[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 248 (Monday, December 28, 1998)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 71390-71396]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-34249]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. NHTSA-98-4934]
RIN 2127--AH24


Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Occupant Crash Protection

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

ACTION: Final rule, correcting amendment.

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

SUMMARY: This document amends a final rule that was published in March 
1997 that expedites the depowering of air bags. This correcting 
amendment clarifies that: The ``corridor'' defining the bounds of 
permissible sled acceleration will be shifted to contain the time at 
which the sled acceleration first reaches 0.5 g, to account for ``lag'' 
in the components of the sled system. This will make the sled test 
easier to conduct because early variations in sled acceleration lag 
will not in themselves cause the sled pulse to be outside the required 
acceleration corridor. While the neck injury criteria for flexion 
bending moment and extension bending moment are intended to be measured 
by the six-axis load cell, located in the dummy head, the values 
measured at that point will be mathematically corrected to reflect the 
corresponding values at the occipital condyle, a lower point near the 
base of the dummy's skull. Prior to testing, the engine, transmissions, 
axles, exhaust, vehicle frame, and vehicle body must be rigidly secured 
to the vehicle and/or the sled. Fluids, batteries and unsecured 
components will be removed. These steps will prevent spikes in the 
acceleration curve during the test that would result from these 
components moving.

DATES: Effective Date: The amendments made to this final rule are 
effective December 28, 1998.
    Petitions: Petitions for reconsideration must be received by 
February 11, 1999.

ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration should refer to the docket 
number of this rule and be submitted to: Administrator, National 
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW, 
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information about air bags and 
related rulemaking: Visit the NHTSA web site at http://
www.nhtsa.dot.gov and click on the icon ``Air Bag Page''.
    For technical issues: Mr. John Lee, Office of Safety Performance 
Standards, NPS-10, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 
Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC 20590. Telephone (202) 366-4924. 
Fax: (202) 493-2739.
    For legal issues: Mr. Paul Atelsek, 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:

I. Background

    On March 19, 1997, NHTSA published a final rule amending Federal 
Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 208, ``Occupant Crash Protection'' to 
temporarily permit a supplemental test procedure for air bag restraint 
systems (62 FR 12960-12975). The intent of the optional test procedure, 
known as the sled test, was to enable vehicle manufacturers to expedite 
their efforts to depower the air bags in their vehicles by 20 to 35 
percent. The agency estimated that this amount of depowering would 
reduce the risk of injury and death to out-of-position child 
passengers, and small statured drivers and passengers.
    In the final rule, the agency added a new section to Federal Motor 
Vehicle Safety Standard 208, ``Occupant Crash Protection,'' S13, 
``Alternative unbelted test for vehicles manufactured before September 
1, 2001.'' This new optional compliance test can be used as a 
substitute for the 30 mile-per-hour unbelted barrier test for air bag-
equipped vehicles. The new sled test procedure involved mounting a full 
(i.e., completed) vehicle equipped with two unbelted 50th percentile 
adult male Hybrid III dummies on a sled. The sled is accelerated very 
rapidly backwards (relative to the direction that the occupants would 
be facing) by a piston mounted in front of the sled, thus simulating 
the deceleration that would be experienced in a 30 mph crash. The 
standard specifies the ranges within which the level of acceleration 
must fall at stated time intervals. This is referred to as the ``sled 
pulse.'' The standard specifies ranges, instead of an exact single 
level of acceleration since defining an exact sled pulse is 
impracticable due to vehicle and equipment variations. The ranges of 
acceleration at each moment of the test collectively define a corridor 
within which the actual test acceleration must fall. The air bags are 
triggered 20 ms after the sled acceleration reaches 0.5 g. The standard 
also specifies neck injury criteria for the dummies.
    When the final rule was issued, neither the agency nor the 
automotive industry had much experience with full-vehicle sled testing. 
Therefore, some of the test conditions and definitions used in the 
procedure were only partially defined. When manufacturers began to 
follow the optional sled test procedure, they encountered problems. 
Recently, several manufacturers approached the agency requesting 
clarifications of technical issues involving the final rule. The 
following is a discussion of these technical issues.

II. Issues

    Two manufacturers and a vehicle test laboratory have approached the 
agency with specific questions concerning the

[[Page 71391]]

sled test. In April, Morton International Automotive Safety Products 
(Morton) approached the agency with questions concerning the test setup 
and the neck injury criteria. On June 10, 1997, Honda visited NHTSA and 
presented specific concerns similar to the Morton questions, dealing 
with the test setup and the neck injury measurement. Honda has also 
submitted a request for interpretation for three of their issues, in a 
letter dated June 30, 1997. On September 12, 1997, the Motor Industry 
Research Association (MIRA) sent NHTSA a letter reporting a problem 
with the definition of ``time zero.'' The following is a discussion of 
these issues.

1. Practicality of Sled Testing a Full Vehicle

    Morton and Honda believe that a full vehicle may exceed the system 
size and weight capacity of a smaller sled system powered by a 12-inch 
piston. Sled systems are classified by the size of the propulsion 
system. For example, they are referred to as a 12-inch or a 24-inch 
diameter piston. The larger a piston's diameter, the more weight the 
sled can handle without exceeding its design parameters. The agency's 
Vehicle Research and Test Center uses the Transportation Research 
Center (TRC) sled, which is equipped with a 24-inch piston. Most other 
sled facilities are equipped with a 12-inch piston. Morton and Honda 
suggested that the weight of a vehicle plus a 2000-pound carriage may 
exceed the 7,000 pound capacity of some 12-inch sled systems.
    The agency considered this issue in the final rule (at 62 FR 
12971):

    AAMA, Subaru, and Volvo stated that manufacturers typically 
conduct partial vehicle tests. Nevertheless, AAMA stated that such 
sled tests could be conducted on either the full vehicle or partial 
vehicle. Similarly, Ford stated that ``audit testing with an entire 
vehicle on a sled would be acceptable, even though vehicle 
manufacturers typically test with only the passenger compartment or 
the front portion of the passenger compartment.'' AVS [Technologies] 
and Morton stated that it is impractical and infeasible to test the 
entire vehicle on the sled given a vehicle's weight and size.
    * * *
    The agency's Vehicle Research Test Center (VRTC) has analyzed 
the size and power of the equipment used to conduct sled tests. 
Based on the available information, the agency believes that the 
current-design sled at Transportation Research Center (TRC) can be 
used to evaluate a full vehicle's response to a 125 ms pulse. 
Memoranda in the docket summarize discussions between agency and 
General Motors personnel indicating that the readily available 12 
inch diameter cylinder sled is capable of producing the required 
acceleration pulse for any complete vehicle subject to Standard No. 
208.

    The agency still does not have specific evidence to indicate that a 
full range of vehicle sizes cannot be tested on the smaller test sleds. 
Neither Morton nor Honda reported that the full-vehicle test would 
exceed the power requirement or the safety parameters of their sleds.
    The agency notes that manufacturers can reduce the weight of the 
vehicles in their tests if they choose, because only the agency 
compliance tests are required to use the full vehicle. Vehicle 
manufacturers are sufficiently familiar with their vehicles to be able 
to remove vehicle components during certification testing that would 
not contribute to the vehicle structure, and therefore would not affect 
the restraint system performance during NHTSA's compliance test. For 
example, the agency does not believe that the engine block head 
contributes to the performance of the restraint system during the sled 
test. To stay within the corridor, NHTSA will normally have to secure 
the engine. In addition, S13.4 specifies that NHTSA will remove the 
tires and wheels prior to the sled test. Removing these components 
could reduce the mass of the test vehicle, if the manufacturers so 
chose.
    Both Morton and Honda stated that the excessive weight would make 
it difficult or impossible for their facilities to achieve the 
specified pulse within the specified corridor. This final rule 
clarifies the definition of ``Time-Zero,'' to make it easier for test 
facilities to achieve the specified pulse.
    Morton and Honda also raised the issue of whether the lengths of 
some vehicles would exceed the 12-foot-sled length. Apparently, some 
facilities are designed with the front of the sled directly in contact 
with a wall. This is sufficient when testing partial vehicles, but a 
full vehicle may hang over the front of the sled, and interfere with 
the sled contacting the propulsion system. The agency believes any test 
laboratory could overcome this problem by adding an extension either to 
the front of the sled or to the end of the piston driving the sled.

2. Securing the Vehicle Parts

    To ensure that the specified sled pulse is achieved, the vehicle 
and its components must accelerate as a rigid unit. Both Morton and 
Honda asked whether they could secure the transmission and engine to 
the frame of the vehicle. Honda provided comparative sled pulse plots 
showing the variation, including an acceleration trace spike, caused by 
the ``floating'' components.
    The agency agrees that it is appropriate to secure masses that are 
not rigidly secured prior to the sled test. As Honda pointed out, large 
parts that shift during a test will cause sled acceleration trace 
variations and repeatability problems. Shifting masses will cause 
vibrations and variations in the acceleration traces. These vibrations 
will appear as ``blips'' in the traces. They may even be significant 
enough to go outside of the test corridor. In one of the agency's 
research sled tests, the agency observed shifting of the vehicle body.
    This conclusion about the appropriateness of securing masses that 
are likely to shift during the test was evident in the final rule, in 
which the agency noted in response to similar concerns from Ford that 
``if necessary, the frame of a vehicle will be rigidly attached to the 
vehicle body during testing such that the specified pulse is registered 
on the vehicle body.'' This conclusion was reflected in the agency 
compliance test procedure (TP-208S-01, Laboratory Test Procedure for 
FMVSS 208, Occupant Crash Protection Sled Test) which includes 
instructions for securing ``the engine, transmission, axles, and 
exhaust to either the vehicle body, vehicle frame, interface frame or 
sled. If the vehicle has a frame, rigidly attach the body to the frame. 
If the vehicle is not attached directly to the sled, rigidly attach the 
vehicle/interface frame unit to the sled.''
    However, the agency now agrees that the specification of rigid 
securement should have been reflected in the standard itself, rather 
than just in the compliance test procedure. Therefore, NHTSA is adding 
a provision to the standard on vehicle securing. The agency emphasizes 
that the sole objective of securing the vehicle components, and of 
removing some unsecured components, is to produce a crash pulse within 
the corridor. Which components are secured or removed and how they are 
secured is within NHTSA's discretion. Any crash pulse within the 
corridor is sufficient evidence that the test procedures were followed 
and that the vehicle's components were rigidly secured and that 
shifting of masses was adequately addressed.
    Morton had suggested cutting the vehicle at the firewall and 
welding it to a bulkhead-type fixture. The agency intended no such 
radical alteration of the vehicle structure, and will not do this in 
its compliance tests. There is no clear way of defining this 
alteration. Further, the alteration may change the performance of the 
vehicle restraint system. The agency notes again that the

[[Page 71392]]

vehicle manufacturer has the option of using data from certification 
testing which deviates from NHTSA's compliance test procedure in the 
way Morton suggests. However, in this case, the manufacturer may want 
to have a larger margin of compliance to compensate for the greater 
deviation from the test procedures.

3. Potential Residual Test-Buck Damage Resulting From ``Pulse Tuning''

    In determining whether the sled pulse will stay within the 
specified pulse corridor, laboratories have been conducting pre-test 
sled runs. These ``dry runs'' may potentially result in residual 
damage, such as roof deformation, that would affect test repeatability. 
Morton requested permission to remove all non-structural underbody 
components, the rear-end suspension assembly, and the engine, and then 
add an L-shaped mounting surface and secure the structural stability of 
the frame, including the roof line.
    The agency does not intend to conduct pre-runs or preliminary sled 
tests during compliance tests. The agency is concerned with the 
repeatability of the results of a test using a vehicle that has already 
been exposed to the effects of a pre-run or preliminary sled test. 
Therefore, NHTSA will not base any enforcement action on the failure of 
a vehicle to meet the sled test requirements unless that vehicle failed 
its initial test.
    As to the request by Morton to permit vehicle modifications to 
ensure repeatability in multiple tests, a change in the test procedure 
is not necessary to enable Morton to make those changes. While Morton 
can deviate from the specified test procedure, vehicle modifications 
such as the removal of structural components may lead to test setup 
confusion and test variability. Since the agency does not plan to make 
such modifications, it does not need to amend the standard to permit 
the agency to make them.

4. Where to Measure for Neck Injury Criteria

    Paragraph S13.2 of the final rule specifies the neck moments be 
``measured with the six axis load cell.'' Morton and Honda pointed out 
that the final rule's neck measurement procedure and the procedure 
under S572.33 (the neck section in Part 572, Anthropomorphic Test 
Devices, or test dummies) may appear to differ. In 572.33, the neck 
moments are defined at the occipital condyle (Moment=My-0.058  x  Fe). 
(The occipital condyle is located on the skull where it meets the first 
vertebra, instead of higher up where the load cell is located.) Morton 
and Honda believe the proper procedure should have been the one 
specified in S572.33.
    Honda and Morton are correct. Although the measurement is indeed 
made with the load cell, the value ultimately calculated is the moment 
at the occipital condyle, instead of the moment at the load cell. The 
NPRM, and the source document referenced in the NPRM (AGARD Conference 
Proceedings of NATO, July 1996, titled ``Anthropomorphic Dummies for 
Crash and Escape Systems'') base the criteria for the flexion bending 
moment and the extension bending moment on the values measured by the 
load cell as corrected to represent the moment at the dummy's occipital 
condyle. However, there was no mention of this correction in the final 
rule. Biomechanical references 1 deal with the measurement 
at the occipital condyle, not at the transducer, as the appropriate 
location when referring to neck-head movement on a dummy. Additionally, 
the location of the transducer may shift, depending on the dummy 
design, and may be difficult to define. An additional indication of the 
agency's intention was the subsequent May 20, 1997 Interim Final Rule 
(62 FR 27511), which upgraded the neck instrumentation on the Hybrid 
III dummy. It specified the conversion calculation in S572.31(a)(3) for 
adjusting the neck moment from the point of measurement within the 
transducer to the occipital condyle. Therefore, there is ample evidence 
that the neck moment injury criteria value was intended to be the value 
at the occipital condyle, not at the transducer. The rule is being 
amended to specify this explicitly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ ``To assess the fore-and-aft bending biofidelity of the neck 
* * *. The resulting moment about the occipital condylar axis versus 
the head to pendulum angle must lie within the prescribed 
corridor.'' Advisory Group for Aerospace Research and Development 
(AGARD) Advisory Report 330, Anthropomorphic Dummies for Crash and 
Escape System Testing, AGARD-AR-330, North Atlantic Treaty 
Organization.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

5. Definition of Time Zero

    Honda and MIRA stated that the final rule was unclear regarding the 
definition of the Time-Zero (T-0, or start) for the actual sled test. 
They asked whether Time-Zero in Figure 6 of the final rule sled pulse 
represents (a) the instant when the sled system in activated, or (b) 
the instant when the sled reaches 0.5 g's. They believe there are 
problems in either case. If T-0 is the time when the sled is activated, 
some sleds will have extreme difficulty fitting in the corridor. If T-0 
is the point at which the sled reaches 0.5 g's, initial noise in the 
acceleration curve as the sled begins moving makes measurement 
difficult. (This point was raised above, in issue 1). Some laboratories 
reportedly use 1.0 g's as a timing point, with adjustments back to the 
approximate 0.5 g point.
    For the purposes of discussion, four start times could conceivably 
be used: (1) T-0Activation, the moment the sled electronics 
are activated, (2) T-0Movement, when the sled begins moving, 
which also represents the start of the test calculating a Delta V 
value, (3) T-0Test, which represents the start of the test 
for fitting the pulse corridor to the acceleration curve, and (4) T-
0Air-bag, start of timing for the air bag deployment count-
down.
    The time when the sled system is activated, T-
0Activation, is not relevant to the performance criteria of 
the sled pulse. When the system is activated, there is a lag time until 
the system actually starts moving. This response lag is due to the fact 
that the electrical and mechanical systems of the sled do not react 
instantaneously.
    Figure 6 of the March 19 final rule indicates that the test begins 
when the sled actually starts to move, at 0.0 g acceleration, but that 
too is impractical. In its June 10 presentation, Honda provided initial 
sled pulse traces for both the VRTC 24-inch piston and a 12-inch 
piston. These traces indicated that the 24-inch cylinder sled took 18.1 
milliseconds to achieve 0.5 g's, yet the corridor ends at the 0.5 g's 
level at 6.5625 ms. Therefore, even the faster acceleration of the 24-
inch sled would be outside the corridor, if T-0Test started 
at 0.0 g acceleration, when the sled starts to move. It appears that 
even after the sled begins moving (although it moves only the width of 
a pencil line), the time lag before it begins significant acceleration 
is so great that no existing sled can produce an acceleration curve 
that stays within the corridor. This time lag has no counterpart in 
rigid barrier vehicle crash tests because the deceleration is 
instantaneous when the vehicle hits the barrier. The figure in the 
final rule portrayed unrealistically rapid increases in acceleration 
from the start of movement.
    The intent of the sled pulse corridor is to ensure a specific 
change of acceleration (g) with respect to time. The important portion 
of the curve for determining fit within the corridor is not the small 
acceleration that occurs while the sled systems fully charge, but the 
rapid acceleration that occurs afterward. The final rule assumed that 
manufacturers would be able to produce

[[Page 71393]]

sled test acceleration curves within the corridor.
    To carry out this intent, it makes sense to shift the corridor with 
respect to time to align it with the true sled pulse, rather than 
having the sled pulse aligned with the corridor. As long as the shape 
of the corridor is not changed, the crash pulse will be no different 
from the standpoint of designing safe air bags. It will just be easier 
to run the test, without affecting the outcome. To accomplish the 
process of fitting the corridor to the sled pulse, T-
0Test should be determined by a specific acceleration level 
for the sled which corresponds to a time at which the most rapid 
acceleration begins, at about 0.5 g's. Computationally shifting the 
corridor to align with the curve is far easier than trying to 
mechanically get the sled pulse curve to begin rapid acceleration 
within the corridor. Starting at 0.5 g will also eliminate much of the 
problem mentioned above in issue 1 concerning noise during the earliest 
part of the test acceleration.
    Therefore, S13.1 and Figure 6 are being amended to reflect that the 
sled test start time for purposes of meeting the requirement of being 
in the corridor, T-0Test, is when the sled achieves 0.5 g's. 
Many test laboratories use T-0Test equal to a specific 
acceleration (g) level, often 0.5 g's. The vehicle will still have to 
achieve the specified range of acceleration during the test. Similarly, 
the time at which the air bag fires is only relevant if it relates to 
when the sled starts accelerating at a significant rate, such as 0.5 
g's. Therefore, the air bag deployment timing should also be timed from 
the time at which the sled reaches 0.5 g acceleration. T-
0Test and T-0Air-bag coincide.

6. Delta V Requirement

    Honda asks whether the agency had intended to require the sled to 
achieve a velocity of 28 to 30 miles per hour, or just to stay in the 
corridor. In other words, it asks whether the final velocity specified 
in S13.1 and Figure 6 of the final rule is a guideline or a 
requirement. If the final velocity is a requirement, then Honda 
believes it is very difficult to consistently stay in the corridor. It 
also asks whether the velocity may be calculated by integrating the 
acceleration data or must the actual velocities be measured with a 
speed device.
    The agency clearly intended the specifications for the final 
velocity to be included in the standard as a requirement during agency 
compliance testing. The change in velocity is specified in S13.1 and in 
Figure 6 of the final rule as Delta V=30 (+0, -2 ) miles per hour, or 
between 28 and 30 mph. As discussed in the preceding section, the 
agency has made a correction that allows the pulse corridor to be moved 
to fit the sled pulse. This should assist the test laboratories in 
keeping within this sled pulse corridor.
    The agency has not specified a method of determining the Delta V. 
TRC measures the velocity directly. However, laboratories without the 
capability to directly measure velocity may mathematically calculate 
the change in velocity by integrating the entire sled pulse starting 
from zero acceleration (T-0Movement). As in the March 19th 
final rule, the agency does not recommend a specific procedure.
    The agency notes that, even though the regulation is a 
specification of the parameters to be used in agency compliance tests, 
there is nothing to preclude vehicle manufacturers from actually 
exceeding the change in velocity specified in the standard. The agency 
would consider a test at a higher-than-required Delta V to be an 
acceptable basis for certification.

7. Signal Problems, Filtering

    Honda reports that it is hard for some laboratories to determine 
the exact 0.5 g level, because of test startup noise. Probably the most 
significant problem is that the air bag initiation time is determined 
by adding 20 milliseconds (+/-2 ms) after the sled achieves 0.5 g 
acceleration. If the instrumentation is incapable of discerning the 
point at which 0.5 g acceleration is reached, the air bag activation 
time may be incorrect. Honda pointed out that much of the noise in the 
instrumentation occurs only at the beginning of the test, and that the 
problem immediately clears up. Honda reports that some laboratories are 
timing the air bag activation from 1.0 g, by applying a mathematical 
time conversion factor to account for the time back to the approximate 
0.5 g point, based on experience with the equipment.
    NHTSA will follow the Standard No. 208 test requirements during 
compliance testing. However, manufacturers may use any method during 
testing that gives them confidence enough to assure that the vehicle 
will comply when tested by the agency. No clarification of the rule is 
necessary.

8. Loading Requirements and Test Attitude

    Honda asks whether the loaded requirement should be applied to the 
actual sled test, or to be used just prior to the test to determine the 
vehicle attitude.
    The load requirement specified in S8.1 of FMVSS 208, as it applies 
to the sled test, is only specified for pre-test loading, to determine 
the vehicle attitude. The vehicle attitude is then used for defining 
the sled-mounting attitude. As discussed in Issues 1 and 2, the sled 
configuration may be slightly modified by removing fluids, battery, and 
unsecured weight, and securing loose parts, but these modifications 
will not affect the test attitude.

III. Effective Date

    The agency finds that there is good cause to make this rule 
effective immediately. These amendments do not impose any new 
requirements. Instead, they relieve some of the testing burden imposed 
on the manufacturers by the March 19, 1997 final rule. It will be 
easier for manufacturers to test by aligning the corridor with the sled 
pulse, as specified in these amendments. Also, the smooth sled pulse 
that will result from rigidly securing the engine, transmissions, 
axles, exhaust, vehicle frame, and vehicle body and removing the 
fluids, batteries and unsecured components will make testing easier. A 
delayed effective date would impose a needless compliance burden on the 
vehicle manufacturing industry and would provide no safety benefits.

IV. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    NHTSA has considered the impact of this correcting amendment under 
Executive Order 12866 and the Department of Transportation's regulatory 
policies and procedures. This rulemaking document was not reviewed by 
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under E.O. 12866, 
``Regulatory Planning and Review.'' This document amends an action that 
was determined to be ``significant'' under the Department of 
Transportation's regulatory policies and procedures because of the 
degree of public interest in this subject. However, today's rule simply 
clarifies the existing requirements and makes the test procedures 
easier to perform. This correcting amendment does not alter the costs 
or benefits of that rule significantly. It merely clarifies the 
intended application of the rule and provides guidance regarding test 
procedures. Therefore, a regulatory analysis is not warranted.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    NHTSA has considered the effects of this rulemaking action under 
the

[[Page 71394]]

Regulatory Flexibility Act. I hereby certify that this rule will not 
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. As explained above, this rule will not have an economic 
impact on any manufacturer or other entity, except for a small 
beneficial impact in promoting ease of testing.
    This correcting amendment slightly increases manufacturer 
flexibility in testing. Most of the changes are interpretations and 
clarifications of the existing language, not changes in requirements 
that impose new burdens. The changes in requirements are designed to 
make vehicles with air bags easier for manufacturers to test their 
vehicles, not to change the vehicle performance. As a result, some 
businesses that otherwise would have had to buy sophisticated testing 
equipment will not need to do so. Therefore, there will be no new 
significant impact on small businesses.

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.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-
511), there are no requirements for information collection associated 
with this final rule.

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4) requires 
agencies to prepare a written assessment of the costs, benefits and 
other effects of proposed or final rules that include a Federal mandate 
likely to result in the expenditure by State, local or tribal 
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of more than 
$100 million annually. This rule does not meet the definition of a 
Federal mandate, because it adds no additional cost to the completely 
permissive final rule which it is clarifying.

Civil Justice Reform

    This final rule has no 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.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 595

    Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Motor vehicles.
    In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA amends 49 CFR part 571 as 
follows:
    1. The authority citation for part 571 continues to read as 
follows:

PART 571--FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117, 30122 and 30166; 
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.

    2. Section 571.208 is amended by replacing the 8th sentence of 
Sec. 13.1 with the four sentences shown below, by revising Sec. 13.2, 
and by adding Sec. 13.5 to read as follows:
* * * * *


Sec. 571.208  Occupant Crash Protection.

* * * * *
    Sec. 13.1. Instrumentation Impact Test--Part 1--Electronic 
Instrumentation. * * * The total change in velocity (Delta V) shall be 
determined from the integration of the entire acceleration versus time 
curve from the sled. The Delta V shall include the period of time in 
which the sled is accelerating to 0.5 g. All points on the acceleration 
versus time curve at and beyond 0.5 g must be contained within or on 
the corridor defined in Figure 6. The agency may shift the curve with 
respect to time in order to fit the curve within the corridor. * * *
    Sec. 13.2 Neck injury criteria. A vehicle certified to this 
alternative test requirement shall, in addition to meeting the criteria 
specified in Sec. 13.1, meet the following injury criteria for the 
neck, measured with the six axis load cell (ref. Denton drawing C-1709) 
that is mounted between the bottom of the skull and the top of the neck 
as shown in Drawing 78051-218, in the unbelted sled test:
    (a) Flexion Bending Moment (calculated at the occipital condyle)--
190 Nm. SAE Class 600.
    (b) Extension Bending Moment (calculated at the occipital 
condyle)--57 Nm. SAE Class 600.
* * * * *
    Sec. 13.5. Vehicle Securing. The engine, transmissions, axles, 
exhaust, vehicle frame, and vehicle body may be rigidly secured to the 
vehicle and/or the sled, and fluids, batteries and unsecured components 
may be removed, in order to assure that all points on the crash pulse 
curve are within the corridor defined in Figure 6.
* * * * *
    3. Figure 6 is revised to appear as follows:

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P

[[Page 71395]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28DE98.000




[[Page 71396]]


    Issued on: December 18, 1998.
Ricardo Martinez,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 98-34249 Filed 12-24-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-C