[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 194 (Friday, October 7, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-24841]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: October 7, 1994]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. 74-14; Notice 92]
RIN 2127-AF30

 

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Occupant Crash Protection

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice proposes to allow manufacturers the option of 
installing a manual device that motorists could use to deactivate the 
front passenger-side air bag in a vehicle without rear seats for the 
purpose of allowing them to place rear-facing infant restraints in the 
front seat. NHTSA research indicates that rear-facing infant restraints 
should not be placed in the front seat of a vehicle equipped with a 
passenger-side air bag. This poses a problem because manufacturers are 
beginning to install, and soon will be required to install, passenger-
side air bags in passenger cars and light trucks, some of which have 
only front seats.

DATES: Comment Dates: Comments must be received by December 6, 1994.

ADDRESSES: Comments should refer to the docket and notice number of 
this notice and be submitted to: Docket Section, Room 5109, National 
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW, 
Washington, DC 20590. (Docket Room hours are 9:30 a.m.-4 p.m., Monday 
through Friday.)

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Daniel Cohen, Chief, Frontal Crash 
Protection Division, Office of Vehicle Safety Standards, NRM-12, 
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW, 
Washington, DC 20590. Telephone: (202) 366-2264.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    This notice proposes to allow manufacturers the option of 
installing a manual device (hereafter referred to as a ``cutoff 
device'') that motorists could use to deactivate the front passenger 
air bag in a vehicle without rear seats for the purpose of allowing 
them to place rear-facing infant restraints in the front seat. (``Rear-
facing infant restraint,'' as used in this notice, refers to an infant 
restraint system (except a car bed) which is positioned in a vehicle so 
that the restrained infant faces the rear of the vehicle.) NHTSA is 
issuing this proposal because one particular type of child restraint, 
i.e., a rear-facing infant restraint, should not be placed in the front 
seat of a vehicle equipped with a passenger air bag. This poses a 
problem because manufacturers are beginning to install, and soon will 
be required to install, passenger air bags in vehicles, some of which 
have only front seats.
    On September 2, 1993, NHTSA published a final rule amending 
Standard No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection, to specify that 
manufacturers must install air bags to satisfy the standard's automatic 
crash protection requirements (58 FR 46551). This rule was required by 
49 U.S.C. 30127 (recently codified and previously cited as Section 2508 
of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991). These 
requirements for driver and passenger air bags are phased-in for both 
passenger cars and other vehicles. The phase-in percentage for 
passenger cars is 95 percent by model year 1997, and all passenger cars 
beginning with model year 1998. The phase-in percentage for trucks, 
buses, and multipurpose passenger vehicles (other than walk-in van-type 
trucks and vehicles designed to be exclusively sold to the United 
States Postal Service) with a gross vehicle weight rating of 8,500 
pounds or less and an unloaded vehicle weight of 5,500 pounds or less 
(collectively referred to as ``light trucks'' throughout the remainder 
of this preamble) is 80 percent by model year 1998 and all light trucks 
beginning with model year 1999.
    NHTSA has already released several documents and completed several 
rulemaking actions addressing the air bag/infant restraint interaction 
problem. Based on the preliminary results of the testing done regarding 
this problem, NHTSA issued a Consumer Advisory on December 10, 1991, 
warning owners of rear-facing infant restraints not to use such a 
restraint in the front seat of a vehicle equipped with a passenger air 
bag.
    Since issuing the 1991 Consumer Advisory, NHTSA has intensified its 
efforts to work closely and cooperatively with interested parties on 
this issue. For example, NHTSA has worked to bring about a better 
understanding of rear-facing infant restraint/air bag interaction 
through the auspices of the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) and 
its technical committees on child safety issues. As a result of mutual 
concerns on the part of government and industry, the SAE was able to 
publish consensus guidelines dealing broadly with the interaction of 
child restraint systems (including rear-facing infant restraints) and 
air bags. The agency worked with State and local governments to 
disseminate the information about the latest, mutually arrived at, 
recommendations concerning rear-facing infant restraint/air bag 
interaction. NHTSA has also worked with the American Academy of 
Pediatrics (AAP), a group of doctors who specialize in the care of 
children. As a result, the AAP has disseminated the warnings about air 
bags and rear-facing infant restraints to its 40,000 members through 
its newsletter and Family Shopping Guide for Car Seats.
    In addition, the agency has reemphasized its commitment to 
educating the public on this issue. In April 1992, the agency reissued 
its Consumer Information Bulletin, ``Transporting Your Children 
Safely.'' This bulletin provides several pages of guidelines on the use 
of child restraints in vehicles, including a chart depicting the 
optimum restraint type for various sizes and weights for children. For 
example, the bulletin recommends that from birth to 9-12 months or 20 
pounds, a rear-facing infant restraint be used. The bulletin also 
states: ``Rear-facing child safety seats should always go in the rear 
seat in cars equipped with passenger-side air bags.''
    In October 1992, based on the final results of the testing 
mentioned above, NHTSA published a final report describing child 
restraint/passenger air bag interactions (Child Restraint/Passenger Air 
Bag Interaction Strategies, DOT HS 808-004, October 1992). The report 
concluded that rear-facing infant restraints should not be placed in 
the front seat of a vehicle with a passenger air bag.
    In response to the October 1992 final report, NHTSA amended several 
safety standards to require warnings concerning the interaction of air 
bags and rear-facing infant restraints. In the September 1993 final 
rule, as described above, the agency required that specified 
information, including information about the proper placement of rear-
facing infant restraints, be placed on labels in vehicles equipped with 
air bags. This warning label must be on the sun visor of any vehicle 
equipped with an air bag manufactured after September 1, 1994. It also 
required that additional, more detailed information about air bags be 
provided in the owner's manual. Consumers were again cautioned by the 
Department not to use rear-facing infant restraints in seating 
positions protected by air bags in an October 28, 1993 news release.
    On February 16, 1994, the agency took a further step to try to 
alert parents to the issue of air bag/rear-facing infant restraint 
interaction. It published in the Federal Register a final rule amending 
Standard No. 213, Child Restraint Systems (59 FR 7643). The amended 
Standard No. 213 requires that the warning label for a rear-facing 
infant restraint include a warning against using the restraint in any 
vehicle seating position equipped with an air bag. It also requires 
that the printed instructions for a rear-facing infant restraint 
include safety information about air bags.
    Believing that steps in addition to providing consumers with 
information were needed, members of the American Automobile 
Manufacturers Association (AAMA) met with NHTSA on January 24, 1994. 
AAMA asked for the meeting to explore the possibility of installing an 
air bag cutoff device to allow rear-facing infant restraints to be 
placed in air bag-equipped passenger seating positions. AAMA 
representatives discussed the general concept of an air bag cutoff 
device, which could be either automatic or manual. However, the 
representatives emphasized that the industry is not quite ready to 
install automatic devices because automatic cutoff technology is not 
yet ready for production. At the meeting, AAMA asked whether Standard 
No. 208 would permit such devices and, if not permitted, whether the 
agency would consider initiating rulemaking to permit such devices.

II. Scope of this Notice

    NHTSA is concerned that despite its efforts to provide warnings to 
not place an infant in a rear-facing infant restraint in the right 
front seat of a vehicle that has a passenger air bag, these warnings 
will provide minimal benefit if a parent chooses to transport his/her 
infant in a vehicle that is physically unable to accommodate a child 
any place other than the front seat, e.g., a vehicle that has no rear 
seat. Examples of such vehicles are a two-seater sports car and a light 
duty truck with only a front seat. It is exclusively for this minority 
of vehicles that this notice is intended. NHTSA believes that allowing 
manufacturers the option to install a manual cutoff device would not 
unduly diminish the ability of these vehicles to provide crash 
protection to the adult population and would avoid the potential 
problem of air bag/infant seat interaction.

III. Legality of Air Bag Cutoff Devices

    After the January 1994 meeting with AAMA, the agency examined 
whether Standard No. 208 currently permits a vehicle to be equipped 
with an air bag cutoff device.
    Standard No. 208 currently requires the front outboard seating 
positions in passenger cars and light trucks to be equipped with 
automatic crash protection systems which protect their occupants by 
means that require no action by vehicle occupants. Compliance with the 
automatic crash protection requirements of Standard No. 208 is 
determined in a dynamic crash test. That is, a vehicle must comply with 
specified injury criteria, as measured on a test dummy, in a 30 mph 
barrier crash test. The two types of automatic crash protection 
currently offered are automatic safety belts (whose automatic nature 
helps to assure belt use) and air bags (which supplement safety belts 
and offer some protection even when safety belts are not used). The 
September 1993 final rule will require manufacturers to comply with the 
automatic crash protection requirements by installing air bags.
    Two types of cutoff devices are possible. The first type involves 
manual technology such as an ``on-off'' switch to disable the operation 
of the passenger air bag by moving the switch to the ``OFF'' position. 
To reactivate, the switch is then moved to the ``ON'' position. This 
reactivation may take place manually or it may occur automatically, 
e.g., after deactivation the system reactivates the next time that the 
ignition is turned on or when a door is opened. The second type of 
cutoff device is one that automatically deactivates and reactivates the 
air bag.
    In past agency interpretations of the safety standards, NHTSA has 
stated that if (1) there are two possible conditions during a 
compliance test (e.g., whether a particular device is in the ``ON'' or 
``OFF'' position), and (2) the standard does not specify which test 
condition is to be used, and (3) the language of the standard as a 
whole and the standard's purpose do not imply a limit that would make 
one of those conditions inappropriate, there is a presumption that the 
requirements have to be met in both test conditions.
    With regard to automatic cutoff devices, the agency expects that 
manufacturers would design these devices so that they would 
automatically ensure that the front passenger air bag is activated 
during the barrier crash test because a 50th percentile adult male 
dummy is in the seat. Thus, there would not be two possible test 
conditions under those circumstances. Therefore, if so designed, 
automatic cutoff devices would be allowed by Standard No. 208.
    With regard to manual cutoff devices, two test conditions are 
possible. In one, the device is in the ``ON'' position and the air bag 
is deactivated. In the other, the device is in the ``OFF'' position and 
the air bag is activated. The position of a cutoff device is not 
specified in Standard No. 208, so the presumption arises that the 
Standard must be met regardless of whether the device is in the ``ON'' 
or ``OFF'' position.
    However, before reaching such a conclusion, the agency considers 
the language and purpose of the standard to see if any limits on the 
test condition are implied. In the past, the agency has found such 
limits when one or more of the possible conditions could not occur 
under normal driving conditions. The purpose of Standard No. 208 is for 
a vehicle to provide automatic protection for vehicle occupants at all 
times when the vehicle is operating. Therefore, if the cutoff device 
could be used when the vehicle is being operated, there is no implied 
limit on the position of the device during the test. Since the injury 
criteria presumably would not be met when the air bag has been 
deactivated, the device would result in a noncompliance with Standard 
No. 208. Therefore, the agency concludes that manual cutoff devices are 
not currently permitted by Standard No. 208.
    The above conclusion about manual cutoff devices applies only to 
vehicles that comply with the automatic protection requirement by means 
of air bags. If a vehicle is voluntarily equipped with air bags, as 
some light trucks are, the installation of a manual cutoff device is 
permitted.

IV. Decision to Allow Manual Cutoff Devices

    NHTSA believes that a regulatory dilemma now exists because drivers 
of two-seater vehicles, i.e., vehicles which have no designated rear 
seating positions, might be forced to ignore the cautions against 
placing an infant in the front seat. Although some manufacturers may be 
able to devise an air bag system that would accommodate an infant in a 
rear-facing infant restraint placed in close proximity to the dashboard 
of a vehicle equipped with a passenger air bag, concerns voiced by the 
AAMA indicate that, in general, most vehicle manufacturers are 
concerned that existing air bag designs do not currently provide the 
special type of protection needed to avoid injury to infants in rear-
facing infant restraints placed on the front seat.
    Because the automatic technologies now under consideration appear 
too immature for immediate application to the problem, the agency is 
proposing to amend Standard No. 208 to permit a manual cutoff device. 
NHTSA has concluded that manual cutoff devices should be optional; they 
should not be mandated. A mandatory installation requirement could 
penalize manufacturers that have produced, or intend to produce, a 
passenger air bag that is not harmful to infants in rear-facing infant 
restraints. The agency believes that a mandatory requirement would 
needlessly stifle innovations and could impede future advances in air 
bag technology. In addition, the agency believes that some vehicles 
with only one row of seats may allow the seat to be moved far enough 
rearward so that the combination of air bag type and design and vehicle 
seat position does not pose a threat to a child in a rear-facing infant 
restraint. Thus, a cutoff device would not be necessary in the vehicle.

V. Details of Proposal

A. Affected Vehicles

    NHTSA is proposing to allow manual cutoff devices in passenger cars 
and light trucks since, as noted above, these vehicles are required to 
have passenger air bags by the late 1990s. NHTSA has also tentatively 
concluded that manual cutoff devices should be allowed only in 
passenger cars and light trucks which do not have forward-facing rear 
seats. If vehicles are equipped with at least one rear seating 
position, that position can be used for a rear-facing infant restraint. 
Even in vehicles without air bags, NHTSA recommends the rear seat as 
the optimum location for any child restraint. Accordingly, NHTSA does 
not believe that manual cutoff devices should be allowed in vehicles 
with a forward-facing rear seat.

B. Means of Activation

    NHTSA is proposing to require the use of a key to activate the 
cutoff device. This would make the device simple and easy to use, but 
still require conscious thought and deliberate action on the part of 
the user. The agency is proposing use of the ignition key to ensure 
that the driver of the vehicle is the person most likely to activate 
the cutoff device, and thereby minimize the likelihood of accidental 
activation. This approach is similar to that used in Standard No. 118, 
Power Operated Window, Partition and Roof Panel Systems, to ensure the 
safe operation of electrically operated devices. NHTSA requests 
comments on mandating the use of the ignition key.
    NHTSA requests comments on other means that would guard against the 
inadvertent deactivation of the air bag, while avoiding the possible 
complexity or inconvenience of the ignition key based approach. 
Examples of other means include a separate key from the ignition key, 
``keyless'' entry technology responding to personal identification 
numbers, the use of ``protected'' switches that require removing or re-
positioning a special safety cap in two or more steps, or other such 
devices. NHTSA will consider all comments regarding the means to 
deactivate the passenger air bag, and will adopt the most practicable 
approach possible which is consistent with the philosophy that the 
device be as simple and easy to use as possible, consistent with the 
goal of preventing inadvertent deactivation.

C. Air Bag Reactivation

    NHTSA is proposing to require that manual cutoff devices be 
designed so that, once the cutoff device has been used to deactivate 
the air bag, the air bag will remain deactivated until it is manually 
reactivated. Mandating manual reactivation would ensure that once an 
air bag has been deactivated for the safety of an infant being 
transported in a rear-facing child restraint in the front seat, it 
would remain deactivated for subsequent trips with the child. NHTSA is 
concerned, for example, that if it instead allowed a manually 
deactivated air bag to be automatically reactivated, motorists making 
stop-and-go shopping trips with infants might forget, after making one 
of their stops, that the air bag has been automatically reactivated and 
needs to be manually deactivated again. The infants would then be at 
risk if the vehicles were involved in crashes that deployed the air 
bags.
    At the same time, the agency is concerned that the air bag be 
operational whenever it is needed by a non-infant occupant. In an 
attempt to ensure that air bag protection would be ready when needed, 
NHTSA also proposes to require a yellow warning light which would be 
clearly visible to the driver and any adult passenger (see Section D, 
Warning Light, below). It would illuminate the words, ``AIR BAG OFF,'' 
whenever the air bag has been manually deactivated. This warning light 
would serve as a reminder that the cutoff device should be reset 
whenever the vehicle is no longer carrying an infant.
    Notwithstanding its proposal to require that manually deactivated 
air bags reactivate by manual means only, NHTSA requests comments on 
whether it should address the problem of ensuring both infant and non-
infant safety by mandating that a manually deactivated air bag be 
automatically reactivated upon the occurrence of some subsequent event. 
The subsequent event that triggers the automatic reactivation of the 
air bag could be the next restarting of the vehicle. However, such a 
design could pose an unnecessary burden and risk in the example given 
above of motorists making stop-and-go shopping trips. The motorists 
must restart their vehicles numerous times on such trips. The 
combination of that fact and the automatic reactivation of the air bag 
each time the vehicles are restarted would multiply the occasions on 
which the motorists might forget to protect their infants by 
deactivating the air bag. To address this problem, NHTSA requests 
comments on whether, if it were to adopt a requirement for automatic 
reactivation, it should qualify that requirement further, by requiring 
that the air bag be reactivated only when the restarting of the vehicle 
occurs after the ignition has been off for more than some minimum 
period, perhaps a period of several hours.
    The ultimate decision whether to mandate manual or automatic 
reactivation of the air bag will depend in large measure on the 
agency's assessment of the relative effects of each method of 
reactivation on the safety of the infant and non-infant occupants of 
the front right passenger seating position in the vehicles affected by 
this rulemaking. Using data from the National Accident Sampling System 
(NASS) and Fatal Accident Reporting System (FARS), the agency has 
attempted to quantify the potential safety trade-offs in its 
preliminary regulatory evaluation for this rulemaking. NHTSA seeks 
comments and information that would enable the agency to refine its 
estimates of those trade-offs.

D. Warning Light

    NHTSA is proposing to require a telltale light on the dashboard 
that is clearly visible from both the driver and front passenger 
seating positions and that is illuminated whenever the passenger air 
bag has been deactivated by means of the cutoff device. This light 
would be separate from the air bag readiness indicator already required 
by Standard No. 208. NHTSA is proposing that the color of the telltale 
be yellow, with the words ``AIR BAG OFF'' clearly visible on the 
telltale when the passenger side air bag has been deactivated.
    NHTSA believes that the indicator should be visible to the driver 
as a reminder that the passenger air bag is, or is not, functioning. 
NHTSA believes that the indicator should be also visible from the 
passenger seating position as a warning to non-infant occupants that 
they are not protected by their air bag.
    While the agency is requiring a warning light that is visible to 
the passenger, its effectiveness may be limited by whether a passenger 
actually looks at, or for, the light, and understands its message. The 
agency seeks comment on whether a supplemental or additional warning 
for passengers would minimize instances in which the air bag was 
unintentionally not reactivated.
    NHTSA is concerned that the level of illumination should be 
consistent with the ambient light condition, and is therefore requiring 
that the warning light indicator provide at least two levels of 
brightness, one of which is barely discernible to a driver who has 
adapted to dark ambient roadway conditions. In addition, NHTSA is 
specifying that the warning light indicator shall not be adjustable 
under any driving condition to a level that is invisible.

E. Air Bag Readiness Indicator

    Currently, S4.5.2 of FMVSS No. 208 requires that every vehicle 
equipped with an air bag also be equipped with an air bag readiness 
indicator that informs the driver about the operational status of the 
air bag system. Specifically, S4.5.2 states:

    An occupant protection system that deploys in the event of a 
crash shall have a monitoring system with a readiness indicator. The 
indicator shall monitor its own readiness and shall be clearly 
visible from the driver's designated seating position. * * *

NHTSA is not aware of any manufacturer which complies with this 
requirement by installing separate readiness indicators, one for the 
driver air bag and another for the passenger air bag. If a single 
readiness indicator for two air bags were used on a vehicle with an air 
bag cutoff device, the indicator would indicate the non-functioning of 
an air bag whenever the passenger air bag was deactivated. NHTSA is 
concerned that, under those circumstances, the driver would have no 
means of knowing the operational status of the driver air bag. NHTSA 
considered proposing to amend S4.5.2 to require separate readiness 
indicators for the driver and passenger side air bags. Instead, NHTSA 
is proposing to amend S4.5.2 to limit the operation of a single 
readiness indicator when the cutoff device is ``on'' so that the 
indicator monitors only the air bag that is not deactivated, i.e., the 
driver air bag. When the cutoff device is ``off,'' the passenger air 
bag would be activated, and the readiness indicator would monitor the 
readiness of both the driver air bag and the passenger air bag.

F. Owner's Manual

    NHTSA is also proposing to require that manufacturers include 
information concerning the cutoff device in the owner's manual. NHTSA 
is not proposing specific language which must be included in the 
owner's manual. NHTSA is proposing to require the owner's manual to 
include instructions on the operation of the cutoff device, a statement 
that the cutoff device should only be used when a rear-facing infant 
restraint is installed in the front passenger seating position, and a 
warning about the safety consequences of using the cutoff device at 
other times.

G. Labels

    Currently, Standard No. 208 requires that by September 1, 1994, air 
bag-equipped vehicles will bear a label on the sun visor that warns, in 
part:

DO NOT INSTALL REARWARD-FACING CHILD SEATS IN ANY FRONT PASSENGER SEAT 
POSITION

Also, Standard No. 213 has been amended to require either of the 
following labels on rear-facing infant seats or on child restraints 
that can be converted for use in a rear-facing infant mode:

WARNING: PLACE THIS RESTRAINT IN A VEHICLE SEAT THAT DOES NOT HAVE AN 
AIR BAG

or

WARNING: WHEN YOUR BABY'S SIZE REQUIRES THAT THIS RESTRAINT BE USED SO 
THAT YOUR BABY FACES THE REAR OF THE VEHICLE, PLACE THE RESTRAINT IN A 
VEHICLE SEAT THAT DOES NOT HAVE AN AIR BAG

The first warning is to be used for child seats that are rear-facing 
only, and the second warning is to be used for infant seats that 
convert from forward-facing to rear-facing.
NHTSA has tentatively concluded that the language of these labels need 
not be amended. Manufacturers of child restraint systems are required 
to state in the printed instructions accompanying the restraint that 
the safest location for any child restraint is in the rear seat, 
regardless of whether the vehicle has an air bag. In addition, NHTSA is 
concerned that changing the language to clarify that the warning does 
not apply when the air bag can be deactivated will lessen the impact of 
the message on the public. Since not all vehicles may be equipped with 
cutoff devices, NHTSA is concerned that the result of lessening the 
impact of the message would be the placement of an infant in a seating 
position with an air bag that cannot be deactivated.

VI. Phase-out of Manual Cutoff Devices

    The agency has tentatively concluded that use of manual cutoff 
devices should not be permitted indefinitely. The agency has also 
tentatively concluded that vehicles with air bags having manual cutoff 
devices should not be counted toward compliance with the phase-in for 
air bags. Further, manual cutoff devices should be prohibited in all 
passenger cars manufactured on or after September 1, 1997, and all 
light trucks manufactured on or after September 1, 1998. These are the 
dates on which 100 percent compliance is required by 49 U.S.C. 30127. 
To implement these proposals, NHTSA would amend S4.1.5.1(b)'s 
definition of an ``inflatable restraint system,'' a term used in the 
paragraphs relating to the air bag requirements, to state that it does 
not include an air bag that can be deactivated by a manual cutoff 
device.
    This several year period would give manufacturers time to develop 
and introduce automatic devices. Automatic technology would reduce the 
potential problem with either intentional or accidental misuse of these 
devices to deactivate an air bag at times other than when a rear-facing 
infant restraint is in the seat. The agency is optimistic that new 
automatic sensing technology will soon be available to deactivate an 
air bag in certain situations, or to modify the deployment rate of the 
air bag according to the speed of the impact or the distance between 
the air bag and the occupant to be protected. NHTSA encourages vehicle 
manufacturers and suppliers to continue and accelerate their efforts to 
develop such technology.

VII. Automatic Cutoff Devices

    As discussed previously, NHTSA has concluded that Standard No. 208 
currently allows automatic cutoff devices. NHTSA requests comments on 
whether the agency should regulate automatic cutoff devices. As part of 
this rulemaking proceeding, NHTSA requests comments on whether any or 
all of the proposals in this notice relating to warning lights, 
readiness indicators, owner's manuals, and labels should also apply to 
vehicles equipped with automatic cutoff devices. NHTSA believes that 
the vehicle manufacturers, in developing automatic cutoff devices, will 
attempt to guard against the possibility of air bags being 
automatically deactivated when they should be providing protection. 
Nevertheless, for the purpose of possible future rulemaking, the agency 
requests comments on the necessity for NHTSA's taking steps to ensure 
that air bag protection remains activated at all appropriate times.

VIII. Consumer Education

    The agency actively works with consumer groups to promote child 
safety, and has been instrumental in reversing the stance long held by 
the American Academy of Pediatrics that infant restraints may be placed 
in the front seat. Additional consumer education is a necessary 
ingredient toward a successful attainment of the philosophy embodied in 
this rulemaking. Toward that end, NHTSA will work actively with the 
interested parties to further promote infant safety and to minimize any 
risk to infants from passenger side air bag. NHTSA invites comments in 
this important area.

IX. Proposed Effective Date

    If adopted, the proposed amendments would become effective 30 days 
following publication of the final rule.

X. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    NHTSA has considered the impact of this rulemaking action under 
E.O. 12866 and the Department of Transportation's regulatory policies 
and procedures. This rulemaking document was reviewed under E.O. 12866, 
``Regulatory Planning and Review.'' This action has been determined to 
be ``significant'' under the Department of Transportation's regulatory 
policies and procedures.
    Absent this rulemaking, and given a vehicle population in which all 
cars and light trucks are equipped with driver and passenger air bags, 
an estimated 1,050 air bag deployments a year will occur in pickup 
trucks and two-seater vehicles when a front passenger seat is occupied 
by an infant in a rear-facing infant seat. The level of the injuries 
resulting from these deployments are uncertain, but may well be severe. 
In an effort to assess the potential for safety trade-offs resulting 
from the failure to reactivate the air bag after it has been 
deactivated for the benefit of infant passengers, the agency estimated 
that only about one percent of the vehicles which would be permitted to 
have a cutoff device are likely to be carrying an infant. If one 
assumes for the purpose of analysis that the older occupants of 10 
percent of these vehicles did not reactivate the air bag for the 
benefit of non-infant passengers, approximately 3 occupants who are at 
least one year old may receive AIS 2-5 (survivable) injuries. In 
addition, for every one percent of all affected vehicles in which the 
older occupants deliberately turn off the air bag, 1-3 fatalities and 
23-32 additional injuries could occur each year. Since the agency 
believes that the percentage of vehicles in which the passenger air bag 
is inadvertently or deliberately deactivated would be fairly small, the 
number of infants who would avoid potentially serious injury far 
exceeds the number of non-infants who might be injured.
    NHTSA estimates that the per vehicle price impact for the addition 
of a passenger air bag cutoff device is $10.15 in 1993 dollars. This 
cost reflects a cost of $5.15 for the cutoff device and $5.00 for the 
light sensor that allows the warning light to have variable levels of 
brightness. NHTSA has not estimated the annual costs of this proposal, 
as that figure is dependent on the number of vehicles voluntarily 
equipped with manual cutoff devices.
    A preliminary regulatory evaluation has been prepared for this 
rulemaking. A more detailed explanation of the costs and benefits can 
be found in that document.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    NHTSA has also considered the impacts of this notice under the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act. I hereby certify that this proposed rule 
would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of 
small entities. As explained above, NHTSA does not anticipate a 
significant economic impact from this rulemaking action.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (P.L. 96-
511), there are no requirements for information collection associated 
with this proposed rule.

D. National Environmental Policy Act

    NHTSA has also analyzed this proposed rule under the National 
Environmental Policy Act and determined that it would not have a 
significant impact on the human environment.

E. Executive Order 12612 (Federalism)

    NHTSA has analyzed this proposal in accordance with the principles 
and criteria contained in E.O. 12612, and has determined that this 
proposed rule would not have significant federalism implications to 
warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

F. Civil Justice Reform

    This proposed rule would not have any retroactive effect. Under 49 
U.S.C. 30103, 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. 30161 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.

XI. Submission of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments on the proposal. 
It is requested but not required that 10 copies be submitted.
    All comments must not exceed 15 pages in length. (49 CFR 553.21). 
Necessary attachments may be appended to these submissions without 
regard to the 15-page limit. This limitation is intended to encourage 
commenters to detail their primary arguments in a concise fashion.
    If a commenter wishes to submit certain information under a claim 
of confidentiality, three copies of the complete submission, including 
purportedly confidential business information, should be submitted to 
the Chief Counsel, NHTSA, at the street address given above, and seven 
copies from which the purportedly confidential information has been 
deleted should be submitted to the Docket Section. A request for 
confidentiality should be accompanied by a cover letter setting forth 
the information specified in the agency's confidential business 
information regulation. 49 CFR Part 512.
    All comments received before the close of business on the comment 
closing date indicated above for the proposal will be considered, and 
will be available for examination in the docket at the above address 
both before and after that date. To the extent possible, comments filed 
after the closing date will also be considered. Comments received too 
late for consideration in regard to the final rule will be considered 
as suggestions for further rulemaking action. Comments on the proposal 
will be available for inspection in the docket. The NHTSA will continue 
to file relevant information as it becomes available in the docket 
after the closing date, and it is recommended that interested persons 
continue to examine the docket for new material.
    Those persons desiring to be notified upon receipt of their 
comments in the rules docket should enclose a self-addressed, stamped 
postcard in the envelope with their comments. Upon receiving the 
comments, the docket supervisor will return the postcard by mail.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571

    Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Motor vehicles.

    In consideration of the foregoing, it is proposed that 49 CFR Part 
571 be amended as follows:

PART 571--FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS

    1. The authority citation for Part 571 of Title 49 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 sections 
S4.1.5.1(b) and S4.5.2 and adding new sections S4.5.4 through S4.5.4.4, 
to read as follows:


571.208  Standard No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection.

* * * * *
    S4.1.5.1 Front/angular automatic protection system.
* * * * *
    (b) For the purposes of sections S4.1.5 through S4.1.5.3 and S4.2.6 
through S4.2.6.2, an inflatable restraint system means an air bag that 
is activated in a crash, other than an air bag that can be deactivated 
by a manual cutoff device permitted by S4.5.4 of this standard.
* * * * *
    S4.5.2 Readiness Indicator. An occupant protection system that 
deploys in the event of a crash shall have a monitoring system with a 
readiness indicator. The indicator shall monitor its own readiness and 
shall be clearly visible from the driver's designated seating position. 
If the vehicle is equipped with a single readiness indicator for both a 
driver and passenger air bag, and if the vehicle is equipped with a 
cutoff device permitted by S4.5.4 of this standard, the readiness 
indicator shall monitor only the readiness of the driver air bag when 
the passenger air bag has been deactivated by means of the cutoff 
device. A list of the elements of the system being monitored by the 
indicator shall be included with the information furnished in 
accordance with S4.5.1 but need not be included on the label.
* * * * *
    S4.5.4 Passenger Air Bag Cutoff Device. Passenger cars, trucks, 
buses, and multipurpose passenger vehicles may be equipped with a 
device that deactivates the air bag installed at the right front 
passenger position in the vehicle, if all of the conditions in S4.5.4.1 
through S4.5.4.4 are satisfied.
    S4.5.4.1 The vehicle has no forward-facing designated seating 
positions to the rear of the front seating positions.
    S4.5.4.2 The device is operable only by means of the ignition key 
for the vehicle. The device shall be separate from the ignition switch 
for the vehicle, so that the driver must take some action with the 
ignition key other than inserting it in the ignition switch to 
deactivate the passenger air bag. Once deactivated, the passenger air 
bag shall remain deactivated until it is reactivated by means of the 
ignition key.
    S4.5.4.3 A telltale light on the dashboard shall be clearly visible 
from all front seating positions and shall be illuminated whenever the 
passenger air bag is deactivated. The telltale:
    (a) Shall be yellow;
    (b) Shall have the identifying words ``AIR BAG OFF'' on the 
telltale;
    (c) Shall remain illuminated for the entire time that the passenger 
air bag is deactivated;
    (d) Shall not be illuminated at any time when the passenger air bag 
is not deactivated;
    (e) Shall not be combined with the readiness indicator required by 
S4.5.2 of this standard; and
    (f) Shall be adjustable to provide at least two levels of 
brightness, one of which is barely discernable to a driver who has 
adapted to dark ambient roadway conditions, and shall not be adjustable 
under any driving condition to a level that is invisible.
    S4.5.4.4 The vehicle owner's manual shall provide, in a readily 
understandable format:
    (a) Complete instructions on the operation of the cutoff device;
    (b) A statement that the cutoff device should only be used when a 
rear-facing infant restraint is installed in the front passenger 
seating position; and,
    (c) A warning about the safety consequences of using the cutoff 
device at other times.
* * * * *
    Issued on October 3, 1994.
Barry Felrice,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 94-24841 Filed 10-5-94; 12:01 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P