[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 151 (Wednesday, August 6, 2003)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 46539-46546]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-20054]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 571
[Docket No. NHTSA-03-15732]
RIN 2127-AI98
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Occupant Crash Protection
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, NHTSA proposes to amend Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety Standard No. 208, Occupant crash protection (FMVSS No.
208), to establish the same maximum test speed and phase-in schedule
for the belted barrier test using the 5th percentile adult female test
dummy as is required for belted tests using the 50th percentile adult
male test dummy commencing September 1, 2007. The effect of this
proposal would be to increase the maximum belted frontal barrier crash
test speed for the smaller dummy from 48 km/h (30 mph) to 56 km/h (35
mph). Preliminary testing has shown that at the higher test speed, a
belted 5th percentile adult female dummy seated in accordance with
FMVSS No. 208 seating procedures may record higher injury measurements
than a 50th percentile adult male dummy tested in the same vehicle.
Improving performance beyond the 48 km/h (30 mph) test speed for the
5th percentile adult female would require that air bag and seat belt
designs be optimized to protect occupants in high speed crashes without
increasing the aggressiveness of those systems to a level where they
are likely to induce injuries for out-of-position occupants.
DATES: You should submit comments early enough to ensure that Docket
Management receives them not later than October 6, 2003.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments (identified by DOT DMS Docket Number
03-15732) by any of the following methods:
[sbull] Web site: http://dms.dot.gov. Follow the instructions for
submitting comments on the DOT electronic docket site.
[sbull] Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
[sbull] Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, Room PL-401,
Washington, DC 20590-001.
[sbull] Hand Delivery : Room PL-401 on the plaza level of the
Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
[sbull] Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and
docket number or Regulatory Identification Number (RIN) for this
rulemaking. For detailed instructions on submitting comments and
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the Requests for
Comments heading of the Supplementary Information section of this
document. Note that all comments received will be posted without change
to http://dms.dot.gov, including any personal information provided.
Please see the Privacy Act heading under Regulatory Analyses and
Notices.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://dms.dot.gov at any time or to Room PL-
401 on the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal Holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For non-legal issues, you may contact
Lori Summers, Office of Crashworthiness Standards, Light Duty Vehicle
Division by phone at (202) 366-1740, and by fax at (202) 493-2739.
For legal issues, you may contact Christopher Calamita of the NHTSA
Office of Chief Counsel by phone at (202) 366-2992 and by fax at (202)
366-3820.
You may send mail to both of these officials at the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh St., SW.,
Washington, DC 20590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Tests conducted to assess the feasibility of a 56 km/h (35 mph)
belted barrier test requirement using the 5th percentile adult
female test dummy
III. Benefits and Costs Associated with the Proposed Rule
IV. Effective Date of the Proposed Rule
V. Requests for Comments
VI. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
I. Background
FMVSS No. 208 requires passenger vehicles to be equipped with
safety belts and frontal air bags to prevent or mitigate the effects of
occupant interaction with the vehicle interior in a crash. While air
bags have been very effective in increasing the number of people saved
in moderate and high speed frontal crashes, they have occasionally been
implicated in fatalities in instances where vehicle occupants were very
close to the air bag when it deployed. On May 12, 2000, NHTSA published
a final rule to require that future air bags be designed to create less
risk of serious air bag-induced injuries than current air bags and
provide improved frontal crash protection for all occupants, by means
that include advanced air bag technology (``Advanced Air Bag Rule'', 65
FR 30680).
The Advanced Air Bag Rule established two phase-in schedules. In
the first phase-in, NHTSA will require vehicle manufacturers to install
air bag systems that reduce the risk of air bag-induced injury
(particularly to young children and small adult drivers), while
improving the frontal crash protection provided by current air bag
systems to occupants of different sizes. In the second phase-in, the
agency will require manufacturers to further improve upon the existing
air bag systems by implementing a belted rigid barrier crash test at
impact speeds up to and including 56 km/h (35 mph), rather than 48 km/h
(30 mph) as has been required for many years. The Advanced Air Bag
[[Page 46540]]
Rule established, on an interim basis, a maximum unbelted test speed
for tests using the 5th percentile adult female and 50th percentile
adult male dummies of 40 km/h (25 mph). While the rule retained the
existing 48 km/h (30 mph) belted test requirement for the 50th
percentile adult male test dummy throughout the first phase-in, it
added a new belted test for the 5th percentile adult female test dummy
at impact speeds up to and including 48 km/h (30 mph). It also
established a 56 km/h (35 mph) maximum test speed for the 50th
percentile adult male in phase two of the requirements (65 FR 30685).
While the agency has been performing a 56 km/h (35 mph) frontal
barrier impact test with 50th percentile adult male dummies in the New
Car Assessment Program (NCAP), now for the first time, FMVSS No. 208
has rigid barrier test requirements for belted occupants at a higher
test speed than for unbelted occupants.\1\ Until the Advanced Air Bag
Rule, FMVSS No. 208 specified the same maximum test speed for both
belted and unbelted rigid barrier testing. From the early 1970s, when
FMVSS No. 208 was first issued, up through the early 1990s, when air
bags first began to be widely introduced, seat belt use was quite low,
reaching only 51 percent in 1991. Since that time, seat belt use has
risen to 75 percent nationally, and is as high as 92 percent in states
with primary seat belt laws and strong enforcement programs. By
increasing the maximum speed for belted testing requirements, the
Advanced Air Bag Rule amended FMVSS No. 208 to better serve the safety
needs of the growing number of Americans using seat belts on a regular
basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Vehicles manufactured after March 18, 1997 not certified to
the Advanced Air Bag Rule may comply with the standard by means of
an unbelted sled test, as opposed to the unbelted rigid barrier
test. 49 CFR 571.208, S13. The sled test does not involve an impact
with a rigid barrier but uses the same crash pulse for each vehicle
and fires air bags artificially without the use of the vehicle
sensor system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the preamble to the Advanced Air Bag Rule the agency stated that
``we did not propose including the 5th percentile adult female dummy in
[the 56 km/h (35 mph) phase-in] requirement because we had sparse
information on the practicability of such a requirement. NHTSA will
initiate testing to examine this issue and anticipates proposing
increasing the test speed for belted tests using the 5th percentile
adult female dummy to 56 km/h (35 mph), beginning at the same time that
the 50th percentile adult male is required to be used in belted testing
at that speed.'' [60 FR 30680, 30690.] This position was reiterated
when the agency declined a petition to immediately begin rulemaking to
establish a requirement for vehicles to meet a 0-56 km/h (0-35 mph)
belted barrier test with the 5th percentile adult female dummy (66 FR
65376; December 18, 2001). However, the agency continued research on
the feasibility and practicability of increasing the testing speed for
belted testing using the 5th percentile adult female dummy.
Based on the results of our research, we are proposing to increase
the maximum belted rigid barrier test speed for the 5th percentile
adult female in accordance with the same phase-in schedule already
adopted for the 50th percentile adult male test dummy. The proposed
amendment would apply to all vehicles required to meet the requirements
of the Advanced Air Bag Rule.
II. Tests Conducted To Assess the Feasibility of a 56 km/h (35 mph)
Belted Barrier Test Requirement Using the 5th Percentile Adult Female
Test Dummy
Preliminary testing conducted by NHTSA and Transport Canada
indicates that a belted 5th percentile adult female dummy may be
subject to higher injury measures than a belted 50th percentile adult
male dummy in comparable frontal barrier crash tests, when both are
seated in accordance with the applicable FMVSS No. 208 seating
procedures. In 2001, NHTSA conducted a series of ten crashes to
demonstrate the feasibility of meeting the performance requirements
adopted in the Advanced Air Bag Rule using belted 5th percentile adult
female driver and passenger dummies in a 56 km/h (35 mph) rigid barrier
test. NHTSA then conducted an additional eight tests through a joint
research program with Transport Canada. Mini, light, and medium
passenger cars were tested, along with sport utility vehicles,
minivans, and a pickup truck.\2\ None of the tested vehicles were
designed to meet the new test requirements of the Advanced Air Bag Rule
(See, NHTSA-2001-10687).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The vehicle classifications were based on those adopted by
NHTSA in NCAP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Of the eighteen vehicles tested, twelve were able to meet the
driver and right front passenger dummy Injury Assessment Reference
Values (IARVs) required under FMVSS No. 208. The six vehicles that
exceeded the IARVs for the 5th percentile adult female dummy were found
to exceed injury measures in the head, chest, and/or neck regions. When
comparable NCAP crash tests were conducted with 50th percentile adult
male dummies, none of the adult male dummies exceeded the IARVs.
In a test of a 2001 Dodge Durango, the driver-side test dummy
measured injury levels that exceeded the IARVs for HIC, Nij, and neck
tension; the passenger dummy exceeded the Nij criteria. Both driver and
passenger dummies exceeded the chest acceleration criteria in a test of
a 2002 Chevy Trailblazer, with acceleration levels approximately 17
percent higher than the levels measured in the next highest vehicle for
both driver and passenger. The driver dummy measured a Nij reading
equivalent to the IARV in a test of a 2001 Ford Taurus and two times
the IARV in a test of a 1998 Geo Metro. The high injury measurement in
the 1998 Geo Metro test was more indicative of cars manufactured in the
mid-1990s than of newer models, many of which have been redesigned to
have a less aggressive air bag deployment. In all four of these
vehicles, NHTSA believes the high injury readings were the result of
the deploying air bag interacting with the dummy.
The driver dummy in a 2001 Dodge Grand Caravan test exceeded both
Nij and chest acceleration limits. Film analysis of the test indicated
that the steering wheel rotated upward during the crash test and the
air bag deployment pattern was such that it inflated under the dummy's
chin, causing high neck loads. At the same time, the air bag may have
failed to prevent dummy contact with the steering wheel through the air
bag, resulting in the high chest acceleration measurement. The sixth
test involved a 2001 Toyota Echo. In that test, the driver dummy
exceeded the HIC criteria. It appears that in this instance the force
limiting seat belt system did not yield effectively and allowed the
dummy's head to snap forward and exceed the HIC criteria. These tests
suggest that the deployment characteristics of some air bag systems and
the force limiting capabilities of some seat belt systems will need to
be optimized for the smaller occupants represented by the 5th
percentile female dummy to provide better protection.
While the remaining twelve vehicles all tested within the IARV
limits, the overall average injury values for the 5th percentile adult
female driver dummies in these vehicles were somewhat higher than the
values for 50th percentile adult male driver dummies tested in the same
vehicles. The greatest discrepancy was with the neck injury criteria
(Nij). Fourteen of the tested vehicles met the neck IARVs for the 5th
percentile adult female driver dummy, but on average the Nij values for
the 5th percentile
[[Page 46541]]
adult female driver dummy were nearly double the Nij values registered
for the 50th percentile adult male driver dummies tested in the same
vehicle. The higher injury measures may result from the proximity of
the female dummy to the steering wheel or instrument panel. The seating
procedure for testing with the 5th percentile female dummy places the
dummy closer to the steering wheel than the 50th percentile adult male
dummy, reducing the distance between the dummy and the deploying air
bag. A major factor in air bag-induced fatalities has been the
proximity of the occupant to the air bag module at deployment.
Therefore, this amendment is intended to ensure that belted small-
stature drivers and any belted passengers seated close to the air bag
are adequately protected in a high speed crash.
These eighteen tests indicate both a need for and the feasibility
of extending the 56 km/h (35 mph) maximum belted test speed to include
the 5th percentile adult female dummy. If adopted, the new requirement
would improve the equality of belted crash protection for occupants of
different sizes by requiring the 5th percentile female and the 50th
percentile male belted rigid barrier crash tests to use the same
maximum speed. As described above, compliance with this amendment will
likely lead to further improvement of air bag and/or seat belt systems.
III. Benefits and Costs Associated With the Proposed Rule
NHTSA estimates that today's proposal, if adopted, could prevent
between five and six small occupant fatalities per year and could also
reduce two to three moderate to severe injuries (MAIS 2+).\3\
Compliance with the proposal would reduce fatalities for drivers by
reducing fatal HIC values by 1.4-2.3 percent, fatal Nij values by 3.8
percent, and fatal chest g values by 2.8 percent. When applying these
reduction rates to the corresponding target population, this translates
to a reduction in driver fatalities from head, neck and chest injuries
of 1-2, 1, and 2, respectively. For passengers, compliance would reduce
fatalities by reducing fatal HIC values by 0.9-1.5 percent. This
translates to a reduction in passenger fatalities by 1. The total
reduction in fatalities would be between five and six drivers and
passengers combined. Compliance with this proposal would also reduce
MAIS 2-5 injuries to drivers by reducing the associated HIC values by
0.2-0.4 percent and the associated chest g values by 0.2 percent. When
applying these reduction rates to the corresponding target population,
this would result in a reduction in head MAIS 2-5 head and chest
injuries of 1-2 and 1 respectively, or a total reduction of MAIS 2-5
injuries of 2-3. A complete discussion of how NHTSA arrived at its
estimates may be found in the Preliminary Regulatory Evaluation located
in the docket for this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ MAIS (Maximum Abbreviated Injury Scale) represents the
maximum injury severity at an Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) level,
regardless of the nature or location of the injury. The AIS ranks
individual injuries by body region on a scale of 1 to 6 as follows:
1=minor, 2=moderate, 3=serious, 4=severe, 5=critical, and 6=maximum/
currently untreatable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beyond reducing the rates of injury and fatality to small-stature
occupants, increasing the maximum belted test speed for testing with
the 5th percentile adult female dummy would expand belted crash
protection to occupants of different sizes. The amendment would address
the potential hazard to all belted occupants who are very close to both
the air bag module and the steering wheel or instrument panel. By
phasing in a maximum test speed of 56 km/h (35 mph) for belted testing
with the 50th percentile adult male dummy, the Advanced Air Bag Rule
should improve occupant protection for belted occupants whose seats are
positioned in the mid-track position or further back. Increasing the
test speed to 56 km/h (35 mph) for 5th percentile female dummies would
oblige occupant protection designers to concurrently focus on improving
the safety of small stature belted drivers as well as other individuals
who for some reason have the seat positioned closer to the instrument
panel or steering wheel.
Compliance with the proposal would result in a nominal additional
cost to vehicle manufacturers. The test procedure itself is already
required at a lower impact speed in FMVSS No. 208; only the maximum
impact speed would be raised. Likewise, agency compliance tests would
use the same procedures that will be used for the 48 km/h (30 mph)
belted barrier test. Additionally, as indicated by twelve vehicles that
met all IARVs in NHTSA's test program, many vehicles already meet the
proposed requirement. Measures implemented to meet the 48 km/h (30 mph)
crash test requirements for the 5th percentile adult female test
dummies may also result in compliance with the proposed 56 km/h (35
mph) requirement with no additional changes.
To the extent additional measures may prove necessary, improving
performance beyond the 48 km/h (30 mph) requirement could involve
relatively simple changes. Air bag inflation characteristics could be
redesigned through changes to the fold pattern, vents, or the air bag
algorithm that would effectively modify the timing between primary and
secondary stages of deployment. Changes could be made to the electronic
control module, which controls the dual stage air bag. Possible changes
could include seat track sensors and/or modified seat track lengths to
position the full forward seating position further away from the
steering assembly. Safety belt pretensioners could be used to remove
the slack from the safety belt and provide restraining forces on the
occupant earlier in the crash, reducing forward excursion into the
steering wheel or deploying air bag. Manufacturers may decide to use a
combination of technologies to maximize the performance of the entire
occupant protection system.
Based on vehicle production numbers, about 20 percent of new light
vehicles would have to change either driver side or passenger side
performance to comply with the proposal. Assuming a new light vehicle
fleet in 2005 of 15.9 million, 3.32 million vehicles would need to
improve driver side performance, with 0.92 million of these vehicles
also having to improve passenger side performance.
Manufacturers may be able to comply with this proposal by changing
the air bag characteristics as described above. There would be minimal
costs associated with this alternative. If manufacturers were to comply
with the proposal by modifying the electronic control module, 3.32
million driver side and 0.92 million passenger side air bags would need
to be improved. At a unit cost of $3.12 per vehicle, the total cost for
this implementation strategy would be $10.36 million.
Of the vehicles that would need improved performance, about 40
percent were equipped with a driver seat track sensor and 60 percent
were not. Under a compliance strategy incorporating seat track sensors,
1.32 million vehicles that would not comply with the proposed
requirements would already be equipped with seat track sensors. These
1.32 million vehicles would need to modify the driver side air bag
inflation characteristics and electronic control module, at a cost of
$3.12 per vehicle, or a total of $4.12 million. Two million of the
vehicles that would not comply with the proposal would not be equipped
with a seat track sensor. These two million vehicles would need to
install a driver side seat track sensor and change the air bag
characteristics. The cost of a sensor and modification of the air bag
[[Page 46542]]
characteristics would be $8.12 ($5.00 + $3.12) per seat. The cost for
the driver side improvement would be $16.24 million. Of these two
million vehicles, 0.92 million vehicles would also have to make
modifications to the front passenger side. These modifications may be
able to be made through altering the characteristics of the air bag.
The total cost for the compliance alternative relying on seat track
sensors would be $20.36 million.
Manufacturers may also be able to comply with the proposal using
pretensioners, with or without adopting other refinements. For vehicles
that would not comply with the proposed requirements but already have
pretensioners, manufacturers would have to change the air bag
electronic control module or other restraint characteristics. For
vehicles that do not comply with the proposed requirements and do not
have pretensioners, manufacturers may have to install pretensioners for
both driver and passenger sides and change the air bag electronic
module.
Eighty seven percent of the vehicles that did not comply with the
proposed requirements had pretensioners, indicating that pretensioners
alone may not be sufficient to meet the proposed requirements. The 2.89
million vehicles equipped with pretensioners that would not comply with
the proposal would have to incorporate improved air bag characteristics
or adopt some other, additional strategy to improve performance of the
overall system. At an incremental cost of $3.12 per vehicle, the cost
for these vehicles would be $9.02 million. Roughly 13 percent of the
vehicles that would need improved performance had no pretensioners. The
addition of pretensioners to these 0.43 million vehicles, at a cost per
seat of $16.50 and installation in at both the driver and front
passenger position, would equal $14.20 million. In addition, these
vehicles would also likely need to improve their air bag
characteristics at a cost of $3.12 per vehicle, or $1.34 million for
the portion of the fleet that needed new pretensioners. The cost for
vehicles that required installation of pretensioners would be $15.54
million. The total estimated cost for compliance based on the
pretensioner option would equal $24.56 million ($9.02 million + 15.54
million).
In summary, the overall cost of the proposal would range from
minimal costs to $24.56 million, depending on the implementation of
technologies. A complete discussion of how NHTSA arrived at these costs
may be found in the Preliminary Regulatory Evaluation located in the
docket for this rulemaking.
IV. Effective Date of the Proposed Rule
If adopted, this proposal would be implemented according to the
same phase-in schedule as for the increase in test speed for the 50th
percentile adult male dummy belted rigid barrier test. Implementation
of the proposed requirement, if adopted, would be as follows:
--35 percent of each manufacturer's light vehicles manufactured during
the production year beginning on September 1, 2007 with an allowance of
advance credits for vehicles built after September 1, 2006;
--65 percent of each manufacturer's light vehicles manufactured during
the production year beginning on September 1, 2008 with an allowance of
carryover credits from vehicles built after September 1, 2006.
--100 percent of each manufacturer's light vehicles manufactured during
the production year beginning on September 1, 2009 with an allowance of
carryover credits from vehicles built after September 1, 2006.
--All light vehicles manufactured on or after September 1, 2010.
If this proposal is adopted as a final rule, the agency will permit
manufacturers that sell two or fewer carlines in the United States at
the beginning of the first year of the phase-in (September 1, 2007) the
option of omitting the first year of the phase-in. Likewise,
manufacturers that produce or assemble fewer than 5,000 vehicles for
the U.S. market per year and multi-stage manufacturers and alterers may
defer compliance with the new requirement until September 1, 2010. This
approach is fully consistent with the existing phase-in for the 0-56
km/h (0-35 mph) belted test using the 50th percentile adult male test
dummy.
V. Request for Comments
To aid the agency in obtaining useful comments, we are setting
forth in this section a specific list of questions for commenters. For
easy reference, the questions are numbered consecutively. NHTSA
encourages commenters to provide specific responses to each question
for which they may have information or views. In addition, in order to
facilitate tabulating the comments by issue, the agency encourages
commenters to respond to the questions in sequence, and to identify the
number of each question to which they are responding.
1. Overall safety. Does the overall proposal achieve an appropriate
level of safety with respect to risks from air bags for small stature
drivers and passengers?
2. Possible unintended consequences. To what extent could the
proposed increase in the test speed for the belted frontal barrier
crash test using the 5th percentile adult female test dummy result in
unintended adverse consequences?
3. Potential cost. What are the potential costs for the technology
and design changes required to meet the proposed amendment?
How Do I Prepare and Submit Comments?
Your comments must be written and in English. To ensure that your
comments are correctly filed in the Docket, please include the docket
number of this document in your comments.
Your comments must not be more than 15 pages long. (49 CFR 553.21).
We established this limit to encourage you to write your primary
comments in a concise fashion. However, you may attach necessary
additional documents to your comments. There is no limit on the length
of the attachments.
Please submit two copies of your comments, including the
attachments, to Docket Management at the address given above under
ADDRESSES.
Comments may also be submitted to the docket electronically by
logging onto the Docket Management System website at http://dms.dot.gov. Click on ``Help & Information'' or ``Help/Info'' to obtain
instructions for filing the document electronically. If you are
submitting comments electronically as a PDF (Adobe) file, we ask that
the documents submitted be scanned using Optical Character Recognition
(OCR) process, thus allowing the agency to search and copy certain
portions of your submissions.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Optical character recognition (OCR) is the process of
converting an image of text, such as a scanned paper document or
electronic fax file, into computer-editable text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please note that pursuant to the Data Quality Act, in order for
substantive data to be relied upon and used by the agency, it must meet
the information quality standards set forth in the OMB and DOT Data
Quality Act guidelines. Accordingly, we encourage you to consult the
guidelines in preparing your comments. OMB's guidelines may be accessed
at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/fedreg/reproducible.html. DOT's
guidelines may be accessed at http://dmses.dot.gov/submit/DataQualityGuidelines.pdf.
[[Page 46543]]
How Can I Be Sure That My Comments Were Received?
If you wish Docket Management to notify you upon its receipt of
your comments, enclose a self-addressed, stamped postcard in the
envelope containing your comments. Upon receiving your comments, Docket
Management will return the postcard by mail.
How Do I Submit Confidential Business Information?
If you wish to submit any information under a claim of
confidentiality, you should submit three copies of your complete
submission, including the information you claim to be confidential
business information, to the Chief Counsel, NHTSA, at the address given
above under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. In addition, you should
submit two copies, from which you have deleted the claimed confidential
business information, to Docket Management at the address given above
under ADDRESSES. When you send a comment containing information claimed
to be confidential business information, you should include a cover
letter setting forth the information specified in our confidential
business information regulation. (49 CFR part 512.)
Will the Agency Consider Late Comments?
We will consider all comments that Docket Management receives
before the close of business on the comment closing date indicated
above under DATES. To the extent possible, we will also consider
comments that Docket Management receives after that date. If Docket
Management receives a comment too late for us to consider in developing
a final rule (assuming that one is issued), we will consider that
comment as an informal suggestion for future rulemaking action.
How Can I Read the Comments Submitted by Other People?
You may read the comments received by Docket Management at the
address given above under ADDRESSES. The hours of the Docket are
indicated above in the same location. You may also see the comments on
the Internet. To read the comments on the Internet, take the following
steps:
(1) Go to the Docket Management System (DMS) Web page of the
Department of Transportation (http://dms.dot.gov/).
(2) On that page, click on ``Simple Search.''
(3) On the next page (http://dms.dot.gov/search/), type in the
four-digit docket number shown at the beginning of this document.
Example: If the docket number were ``NHTSA-1998-1234,'' you would type
``1234.'' After typing the docket number, click on ``Search.''
(4) On the next page, which contains docket summary information for
the docket you selected, click on the desired comments. You may
download the comments. However, since the comments are imaged
documents, instead of word processing documents, the downloaded
comments are not word searchable.
Please note that even after the comment closing date, we will
continue to file relevant information in the Docket as it becomes
available. Further, some people may submit late comments. Accordingly,
we recommend that you periodically check the Docket for new material.
VI. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993), provides for making determinations whether a
regulatory action is ``significant'' and therefore subject to Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) review and to the requirements of the
Executive Order. The Order defines a ``significant regulatory action''
as one that is likely to result in a rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or Tribal governments or
communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budget impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
This rulemaking document was not reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget under E.O. 12866. It is not considered to be
significant under E.O. 12866 or the Department's Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979).
This document proposes to amend 49 CFR 571.208 by increasing the
maximum belted frontal barrier crash test speed from 48 km/h (30 mph)
to 56 km/h (35 mph) for the 5th percentile adult female dummy. This
proposal would establish the same requirement and phase-in schedule for
testing with a 5th percentile adult female dummy as is currently
required for the 50th percentile adult male dummy. Preliminary testing
has shown that at a maximum frontal barrier crash test speed, a belted
5th percentile adult female dummy may produce higher injury
measurements than a 50th percentile adult male dummy tested in the same
vehicle. Increasing the maximum belted crash test speed for the 5th
percentile female would require manufacturers to optimize safety belt
and air bag performance for both the 5th percentile female and 50th
percentile male dummies at the same crash test speed. The proposed
amendment would not necessarily require any additional vehicle crash
testing to be conducted by the manufacturer and the test procedures are
already specified in the FMVSSs. Measures to provide protection to
occupants the size of the 5th percentile adult female dummy are
currently being implemented to meet the Advanced Air Bag Rule crash
test requirements up to 48 km/h (30 mph).
As noted above in the section entitled Benefits and Costs
Associated with the Proposed Rule, the overall cost of the proposal
would range from minimal costs to $24.56 million, depending on the
implementation of technologies. A complete discussion of how NHTSA
arrived at these costs may be found in the Preliminary Regulatory
Evaluation located in the docket for this rulemaking.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
In compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq., NHTSA has evaluated the effects of this proposed action on small
entities. I hereby certify that this notice of proposed rulemaking
would not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
The following is the agency's statement providing the factual basis
for the certification (5 U.S.C. 605(b)). If adopted, the proposal would
directly affect motor vehicle manufacturers, second stage or final
manufacturers, and alterers. SIC code number 3711, Motor Vehicles and
Passenger Car Bodies, prescribes a small business size standard of
1,000 or fewer employees. SIC code No. 3714, Motor Vehicle Part and
Accessories, prescribes a small business size standard of 750 or fewer
employees.
The majority of motor vehicle manufacturers would not qualify as a
small business. These manufacturers,
[[Page 46544]]
along with manufacturers that do qualify as a small business, are
already required to comply with the 48 km/h (30 mph) maximum crash test
speed requirements using 5th percentile adult female dummies under the
Advanced Air Bag Rule of FMVSS No. 208. Measures to provide protection
up to 48 km/h (30 mph) are already being implemented, and 12 of 18
vehicles tested currently comply with the proposed amendment (more than
five model years prior to the first proposed phase-in). Improving
performance to further meet the proposed 56 km/h (35 mph) requirement
could be achieved through simple changes in safety belt design or
changes in air bag inflation characteristics with low-cost algorithm
changes. Furthermore, small volume manufacturers would be given the
option of waiting until the end of the phase-in to meet the new
requirements.
Most of the intermediate and final stage manufacturers of vehicles
built in two or more stages and alterers have 1,000 or fewer employees.
But again, these companies already are required to comply with the 48
km/h (30 mph) belted 5th percentile adult female dummy requirement.
These companies could either rely on the original equipment
manufacturer's certification, or employ similar low cost measures as
the large manufacturers. Accordingly, there would be no significant
impact on small businesses, small organizations, or small governmental
units by these amendments. For these reasons the agency has not
prepared a preliminary regulatory flexibility analysis.
C. Executive Order No. 13132
NHTSA has analyzed this proposed rule in accordance with the
principles and criteria set forth in Executive Order 13132, Federalism
and has determined that this proposal does not have sufficient Federal
implications to warrant consultation with State and local officials or
the preparation of a Federalism summary impact statement. The proposal
would not have any substantial impact on the States, or on the current
Federal-State relationship, or on the current distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various local officials.
D. National Environmental Policy Act
NHTSA has analyzed this proposal for the purposes of the National
Environmental Policy Act. The agency has determined that implementation
of this action would not have any significant impact on the quality of
the human environment.
E. Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the new procedures established by the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995, a person is not required to respond to a collection of
information by a Federal agency unless the collection displays a valid
OMB control number. For the phase-in reporting requirements, NHTSA is
submitting to OMB a request for approval of the following collection of
information. Public comment is sought on the proposed collection.
Agency: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).
Title: Part 585--Advanced Air Bag Phase-In Reporting Requirements.
Type of Request: Updated collection.
OMB Clearance Number: 2127-0599.
Form Number: This collection of information will not use any
standard forms.
Requested Expiration Date of Approval: Three years from the date of
approval.
Summary of the Collection of Information
So that NHTSA could ensure that vehicle manufacturers are
certifying their applicable vehicles as meeting the rigid barrier test
using the belted 5th percentile adult female test dummy, NHTSA would
require vehicle manufacturers to report on compliance of their vehicles
with the upgraded frontal barrier crash test for the 5th percentile
adult female test dummy. The report would be included with the required
reports for the phase-in of the higher test speed for the 50th
percentile adult male dummy.
This proposal would be implemented according to the same phase-in
schedule as for the increase in test speed for the 50th percentile
adult male dummy belted rigid barrier test. Implementation of the
proposed requirement, if adopted, would be as follows:
--35 percent of each manufacturer's light vehicles manufactured during
the production year beginning on September 1, 2007 with an allowance of
advance credits for vehicles built after September 1, 2006;
--65 percent of each manufacturer's light vehicles manufactured during
the production year beginning on September 1, 2008 with an allowance of
carryover credits from vehicles built after September 1, 2006.
--100 percent of each manufacturer's light vehicles manufactured during
the production year beginning on September 1, 2009 with an allowance of
carryover credits from vehicles built after September 1, 2006.
--All light vehicles manufactured on or after September 1, 2010.
If this proposal is adopted as a final rule, the agency would
permit manufacturers that sell two or fewer carlines in the United
States at the beginning of the first year of the phase-in (September 1,
2007) the option of omitting the first year of the phase-in. Likewise,
manufacturers that produce or assemble fewer than 5,000 vehicles for
the U.S. market per year and multi-stage manufacturers and alterers
could defer compliance with the new requirement until September 1,
2010. This approach is fully consistent with the existing phase-in for
the 0-56 km/h (0-35 mph) belted test using the 50th percentile adult
male test dummy.
For each year of the phase-in period, manufacturers would be
required to provide to NHTSA, within 60 days after August 31 of each
``production year,'' information identifying the vehicles (by make,
model, and vehicle identification number (VIN)) that have been
certified as complying with the belted barrier test upgrade.
Description of the Need for the Information and Proposed Use of the
Information
NHTSA would need this information to ensure that vehicle
manufacturers are certifying their applicable vehicles as meeting the
new belted barrier test using the 5th percentile female. NHTSA will use
this information to determine whether a manufacturer has complied with
the amended requirements of FMVSS No. 208 during the phase-in period.
Description of the Likely Respondents (Including Estimated Number, and
Proposed Frequency of Response to the Collection of Information)
NHTSA estimates that 21 vehicle manufacturers would submit the
required information. For each report, the manufacturer will provide,
in addition to its identity, several numerical items of information.
This information would include:
(a) Total number of vehicles manufactured for sale during the
preceding production year,
(b) Total number of vehicles manufactured during the production
year that meet the new regulatory requirements, and
(c) Information identifying the vehicles (by make, model, and
vehicle identification number (VIN)) that have been certified as
complying with the belted barrier test upgrade.
[[Page 46545]]
Estimate of the Total Annual Reporting and Recordkeeping Burden
Resulting From the Collection of Information
NHTSA estimates that each manufacturer will incur 61 burden hours
per year. This is an increase in one additional annual burden hour to
the estimated annual burden for the existing OMB clearance, 2127-0599.
This estimate is based on the fact that data collection would involve
only computer tabulation and that manufacturers would provide the
information to NHTSA in an electronic (as opposed to paper) format. We
anticipate the data collection to involve the same vehicles as for the
upgrade of the belted barrier test using the 50th percentile adult male
test dummies.
NHTSA estimates that the recordkeeping burden resulting from the
collection of information would be 0 hours because the information will
be retained on each manufacturer's existing computer systems for each
manufacturer's internal administrative purposes.
NHTSA estimates that the total annual cost burden would be
increased by $735 dollars (1 additional hour x 21 manufacturers x $35
cost per hour). There would be no capital or start-up costs as a result
of this collection. Manufacturers could collect and tabulate the
information by using existing equipment. Thus, there would be no
additional costs to respondents or recordkeepers.
NHTSA requests comment on its estimates of the total annual hour
and cost burdens resulting from this collection of information. Please
submit any comments to the NHTSA Docket Number referenced in the
heading of this notice or to: Lori Summers, Office of Rulemaking,
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh St., SW.,
Washington, DC 20590. Ms. Summers' telephone number is: (202) 366-1740.
Comments are due within 60 days of the date of publication of this
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the Federal Register.
F. 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.'' If adopted, the amendments would use the technical
standards currently in FMVSS No. 208 and would only increase the
maximum speed for the frontal barrier crash test using the 5th
percentile adult female dummy from 48 km/h (30 mph) to 56 km/h (35
mph). No voluntary consensus standard uses a maximum speed of 56 km/h
(35 mph) for a frontal barrier crash test using a 5th percentile adult
female dummy.
G. Civil Justice Reform
This proposal would not have any retroactive effect. Under 49
U.S.C. 21403, whenever a Federal motor vehicle safety standard is in
effect, a State may not adopt or maintain a safety standard applicable
to the same aspect of performance which is not identical to the Federal
standard, except to the extent that the state requirement imposes a
higher level of performance and applies only to vehicles procured for
the State's use. 49 U.S.C. 21461 sets forth a procedure for judicial
review of final rules establishing, amending or revoking Federal motor
vehicle safety standards. That section does not require submission of a
petition for reconsideration or other administrative proceedings before
parties may file suit in court.
H. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires agencies to
prepare a written assessment of the costs, benefits and other effects
of proposed or final rules that include a Federal mandate likely to
result in the expenditure by State, local or tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector, of more than $100 million annually
(adjusted for inflation with base year of 1995). This rulemaking would
not result in expenditures by State, local or tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector in excess of $100 million
annually.
I. Executive Order 13045
Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any
rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' as
defined under E.O. 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental, health, or
safety risk that NHTSA has reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets
both criteria, we must evaluate the environmental health or safety
effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned
regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably
feasible alternatives considered by us.
This proposed rule is not subject to the Executive Order because it
is not economically significant as defined in E.O. 12866 and does not
involve decisions based on environmental, health, or safety risks that
disproportionately affect children. The proposed rule, if made final,
would increase the maximum belted frontal crash barrier test speed from
48 km/h (30 mph) to 56 km/h (35 mph) for the 5th percentile adult
female dummy.
J. Executive Order 13211
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 18, 2001) applies to any
rule that: (1) Is determined to be economically significant as defined
under E.O. 12866, and is likely to have a significantly adverse effect
on the supply of, distribution of, or use of energy; or (2) that is
designated by the Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs as a significant energy action. If made final, this
rulemaking would increase the maximum belted frontal crash barrier test
speed from 48 km/h (30 mph) to 56 km/h (35 mph) for the 5th percentile
adult female dummy. Therefore this proposal was not analyzed under E.O.
13211.
K. Data Quality Act
Section 515 of the Fiscal Year (FY) 2001 Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act (Pub. L. 106-554, sec. 515, codified at
44 U.S.C. 3516 historical and statutory note), commonly referred to as
the Data Quality Act, directed OMB to establish government-wide
standards in the form of guidelines designed to maximize the
``quality,'' ``objectivity,'' `` utility,'' and ``integrity'' of
information that federal agencies disseminate to the public. The Act
also required agencies to develop their own conforming data quality
guidelines, based upon the OMB model. OMB issued final guidelines
implementing the Data Quality Act (67 FR 8452, Feb. 22, 2002). On
October 1, 2002, the Department of Transportation promulgated its own
final information quality guidelines that take into account the unique
programs and information products of DOT agencies (67 FR 61719). The
DOT guidelines were reviewed and approved by OMB prior to promulgation.
NHTSA made information quality a primary focus well before passage
of the Data Quality Act, and has made implementation of the new law a
priority. NHTSA has reviewed its data collection, generation, and
dissemination processes in order to ensure that agency information
meets the standards articulated in the OMB and DOT guidelines, and
plans to review and update these procedures on an ongoing basis.
[[Page 46546]]
NHTSA believes that the information and data used to support this
rulemaking adhere to the intent of the Data Quality Act and comply with
both the OMB and DOT guidelines. NHTSA has reviewed all relevant
procedures for research and analysis in order to ensure that
information disseminated by the agency is accurate, reliable, and
unbiased in substance, and is presented in a clear, complete, and
unbiased manner. Having followed those procedures, NHTSA believes that
the information related to this rulemaking meet the requirements of the
Data Quality Act guidelines of both OMB and DOT. This expectation
regarding information quality has been confirmed by the agency in the
course of its pre-dissemination review, per the guidelines.
Individuals may review all of the data related to this rulemaking
by accessing NHTSA Docket No. NHTSA-03-15732 through the DOT docket
management Web site at http://dms.dot.gov. See Section N. of this
notice for further instructions.
L. Plain Language
Executive Order 12866 and the President's memorandum of June 1,
1998, require each agency to write all rules in plain language.
Application of the principles of plain language includes consideration
of the following questions:
[sbull] Have we organized the material to suit the public's needs?
[sbull] Are the requirements in the rule clearly stated?
[sbull] Does the rule contain technical language or jargon that
isn't clear?
[sbull] Would a different format (grouping and order of sections,
use of headings, paragraphing) make the rule easier to understand?
[sbull] Would more (but shorter) sections be better?
[sbull] Could we improve clarity by adding tables, lists, or
diagrams?
[sbull] What else could we do to make the rule easier to
understand?
If you have any responses to these questions, please include them
in your comments on this proposal.
M. 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.
N. Privacy Act
Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments
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.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477-78) or you may visit
http://dms.dot.gov.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571
Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Motor vehicles, and Tires.
In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA proposes to amend 49 CFR
part 571 as set forth below.
PART 571--FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS
1. The authority citation for part 571 would continue to read as
follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117 and 30166;
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.
2. Section 571.208 would be amended by revising S16.1(a) to read as
follows:
Sec. 571.208 Standard No. 208; Occupant crash protection.
* * * * *
S16.1 General provisions. * * *
(a) Belted test. (1) Vehicles certified to S14.1 or S14.2. Place a
49 CFR part 572 subpart O 5th percentile adult female test dummy at
each front outboard seating position of a vehicle, in accordance with
the procedures specified in S16.3 of this standard. Impact the vehicle
traveling longitudinally forward at any speed, up to and including
48km/h (30 mph), into a fixed rigid barrier that is perpendicular
within a tolerance of +/-5 degrees to the line of travel of the vehicle
under the applicable conditions of S16.2 of this standard.
(2) Vehicles certified to S14.3 or S14.4. Place a 49 CFR part 572
subpart O 5th percentile adult female test dummy at each front outboard
seating position of a vehicle, in accordance with the procedures
specified in S16.3 of this standard. Impact the vehicle traveling
longitudinally forward at any speed, up to and including 56km/h (35
mph), into a fixed rigid barrier that is perpendicular within a
tolerance of +/-5 degrees to the line of travel of the vehicle under
the applicable conditions of S16.2 of this standard.
* * * * *
Issued on: August 1, 2003.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 03-20054 Filed 8-5-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P