[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