[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 93 (Wednesday, May 14, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 26425-26427]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-12640]



[[Page 26425]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. 74-14; Notice 117]
RIN 2127--AG80


Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Occupant Crash Protection

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

ACTION: Interim final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In March 1997, NHTSA temporarily amended the agency's occupant 
crash protection standard to ensure that vehicle manufacturers can 
quickly depower all air bags so that they inflate less aggressively. 
More specifically, the agency adopted an unbelted sled test protocol as 
a temporary alternative to the standard's full scale unbelted barrier 
crash test. NHTSA took this action to provide an immediate, but 
interim, solution to the problem of the fatalities and injuries that 
current air bag designs are causing in relatively low speed crashes to 
small, but growing numbers of children, and occasionally to adult 
occupants. This document makes a further amendment to the agency's 
occupant crash protection standard, so that certain exclusions from 
requirements in two other safety standards that are available for 
vehicles certified to the unbelted barrier test will also be available 
for vehicles certified to the alternative sled test. This action is 
necessary to prevent a delay in depowering. NHTSA also solicits 
comments on this amendment.

DATES: Effective date: The amendments made by this interim final rule 
are effective May 9, 1997.
    Comments: Comments must be received on or before July 14, 1997.

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:

    For information about air bags and related rulemakings: Visit the 
NHTSA web site at http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov and select ``AIR BAGS: 
Information about air bags.''
    For non-legal issues: Mr. Clarke Harper, Chief, Light Duty Vehicle 
Division, NPS-11, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 
Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. Telephone: (202) 366-2264. 
Fax: (202) 366-4329.
    For legal issues: J. Edward Glancy, Office of Chief Counsel, NCC-
20, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, 
SW., Washington, DC 20590. Telephone: (202) 366-2992. Fax: (202) 366-
3820.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 0n March 19, 1997, NHTSA published in the 
Federal Register (62 FR 12960) a final rule temporarily amending 
Standard No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection, to ensure that vehicle 
manufacturers can quickly depower all air bags so that they inflate 
less aggressively. More specifically, the agency adopted an unbelted 
sled test protocol, recommended by the American Automobile 
Manufacturers Association (AAMA), as a temporary alternative to 
Standard No. 208's full scale unbelted barrier crash test. The agency 
did not change the standard's full scale belted barrier crash test.
    NHTSA took this action to provide an immediate, but interim, 
solution to the problem of the fatalities and injuries that current air 
bag designs are causing in relatively low speed crashes to small, but 
growing numbers of children, and occasionally to adult occupants. The 
sled test alternative will be available for vehicles manufactured 
before September 1, 2001, by which time the agency expects the vehicle 
manufacturers to be able to adopt more advanced air bags that will 
address these problems.
    In early April 1997, AAMA advised the agency that its member 
companies had discovered that certain provisions in Standard No. 203, 
Impact protection for the driver from the steering control system, and 
Standard No. 209, Seat belt assemblies, could prevent or substantially 
delay depowering. In each case, the other standard specified an 
exclusion from certain requirements for vehicles certified to meet 
Standard No. 208's barrier crash test requirements. The exclusion would 
thus not be available for a vehicle which was certified to Standard No. 
208's alternative sled test requirement.
    NHTSA notes that neither it nor the commenters on the depowering 
proposal identified the issue of whether these exclusions in standards 
other than Standard No. 208 should be available for vehicles certified 
to the alternative sled test requirement. The agency did, however, make 
it clear that it believes it is critical to ensure that vehicle 
manufacturers can quickly depower all air bags so that they inflate 
less aggressively. NHTSA therefore does not want the vehicle 
manufacturers to face any unnecessary impediments to depowering.
    In that context, the agency has considered whether the exclusions 
in Standards No. 203 and 209 should be made available for vehicles 
certified to the alternative sled test requirement. The agency's 
analysis for each of the standards is set forth below.

Standard No. 203, Impact Protection for the Driver From the 
Steering Control System

     Standard No. 203 specifies requirements for steering control 
systems to minimize chest, neck, and facial injuries to the driver as a 
result of impact. The standard does not apply to ``vehicles that 
conform to the frontal barrier crash requirements (S5.1) of Standard 
No. 208 (49 CFR 571.208) by means of other than seat belt assemblies.''
    The agency adopted this exclusion in 1975, in response to a 
petition from General Motors (GM). GM had advised that in developing 
driver air bags, it found that the changes in the steering control 
system made conformity with Standard No. 203 difficult and in some 
cases impossible. GM petitioned the agency to exclude vehicles which 
meet the frontal barrier crash requirements of Standard No. 208 from 
Standard No. 203 on the grounds that compliance with the latter would 
be redundant and design restrictive in the development of air bags.
    In deciding to provide the requested exclusion, NHTSA stated that 
it had determined that the redundant protection offered by Standard No. 
203 is not justified where it directly interferes with the development 
of a more advanced, convenient and effective restraint system. 40 FR 
17992, April 24, 1975. In the notice of proposed rulemaking, the agency 
explained that the level of protection offered by Standard No. 208's 
frontal barrier crash test is at least equivalent to that of the 15-
mile-per-hour body impact of Standard No. 203. The agency also 
explained that Standard No. 208's barrier crash test requirements alone 
are designed to provide adequate protection to the driver from impact 
forces. NHTSA noted that in the case of an air bag, this protective 
level must be met by the uncushioned steering control system below the 
system's deployment level and by the air bag above the deployment 
level, at any speed up to 30 mph.
    NHTSA believes that the rationale for Standard No. 203's exclusion 
for vehicles certified to Standard No. 208's barrier test is also 
applicable to vehicles

[[Page 26426]]

certified to the alternative sled test. The concern about the need to 
meet Standard No. 203 interfering with the design of air bags would not 
differ depending on whether an air bag is depowered or not. Moreover, 
the need to meet Standard No. 203 would particularly interfere with 
depowering.
    It is NHTSA's understanding, based on its discussions with AAMA, 
that the vehicle manufacturers do not test their air-bag-equipped 
vehicles to Standard No. 203, based on the current exclusion. Thus, the 
manufacturers do not know whether their vehicles would pass Standard 
No. 203's requirements.
    In the absence of an exclusion for vehicles certified to the 
alternative sled test, the vehicle manufacturers would need to conduct 
significant testing to determine whether a vehicle could comply with 
Standard No. 203. To the extent that a vehicle could not comply, the 
manufacturer would then need to determine whether it was possible to 
make design changes that would result in compliance. All of this would 
result in significant delays to depowering.
    NHTSA also believes that the protection specified by Standard No. 
203 is redundant to that offered by depowered air bags certified to the 
alternative sled test. The agency notes that the alternative sled test 
addresses the same safety problems as the full scale barrier test.
    In the depowering rulemaking, the agency recognized that a full 
scale barrier test does offer a number of advantages over a sled test. 
However, the agency decided to allow the sled test as a temporary 
measure given the need to provide manufacturers with maximum 
flexibility to respond rapidly to the risk posed by air bag activation 
in low speed crashes. See 62 FR 12965-66, March 19, 1997.
    The agency believes that this same consideration leads to applying 
the Standard No. 203 exclusion to vehicles certified to the alternative 
sled test, even if the degree of redundancy is somewhat less than that 
afforded by the barrier test requirement. NHTSA notes that the sled 
test requirement need only be met at a single change in velocity, 
rather than at all speeds up to 30 mph. However, the agency believes 
that a depowered air bag will provide protection at speeds above the 
deployment level, and does not believe manufacturers will reduce the 
protection currently being offered by steering control systems at 
speeds below the deployment level.

Standard No. 209, Seat Belt Assemblies

    One of the performance requirements specified by Standard No. 209 
limits the amount that the webbing of a belt assembly is permitted to 
extend or elongate when subjected to certain forces. This requirement 
does not apply to seat belt assemblies that include a load limiter and 
that are installed at designated seating positions subject to the 
requirements of S5.1 of Standard No. 208.
    This exclusion had its origin in a petition for rulemaking 
submitted by Mercedes-Benz (Mercedes). That company petitioned the 
agency to exclude from the elongation requirement seat belt assemblies 
installed in conjunction with air bags.
    Mercedes was considering the use of a belt system that incorporates 
a load-limiting device. A load-limiter is a seat belt assembly 
component or feature that controls tension on the seat belt to modulate 
the forces that are imparted to occupants restrained by the belt 
assembly during a crash. These load-limiting systems are intended to 
reduce head and upper torso injuries through increased energy 
management.
    Mercedes indicated that the webbing in its belt system would 
elongate beyond the limits that were specified in Standard No. 209. 
However, Mercedes argued that this type of belt system should be 
allowed in vehicles equipped with air bags since the two systems used 
in conjunction with one another can be designed to achieve the maximum 
reduction in head injuries and upper torso injuries.
    NHTSA adopted the exclusion requested by Mercedes in 1981. The 
agency limited the exclusion to vehicles equipped with automatic 
restraints since there were then no dynamic performance requirements or 
injury criteria for manual belt systems used alone. See 46 FR 2618-19, 
January 12, 1981. Later, however, after it established dynamic testing 
requirements for manual safety belt systems in passenger cars and light 
trucks, the agency extended this exclusion to permit the use of load 
limiters on all safety belts installed at seating positions subject to 
dynamic testing. See 56 FR 15295, April 16, 1991.
    With respect to whether this exclusion should apply to vehicles 
certified to the alternative sled test, the key point is that these 
vehicles will continue to have to be certified to Standard No. 208's 
full scale belted barrier crash test. Thus, safety belts will continue 
to be subject to the same dynamic performance requirements as before 
the depowering final rule was issued. The agency therefore believes 
there is no reason why this exclusion should not be available for 
vehicles certified to the alternative sled test, which addresses 
unbelted, rather than belted, performance.
    NHTSA finds that the issuance of this interim final rule without 
prior opportunity for comment is necessary in view of the fact that 
depowering would be significantly delayed if the standard were not 
amended. For the same reason, the agency finds for good cause that it 
is in the public interest to establish an immediate effective date for 
this amendment. The amendment imposes no new requirements but instead 
provides additional flexibility to manufacturers by removing a design 
restriction.
    NHTSA is requesting comments on this amendment. Because there has 
not been a prior opportunity for comment, the agency is limiting 
application of this interim final rule to vehicles manufactured before 
September 1, 1998. However, NHTSA contemplates making the amendment 
apply for the same duration as the depowering amendment, i.e., for 
vehicles manufactured before September 1, 2001. The agency will 
announce a final decision as soon as possible after the comment closing 
date.

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 not reviewed under E.O. 
12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review.'' This action has been 
determined to be ``nonsignificant'' under the Department of 
Transportation's regulatory policies and procedures. The amendment does 
not impose any new requirements but simply ensures that the vehicle 
manufacturers do not face previously unidentified impediments in 
depowering air bags. The agency concludes that the impacts of the 
amendment are so minimal that a full regulatory evaluation is not 
required. Readers who are interested in the costs and benefits of 
depowering are referred to the agency's regulatory evaluation for that 
rulemaking action, which remains valid.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    NHTSA has also considered the impacts of this final rule under the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act. I hereby certify that this rule does not 
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. The amendment does not impose any new requirements but simply 
ensures that the vehicle manufacturers do not

[[Page 26427]]

face previously unidentified impediments in depowering air bags. 
Further, since no price increases are associated with the rule, small 
organizations and small governmental units are not to be affected in 
their capacity as purchasers of vehicles.

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 rule.

D. National Environmental Policy Act

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

E. Executive Order 12612 (Federalism)

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

F. Civil Justice Reform

    This rule does 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.

Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments on this document. 
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 
the 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 NHTSA 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 by NHTSA before the close of business on the 
comment closing date indicated above 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 this rulemaking action will be 
considered as suggestions for further rulemaking action. Comments on 
the document 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 recommends 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, Incorporation by reference, Motor vehicle safety, Motor 
vehicles, Rubber and rubber products, Tires.

    In consideration of the foregoing, 49 CFR part 571 is amended as 
follows:

PART 571--FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS

    1. The authority citation for part 571 of title 49 continues 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 is amended by revising S3 to read as follows:


Sec. 571.208  Standard No. 208; Occupant crash protection.

* * * * *
    S3. Application. This standard applies to passenger cars, 
multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, and buses. In addition, S9, 
Pressure vessels and explosive devices, applies to vessels designed to 
contain a pressurized fluid or gas, and to explosive devices, for use 
in the above types of motor vehicles as part of a system designed to 
provide protection to occupants in the event of a crash. 
Notwithstanding any language to the contrary, any vehicle manufactured 
after March 19, 1997 and before September 1, 2001 that is subject to a 
dynamic crash test requirement conducted with unbelted dummies may meet 
the requirements specified in S13 instead of the applicable unbelted 
requirement. For vehicles manufactured before September 1, 1998, 
compliance with S13 shall, for purposes of Standards No. 203 and 209, 
be deemed as compliance with the unbelted frontal barrier requirements 
of S5.1 of this section.
* * * * *
    Issued on: May 8, 1997.
Ricardo Martinez,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 97-12640 Filed 5-9-97; 2:01 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P