periphery, and clarifies the target location for edge impact tests. This document denies all other portions of the petition for reconsideration, including revising the definition of "daylight opening."
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 10 (Thursday, January 15, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 10 (Thursday, January 15, 2026)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 1709-1718]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-00728]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 571
[Docket No. NHTSA-2026-0001]
RIN 2127-AM79
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards: Anti-Ejection Glazing for
Bus Portals; Mandatory Applicability Beginning October 30, 2027
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule; partial grant of a petition for reconsideration.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document partially grants a petition for reconsideration
of the October 30, 2024 final rule that established Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 217a, ``Anti-ejection glazing for
bus portals; Mandatory applicability beginning October 30, 2027.'' The
standard intends to drive installation of advanced glazing in over-the-
road buses (motorcoaches) and other large buses to reduce occupant
ejections. This final rule revises the minimum size requirement for
applicable portals, adds a figure to illustrate a daylight opening
periphery, and clarifies the target location for edge impact tests.
This document denies all other portions of the petition for
reconsideration, including revising the definition of ``daylight
opening.''
DATES:
Effective Date: This final rule is effective January 15, 2026.
Compliance Date: The compliance date of this final rule is October
30, 2027. Optional early compliance is permitted.
Petitions for Reconsideration: If you wish to petition for
reconsideration of this rule, your petition must be received by March
2, 2026.
ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration of this final rule must refer
to the docket and notice number set forth above and be submitted to the
Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590. Note that all petitions
received will be posted without change to the docket for this
rulemaking at <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a>, including any personal information
provided.
Confidential Business Information: If you wish to submit
confidential business information, see the instructions in the
rulemaking analyses and notices section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For non-legal issues, you may email
Mr. James Myers, NHTSA Office of Crashworthiness Standards
(<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#3c765d51594f127145594e4f7c585348125b534a"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="7b311a161e085536021e09083b1f140f551c140d">[email protected]</span></a>). For legal issues, you may email Mr. John Piazza,
NHTSA Office of Chief Counsel (<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#fab0959294d4aa939b80809bba9e958ed49d958c"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="5d17323533730d343c27273c1d393229733a322b">[email protected]</span></a>). You may contact
these officials by phone at 202-366-1810 or by mail at the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Petitions for Reconsideration and Agency Response
a. Daylight Opening Definition
b. Minimum Size Requirement
c. Discrete Attachment Point
d. Irregular Daylight Openings
e. Other Clarifications
III. Corrections
IV. Good Cause
IV. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
I. Background
On October 30, 2024, NHTSA published a final rule that established
FMVSS No. 217a, ``Anti-ejection glazing for bus portals; Mandatory
applicability beginning October 30, 2027'' (89 FR 86255, Docket No.
NHTSA-2024-0061). The purpose of this safety standard is to drive the
installation of advanced glazing in over-the-road buses (motorcoaches)
and other large buses \1\ to reduce passenger and driver ejections. The
standard is designed to ensure window glazing remains securely bonded
to window frames, no potential ejection portals are created due to
breaking of the glazing, and windows do not open during a crash, even
if an occupant is thrown against the glazing. The October 30, 2024
final rule fulfilled a statutory mandate in the Motorcoach Enhanced
Safety Act of 2012, which was incorporated and passed as part of the
Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21). Under
section 32702 of MAP-21, ``advanced glazing'' means ``glazing installed
in a portal on the side or the roof of a motorcoach that is designed to
be highly resistant to partial or complete occupant ejection in all
types of motor vehicle crashes.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ FMVSS No. 217a is applicable to over-the-road buses
manufactured on or after October 30, 2027. The standard is also
applicable to buses, other than over-the-road buses, that have a
gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) greater than 11,793 kilograms
(kg) manufactured on or after October 30, 2027. This standard does
not apply to school buses, transit buses, prison buses, and
perimeter-seating buses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To accomplish this safety objective, FMVSS No. 217a specifies
minimum requirements that applicable bus window glazing must meet when
it is contacted by an impactor launched at the window at a specified
speed. The impactor and impact speed are designed to simulate an
average size unrestrained adult male thrown from one side of a large
bus and impacting a window on the opposite side of the bus in a
rollover. Each side window and glass panel/window on the roof may be
subject to any one of three impacts, as selected by NHTSA in a
compliance test: (a) an impact near a latching mechanism or (for
windows without latches) the center of the lower window edge of an
intact window; (b) an impact at the center of the daylight opening of
an intact window; and (c) an impact at the center of the daylight
opening of a pre-broken window. No part of the window may displace past
a pre-defined ejection reference plane during the impact, and the
window must prevent passage of a 102-millimeter (mm) (4 inch) diameter
sphere after the impact. In addition, emergency exits must remain
operable after the impactor test.
[[Page 1710]]
These requirements ensure that the glazing is securely bonded to
the window frames, no potential ejection portals are created due to
breaking of the glazing, the windows remain closed when impacted, and
emergency exits remain operable after the crash. The test with the pre-
broken glazing encourages the installation of advanced glazing. The
requirements also help ensure the advanced glazing retains occupants
within the structural sidewall of the bus in a crash.
II. Petition for Reconsideration and Agency Response
NHTSA received a petition for reconsideration of the October 30,
2024 final rule from one respondent, IC Bus, LLC (``IC Bus'').\2\ In
its petition, IC Bus requested that NHTSA adjust aspects of the final
rule and requests clarification on aspects of the final rule. IC Bus
also identified two typographical errors in the published standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ IC Bus, LLC, petition for reconsideration of FMVSS No. 217a
final rule <a href="https://www.regulations.gov/document/NHTSA-2024-0061-0004">https://www.regulations.gov/document/NHTSA-2024-0061-0004</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
a. Daylight Opening Definition
IC Bus requested two adjustments to the definition of ``daylight
opening.'' It requested that NHTSA include the following statement in
the daylight opening definition: ``Only the innermost portion of the
window frame is used to determine the daylight opening.'' \3\ IC Bus
also requested that NHTSA add a figure from the Technical Support
Document that was included in the docket with the October 2024 final
rule.\4\ The figure represents the cross-section of an example bus
window, which illustrates the periphery of the daylight opening. The
original figure can be found in the Technical Support Document
published with the final rule in Docket No. NHTSA-2024-0061. IC Bus
stated in its petition that, ``the regulation does not provide any
reference to this Technical Supporting Document, which leads to a
concern that manufacturers looking at this regulation in the future may
not be aware that such helpful clarification exists.'' \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Ibid., p. 4.
\4\ National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Technical
Support Document: Impactor Details and Daylight Opening, Docket No.
NHTSA-2024-0061, Supporting Documents Folder, <a href="https://www.regulations.gov/document/NHTSA-2024-0061-0002">https://www.regulations.gov/document/NHTSA-2024-0061-0002</a>.
\5\ IC Bus, LLC, petition for reconsideration of FMVSS No. 217a
final rule, p. 4, <a href="https://www.regulations.gov/document/NHTSA-2024-0061-0004">https://www.regulations.gov/document/NHTSA-2024-0061-0004</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As defined in FMVSS No. 217a, daylight opening means, for openings
on the side of the vehicle (other than a door opening), the locus of
all points where a horizontal line, perpendicular to the vehicle
longitudinal centerline, is tangent to the periphery of the opening.
For openings on the roof of the vehicle, daylight opening means the
locus of all points where a vertical line is tangent to the periphery
of the opening. The periphery includes surfaces 100 millimeters (mm)
inboard of the inside surface of the window glazing and 25 mm outboard
of the outside surface of the window glazing. The periphery excludes
the following: Any flexible gasket material or weather stripping used
to create a waterproof seal between the glazing and the vehicle
interior; grab handles used to facilitate occupant egress and ingress;
and any part of a seat.\6\ This definition is modified slightly from
the definition used in FMVSS No. 226, ``Ejection Mitigation'' which
establishes requirements for ejection mitigation systems to reduce the
likelihood of occupant ejections in light-duty vehicles.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No.
217a: Anti-Ejection Glazing for Bus Portals, 49 CFR 571.217a S4,
<a href="https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-49/subtitle-B/chapter-V/part-571">https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-49/subtitle-B/chapter-V/part-571</a>.
\7\ FMVSS No. 226 uses the term ``side daylight opening.''
According to the standard, a side daylight opening ``means, other
than a door opening, the locus of all points where a horizontal
line, perpendicular to the vehicle vertical longitudinal plane, is
tangent to the periphery of the opening. The periphery includes
surfaces 100 millimeters inboard of the inside surface of the window
glazing and 25 mm outboard of the outside surface of the side
glazing. The periphery excludes the following: any flexible gasket
material or weather stripping used to create a waterproof seal
between the glazing or door and the vehicle interior; grab handles
used to facilitate occupant egress and ingress; and any part of a
seat.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agency Response: NHTSA partially grants the petition to revise the
definition of ``daylight opening'' as requested by IC Bus.
First, IC Bus requested NHTSA add the following statement into the
definition of daylight opening: ``Only the innermost portion of the
window frame is used to determine the daylight opening.'' \8\ This
statement is unnecessary and may increase confusion interpreting the
definition without also specifying what is meant by ``innermost.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ IC Bus, LLC, petition for reconsideration of FMVSS No. 217a
final rule, p. 4, <a href="https://www.regulations.gov/document/NHTSA-2024-0061-0004">https://www.regulations.gov/document/NHTSA-2024-0061-0004</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the current definition explains that the periphery includes
surfaces 100 mm inboard and 25 mm outboard of the glazing surface, the
concept of IC Bus's request is already included in the definition.
Further, the definition of ``daylight opening'' is modified only
slightly from the existing standard FMVSS No. 226, and manufacturers
have not informed NHTSA of any confusion when complying with that
standard. Therefore, NHTSA denies IC Bus's request to add the statement
into the definition of ``daylight opening.''
Next, IC Bus requested that Figure 7 in the Technical Support
Document,\9\ which was submitted to the docket with the FMVSS No. 217a
final rule, be included in the standard. The purpose of that figure and
the Technical Support Document was to provide helpful context and
examples for aspects of the final rule. This supplemental document and
the figures within it will remain accessible on the public docket to
manufacturers or other interested parties. However, NHTSA agrees with
IC Bus that the figure could be a helpful addition to the regulatory
text by making it easier for manufacturers to understand how to
determine the daylight opening periphery. This figure is for
illustrative purposes only and does not represent all possible daylight
opening configurations. Therefore, NHTSA is adding the figure to the
regulatory text and amending the definition of ``daylight opening'' to
include the following sentence: ``An example of a daylight opening
periphery is provided in Figure 3 for illustrative purposes only.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Technical
Support Document: Impactor Details and Daylight Opening, Figure 7,
Docket No. NHTSA-2024-0061, Supporting Documents Folder, <a href="https://www.regulations.gov/document/NHTSA-2024-0061-0002">https://www.regulations.gov/document/NHTSA-2024-0061-0002</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. Minimum Size Requirement
FMVSS No. 217a states in paragraph S5 that the standard's
requirements do not apply to a side or roof portal whose minimum
surface dimension measured through the center of its area is less than
279 mm. This minimum size requirement ensures that the glazing being
tested is large enough for the impactor to effectively evaluate its
anti-ejection capabilities without impacting the window frame or other
structural components. IC Bus petitioned NHTSA to specify in paragraph
S5 that the minimum size requirement applies to the daylight opening of
the portal, and not the portal itself. Specifically, IC Bus recommended
changing the relevant sentence of paragraph S5 to read as follows:
``The requirements of this paragraph S5 do not apply to portals other
than side and roof portals, and do not apply to a side or roof portal
with a daylight opening whose minimum surface dimension measured
through
[[Page 1711]]
the center of its area is less than 279 mm.''
Agency Response: NHTSA agrees with IC Bus and grants its petition
as requested. The definition of a ``portal'' according to FMVSS No.
217a is ``an opening that could, in the event of a crash involving the
vehicle, permit the partial or complete ejection of an occupant from
the vehicle, including a young child.'' While a door or roof hatch may
meet the definition of a portal even if there is no glazing present,
such portals are outside the scope of FMVSS No. 217a. As previously
stated, the intent of FMVSS No. 217a is to drive the installation of
advanced glazing in motorcoaches and other large buses to reduce
passenger and driver ejections. Therefore, to better align the
requirements of the standard to the intent of the standard, NHTSA is
adjusting paragraph S5 to state that the requirements ``do not apply to
a side or roof portal with a daylight opening whose minimum surface
dimension measured through the center of its area is less than 279
mm.''
c. Discrete Attachment Point
Paragraph S6.1.1 of FMVSS No. 217a describes the test location for
the edge impact test procedure. During the 2013 Motorcoach Side Glazing
Retention Research testing,\10\ NHTSA determined there was a safety
need for a test that assesses the ability of window latches to keep the
window closed when subjected to impactor loading. The edge impact test
is designed to test the glazing near the window latch if a latch is
present. If the window does not have a latch, the glazing is impacted
at the edge of the glazing as described in paragraph S6.1.1(a) or
S6.1.1(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Duffy, S., & Prasad, A., National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, Motorcoach Side Glazing Retention Research, (Report
No. DOT HS 811 862) (Nov. 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paragraph S6.1.1 states that when aligning the impactor face to the
test location for the edge impact test, it is positioned such that the
center of the impactor face plate is as close as practicable to the
center of the latch attachment point or discrete attachment point. In
the preamble of the October 2024 final rule, NHTSA justified that
choice because the location where the latch attaches to the movable
portion of the window is where the latch is most likely to fail. The
regulatory text specified the impactor face plate must align as closely
as practicable to the center of the latch attachment point or discrete
attachment point. The purpose of adding the term ``discrete attachment
point'' was to account for varying latch designs, where the handle of
the latch, body of the latch, and attachment point of the latch to the
window may be laterally or vertically offset from one another.
IC Bus requested that NHTSA define or clarify what is meant by a
``discrete attachment point.'' It emphasized that, according to the
standard, the impactor face must be positioned adjacent to a latch or
discrete attachment point when setting up the edge impact test. Since
there is not a definition of ``discrete attachment point'' provided in
the standard, IC Bus requested that NHTSA provide one. It also asked if
discrete attachment points are in reference to physical fasteners that
attach the window to the window frame, or to emergency exit window
hinges that connect the overall window frame to the vehicle body.
Agency Response: As NHTSA described in the final rule preamble, the
term ``discrete attachment point'' is applicable only in the context of
a bus window latch.\11\ NHTSA also stated in the May 2016 Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) \12\ that an intent of the edge impact test
was to evaluate window latches if they are present. However, NHTSA
agrees with IC Bus that the term could be misinterpreted in the
regulatory text. In addition to latches, bus windows may have hinges or
other hardware with discrete attachment points that connect the window
to the bus frame. Targeting attachment components other than latches
for testing is not included in the scope of this standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ 89 FR 86272.
\12\ 81 FR 27917.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To address this request in IC Bus's petition for reconsideration,
NHTSA will remove the term ``discrete attachment point'' and define the
term ``latch attachment point.'' The regulatory text does not need to
reference both a ``latch attachment point'' and a ``discrete attachment
point'' because both terms describe the same location. This approach
simplifies the paragraph and ensures the test location is identified
clearly for any window type or latch type. The term ``latch attachment
point'' will be defined in paragraph S4 as ``the center point of the
latch's interface connecting the window and the bus structure when the
window is closed and the latch is in the locked position.''
This change removes reference to the term ``discrete attachment
point'' within paragraph S6.1.1 and defines ``latch attachment point''
within paragraph S4. This point represents the part of the latching
mechanism that connects the window to the bus structure. This is the
point where an insufficient latch could result in a failure to comply
with the impactor testing as demonstrated in NHTSA's 2013 Motorcoach
Side Glazing Retention Research. Testing near this location also aligns
with the intent of the edge impact test. The revisions to paragraphs S4
and S6.1.1 clarify any confusion surrounding discrete attachment
points, answers IC Bus's specific questions, and better describes the
test location for the edge impact test.
d. Irregular Daylight Openings
The daylight opening for a typical bus window is usually a regular
geometric shape with a clearly defined and easily measurable center
point. However, there are scenarios where a window may be partially
blocked by a structure such as a stowed wheelchair lift or a luggage
rack, resulting in an irregularly shaped daylight opening. It may be
difficult to accurately locate the center of an irregularly shaped
daylight opening.
IC Bus provided a figure on page 5 of its petition for
reconsideration, which depicts a bus window partially blocked by a
stowed wheelchair lift. It noted that the resulting daylight opening
may not be a regular geometric shape where the center would be obvious.
IC Bus asked how NHTSA would measure the minimum surface dimension
through the center of the daylight opening during a compliance test.
Agency Response: NHTSA will address this issue about locating the
center of regular and irregular daylight openings in the test procedure
for compliance testing and not in the regulatory text of the final
rule. The regulatory text of the final rule outlines the general
requirements and procedures of the standard and does not need to
outline the specific measurement techniques and equipment the agency
will use in compliance testing. Those details will be described in the
applicable test procedure and that will be available on NHTSA's
website.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ <a href="https://www.nhtsa.gov/vehicle-manufacturers/test-procedures">https://www.nhtsa.gov/vehicle-manufacturers/test-procedures</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As a related example, the test procedure associated with FMVSS No.
226, ``Ejection Mitigation'' is outlined in TP-226-00,\14\ specifies
the use of a portable Coordinate Measuring Machine (CMM) for
determining the center of the side daylight opening. A CMM can
precisely measure the geometry of the daylight opening, allowing NHTSA
to mathematically calculate the geometric center. NHTSA will use a
similar approach to determine the center of daylight openings for FMVSS
No. 217a.
[[Page 1712]]
The associated test procedure document will outline these details.
Therefore, no further details will be included in the final rule
regulatory text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
e. Other Clarifications
IC Bus also sought clarification from NHTSA on three additional
points: (1) Whether restraining barriers, stanchions, and Lexan safety
shields would be included or excluded from the periphery of the
daylight opening; (2) if a stowed wheelchair lift needs to be within
100 mm of the interior window surface to be considered ``blocking'' the
window; and (3) whether one window could be split up into multiple
daylight openings if the window is blocked by something like a luggage
rack or shelves, and whether each daylight opening would be tested
separately. IC Bus provided graphical illustrations of the scenarios
for points (2) and (3).
NHTSA provides responses below with the intent to assist in the
understanding of the final rule for IC Bus and any other interested
parties. However, these items are not petitions for reconsideration
because they do not request regulatory text changes.
1. Components Excluded From the Daylight Opening Periphery
According to the daylight opening definition, the periphery
includes surfaces within 100 mm inboard and 25 mm outboard of the
glazing surface. The periphery excludes flexible gasket material or
weather stripping used to create a waterproof seal between the glazing
and the vehicle interior, grab handles used to facilitate occupant
egress and ingress, and any part of a seat.
IC Bus requested clarification on whether restraining barriers,
stanchions, and Lexan safety shields would be included or excluded from
the periphery. IC Bus claimed restraining barriers are ``essentially
the same as seatbacks, and seats are specified as excluded. . . .''
Thus, IC Bus sought confirmation that restraining barriers would be
excluded from the periphery. For stanchions, IC Bus described them as
``upright bars or posts used to support the roof, luggage, or storage
compartment.'' IC Bus sought confirmation that stanchions would not be
excluded from the periphery. IC Bus stated Lexan safety shields are
``used to separate interior sections or compartments or prevent
passenger contact with interior items.'' IC Bus sought confirmation
that Lexan safety shields would not be excluded from the periphery.
Agency Response: The agency agrees with IC Bus's evaluation that
restraining barriers are excluded from the periphery while stanchions
and Lexan safety shields are not. In other words, if Lexan safety
shields or stanchions are within 100 mm of the interior glazing surface
or 25 mm of the exterior glazing surface, they would be included in the
periphery of the daylight opening.
IC Bus manufactures primarily school buses and other buses based on
school bus platforms.\15\ Restraining barriers are padded panels,
similar to school bus seat backs, generally located in front of a
school bus seat without any seat in front of it. Restraining barriers
may also be in buses that are based on school bus platforms. Similar to
school bus seat backs, restraining barriers provide passenger crash
protection by absorbing impact energy and containing students within a
designated safety zone. While restraining barriers are capable of
preventing passenger movement past the barrier in a frontal crash or a
sudden braking maneuver, these barriers are not designed to prevent
passengers from being ejected through an ejection portal in a rollover
or side impact crash. Therefore, NHTSA is excluding restraining
barriers from the periphery of the daylight opening and will update the
daylight opening definition to reflect this exclusion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ <a href="https://www.icbus.com/">https://www.icbus.com/</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stanchions are typically solid structures capable of providing a
positive effect in terms of ejection mitigation. Stanchions are also
distinct from ``grab handles,'' which are excluded from the periphery.
Grab handles are excluded from the periphery in FMVSS No. 217a for the
same reason they are excluded from the periphery in FMVSS No. 226.
These grab handles are typically located on the A-pillar of the vehicle
and often protrude into the daylight opening. They are also typically
non-structural and unlikely to provide a positive effect in terms of
ejection mitigation. Since stanchions are distinct from these grab
handles, and they are expected to have a positive effect in terms of
ejection mitigation, NHTSA confirms IC Bus's understanding that they
are not excluded from the periphery of the daylight opening.
Lexan, or polycarbonate, is a transparent thermoplastic material
with high stiffness and impact resistance.\16\ This material is often
installed in large buses and motorcoaches to prevent passengers from
entering certain areas, to prevent occupants from throwing items at
drivers, or as partitions between sections of a bus's interior. To
leverage polycarbonate's high stiffness, the sheet must be securely
mounted within the bus to minimize deflection. Such an installation
will block a passenger's movement past the barrier. Since polycarbonate
barriers are not listed as an exclusion to the periphery and are likely
to have a positive effect on ejection mitigation due to the high
stiffness of the material, NHTSA confirms IC Bus's understanding that
they will not be excluded from the periphery.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ Laminated Plastics, ``Technical Data Sheet Polycarbonate,''
<a href="https://laminatedplastics.com/polycarbonate.pdf">https://laminatedplastics.com/polycarbonate.pdf</a>. accessed August 25,
2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Daylight Opening With Partially Blocked Window
IC Bus stated its understanding that a stowed wheelchair lift would
need to be within 100 mm of the interior window surface in order for it
to be considered ``blocking'' the window. Additionally, IC Bus stated
it understands that the portion of the wheelchair lift blocking the
window becomes part of the periphery of the daylight opening, and the
unblocked portion of the window becomes the daylight opening. IC Bus
provided an illustration of the scenario it described on page 7 of its
petition for reconsideration. The figure shows a graphical
representation of a rectangular bus window with the bottom portion
blocked by a stowed wheelchair lift. IC Bus sought confirmation that
its understanding was correct, and that the resulting daylight opening
as described would need a minimum surface dimension of 279 mm to be
required to comply with the FMVSS No. 217a impact requirements.
Agency Response: IC Bus's understanding of the scenario is correct.
The daylight opening is the unblocked portion of the window when the
wheelchair lift that blocks the bottom of the window is within 100 mm
of the interior glazing surface.
3. One Window With Multiple Daylight Openings
IC Bus requested clarification on a scenario where a bus window may
be split up into multiple daylight openings if it is blocked by
equipment such as shelves, stanchions, or a luggage rack. Specifically,
IC Bus asked whether each daylight opening for the window would require
separate edge, center, and pre-broken glazing impact validation,
assuming the minimum surface dimension measured through the center of
each daylight opening was greater than or equal to 279 mm. IC Bus
provided a figure to illustrate this scenario on page 8 of its petition
for reconsideration. The figure is a graphical representation of a
rectangular bus window blocked by two long,
[[Page 1713]]
horizontal bars representing shelves or a luggage rack. When these bars
are within 100 mm of the interior glazing surface, they are included in
the periphery of the daylight opening. Additionally, because these bars
are longer than the width of the window, the result is a single window
split into three separate daylight openings. IC Bus specifies in the
figure that two of the three daylight openings have a minimum surface
dimension greater than 279 mm.
Agency Response: For the scenario described and illustrated by IC
Bus, NHTSA agrees that the single window would be split into multiple
daylight openings. If there are multiple daylight openings that meet
the minimum size requirements, any of those daylight openings could be
selected for impact test validation by NHTSA in a compliance test. Any
daylight openings that do not meet the minimum size requirement would
not be subject to any impact test validation.
III. Corrections
In addition to the requests discussed above, IC Bus also notified
NHTSA of two typographical errors in the published version of the
October 2024 final rule regulatory text. NHTSA is correcting both
errors with this final rule.
The first correction is in paragraph S5 in the regulatory text. The
letter ``n'' erroneously appears in the middle of the second sentence.
NHTSA is deleting the letter ``n'' in this paragraph.
The second correction is in the figures in the regulatory text of
the standard. As IC Bus noted, the figure numbers are not included in
the figures. NHTSA is adding the figure numbers to those figures with
this final rule.
IV. Good Cause
NHTSA finds that issuing this final rule without additional notice
and comment is appropriate under the ``good cause'' exception in 5
U.S.C. 553(b)(B). The APA authorizes agencies to issue regulations
without notice and public comment when an agency finds, for good cause,
that notice and comment is ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to
the public interest,'' 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), and to make the rule
effective immediately for good cause. 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). NHTSA has
determined that an opportunity for notice and comment on this final
rule is unnecessary. The changes in this final rule are made in
response to petitions for reconsideration submitted to NHTSA in
response to and docketed in the record of the October 2024 final rule,
which is supported by an extensive administrative record, in accordance
with 49 CFR 553.35 and 49 CFR 553.37.\17\ This final rule makes only
technical changes within the ambit of the comments already received and
addressed in the October 2024 final rule. Specifically, NHTSA includes
a figure from the Technical Support Document in the standard for
illustrative purposes. NHTSA also updates the regulatory text to
clarify that doors and roof hatches with a daylight opening whose
minimum surface dimension is less than 279 mm are outside the scope of
FMVSS No. 217a. NHTSA also substitutes the term ``latch attachment
point'' for ``discrete attachment point'' and defines ``latch
attachment point'' as the part of the latching mechanism that connects
the window to the bus structure. This change is intended to clarify
that the regulation refers to a latch, not hinges or other hardware
with discrete attachment points that connect the window to the bus
frame.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ These regulations grant to the Administrator the authority,
consistent with 5 U.S.C. 553b(B), to issue a final decision in
response to petitions for reconsideration without further
proceedings or with opportunity for further comment as the
Administrator deems appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, NHTSA notes that given the long development times
involved in motor vehicle design and manufacturing, manufacturers are
nearing the time at which design changes required by the October 2024
final rule must be made and finalized to meet production schedules for
the model years that must comply.
IV. Rulemaking Analysis and Notices
Executive Order 12866, Executive Order 14192, and DOT Regulatory
Policies and Procedures
NHTSA has considered the impact of this rule under Executive Order
12866 and Executive Order 14192. NHTSA has considered the costs and
benefits of the final rule under the principles of these executive and
departmental orders. Please refer to the October 2024 final rule for
this discussion. This rule, which clarifies certain aspects of the
October 2024 final rule, may facilitate compliance by regulated
entities, but is not expected to result in any costs or benefits beyond
those examined in the October 2024 final rule. Therefore, this rule is
neither a regulatory or a deregulatory action pursuant to E.O. 14192.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.,
as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
(SBREFA) of 1996), whenever an agency is required to publish a notice
of proposed rulemaking or final rule, it must prepare and make
available for public comment a regulatory flexibility analysis that
describes the effect of the rule on small entities (i.e., small
businesses, small organizations and small governmental jurisdictions),
unless the head of an agency certifies the rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Agencies must also provide a statement of the factual basis for this
certification. Because NHTSA is not required to publish this rule for
comment, the analytical requirements of the RFA do not apply.
NHTSA notes, however, that NHTSA does not believe this final rule
will have a significant economic impact on affected small entities as
identified in the October 2024 final rule. This final rule revises the
minimum size requirement verbiage for applicable portals, adds a figure
to illustrate a daylight opening periphery, and clarifies the target
location for edge impact tests. These are minor adjustments to the
October 2004 final rule and are not expected to impose costs above
those already considered as part of the October 2024 final rule. NHTSA
determined that the October 2024 final rule would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities,
and the amendments in this rule do not change that finding.
Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
NHTSA has examined this final rule pursuant to E.O. 13132 (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and concluded that no additional consultation
with States, local governments or their representatives is mandated
beyond the rulemaking process. NHTSA has concluded that the rulemaking
would not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant
consultation with State and local officials or the preparation of a
federalism summary impact statement. This final rule would not have
``substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
NHTSA rules can have preemptive effect in two ways. First, the
National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act contains an express
preemption provision stating that, if NHTSA has established a standard
for an aspect of motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment performance,
a State may only prescribe or continue in effect a
[[Page 1714]]
standard for that same aspect of performance if the State standard is
identical to the Federal standard.\18\ It is this statutory command by
Congress that preempts any non-identical State legislative and
administrative law addressing the same aspect of performance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ 49 U.S.C. 30103(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The express preemption provision described above is subject to a
savings clause under which ``[c]ompliance with a motor vehicle safety
standard prescribed under this chapter does not exempt a person from
liability at common law.'' \19\ Pursuant to this provision, State
common law tort causes of action against motor vehicle manufacturers
that might otherwise be preempted by the express preemption provision
are generally preserved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ 49 U.S.C. 30103(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NHTSA rules can also preempt State law if complying with the FMVSS
would render the motor vehicle manufacturers liable under State tort
law. Because most NHTSA standards established by an FMVSS are minimum
standards, a State common law tort cause of action that seeks to impose
a higher standard on motor vehicle manufacturers will generally not be
preempted. However, if and when such a conflict does exist--for
example, when the standard at issue is both a minimum and a maximum
standard--the State common law tort cause of action is impliedly
preempted.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ See Geier v. American Honda Motor Co., 529 U.S. 861 (2000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to E.O. 13132, NHTSA has considered whether this final
rule could or should preempt State common law causes of action. The
agency's ability to announce its conclusion regarding the preemptive
effect of one of its rules reduces the likelihood that preemption will
be an issue in any subsequent tort litigation. To this end, the agency
has examined the nature (e.g., the language and structure of the
regulatory text) and objectives of this final rule and finds that this
final rule, like many NHTSA rules, prescribes only a minimum safety
standard. Accordingly, NHTSA does not intend that this final rule
preempt state tort law that would effectively impose a higher standard
on motor vehicle manufacturers than that established by this final
rule. Establishment of a higher standard by means of State tort law
would not conflict with the minimum standard finalized in this
document. Without any conflict, there could not be any implied
preemption of a State common law tort cause of action.
Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)
With respect to the review of the promulgation of a new regulation,
section 3(b) of Executive Order 12988, ``Civil Justice Reform'' (61 FR
4729, Feb. 7, 1996), requires that Executive agencies make every
reasonable effort to ensure that the regulation: (1) Clearly specifies
the preemptive effect; (2) clearly specifies the effect on existing
Federal law or regulation; (3) provides a clear legal standard for
affected conduct, while promoting simplification and burden reduction;
(4) clearly specifies the retroactive effect, if any; (5) adequately
defines key terms; and (6) addresses other important issues affecting
clarity and general draftsmanship under any guidelines issued by the
Attorney General. This document is consistent with that requirement.
The issue of preemption is discussed in the section discussing
Executive Order 13132 (Federalism). NHTSA believes that this final rule
specifies clearly the changes made to FMVSS No. 217a and that this rule
provides a clear legal standard for manufacturers to follow. NHTSA
notes further that there is no requirement that individuals submit a
petition for reconsideration or pursue other administrative proceedings
before they may file suit in court.
Executive Order 13609 (Promoting International Regulatory Cooperation)
Executive Order 13609, ``Promoting International Regulatory
Cooperation,'' promotes international regulatory cooperation to meet
shared challenges involving health, safety, labor, security,
environmental, and other issues and to reduce, eliminate, or prevent
unnecessary differences in regulatory requirements.
The agency participates in the negotiation and development of
technical standards for Safety Glazing in the United Nations Economic
Commission for Europe (UNECE) World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle
Regulations (WP.29). As a signatory member, NHTSA is obligated to
initiate rulemaking to incorporate safety requirements and options
specified in Global Technical Regulations (GTRs) if the U.S. votes in
the affirmative to establish the GTR. No GTR for anti-ejection glazing
for bus portals has been developed at this time.
NHTSA has analyzed this rule under the policies and agency
responsibilities of Executive Order 13609 and has determined this
rulemaking will have no effect on international regulatory cooperation.
National Environmental Policy Act
The Department has analyzed the environmental impacts of this
rulemaking pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and DOT Order 5610.1D.\21\ Pursuant to
49 CFR 1.81, the Secretary has delegated the ``functions'' under NEPA
to the Administrators ``as they relate to the matters within the
primary responsibility of each Operating Administration.'' NHTSA has
determined that this rule is categorically excluded pursuant to 23 CFR
771.118(c)(4). Categorical exclusions are actions identified in an
agency's NEPA procedures that do not normally have a significant impact
on the environment and therefore do not require either an environmental
assessment (EA) or environmental impact statement (EIS). This
rulemaking, which proposes to partially grant a petition for
reconsideration of the October 30, 2024, final rule that established
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 217a, ``Anti-ejection
glazing for bus portals; Mandatory applicability beginning October 30,
2027,'' revises the minimum size requirement verbiage for applicable
portals; adds a figure to illustrate a daylight opening periphery;
clarifies the target location for edge impact tests; and denies other
portions of the petition for reconsideration, including revising the
definition of ``daylight opening.'' This rulemaking is categorically
excluded pursuant to 23 CFR 771.118(c)(4) (Planning and administrative
activities not involving or leading directly to construction, such as:
Training, technical assistance and research; promulgation of rules,
regulations, directives, or program guidance; approval of project
concepts; engineering; and operating assistance to transit authorities
to continue existing service or increase service to meet routine
demand). NHTSA does not anticipate any environmental impacts, and there
are no extraordinary circumstances present in connection with this
rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ DOT's Procedures For Considering Environmental Impacts, DOT
Order 5610.1D, July 2025, <a href="https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2025-07/DOT_Order_5610.1D_OST-P-250627-001_508_Compliant.pdf">https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2025-07/DOT_Order_5610.1D_OST-P-250627-001_508_Compliant.pdf</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the procedures established by the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.), a Federal agency must request and
receive approval from OMB before it collects certain information from
the public and a person is not required to respond to
[[Page 1715]]
a collection of information by a Federal agency unless the collection
displays a valid OMB control number. This rulemaking does not contain
any information collection requirements as defined by OMB in 5 CFR part
1320.
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Under the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(NTTAA) (Pub. L. 104-113), ``all Federal agencies and departments shall
use technical standards that are developed or adopted by voluntary
consensus standards bodies, using such technical standards as a means
to carry out policy objectives or activities determined by the agencies
and departments.'' Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus standards bodies, such as SAE. The NTTAA directs
the agency to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the
agency decides not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus
standards. The NTTAA requires agencies to use voluntary consensus
standards in lieu of government-unique standards except where
inconsistent with law or otherwise impractical. There are no voluntary
consensus standards developed by voluntary consensus standards bodies
pertaining to this final rule.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
(UMRA) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of regulatory
actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or Tribal
government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $206 million
(the value equivalent of $100 million in 1995, adjusted for inflation
to 2025) or more in any 1 year. This final rule does not contain
Federal mandates (under the regulatory provisions of Title II of the
UMRA) for State, local and Tribal governments, or the private sector of
$206 million or more in any one year. Thus, the analytical requirements
of the UMRA do not apply to this action.
Executive Order 13175
Executive Order 13175 requires Federal agencies to consult and
coordinate with Tribes on a government-to-government basis on policies
that have Tribal implications, including regulations, legislative
comments or proposed legislation, and other policy statements or
actions that have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian
Tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian
Tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between
the Federal Government and Indian Tribes. NHTSA has assessed the impact
of this rule on Indian tribes and determined that this rule does not
have tribal implications that require consultation under Executive
Order 13175.
Privacy Act
Petitions for review of the final rule will be placed in the
docket. Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all documents
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). For information on
DOT's compliance with the Privacy Act, see DOT Privacy Program [verbar]
U.S. Department of Transportation.\22\ To see the list of DOT's systems
of records notices, please visit <a href="https://www.transportation.gov/individuals/privacy/privacy-act-system-records-notices">https://www.transportation.gov/individuals/privacy/privacy-act-system-records-notices</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ U.S. Department of Transp. Privacy Policy, <a href="https://www.transportation.gov/privacy">https://www.transportation.gov/privacy</a> (last updated Oct. 10, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)
The Department of Transportation assigns a regulation identifier
number (RIN) to each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of
Federal Regulations. The Regulatory Information Service Center
publishes the Unified Agenda in April and October of each year. You may
use the RIN contained in the heading at the beginning of this document
to find this action in the Unified Agenda.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571
Buses, Motor carriers, Motor vehicles, Motor vehicle safety.
Amended Regulatory Text
In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA amends 49 CFR part 571 as
follows:
PART 571--FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS
0
1. The authority citation for Part 571 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117, and 30166;
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.95.
0
2. Amend Sec. 571.217a by:
0
a. Revising the definition of ``Daylight opening'' and adding the
definition of ``Latch attachment point'' in S4;
0
b. Revising S5;
0
c. Revising the introductory text of S6.1.1;
0
d. Revising Figure 1 and Figure 2; and
0
e. Adding Figure 3.
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 571.217a Standard No. 217a; Anti-ejection glazing for bus
portals; Mandatory applicability beginning October 30, 2027.
* * * * *
S4. * * *
Daylight opening means, for openings on the side of the vehicle
(other than a door opening), the locus of all points where a horizontal
line, perpendicular to the vehicle longitudinal centerline, is tangent
to the periphery of the opening. For openings on the roof of the
vehicle, daylight opening means the locus of all points where a
vertical line is tangent to the periphery of the opening. The periphery
includes surfaces 100 millimeters (mm) inboard of the inside surface of
the window glazing and 25 mm outboard of the outside surface of the
window glazing. The periphery excludes the following: Any flexible
gasket material or weather stripping used to create a waterproof seal
between the glazing and the vehicle interior; grab handles used to
facilitate occupant egress and ingress; a restraining barrier; and any
part of a seat. An example of a daylight opening periphery is provided
in Figure 3 for illustrative purposes only.
Latch attachment point means the center point of the latch's
interface connecting the window and the bus structure when the window
is closed, and the latch is in the locked position.
* * * * *
S5. Requirements. When tested according to the procedures specified
in S6 of this section and under the conditions specified in paragraph
S7 of this section, each applicable bus shall meet the following
requirements specified in this section. The requirements of this
paragraph S5 do not apply to portals other than side and roof portals,
and do not apply to a side or roof portal with a daylight opening whose
minimum surface dimension measured through the center of its area is
less than 279 mm.
* * * * *
S6.1.1 Edge impact. Position the impactor face on the glazing
adjacent to a latch attachment point such that, when viewed
perpendicular to the glazing surface, the center of the impactor face
plate is as close as practicable to the center of the latch attachment
point with the impactor face plate either horizontal or vertical,
whichever orientation provides the shortest distance between the two
[[Page 1716]]
centers, while maintaining at least a 25 mm <plus-minus> 2 mm distance
between the impactor face plate edge and the window frame. ``Window
frame'' includes latches, handles, attachments, and any solid
structures other than the glazing material or flexible gaskets. If the
window does not have any latches (e.g., it is fully rubber bonded or
glued), position the impactor as follows:
* * * * *
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
Figure 1 to 49 CFR 571.217a--Guided Impactor
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR15JA26.014
Figure 2 to 49 CFR 571.217a--Glazing Break Pattern
[[Page 1717]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR15JA26.015
Figure 3 to 49 CFR 571.217a--An Example of a Daylight Opening Periphery
(for Illustrative Purposes Only)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR15JA26.016
[[Page 1718]]
Issued under authority delegated in 49 CFR 1.95.
Jonathan Morrison,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2026-00728 Filed 1-14-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-C
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on January 15, 2026.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.