[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 152 (Thursday, August 7, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 42469-42472]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-20726]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Parts 571 and 572

[Docket No. 74-14; Notice 120]
RIN 2127-AG39


Anthropomorphic Test Dummy; Occupant Crash Protection

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

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This document proposes modifications to the Hybrid III test 
dummy, which is specified by the agency for use in compliance testing 
under Standard No. 208, Occupant crash protection. The agency is 
proposing minor modifications to the test dummy's clothing and shoes 
and to the hole diameter in the femur flange in the pelvis bone flesh. 
The changes would facilitate compliance testing, while having 
practically no effect on Standard No. 208 test results.

DATES: Comments must be received by October 6, 1997.


[[Page 42470]]


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 non-legal issues: Mr. Stanley Backaitis, Office of 
Crashworthiness Standards, National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC 20590. 
Telephone: (202) 366-4912. Fax: (202) 366-4329.
    For legal issues: Mr. Stephen P. Wood, NCC-20, Rulemaking Division, 
Office of Chief Counsel, National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, D.C. 20590 (202-
366-2992).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Standard No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection, currently permits the 
use of either the Hybrid III test dummy or the older Hybrid II dummy in 
compliance testing. Effective September 1, 1997, however, the Standard 
will specify the use of only a single dummy, the Hybrid III dummy. The 
specifications for the Hybrid III dummy appear in subpart E of 49 CFR 
part 572.
    The Hybrid III dummy is the most human-like test dummy currently 
available and represents a number of advances over the earlier dummy. 
Among other things, the Hybrid III dummy has more human-like seated 
posture, head, neck, chest, and lumbar spine designs that meet 
biofidelic impact response requirements. It also has the capability to 
monitor almost four times as many injury-indicating parameters as 
compared with the Hybrid II dummy. NHTSA decided to specify exclusive 
use of the Hybrid III dummy in a final rule published in the Federal 
Register (58 FR 59189) on November 8, 1993.
    The Hybrid III dummy has seen widespread use in recent years. A 
number of manufacturers use that dummy for Standard No. 208 
certification purposes and in their research and developmental testing. 
NHTSA also uses the Hybrid III dummy in its New Car Assessment Program 
(NCAP). This program involves testing new cars and trucks by crashing 
them into a fixed collision barrier at 35 mph, which is five mph faster 
and 36 percent more severe than the crash test specified in Standard 
No. 208.

II. NHTSA Proposal

A. General

    NHTSA has decided to propose two modifications to the Hybrid III 
dummy. First, the agency is proposing to amend the specifications for 
the Hybrid III dummy's clothing and shoes. The purpose of this change 
is to make the requirements consistent with compliance testing 
practices. Second, the agency is proposing to specify a hole diameter 
in the pelvis bone flesh. The purpose of this change, which is 
consistent with a Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) Task Force 
recommendation, is to facilitate femur flange (shank portion) insertion 
during its attachment to the pelvis bone.
    NHTSA has tentatively concluded that the Hybrid III dummy 
specifications should be changed to incorporate these minor 
modifications. The agency believes that the proposed modifications 
would facilitate testing and would provide additional information from 
which a more realistic assessment of the effectiveness of occupant 
protection systems could be made, without effecting the dummy impact 
responses for either Standard No. 208 or NCAP testing.

B. Dummy Clothing and Shoes

    Sections S8.1.9.1 and S8.1.9.2 of Standard No. 208 specify that the 
test dummies are clothed in formfitting cotton stretch garments with 
midcalf length pants. The use of mid-calf pants was a carry-over from 
the General Motors original specifications for the Hybrid III dummy, 
but it is unclear why use of midcalf length pants were specified in 
compliance tests. The drawing (78051-293) states:

STYLE--PANTY--BELOW THE KNEE
SIZE--LARGE
COLOR--TEAROSE

MAY BE PURCHASED FROM:
SEMCO SALES,
623 CASS,
DETROIT, MICHIGAN 48226

1428 PL PANTIES OR EQUIVALENT

    First Technology Safety Systems contacted NHTSA in writing and the 
Motor Industry Research Association (MIRA of United Kingdom) orally 
about what it viewed as a conflict between the Hybrid III's 
specifications and the length of stretch pants actually used on the 
Hybrid III dummy in Standard No. 208 compliance testing. While 
paragraph S8.1.9.1 and S8.1.9.2 specify use of midcalf length pants, 
all compliance and most development laboratories use above-the-knee 
length pants.
    MIRA notified the agency that the pants, undershirt, and shoes are 
not available anymore from the supply sources referenced in the 
drawings of those items and users are having difficulty finding such 
articles in the market. MIRA requested that NHTSA clarify where such 
articles may be procured and what specifications should be used to 
ensure that the correct items are procured.
    Other dummy users indicated similar procurement difficulties and a 
preference to procure shoes and garments for the dummy in the open 
commercial market and not from one specific source. They stated that 
neither the specified articles nor the supply sources are available 
anymore and they would prefer to procure them under general product 
description guidelines.
    The agency agrees with these observations and finds that many 
commercially available articles would serve the intended purposes. 
Accordingly, NHTSA has decided to propose amending Standard No. 208 to 
allow the users to equip the Hybrid III dummies with commercially 
available shoes and cotton stretch light weight above-the-knee length 
panties and undershirt that fit the general description guidelines 
rather than having to procure them from a designated supplier. The 
agency notes that such a change would reflect what has become common 
procurement and use practice among manufacturers and NHTSA contractors 
performing compliance tests.
    In compliance tests, the panties are either cut off above the dummy 
knees or rolled up above the knees for two reasons. First, S11.5 of 
Standard No. 208 requires the legs to be positioned with a specified 
distance between the ``outboard knee clevis flange surfaces.'' To 
measure this distance, the panties must be rolled up above the knees 
for dummy positioning. Second, the dummy knees are often marked with 
chalk to determine where knee contact with the vehicle interior occurs 
during the test. It does not work well by chalking the dummy panties, 
as the panties often ride up the dummy's legs during the crash event. 
While this information is not required by Standard No. 208, it is 
helpful.
    NHTSA would remove drawings related to shoes and garments from the 
Hybrid III drawing set (78051-292, -293, -294, and -295) and 
incorporate appropriately worded modifications in Sec. 571.208 S8.1.9.1 
and S8.1.9.2 in which the shoes and garments to be used on the Hybrid 
III dummy are described, if today's proposal is adopted. NHTSA believes 
that this change would not affect the stringency of Standard No.

[[Page 42471]]

208's requirements or result in any difference in costs to 
manufacturers.

C. Access Hole Diameter in the Pelvis Flesh

    In response to a June 30, 1995 notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 
(60 FR 34213, Docket 74-14, Notice 96), the American Automobile 
Manufacturers Association (AAMA) stated that the access holes in the 
pelvis flesh should be enlarged to facilitate the insertion of the 
femur flange (shank portion) for their attachment to the pelvis bone. 
That organization stated that the holes' diameter has not been 
specified even though the holes are shown on the drawing. AAMA claimed 
that the pelvis flesh may be damaged when the femur flange is inserted 
through the existing two inch diameter holes (as scaled from the 
drawing). It recommended that the holes' diameter should be enlarged to 
2\5/16\ inches, a change it believed would accommodate insertion of the 
femur flange without tearing the flesh material. In support of its 
request, AAMA stated that the SAE Hybrid III Family and SAE Hip 
Calibration Task Forces have recognized the need to address this issue. 
AAMA stated that such a change would not significantly affect dummy 
kinematics or instrumentation readings.
    NHTSA has decided to propose specifying the diameter of the hole in 
the pelvis flesh as 2\5/16\ inches. The agency believes that the larger 
size would facilitate testing by making insertion of the femur shaft 
less cumbersome. The larger hole would permit easier slip-through of 
the section of the femur shaft containing the rubber bumper. The larger 
hole therefore may prevent an occasional hang up of the urethane 
bumper's edge against the inner edge of the hole in the pelvis flesh. 
As a result, the flesh with the enlarged hole would be less susceptible 
to damage during the femur flange insertion process. The agency 
anticipates that the loads on the femur shaft, because of a looser fit 
within as it compresses the pelvis flesh, would be no different whether 
the hole is 2 inches in diameter or 2\5/16\ inches in diameter. The 
agency requests comment about the effect of specifying a larger hole 
diameter.

D. Optional Use of Lumbar Spine Load Cell

    In response to the June 30, 1995 NPRM, GM submitted a petition 
requesting that the Hybrid III specifications in Part 572 Subpart E be 
amended to include, as an option, use of an available lower lumbar 
spine load cell assembly in place of the standard Hybrid III lumbar 
adapter. GM stated that the optional transducer would allow additional, 
useful information to be obtained during Standard No. 208 testing.
    NHTSA believes that it is unnecessary to amend Part 572 to allow 
manufacturers to use the lumbar spine load cell assembly. As explained 
below, a manufacturer may use the lumbar spine load cell assembly, at 
its discretion.
    NHTSA notes that a ``compliance test'' is a test conducted by or 
for the agency to determine if a vehicle meets the performance 
requirements of a Federal motor vehicle safety standard. In contrast, a 
``certification test'' is a test conducted by or for a manufacturer to 
assure itself that the vehicle will meet the performance requirements 
of the particular standard. A compliance test is conducted in 
accordance with the standard to facilitate a possible enforcement 
action. On the other hand, a manufacturer has discretion about how it 
conducts a certification test. It may, at its discretion, use a load 
cell. Accordingly, a manufacturer does not need the agency to approve 
use of the optional test cell since the manufacturer alone decides how 
to conduct its certification tests.

III. Effective Dates

    NHTSA is proposing to make the amendments effective 45 days after 
publication of a final rule. The agency is proposing such an early 
effective date because the modifications resulting from this proposal 
would only affect the drawings related to the dummy and would not 
affect compliance testing or certification.

IV. 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 ``non-significant'' under the Department of 
Transportation's regulatory policies and procedures. The proposed 
amendments would not require any vehicle design changes but would 
instead only require minor modifications in the test dummies used to 
evaluate a vehicle's compliance with Standard No. 208. The agency 
believes that the proposed clothing and pelvis modifications would not 
affect the cost of new dummies. Therefore, the impacts of the proposed 
amendments would be so minimal that a full regulatory evaluation is not 
required.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    NHTSA has considered the effects of this rulemaking action under 
the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) I hereby certify 
that the proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on 
a substantial number of small entities. The following is NHTSA's 
statement providing the factual basis for the certification (5 U.S.C. 
Sec. 605(b)).
    The proposed rule would affect passenger car and light truck 
manufacturers, few of which are small entities. As described above, 
there would be no significant economic impact on those vehicle 
manufacturers that are small entities.
    The Small Business Administration's regulations at 13 CFR Part 121 
define a small business, in part, as a business entity ``which operates 
primarily within the United States.'' (13 CFR Sec. 121.105(a)).
    SBA's size standards are organized according to Standard Industrial 
Classification Codes (SIC). SIC Code 3711 ``Motor Vehicles and 
Passenger Car Bodies'' has a small business size standard of 1,000 
employees or fewer.
    For passenger car and light truck manufacturers, NHTSA estimates 
there are at most five small manufacturers of passenger cars in the 
U.S. Because each manufacturer serves a niche market, often 
specializing in replicas of ``classic'' cars, production for each 
manufacturer is fewer than 100 cars per year. Thus, there are at most 
five hundred cars manufactured per year by U.S. small businesses.
    In contrast, in 1996, there are approximately nine large 
manufacturers manufacturing passenger cars and light trucks in the U.S. 
Total U.S. manufacturing production per year is approximately 15 to 15 
and a half million passenger cars and light trucks per year. NHTSA does 
not believe small businesses manufacture even 0.1 percent of total U.S. 
passenger car and light truck production per year.
    NHTSA also notes that the cost of new passenger cars or light 
trucks would not be affected by the proposed rule.

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.

[[Page 42472]]

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.
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 572

    Motor vehicle safety, Incorporation by reference.

    In consideration of the foregoing, it is proposed that 49 CFR Parts 
571 and 572 be amended as follows:

PART 571--[AMENDED]

    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 S8.1.8.2, as 
published at 58 FR 59191, November 8, 1993, with an effective date of 
September 1, 1997, to read as follows:


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

* * * * *
    S8.1.8.2  Each test dummy is clothed in a formfitting cotton 
stretch short sleeve shirt with above-the-elbow sleeves and above-the-
knee length pants. The weight of the shirt or pants shall not exceed 
0.25 pounds each. Each foot of the test dummy is equipped with a size 
11XW shoe which meets the configuration size, sole, and heel thickness 
specifications of MIL-S 13192 change ``P'' and whose weight is 1.25     
  # 0.2 pounds.
* * * * *

PART 572--[AMENDED]

    3. The authority citation for Part 572 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.

Subpart E--Hybrid III Test Dummy

    4. Section 572.31 would be amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1), 
(a)(3), (a)(4), and the table in paragraph (b), to read as follows:


Sec. 572.31  General description.

    (a) * * *
    (1) The Anthropomorphic Test Dummy Parts List, dated [a new date 
would be inserted], and containing 16 pages, and a Parts List Index, 
dated [a new date would be inserted], containing 8 pages.
* * * * *
    (3) A General Motors Drawing Package identified by GM Drawing No. 
78051-218, revision [a new revision letter would be inserted], and 
subordinate drawings.
    (4) Disassembly, Inspection, Assembly and Limbs Adjustment 
Procedures for the Hybrid III dummy, dated [a new date would be 
inserted].
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
[new revision letters would be inserted in the table for the drawings 
for leg assemblies]
* * * * *
    4. Section 572.34 would be amended by revising paragraph (b) to 
read as follows:


Sec. 572.34  Thorax.

* * * * *
    (b) When impacted by a test probe conforming to 572.36(a) at 22 fps 
+/-0.40 fps in accordance with paragraph (c) of this section, the 
thorax of a complete dummy assembly (78051-218, revision (a new 
revision letter would be inserted)), without shoes, shall resist with a 
force of 1242.5 pounds +/-82.5 pounds measured by the test probe and 
shall have a sternum displacement measured relative to spine of 2.68 
inches +/-0.18 inches. The internal hysteresis in each impact shall be 
more than 69% but less than 85%. The force measured is the product of 
pendulum mass and deceleration.
* * * * *

    Issued on August 1, 1997.
L. Robert Shelton,
Associate Administrator for Safety Performance Standards.
[FR Doc. 97-20726 Filed 8-6-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P