[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