[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 148 (Wednesday, July 31, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 39904-39909]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-19354]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 571 and 590

[Docket No. 94-70, Notice 4]
RIN 2127-AF35


Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Door Locks and Door 
Retention Components

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

ACTION: Final rule; response to petitions for reconsideration.

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

SUMMARY: This document grants in part and denies in part petitions for 
reconsideration of a final rule of this agency that extended the 
performance requirements applicable to vehicle side door latches, 
hinges, and locks to the back doors of passenger cars and multipurpose 
passenger vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of 4,536 
kilograms (10,000 pounds) or less.
    The agency is granting two of the requests in the petitions. First, 
the agency is granting a request for a phase-in of the compliance date 
of the new requirements and establishing the usual reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements necessary for enforcement of a phase-in. 
Secondly, the agency is clarifying the definition of ``trunk lid'' with 
respect to vehicles in which the seatbacks of rear seats fold down to 
provide additional cargo space. NHTSA is denying the other two requests 
in the petitions.

DATES: This final rule is effective September 2, 1997.
    Any petition for reconsideration of this rule must be received by 
NHTSA not later than September 16, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration should refer to the docket and 
notice numbers noted above for this rule and be submitted to the Docket 
Section, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh 
Street, SW., Room 5109, Washington, DC 20590; telephone (202) 366-4949. 
Docket room hours are from 9:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday through 
Friday.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical issues: Dr. William Fan, 
Light Duty Vehicle Division, Office of Crashworthiness Standards, 
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street SW, 
Washington, DC 20590; telephone (202) 366-4922; FAX (202) 366-4329. For 
legal issues: Walter Myers, Office of the Chief Counsel, National 
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street SW, 
Washington, DC 20590; telephone (202) 366-2992; FAX (202) 366-3820.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Federal motor vehicle safety standard (Standard) No. 206, Door 
locks and door retention components (49 CFR 571.206), specifies 
performance requirements for side door latches, hinges, locks, and 
other supporting means. The requirements of the standard, applicable to 
all passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles (MPV), and trucks, 
are intended to minimize occupant ejection from the vehicle in the 
event of a crash.
    On September 28, 1995, NHTSA published a final rule in the Federal 
Register (60 FR 50124) extending the requirements of the standard to 
the back doors of passenger cars and MPVs that are so equipped and that 
have a GVWR of 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) or less, including 
hatchbacks, station wagons, sport utility vehicles, and passenger vans. 
The effective date of the new requirements was specified in the rule as 
September 1, 1997.
    The final rule defined ``back door'' as follows:

    [A] door or door system on the back end of a vehicle through 
which passengers can enter of depart the vehicle, or cargo can be 
loaded or unloaded, except--
    (1) The trunk lid of a passenger car whose trunk is separated 
from the passenger compartment by a partition; and
    (2) a door or window composed entirely of glazing material whose 
latches and/or hinges are attached directly onto the glazing 
material.

    The rule required that each back door system have at least one 
primary latch and that each primary latch not separate when a load of 
11,000 Newtons (2,500 pounds) is applied perpendicular to the face of 
the latch (Load Test One); when a load of 8,900 Newtons (2,000 pounds) 
is applied in the direction of fork-bolt opening parallel to the face 
of the latch (Load Test Two); and when a load of 8,900 Newtons (2,000 
pounds) is applied in a direction orthogonal to the other two 
directions (Load Test Three). The rule further specified that auxiliary 
latches in multiple-latch back door systems must meet the same strength 
requirements as primary latches on those doors.
    The primary latches of the back doors are required by the rule to 
have both the fully latched and the secondary latched positions. 
Auxiliary latches are not required to have a secondary latched 
position.

[[Page 39905]]

The Petitions

    (a) The American Automobile Manufacturers Association (AAMA) 
submitted a petition for reconsideration on behalf of its members, 
Chrysler Corporation (Chrysler), Ford Motor Company (Ford), and General 
Motors (GM), urging the deletion of ``unnecessary and design 
restrictive requirements'' and extension of the effective date. 
Specifically, the AAMA requested reconsideration of the following 
requirements:
    (1) Auxiliary latch performance requirements. AAMA asserted that 
auxiliary latches should not be required to meet the same strength 
requirements as primary latches. AAMA argued that since the standard 
does not require auxiliary latches, a door equipped with only a primary 
latch that met requirements would comply with the standard, while a 
door with a complying primary latch and an auxiliary latch that did not 
meet the primary latch strength requirements would not. The AAMA stated 
that such a situation is neither reasonable nor appropriate since the 
addition of an auxiliary latch, whatever its performance level, would 
provide a level of security over and above that required by the 
standard. In addition, the current requirement could result in a 
reduction in door system performance if it causes manufacturers not to 
add auxiliary latches to doors because of the additional costs 
involved. Finally, AAMA argued that auxiliary latches are often added 
to prevent water leaks, wind noise, squeaks, and rattles, and the 
deletion of such latches could cause customer dissatisfaction. 
Accordingly, when a door system contains multiple latches, only one 
should be required to meet the requirements of the standard.
    (2) Secondary latching position for hatches. AAMA stated that 
requiring a secondary latching position for the hatches of hatchback 
cars is unnecessary and provides no benefit to customers. AAMA asserted 
that the benefits of a secondary latching position for side doors are 
derived from the presence of a seated occupant near those doors. Thus, 
in the event of occupant misuse, such as a door not fully closed by the 
occupant, the secondary latch position can retain a door in a closed 
position until it can be secured in the fully latched position. AAMA 
stated that in addition to forcing redesign of the latch, requiring a 
secondary latching position on the back doors of hatchback cars will 
require redesign of the latch release mechanism because hatch release 
mechanisms may be key-controlled only. Further, ergonomics may require 
installation of an exterior release handle where one does not presently 
exist, thus further increasing resource expenditure with no 
commensurate safety benefit. Thus, AAMA asked that the latch releases 
on hatchback cars be required to meet requirements prohibiting 
component separation in the fully latched position only.
    (3) Lead time. In the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) of 
August 30, 1994 (59 FR 44691) in which NHTSA proposed extending the 
side door requirements to back doors, the proposed effective date was 
``the first September 1 that occurs following a two year period 
beginning with the publication of a final rule.'' AAMA stated that that 
proposed lead time would have provided a lead time of slightly less 
than 3 years to slightly more than 2 years, but that the lead time 
specified in the final rule was less than that proposed in the NPRM. 
Since some AAMA members' back door and hatch systems do not comply with 
the new requirements, new latches and locks may have to be designed, 
tested and validated, then production tooling must be designed and 
built, all requiring approximately 2 to 3 years lead time. In addition, 
some members are planning certain phase-outs in model year (MY) 1997 
and introduction of new models in MY 1998. Thus, phasing-in the new 
requirements would allow manufacturers the flexibility to direct 
resources to products which offer long term impact and be more in 
accordance with the lead time proposed in the NPRM. AAMA therefore 
requested a phase-in of 60 percent of production by MY 1998 (September 
1, 1997) and 100 percent by MY 1999 (September 1, 1998).
    (b) General Motors. GM stated that it participated in and supported 
the petition of AAMA. GM further commented that a lead time of less 
than 2 years is unreasonable and requested a 2-model year phasing-in of 
the new requirements commencing September 1, 1997.
    (c) Chrysler Corporation. Chrysler also stated that it participated 
in and supported the petition of AAMA, and reiterated AAMA's request 
for a 2-model year phase-in of the new requirements.
    (d) Ford Motor Company. Ford stated that it, too, participated in 
and supported the petition of the AAMA. In addition, Ford stated that 
the definition of ``back door'' in the rule (quoted above) is ambiguous 
in that passenger sedans equipped with fold-down rear seats could be 
construed as not having a trunk ``separated from the passenger 
compartment by a partition'' since there would be no partition when the 
seats are folded down.

Agency Analysis and Decision

    (a) Clarifying the definition of ``back door.'' NHTSA recognizes 
that certain models of passenger sedans are equipped with rear seats on 
which the seatbacks fold down to provide additional cargo space. Thus, 
to eliminate any possibility that the exclusion of trunk lids from the 
definition of ``back door'' might be misapplied with respect to 
vehicles with fold-down rear seats, the agency is clarifying the 
exclusion by adding a definition of ``trunk lid.''
    (b) Phase-in of requirements. The petitioners were unanimous in 
their assertions that an effective date of September 1, 1997 did not 
provide sufficient lead time to design, test, and produce new latch 
systems and to accommodate planned business cycles. Accordingly, to 
provide manufacturers sufficient time to redesign, build, test, and 
validate latches that may need to be changed to meet the new 
requirements, petitioners requested a phase-in of the new requirements 
so that compliance of 60 percent of production is required beginning 
September 1, 1997 (MY 1998) and 100 percent beginning September 1, 1998 
(MY 1999).
    NHTSA proposed an effective date of the first September 1 following 
2 years after publication of the final rule in the Federal Register. 
NHTSA believed that a lead time of 2 to 3 years would be needed by 
manufacturers to make necessary latch design and tooling changes for 
some of their vehicles. In addition, the agency was aware of the 
ability of manufacturers to replace certain add-on components with 
upgraded parts without having to change existing vehicle body 
structures. Thus, the agency did not believe it likely that a latch 
upgrade operation would involve significant vehicle sheet metal or body 
structure changes. NHTSA believed that the lead time provided in the 
final rule, a period that is 4 weeks short of 2 years, would be 
adequate.
    As noted above, the petitioners reiterated the arguments they made 
in response to the NPRM that 2 years was insufficient lead time for 
certifying the compliance of all vehicles. They also alleged that the 
agency failed to provide even the minimum lead time (2 years) that it 
had proposed in the NPRM. Further, some petitioners provided 
confidential information concerning the time necessary to design new 
latches, build and test prototypes, assure quality and durability, and 
conduct certification tests. Based on this new information, as

[[Page 39906]]

well as other confidential data submitted regarding product plans, 
NHTSA has concluded that the short phase-in requested by the 
petitioners would provide manufacturers with the necessary time needed 
to comply with the new requirements, while minimizing compliance costs. 
Compared with requiring 100 percent compliance beginning September 1, 
1997, as specified in the final rule, adopting the petitioners' request 
would result in a compliance delay of a maximum of 40 percent of 
production for a 1-year period. In view of the agency's belief that 
many back door latch, hinge, and lock assemblies already comply with 
the new requirements and that many more manufacturers will comply with 
the new requirements by the original effective date, the agency 
believes that the actual difference in the implementation delay between 
the original effective date and the petitioners' requested phase-in of 
the effective date would be less than 40 percent of total vehicle 
production. Accordingly, the effective date of the requirements of the 
final rule will be phased-in to require 60 percent of affected vehicles 
to comply with the new requirements by September 1, 1997 (MY 1998), and 
to require all such vehicles manufactured after September 1, 1998 (MY 
1999) to comply with the new requirements.
    NHTSA is also establishing the usual reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements necessary for agency enforcement of a phase-in. These 
requirements are necessary to enable the agency to identify which 
vehicles are certified to be in compliance with the new back door 
requirements. In general, each manufacturer must submit a report to 
NHTSA within 60 days after the end of the production year ending August 
31, 1998 detailing its 60 percent compliance with the back door latch, 
hinge, and lock requirements of its passenger cars and MPVs produced 
that production year. The information required for each report is also 
specified. Finally, each manufacturer must maintain records of the 
vehicle identification numbers of each passenger car and MPV for which 
information is reported under this standard until December 31, 1999.
    (c) Auxiliary Latch Performance Requirements. For the first time, 
``auxiliary latch'' was defined in the standard as a latch or latches 
other than the primary latch (which was also defined in the standard 
for the first time) installed on a door equipped with more than one 
latch. The final rule specified that the primary latch is required to 
have both fully latched and secondary latched positions, while 
auxiliary latches are required to have only a fully latched position.
    Although the amendments to the standard specifically address 
auxiliary latches, they did not require installation of auxiliary 
latches on back door systems. There is too much variation in the 
configurations and designs of those door systems for the agency to be 
able to specify a practicable and broadly-worded requirement for 
auxiliary latches that would appropriately distinguish between those 
door systems needing auxiliary latches and those that do not. More 
importantly, adopting such a requirement is not necessary to ensure 
that auxiliary latches are provided on multiple door systems since the 
vehicle manufacturers already do so. The agency believes, however, that 
if auxiliary latches are installed, there is a need to ensure that they 
perform properly.
    The agency believes that, in the interest of motor vehicle safety, 
auxiliary latches on back doors must meet the same strength 
requirements that primary latches must meet in the fully latched 
position. While primary and auxiliary latches serve a common purpose in 
holding the door system closed, they are usually in different 
locations, oriented in different directions, and subjected to different 
loading conditions in a crash. In a typical double cargo door system, 
for example, if the auxiliary latch that attaches a door part to the 
vehicle floor fails in a crash, the door parts would tend to rotate 
outward, creating a pulling and twisting loading on the primary latch. 
Since the primary latch is not required to meet such a rotational load 
requirement, it may not perform well in such a loading condition. In 
fact, NHTSA data show that in a rotational load test, many production 
door latches, whether primary or auxiliary, fail at a much lower load 
level than the load limits specified in S4.1.1.1 and S4.1.1.2 of the 
standard. If auxiliary latches meet the same strength requirements as 
primary latches, however, such additional strength would reduce the 
likelihood of primary latch failure due to the rotational loading of a 
crash, thereby reducing the risk of unintentional door opening and 
consequent occupant ejection.
    NHTSA does not agree with AAMA's argument that applying strength 
requirements to auxiliary latches could cause manufacturers to delete 
auxiliary latches, thus resulting in reductions in door system 
performance. As AAMA pointed out in its petition, manufacturers add 
auxiliary latches for purposes related to consumer satisfaction, such 
as prevention of water leaks, wind noise, squeaks, rattles, and the 
like. NHTSA believes that vehicle manufacturers will remain responsive 
to motor vehicle safety and consumer satisfaction, and that the number 
of latches fitted to a door system will continue to reflect the 
manufacturer's assessment of the actual safety needs of the system. 
Further, the technology of door latch design is well established and 
commonly used throughout the auto industry. Thus, NHTSA is confident 
that manufacturers will not delete auxiliary latches merely to avoid 
making some minor modifications to some latch designs, assuming that 
any are in fact necessary.
    For the reasons discussed above, the agency is convinced that in 
order to reduce the safety risk of inadvertent door openings in crashes 
and potential occupant ejection as a result of those openings, all door 
latches, whether primary or auxiliary, must meet the strength 
requirements of the standard. Accordingly, this request of the 
petitioners is denied.
    (d) Secondary latching position requirement for hatchbacks. AAMA 
suggested that the secondary latching position is not necessary for the 
back door latches of hatchback cars since such doors are designed 
solely for loading and unloading cargo. AAMA contended that the 
secondary latching requirement for such doors serves no safety purpose 
and provides no benefits to occupants. AAMA further contended that such 
a requirement will require redesign of the latch release mechanisms 
since hatch release mechanisms may be key-controlled only. AAMA stated 
that ergonomics may require the addition of an outside door handle 
where one does not now exist, thus increasing costs without any 
commensurate safety benefit.
    NHTSA disagrees with AAMA on this issue. The purpose of the 
secondary latching position requirement is to prevent door opening in 
the event that the fully latched position fails, for whatever reason, 
to retain the door in the closed position. Latch disengagement from the 
fully latched position can occur from many dynamic factors, notably 
impact or inertia forces generated in a crash. Although the hatches of 
hatchback cars are typically designed for the loading and unloading of 
cargo and have no interior door handle that can inadvertently cause the 
door to open, they are particularly susceptible to opening in crashes. 
NHTSA pointed out in the final rule that agency data show that hatches 
on hatchback cars have a significantly

[[Page 39907]]

higher opening rate in crashes than back doors in other types of 
vehicles, making them a major source of occupant ejections. 
Accordingly, requiring a secondary latching position on these latches 
is an added element of security in preventing door opening and 
consequent occupant ejection in crashes.
    The agency also does not agree that requiring a secondary latching 
position for latches on hatchbacks will necessitate extensive redesign 
of those latches. The agency believes that key-controlled latches can 
be designed to have secondary latching positions, with perhaps only 
very minor modifications. Further, the agency continues to believe that 
a large variety of such latches, whether key-controlled or otherwise, 
already comply with the requirements of the standard. The agency 
pointed out in the final rule that the production cost of a latch is 
nearly the same with or without the secondary latching position, and 
that the incremental cost for latch improvement, if needed, is not more 
than $1.00 per latch. The final rule referred to a 1994 engineering 
evaluation of the back door latches of 8 minivans conducted by the 
agency in which it was found that 7 of those vehicles already had 2 
latching positions on their back door latches. The agency also 
considers it likely that many existing side or back door latch systems 
that now comply with the standard can be used for hatch doors. 
Accordingly, this request in the AAMA petition for reconsideration is 
denied.

Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

    (a) Executive Order No. 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and 
Procedures.
    This rulemaking document was not reviewed under E.O. 12866, 
Regulatory Planning and Review. NHTSA has considered the impact of this 
rulemaking action under the DOT's regulatory policies and procedures 
and has determined that it is not ``significant'' within the meaning of 
those policies and procedures.
    The amendments promulgated by this document are intended to clarify 
the applicability of Standard No. 206 in terms of what latches, hinges 
and locks are not covered by the requirements of the standard (trunk 
lids), and to permit a phase-in of the effective date of the amendments 
to the standard published in the final rule of September 28, 1995 (60 
FR 50124). The cost impacts of the amendments to the standard were 
analyzed at length in the 1995 final rule and determined to be so minor 
as not to require a final regulatory evaluation. The petitioners 
submitted no data or information showing any cost impacts not 
considered in the 1995 final rule. Further, slight delay in the 
implementation of the 1995 final rule does not alter the agency's 
conclusions about the rule's cost impacts. Accordingly, NHTSA reaffirms 
the cost estimates discussed in the 1995 final rule and has not 
prepared a full regulatory evaluation for this response to the 
petitions for reconsideration.
    (b) Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    NHTSA has considered the effects of this rulemaking action under 
the Regulatory Flexibility Act. For the reasons explained above, I 
hereby certify that the amendments promulgated by this rule will not 
have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
Accordingly, a regulatory flexibility analysis was not prepared.
    (c) Executive Order 12612 (Federalism).
    NHTSA has analyzed this rulemaking action in accordance with the 
principles and criteria contained in E.O. 12612, Federalism, and has 
determined that this rule does not have sufficient federalism 
implications to warrant preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
    (d) National Environmental Policy Act.
    NHTSA has analyzed this rulemaking action for the purposes of the 
National Environmental Policy Act and has determined that 
implementation of this rulemaking action will not have any significant 
impact on the quality of the human environment.
    (e) Paperwork Reduction Act.
    The reporting requirements associated with this rule will be 
submitted to the Office of Management and Budget for approval in 
accordance with Chapter 35 of Title 44, United States Code, prior to 
the effective date of such reporting requirements. Administration: 
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration; Title: Back Door Latch, 
Hinge, and Lock Phase- in Reporting Requirements; Need for Information: 
To report manufacturers' production for the first year of the phase-in 
period; Proposed Use of Information: To determine compliance with 
`phase-in requirements; Frequency: One report; Burden Estimate: 1,260 
hours; Respondents: 35; Forms(s): Written reports; Average Burden Hours 
Per Respondent: 24.
    (f) Executive Order 12778 (Civil Justice Reform).
    This final rule does not have any retroactive effect. Under 49 
U.S.C. 30103(b), whenever a Federal motor vehicle safety standard is in 
effect, a state or political subdivision thereof may prescribe or 
continue in effect a standard applicable to the same aspect of 
performance of a motor vehicle only if such standard is identical to 
the Federal standard. A state may, however, prescribe a standard for a 
motor vehicle or item of equipment obtained for its own use that 
imposes a higher performance requirement than the Federal standard. 49 
U.S.C. 30161 sets forth a procedure for judicial review of final rules 
establishing, amending or revoking Federal motor vehicle safety 
standards. A petition for reconsideration or other administrative 
proceeding is not required before parties may file suit in court.

List of Subjects

49 CFR Part 571

    Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Motor vehicles, Rubber and rubber 
products, Tires.

49 CFR Part 590

    Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

PART 571--FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS

    1. The authority citation for part 571 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. sec. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117, and 30166; 
delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.

    2. Section 571.206 is amended in S.3 by revising the definition of 
``back door'' first published at 60 FR 50124, September 28, 1995, to 
become effective September 1, 1997; by adding the definition of ``trunk 
lid;'' and by revising S4 to read as follows:


Sec. 571.206   Standard No. 206, Door locks and door retention 
components.

* * * * *
    S3. * * *
    Back door means a door or door system on the back end of a motor 
vehicle through which passengers can enter or depart the vehicle, or 
cargo can be loaded or unloaded; but does not include:
    (a) A trunk lid; or
    (b) A door or window that is composed entirely of glazing material 
and whose latches and/or hinges are attached directly to the glazing 
material.
* * * * *
    Trunk lid means a movable body panel that provides access from 
outside the vehicle to a space wholly partitioned from the occupant 
compartment by a permanently attached partition or a fixed or fold-down 
seat back.
* * * * *
    S4. Requirements.

[[Page 39908]]

    (a) Components on side doors. Components on any side door that 
leads directly into a compartment that contains one or more seating 
accommodations shall conform to this standard.
    (b) Components on back doors. Components on any back door of a 
passenger car or multipurpose passenger vehicle with a gross vehicle 
weight rating (GVWR) of 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) or less that 
leads directly into a compartment that contains one or more seating 
accommodations shall conform to this standard, subject to the following 
compliance schedule:
    (1)(i) For those affected passenger cars and multipurpose passenger 
vehicles manufactured on or after September 1, 1997, and before 
September 1, 1998, the amount of such vehicles complying with this 
standard shall be not less than 60 percent of the combined total 
production of passenger cars and multipurpose passenger vehicles, based 
on:
    (A) The manufacturer's average annual production of such vehicles 
manufactured on or after September 1, 1996 and before September 1, 
1998; or
    (B) The manufacturer's production of such vehicles on or after 
September 1, 1997 and before September 1, 1998.
    (ii) For calculating average annual production of affected 
passenger cars and multipurpose passenger vehicles for each 
manufacturer and the number of such vehicles manufactured by each 
manufacturer, a vehicle produced by more than one manufacturer shall be 
attributed to a single manufacturer as follows:
    (A) A vehicle that is imported shall be attributed to the importer;
    (B) A vehicle manufactured in the United States by more than one 
manufacturer, one of which also markets the vehicle, shall be 
attributed to the manufacturer that markets the vehicle.
    (C) A vehicle produced by more than one manufacturer shall be 
attributed to any one of the vehicle's manufacturers specified by an 
express written contract between the manufacturer so specified and the 
manufacturer to which the vehicle would otherwise be attributed under 
paragraph (b)(1)(ii) (A) or (B) of this section.
    (2) Components on the back doors of affected passenger cars and 
multipurpose passenger vehicles manufactured on and after September 1, 
1998 shall conform to all applicable requirements of this standard.
    (c) Components on folding doors, roll-up doors, doors that are 
designed to be easily attached to or detached from motor vehicles 
manufactured for operation without doors, and doors that are equipped 
with wheelchair lifts and that are linked to an alarm system consisting 
of either a flashing visible signal located in the driver's compartment 
or an alarm audible to the driver that is activated when the door is 
open, need not conform to this standard.
    (d) A particular latch or hinge assembly utilized as a test 
specimen need not meet further requirements after having been subjected 
to and having met any one of the requirements of S4 or S5.1 through 
S5.4.
* * * * *
    1. Part 590 is added to read as follows:

PART 590--BACK DOOR LATCH, HINGE, AND LOCK PHASE-IN REPORTING 
REQUIREMENTS

Sec.
590.1  Scope.
590.2  Purpose.
590.3  Applicability.
590.4  Definitions.
590.5  Response to inquiries.
590.6  Reporting Requirements.
590.7  Records.
590.8  Petition to extend period to file report.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117, and 30166; 
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.


Sec. 590.1   Scope.

    This part establishes requirements for manufacturers of passenger 
cars and multipurpose passenger vehicles with a gross vehicle weight 
rating of 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) or less to respond to NHTSA 
inquiries, to submit reports, and maintain records related to such 
reports, concerning the number of such vehicles that meet the back door 
latch, hinge, and lock requirements of Standard No. 206, Door locks and 
door retention components (49 CFR 571.206).


Sec. 590.2   Purpose.

    The purpose of these reporting requirements is to aid the NHTSA in 
determining whether a manufacturer of passenger cars and multipurpose 
passenger vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating of 4,536 
kilograms (10,000 pounds) or less has complied with the back door 
latch, hinge, and lock requirements of Standard No. 206.


Sec. 590.3  Applicability.

    This part applies to manufacturers of passenger cars and 
multipurpose passenger vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating of 
4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) or less. However, this part does not 
apply to those motor vehicles excluded from the requirements of 
Standard No. 206.


Sec. 590.4  Definitions.

    (a) All terms defined in 49 U.S.C. 30102 are used in their 
statutory meanings.
    (b) Gross vehicle weight rating, multipurpose passenger vehicle, 
and passenger car are used as defined in Sec. 571.3 of this chapter.
    (c) Production year means the 12-month period between September 1 
of one year and August 31 of the following year, inclusive.


Sec. 590.5  Response to inquiries.

    During the production year ending August 31, 1998, each 
manufacturer shall, upon request from the Office of Vehicle Safety 
Compliance, this agency, provide information regarding which vehicle 
makes/models are certified as complying with the provisions of S4 and 
S5, Standard No. 206.


Sec. 590.6  Reporting requirements.

    (a) General reporting requirements. Within 60 days after the end of 
the production year ending August 31, 1998, each manufacturer shall 
submit a report to NHTSA concerning the manufacturer's compliance with 
the latch, hinge, and lock requirements of this standard for the back 
doors of its passenger cars and multipurpose passenger vehicles with a 
gross vehicle weight rating of 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds or less) 
produced in that year. Each report shall:
    (1) Identify the manufacturer;
    (2) State the full name, title, and address of the official 
responsible for preparation of the report;
    (3) Identify the production year being reported on;
    (4) Contain a statement regarding whether or not the manufacturer 
complied with the back door latch, hinge, and lock requirements of this 
standard in the percentages specified in S4 for the period covered by 
the report and the basis for that statement;
    (5) Provide the information specified in Sec. 590.7;
    (6) Be written in the English language; and
    (7) Be submitted to: Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration, ATTN: NSA-01, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 
20590.
    (b) Report content.--(1) Basis for phase-in production goals. Each 
manufacturer shall provide the number of passenger cars and 
multipurpose passenger vehicles with a GVWR of 4,536 kilograms (10,000 
pounds) or less manufactured for sale in the United States for each of 
the two previous production years or, at the manufacturer's option, for 
the current

[[Page 39909]]

production year. A new manufacturer that has not previously 
manufactured passenger cars and multipurpose passenger vehicles with a 
GVWR of 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) or less for sale in the United 
States must report the number of such vehicles manufactured during the 
current production year.
    (2) Production. Each manufacturer shall report for the production 
year for which the report is filed the number of passenger cars and 
multipurpose passenger vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating of 
4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) or less that meet the back door latch, 
hinge, and lock requirements of this standard.


Sec. 590.7  Records.

    Each manufacturer shall maintain records of the vehicle 
identification number of each passenger car and multipurpose passenger 
vehicle for which information is reported in accordance with Sec. 590.6 
until December 31, 1999.


Sec. 590.8  Petition to extend period to file reports.

    A petition for extension of time to file a report required by S6.1 
must be received not later than 15 days before expiration of the time 
specified in Sec. 590.5(a). The petition must be submitted to: 
Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, ATTN: 
NSA-01, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. The filing of a 
petition does not automatically extend the time for filing a report. A 
petition will be granted only if the petitioner shows good cause for 
the extension and the extension is consistent with motor vehicle 
safety.

    Issued on July 23, 1996.
Ricardo Martinez,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 96-19354 Filed 7-30-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P