[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 160 (Friday, August 17, 2001)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43113-43121]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-20831]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. NHTSA-01-10381]
RIN 2127-AI51


Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards: Interior Trunk Release

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

ACTION: Final rule; response to petitions for reconsideration.

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

SUMMARY: In October 2000, NHTSA published a final rule establishing a 
new Federal motor vehicle safety standard that will require passenger 
cars with trunks to be equipped with a release latch inside the trunk 
compartment. Four organizations filed petitions for reconsideration of 
this rule.
    In response to these petitions, the agency is making several 
substantive changes to the final rule. It is excluding hatchbacks and 
station wagons. It is also excluding sub-compartments that are formed 
within the trunk compartment when a convertible power top folds down 
into the trunk. The agency is changing the definition of ``trunk lid'' 
to explicitly exclude the lids of interior storage compartments. The 
agency is revising the definition of ``trunk compartment'' to include 
standard equipment in the determination of the size of the trunk 
compartment. The agency is amending the standard to require that 
interior trunk releases on passenger cars with front trunk compartments 
unlatch the primary, but not the secondary, latch if the passenger car 
is moving when the trunk release is actuated. The agency is providing 
an additional year of lead-time for passenger cars with front trunk 
compartments.
    The agency is also denying requests: To exclude passenger cars with 
trunk lids that contact the three-year-old child dummy (used to 
determine whether a trunk compartment is large enough to be subject to 
the standard) before latching, or provide those cars with an additional 
year of lead-time; to require that the ignition be in the ``off'' 
position for an automatic trunk release system to operate; to require 
that an automatic trunk release system may unlatch the trunk lid only 
when a person inside the trunk compartment is moving; and to allow 
means for temporary disabling of automatic trunk release systems.
    Finally, the agency is adding a requirement that manufacturers 
irrevocably select which compliance option, manual or automatic, they 
will employ.

DATES: Effective date: The effective date for the amendments in this 
final rule is September 1, 2001.
    Petitions for reconsideration deadline: If you wish to petition for 
reconsideration of this final rule, you must submit it so that we 
receive your petition not later than October 1, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration should refer to the docket 
number and be submitted to: Administrator, Room 5220, National Highway 
Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 
20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical and policy questions: 
Kenneth O. Hardie, Office of Crash Avoidance Standards, NHTSA, 400 
Seventh Street,

[[Page 43114]]

SW, Washington, DC 20590 (Telephone: 202-366-6987) (Fax: 202-493-2739).
    For legal questions: Dion Casey, Office of Chief Counsel, NHTSA, 
400 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, D.C. 20590 (Telephone: 202-366-
2992) (Fax: 202-366-3820).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. Petitions for Reconsideration and NHTSA's Responses
    A. Application
    1. Hatchback Models
    2. Station Wagon Models
    3. Interior Storage Compartments
    4. Sub-Compartments
    5. Small Trunks
    B. Performance Requirements
    1. Complete Unlatching of Front-Opening Trunk Lids
    2. Operation While the Vehicle Is in Motion
    3. Operation When Trapped Person Is Stationary
    4. Temporarily Disabling the System
    C. Test Conditions for Trunk Size Determination
    D. Irrevocable Election
    E. Lead-Time
III. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
    A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and 
Procedures
    B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    C. National Environmental Policy Act
    D. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
    E. Civil Justice Reform
    F. Paperwork Reduction Act
    G. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    H. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    I. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)

I. Background

    On October 20, 2000, NHTSA published a final rule establishing a 
new Federal motor vehicle safety standard (FMVSS No. 401, Interior 
Trunk Release) to address the problem of trunk entrapment. (65 FR 
63014). Trunk entrapment can occur accidentally, such as when a child 
playing a game climbs into a trunk and pulls down the trunk lid, and 
intentionally, such as when a criminal forces a person into the trunk. 
The agency estimated that 21 people have died in 11 incidents of 
accidental trunk entrapment from 1987 to 1999. Eleven of these were 
children who died in three separate incidents when they locked 
themselves in the trunk of an automobile during a three-week period in 
July and August of 1998. The standard provides persons who find 
themselves trapped inside a passenger car trunk a chance to get out of 
the trunk alive.
    Standard No. 401 requires all new passenger cars with trunks to be 
equipped with an interior trunk release inside the trunk compartment, 
beginning September 1, 2001. Manufacturers may comply with the standard 
by installing a manual release latch or an automatic release system 
which detects the presence of a person in the trunk and automatically 
unlatches the trunk lid.
    To aid readers in understanding this document, we have set out the 
short standard, as published, in its entirety:

    Sec. 571.401--Standard No. 401; Interior trunk release.
    S1. Purpose and scope. This standard establishes the requirement 
for providing a trunk release mechanism that makes it possible for a 
person trapped inside the trunk compartment of a passenger car to 
escape from the compartment.
    S2. Application. This standard applies to passenger cars that 
have a trunk compartment.
    S3. Definitions.
    Trunk compartment means a space that:
    (a) Is intended to be used for carrying luggage,
    (b) Is wholly separated from the occupant compartment of a 
passenger car by a permanently attached partition or by a fixed or 
fold-down seat back and/or partition,
    (c) Has a trunk lid, and
    (d) Is large enough so that the three-year-old child dummy 
described in Subpart C of Part 572 can be placed inside the trunk 
compartment and, with the test dummy in the trunk compartment, the 
trunk lid can be closed and latched. (Note: For purposes of this 
standard, the Part 572 Subpart C test dummy need not be equipped 
with the accelerometers specified in Part 572.21.)
    Trunk lid means a movable body panel that provides access from 
outside a motor vehicle to a trunk compartment.
    S4. Requirements.
    S4.1 Each passenger car with a trunk compartment must have an 
automatic or manual release mechanism inside the trunk compartment 
that unlatches the trunk lid.
    S4.2(a) Each manual release mechanism installed pursuant to S4.1 
of this section must include a feature, like lighting or 
phosphorescence, that allows the release mechanism to be easily seen 
inside the closed trunk.
    (b) Each automatic release mechanism installed pursuant to S4.1 
of this section must unlatch the trunk lid within 5 minutes of when 
the lid is closed with a person inside the trunk compartment.
    S4.3 Actuation of each release mechanism required by S4.1 of 
this section must completely release the trunk lid from all latching 
positions of the trunk lid latch, notwithstanding the requirements 
of any other standards in part 571 of this title.

II. Petitions for Reconsideration and NHTSA's Responses

    NHTSA received petitions for reconsideration of the final rule from 
General Motors North America (GM), and Porsche Cars North America, Inc. 
(Porsche). The agency also received requests for interpretation of the 
final rule from Volkswagen of America (VW) and the Alliance of 
Automobile Manufacturers (Alliance), whose members are the BMW Group, 
Daimler Chrysler, Fiat, Ford Motor Company, GM, Isuzu, Mazda, 
Mitsubishi Motors, Nissan, Porsche, Toyota, VW, and Volvo. VW and the 
Alliance requested that if NHTSA disagreed with their interpretations 
of the final rule, the agency treat the letters as petitions for 
reconsideration. The Alliance also filed a letter which contained 
comments supporting the GM and Porsche petitions for reconsideration.

A. Application

1. Hatchback Models
    In their letters, VW and the Alliance requested that NHTSA issue a 
letter of interpretation to confirm their understanding of Standard No. 
401 as not applying to hatchback models. VW and the Alliance requested 
that NHTSA determine that the hinged rear door (``hatch'') of hatchback 
models is a ``back door'' rather than a ``trunk lid.'' VW and the 
Alliance requested that if the agency disagreed with their 
understanding of the standard, that the agency treat their letters as 
petitions for reconsideration.
    S3 of Standard No. 401 defines ``trunk compartment'' as a space 
that:

    (a) is intended to be used for carrying luggage,
    (b) is wholly separated from the occupant compartment of a 
passenger car by a permanently attached partition or by a fixed or 
fold-down seat back and/or partition,
    (c) has a trunk lid, and
    (d) is large enough so that the three-year-old child dummy 
described in Subpart C of Part 572 can be placed inside the trunk 
compartment and, with the test dummy in the trunk compartment, the 
trunk lid can be closed and latched.

    The issue presented by VW and the Alliance is whether the hatch on 
hatchback \1\ models is a ``trunk lid'' or a ``back door.'' S3 of 
Standard No. 401 defines a ``trunk lid'' as ``a moveable body panel 
that provides access from outside a motor vehicle to a trunk 
compartment.'' Standard No. 206, Door Locks and Door Retention 
Components, defines ``back door'' as ``a door or door system on the 
back end of a motor vehicle through which passengers can enter or 
depart the vehicle, or cargo can

[[Page 43115]]

be loaded or unloaded; but does not include: (a) A trunk lid * * * .''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ NHTSA uses the term ``hatchback'' in several of its 
standards and regulations, but does not define it. The Environmental 
Protection Agency has defined it in 40 CFR 600.002-85(a)(34) to mean 
``a passenger automobile where the conventional luggage compartment, 
i.e., trunk, is replaced by a cargo area which is open to the 
passenger compartment and accessed vertically by a rear door which 
encompasses the rear window.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NHTSA intended the terms ``back door'' and ``trunk lid'' to be 
mutually exclusive. The agency made this distinction when it extended 
the door lock and retention requirements of Standard No. 206, which 
originally covered only side doors, to back doors, including the hatch 
on hatchback models. (60 FR 50124, September 28, 1995). NHTSA did not 
intend for trunk lids to have to meet the lock and retention 
requirements, so the agency specifically excluded trunk lids from the 
definition of ``back door.''
    NHTSA intended to echo the distinction between a ``back door'' and 
a ``trunk lid'' in the final rule establishing Standard No. 401. In the 
preamble of that final rule, the agency stated that ``the requirements 
in * * * Standard No. 206 only apply if the moveable panel is not a 
trunk lid, and the requirements in this standard [No. 401] only apply 
if the moveable panel is a trunk lid.'' (65 FR 63019).
    Despite this distinction, however, the hatch on some hatchback 
models may meet both the definition of ``back door'' and the definition 
of ``trunk lid'' in the October 2000 final rule. For example, a hatch 
may satisfy the latter part of the definition of a ``back door,'' i.e., 
a ``door on the back end of a motor vehicle through which passengers 
can enter or depart the vehicle, or cargo can be loaded or unloaded.'' 
It is possible that some hatches may also satisfy the definition of a 
``trunk lid,'' i.e., ``a moveable body panel that provides access from 
outside a motor vehicle to a trunk compartment.'' A ``trunk 
compartment'' is, in turn, defined as a space that ``is intended to be 
used for carrying luggage,'' ``is wholly separated from the occupant 
compartment * * * by a permanently attached partition or by a fixed or 
fold-down seat back and/or partition,'' ``has a trunk lid [the 
hatch],'' and is large enough to fit the three-year-old child dummy.
    NHTSA recognizes that it may have used conflicting language in the 
NPRM and the final rule establishing Standard No. 401. In the NPRM, 
NHTSA said that the standard would not apply to the hatch on hatchback 
models. The agency stated that its proposed definition of ``trunk lid'' 
would mean that ``the requirement for an interior release would not 
apply to vehicles that do not typically have trunk lids, like hatchback 
cars, station wagons, pickup trucks, sport utility vehicles, and 
vans.'' (64 FR 70675).
    However, in the final rule, the agency stated:

    Concerning the applicability of this Standard to hatchbacks, if 
a movable body panel, that provides access to a space wholly 
partitioned from the occupant compartment, encloses that space upon 
closing a permanently attached lid such as a hatchback lid, then the 
closing lid is considered a trunk lid for the purposes of this rule. 
(65 FR 63017).

(This statement was intended to indicate that hatchbacks were included 
only if the cargo area were actually wholly separated from the occupant 
compartment. Conversely, hatchbacks were excluded if the cargo area was 
only partially separated from the occupant compartment, e.g., by means 
of netting or by a roll-out shade that leaves open spaces on the side.)
    In addition, in response to comments from the Ford Motor Company 
recommending that Standard No. 401 specifically exclude vehicles with 
hinged back doors, such as vans, SUVs, station wagons, and hatchbacks, 
that must comply with the latch requirements of Standard No. 206, the 
agency stated:

    Contrary to Ford's assertions, S3 of Standard No. 206 expressly 
provides that the term ``back door'' does not include a ``trunk 
lid.'' Thus, the requirements in S4.4.2 of Standard No. 206 only 
apply if the movable panel is not a trunk lid, and the requirements 
in this standard only apply if the movable panel is a trunk lid. (65 
FR 63019).

    The agency does not wish to apply Standard No. 401 to any 
hatchbacks. The agency notes that the Expert Panel on Trunk Entrapment, 
which was formed prior to the Standard No. 401 NPRM to study the 
problem of trunk entrapment, did not address hatchbacks, nor were there 
any data presented to the panel indicating that persons have died as a 
result of their being inadvertently or intentionally locked in the rear 
of hatchbacks. Absent such evidence, NHTSA is excluding them from 
Standard No. 401. However, the agency will reconsider the applicability 
of Standard No. 401 to some or all hatchbacks if data indicate that 
trunk entrapment deaths are occurring in them.
    The agency is amending Standard No. 401 by excluding vehicles with 
a back door from the standard, adding a definition of ``back door,'' 
and changing the definition of ``trunk lid,'' as follows:

    S2. Application. This standard applies to passenger cars that 
have a trunk compartment. This standard does not apply to passenger 
cars with a back door.
    Back door means a door or door system on the back end of a 
passenger car through which cargo can be loaded or unloaded. The 
term includes the hinged back door on a hatchback or a station 
wagon.
    Trunk lid means a moveable body panel that is not designed or 
intended as a passenger car entry point for passengers and that 
provides access from outside a passenger car to a trunk compartment. 
The term does not include a back door or the lid of a storage 
compartment located inside the passenger compartment of a passenger 
car.
2. Station Wagon Models
    VW and the Alliance also asked the agency to confirm their 
understanding that Standard No. 401 does not apply to station wagon 
models equipped with luggage compartment covers. In its letter, VW 
stated:

    Volkswagen and Audi station wagon models provide a luggage 
compartment cover, which operates like a roll-out shade or a net 
that the customer can use to provide privacy or retention for the 
luggage area. The luggage compartment cover can be released and 
rolled back even when the back door is closed and is made of soft 
material that can be moved aside by anyone who may be inside the 
luggage compartment when the cover is closed. It is Volkswagen's 
interpretation that such station wagon luggage compartment covers do 
not form an enclosed space, which would require an interior release 
for the back door of its station wagon models.
    In its letter, the Alliance stated:

    Station wagon models have open luggage compartment areas with 
direct access from the luggage compartment into the occupant seating 
area and therefore clearly do not have trunk compartments as defined in 
FMVSS 401. However, some station wagon models are provided with luggage 
cover accessories which operate like a roller shade or a netting and 
which are made of soft materials that can be moved aside to provide 
access from the covered luggage area to the passenger compartment.
    For purposes of Standard No. 401, NHTSA has concluded that the rear 
door on station wagon models is not, and should not be treated as, a 
trunk lid. This conclusion is based primarily on the regulatory text in 
the final rule. Being full of openings, a net would clearly not 
``wholly separate'' (emphasis added) the passenger compartment from the 
luggage area. Likewise, if a roll-out shade leaves any openings between 
the passenger compartment and the luggage area, the rear door is not a 
trunk lid under the final rule.
    This conclusion is consistent with the Standard No. 401 NPRM. In 
the NPRM, NHTSA proposed to exclude the rear door of station wagon 
models. The agency stated that its proposed definition of ``trunk lid'' 
would mean that ``the requirement for an internal release would not 
apply to vehicles that do not typically have trunk lids, like

[[Page 43116]]

hatchback cars, station wagons, pickup trucks, sport utility vehicles, 
and vans.'' (64 FR 70675). Moreover, NHTSA is also concerned that, if 
the agency were to require the rear door of station wagon models to 
have an interior release mechanism, a child seated in the rear of a 
station wagon might be able to activate the mechanism and open the rear 
door while the station wagon is in motion.
    Thus, the agency is amending Standard No. 401 by adding a 
definition of ``back door,'' changing the definition of ``trunk lid,'' 
and excluding vehicles with a back door from the standard as noted 
above in the section on hatchback models.
3. Interior Storage Compartments
    The Alliance expressed concern regarding the applicability of 
Standard No. 401 to interior storage compartments in convertibles. The 
Alliance stated:

    It is conceivable that if a convertible top is down, a vehicle 
interior compartment door could be opened from outside the vehicle. 
In some vehicles, the interior storage compartment could accommodate 
a 3-year-old dummy.

    For example, the Toyota MR2-Spyder, a two-seat convertible, has two 
interior storage compartments, one behind each of the seats. In this 
vehicle, in order to open the compartment doors, the driver's seat and/
or passenger's seat would have to be inclined forward. Otherwise, the 
seat in front of the interior compartment would block the compartment 
door. The Alliance argued that, in this case, even if a trunk release 
were required and installed in the interior compartment, the 
compartment doors would not open enough to allow egress from the 
compartment, unless the seats are inclined forward. Thus, the Alliance 
asked the agency to confirm that Standard No. 401 does not apply to 
interior storage compartments.
    NHTSA agrees with this interpretation. The agency does not consider 
interior storage compartments to be ``trunk compartments.'' The lids of 
interior storage compartments do not provide access from outside a 
motor vehicle to a trunk compartment. The agency did not intend for 
interior storage compartments to be subject to the requirements of 
Standard No. 401. To address this, the agency is revising the 
definition of ``trunk lid'' to read as follows:

    Trunk lid means a moveable body panel that is not designed or 
intended as a vehicle entry point for passengers and that provides 
access from outside a motor vehicle to a trunk compartment. It does 
not mean the lid of a storage compartment located inside the 
passenger compartment of the vehicle.
4. Sub-Compartments
    The Alliance stated that some convertible models are equipped with 
a power top that folds down into the vehicle trunk, thereby 
partitioning the trunk space into sub-compartments. There may be 
sufficient room for a three-year-old child to become trapped in such a 
sub-compartment when the top is stowed. However, for this to happen, 
the child would have to access a sub-compartment during the short time 
when the power top is actively being stowed. Further, stowing the power 
top requires the vehicle key to be actuated and a button to be 
continuously pressed, indicating that an adult is present. In addition, 
for the sub-compartment to be accessible during this time, a child 
would have to be in the trunk compartment already. Based upon these 
circumstances, the Alliance asked NHTSA to confirm its understanding 
that the interior trunk release need not be accessible to children 
trapped in the sub-compartments created by stowing a convertible power 
top in the vehicle's trunk compartment.
    The Alliance's understanding is correct. The agency believes that 
it is highly unlikely that a child could become trapped in such a sub-
compartment under the circumstances described in the Alliance letter. 
Thus, the interior trunk release in convertible models with power tops 
that stow in the trunk compartment need not be accessible to a child 
trapped in the sub-compartments created by stowing the power top.
    The trunk compartment of a convertible model with a power top that 
stows in the trunk still must have an interior trunk release. A person 
may become trapped in the trunk compartment while the power top is up. 
The agency is only stating that the interior trunk release in such a 
model need not be accessible to a child trapped in the sub-compartments 
created in the trunk compartment by stowing the power top.
    To address this, the agency is revising the definition of ``trunk 
compartment'' to add the following at the end:
    (b) does not include a sub-compartment within the trunk 
compartment.
5. Small Trunks
    Standard No. 401 requires a trunk compartment to have an interior 
trunk release mechanism if the trunk compartment ``[i]s large enough so 
that the three-year-old child dummy described in Subpart C of Part 572 
can be placed inside the trunk compartment and, with the test dummy in 
the trunk compartment, the trunk lid can be closed and latched.''
    In its letter, the Alliance stated:

    Alliance member companies have evaluated this space requirement 
on some vehicles and found cases where the trunk lid could not close 
and latch if the trunk lid is rested on the dummy in the trunk 
compartment. However, if the trunk lid were ``slammed'' or pushed 
down, squeezing the dummy into the compartment with the lid, the 
trunk lid could be latched. If a child was actually in this 
situation, we believe no movement would be afforded to allow the 
child to operate a trunk release nor would the child be expected to 
be able to ``slam'' down the trunk lid onto themselves.

    The Alliance asked the agency to confirm its understanding that 
trunk lids that contact the dummy before latching are not required to 
have an interior release mechanism.
    NHTSA disagrees with this understanding. The agency notes that 
while the three-year-old child dummy used in the evaluation of the size 
of the trunk compartment is not pliable, children are. A child may bend 
and squeeze him/herself into a space in which a dummy would not be able 
to fit due to its inflexibility. Moreover, although a child in such a 
trunk compartment may not be able to pull down and close the trunk lid, 
a second child may be able to push the trunk lid down, trapping the 
first child in the trunk compartment. In addition, many vehicles 
manufactured by members of the Alliance have closure assisting devices 
as part of the trunk latch design. These provide the closure force that 
is necessary to perform latching, without the need for slamming. Thus, 
the agency believes that if the trunk lid can be closed with the three-
year-old child dummy in the trunk compartment, the trunk lid is 
required to have an interior release.
    The Alliance's argument that a child trapped in such a small trunk 
would not have enough room to operate a manual trunk release is not 
persuasive because the standard allows vehicles to be equipped with 
automatic trunk releases as well as manual releases.
    Since NHTSA disagreed with this portion of the Alliance letter, the 
agency treated it as a petition for reconsideration. That part of the 
Alliance petition is denied.

B. Performance Requirements

1. Complete Unlatching of Front-Opening Trunk Lids
    S4.3 of Standard No. 401 requires the trunk release mechanism to 
``completely release the trunk lid from all latching positions of the 
trunk lid latch,

[[Page 43117]]

notwithstanding the requirements of any other'' Federal motor vehicle 
safety standards. Standard No. 113, Hood Latch System, requires front 
opening hoods which, in any open position, partially or completely 
obstruct a driver's forward view through the windshield to be provided 
with a second latch position on the hood latch system or with a second 
hood latch system. The purpose of Standard No. 113 is to prevent front 
opening hoods from flying open and obstructing the driver's view while 
the vehicle is in motion.
    Porsche manufactures several passenger car models with front 
opening hoods. In its petition for reconsideration, Porsche maintained 
that having a trunk release mechanism that unlocks or opens a front 
opening hood from all latching positions or latches while the vehicle 
is in motion results in risk of injuring the driver, passenger, and 
other motorists whether the release functions as intended or 
inadvertently. Thus, Porsche requested that the agency ``modify S4.3 of 
the final rule to indicate that, for front-opening hoods, only the 
primary latch need be completely released.''
    Porsche requested that if NHTSA denied this recommendation, the 
agency provide manufacturers the option of disabling the interior trunk 
release system when the passenger car is in motion. Porsche stated that 
it currently deactivates the standard electro-mechanical hood release 
on its passenger cars when they have obtained a speed of 5 km/h 
 2 km/h.
    NHTSA is granting Porsche's request to amend Standard No. 401 to 
indicate that for front opening hoods, only the primary latch need be 
completely released. As NHTSA stated in the preamble to the final rule, 
the agency believes that allowing a trapped person to get out of the 
trunk is paramount. However, NHTSA recognizes the significant 
additional risk of completely releasing a front opening hood while the 
passenger car is in motion. The release of both the primary and 
secondary latches when the passenger car is in motion could result in 
the hood flying open and obstructing the driver's forward view through 
the windshield. In addition, if the driver were to apply the brakes in 
such a situation, the trapped person could be ejected from the trunk 
compartment.
    The agency agrees with Porsche that if only the primary latch is 
released when the passenger car is in motion, the hazard of collision 
and possible ejection of the trapped person would be greatly reduced. 
In addition, release of the primary latch would at least provide the 
trapped person with access to outside air and increase the possibility 
of the trapped person being noticed by others.
    The agency notes that this change would not favor victims of 
intentional entrapment. Such victims would not be able to completely 
release the trunk lid and escape, at least not while the passenger car 
was in motion. To address this, the agency is requiring that the trunk 
lid open completely when the passenger car is stationary or moving at a 
speed of less than 3 km/h.
    Thus, the agency is adding a paragraph (b) to S4.3 of Standard No. 
401, to read as follows:

    S4.3(b) For passenger cars with a front trunk compartment that 
has a front opening hood required to have a secondary latch 
position, actuation of the release mechanism required by paragraph 
S4.1 of this standard when the passenger car is in motion (at a 
speed of 3 km/h or more) must release the primary latch position, 
but not the secondary latch position. At all other times, actuation 
of the release mechanism required by paragraph S4.1 of this standard 
must completely release the trunk lid from all latching positions of 
the trunk lid latch. The passenger cars described in this paragraph 
are excluded from the requirements of this standard until September 
1, 2002.

    The agency notes that the amended text requires actuation of the 
release mechanism when the passenger car is stationary or moving at a 
speed of less than 3 km/h to release the latch completely from all 
latch positions, regardless of the previous state of the latches or 
whether the primary latch has been released during passenger car 
movement. Since NHTSA is granting this request, the agency does not 
have to address Porsche's request to provide manufacturers the option 
of disabling the interior trunk release system when the vehicle is in 
motion.
    The agency realizes that this amendment adds some complexity to the 
design of trunk release systems for passenger cars with a trunk 
compartment located in the front. It also imposes an additional 
performance requirement associated with the speed of the passenger car. 
However, the agency has not estimated the costs of this additional 
burden. The agency believes that very few passenger cars have a trunk 
compartment located in the front. Moreover, the agency notes that 
Porsche stated that it currently deactivates the standard electro-
mechanical hood release on its passenger cars when they have obtained a 
speed of 5 km/h  2 km/h. Thus, the requirement that the 
front hood lid only release the primary latch when the passenger car 
has obtained a speed of 3 km/h should not be a substantial burden.
2. Operation of Automatic Systems While the Vehicle Is in Motion
    Standard No. 401 permits passenger car manufacturers to install an 
automatic trunk release system which detects the presence of a person 
in the trunk and automatically unlatches the trunk lid. S4.2(b) of the 
standard requires such systems to ``unlatch the trunk lid within 5 
minutes of when the lid is closed with a person inside the trunk 
compartment.'' The standard does not specify that the automatic trunk 
release system must operate only when the passenger car is stationary.
    In its petition for reconsideration, GM stated that it has designed 
an automatic trunk release system that senses a combination of motion 
and a difference in temperature in the trunk compartment, i.e., a 
difference in the temperature of the trunk compartment and the 
temperature of an object in the trunk compartment. However, the system 
is not designed to operate while the passenger car is in motion because 
unsecured cargo (such as a basketball) often moves in the trunk while 
the passenger car is in motion. If automatic trunk release systems are 
required to operate while the passenger car is in motion, GM argued, 
motion detectors, even when used in combination with a temperature 
sensor, could not be used without the risk of causing unwanted trunk 
releases and possible adverse safety consequences.
    GM also stated that motion sensors could not be used if automatic 
trunk release systems are required to operate while the passenger car 
is stationary for a short time, such as when the passenger car is in 
gear but stopped at a stop light. GM said that there are two reasons 
for this:

    First, motion is imminent when the ignition is on, and an 
unwanted trunk release could occur. [We take this to mean the trunk 
lid could open right before the vehicle resumes motion.] Second, the 
vehicle's ability to measure the speed at which it is moving has 
poor resolution at very low speeds. Therefore, a vehicle that is 
inching forward in a parking lot or at a stop light will not 
register motion, but the motion sensor in the trunk will register 
the motion of the cargo that is moving as a result of the vehicle's 
motion.

    GM claimed that its testing has demonstrated that a truck passing a 
stopped passenger car can generate movement inside the trunk 
compartment of the stopped car that could mimic human-like motion. In 
addition, GM stated that persons moving inside the passenger 
compartment can cause motion to be registered inside the trunk 
compartment

[[Page 43118]]

even though the passenger car is stationary.
    Either of these occurrences could cause the trunk lid to open while 
the passenger car is in motion. GM also stated that it is not aware of 
any child trunk entrapment incident involving a passenger car that was 
in motion shortly after the child become trapped.
    For these reasons, GM's automatic trunk release system is designed 
to operate only when the passenger car is stationary and the ignition 
is off. GM stated:

    GM believes that requiring a passive [automatic] system to work 
when the vehicle is in motion or when motion is imminent will impose 
a significant and unwarranted design restriction that may preclude 
manufacturers from introducing passive systems. GM believes that 
such a restriction is not necessary to achieve the purposes of FMVSS 
401, and that the final rule should allow manufacturers the 
flexibility to determine optimal design solutions, including the use 
of motion detectors in passive trunk release systems.

    To address this issue, GM recommended that language such as ``a 
stationary vehicle with the key off'' be added to S4.2(b) of Standard 
No. 401.
    NHTSA is denying GM's request to amend S4.2(b) so that automatic 
trunk release systems do not have to operate while the passenger car is 
in motion. NHTSA understands GM's concerns with respect to inanimate 
objects moving in the trunk compartment causing the trunk lid to open 
while the passenger car is in motion. However, the agency has concluded 
that the conditions suggested by GM are not suitable.
    GM stated that it was not aware of a child entrapment incident 
involving a passenger car that was in motion shortly after the child 
became entrapped. NHTSA is aware of at least two possible such 
incidents. An Associated Press account of the five children who died in 
Utah in August 1998, reported that a relative of two of the five 
children who died in the trunk compartment drove the vehicle around the 
neighborhood searching for the children, unaware that their bodies were 
in the vehicle's trunk compartment. The newspaper account stated that 
this situation was similar to another incident in New Mexico, where 
four children died in July 1998 after climbing into the trunk 
compartment of a vehicle. Relatives searching for the children drove 
the vehicle for nearly an hour before finding their bodies in the trunk 
compartment.
    In neither case is it clear how long the children had been trapped 
in the trunk compartments before their relatives began driving the car. 
Consequently, NHTSA considers the 5 minute time limit in S4.2(b) a 
reasonable safety requirement for all automatic trunk release systems, 
whether or not the passenger car is moving.
    NHTSA also believes that the suggested requirement that the key 
that controls activation of the passenger car's engine be in the 
``off'' position before the automatic trunk release system will operate 
could preclude possible escape from the trunk compartment by trapped 
persons. Individuals trapped in the trunk compartment (as a result of 
criminal entrapment or inadvertent trunk locking) would be unable to 
escape if the key or controlling device were intentionally or 
inadvertently left by the driver in some position other than the 
``off'' position. Thus, the agency is denying the GM request to amend 
the standard to require that the key be in the ``off'' position for the 
automatic trunk release system to operate.
3. Operation of Automatic Systems When Trapped Person Is Stationary
    GM also stated that its automatic trunk release system cannot 
detect a person in the trunk compartment if that person remains 
stationary. The system requires some motion to activate the trunk 
release. If automatic systems are required to open the trunk when a 
person, whether stationary or moving, is inside the trunk compartment 
for five minutes, the GM system will be precluded. Thus, GM recommended 
that language be added to S4.2(b) requiring automatic trunk release 
systems to unlatch the trunk lid only when the trapped person is moving 
and attempting to escape.
    GM suggested revising S4.2(b) as follows:

    S4.2(b) Each automatic release mechanism installed pursuant to 
S4.1 of this section must unlatch the trunk lid within 5 minutes 
when all of the following conditions are met:
    (1) the vehicle is stationary;
    (2) the key that controls activation of the vehicle's engine is 
in the ``off'' position;
    (3) the lid is closed; and
    (4) a person inside the trunk compartment is simulating an 
attempt to escape by continually reaching for two or more of the 
interior sides of the trunk by gross arm(s) and/or leg(s) motion for 
three minutes.

    NHTSA is denying GM's request to amend the standard by requiring 
that an automatic trunk release system may unlatch the trunk lid only 
when a person inside the trunk compartment is moving. The agency has 
determined that such a requirement would result in an ineffective 
system. According to GM's study, and a child psychologist who testified 
before the Expert Panel on Trunk Entrapment, many children who become 
trapped in trunk compartments simply ``shut down'' and passively wait 
for rescue. An automatic trunk release system that depends on the 
occupant continually moving around for three minutes appears to require 
greater effort by the trapped person than a manual trunk release 
system, which simply requires the trapped person to pull a lever.
    NHTSA wishes to accommodate as broad an array of technologies as 
possible. The agency agrees with GM that an automatic trunk release 
system offers some conceptual advantages for helping trapped persons 
escape from the trunk, especially young children who may have trouble 
activating a manual trunk release system. However, the conditions 
suggested by GM for activation of its automatic system would result in 
trunk release systems that would not effectively accomplish the safety 
purpose of Standard No. 401. In the near term, GM may equip its 
vehicles with a manual trunk release system until some of the 
difficulties associated with automatic trunk release systems can be 
worked out. NHTSA will work with GM and other manufacturers to 
understand the capabilities and limitations of current automatic trunk 
release systems and attempt to develop performance criteria that would 
ensure that those systems effectively accomplish the safety purpose of 
the standard and would be feasible for current automatic systems.
4. Temporarily Disabling the System
    GM also stated that drivers may occasionally want to disable the 
automatic trunk release system so that the motion of the passenger car 
or items in the trunk will not cause the trunk to open. GM would like 
to provide a means of temporarily disabling the system without 
affecting the safety benefits of the system. Accordingly, GM requested 
that the agency add an additional paragraph to Standard No. 401 as 
follows:

    S4.2(c) An automatic release mechanism may be capable of being 
deactivated only if all of the following conditions are met:
    (1) the key that controls activation of the vehicle's engine is 
in the ``on'' position;
    (2) the deactivation switch is located away from the driver's 
position or the deactivation process requires multiple deliberate 
actions;
    (3) the system is automatically reactivated when the trunk is 
opened; and
    (4) the system can manually be reactivated from inside the trunk 
or otherwise can unlatch the trunk.

    NHTSA is denying GM's request to amend the standard to allow for 
temporary disabling of automatic trunk

[[Page 43119]]

release systems. As a general rule, NHTSA does not permit the 
overriding of a safety device required by a Federal motor vehicle 
safety standard unless there are significant safety issues involving 
potential risks to individuals if the safety device is not disabled. 
For example, the agency permits the disabling or deactivation of 
passenger side air bags only under certain limited circumstances. The 
agency does not believe that safety devices should be disabled simply 
for purposes of operational convenience. GM has not cited any 
significant safety issues involving potential risks to individuals if 
the automatic trunk release system is not disabled.

C. Test Conditions for Trunk Size Determination

    The Alliance noted that in the preamble to the Standard No. 401 
final rule, NHTSA stated its intention to require manufacturers to 
conduct the evaluation to determine whether the three-year-old child 
dummy can fit inside the trunk compartment with all standard equipment 
in the trunk compartment (e.g., spare tire, wheel jack, tools, etc.). 
In fact, the agency stated in the preamble that ``[s]uch an evaluation 
must be conducted with all standard equipment in the trunk (i.e., spare 
tire, wheel jack, tools, etc.).'' (65 FR 63018). However, this test 
specification was inadvertently omitted from the regulatory text. The 
Alliance petitioned NHTSA to revise the regulatory text to include this 
specification.
    The agency is granting this request. The agency is revising 
paragraph (d) in the definition of ``trunk compartment'' to read as 
follows:

    (d) Is large enough so that the three-year-old child dummy 
described in Subpart C of Part 572 can be placed inside the trunk 
compartment, and the trunk lid can be closed and latched, with all 
removable equipment furnished by the passenger car manufacturer 
stowed in the trunk compartment in accordance with label(s) on the 
passenger car or information in the passenger car owner's manual, 
or, if no information is provided, as located when the passenger car 
is delivered. (Note: For purposes of this standard, the Part 572 
Subpart C test dummy need not be equipped with the accelerometers 
specified in Part 572.21.)

D. Irrevocable Election

    Standard No. 401 allows manufacturers the option of installing a 
manual or automatic trunk release. Over the past five years, when NHTSA 
has allowed such a compliance option in a Federal motor vehicle safety 
standard, the agency has required that manufacturers irrevocably elect 
which option they will use to comply with the standard. Thus, when 
NHTSA officials conduct compliance testing of vehicles, they will know 
which requirements the vehicle must meet. For example, S6.1 of Standard 
No. 201, ``Occupant Protection in Interior Impact,'' allows 
manufacturers different compliance options. It also requires 
manufacturers to irrevocably select which compliance option they will 
employ at the time they certify their vehicles.
    This requirement was inadvertently omitted from the final rule 
establishing Standard No. 401. Accordingly, the agency is revising S4.1 
to read as follows:

    S4.1 Each passenger car with a trunk compartment must have an 
automatic or manual release mechanism inside the trunk compartment 
that unlatches the trunk lid. Each trunk release shall conform, at 
the manufacturer's option, to either S4.2(a) and S4.3, or S4.2(b) 
and S4.3. The manufacturer shall select the option by the time it 
certifies the vehicle and may not thereafter select a different 
option for the vehicle.

E. Lead-Time

    Standard No. 401 applies to new passenger cars manufactured on or 
after September 1, 2001. In its letter, the Alliance requested an 
additional year (until September 1, 2002) of lead-time if NHTSA 
interprets the standard as applying to hatchback or station wagon 
models, interior storage compartments, sub-compartments within the 
trunk compartment, or vehicles with trunk lids that contact the three-
year-old child dummy before latching. As a result of the amendments 
discussed above, the standard does not apply to hatchback or station 
wagon models, interior storage compartments, or sub-compartments within 
the trunk compartment. Thus, the agency need not address the issue of 
additional lead-time for these vehicles.
    The standard does apply to passenger cars with trunk lids that can 
be closed despite contacting the dummy before latching. The agency 
notes that the NPRM and final rule preambles did not state or imply 
that trunk compartments with trunk lids that contact the dummy before 
latching would be excluded from the standard. Nor was this issue 
addressed in any comments to the NPRM. The agency is unaware of any 
technical challenges that such trunk compartments pose to the 
development and manufacture of interior trunk release mechanisms. 
Therefore, the Alliance's request for additional lead-time beyond the 
September 1, 2001 effective date of the standard is denied.
    Porsche requested that the agency grant additional lead-time of at 
least one year from the date the agency grants or denies its 
recommended changes with regard to passenger cars with front opening 
trunk lids.
    In response to the Porsche petition, NHTSA is amending the standard 
to allow passenger cars with front opening trunk lids to unlatch only 
the primary latch position when the passenger car is in motion. The 
agency notes that this amendment adds some complexity to the design of 
trunk release systems for passenger cars with trunk compartments 
located in the front. It also imposes an additional performance 
requirement associated with the speed of the passenger car. Because 
this amendment represents an increase in burden to manufacturers of 
passenger cars with trunk compartments located in the front, NHTSA has 
decided to extend the effective date for these passenger cars by one 
year. Thus, the effective date for passenger cars with trunk 
compartments which are located at the front and have a front opening 
hood required to have a secondary latch position is September 1, 2002.
    GM stated that if NHTSA adopted GM's requested changes, GM would be 
able to meet Standard No. 401's current effective date of September 1, 
2001. However, GM said that if the agency did not adopt GM's requested 
changes, it would need additional development, tooling, and validation 
time to incorporate complying systems. Thus, GM requested that the 
agency grant an additional year of lead-time for passenger cars 
equipped with automatic trunk release systems. In subsequent 
communications with the agency, GM withdrew that request.
    The agency realizes that manufacturers may have experienced some 
difficulties in designing an automatic trunk release system that 
complies with the standard. As noted above, NHTSA will work with GM and 
other manufacturers to understand the capabilities and limitations of 
current automatic trunk release systems and attempt to develop 
performance criteria that would ensure that those systems effectively 
accomplish the safety purpose of the standard and would be feasible for 
current automatic systems. NHTSA does not wish to discourage the use of 
automatic systems because the agency believes that automatic systems 
may have some advantages over manual systems in certain situations. For 
example, young children may have some trouble operating a manual 
release, especially if they are frightened and disoriented, as one 
would expect a young child trapped in a trunk to be. Also, as stated 
above, many children who become trapped in trunk compartments simply 
``shut down'' and

[[Page 43120]]

passively wait for rescue. Finally, a person who is intentionally 
placed in a trunk, i.e., by a criminal, may be unconscious or 
physically restrained, and thus unable to operate a manual release. 
Since an automatic trunk release system opens the trunk lid without 
requiring a trapped person to take any action, it may provide a better 
chance of escape than a manual trunk release system in these types of 
situations.

III. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' (58 FR 
51735, October 4, 1993), provides for making determinations whether a 
regulatory action is ``significant'' and therefore subject to Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) review and to the requirements of the 
Executive Order. The Order defines a ``significant regulatory action'' 
as one that is likely to result in a rule that may:
    (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or 
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the 
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public 
health or safety, or State, local, or Tribal governments or 
communities;
    (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an 
action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, 
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients 
thereof; or
    (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal 
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in 
the Executive Order.
    This rulemaking document was not reviewed under Executive Order 
12866. It is not significant within the meaning of the DOT Regulatory 
Policies and Procedures. The only additional burden it imposes is on 
manufacturers of vehicles with trunk compartments located at the front 
of the vehicle. These vehicles must release only the primary latch when 
the interior trunk release mechanism is actuated while the vehicle is 
in motion.
    The agency has no evidence that this requirement will significantly 
increase the costs of complying with Standard No. 401 for such 
vehicles. Further, the agency believes that very few vehicles have 
trunk compartments located at the front of the vehicle. Moreover, the 
agency notes that Porsche, in its petition for reconsideration, stated 
that it currently deactivates the standard electro-mechanical hood 
release on its vehicles when the vehicle has obtained a speed of 5 km/h 
 2 km/h. Thus, the requirement that the front hood lid only 
release the primary latch when the vehicle has obtained a speed of 3 
km/h should not be a substantial burden. The agency believes that this 
impact is so minimal as to not warrant the preparation of a full 
regulatory evaluation.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., 
as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act 
(SBREFA) of 1996) whenever an agency is required to publish a notice of 
rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it must prepare and make 
available for public comment a regulatory flexibility analysis that 
describes the effect of the rule on small entities (i.e., small 
businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions). 
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 121.105(a)). No 
regulatory flexibility analysis is required if the head of an agency 
certifies the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. SBREFA amended the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act to require Federal agencies to provide a statement of 
the factual basis for certifying that a rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    As noted above, the agency has not estimated the costs associated 
with this rulemaking. The sole additional requirement imposed by this 
rulemaking is on vehicles with trunk compartments located at the front. 
The agency believes that very few such vehicles are manufactured. 
Moreover, the only manufacturer of such vehicles that the agency is 
aware of is Porsche, which does not qualify as a small entity. Based on 
this analysis, I certify that this final rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

C. National Environmental Policy Act

    NHTSA has analyzed this rulemaking action for the purposes of the 
National Environmental Policy Act. The agency has determined that 
implementation of this action will not have any significant impact on 
the quality of the human environment.

D. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    Executive Order 13132 requires NHTSA to develop an accountable 
process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input by State and local 
officials in the development of regulatory policies that have 
federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism 
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations 
that have ``substantial direct effects on the States, on the 
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government.'' Under Executive Order 13132, the agency may not issue a 
regulation with Federalism implications, that imposes substantial 
direct compliance costs, and that is not required by statute, unless 
the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct 
compliance costs incurred by State and local governments, the agency 
consults with State and local governments, or the agency consults with 
State and local officials early in the process of developing the 
proposed regulation. NHTSA also may not issue a regulation with 
Federalism implications and that preempts State law unless the agency 
consults with State and local officials early in the process of 
developing the proposed regulation.
    The agency has analyzed this rulemaking action in accordance with 
the principles and criteria set forth in Executive Order 13132. NHTSA 
has determined that this final rule does not have sufficient federalism 
implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment. 
Accordingly, a Federalism Assessment has not been prepared.

E. Civil Justice Reform

    This final rule will 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.

[[Page 43121]]

F. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rule does not have any requirements that are considered to be 
information collection requirements as defined by the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) in 5 CFR part 1320.

G. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272) 
directs us to use voluntary consensus standards in our regulatory 
activities unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or 
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical 
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling 
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by 
voluntary consensus standards bodies, such as the Society of Automotive 
Engineers (SAE). The NTTAA directs us to provide Congress, through OMB, 
explanations when we decide not to use available and applicable 
voluntary consensus standards.
    There are no voluntary consensus standards available at this time. 
NHTSA will consider any such SAE recommended practices if they become 
available.

H. 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 final rule will not have any such impacts 
on those parties. As noted above, the agency has not estimated expects 
the costs associated with this rule. However, the agency believes that 
they will be minimal, as the only additional burden imposed by this 
final rule will affect very few vehicles. Consequently, no Unfunded 
Mandates assessment has been prepared.

I. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)

    The Department of Transportation assigns a regulation identifier 
number (RIN) to each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of 
Federal Regulations. The Regulatory Information Service Center 
publishes the Unified Agenda in April and October of each year. You may 
use the RIN contained in the heading at the beginning of this document 
to find this action in the Unified Agenda.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571

    Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Motor vehicles, Rubber products, 
tires.
    In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA is amending 49 CFR chapter 
V as follows:

PART 571--FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS

    1. The authority citation for part 571 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 21411, 21415, 21417, and 21466; 
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.

    2. Section 571.401 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 571.401  Standard No. 401; Interior trunk release.

    S1. Purpose and scope. This standard establishes the requirement 
for providing a trunk release mechanism that makes it possible for a 
person trapped inside the trunk compartment of a passenger car to 
escape from the compartment.
    S2. Application. This standard applies to passenger cars that have 
a trunk compartment. This standard does not apply to passenger cars 
with a back door.
    S3. Definitions.
    Back door means a door or door system on the back end of a 
passenger car through which cargo can be loaded or unloaded. The term 
includes the hinged back door on a hatchback or a station wagon.
    Trunk compartment. (a) Means a space that:
    (1) Is intended to be used for carrying luggage or cargo,
    (2) Is wholly separated from the occupant compartment of a 
passenger car by a permanently attached partition or by a fixed or 
fold-down seat back and/or partition,
    (3) Has a trunk lid, and
    (4) Is large enough so that the three-year-old child dummy 
described in Subpart C of Part 572 can be placed inside the trunk 
compartment, and the trunk lid can be closed and latched with all 
removable equipment furnished by the passenger car manufacturer stowed 
in accordance with label(s) on the passenger car or information in the 
passenger car owner's manual, or, if no information is provided, as 
located when the passenger car is delivered. (Note: For purposes of 
this standard, the Part 572 Subpart C test dummy need not be equipped 
with the accelerometers specified in Sec. 572.21.)
    (b) Does not include a sub-compartment within the trunk 
compartment.
    Trunk lid means a moveable body panel that is not designed or 
intended as a passenger car entry point for passengers and that 
provides access from outside a passenger car to a trunk compartment. 
The term does not include a back door or the lid of a storage 
compartment located inside the passenger compartment of a passenger 
car.
    S4. Requirements.
    S4.1 Each passenger car with a trunk compartment must have an 
automatic or manual release mechanism inside the trunk compartment that 
unlatches the trunk lid. Each trunk release shall conform, at the 
manufacturer's option, to either S4.2(a) and S4.3, or S4.2(b) and S4.3. 
The manufacturer shall select the option by the time it certifies the 
vehicle and may not thereafter select a different option for the 
vehicle.
    S4.2(a) Each manual release mechanism installed pursuant to S4.1 of 
this standard must include a feature, like lighting or phosphorescence, 
that allows the release mechanism to be easily seen inside the closed 
trunk compartment.
    (b) Each automatic release mechanism installed pursuant to S4.1 of 
this section must unlatch the trunk lid within 5 minutes of when the 
trunk lid is closed with a person inside the trunk compartment.
    S4.3(a) Except as provided in paragraph S4.3(b), actuation of the 
release mechanism required by S4.1 of this standard must completely 
release the trunk lid from all latching positions of the trunk lid 
latch.
    (b) For passenger cars with a front trunk compartment that has a 
front opening hood required to have a secondary latch position, 
actuation of the release mechanism required by paragraph S4.1 of this 
standard when the passenger car is in motion (at a speed of 3 km/h or 
more) must release the primary latch position, but not the secondary 
latch position. At all other times, actuation of the release mechanism 
required by paragraph S4.1 of this standard must completely release the 
trunk lid from all latching positions of the trunk lid latch. The 
passenger cars described in this paragraph are excluded from the 
requirements of this standard until September 1, 2002.

    Issued: August 7, 2001.
L. Robert Shelton,
Executive Director.
[FR Doc. 01-20831 Filed 8-15-01; 11:07 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P