[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 243 (Tuesday, December 18, 2001)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 65376-65421]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-30754]



[[Page 65375]]

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

Part IV





Department of Transportation





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



National Highway Traffic Safety Administration



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



49 CFR Part 571



Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Occupant Crash Protection; 
Final Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 243 / Tuesday, December 18, 2001 / 
Rules and Regulations  

[[Page 65376]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. NHTSA 01-11110; Notice 1]
RIN 2127-AI10


Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Occupant Crash Protection

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

ACTION: Final rule; response to petitions for reconsideration.

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

SUMMARY: This document responds to petitions for reconsideration of the 
new, advanced air bag final rule; interim final rule that we published 
in May 2000. This document grants portions of the petitions and denies 
other portions of the petitions.
    The May 2000 final rule amended our occupant crash protection 
standard to require that future air bags be designed so that, compared 
to current air bags, they create less risk of serious air bag-induced 
injuries, particularly for small women and young children; and provide 
improved frontal crash protection for all occupants, by means that 
include advanced air bag technology. The issuance of that rule 
completed the implementation of our 1996 comprehensive plan for 
reducing air bag risks. It was also required by the Transportation 
Equity Act for the 21st Century, which was enacted in 1998.

DATES: Effective Date: The amendments made in this rule are effective 
January 17, 2002.
    Petitions: Petitions for reconsideration must be received by 
February 1, 2002.

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For non-legal issues, you may contact 
Dr. Roger A. Saul, Director, Office of Crashworthiness Standards, NPS-
10. Telephone: (202) 366-1740. Fax: (202) 493-2739. E-mail: 
[email protected].
    For legal issues, you may contact Edward Glancy or Rebecca 
MacPherson, Office of Chief Counsel, NCC-20. Telephone: (202) 366-2992. 
Fax: (202) 366-3820.
    You may send mail to these officials at the National Highway 
Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh St., SW., Washington, DC, 
20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Background: The Advanced Air Bag Final Rule
II. Petitions for Reconsideration
III. Summary of Response to Petitions
IV. Issues Related to Improving the Protection of Occupants in 
Serious Crashes
    A. Maximum Test Speed for Unbelted Barrier Test
    B. Minimum Test Speed for Unbelted Barrier Test
    C. Additional Tests
    1. The Consumer Groups' Requests
    2. Agency Response to Consumer Groups' Requests
    D. Positioning Procedure for the 5th Percentile Adult Female 
Test Dummy (Barrier Test)
V. Issues Related to Minimizing the Risk of Injuries and Deaths 
Caused By Air Bags
    A. Automatic Suppression Requirements
    1. Child Restraints
    2. Dummy Positioning
    3. Use of Humans for Testing Automatic Suppression Systems
    B. Low-Risk Deployment Options
    1. 300 ms Test Duration
    2. Seat Positioning
    3. Tests to Determine Which Stage of Deployment Will be Used in 
the Low-Risk Deployment Tests
    4. Test Procedures for the Passenger-Side Air Bag
    a. Chest-on-Instrument Panel Test Procedure
    b. Head-on-Instrument Panel Test Procedure
    c. Definition of Points, Planes and Materials
    5. Driver Side Air Bags
VI. Issues Related to Injury Criteria
    A. Head Injury Criteria (HIC)
    B. Chest Injury Measurements
    C. Neck Injury Criteria
VII. Issues Related to Labels, Telltales, and Owner's Manual 
Information
    A. Warning Labels
    B. Telltales
    C. Owner's Manual Information
VIII. Issues Related to Phase-in Requirements for Small Volume 
Manufacturers
IX. Other Issues
    A. Dummy Containment
    B. Partial Compliance
    C. Cross-Reference for Test Duration
    D. Combination of Standard No. 208 Oblique Barrier Test and 
Standard No. 301 Oblique Barrier Test
    E. Effective Date for New Data Filtering Technique
    F. Use of Human Child to Detect the Presence of an Infant
X. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

I. Background: The Advanced Air Bag Final Rule

    On May 12, 2000, we published in the Federal Register (65 FR 30680) 
a final rule; interim final rule to require advanced air bags. (Docket 
No. NHTSA 00-7013; Notice 1.) The rule amended Standard No. 208, 
Occupant Crash Protection, to require that future air bags be designed 
so that, compared to current air bags, they create less risk of serious 
air bag-induced injuries, particularly for small women and young 
children; and provide improved frontal crash protection for all 
occupants, by means that include advanced air bag technology.
    To achieve these goals, the rule added a wide variety of new 
requirements, test procedures, and injury criteria, based on the use of 
an assortment of new dummies. Among other things, it replaced the 
current sled test with a rigid barrier crash test for assessing the 
protection of unbelted occupants.
    The issuance of the rule completed the implementation of our 1996 
comprehensive plan for reducing air bag risks. It was also required by 
the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA 21), which was 
enacted in 1998. That Act required us to issue a rule amending Standard 
No. 208:

to improve occupant protection for occupants of different sizes, 
belted and unbelted, under Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 
208, while minimizing the risk to infants, children, and other 
occupants from injuries and deaths caused by air bags, by means that 
include advanced air bags.
(Emphasis added.)

    The rule will improve protection and minimize risk by requiring new 
tests and injury criteria and specifying the use of an entire family of 
test dummies: the existing dummy representing 50th percentile adult 
males, and new dummies representing 5th percentile adult females, 6-
year-old children, 3-year-old children, and 1-year-old infants. With 
the addition of those dummies, Standard No. 208 will more fully reflect 
the range in sizes of vehicle occupants.
    The rule will be phased in during two stages. The first stage 
phase-in will require vehicles to be certified as passing the unbelted 
test requirements \1\ for both the 5th percentile adult female and 50th 
percentile adult male dummies in a 32-40 km/h (20-25 mph) rigid barrier 
crash, and belted test requirements \2\ for the same two dummies in a 
rigid barrier crash with a maximum test speed of 48 km/h (30 mph). In 
addition, the first stage will require vehicles to include technologies 
that will minimize the risk of air bag-induced injuries for young 
children and small adults.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ ``Unbelted test requirements'' are requirements that specify 
the use of unbelted dummies in testing vehicles.
    \2\ ``Belted test requirements'' are requirements that specify 
the use of belted dummies in testing vehicles.

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

[[Page 65377]]

    The second stage phase-in will require vehicles to be certified as 
passing the belted test requirements for the 50th percentile adult male 
dummy up to 56 km/h (35 mph). This requirement will provide improved 
protection for belted occupants.

First Stage Phase-in--Risk Minimization Provisions

    During the first stage phase-in, from September 1, 2003 to August 
31, 2006, increasing percentages of motor vehicles will be required to 
meet requirements for minimizing air bag risks, primarily by either 
automatically turning off the air bag when young children are present 
or deploying the air bag in a manner more benignly so that it is much 
less likely to cause serious or fatal injury to out-of-position 
occupants.\3\ If they so wish, manufacturers may choose to use a 
combination of those approaches.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The rule also establishes very general performance 
requirements for dynamic automatic suppression systems (DASS) and a 
special expedited petitioning and rulemaking process for considering 
procedures for testing advanced air bag systems incorporating a 
DASS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Manufacturers that decide to turn off the passenger air bag will 
use weight sensors and/or other means of detecting the presence of 
young children. To test the ability of those means to detect the 
presence of children, the rule specifies that child dummies be placed 
in child seats that are, in turn, placed on the passenger seat in both 
proper and (to simulate misuse) improper ways. It also specifies tests 
that are conducted with unrestrained child dummies sitting, kneeling, 
standing, or lying on the passenger seat.
    The ability of air bags to deploy in a low-risk manner will be 
tested using child dummies on the passenger side and the small adult 
female dummy on the driver side. For manufacturers that decide to 
design their passenger air bags to deploy in a low risk manner, the 
rule specifies that unbelted child dummies be placed against the 
instrument panel in two different positions. The air bag is then 
deployed. This placement was specified because pre-crash braking can 
cause unrestrained children to move forward into or near the instrument 
panel before the air bag deploys. The ability of driver air bags to 
deploy in a low risk manner will be tested by placing the 5th 
percentile adult female dummy against the steering wheel in two 
different positions and then deploying the air bag.

First Stage Phase-in--Protection Improvement Provisions

    In addition, the vehicle manufacturers will be required to meet a 
rigid barrier crash test with both unbelted 5th percentile adult female 
dummies and unbelted 50th percentile adult male dummies. The unbelted 
rigid barrier test replicates what happens to motor vehicles and their 
occupants in real world crashes better than the current sled test does. 
The maximum test speed for unbelted dummy testing will be 40 km/h (25 
mph).
    Our decision to set the maximum test speed for unbelted dummy 
testing at 40 km/h (25 mph) was issued as an interim final rule. We 
concluded that was the appropriate test speed for at least the TEA 21 
implementation period (MY 2004-2007). We explained that that speed will 
provide vehicle manufacturers with the flexibility they need during 
that period to meet the technological challenges involved in 
simultaneously improving protection and minimizing risk. To achieve 
those twin goals, the manufacturers will have to comply with the wide 
variety of new requirements using an array of new dummies during this 
near-term time frame.
    However, we did not draw any final conclusion about the 
appropriateness of that test speed in the longer run. We explained 
that, at this time, we cannot assess whether the uncertainty about the 
manufacturers' ability to improve protection further and minimize risk 
simultaneously will persist beyond the TEA 21 implementation period. We 
stated that, in addition, while we believed that it was unlikely that 
the selection of a 40 km/h (25 mph) maximum test speed (instead of a 48 
km/h (30 mph) maximum test speed) would lead to a reduction in high 
speed protection during that period and the years beyond, we could not 
rule out that possibility. We noted that if manufacturers were to 
engage in significant depowering, it could result in lesser crash 
performance for teenage and adult occupants.
    We stated that, to help resolve these issues and concerns, we were 
planning a multi-year effort to obtain additional data. We stated that, 
based on the results of those information gathering and analysis 
efforts, we would make a final decision regarding the maximum test 
speed for unbelted dummy testing in the long run, after providing 
opportunity for informed public comment.
    The final rule made still other additions to Standard No. 208. To 
ensure that vehicle manufacturers upgrade their crash sensing and 
software systems as necessary to prevent late air bag deployments in 
crashes with soft pulses, they will be required to design their 
vehicles to meet an up-to-40 km/h (25 mph) offset deformable barrier 
test using belted 5th percentile adult female dummies. A late air bag 
deployment would allow enough time for even a belted occupant to move 
forward into the steering wheel or instrument panel during a crash 
before the air bag deploys. Thus, the occupant would be in contact with 
or very close to the air bag module when the air bag deploys, creating 
an increased risk of severe or fatal injury. In addition, the 5th 
percentile female dummy is added to the 48 km/h (30 mph) belted rigid 
barrier test that currently uses only the 50th percentile adult male 
dummy.

Second Stage Phase-in--Protection Improvement Provision

    During the second stage phase-in, from September 1, 2007 to August 
31, 2010, the maximum test speed for the belted rigid barrier test will 
increase from 48 km/h (30 mph) to 56 km/h (35 mph) in tests with the 
50th percentile adult male dummy only. As in the case of the first-
stage requirements, this second-stage requirement will be phased in for 
increasing percentages of motor vehicles. We explained that we did not 
include the 5th percentile adult female dummy in this requirement at 
this time because we have sparse information on the practicability of 
such a requirement. We stated that we would initiate testing to examine 
this issue and anticipated proposing increasing the test speed for 
belted tests using the 5th percentile adult female dummy to 56 km/h (35 
mph), beginning at the same time that the belted test must be met at 
that speed using the 50th percentile adult male. That testing has 
already begun.

Preceding Rulemaking Proposals

    The rule was preceded by a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), 
which we published in the Federal Register (63 FR 49958) (Docket No. 
NHTSA-98-4405) on September 18, 1998, and a supplemental notice of 
proposed rulemaking (SNPRM), which we published in the Federal Register 
(64 FR 60556) (Docket No. NHTSA-99-6407) on November 5, 1999.

II. Petitions for Reconsideration

    Eight petitions for reconsideration were submitted to the agency 
(see Docket No. 7013). Four of the petitions were from manufacturers of 
vehicles or air bags. Petitions were also filed by three industry 
associations representing vehicle manufacturers, and by a coalition of 
four consumer groups. In addition, Isuzu and TRW submitted requests for 
clarification before the period of time for filing petitions had

[[Page 65378]]

run. Honda, Autoliv, and Ferrari filed comments that would be 
considered petitions for reconsideration had they been timely filed. 
These comments are addressed in today's document.
    The coalition of consumer groups which filed a petition included 
the Center for Auto Safety, the Consumer Federation of America, Parents 
for Safer Air Bags, and Public Citizen. (We will refer to this 
coalition of consumer groups as the ``Consumer Groups.'') The Consumer 
Groups requested several changes to the final rule. First, they 
requested we amend the unbelted rigid barrier test requirements in the 
final rule to require a higher test speed for passenger cars (48 km/h 
(30 mph)) than for light trucks, vans and SUVs (40 km/h (25 mph)). 
Second, they requested that we require that the 40 km/h (25 mph) offset 
deformable barrier test be conducted with unbelted instead of belted 
dummies and that the vehicle impact the barrier on both the driver and 
passenger sides. Third, they asked that we require manufacturers to 
meet a 56 km/h (35 mph) belted barrier test with the 5th percentile 
adult female dummy as well as the 50th percentile adult male dummy. 
Fourth, they asked that we require vehicles to satisfy all rigid 
barrier test requirements in both the perpendicular and oblique modes.
    The Coalition of Small Volume Automobile Manufacturers (COSVAM) 
petitioned us to expand the scope of a special provision we included in 
the final rule to accommodate the needs of small volume manufacturers 
(SVMs). The provision at issue permits manufacturers that produce fewer 
than 5,000 vehicles per year worldwide to wait until the end of the 
phase-in to meet the new requirements. COSVAM petitioned us to apply 
this provision to manufacturers that produce up to 10,000 vehicles per 
year. Alternatively, it petitioned that the 5,000 vehicle cap be 
limited to vehicles sold in the United States per year or that the 
5,000 vehicle cap be averaged over the phase-in period. Under the 
averaged approach, if a manufacturer produced more than 5,000 vehicles 
in a single year, it could still take advantage of the exclusion as 
long as its average of production during the phase-in was not more than 
5,000 vehicles per year.
    The petitions from manufacturers and their associations requested 
numerous changes in other aspects of the final rule.
    DaimlerChrysler and Toyota requested that the unbelted rigid 
barrier test be conducted at only 40 km/h (25 mph), with the 
possibility of a small tolerance, instead of the specified range of 32 
to 40 km/h (20 to 25 mph). They claimed that meeting the requirements 
of the unbelted barrier tests at speeds below 40 km/h (25 mph) may 
prevent them from certifying compliance on the passenger side using the 
low risk deployment option. They also claimed they would have 
difficulty meeting the low risk deployment requirements on the driver 
side. Several petitioners also expressed concern over the seating 
position for the 5th percentile adult female test dummy in the barrier 
tests.
    Several requests were made concerning the automatic suppression 
option, most of which concerned the level of seat belt cinch down force 
for the belted test procedures and the selection of child restraints. 
Toyota, the Alliance, DaimlerChrysler and Takata all stated that they 
believed the 134 N (30 pounds) cinch-down force specified in the final 
rule was unreasonable. Petitioners urged NHTSA to adopt a cinch down 
force of 67N (15 pounds), which is currently specified in Standard No. 
213.
    Toyota also raised several issues in its petition related to the 
use of current anthropomorphic test dummies and humans in automatic 
suppression tests. It urged the agency to work with industry in 
developing better test dummies because of the recognition problems many 
automatic suppression systems have with the current test dummies. 
Mitsubishi echoed this request.
    We received several requests regarding the test procedures for both 
the driver and passenger low-risk deployment tests, as well as the 300 
ms test duration specified in the final rule for those tests. 
Additionally, several issues regarding the low-risk deployment test 
procedures were raised at a December 2000 technical workshop that the 
agency conducted to explore issues related to test procedures. Several 
petitioners, including Toyota, the Alliance, TRW, and DaimlerChrysler 
argued against the extension of the 300 ms test data acquisition 
requirement for measuring injury criteria in the static low risk 
deployment tests. The petitioners argued that data should only be 
counted for the period prior to recoil of the head, neck and torso away 
from the air bag into the seat back, head restraint, B-pillar or other 
interior components. DaimlerChrysler petitioned the agency to change 
the test procedure for determining which stage or stages of the air bag 
to fire in the low risk deployment tests. It argued in favor of 
allowing the use of the dummies for which the low-risk deployment 
technology is designed to be used in the initial test. Thus, if a 
manufacturer certifies to the low-risk deployment requirement for the 
6-year-old child dummy, the barrier test would be conducted using that 
dummy.
    While the petitions regarding the low risk deployment tests for the 
passenger air bag addressed both the dummy head-on-instrument panel 
position and dummy chest-on-instrument panel test position, the 
greatest criticism was leveled against the chest-on-instrument panel 
position procedure. While other petitioners expressed general concerns 
about the test procedure in their petitions, the most comprehensive 
analysis was provided by TRW. TRW noted that when both the 3-year-old 
and the 6-year-old test dummies were initially positioned as specified 
and then moved forward, dummy contact with the windshield or instrument 
panel could result in the dummy being positioned at a considerable 
distance from the air bag unless the dummy were moved after contact was 
made.
    Several petitioners, including TRW, DaimlerChrysler, and Toyota, 
sought clarification of what was meant by the ``geometric center of the 
right air bag tear seam,'' the point used to align the dummies in the 
static low risk deployment tests of passenger air bags. They noted that 
many passenger systems do not have a true tear seam. Instead, they may 
have a cover that opens as part of the instrument panel, or the 
instrument panel may be a solid structure with no visible tear seam. In 
both of these instances, the ``geometric center of the right air bag 
tear seam'' is difficult to determine and could vary depending on who 
is conducting the test.
    Petitions concerning the positioning procedure for the low risk 
deployment test on the driver side focused on the procedure for the 
dummy chin-on-steering wheel rim test. Toyota stated in its petition 
that the final rule did not adequately ensure that the dummy's chin 
would not catch on the rim of the steering wheel, leading to 
artificially high neck extension bending moments. Honda raised similar 
concerns. Toyota also stated that using the seat to move the dummy 
forward results in pre-loading the dummy. Mitsubishi and TRW queried 
whether forward head movement was to cease if the dummy chest or torso 
impacted the steering wheel before the head contacted the windshield.
    The Alliance, DaimlerChrysler, and Toyota petitioned for changes in 
the final rule's new injury criteria. The Alliance and DaimlerChrysler 
petitioned the agency to set the Head Injury Criterion (HIC) maxima for 
the 5th percentile adult female dummy and the 6-year-old child dummy at 
a

[[Page 65379]]

maximum HIC of 779 and 723, respectively. The Alliance, Toyota and 
DaimlerChrysler petitioned the agency to adopt the Alliance's scaled 
chest acceleration maximum of 73 g for the 5th percentile adult female 
dummy. They expressed particular concern over the effect that the 60 g 
limit would have in the belted barrier test for the 50th percentile 
adult male dummy. In their petitions for reconsideration, both Toyota 
and DaimlerChrysler reiterated their concerns with the Hybrid III dummy 
neck design and with the adoption of Neck Injury Criterion (Nij) an 
injury criterion. Toyota asked that the introduction of Nij be delayed 
until certain bending moment issues are resolved. DaimlerChrysler asked 
the agency to measure only axial force rather than using Nij due to 
problems it believes the current Hybrid III neck has in measuring 
bending moments.
    We also received petitions for reconsideration for and comments on 
both the changed label and on the issue of whether to allow additional 
information other than that required by the warning label. Toyota urged 
us to keep the existing warning label, except for the addition of the 
statement ``even with advanced air bags,'' arguing that the advanced 
air bag technology is not yet developed enough to justify a weaker 
label. DaimlerChrysler, Toyota, GM, the Alliance and Ford have all 
requested that NHTSA limit any information beyond that in the required 
label to the owner's manual. Parents for Safer Air Bags asked for 
clarification of the agency's position regarding the extent of 
information to be provided on the labels.
    The Alliance, DaimlerChrysler, and Mitsubishi petitioned the agency 
to revise the current requirement that the telltale indicating the 
passenger air bag has been suppressed be visible to occupants of all 
ages, and urged us instead to adopt the requirements of Standard No. 
101, Controls and Displays. DaimlerChrysler also requested the 
regulatory text be clarified to assure that the telltale would be 
visible to all occupants seated in a forward-facing position, and that 
it not be obstructed by a rear-facing child restraint. The Alliance 
requested that they be allowed to use the abbreviation ``pass'' in lieu 
of ``passenger'' in the message text. DaimlerChrysler requested that 
manufacturers be allowed to use a universal symbol representing the 
status of the air bag rather than a specified text.

Technical Workshop

    Petitioners raised a large number of concerns about the various 
test procedures in their written submissions. The agency decided to 
hold a technical workshop so that it could better understand the 
specific concerns and to determine if the test procedures needed 
refinement. The workshop was held at NHTSA's Vehicle Research and Test 
Center in East Liberty, Ohio on December 6, 2000. Representatives of 18 
vehicle manufacturers and 13 seat, sensor, and dummy manufacturers 
attended the workshop. Five different vehicles were used as test 
vehicles. Some of the five had been provided by the manufacturer 
because it was experiencing particular problems with the existing test 
procedures in these vehicles. The workshop focused on the cinch-down 
procedure for the child seats, and the positioning procedures for the 
low-risk deployment tests. There was some discussion about the 
positioning procedure for the 5th percentile adult female test dummy 
for the rigid barrier tests. After we had finished trying out the test 
procedures on the various test vehicles, we allowed parties to make 
presentations. TRW, DaimlerChrysler, Toyota, and others provided slide 
presentations highlighting their specific concerns. Copies of these 
presentations have been placed in the docket (NHTSA-00-7013-51).

III. Summary of Response to Petitions

    We are making several changes to the final rule in response to the 
petitions. These changes include a number of refinements to the 
positioning procedures for the low risk deployment tests and, to a 
lesser degree, for the automatic suppression tests. We are also 
changing the test duration for the low risk deployment tests. Also, the 
test used for determining the stage(s) of the air bag to be used for 
the passenger side low risk tests is modified. We are also modifying 
the definition of small volume manufacturer for the purpose of the 
rule's phase-in schedule. We have also added an option to use human 
children instead of the newborn or 12-month-old dummies to test a 
vehicle's occupant recognition system.
    We have decided against making any changes to the rigid and offset 
deformable barrier tests other than the seating procedure for the 5th 
percentile adult female test dummy. Nor are we making any changes to 
the required injury criteria. We are addressing petitions for 
reconsideration of the offset deformable barrier design in a separate 
rulemaking.

IV. Improving the Protection of Occupants in Serious Crashes

A. Maximum Test Speed for Unbelted Barrier Test

    In their petition for reconsideration, the Consumer Groups 
requested that we amend the final rule to require passenger cars to 
meet a 48 km/h (30 mph) unbelted barrier test, while applying the 40 
km/h (25 mph) maximum speed only to LTVs (light trucks, vans and SUVs).
    These petitioners stated that, in their view, the primary reason 
why the agency lowered the standard's unbelted test speed to 40 km/h 
(25 mph) for all vehicles, including passenger cars, was because of the 
greater difficulties that SUVs and light trucks would have in complying 
with a 48 km/h (30 mph) unbelted test, due to their stiffer frames. In 
support of this assertion, the Consumer Groups cited a statement by the 
agency in the final rule preamble that ``a 40 km/h (25 mph) maximum 
test speed gives vehicle manufacturers more flexibility to address the 
greater compliance problems associated with vehicles, e.g., SUVs, with 
particularly stiff pulses.''
    The Consumer Groups argued further that passenger cars can meet the 
new injury criteria in a 48 km/h (30 mph) unbelted test. In support of 
this argument, they alleged that test results show some passenger cars 
already meet the unbelted 48 km/h (30 mph) test requirements for both 
50th percentile male and 5th percentile female dummies.
    The Consumer Groups stated that since, in their view, manufacturers 
already build some cars that meet the 48 km/h (30 mph) unbelted test, 
NHTSA should have required cars to meet the 48 km/h (30 mph) unbelted 
test, while allowing LTVs to meet a 40 km/h (25 mph) test. They argued 
that this would provide manufacturers with additional time and 
necessary design flexibility to develop engineering solutions to meet 
48 km/h (30 mph) test for LTVs at some future time. They also argued 
that a separate phase-in would take account of the need to improve 
occupant protection in light of the increased number of LTVs. The 
Consumer Groups stated that, with LTVs accounting for over half of new 
vehicle sales, the need for a high level of occupant protection for 
passenger car occupants is especially acute since car occupants are 
four times more likely to be killed in collisions with LTVs than their 
LTV counterparts. The petitioners noted that the agency has in the past 
adopted different phase-ins for different types of vehicles, with 
passenger cars being required to meet

[[Page 65380]]

more stringent safety standards sooner than light trucks.
    The Consumer Groups argued that the decision to apply the 40 km/h 
(25 mph) test speed to passenger cars as well as LTVs has serious 
consequences because in frontal crashes between light trucks/SUVs and 
cars, the lighter car experiences a higher crash severity than the 
heavier truck. The Consumer Groups argued that cars that need more 
protection received less protection under the final rule. The 
petitioners also argued that since a 48 km/h (30 mph) test speed 
represents median speed of all fatal frontal crashes, NHTSA is 
sacrificing passenger car occupants by not requiring 48 km/h (30 mph) 
protection at least for passenger cars.
    After carefully considering the arguments that the Consumer Groups 
made in support of their request that we adopt a 48 km/h (30 mph) 
maximum test speed for passenger cars during the TEA 21 phase-in, we 
have decided to deny that request. The reasons for our denial are 
discussed below.
    The Consumer Groups' argued that the agency's primary justification 
for adopting a 40 km/h (25 mph) maximum unbelted test speed for all 
light vehicles, including passenger cars was the greater difficulties 
that vehicles with particularly stiff crash pulses, e.g., SUVs, would 
have in meeting a 48 km/h (30 mph) unbelted test. They contrasted those 
difficulties with the fact that they believe some passenger cars 
already meet the unbelted 48 km/h (30 mph) barrier test for both the 
50th percentile adult male dummy and the 5th percentile adult female 
dummy. They concluded that the agency should, therefore, have adopted a 
48 km/h (30 mph) maximum speed for passenger cars.
    We believe that the petitioners may have misunderstood the agency's 
reasoning. Contrary to the petitioners' assertion, the greater 
challenges posed by vehicles with stiffer crash pulses, including 
typical SUVs, was only one of many considerations, and not the 
paramount one, that led the agency to conclude that 40 km/h (25 mph) 
should be chosen as the maximum speed for the unbelted test in the near 
term. In the summary of our May 2000 final rule, NHTSA said that the 
maximum test speed for the unbelted test ``reflect the uncertainty of 
simultaneously achieving the twin goals of TEA 21,'' to provide 
improved frontal crash protection for all occupants and to minimize the 
risks of serious air bag-induced injuries.
    NHTSA set forth six reasons for why it was in the best overall 
interest of safety to choose 40 km/h (25 mph) as the unbelted test 
speed. See 65 FR 30680, at 30687-30690. These reasons (presented in a 
condensed fashion) were as follows:
    1. It is very important that advanced air bags be properly designed 
from the very beginning. Because of the potential for death and injury, 
we want to be cautious in how far and how fast vehicle manufacturers 
are required to advance the state of advanced air bag technologies in 
their vehicles. We are particularly concerned about the difficulties of 
trying to meet the unbelted rigid barrier test at 48 km/h (30 mph) with 
both adult dummies while simultaneously trying to reduce the risks of 
air bag-induced injuries and deaths. Since a significant percentage of 
current vehicles can already satisfy the new unbelted barrier crash 
test at 40 km/h (25 mph) with both the 5th percentile adult female 
dummy and the 50th percentile adult male dummy, we conclude that 
setting the maximum speed at that level will help vehicle manufacturers 
to focus their resources and compliance efforts during the first stage 
on meeting the risk reduction requirements. While advanced air bag 
technologies will facilitate simultaneously achieving the goals of 
improving protection and minimizing risk, we cannot forecast the pace 
of development of those technologies.
    We noted that while the manufacturers' resources for dealing with 
air bags, as well as all the other engineering issues associated with 
future motor vehicles, are extensive, there are limits to how much can 
be done at any one time. We explained that we needed to consider the 
variety and complexity of changes in air bag testing and technology 
that will be required by the rule. We noted that the array of new 
requirements that the manufacturers will have to meet in the first 
stage is challenging. The May 2000 final rule specified the use of a 
new test dummy (the 5th percentile adult female) in high speed tests, 
added a new test (offset belted), adds new neck injury criteria, and 
made existing injury criteria more stringent (chest deflection). The 
rule also added an entire new series of risk minimization tests, which 
require manufacturers to install air bag suppression systems or low-
risk deployment systems, or both.
    Of particular concern here was that air bags must be tuned to 
inflate quickly enough to protect the unbelted mid-sized male dummy 
without posing risks to the unbelted small female dummy that will be 
positioned much closer to the air bag. At the same time, manufacturers 
are required to develop and tune suppression technologies, low-risk 
deployment technologies, or a combination of both of these technologies 
to meet the risk minimization requirements. Even now, more than one 
year later the issuance of the May 2000 final rule, NHTSA cannot 
forecast how long it will take to complete the process of 
simultaneously developing and incorporating all of these technologies 
into all vehicles lines. NHTSA decided that we would increase the risks 
of advanced air bags not being able to meet all of the new requirements 
if we adopted the more difficult 48 km/h (30 mph) unbelted test. Those 
were not, and are not, risks that the agency is willing to take with 
the available information.
    Differences in crash pulse are but one of the many technological 
challenges that must be overcome to provide improved protection for all 
occupants as well as to reduce the risks of air bag-induced injuries. 
The need to develop and apply technology that works reliably is a 
challenge for both passenger cars and light trucks.
    2. There are unresolved issues that make it difficult for vehicles 
to provide protection for both small females and mid-sized males in a 
48 km/h (30 mph) unbelted test without compromising efforts to minimize 
the risks of serious air bag-induced injuries. A good example is the 
issue of the best strategy for using the two inflation levels of a 
dual-stage air bag to meet that test. The choice among competing 
strategies is complicated by the existence of ``gray'' or transition 
zones, i.e., ranges of conditions in which the air bag changes from one 
level of performance to another.
    To date, the vehicle manufacturers have been required to certify 
compliance of their air bags based on only a single size of dummy at 
only a single seat adjustment position. Tuning an air bag to perform in 
that single combination of test conditions is a relatively simple task. 
No regulatory requirements preclude manufacturers from optimizing 
performance for that combination of test conditions while placing 
secondary importance on other sizes of occupants in other seat 
adjustment positions.
    In the May 2000 final rule, NHTSA for the first time required 
manufacturers to balance the performance of their air bag systems for 
different sized occupants. In addition to protecting mid-size male 
dummies with the seat in the mid-track position, air bags will be 
required to protect small size female dummies with the seat all the way 
forward. This is a far more challenging task for air bag system 
designers. We expect that the new, more demanding requirements will 
encourage the use of dual-stage

[[Page 65381]]

inflator technology. Although the challenge of this task may be 
compounded somewhat by a relatively stiff crash pulse, the task is 
formidable for all vehicles, regardless of crash pulse.
    3. The vehicle manufacturers need design flexibility to address 
issues regarding performance in real world crash conditions not 
directly replicated by Standard No. 208's tests. One of the greatest 
limitations of early generation air bags is that they typically deploy 
in the same manner regardless of such factors as crash severity or 
occupant size, weight or position. Successful implementation of air 
bags designed to vary their performance in response to sensed 
differences in crash severity or other conditions presents a challenge 
to the manufacturers in that these air bags have ``gray'' or transition 
zones, i.e., ranges of conditions in which the air bag changes from one 
level of performance to another. We believe it is appropriate for the 
manufacturers initially to introduce relatively simple advanced 
systems. While we believe that more complex systems offer promise of 
even greater benefits, there are significant uncertainties regarding 
the feasibility and thus availability of such systems.
    Standard No. 208 currently tests for a full frontal crash. While 
such a crash occurs less frequently, compared to offset crashes, in the 
real world, we have chosen the full frontal crash mode because it is 
very repeatable and provides a more demanding evaluation of restraint 
systems. However, NHTSA expects vehicle and air bag manufacturers will 
take into account other frontal crash modes, such as offset crashes and 
crashes into poles. To the extent that we make our full frontal crash 
test more stringent, we limit the ability of the manufacturers to take 
account of these other crash modes. This is because the most stringent 
test is the primary determinant of the design of air bag and vehicle 
performance. After the performance attributes of the air bag system are 
optimized for the most stringent test (in this case, the unbelted full 
frontal barrier crash), the manufacturers will typically run a check on 
performance in other relevant test conditions to ensure acceptable 
performance in those conditions as well. However, the ability to adjust 
performance to improve performance in these other test conditions is 
limited by the stringency of the most severe test. Choosing 48 km/h (30 
mph), instead of 40 km/h (25 mph), as the maximum test speed for the 
unbelted full frontal crash would allow the manufacturers less 
flexibility to enhance performance in other test conditions. Again, 
while the need for design flexibility may be compounded somewhat by a 
relatively stiff crash pulse, that need is substantial for all 
vehicles, regardless of crash pulse.
    4. A 40 km/h (25 mph) maximum test speed gives vehicle 
manufacturers more flexibility to address the greater compliance 
problems associated with vehicles, e.g., SUVs, with particularly stiff 
crash pulses. Since unbelted occupants moving forward in frontal 
crashes of these vehicles will have to be engaged more quickly than in 
vehicles with softer crash pulses, the task of designing air bag 
systems in stiff pulse vehicles is significantly more challenging.
    This reason is based on the greater compliance difficulties for 
vehicles with relatively stiff crash pulses. As a generality, SUVs and 
other vehicles with frame rail construction have stiff crash pulses, 
while cars and other vehicles with uni-body construction have softer 
crash pulses. In a crash, the occupants travel forward more quickly 
toward the steering wheel and dashboard in a vehicle with a stiff crash 
pulse than they would in a vehicle with a softer crash pulse. 
Accordingly, air bags typically need to come out sooner and/or quicker 
in a vehicle with a similarly stiff crash pulse than they would in a 
vehicle with a softer pulse. To the extent that air bags must come out 
quicker in vehicles with stiff crash pulses makes it more difficult to 
minimize air bag risks in those vehicles because the methods for 
getting air bags out quicker, e.g., having a fast inflation rise rate, 
tend to make air bags more aggressive to out-of-position occupants. It 
is for this reason that the technological challenges faced by the 
vehicle manufacturers in simultaneously improving protection and 
minimizing risk can be somewhat greater for vehicles with stiff crash 
pulses than for other vehicles.
    However, the above generalization about the relative crash pulses 
of cars and other light vehicles has important limitations. Some newer, 
more ``car-like'' SUVs, i.e., cross-over or hybrid SUVs, such as the 
Ford Escape and the Honda CRV, are not built with frame rail 
construction and do not have particularly stiff crash pulses. On the 
other hand, many small cars, despite their uni-body construction, have 
relatively stiff crash pulses, because the small space limits the 
energy absorption by the front of the vehicle. Further, the 
uncertainties associated with the task of simultaneously improving 
protection, while also minimizing risk, are formidable for all light 
vehicles, regardless of crash pulse.
    5. It is unlikely that vehicle manufacturers will significantly 
depower their air bags and minimally comply with the 40 km/h (25 mph) 
test. Thus, NHTSA believes that it is not risking a substantial loss of 
benefits by establishing an unbelted barrier test of 40 km/h (25 mph).
    We explained our view that the air bags most likely to be produced 
under a 40 km/h (25 mph) standard would offer at least as much overall 
high speed protection as the current redesigned air bags, i.e., those 
certified to the sled test option adopted in 1997. We noted that while 
manufacturers might make some adjustments in providing high speed 
protection for different size occupants, we believed it was unlikely 
that they would reduce the overall level of protection, much less 
switch to some kind of new, hypothetical air bag design that might 
minimally pass the 40 km/h (25 mph) test, but provide little or no 
protection to unbelted occupants in higher severity crashes.
    We cited several reasons for this belief. We noted that most 
vehicle manufacturers did not respond to the flexibility provided by 
the sled test by providing air bags that only minimally complied with 
the sled test. They did not depower their air bags as much as they 
could have. We also noted that the vehicle manufacturers had 
specifically committed to not reducing high speed protection of air bag 
systems through significant and widespread depowering.
    For these reasons, and the others discussed in the final rule 
preamble, we continue to believe that it is unlikely that there will be 
any significant reduction in safety benefits as a result of our 
adoption of the 40 km/h (25 mph) maximum test speed as an interim final 
rule. Put another way, we continue to believe that we are not risking a 
substantial loss of benefits by establishing a maximum unbelted barrier 
test speed of 40 km/h (25 mph). We observe that the Consumer Groups did 
not provide any data or analysis contradicting our arguments in this 
area.
    Finally, we note that this fifth reason applies equally to all 
vehicles, regardless of whether they have a stiff or soft crash pulse.
    6. Replacing the 48 km/h (30 mph) generic sled test with the 40 km/
h (25 mph) unbelted rigid barrier test requires a significantly higher 
level of safety.
    This reason applies equally to all vehicles, regardless of whether 
they have a stiff or soft crash pulse.
    From this review of our six reasons for selecting a maximum test 
speed of 40 km/h (25 mph), it is apparent that the

[[Page 65382]]

differences in crash pulses were not a paramount consideration in our 
assessment of the challenges presented by the advanced air bag rule. 
Given the uncertainties associated with overcoming those challenges, 
and a statutory requirement to issue a final rule in early 2000, NHTSA 
chose an approach that assures improved air bag protection for 
occupants of all sizes, without compromising efforts to reduce the 
risks of air bar-induced injuries to vulnerable occupants. As we said 
in the preamble to the May 2000 final rule:

    Such an approach is one that involves the least uncertainty for 
the occupants who have been most at risk. In other words, as long as 
the manufacturers improve the already substantial overall level of 
air bag protection provided by current redesigned air bags, the 
uncertainty involved in meeting the challenge to improve high-speed 
protection and minimize risk simultaneously is best resolved at this 
point in favor of minimizing risk. This is especially true in the 
early stages of the introduction of advanced air bag technologies.

65 FR 30680, at 30688 (Emphasis added).
    We selected that test speed on a interim final basis in recognition 
of the possibility that those uncertainties may be resolved in the 
foreseeable future. To expedite the resolution of those uncertainties, 
we committed to a multi-year effort to obtain additional data to help 
resolve the issues and concerns relating to the unbelted test speed in 
the barrier crash test. See 65 FR 30692. To carry out that commitment, 
we published for public comment our plan for monitoring the performance 
of advanced air bags and gathering the information needed to make a 
final decision on the appropriate test speed for the unbelted test in 
the long run. See 66 FR 33657; June 25, 2001 (Docket No. NHTSA 2001-
8953).
    In the final analysis, the consumer groups provided no new data or 
analyses regarding our decision to select a maximum test speed of 40 
km/h (25 mph). Further, they isolated and focused on a limited portion 
of all the considerations leading to that decision in arguing that that 
limited portion should overwhelm the big picture. Their petition simply 
highlights their judgment that they would have mandated a higher speed 
for the unbelted test, given the information that was available to us 
when we made our decision. We respect their judgment, but reached 
different conclusions after considering all of the risks and 
uncertainties in this area. It may be that we will ultimately propose 
coming to the same conclusion that the Consumer Groups are advocating--
after we have gathered the additional information necessary to resolve 
the uncertainties. Until we have that information, however, our 
judgment remains that the most appropriate maximum speed for the 
unbelted test is 40 km/h (25 mph).

B. Minimum Test Speed for Unbelted Barrier Test

    Under the May 2000 final rule; interim final rule, vehicle 
manufacturers are required to meet the rigid barrier crash test with 
unbelted 5th percentile adult female dummies and unbelted 50th 
percentile adult male dummies at all speeds from 32 km/h through 40 km/
h (20 mph and through 25 mph).
    In their petitions for reconsideration, DaimlerChrysler and Toyota 
requested that the unbelted rigid barrier test be conducted only at 40 
km/h (25 mph) (or at 40 km/h (25 mph) with a small tolerance) instead 
of over a range of test speeds. They claimed that the need to meet the 
unbelted rigid barrier test with 50th percentile adult male dummies 
over the range of speeds between 32 km/h and 40 km/h (20 mph and 25 
mph) creates a conflict with meeting the low risk requirements using 3-
year-old and 6-year-old child dummies on the passenger side and using 
the 5th percentile adult female dummy on the driver side.
    In addressing these petitions, we begin by noting that we addressed 
this issue in the final rule preamble, and made changes from the SNPRM 
to the final rule in light of this concern.
    In the SNPRM, we proposed that manufacturers would need to meet the 
unbelted rigid barrier test at any speed between 29 km/h (18 mph) to 
the maximum speed (as discussed earlier, we were considering a range 
between 40 to 48 km/h (25 to 30 mph) for the maximum speed). This range 
represented a change from the belted barrier test and previous unbelted 
barrier tests, which required injury criteria to be met at any speed up 
to 48 km/h (30 mph).
    In commenting on the SNPRM, GM and Ford supported the proposed 
lower test parameter 29 km/h (18 mph). AAM, DaimlerChrysler and Toyota 
supported a higher minimum test speed. VW and Honda supported a lower 
minimum test speed. Delphi urged the agency to return to its 
traditional ``any speed between zero and'' the maximum test speed, 
arguing that the minimum test speed will result in an unacceptable 
safety trade-off for individuals who could be aided by a deploying air 
bag in lower speed crashes.
    In the final rule preamble, we explained that the concerns of the 
vehicle manufacturers opposed to the 29 km/h (18 mph) lower limit 
revolved around their ability to meet both the low risk deployment 
tests for whatever stages of the air bag would deploy in speeds up to 
29 km/h (18 mph) and the unbelted high speed tests at any speed between 
29 km/h (18 mph) and 40 to 48 km/h (25 to 30 mph). These manufacturers 
argued that while individual manufacturer's strategies will differ, the 
basic premise for dual-stage inflation systems is that the first stage 
can be tailored to reduce risk for children while offering protection 
for 5th percentile adult females while the second stage protects the 
50th percentile adult male occupant. According to the manufacturers, in 
many cases a first stage air bag that would not harm children would not 
be sufficient to satisfy the injury criteria performance limits for the 
50th percentile adult male dummy in a test at 40 km/h (25 mph) and may 
be insufficient to certify compliance in a 29 km/h (18 mph) test. In 
order to assure compliance with both the unbelted crash test 
requirement and a low risk deployment option utilizing a dual-stage air 
bag system, a manufacturer arguably would either have to drop the 
threshold for the second stage air bag close to 29 km/h (18 mph) to 
ensure compliance for the 50th percentile adult male or provide a 
higher-energy first stage inflator. The commenters asserted that if 
NHTSA were to impose the proposed speed range for the unbelted tests, 
we would create a situation that would make compliance with a low risk 
deployment option impossible, since it would not be possible to assure 
that only the first stage air bag deploys at 29 km/h (18 mph) for the 
out-of-position test.
    For the final rule, we decided to raise the minimum test speed for 
the unbelted test from 29 km/h (18 mph) to 32 km/h (20 mph) while 
decreasing the maximum threshold for the various out-of-position tests 
from 29 km/h (18 mph) to 26 km/h (16 mph). We stated that we believed 
that this difference in speed between the two tests would be sufficient 
to resolve manufacturers' concerns in this area. We noted that the 
requirement we adopted built in a 6 km/h (4 mph) ``grey zone'' that 
would allow manufacturers to assure the deployment of both inflator 
stages, if needed, in all high speed tests, while preserving their 
ability to deploy only the first stage (or allow for deployment of a 
combination of benign stages) of the air bag in the low risk deployment 
tests.
    In the final rule preamble, we stated that we were rejecting 
DaimlerChrysler's and Toyota's request that we test unbelted dummies 
only at 40 km/h (25 mph) because we continued to believe

[[Page 65383]]

a range of speeds is necessary to adequately protect drivers and adult 
passengers.
    In petitioning for reconsideration, DaimlerChrysler again requested 
testing only at 40 km/h (25 mph). That manufacturer argued that the 
requirement for protecting an unbelted 50th percentile adult male 
occupant during a rigid barrier test at speeds as low as 32 km/h (20 
mph) and the requirement for static out-of-position tests to be 
conducted with whichever air bag stage is deployed during a 26 km/h (16 
mph) rigid barrier test are in conflict and inconsistent with the 
reality of crash sensing and air bag inflator technology.
    Toyota similarly argued that the agency's decision to reduce the 
test speed range from 29-40 km/h (18-25 mph) to 32-40 km/h (20-25 mph), 
although directionally correct, does not adequately address the 
concerns it outlined in its comment on the SNPRM. That company argued 
that conflicts exist between offering sufficient compliance margin for 
the 50th percentile male dummy in the upper speed ranges and the desire 
to minimize risk to out-of-position children and small adults. Toyota 
stated that it believes that given the limitations of current seat 
suppression technology, regardless of its performance in certification 
tests under controlled conditions, automakers must be allowed the 
design flexibility to offer seemingly redundant technologies to protect 
out-of-position children in the real world.
    On reconsideration, after carefully considering DaimlerChrysler's 
and Toyota's requests that we specify testing of unbelted dummies only 
at 40 km/h (25 mph) instead of a range between 32-40 km/h (20-25 mph), 
we have decided to deny those requests. As discussed below, we again 
conclude that the 32-40 km/h (20-25 mph) range of speeds helps ensure 
adequate protection of drivers and adult passengers. Moreover, we 
believe that the change requested by these petitioners is unnecessary, 
particularly in light of another change we are making in response to 
the petitions for reconsideration.
    In addressing the requests of DaimlerChrysler and Toyota, it is 
appropriate to begin by citing again the requirements of TEA 21, that 
the agency issue a final rule meeting two different, equally important 
goals:

To improve occupant protection for occupants of different sizes, 
belted and unbelted, under Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 
208, while minimizing the risk to infants, children, and other 
occupants from injuries and deaths caused by air bags, by means that 
include advanced air bags. 
(Emphasis added.)

    There is obviously a tension between improving occupant protection 
for occupants of different sizes, belted and unbelted, while also 
minimizing the risk to infants, children, and other occupants from 
injuries and deaths caused by air bags. This tension exists because the 
deployment process of the air bag that is needed to provide protection 
can also create risks for persons who are extremely close to the air 
bag before that deployment. It was because of this tension that 
Congress included the reference to ``advanced air bags''; it recognized 
the need for vehicle manufacturers to incorporate advanced technologies 
in their air bags in order for these two goals to be met 
simultaneously.
    However, while we recognize that there is a tension between these 
goals, there is no conflict between requiring vehicles to meet the 
rigid barrier crash test with unbelted 5th percentile adult female 
dummies and unbelted 50th percentile adult male dummies at all speeds 
between 32 km/h and 40 km/h (20 mph and 25 mph) while also meeting risk 
minimization requirements. We will discuss this issue separately for 
the driver and passenger sides.
    To address the risks posed by driver air bags, the rule requires 
vehicles to either (1) have a driver air bag that deploys in a low-risk 
manner to out-of-position occupants or (2) to have a feature that 
suppresses the air bag when a driver is out-of-position (including in 
dynamic events). We believe that all manufacturers are focusing on the 
first of these two options. The ability of air bags to deploy in a low-
risk manner is tested in static, out-of-position tests, using unbelted 
5th percentile adult female dummies placed against the steering wheel, 
and deploying the air bag with any stage(s) that may deploy during a 26 
km/h (16 mph) rigid barrier test.
    We believe the arguments raised by DaimlerChrysler and Toyota are 
primarily relevant to passenger side air bags and not to driver air 
bags. The information we have indicates that available technology 
enables vehicle manufacturers to meet the low risk and unbelted high 
speed protection requirements for driver air bags.
    We recognize that passenger air bags pose a greater design 
challenge than driver air bags with respect to simultaneously meeting 
both low risk and unbelted high speed protection requirements. The 
challenge is greater for two reasons. First, passenger air bags 
typically need to be considerably larger than driver air bags to 
provide protection. Larger air bags typically create greater risk to 
out-of-position occupants than smaller air bags. Second, young children 
are more susceptible to risk than adults.
    To address the risks posed by passenger air bags, the rule requires 
vehicles to either (1) have a passenger air bag that deploys in a low-
risk manner to out-of-position occupants, (2) to have a feature that 
suppresses the air bag when a young child is present in a variety of 
positions, or (3) to have a feature that suppresses the air bag when a 
passenger is out-of-position (including in dynamic events). The risk 
minimization requirements must be met separately for 1-year-old, 3-
year-old and 6-year-old children, and manufacturers may choose 
different options for these three classes of occupants. We developed 
the risk minimization requirements for passenger air bags in light of 
these classes of occupants because, on the passenger side, the vast 
majority of deaths and serious injuries from air bags have been to 
young children.
    We believe that all manufacturers are focusing on suppressing the 
air bag for 1-year-old children. Thus, the requirements for those 
children are not relevant to the issues raised by DaimlerChrysler and 
Toyota.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ We note that the risk minimization requirements using infant 
dummies differ in certain respects from those using 3-year-child 
dummies and 6-year-old child dummies. The third option cited above, 
for a feature that suppresses the air bag when a passenger is out-
of-position, is not available for infant dummies because infants in 
rear facing child seats would always be extremely close to the air 
bag. Different requirements also apply with respect to determining 
which stages of an air bag are deployed in low risk deployment 
tests.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Manufacturers are generally focusing on the first two options for 
3-year-old children and 6-year-old children; i.e., the low risk 
deployment requirements and/or suppressing the air bag in the presence 
of young children.
    The ability of an air bag to deploy in a low risk manner is tested 
in static out-of-position tests, using unbelted 3-year-old and 6-year-
old child dummies placed against the instrument panel in two positions, 
and deploying the air bag with any stages that may deploy during a 26 
km/h (16 mph) rigid barrier test. Specified injury criteria performance 
limits must be met to pass the low risk test.
    Manufacturers that decide to suppress the passenger air bag in the 
presence of young children will use weight sensors, pattern recognition 
sensors and/or other means of detecting their presence. To test the 
ability of those means to detect the presence of children, the rule

[[Page 65384]]

specifies that 3-year-old and 6-year-old child dummies are placed in 
child seats that are, in turn, placed on the passenger seat. It also 
specifies tests that are conducted with unrestrained child dummies 
sitting, kneeling, standing, or lying on the passenger seat. At the 
option of the manufacturer, the ability of a suppression system to 
detect the presence of a child may be demonstrated using human beings 
instead of test dummies.
    While manufacturers are required to meet at least one of the 
options specified by the risk minimization requirements, they are free 
to meet more than one of those options. For example, they can suppress 
the air bag in the presence of young children and also provide air bags 
that deploy in a low risk manner.
    We recognize that the combination of suppression and low risk 
deployment may best achieve the goal of minimizing air bag risks. For 
example, low risk deployment air bags may provide benefits that would 
not be provided by systems that simply suppress the air bag in the 
presence of young children. It was in light of this recognition, as 
well as to avoid unnecessary design restrictions, that we were willing 
to make some adjustments between the SNPRM and the final rule to 
facilitate use of low risk systems. In particular, we were willing to 
raise the minimum test speed for the unbelted test from 29 km/h (18 
mph) to 32 km/h (20 mph) while decreasing the test speed threshold for 
determining the stages to deploy in the low risk deployment tests from 
29 km/h (18 mph) to 26 km/h (16 mph).
    However, we believe that granting DaimlerChrysler's and Toyota's 
request to raise further the minimum test speed for the unbelted test 
from 32 km/h (20 mph) to 40 km/h (25 mph) (the same speed as the 
maximum test speed) would have significant adverse safety consequences.
    Unbelted occupants are at significant risk of serious injury and 
fatality in crashes with a delta V between 32 km/h and 40 km/h (20 mph 
and 25 mph). Indeed, the agency's Final Economic Assessment for the 
advanced air bag final rule estimated that air bags designed for an 
unbelted rigid barrier test with a maximum test speed of 40 km/h (25 
mph) would save 472 lives in crashes within the 32 to 40 km/h (20 to 25 
mph) range. Of these 472 lives saved, 372 would be on the driver side 
and 98 would be on the passenger side.
    We also believe that the change requested by these petitioners is 
unnecessary. As noted earlier, available technology enables vehicle 
manufacturers to meet the low risk and unbelted high speed protection 
requirements for driver air bags, even without using dual stage air 
bags.
    As for passenger air bags, we note that the advanced air bag final 
rule does not require manufacturers to meet low risk requirements for 
passenger air bags. They can alternatively choose to meet the 
standard's risk minimization requirements for passenger air bags by 
suppressing the air bag in the presence of 3-year-old and 6-year-old 
children. A number of vehicle manufacturers appear to be pursuing this 
option.
    Also, as discussed later in this document, we are making another 
change in the final rule that should resolve any concerns as to whether 
the need to meet the standard's high speed protection requirements for 
unbelted 50th percentile adult male dummies prevents manufacturers from 
providing low risk deployment for small children. In particular, we 
have decided to use 5th percentile adult female dummies, instead of 
50th percentile adult male dummies, in the 26 km/h (16 mph) rigid 
barrier test that is used for determining the stage(s) of the air bag 
to be used for the passenger side low risk tests.
    Thus, if a vehicle manufacturer faces a situation where deployment 
of both stages of a dual stage air bag is necessary to meet the 
unbelted barrier test requirements for 50th percentile adult male 
dummies in a 32 km/h (20 mph) crash test, and, because of grey zone 
issues, it is possible that both stages may fire in a 26 km/h (16 mph) 
crash, the manufacturer can design its air bag system, using occupant 
recognition technology, so that only the first stage will fire in the 
presence of 5th percentile adult female dummies in crash tests at these 
severity levels. Since only the first stage of the air bag would fire 
when 5th percentile adult female dummies are used in a 26 km/h (16 mph) 
rigid barrier test, only the first stage would be fired when conducting 
the low risk tests using child dummies.

C. Additional Tests

    In addition to their request concerning the maximum test speed for 
the unbelted barrier test, the Consumer Groups requested that we make a 
number of other changes to address what they consider to be 
shortcomings of the final rule. They argued that the final rule fails 
to follow the Congressional mandate of providing advanced air bag 
protection for all occupants, male and female, large and small, belted 
and unbelted. The Consumer Groups requested that we amend the final 
rule to add a number of tests. They also asked that we change one test 
from a belted test to an unbelted test. These requests of the Consumer 
Groups are addressed below.
1. The Consumer Groups' Requests
    Protection for unbelted occupants in crashes with soft pulses. The 
Consumer Groups argued that the final rule does not require protection 
for unbelted occupants in crashes with soft pulses. They stated that 
although NHTSA recognizes that many air bag fatalities occur in low 
speed, soft pulse crashes, where the air bag deploys late and strikes 
an out-of-position occupant who has moved forward in the crash before 
the air bag deploys, the agency failed to require any test to protect 
against this in the final rule. The Consumer Groups argued that the 
agency instead adopted only a belted offset deformable barrier test and 
an automatic suppression test. They argued that neither of these tests 
requires protection for unbelted occupants in crashes with soft pulses.
    The Consumer Groups argued that conducting the offset test with 
belted dummies ignores the fact that unbelted occupants are at greater 
risk from air bags than belted occupants. They also argued that 
manufacturers might respond to the up-to-40 km/h (25 mph) belted offset 
test by suppressing deployment, whereas specifying the use of unbelted 
dummies would more likely require deployment and the use of multi-stage 
inflators. The Consumer Groups apparently believed (erroneously) that 
the offset test is conducted with a dummy only on the driver's side and 
argued that this omits requiring protection for passengers.
    The Consumer Groups also expressed concern that the agency dropped 
the proposed dynamic out-of-position test requirements. They stated 
that the final rule contains only a series of static tests that are far 
simpler to meet than a dynamic test. They stated that weight-based 
static sensors can be fooled into false readings. They argued that the 
agency compounded this problem by deleting ``rough road'' testing.
    The Consumer Groups requested that we require that the up-to-40 km/
h (25 mph) offset deformable barrier test be conducted with unbelted 
rather than belted dummies and on both the driver and passenger sides.
    High speed crash protection for 5th percentile adult females. The 
Consumer Groups also argued that the final rule does not ensure high 
speed crash protection for 5th percentile adult females. They objected 
to the agency's adopting a 56 km/h (35 mph) belted test using 50th 
percentile adult male dummies while deferring the decision whether to 
propose using 5th percentile

[[Page 65385]]

adult female dummies until additional testing is completed. They argued 
that the agency's explanation that there is sparse information on the 
practicability of such a requirement is inconsistent with actions taken 
by the agency with respect to other requirements in this rulemaking.
    The Consumer Groups requested that we require manufacturers to meet 
a 56 km/h (35 mph) belted barrier test with the 5th percentile adult 
female dummy as well as the 50th percentile adult male dummy.
    Protection for unbelted 5th percentile adult females in oblique 
crashes. The Consumer Groups also objected to the fact that the final 
rule does not specify that the rigid barrier tests using 5th percentile 
adult females are conducted at angles but are instead only conducted in 
the perpendicular mode. They argued that in specifying oblique testing 
only using 50th percentile adult male dummies, the agency assumes that 
if the male is protected, so will the female. The Consumer Groups 
argued that this logic has led to many small women being killed by air 
bags. These petitioners stated that an oblique test of the 1997 Dodge 
Caravan conducted by NHTSA shows that interaction of the air bag with 
the anatomy of small women can lead to fatal air bag injuries.
    The Consumer Groups requested that we specify that vehicles must 
satisfy the requirements of all barrier tests in both the perpendicular 
and oblique modes.
2. Agency Response to Consumer Groups' Requests
    As we address the Consumer Groups' requests for additional tests, 
we begin by noting that no matter how many tests we include in Standard 
No. 208, it would always be possible to identify additional tests that 
represent potential real world situations. However, as we explained in 
the final rule preamble, it is necessary to strike a balance between 
ensuring that there are sufficient tests to meet the need for safety, 
and avoiding unwarranted compliance burdens.
    We note that some of the additional tests requested by the Consumer 
Groups are ones that we dropped during the course of the advanced air 
bag rulemaking. After considering the comments on our original 
September 1998 NPRM, we tentatively concluded that we could reduce the 
number of originally proposed tests without significantly affecting the 
benefits of the rule. We were persuaded by the commenters that reducing 
the amount of testing was important, given resource limitations and the 
costs to manufacturers associated with certifying vehicles to such a 
large number of new test requirements. At the same time, we wanted to 
be sure that the advanced air bag rule included sufficient tests to 
ensure that air bags are redesigned to meet the goals mandated by TEA 
21. Considering both of these factors, we included a reduced number of 
tests in our November 1999 SNPRM and in our May 2000 final rule.
    While the final rule for advanced air bags includes fewer tests 
than our original proposal, it nonetheless specifies an unprecedented 
number of new tests, and mandates a much more comprehensive assessment 
of air bag protection than the earlier version of Standard No. 208. In 
the past, the standard assessed air bag protection solely by means of 
rigid barrier crash tests (or a temporary sled test) using a single 
size of test dummy positioned well back from the air bag. The final 
rule adds an entirely new series of tests to assess low speed risk to 
occupants of many different sizes. For the first time in the history of 
Standard No. 208, the agency will use dummies representing a 12-month-
old infant, a 3-year-old child, a 6-year-old child, and a 5th 
percentile adult female. All of these new dummies will be used in 
assessing risk of air bags. For the belted and unbelted tests assessing 
high speed protection, performance will be evaluated using both the 
mid-sized male dummy positioned well back from the air bag and the new 
5th percentile female dummy positioned as far forward as the seat and/
or vehicle interior allows. Also, a new belted offset test using the 
5th percentile female dummy will help ensure that vehicle manufacturers 
upgrade their crash sensing and software systems, as necessary, to 
better address soft crash pulses.
    With this background in mind, we will address the specific requests 
of the Consumer Groups.
    Protection for unbelted occupants in crashes with soft pulses. As 
discussed earlier, the Consumer Groups argued that the final rule does 
not require protection for unbelted occupants in crashes with soft 
pulses, where the air bag may deploy late and strike an out-of-position 
occupant who has moved forward in the crash before the air bag deploys. 
They asked that we require that the 0-40 km/h (0-25 mph) offset 
deformable barrier test be conducted with unbelted rather than belted 
dummies. In considering the Consumer Groups' petition, we have 
considered both the possibility of changing the test from a belted test 
to an unbelted test, and of adding an unbelted test in addition to the 
belted test.
    In developing the advanced air bag rule, we focused a great deal of 
attention on identifying a sensible, effective array of requirements 
for increasing protection and minimizing risk. A considerable portion 
of the new rule is designed to help ensure the safety of unbelted 
occupants in crashes where occupants may be out-of-position and very 
close to the air bag. Occupants may move forward toward the air bag in 
crashes with soft pulses and/or as a result of pre-crash braking before 
the air bag deploys.
    On the passenger side, the vast majority of deaths and serious 
injuries from air bags have been to young children. The rule requires 
vehicles to meet requirements for minimizing these risks, primarily by 
either automatically turning off the air bag in the presence of young 
children or deploying the air bag in a manner much less likely to cause 
serious or fatal injury to out-of-position occupants. If they so wish, 
manufacturers may choose to use a combination of those two approaches. 
There is also an option for a feature that suppresses the air bag when 
a child is out-of-position (including in dynamic events).
    Manufacturers that decide to turn off the passenger air bag in the 
presence of young children will use weight sensors and/or other means 
of detecting their presence. To test the ability of those means to 
detect the presence of children, the rule specifies that child dummies 
be placed in child seats that are, in turn, placed on the passenger 
seat. It also specifies tests that are conducted with unrestrained 
child dummies sitting, kneeling, standing, or lying on the passenger 
seat.
    The ability of air bags to deploy in a low risk manner is tested 
using unbelted child dummies placed against the instrument panel. The 
air bag is then deployed, and specified injury criteria performance 
limits must be met.
    To address the risks air bags pose to out-of-position drivers, the 
rule requires vehicles to either have a driver air bag that is deployed 
in a manner much less likely to cause serious or fatal injury to out-
of-position occupants or to have a feature that suppresses the air bag 
when a driver is out-of-position (including in dynamic events). The 
ability of air bags to deploy in a low risk manner is tested using 
unbelted 5th percentile adult female dummies placed against the 
steering wheel.
    The Consumer Groups did not present any analysis to support their 
contention that these requirements are inadequate, or to support their 
assertion that suppression devices are likely to be Afooled'' into 
false readings. Moreover, we disagree with their characterization of 
the final rule as containing ``only a

[[Page 65386]]

series of static-based tests that are far simpler to meet than a 
dynamic test.'' The ease or difficulty in meeting a particular test 
requirement does not depend on whether the test is static or dynamic, 
but instead on the overall nature of the test requirement. Moreover, in 
some situations, static tests can offer advantages over dynamic tests. 
For example, by using static tests to evaluate the ability of a 
suppression system to detect the presence of children, we are able to 
test many more potential real world conditions relating to how children 
might be positioned than if we specified dynamic tests.
    As to the petitioners' concerns about dropping the proposed dynamic 
out-of-position test option and the rough road tests, we explained in 
the November 1999 SNPRM that both proposed tests had proven to be 
unworkable in their existing forms, and that both tests were 
unnecessary for safety. As to the option for a full scale dynamic out-
of-position test, we explained in the final rule preamble that other 
options included in the final rule would accommodate the various 
advanced air bag technologies under development. With respect to the 
rough road tests, we explained:

    While rough road performance is certainly important, we do not 
believe there is any evidence that this is likely to be a real world 
problem. It would also be difficult to develop a test procedure that 
would assure that a dummy responded like a human to the forces 
imparted by a rough road. Indeed, the procedure we had proposed in 
the NPRM turned out to be impractical and did not accomplish its 
objective. Given our limited resources, we do not believe there is a 
need at this time to develop test procedures in this area.

    The Consumer Groups were incorrect with respect to their apparent 
belief that the offset test is conducted with a dummy only on the 
driver's side. Dummies are positioned at both the driver and right 
front passenger positions.
    These petitioners may, however, have meant to refer to the fact 
that the test is conducted only with the left side of the vehicle 
engaged with the barrier. (The left side of the vehicle is nearly 
always the driver side, although the driver sits on the right in a few 
vehicles.\5\) As we discussed in the final rule preamble, we believe 
that testing with the left side of the vehicle engaged with the barrier 
will be sufficient to help ensure that vehicle manufacturers improve 
their sensing systems. We stated, however, that we will monitor future 
air bag system designs and will consider changing this decision if we 
find that manufacturers are implementing sensor systems that optimize 
performance only for impacts into the left side of the vehicle.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ DaimlerChrysler petitioned the agency to impact only the 
driver-side of the vehicle rather than the left-side. It noted that 
in some vehicles the driver sits on the right. We are not making the 
suggested change. Occupants on both the left and right side of the 
vehicle should be protected in an offset crash. However, one portion 
of the regulatory text, S18.1, references the driver side of the 
vehicle rather than the left side. That reference has been 
corrected.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Consumer Groups also did not even attempt to demonstrate that 
requiring that the 0-40 km/h (0-25 mph) offset deformable barrier test 
to be conducted with unbelted rather than belted dummies (or with both 
belted and unbelted dummies) would result in any additional safety 
benefits, given the overall array of tests included in the advanced air 
bag rule to improve protection and minimize risk.
    We added this particular test to encourage vehicle manufacturers to 
upgrade their crash sensing and software systems, as necessary, to 
better address soft crash pulses. As we noted in the final rule 
preamble, the improved sensing systems required by this test will 
benefit both belted and unbelted occupants. We also pointed out in the 
final rule that the belted offset test may represent the worst case 
scenario since the belt allows the dummy's head and neck to rotate into 
the path of the deploying air bag. This condition may better test for 
potential neck injuries than an unbelted test.
    We also note that the unbelted rigid barrier test using 5th 
percentile adult female dummies, conducted at speeds between 32 and 40 
km/h (20 and 25 mph), and the belted rigid barrier test using 5th 
percentile adult female dummies, conducted at speeds up to 48 km/h (30 
mph), also help ensure protection of occupants who are close to the air 
bag, since the 5th percentile adult female dummies are positioned with 
the seats in the full forward position.
    We conclude that it would be inappropriate to change the offset 
deformable barrier test from a belted test to an unbelted test. As 
discussed in previous rulemaking notices, this test was developed by 
Transport Canada. That agency found in its research that one of the 
causes of adverse effects of air bags is late deployment of some air 
bags in crashes with a ``soft crash pulse.'' In order to reproduce the 
softer, longer duration crash pulse, it selected the 40 percent offset 
barrier. Transport Canada found that in 40 km/h (25 mph) offset 
deformable barrier crash tests, the air bag typically deployed and was 
sometimes so late that the belted test dummy would be right on the 
steering wheel at that time, a ``worst case'' condition.
    The test configuration represents a real world situation where 
small women who are wearing their seat belts may nonetheless be at risk 
from the air bag, since they are seated close to the air bag. This is a 
particularly common situation on the driver side, since small women 
typically need to sit close to the steering wheel in order to drive the 
vehicle.
    By specifying that the belted 5th percentile adult female dummies 
are in the full forward position in this test, we can effectively test 
whether the air bag deploys late. Having the dummy unbelted would not 
improve the test. In addition, as noted earlier, the belted offset test 
may represent a worst case scenario as compared to the unbelted test. 
For all of these reasons, we believe it appropriate to maintain a 
belted 0-40 km/h (0-25 mph) offset deformable barrier test.
    We have also considered the possibility of adding an unbelted 0-40 
km/h (0-25 mph) offset deformable barrier test. Given the wide array of 
tests already included in the advanced air bag rule, and noting the 
fact that the Consumer Groups did not provide any evidence, we do not 
believe that there would be any significant benefits from adding this 
particular test.
    After carefully considering the Consumer Groups' request that the 
0-40 km/h (0-25 mph) offset deformable barrier test be conducted with 
unbelted rather than belted dummies, we decline to make that change.
    High speed crash protection for 5th percentile adult females. The 
Consumer Groups also argued that the final rule does not ensure high 
speed crash protection for 5th percentile adult females, since the 
agency adopted a 56 km/h (35 mph) belted test using 50th percentile 
adult male dummies but deferred the decision whether to propose also 
using 5th percentile adult female dummies in that test until additional 
testing is completed. They requested that we require vehicles to meet a 
56 km/h (35 mph) belted barrier test with the 5th percentile adult 
female dummy as well as the 50th percentile adult male dummy.
    The Consumer Groups are incorrect in asserting that ``the final 
rule requires no high speed crash protection for the 5th% female.'' We 
note that while Standard No. 208 has long included high speed crash 
test requirements using 50th percentile adult male dummies, the 
advanced air bag rule establishes, for the first time, high speed crash 
test requirements using 5th percentile adult female dummies. For belted 
dummies, vehicles must meet injury criteria performance limits at 
speeds up to 48 km/h (30 mph), the

[[Page 65387]]

same speed that has long been used for 50th percentile adult male 
dummies. For unbelted 5th percentile adult female dummies, vehicles 
must meet injury criteria performance limits at speeds from 32 km/h (20 
mph) to 40 km/h (25 mph), the same speed range as will apply to 
unbelted tests with 50th percentile adult male dummies.
    The final rule does increase the speed for the belted test using 
the 50th percentile adult male dummy from 48 km/h to 56 km/h (30 mph to 
35 mph). This increase in test speed will be phased-in after the phase-
in of the other requirements for advanced air bags is complete, 
beginning in the 2008 model year.
    As we discussed in the advanced air bag final rule preamble, we did 
not include the 5th percentile adult female dummy in this requirement 
because we had sparse information on the practicability of such a 
requirement. We stated that we would initiate testing to examine this 
issue and anticipated proposing to increase the test speed for belted 
tests using the 5th percentile adult female dummy to 56 km/h (35 mph), 
beginning at the same time that the 50th percentile adult male is 
required to be used in belted testing at that speed. We note that 
Congress gave us money in our FY 2001 budget to do research to gather 
information in this area.
    We disagree with the Consumer Groups' assertion that it is 
``arbitrary and capricious'' for the agency to conduct testing that 
will help us determine whether a 56 km/h (35 mph) belted rigid barrier 
test requirement using 5th percentile adult female dummies is 
practicable, prior to proposing and adopting such a requirement. We 
believe that testing before imposing a requirement represents a 
rational approach to establishing safety performance requirements. We 
also disagree with the Consumer Groups' suggestions that we are being 
inconsistent as compared to our actions with some of the other 
requirements for advanced air bags, such as the out-of-position 
requirements for 5th percentile adult female drivers and children. The 
amount of testing and analysis that may be needed to establish the 
practicability of a particular requirement varies with the requirement 
at issue. We note, however, that we did conduct significant testing and 
analysis concerning the out-of-position requirements for 5th percentile 
adult female drivers and children.
    After considering the Consumer Groups' request that we establish a 
requirement now for vehicles to meet a 0-56 km/h (0-35 mph) belted 
barrier test with the 5th percentile adult female dummy, we decline to 
take that action. However, depending on the results of our testing, we 
continue to anticipate proposing to increase the maximum test speed for 
belted tests using the 5th percentile adult female dummy to 56 km/h (35 
mph), beginning at the same time that the 50th percentile adult male is 
required to be used in belted testing at that speed.
    Protection for unbelted 5th percentile adult females in oblique 
crashes. The Consumer Groups also objected to the fact that the final 
rule does not specify that the rigid barrier tests using 5th percentile 
adult female dummies include oblique tests. They requested that we 
specify that vehicles must satisfy the requirements of all barrier 
tests in both the perpendicular and oblique modes.
    We note that the oblique tests using the 5th percentile adult 
female dummy, as well as the oblique tests using the belted 50th 
percentile adult male dummy, were among the ones we dropped during the 
course of the advanced air bag rulemaking. We were persuaded by the 
commenters that reducing the amount of testing was important, given 
resource limitations and the costs to manufacturers associated with 
certifying vehicles to such a large number of new test requirements. 
Moreover, looking at the whole array of test requirements included in 
the advanced air bag rule, we believed that these tests were 
unnecessary.
    As we have explained before, the primary purpose of oblique tests 
is to ensure that air bags are sufficiently wide to provide protection 
if an oblique crash results in the occupant moving forward at an angle. 
The test that presents the greatest challenge with respect to the width 
of the air bag is the unbelted test using the 50th percentile adult 
male dummy.
    As we explained in the final rule preamble, we dropped the 
requirement for conducting oblique angle tests on vehicles using 5th 
percentile adult female dummies because we believed that if a vehicle 
can pass the perpendicular test with 5th percentile adult female 
dummies and the oblique tests with unbelted 50th percentile adult male 
dummies, it would also likely pass the oblique test using 5th 
percentile adult female dummies. We explained further that we dropped 
the belted oblique angled tests for the 50th percentile adult male 
dummy because, given the unbelted oblique tests using that dummy, we 
believed that the belted oblique angled tests are unnecessary. We noted 
that the unbelted oblique tests are more stringent than the belted 
oblique tests in this respect, since the belts limit occupant movement, 
and that the unbelted oblique tests, which are being retained, will 
ensure that air bags are sufficiently wide to provide protection when 
occupants move forward at an angle in oblique crashes.
    Upon reconsideration, we continue to believe that the current array 
of tests strikes a reasonable balance between ensuring that there are 
sufficient tests to meet the need for safety, and avoiding unwarranted 
compliance burdens. Given the entire array of tests that both ensure 
protection and minimize risk, and in light of the reasons discussed 
above, we do not believe that adding additional oblique crash test 
requirements would produce significant safety benefits.
    We disagree with the Consumer Groups' assertion that in specifying 
oblique testing only using 50th percentile adult male dummies, the 
agency ``assumes that, if the male is protected, so will the female.'' 
Our decision reflects careful analysis of the practical effects of the 
various requirements on air bag design, and the contribution each 
requirement makes to ensuring protection and reducing risks.
4. Positioning Procedure for the 5th Percentile Adult Female Test Dummy 
(Barrier Test)
    The final rule established a new positioning procedure for the 5th 
percentile adult female test dummy in the dynamic crash tests. This 
procedure used the dummy legs' relationship with the front of the seat 
to determine where the dummy's H-point would be set. The seat would 
then be moved forward until the seat reached its full-forward position 
or until a dummy leg contacted the vehicle interior. Under the final 
rule, the legs are moved into position; e.g., the driver's leg is 
adjusted to place the foot on the pedal, only after the seat has been 
moved forward.
    We received several comments and petitions regarding various 
aspects of the 5th percentile adult female dummy positioning procedure. 
Mitsubishi and DaimlerChrysler raised questions about the relationship 
between the seat cushion angle and the seat position. Honda commented 
that not specifying a seat position before the dummy is placed in the 
vehicle could lead to repeatability problems. As with the low-risk test 
conditions, Mitsubishi queried whether the centerline of the seat was 
the geometric center of the entire seat or only of the designated 
seating area. Honda, Mitsubishi, DaimlerChrysler, and the Alliance all 
had concerns about positioning the legs and feet. These

[[Page 65388]]

concerns were focused on placement of the left foot on the foot rest, 
early interference of the dummy legs with the steering wheel or column, 
and the distance between the dummy's knees when initially positioning 
the dummy.
    At the December, 2000 technical workshop, VW asked what seat 
position would be required for vehicles with seat cushions that could 
be lengthened or shortened. Honda noted that in some of its vehicles it 
could not position the seat in a full forward position using the 
existing procedure. A more general discussion followed exploring 
possible solutions to the problem raised by Honda.
    We have reviewed the petitions and the seating procedure specified 
in the final rule. After experimenting with the test procedure in 
several vehicles, we have determined that the seating procedure 
specified in the final rule should be modified to better address 
potential problems in production vehicles. The primary problem with the 
existing seating procedure is that early dummy contact with the 
steering wheel, steering column, or knee bolsters can preclude placing 
the seat in the full forward seating position. As we noted in both the 
NPRM and the SNPRM, we believe it is critical to test with the seat in 
the most forward designated seating position because this represents 
the worst case position. A procedure where the final seat position is 
closer to mid-track than full forward circumvents the intent of the 
final rule. Since the existing procedure led to this result in some 
vehicles, we have determined the procedure and the regulatory text 
should be changed to address early contact with interior components.
    Rather than requiring the knees be at a 90 degree angle when 
placing the dummy in the seat and moving the seat forward, we are now 
specifying that the knees be placed at a 120 degree angle at the 
beginning of the seating procedure. By changing the initial knee angle, 
it is now possible in most vehicles to move the seat into the full 
forward seat position and to have the right foot reach the accelerator. 
In some cases, the steering wheel or steering column will still 
prohibit moving the seat into a full-forward position. In those 
instances, we are now specifying that the steering wheel be adjusted 
upwards to facilitate dummy placement and that the legs then be splayed 
if needed. The steering wheel height will be returned to the mid-
position prior to running the barrier tests. We note that we are making 
these changes not because we believe that people actually engage in 
such acts each time they enter their vehicle, but because the dummies 
are much more difficult to place in a vehicle given their relatively 
stiff structure.
    There may be instances where, even with the new procedure, it is 
impossible to place the dummy in a full-forward seating position. In 
such instances, we will use the new procedure and move the seat forward 
until there is no more than a 5 mm (0.2 in) clearance between the dummy 
and the vehicle interior. Given the variety of vehicle interior 
designs, we do not believe it is possible to develop a test procedure 
that allows dummy placement in a full-forward position in every 
vehicle. However, we have determined that this is not a significant 
problem. Using the new procedure, we were able to place the dummy in a 
full-forward position most of the time. We did find that in the Dodge 
Grand Caravan we were only able to get the seat within one quarter inch 
of the full-forward position. In the Dodge Durango, we were only able 
to get the seat within one-and-one-quarter inch of the full-forward 
position. In both cases, the seat was much closer to the full-forward 
position than to the mid-track position. We do not expect manufacturers 
to introduce excessive molding and contouring into the vehicle interior 
to prevent the dummy from reaching the full forward position since that 
approach would invariably have a negative effect on vehicle sales. 
People will not buy cars that they cannot drive. To the extent 
manufacturers rely on such molding and contouring to keep the occupant 
away from the air bag, they will also have to provide some 
countermeasure to ensure that individuals can reach the accelerator and 
brake. If we find that manufacturers mold the steering column or knee 
bolsters primarily to prevent the dummy from being placed in a full-
forward position, we may amend the regulation.
    Other minor changes have been made in the seating procedure to ease 
placement of the dummy in the full-forward seat position and to address 
the specific issues raised by the commenters. First, the new seating 
procedure provides specific information on seat location and 
configuration prior to placing the dummy on the seat; this accounts for 
vehicle seat cushions that can be adjusted without changing the seat 
track. Second, the legs are positioned equidistant from the center of 
the steering wheel rim to improve repeatability. Third, the left foot 
is now positioned on the toe board unless it is impossible to maintain 
that position. In that case, the left foot is placed on the floor pan.
5. Issues Related to Minimizing the Risk of Injuries and Deaths Caused 
by Air Bags
    The advanced air bag final rule implemented numerous measures 
designed to minimize the risk of serious injury or death caused by 
deploying air bags. On the passenger side, these measures were directed 
primarily towards small children, while on the driver side, the 
measures were directed toward individuals, primarily small women but 
also other out-of-position occupants, who are close to the air bag at 
the time of deployment. Because we wished to avoid being unnecessarily 
design-restrictive, the agency provided manufacturers with multiple 
compliance options to reduce these risks. On the passenger side, we 
allowed both automatic suppression and dynamic suppression systems, as 
well as systems that utilize low-risk deploying air bags. For the 
driver side, we allowed a dynamic suppression system or low-risk 
deployment systems.
    While we are aware of some long-range development work in the area 
of dynamic suppression systems, we do not know of any manufacturers who 
currently plan on using such systems as a method of certifying 
compliance with the requirements of the final rule. We received no 
petitions for reconsideration on that option. We have received numerous 
petitions for reconsideration on various aspects of the automatic 
suppression and low-risk deployment options.

A. Automatic Suppression Requirements

    Several petitions were filed concerning the automatic suppression 
option, most of which addressed the level of seat belt cinch-down force 
for the belted test procedures and the selection of child restraints. 
Additionally, Toyota stated that given the wide variation in ``cushion 
hardness'' and ``cover tightness'' in production seats, it did not 
believe it could certify compliance for the 6-year-old child using 
automatic suppression. It also raised concerns about the use of current 
test dummies for testing automatic suppression systems.
1. Child Restraints
    The primary concern raised by petitioners regarding automatic 
suppression systems regarded the belt cinch-down requirement for rear-
facing child restraints systems (RFCRS) and convertible child restraint 
systems. The final rule specifies that the car bed, the RFCRSs and the 
convertible child seats specified in Appendix A to the final

[[Page 65389]]

rule all need to pass certain compliance tests with the child 
restraints in both a belted and unbelted condition. In the belted 
tests, the seat belt is to be cinched down at 134 N (30 lbf) as 
measured at the outboard section of the lap belt.
    Toyota, the Alliance, DaimlerChrysler and Takata all commented that 
they believed the 134 N (30 lbf) cinch-down force was unreasonable. 
They argued that this force was impossible to achieve and often placed 
the child seat in an unrealistic position. They also argued that one 
would not expect to see a child seat installed with this level of force 
in the real world. Petitioners urged NHTSA to adopt a cinch-down force 
of 67N (15 lbf), which is currently specified in Standard No. 213. 
Toyota posited that perhaps NHTSA was measuring the seat belt force 
differently than manufacturers and suggested a detailed test procedure 
be provided to assure that the 134 N (30 lbf) force could be achieved.
    Additional concerns were raised at the technical workshop held in 
December, 2000. Ford observed that a system it is evaluating, which 
uses a load cell built into the seat belt system, had difficulty 
differentiating between a child seat installed at 134 N (30 lbf) and a 
large adult occupant that was straining against the seat belt. Delphi 
noted that when RFCRSs were installed without a base at the required 
force level, the restraint flipped up against the back of the passenger 
seat unless towels or blankets were placed under the restraint. Isuzu 
remarked that on one of its vehicles, the load cell could not be placed 
in the position required by the final rule because of a sheath that 
encases the belt on the outboard side. Testing on the Isuzu vehicle 
provided for the workshop verified that the load cell being used at the 
workshop did not fit in the specified location. Finally, our own 
testing in preparation for the workshop indicated that the 134 N (30 
lbf) force level was impossible to achieve with the car bed specified 
for testing because that car bed does not use a rigid structure for 
feeding the seat belt through the restraint. Indeed, we noted that the 
greater the force placed on the seat belt, the less realistic the test 
became, because the car bed was tipped up off the seat and toward the 
seat back.
    Several commenters also noted that some of the child restraints 
listed in the appendix to the final rule were already obsolete. Toyota 
and the Alliance urged us to reconsider developing a standardized test 
device that could provide a common ``footprint'' for seat-based 
suppression systems. At the December workshop, DaimlerChrysler 
requested we clarify the time frame that child seats on the list would 
be used as potential test devices in the agency's compliance tests. 
DaimlerChrysler also urged the agency to establish a point in time, 
such as the date of certification, at which the list of child 
restraints becomes final for the purpose of compliance tests. It was 
concerned that it could be responsible for the recognition of child 
restraints for which the suppression system had not been designed.
    Finally, DaimlerChrysler introduced in its petition some clarifying 
language regarding the use of Standard No. 225 restraint attachments in 
vehicles that are equipped with such attachments in the front seat. 
DaimlerChrysler also suggested that the automatic suppression tests be 
conducted with and without tethers, arguing that tethers can place 
additional weight on the seat and could reflect a ``worst case'' 
scenario.
    We have decided to retain the 134 N (30 lbf) cinch-down requirement 
specified in the final rule for all child seats except the car bed. The 
car bed will be installed in accordance with the restraint 
manufacturer's installation instructions, and a cinch-down force will 
not be measured.
    We believe the primary problem related to belt cinch-down is the 
level of variability in the load cell measurement. Indeed, we found at 
the December 2000 technical workshop that the load cell we used 
provided widely variable readings. Subsequent to the workshop we 
obtained a smaller load cell that is specifically designed for use on a 
seat belt. The smaller load cell is designed to measure loads only up 
to 447 N (100 lbf), which significantly decreases the amount of 
variability in measurement. With this load cell, we found that 
consistent results could be obtained for at least five minutes, 
establishing that the load cell was measuring force in a repeatable 
manner. These readings were above 134 N (30 lbf). Additionally, the 
child restraints were positioned in a stable and realistic manner. We 
were able to achieve the load levels using the test procedure laid out 
in the final rule, although in some instances the plastic button that 
some manufacturers place on belts to keep the buckle from sliding down 
on the unsecured belt had to be removed. Thus, we do not believe there 
is any need to change or refine the existing test procedure. While we 
are not adding a provision to the regulatory text, we do intend to 
remove the plastic button if it prevents us from reaching a 134 N (30 
lbf) force. This button is not required under any Federal motor vehicle 
safety standards.
    We note that it will likely be impossible to maintain a cinch-down 
force in excess of 134 N (30 lbf) once the test dummy or child is 
placed in the child restraint. The test procedure does not require that 
the cinch-down force remain stable once the restraint is occupied. This 
is because the intent behind the 134 N (30 lbf) cinchdown requirement 
is to replicate the installation of a child restraint by individuals 
who have been trained in such installation. Given our ability to 
consistently achieve a 134 N (30 lbf) force, we continue to believe 
some installers will install child restraints at this level. However, 
once a child is seated in that restraint, the amount of force applied 
to the seat belt will ease up.
    We reject Toyota's suggestion that we adopt a maximum cinch-down 
force of 67 N (15 lbf). As noted by Toyota, this is the maximum force 
required by Standard No. 213. That standard specifies a cinch-down 
force between 53.2 N and 67 N (11.9-15 lbf). The purpose of measuring 
cinch-down force is different in Standard No. 213 than in Standard No. 
208. In Standard No. 213, the intent is to replicate the circumstances 
under which most child restraints are installed and then to test how 
well the restraint protects an occupant when so installed. As such, 67 
N (15 lbf) cinchdown force does not represent a ``worst case'' scenario 
for testing the child restraint. In Standard No. 208, we want to be 
sure that the air bag suppression systems in vehicles perform properly 
under a worst case scenario; i.e., when a properly installed seat that 
is cinched down in a manner that might fool an inadequate suppression 
system into believing the seat is occupied by someone other than a 
small child.
    We recognize the difficulties Ford is currently experiencing with 
the load cells that it was planning to use in its vehicles. However, we 
believe manufacturers will be able to improve this type of technology, 
and note that even with this technology, the presence of pressure on 
the safety belt is only one of the factors considered by the 
suppression system to determine whether to suppress.
    As for Isuzu's problems in getting a load cell to fit on the seat 
belt, we note that it may need to shorten the sheath on the belt to 
conduct compliance testing. As a larger matter, we hope Isuzu would do 
this anyway because we are concerned that its sheath may make routine 
installation of some child restraints unduly difficult. We

[[Page 65390]]

recommend all vehicle manufacturers consult SAE recommended practice 
J1819, Securing Child Restraint System in Motor Vehicles (Rev 11/94) 
when designing their seat belts to assure a good fit between the 
vehicle and the child restraint.
    We have decided against changing our test procedure to allow the 
use of rolled up blankets or towels when installing the child 
restraint. As noted in the final rule, we expect manufacturers to 
design their suppression systems to recognize the presence of a towel 
or blanket. However, we do not believe we should add a requirement that 
child restraints be tested with such objects since that would 
significantly add to the manufacturer's compliance burden. We recognize 
that in some instances testing facilities will need to exercise care in 
applying the cinch load so that the child restraint does not shift from 
the proper position.
    We have updated the list of child restraints contained in Appendix 
A to Standard No. 208, removing those restraints that are no longer in 
production. These models have been removed from Appendix A, and 
replacement restraints have been added. We are not adopting Toyota and 
the Alliance's suggestion that a common ``footprint'' test device be 
developed for testing automatic suppression systems. As stated in the 
final rule, passing a compliance test using a test device that is not 
representative of near-term production child restraints provides no 
assurances that the automatic suppression systems will actually work in 
the real world. The only way to relieve this concern would be to 
require all child restraint manufacturers to incorporate that footprint 
into their restraints. We decided in the final rule that there was no 
need to be so design restrictive, and petitioners have offered no new 
arguments that would lead us to change our position on this matter.
    We believe DaimlerChrysler's concern over how a manufacturer can 
assure a given vehicle will be tested using the restraints on a 
specific list is valid. Manufacturers are not responsible, as a matter 
of certification, for child restraints that are not included in the 
appendix on the date of vehicle certification. We believe the text of 
Appendix A is clear in that regard. However, problems may arise when 
the appendix is updated with insufficient leadtime to reasonably permit 
manufacturers to assure compliance of vehicles with the updated list. 
Other than the updated appendix that is part of this rule, which is 
effective in 30 days, we will specify in the text of any updated 
appendix that its effective date shall be at least one year from the 
date of publication. All vehicles certified on or after that effective 
date will need to comply with the standard using the restraints on the 
updated list. We believe this one-year leadtime will provide 
manufacturers with sufficient time to ensure that their vehicles 
comply. Providing an effective date in the text of the appendix will 
also avoid any confusion as to which set of restraints are to be used 
to test a given vehicle.
    We note that some vehicle manufacturers may wish to certify 
compliance with the updated appendix prior to the effective date of the 
appendix. We will allow this type of ``early compliance'' as long as 
the manufacturer notifies us that it is irrevocably exercising this 
option.
    We believe DaimlerChrysler's suggestion for clarifying language 
regarding the use of Standard No. 225 vehicle restraint attachments 
improves the clarity of the regulatory text. Accordingly, we have 
adopted those changes. However, we decline to accept DaimlerCrysler's 
suggestion that we test child restraints with any tethers attached. We 
believe attaching the tethers would represent the worst case scenario 
in only one instance; i.e., if the automatic suppression system used 
only the force of tension against the belt to determine whether to 
suppress. In this instance, the suppression system could determine that 
a heavier occupant was in the seat. However, as noted earlier, we do 
not believe a suppression technology could depend solely on the force 
measured against a seat belt and meet all of the test requirements for 
suppression systems.
2. Dummy Positioning
    The final rule did not specify extremely detailed positioning 
procedures for dummies used in the testing of automatic suppression 
systems. Toyota petitioned that the positioning procedure be specified 
in greater detail, particularly the spacing between the knees 
(S22.2.2.6) and the feet (S22.2.2.5). It also petitioned to change the 
test procedure that tests for a child lying on the seat. Likewise, 
Mitsubishi raised questions about how to find the geometric center of 
the seat for determining the location of Plane B and questioned whether 
the seat height was in the mid-position. Toyota requested that Plane B 
be defined in relation to the H-point rather than the entire seat.
    At the technical workshop, TRW presented data indicating that the 
knee angle established in the 5th percentile female seating procedure 
had the effect of shifting too much weight to the floor pan, making the 
weight on the seat resemble the weight of the 6-year-old test dummy.
    DaimlerChrysler opined that the requirement to make sure any 
threads used to hold a dummy in position do not interfere with the air 
bag was overly stringent. It argued that the location of the thread in 
relationship to the air bag was irrelevant since the air bag is not 
deployed in any of the automatic suppression tests. Isuzu noted an 
apparent typographical error in the position that tests for a child 
leaning against the door (S24.2.3). It stated that the regulatory text 
should allow a maximum distance of 5 mm (0.2 in) between the dummy and 
the vehicle interior rather than a minimum distance of 5 mm (0.2 in).
    For the most part, we have decided against adopting positioning 
procedures more detailed than those in the final rule. We want the 
positioning procedures to be broad to ensure that the automatic 
suppression systems will work in the myriad of occupant positions that 
occur in the real world. More precision in test positions would permit 
manufacturers to certify suppression systems that work when occupants 
are in the specified position but may not work if the occupant were 
positioned slightly out of this position. Accordingly, although the 
procedures set forth in the final rule may not be precisely repeatable, 
this is consistent with the purposes of the rule and helps to assure 
the proper performance of the suppression systems in the real world.
    We have refined the seating procedure for the child-lying-on-seat 
position. As Isuzu noted in its petition, the final rule does not 
specify a longitudinal position. We agree that the position described 
in the final rule may be ambiguous with regard to the placement of the 
dummy against the vehicle's seat back. Accordingly, we have added 
language to the regulatory text specifying that the dummy is to be 
positioned as far back in the seat as possible.
    We have also made some changes to the positioning procedure for the 
test that represents a child kneeling on the seat, facing forward 
(S22.2.2.6). Upon review of the regulatory text, the agency believes it 
makes more sense to state where the dummy should be positioned on the 
seat before placing the dummy on the seat, rather than having the dummy 
placed on the seat and then only later specifying how it was to be 
placed. Additionally, the requisite 90 degree angle at the knee has 
proven unworkable in vehicles with sloped seat cushions. This is 
because keeping the spine vertical and the knees at 90

[[Page 65391]]

degrees could mean that the legs do not fully contact the seat cushion. 
Accordingly, the reference to a specific leg angle has been removed and 
the legs are to follow the contour of the seat cushion while 
maintaining a vertical spine.
    Plane B is used to place the child dummies roughly in the center of 
the seat. In defining Plane B in the final rule, we specified that the 
plane would be aligned along the geometric center of the seat parallel 
to the longitudinal centerline of the vehicle. We believe it may be 
clearer to specify that Plane B is aligned along the longitudinal 
centerline of the seat rather than the geometric center. We acknowledge 
that in vehicles where the outside seat bolster is larger than the 
inboard seat bolster, the center of the designated seating position may 
be slightly different than the center of the actual seat. We do not 
believe this difference will be significant. Accordingly, we have 
decided against adopting Toyota's recommendation to use the H-point. We 
believe it is appropriate to establish Plane B as a plane that can be 
practically and repeatedly defined. In keeping with our desire to have 
automatic suppression positioning procedures that are not overly 
specific, we have decided against adopting a plane that is defined by 
the H-point rather than the overall measurements of the seat.
    As discussed above, the seating procedure for the 5th percentile 
adult female has been changed in various respects. One of those changes 
involves changing the initial knee angle from 90 degrees to 120 
degrees. We believe this change will largely resolve the problem 
addressed by TRW's presentation at the technical workshop. We also note 
that using humans rather than test dummies may resolve any lingering 
problems in this regard.
    DaimlerChrysler is correct that there is no need to specify that 
the placement of threads used to hold the dummy in position not 
interfere with the air bag. The automatic suppression tests do not 
involve deployment of the air bag. Accordingly, it is irrelevant where 
these threads are located relative to the air bag. This requirement has 
been removed.
    Isuzu is correct that the intent of the leaning against the door 
test procedure is to have the dummy contact the door, not to avoid 
contact. Thus, the requirement for a minimum distance from the vehicle 
interior has been changed to specify a maximum allowable distance from 
the vehicle interior.
3. Use of Humans for Testing Automatic Suppression Systems
    Toyota raised several issues in its petition related to the use of 
current anthropomorphic test dummies and humans in automatic 
suppression tests. Initially, it urged the agency to work with industry 
in developing better test dummies because of the recognition problems 
many automatic suppression systems have with the current test dummies. 
Mitsubishi echoed this request. Not only are the current dummies not 
physiologically accurate enough to mimic the human form or 
characteristics, but according to Toyota, these dummies shift up the 
suppression threshold when compared to humans of the same weight. Thus, 
as many as 50 percent of the tests conducted by or on behalf of Toyota 
with the 5th percentile adult female test dummy did not detect the 
presence of that dummy at the weight needed to turn off the suppression 
system; i.e., to assure that the air bag would deploy in a crash.
    Toyota was dissatisfied with the option that they certify their 
systems using humans within specified height and weight ranges because 
it believes those parameters allow for too much variation in physiology 
to make humans practical test objects.
    Finally, Toyota maintained that NHTSA should specify as part of the 
regulatory text that it will conduct its compliance tests using the 
test device used by the vehicle manufacturer when it certified its 
system. Thus, if certification was based on tests with human test 
objects, NHTSA would conduct its compliance tests using humans. 
Likewise, if the manufacturer used a test dummy to certify compliance, 
the agency would use test dummies in running its compliance tests.
    At the December 2000 workshop, TRW presented data indicating that 
the seated weight distribution of the 5th percentile adult female test 
dummy is sufficiently different from the seated weight distribution of 
a seated human who is in the weight and height range specified in the 
final rule.
    We recognize there may be some variations in using humans instead 
of a test dummy. As discussed in both the SNPRM and the final rule, the 
fact remains that no physiologically accurate dummy currently exists. 
This is why we decided to allow manufacturers to certify compliance 
with the automatic suppression requirements using either the existing 
test dummies or human beings. Thus, while we note Toyota's concerns, we 
see no alternative beyond what is already in the final rule. If Toyota 
finds that its automatic suppression systems cannot adequately 
distinguish between the 6-year-old child dummy and the 5th percentile 
adult female test dummy, then it may certify compliance using humans.
    As noted in the final rule, certifying compliance using humans for 
recognition purposes constitutes exercising a specific compliance 
option. Thus, NHTSA must be told whether certification to the automatic 
suppression option was based on recognition of dummies or of humans. We 
will conduct our compliance tests using the type of occupant used by 
the manufacturer. We note that manufacturers will not be able to come 
back to the agency, in the event of a noncompliance, and argue that the 
system would meet the requirements if another type of occupant were 
used. Likewise, manufacturers cannot use humans for some portion of the 
automatic suppression test for a given size child/dummy and test 
dummies for other portions related to that size child/dummy.
    We do not believe it is useful to further restrict the size and 
weight ranges of the humans that may be used for conducting compliance 
tests. As an initial matter, further restrictions will make it more 
difficult to find surrogates for use in the tests. More importantly, 
adopting narrower parameters has the potential of reducing the 
effectiveness of automatic suppression systems in the real world. As 
explained above in our discussion of the positioning procedures for 
child-size occupants, we believe automatic suppression systems need to 
be very robust. This is why we have refused to adopt more stringent 
positioning procedures in many of the automatic suppression tests. The 
same rationale applies here.

B. Low-Risk Deployment Options

    In the final rule, the agency adopted the low-risk deployment tests 
that were proposed in the SNPRM with two modifications. First, we 
decreased the speed in the crash test that determines the low-risk 
stage of deployment from 29 km/h (18 mph) to 26 km/h (16 mph). We have 
already addressed the comments and petitions for reconsideration that 
deal with this change. Second, we reduced the number of steps involved 
in placing the dummies in a final position because we were concerned 
that small variations in the procedure, as well as specific vehicle 
configurations, could lead to significant variations in final placement 
of the dummy. Since the only position we are interested in is the final 
one, it seemed reasonable to specify that

[[Page 65392]]

position and not address how it was reached. However, we retained, with 
slight modifications, the step-by-step procedure proposed in the SNPRM 
for the head-on-instrument-panel test position because we believed it 
was impossible to specify a final position for that test with 
sufficient clarity. We also set the test duration at 300 ms, as 
measured by the point where the air bag is signaled to deploy, taking 
into account DaimlerChrysler's observation that peak injury readings 
could occur after the 100 ms time frame proposed in the SNPRM.
    We received several petitions regarding the test procedures for 
both the driver and passenger low-risk deployment tests, as well as the 
300 ms time frame specified in the final rule for those tests. 
Additionally, several issues regarding the low-risk deployment test 
procedures were raised at the December 2000 technical workshop. More 
detailed discussions are given below that directly address the 
petitioners' specific concerns.
1. 300 ms Test Duration
    In the final rule, we extended the period of time for which we 
would collect data from the proposed 100 ms to 300 ms, relying in large 
part on DaimlerChrysler's comments to the SNPRM that the proposed 100 
ms timeframe was too short to allow clearance of the dummy from the air 
bag in some systems.
    Several petitioners, including Toyota, the Alliance, TRW, and 
DaimlerChrysler have argued against the extension of the 300 ms data 
acquisition requirement for measuring injury criteria in the low risk 
deployment tests. Toyota, Takata, and the Alliance argued that data 
should only be counted prior to impact of the head, neck and torso with 
interior components other than the air bag. Toyota indicated that its 
dynamic tests showed that interaction with these other interior 
components were not significant. However, in its static tests, the peak 
injury values were the result of dummy interaction with these 
components. Arguing that the dynamic tests better represent actual 
crash events, Toyota stated that the data produced as a result of 
interaction with interior components other than the air bag were of 
little consequence and should not be counted. Toyota, Honda and VW 
noted that their primary problem with the 300 ms time frame was that 
the lack of requirements regarding seat track, height, and seat back 
angle made it impossible for them to determine whether a dummy could 
meet all applicable injury criteria for that period of time since they 
could not determine how the dummy would respond in all the possible 
seat positions. The Alliance suggested the test last until the dummy 
was no longer in contact with the air bag or 300 ms, whichever occurs 
first.
    DaimlerChrysler argued that since the 300 ms range was not included 
in either the NPRM or the SNPRM, commenters did not have sufficient 
opportunity to comment on it.
    We adopted the 300 ms time duration after DaimlerChrysler commented 
that the 100 ms time duration proposed in the NPRM was insufficient for 
some air bag systems. Contrary to DaimlerChrysler's assertion, the 
issue of time duration for low risk deployment tests was raised in the 
SNPRM and the 300 ms requirement was adopted in light of the comments 
to that document. Because of the concerns originally raised by 
DaimlerChrysler, we continue to believe a time duration less than 100 
ms would be too short.
    We adopted a specific period of time for measuring injury criteria 
because we do not want manufacturers to claim that a test is over for 
compliance purposes even though air bag-related injuries are possible. 
In order to address the petitioners' concerns, NHTSA reviewed its out-
of-position tests to determine if there is a need to further truncate 
the data. We reviewed twelve tests conducted at VRTC. Seven of the 
twelve tests were conducted with a 5th percentile adult female dummy in 
the driver position, and five were conducted using the 6-year-old child 
dummy on the passenger side. In the seven driver tests the sole failure 
mode was Nij, with the latest failure occurring at approximately 40 ms. 
The earliest moment of contact with the vehicle interior was at 62 ms, 
and the earliest point at which the dummy was clearly no longer in 
contact with the air bag was at 58 ms. In the five passenger tests 
there were HIC, chest deflection, Nij, neck tension, and neck 
compression failures. The earliest contact with the vehicle and the 
earliest clear indication that the dummy was no longer engaged with the 
air bag were both at approximately 50 ms. Two of the five tests had 
peak neck injury readings after 50 ms, with the latest peak measurement 
recorded at 104 ms.
    We are not adopting the recommendation made by the Alliance that 
injury criteria be measured for 300 ms or until the dummy is no longer 
in contact with the air bag, whichever occurs first. We believe this 
proposal to subjectively determine when the dummy is no longer in 
contact with the air bag is inherently nonobjective, and would be 
unmanageable from a compliance perspective. Measuring injury criteria 
for a specific period of time is the most objective way to assure that 
the requisite injury criteria are met for the duration of the test.
    As noted in the preamble to the final rule, we do not believe that 
all dummy contact with the vehicle interior would necessarily be the 
result of dummy interaction with an overly aggressive air bag. 
Nevertheless, we are concerned that peak injury measurements that are 
recorded early in the crash event could be the result of an air bag 
propelling the dummy backward with excessive force. Likewise, we are 
concerned that with a multiple-stage air bag, those stages that are 
deployed later in the crash event could be sufficiently aggressive to 
cause injury. The test duration for low risk deployment tests should 
accurately reflect the propensity of the deploying air bag to harm an 
occupant while it is deploying. Thus, we are adopting a time duration 
for the low risk deployment test of 125 ms from the initiation of 
deployment of the final stage air bag that will fire in a 26 km/h (16 
mph) crash. We believe this time frame will adequately measure air bag-
related injuries without penalizing manufacturers for injuries 
sustained by vehicle contact that is unrelated to the air bag 
deployment. However, we intend to monitor our test data to determine 
whether all air bag-related injuries are in fact being included within 
the specified time period. If they are not, we may consider increasing 
the period of time for measuring injury criteria in the compliance 
tests.
    We believe that currently manufacturers would not deploy the last 
stage of an air bag more than 100 ms after first initiating an air bag 
deployment. Thus, the injury criteria would likely only be measured up 
to 225 ms, and often for an even smaller period of time. Vehicle 
manufacturers will be required to provide NHTSA with the time interval 
between the initial signal to deploy the air bag and the initiation of 
the final stage of deployment so that we will know when to stop 
counting the injury measurements. We note that the 300 ms time duration 
remains in full effect for all barrier tests.
2. Seat Positioning
    Toyota requested that all the low risk test procedures incorporate 
specific seat positions. They argued that more specificity was needed 
to achieve repeatable results. At the public workshop, other 
participants echoed this request, stating that the lack of seat 
position requirements, when coupled with a 300 ms test duration, 
prevented

[[Page 65393]]

them from controlling injury measurements after the dummy's head and 
chest had cleared the air bag. They said they would need to test in all 
possible seat positions to ensure that a dummy rebound would not cause 
unacceptably high injury measurements.
    We believe we have largely resolved the petitioners' concerns 
regarding the location of the seat by reducing the duration of the low 
risk deployment tests. However, because we are rejecting a test 
duration that is defined by when the dummy clears the air bag, we 
believe there may still be value in specifying the seat position. 
Accordingly, seat track, seat height, head restraint, and seat back 
angle are now all specified in the positioning procedures for each of 
the low risk deployment tests.
3. Tests to Determine Which Stage of Deployment Will Be Used in the Low 
Risk Deployment Tests
    The final rule requires all vehicles certified to the advanced air 
bag requirements pass a static low risk deployment test or dynamic 
suppression test on the driver side and a low risk deployment, 
automatic suppression test, or dynamic suppression test on the 
passenger side. These requirements are consistent with TEA 21's mandate 
to reduce the risk of air bag injury to all front-seat occupants in low 
speed crashes, particularly small women and children.
    The low risk deployment test actually consists of two different 
types of tests, a dynamic crash test and a static low risk deployment 
test. Each type of test serves a specific purpose.
    Prior to conducting the various static low risk deployment tests, 
the manufacturer must first determine which stage or stages of the air 
bag to deploy in the static low risk test. This is determined by 
running a dynamic, frontal barrier crash test at 26 km/h (16 mph) 
(except for the 12-month-old child dummy, where the dynamic test is run 
at 64 km/h (40 mph)). Under the May 2000 final rule, all of these 
dynamic tests, except for the one involving low risk deployment 
technology for infants, are run using an unbelted 50th percentile male 
dummy in the mid-track seat position.\6\ The use of the 50th percentile 
male dummy in the dynamic crash test effectively makes crash speed the 
sole determinant of which stage or stages of the air bag fires in the 
static low risk deployment test. Injury measurements are not recorded.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ In the infant test, the test is conducted with the 12-month-
old child dummy in a belted rear-facing child restraint, since this 
is the only risk group the requirement attempts to protect.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Once the appropriate level of deployment has been determined, the 
specified static low risk deployment test is run for each of the 
dummies for which the manufacturer has certified to the low risk 
deployment option, and injury criteria are measured. The static low 
risk deployment tests are conducted with a 5th percentile adult female 
at the two specified positions on the driver side and either a 6-year-
old child, or 3-year-old child dummy at the two specified positions on 
the passenger side (the manufacturer may use a combination of automatic 
suppression and low risk deployment systems).
    The purpose of determining compliance with the injury criteria 
using the 5th percentile adult female dummy on the driver side and with 
the 6-year-old and/or 3-year-old dummies on the passenger side is to 
ensure that the low risk deployment is sufficiently benign to prevent 
air bag-related serious injuries or fatalities to the entire population 
of individuals who are exposed to a low risk deployment in a low-speed 
crash. Compliance with the injury criteria is determined using only the 
dummies that represents historically the most-at-risk individuals 
within the greater population because requiring tests using all the 
dummies represented by the greater population would be overly 
expensive. In issuing the final rule, we assumed that heavier 
individuals would not be seriously injured by an air bag that meets the 
injury criteria for the smaller dummy.
    DaimlerChrysler petitioned us to have the dynamic tests run with 
the dummies which will be used in the static low risk deployment tests 
rather than with a 50th percentile adult male dummy. DaimlerChrysler's 
petition for reconsideration made four arguments: the sole purpose of 
the dynamic test is to determine what stage air bag to deploy in the 
static low risk deployment test; using the 50th percentile adult male 
test dummy is inconsistent with the use of the 12-month-old dummy in 
the dynamic portion of the infant low risk deployment test; the agency 
failed to consider the impact of using the 50th percentile adult male 
in the dynamic portion of the non-infant low risk deployment tests; and 
reducing the size of the dummies used in the dynamic portion of the low 
risk deployment tests will resolve many of its concerns regarding the 
size of the gray zone between the low risk deployment tests and the 
barrier tests since it will be able to design low risk deployment 
systems based on occupant recognition rather than on crash speed alone.
    In a recent meeting with the agency, DaimlerChrysler changed its 
position and suggested that the dynamic portion of the test could be 
run with the 5th percentile adult female dummy on the passenger-side 
and the 50th percentile adult male dummy on the driver-side. While 
DaimlerChrysler did not provide a basis for its change in position, 
Volkswagen and BMW reiterated this potential approach in subsequent 
meetings and provided a basis for making the change. All three 
manufacturers expressed concern with the ability of current automatic 
suppression technology to reliably differentiate between a 6-year-old 
child and a small adult in real world conditions. Volkswagen and BMW 
indicated that the occupant recognition technology that they had 
studied can reliably differentiate between a small adult and a mid-size 
adult male. They expressed confidence that they could employ a low-risk 
deployment strategy that would assure all children and small adults 
would receive the benefit of a benignly deploying air bag at low 
speeds, while larger occupants could be provided with an air bag that 
deployed with more force. This design strategy would allow the 
manufacturer to provide protection to the larger occupant, while 
minimizing the risk of injury to smaller occupants. All three 
manufacturers stated that they would suppress the air bag in the 
presence of an infant.
    Accordingly, we have decided to specify that the dynamic portion of 
the low risk test be run with the 5th percentile adult female on the 
passenger-side. Because we do not want manufacturers to rely on a seat-
track based system to assure a low risk deployment at speeds up to 26 
km/h (16 mph), we are further specifying that the test may be run with 
the passenger seat in any seat track position.
    Low risk deployment options on the driver side remain the same as 
in the final rule. This is because there are not the same 
practicability concerns as there are on the passenger side and because 
no one needs the full-powered deployment of a driver air bag in low 
speed crashes.
4. Test Procedures for the Passenger Air Bag
    As discussed briefly above, the positioning procedure for the 
chest-on-instrument-panel test was revised significantly in the final 
rule. The procedure for the head-on-instrument-panel test was largely 
adopted as proposed in the SNPRM. The Alliance stated in its petition 
that neither test position assured that the dummy's head

[[Page 65394]]

or chest would actually be positioned against the instrument panel, 
contradicting the intent of the original ISO positions on which they 
were based.
a. Chest-on-Instrument Panel Test Procedure
    While the petitions addressed both the head-on-instrument panel and 
chest-on-instrument panel test positions, the greatest criticism was 
leveled against the chest-on-instrument panel position. While Toyota 
and the Alliance expressed general concerns about the test procedure in 
their petitions, the most comprehensive analysis was provided by TRW. 
TRW noted that when both the 3-year-old and the 6-year-old test dummies 
are initially positioned as required and then moved forward, it soon 
becomes impossible to keep Point 1 in Planes C (a horizontal plane) and 
D (a vertical plane) as specified by the regulatory text because of 
contact with the windshield. The problem is more acute with the 6-year-
old dummy than with the 3-year-old dummy, although it can occur with 
either dummy depending on vehicle design. While the regulatory text 
then specifies that the dummy may be lowered until there is a 5 mm (0.2 
in) clearance from the windshield, TRW noted that the text does not 
then say whether to continue to move the dummy forward along a diagonal 
plane until there is contact with the instrument panel, or to leave the 
dummy in that position. Leaving the dummy in that position may result 
in the chest being a considerable distance from the instrument panel. 
Moving the dummy along a diagonal plane until there is contact with the 
instrument panel may mean that Point 1 is significantly lower than 
Plane C, the horizontal plane located at the center of the air bag tear 
seam. TRW noted that this is particularly problematic in vehicles with 
top-mounted air bags because Plane C is on or near the top of the 
instrument panel. It is also a problem in vehicles with deeply sloped 
windshields because contact with the windshield occurs relatively 
quickly. These concerns were echoed by Honda and Autoliv in their late 
submissions and by other manufacturers at the December 2000 technical 
workshop.
    At that workshop, VW inquired as to whether a handgrip mounted on 
the front of the instrument panel would be considered as part of the 
instrument panel for the purpose of these tests. VW also queried 
whether it could place the legs of the 6-year-old dummy back on the 
dummy after the final position had been reached in vehicles where it 
was possible to do so. This request was similar to the one made by 
DaimlerChrysler in its petition that the legs of the 6-year-old dummy 
only be removed when necessary, as the removal of the legs could affect 
the dummy kinematics in a manner that may not be representative of a 6-
year-old child.
    Several petitioners and commenters asked for seat position 
requirements for the chest-on-instrument panel test procedure. We did 
not specify seat requirements for this test because the seat is not 
used in positioning the test dummy. The primary concern on the part of 
petitioners is that the lack of a specified seating position may lead 
to excessive test variability that is unrelated to air bag design, 
particularly if injury criteria are to be measured for 300 ms. Our 
resolution of this issue was discussed earlier.
    We believe the primary problem with the seating procedure specified 
in the final rule is that it starts with the dummy in an elevated 
position and then moves the dummy forward along a horizontal plane. The 
SNPRM had proposed a test procedure where the dummy was positioned 
against the instrument panel and then moved up. We have reevaluated 
both positioning procedures and believe that the procedure proposed in 
the SNPRM largely resolves the problems experienced by petitioners. The 
regulatory text has also been simplified to make the positioning 
procedure clearer. In response to VW's question, the instrument panel 
would include any handgrips that are within Plane D.
    Under the new test procedure, there may be some instances where the 
center of the chest, as indicated by Point 1, will not be in the same 
horizontal plane as the center of the air bag, as indicated by Plane C. 
This will be more likely in vehicles with top-mounted air bags. In that 
instance, we believe it is more important to place the chest against 
the instrument panel, than to establish Point 1 in Plane C. The only 
way to assure that Point 1 remains in Plane C and that the chest 
maintains contact with the instrument panel in all vehicles would be to 
remove the windshield for vehicles with top-mounted air bags. We 
believe this is an inappropriate test condition.
    It is possible that even with the new positioning procedures, there 
may be instances where the deployment of the air bag will be closer to 
the dummy's head than Point 1. We believe that two vehicle designs 
could lead to such a scenario. First, if the windshield were severely 
sloped at a position rearward of the instrument panel, the dummy could 
strike the windshield before the chest is positioned near Plane C. 
Second, if the air bag were a top-mounted air bag, such an air bag 
could establish Plane C substantially higher than it would be in a mid-
mounted air bag. In these instances, the chest-on-instrument panel test 
may test the effect of the air bag on the head and neck twice. The 
dummy would be positioned further away from the air bag than in the 
head-on-instrument panel test, so it is likely that the chest-on-
instrument panel would produce lower injury measurements than the head-
on-instrument panel test. However, it is possible that the particular 
kinematics may result in a greater stress on the neck. Accordingly, we 
will be paying particular attention to the test results from this 
chest-on-instrument panel test, particularly in vehicles with top-
mounted air bags.
    We have decided against allowing manufacturers to leave the legs on 
the 6-year-old dummy in vehicles that will accommodate the entire dummy 
in this position. Having the legs attached in some but not all 
compliance tests could lead to different injury measurements, because 
of the different dummy kinematics. We believe it is critical that all 
vehicles should be tested using the same test procedure.
b. Head-on-Instrument-Panel Test Procedure
    The final rule specifies placement of the 3-year-old and 6-year-old 
test dummies such that the head is located on the instrument panel. 
This test procedure was challenged by several petitioners and 
commenters. Honda commented that it believed differences in the dummy's 
leg position could affect the kinematics of the crash and the injury 
measurements. It noted that it believes that this is particularly 
troublesome with top-mounted air bags. Honda maintained that the 
positioning procedure for the head-on-instrument panel test calls for 
rotating the dummy thighs and legs in a manner that does not 
sufficiently control the positioning of the legs. It offered no 
suggestions, however, on how to resolve its concerns. Toyota and TRW 
raised questions regarding dummy movement after contact has been made 
with the instrument panel. They noted that if the dummy were not moved 
once contact was made, the dummy could be a considerable distance from 
the instrument panel. This is because the knees could strike the 
instrument panel early in the positioning process, and the chest or 
head would still be some distance from the instrument panel. Toyota and 
TRW urged us to change the regulatory text to accommodate an early

[[Page 65395]]

knee contact. At the public workshop, some participants, primarily 
Honda and Toyota, urged us to specify that the dummy be pushed forward 
once initial contact was made while others, primarily DaimlerChrysler 
and VW, urged that movement of the dummy stop once initial contact was 
made. The primary difference in opinion was due to concerns on the part 
of some participants that moving the dummy forward could change the leg 
angle, which they believe could lead to wide variations in the final 
placement of the dummy on the instrument panel. Those supporting the 
continued movement of the dummy argued that it was more important to 
get the dummy against the instrument panel than to maintain a level leg 
position.
    Honda failed to provide any data indicating that more specific leg 
positioning procedures are needed. We acknowledge that the angle of the 
femur, as measured against the spine, could have some effect on the 
abdomen. However, we do not believe that slightly different angles 
would lead to inconsistent HIC or Nij measurements, the most critical 
injury criteria for this test. Thus, we have decided against adopting 
more specified leg positioning procedures. Likewise, we have decided 
against adopting the recommendation of VW and DaimlerChrysler that the 
leg remain parallel to the floorpan, when maintaining that position 
would result in the head not being placed on the instrument panel. We 
believe it is critical that the head be in contact with the instrument 
panel, even if the legs must be rotated out of a horizontal plane to 
achieve contact. Thus, under the new test procedure, early leg contact 
does not prevent placement of the dummy head on the instrument panel. 
Instead, the dummy is rotated forward until contact is achieved. While 
in some instances, this rotation could result in a relatively severe 
leg angle, as measured against the pelvis, we believe it is more 
critical that the head contact the instrument panel than that this 
angle remain constant.
c. Definition of Points, Planes and Materials
    The positioning procedures for the low risk deployment tests 
specify two planes and one point. ``Plane C'' is defined as the 
horizontal plane through the geometric center of the right air bag tear 
seam. ``Plane D'' is defined as the vertical plane parallel to the 
vehicle longitudinal centerline through the geometric center of the 
right air bag tear seam. ``Point 1'' is defined as the center point of 
the dummy's chest/rib plate (the vertical mid-point of the frontal 
chest plate of the dummy on the midsagittal plane).
    Questions were raised at the workshop about referencing Point 1 
from a rigid structure on the dummy, such as the shoulder joints, 
rather than a point on the chest jacket. Several petitioners, including 
TRW, DaimlerChrysler, and Toyota sought clarification of what the 
agency meant by the term ``geometric center of the right air bag tear 
seam''. They noted that many passenger systems do not have a true tear 
seam. Rather, they may have a cover that opens as part of the 
instrument panel. The air bag may not be centered under the cover. 
Likewise, the instrument panel may be a solid surface with no visible 
tear seam. In both of these instances, the ``geometric center of the 
right air bag tear seam'' is difficult to determine and could vary 
depending on who is conducting the test. Finally, at the technical 
workshop, DaimlerChrysler requested that Plane D be established 
relative to the geometric center of the seat rather the geometric 
center of the air bag. This would allow them to take advantage of 
various countermeasures, such as a slight offset, that they use to 
reduce the aggressivity of the passenger air bag.
    We have redefined the location of Point 1 to place it in a location 
relative to the upper edge of the chest jacket rather than the center 
of the chest/rib plate. The chest jacket, while relatively snug, still 
moves about the dummy's ribcage. Thus, the center of the chest/rib 
plate may be different relative to the internal hardware from one test 
to another. The upper edge of the chest jacket, however, remains 
largely the same, making it a preferable point of reference. We decided 
against measuring Point 1 relative to fixed hardware because we do not 
believe that degree of specificity is required and because there is 
very little exposed fixed hardware. Point 1 is now located on the front 
of the dummy chest jacket on the midsagittal plane by measuring a 
certain distance along the surface of the chest skin from the top of 
the skin at the neckline.
    We agree that the final rule is not as clear as it could be in 
specifying the location of the planes. ``Air bag tear seam'' has no 
technical definition. Accordingly, the center of the tear seam could be 
subject to different interpretations. More importantly, the apparent 
air bag opening may be considerably different from the opening from 
which the air bag initially emerges. This is because the air bag covers 
may be designed in a manner that best accommodates the overall shape of 
the dashboard, with only a nominal relationship to the actual location 
of the air bag opening beneath the dashboard. Additionally, many 
dashboards have no discernable air bag cover, and the air bag enters 
the occupant compartment through a tear in the dashboard. At the 
technical workshop, the agency attempted to garner some consensus among 
industry on a better definition that would establish the vertical and 
horizontal planes along a point that was centered on where the air bag 
deployed. No one was able to come up with a location that was readily 
understandable and that was easily measured.
    We do, however, believe that it would be more appropriate to 
specify that the planes be established using the geometric center of 
the opening through which the air bag deploys into the occupant 
compartment. This would not necessarily be the same as the geometric 
center of the air bag cover. Rather, it would be the geometric center 
of whatever frame or casing is used to allow the air bag to deploy in a 
controlled manner. Since this frame or casing cannot be seen without 
dismantling the dashboard, we intend to ask vehicle manufacturers to 
give us the location of the air bag opening as part of our pre-
compliance test information requests.
    The final rule specifies that the dummies be held in place using 
thread. Toyota requested specific definitions related to the material 
properties of the thread. TRW asked that the specification for thread 
be removed, arguing that other materials, such as tape, could work just 
as well. We agree with TRW. The material properties of the binding is 
irrelevant as long as it holds the dummy in place for the duration of 
the low speed deployment tests. Thread was merely specified because 
that is the material the agency has traditionally used. The regulatory 
text has been changed to remove the specification for thread.
    We have chosen not to use the geometric center of the seat as a 
reference for Plane D. We have changed the definition to ``* * * 
vertical plane parallel to the vehicle longitudinal centerline through 
the geometric center of the opening through which the right front air 
bag deploys into the occupant compartment.'' We believe this is more 
practical for compliance tests and removes the problem of defining the 
tear seam.
5. Driver Side Air Bags
    As with the low risk deployment tests for the passenger air bag, 
the agency did not provide final seat positions for the test dummy in 
tests for the driver air bag

[[Page 65396]]

in the final rule. Toyota has petitioned that detailed seat positions 
be specified. For the reasons discussed in the section of this document 
addressing the passenger low risk deployment tests, we are adopting 
specific seat track, head rest, seat cushion angles, and seat back 
positions. Beyond Toyota's general request, all other petitions related 
to the driver air bag low risk deployment test procedure addressed 
concerns with the chin-on-rim procedure.
    The purpose of the chin-on-rim test is to determine the risk of 
injury when a person's chest is directly in the path of the deploying 
air bag. The test is conducted with a 5th percentile adult female test 
dummy. The test procedure requires the dummy be moved up off the seat 
and positioned with spacer blocks.
    Toyota stated in its petition that the procedure for the chin-on-
rim test specified in the final rule did not adequately ensure that the 
dummy's chin would not catch on the rim of the steering wheel, leading 
to artificially high neck extension bending moments. Honda raised 
similar concerns. Toyota noted that the regulatory text specifies that 
the chin not be hooked over the rim, but noted that it believed a more 
detailed test procedure was needed to prevent the potential problem. It 
suggested that a point on the chin 40 mm below the mouth be placed at 
the uppermost edge of the rim. Toyota also stated that using the seat 
to move the dummy forward results in pre-loading the dummy, which it 
maintains moves the torso roughly 20 mm closer to the steering wheel 
than if only the dummy is moved forward. Toyota presented no data 
analyzing the effect of such pre-loading. Mitsubishi queried whether 
forward head movement was to cease if the dummy chest or torso impacted 
the steering wheel before the head contacted the windshield. TRW wanted 
to know if the dummy is further moved, and in what direction, if the 
head hits the windshield. It also asked whether the dummy's thorax 
instrument cavity rear face angle needs to be maintained during the 
positioning procedures. Honda noted at the technical workshop that the 
dummy could contact the windshield or the header long before the 
dummy's chin contacted the steering wheel. Honda questioned whether the 
dummy should be moved down so that contact with the steering wheel is 
made, even though this would lower the chest.
    Toyota is correct that the agency intended to provide a procedure 
that prevents the chin from hooking over the steering wheel when it 
published the final rule. We also agree that Toyota's suggestion to 
define a point on the chin that contacts the steering wheel is a more 
objective means of ensuring that the chin does not hook over the rim. 
Accordingly, we have adopted that change in test procedure.
    As to its concern with potential pre-loading, we note that Toyota 
failed to provide any data addressing the effect of potential pre-
loading in its petition. We would agree that, in general, pre-loading 
is not desirable. However, we believe it is very important that the 
chin actually makes contact with the steering wheel. Additionally, we 
believe that placing the center of the chin directly on the steering 
wheel will reduce the likelihood of any pre-loading. Accordingly, we 
are not changing the procedure to address the possibility of pre-
loading.
    The thorax instrument cavity rear face angle is an initial 
position. We expect in many instances that this angle will need to be 
changed to address specific vehicle designs. This is because we believe 
it is very important to position the dummy parallel to the steering 
wheel before deploying the air bag. Keeping the dummy parallel serves 
multiple purposes. First, it should largely resolve Honda's concern 
that the dummy head will impact the windshield or header before the 
dummy's chin contacts the steering rim, as well as Mitsubishi's 
question on whether to stop moving the dummy if steering wheel contact 
is made before the head strikes the windshield. Second, it tests for a 
worst case scenario; i.e., a direct impact by the deploying air bag. 
Finally, we believe it provides the most repeatable test procedure.

VI. Issues Related to Injury Criteria

A. Head Injury Criteria (HIC)

    In the final rule, we adopted a new Head Injury Criteria applicable 
to vehicles meeting the new, advanced air bag requirements. For the 
50th percentile adult male dummy, Standard No. 208 has required 
manufacturers to certify that the dummy HIC measurement does not exceed 
1000 when calculated over a period of 36 ms. Under the new criteria, 
that measurement is now limited to 700, but is calculated over a much 
shorter 15 ms period. The HIC for the new 5th percentile adult female 
dummy is also 700 when calculated over 15 ms, as is the HIC for the 6-
year-old child dummy. Lower maximum HIC were established for the 3-
year-old and 12-month-old dummies.
    The Alliance and DaimlerChrysler petitioned the agency to scale the 
HIC measurements for the 5th percentile adult female dummy and the 6-
year-old child dummy at a maximum HIC of 779 and 723, respectively. The 
Alliance argued that these proposed limits were derived from the new 
maximum HIC for the 50th percentile adult male dummy using a scaling 
relationship that considered the size differences of the heads of the 
three dummies. It further argued that we did not consistently apply 
these scaling relationships when establishing a maximum HIC of 700 for 
all three dummies.
    Petitioners have not provided biomechanical data to support their 
contention that a higher maximum HIC for the 5th percentile adult 
female dummy or the 6-year-old child dummy is appropriate. Rather, 
petitioners appear to base their scaling technique on the premise that 
the experimental population was the representative size of the 50th 
percentile adult male head or that the analysis that produces HIC 
somehow explicitly accounted for head size and the HIC relationship now 
represents only the 50th percentile male. While it is true that the 
mean head size of the experimental population is approximately equal to 
that of the 50th percentile adult male, the head size of the 
experimental population also spans that of the entire adult population. 
In particular, the experimental population correlates with the size of 
a 5th percentile adult female in about 30% of the cases, with a 50th 
percentile adult male in about 33% of the cases and with a 95th 
percentile adult male in about 37% of the cases. Furthermore, there is 
insufficient data to develop a statistically significant relationship 
of how head size modifies HIC threshold levels, i.e., that the smaller 
size of the 5th percentile adult female head results in a higher HIC 
threshold than a 50th percentile adult male head. Consequently, we 
believe that there is no need or justification to provide different 
maximum HIC levels for any sub-group of the adult population, and we 
continue to support a maximum HIC value of 700 for both adult dummy 
sizes.
    As previously discussed in the biomechanical technical report 
released with the final rule, we have no biomechanics data on the skull 
fracture and brain injury tolerances for children. Thus, we scaled the 
HIC for the 6-year-old child dummy, the 3-year-old child dummy, and the 
12-month-old child dummy based on geometric size and material strength. 
Since exact scaling is inappropriate for the reasons given above, 
judgement was used to determine whether the scaled limits were 
reasonable. The scaled measurement for the 6-year-old child dummy was 
723, a limit slightly higher than that for the

[[Page 65397]]

adult population. However, since the scaling is an inexact science and 
much of this rule is designed to reduce the risk of death or serious 
injury to small children, we believe that raising the maximum HIC for 
the 6-year-old child would be inappropriate.
    Agency low risk deployment tests of seven 1999 model year vehicles 
indicates that a maximum HIC of 700 for the 6-year-old child test dummy 
is practicable. One hundred percent of the vehicles tested in position 
1 (chest-on-instrument panel) and in position 2 (head-on-instrument 
panel) measured a maximum HIC of less than 700. These injury levels 
were obtained in vehicles that have not been designed to the low risk 
deployment requirements of the final rule. We see no reason to raise 
the maximum HIC for this dummy.

B. Chest Injury Measurements

    In the SNPRM, the agency had proposed a maximum chest acceleration 
for the 5th percentile adult female dummy of 60 g. The Alliance 
recommended a maximum allowable chest acceleration rate of 73 g. 
Instead of adopting the Alliance's proposal, we decided to adopt the 60 
g limit. This is the same acceleration limit that has been in place for 
the 50th percentile adult male dummy for some time. The Alliance's 
recommended chest acceleration limit was obtained using scaling 
procedures that only considered the effects of the geometric 
differences between 50th percentile adult males and 5th percentile 
adult females. We determined that considering these factors alone 
insufficiently accounted for the risk to out-of-position occupants and 
to elderly women, who have been disproportionately injured by deploying 
air bags. Accordingly, we adopted a maximum chest g of 60 for the 5th 
percentile adult female test dummy.
    The Alliance, Toyota \7\ and DaimlerChrysler petitioned the agency 
to adopt the Alliance's scaled chest acceleration measurement of 73 g. 
They expressed particular concern over the effect the 60 g limit would 
have in the belted barrier test for the 50th percentile adult male 
dummy. According to the petitioners, the agency's measurement is far 
too conservative. They argued that the more conservative limit could 
cause difficulties in meeting the belted 48 km/h (30 mph) test and thus 
could lead manufacturers to lower the output of the seat belt load 
limiters, which would then require air bags to be repowered in order to 
achieve acceptable injury measurements in the 50th percentile adult 
male test dummy in the 56 km/h (35 mph) belted crash tests. 
DaimlerChrysler also argued that while existing seat belt designs can 
meet the 60 g limit, the levels so closely approach that level that 
manufacturers cannot certify compliance to the belted tests with a 
reasonable margin of compliance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Toyota also recommended the agency adopt sternal deflection 
rate (SDR) as the appropriate chest measurement rather than 
acceleration. The agency had initially proposed adopting SDR, but 
dropped its proposal in the SNPRM because the biomechanics community 
argued persuasively that SDR was insufficiently developed to be used 
in compliance testing. We refer the reader to our discussion of SDR 
in the SNPRM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted above, the Alliance's recommended chest acceleration limit 
of 73 g for the 5th percentile adult female dummy was obtained using 
scaling procedures that consider only the geometric differences between 
the 50th percentile adult male and the 5th percentile adult female. 
This scaling method discounts any possible decrease in bone strength 
experienced by an older driver. Yet we know that older drivers are at 
increased risk from a deploying air bag. When one allows for the 
decreased bone mass, the scaled measurement is 61.6 g, only nominally 
more than the level specified in the final rule. Additionally, as noted 
above, any scaling method will be inexact, and some degree of judgement 
is required to determine how injury criteria should be scaled for 
different populations. The tests with the 5th percentile adult female 
dummies are intended to minimize to the greatest extent possible the 
likelihood that an individual would be severely injured or killed by a 
deploying air bag. Discounting the effect of decreased bone density 
would lead to the anomalous event where the most at-risk population 
would not receive the full benefits of the advanced air bag systems.
    Petitioners have presented no data to substantiate their claim that 
a higher chest acceleration limit for the 5th percentile adult female 
dummy is necessary to avoid repowering air bags. However, NHTSA and 
Transport Canada have co-sponsored vehicle crash tests conducted at 
Transport Canada to determine whether the petitioners' claim has merit. 
Transport Canada conducted belted barrier tests at 48 km/h (30 mph) 
with both the 5th percentile adult female test dummy and with the 50th 
percentile adult male test dummy. We also looked at NCAP test results 
for vehicles of the same make, model, and production year to determine 
whether either the 50th percentile adult male dummy were measuring 
chest g's in excess of 60 g in 56 km/h (35 mph) belted tests.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Although Toyota limited its argument that repowered air bags 
would be needed because of the 56 km/h (35 mph) belted barrier test 
using a 50th percentile adult male dummy, we reviewed the NCAP test 
results of vehicles tested with a 5th percentile adult female dummy 
to see if the chest acceleration indicate an overly stiff seat belt 
that was not designed for smaller occupants. The 5th percentile 
adult female dummy registered chest g readings that were slightly 
higher than those registered by the 50th percentile adult male 
dummy, but the readings were still significantly lower than 60 g.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Twenty-six vehicles were tested at Transport Canada with the 5th 
percentile adult female dummy in both the driver and passenger 
position. The seats were positioned full forward. All dummies in the 
driver position and 25 dummies in the passenger position passed the 60 
g chest acceleration limit, establishing 60 g as a practicable injury 
measurement. Only five of the dummies on the driver side recorded 
acceleration rates greater than 50 g. Three of these dummies contacted 
the steering rim, and we have determined that the higher chest g 
measurement was probably a result of that interaction. In the two cases 
where there was no steering wheel contact, we believe the higher injury 
measurements were likely the result of very stiff shoulder belts.
    These observations were borne out by the results of the NCAP tests 
with the 50th percentile adult male dummy. In cases where the higher 
chest acceleration was probably the result of contact with the steering 
wheel, the male dummy experienced low chest accelerations at a 
comparable speed because it did not strike the steering wheel. In the 
two cases where NHTSA attributed the higher measurements to a stiff 
shoulder belt, the male dummy also measured high chest acceleration 
measurements in the 56 km/h (35 mph) NCAP tests. There were a number of 
vehicles tested in which the chest acceleration for the 5th percentile 
adult female was well below 60 g, and where the injury measurements of 
the 50th percentile adult male in the NCAP tests earned the vehicle a 
four- or five-star rating. Accordingly, we cannot accept Toyota's 
argument that a 60 g chest acceleration will require repowered air bags 
to provide protection to the 50th percentile male in a 56 km/h (35 mph) 
belted crash test.
    We have reviewed three vehicle crash tests in which the lower 
thorax/abdomen of the 5th percentile adult female dummy contacted the 
steering rim, producing high chest g measurements and low chest 
deflection measurements. In these cases, the close proximity of the 
dummy's lower thorax/

[[Page 65398]]

abdomen to the steering wheel rim prevented the lower portion of the 
air bag from fully inflating. As a result, the lower thorax/abdomen was 
not offered protection and impacted the steering wheel rim. We believe 
that the injury criteria selected for the advanced air bag rule should 
be sensitive to the injurious loading mode of steering wheel rim 
contact. Chest deflection, measured only at the central upper thorax, 
and chest acceleration with a performance limit of 73 g would not 
identify these cases of steering wheel rim contact as injurious, 
whereas a performance limit of 60 g for chest acceleration would 
correctly identify this as injurious occupant interaction with the 
vehicles. Consequently, we continue to support a performance limit of 
60 g for the 5th percentile adult female.

C. Neck Injury Criteria

    As part of the final rule, we adopted a new neck injury criterion 
(Nij). Nij measures both neck axial force (tension and compression) and 
neck bending moments (flexion and extension). Prior to the issuance of 
the rule, neck injuries were not directly accounted for in barrier 
tests, although the 36 ms HIC duration did indirectly address concerns 
with neck injuries in real world crashes. We rejected DaimlerChrysler 
and Toyota's arguments in favor of not adopting Nij as part of the 
final rule. Our rationale was largely based on concerns the two 
manufacturers had regarding the suitability of the Hybrid III dummy 
neck for measuring extension.
    In their petitions for reconsideration, both Toyota and 
DaimlerChrysler have reiterated their concerns with the Hybrid III neck 
design and with the adoption of Nij as an injury criterion. As in its 
response on the SNPRM, Toyota states that it believes the 5th 
percentile adult female Hybrid III neck is reading artificially high 
neck moments in crash tests that are not found in tests using the 50th 
percentile adult male test dummy. It also believes that the location of 
the load cell at the top of the neck does not address the likelihood of 
injury in the low- to mid-portion of the neck, the location where it 
believes most neck injuries actually occur. Finally, Toyota noted that 
a relaxed human neck can accommodate 15 degrees of rotation between the 
neck and the head, which the Hybrid III neck cannot. Due to the 
combination of these concerns, Toyota petitioned that the introduction 
of Nij be delayed until the bending moment issues are resolved. 
DaimlerChrysler petitioned the agency to measure only axial force 
rather than using Nij due to problems it believes the current Hybrid 
III neck has in measuring bending moments. It also averred that using 
Nij with the Hybrid III neck would require manufacturers to place 
rapidly deploying air bags in vehicles.
    We have decided against either altering or eliminating Nij as an 
injury measurement. A full discussion of petitioners' arguments and our 
response to those arguments is provided in the technical paper 
``Supplement: Development of Improved Injury Criteria for the 
Assessment of Advanced Automotive Restraint Systems'' (Docket No. 
NHTSA-00-7013-3).
    We believe that the dummies do not generate artificially high neck 
moments in crash tests. Toyota indicated that a review of crash films 
did not point to likely neck injury, even though high injury 
measurements were recorded. We do not believe a review of crash films 
is a useful means of determining strain on the neck. This is because 
when there is a high loading rate and the cervical musculature is 
partially activated, the human neck can experience large extension 
moments even though the rotation of the head is small.\9\ Testing at 
VRTC indicated that the moments experienced by human volunteers prior 
to noticeable head rotation were similar to the moments registered by 
the Hybrid III test dummy. The moments experienced by humans in a crash 
would be higher because the informal tests were static tests and 
because the neck was not pushed to the point of pain. Thus, we believe 
that the moments produced by the dummy neck when there is little head-
to-torso rotation are a reasonable representation of what the human 
neck would experience in a similar crash environment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See ``Human Tolerance to Impact Conditions as Related to 
Motor Vehicle Design'' SAE document J885, July 1986, which states 
``* * * the neck can be injured without exceeding its static angular 
range of motion * * * Measures of the neck may be a better indicator 
of injury potential [than angular rotation].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Likewise, we do not believe that the neck on the 5th percentile 
adult female dummy produces neck injury measurements that are not 
representative of injury risk in real world crashes. Toyota stated that 
the risk of neck injury was roughly the same among all adult occupants, 
but that the 5th percentile adult dummy could not meet the required 
injury criteria, while the 50th percentile adult male dummy could. The 
neck of the 5th percentile adult female dummy was based on a scaled 
down version of the 50th percentile adult male dummy. Thus, there 
should be no test artifact that manifests in one dummy but not the 
other.
    We agree with Toyota that most flexion injuries in the real world 
that are the result of inertial loading (i.e., loading of the neck due 
to restraints of the torso by seat belts) occur in the middle or lower 
cervical spine. However, research indicates that flexion and extension 
bending moments calculated at the occipital condyle are a good 
predictor of overall neck injury even though the site of injury was 
located below the occipital condyles in the middle cervical spine (C3-
C4).\10\ Additionally, for air bag loading, the upper cervical spine 
has been the predominant injury site for both children and adults. 
While real world data seems to indicate that tension and/or extension 
are the predominant injury mechanism in air-bag induced upper cervical 
spine injuries, research has shown that flexion can also produce 
similar upper cervical spine injuries.\11\ Consequently, we believe it 
is appropriate to monitor the loads at occipital condyles using the 
upper load cell instrumentation, including tension, compression, 
flexion, and extension, to improve safety in both inertial and air bag 
loading situations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Mertz H J and Patrick L M, Strength and Response of the 
Human Neck, Proceedings of the Fifteenth Stapp Car Crash Conference, 
SAE Paper No. 710855, (1971). Mertz H J and Partick L M, 
Investigation of the Kinematics and Kinetics of Whiplash during 
Vehicle Rear-end Collisions, Proceedings of the Eleventh Stapp Car 
Crash Conference, SAE Paper No. 670919, (1967).
    \11\ Nightingale R W, Winkelstein B A, Van Ee C A, Myers B S, 
Injury Mechanisms in the Pediatric Cervical Spine During Out-of-
position Airbag Deployments, 42nd Annual Proceedings of the 
Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine, (1998).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Likewise, we disagree with DaimlerChrysler's contention that only 
axial forces should be measured because the axial force best determines 
real world risk of injury and a Nij requirement would require smaller 
or more aggressive air bags to counteract problems with the Hybrid III 
neck. We believe there is a good kinematic and dynamic correlation 
between the Hybrid III neck and the human neck. The Hybrid III neck is 
effective at measuring the risk of neck injury in the real world. High 
moment readings are consistent with injuries resulting from exposure to 
aggressive air bags. DaimlerChrysler suggested that the Thor dummy neck 
may be more biofidelic, but we note that Thor is still under 
development. If we determine that it is an adequate instrument for 
compliance testing and is a better predictor of occupant injury, we may 
incorporate it into Standard No. 208. Nevertheless, the possibility 
that an enhanced dummy neck will be available in the future is not a 
persuasive reason

[[Page 65399]]

to delay action until that neck is available. While axial force may be 
an accurate indicator of injury in a single loading mode, the neck is 
subject to many loading modes in a crash, including flexion, extension, 
fore/aft shear, lateral bending, and torsion. These other loading modes 
also cause neck injury in the real world. This is why the agency 
adopted the Nij formula, which incorporates the relevant measurements 
for evaluating neck injury during frontal impact. We note much of the 
automotive industry has accepted Nij as a valid injury measurement.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See ``Recommended Procedures for Evaluating Occupant Injury 
Risk from Deploying Side Air Bags'' (August 8, 2000). (NHTSA-99-
5098-31)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VII. Issues Related to Labels, Telltales, and Owner's Manual 
Information

A. Warning Labels

    In the final rule we added a new warning label that must be used in 
vehicles with advanced air bags. We also discussed in the preamble that 
we would not prohibit additional labels on the sun visor that provided 
design-specific information on how to use a vehicle's advanced air bag 
technology. The regulatory text, however, did not remove the 
prohibition against adding additional information on the sun visor.
    We received petitions for reconsideration for and comments on both 
the changed label and on the issue of whether to allow additional 
information other than that required by the warning label. Toyota urged 
us to keep the existing warning label, except for the addition of the 
statement ``even with advanced air bags'', arguing that the advanced 
air bag technology is not yet developed enough to justify a weaker 
label. DaimlerChrysler, GM, the Alliance and Ford have all requested 
that we limit any information beyond that in the required label to the 
owner's manual and that no additional information be allowed in the 
vehicle interior. Parents for Safer Air Bags asked for clarification of 
the agency's position.
    As noted above, S4.5.1(b)(3) prohibits any information other than 
an air bag maintenance label or a SUV rollover warning label from 
appearing on the same side of the sun visor as the air bag warning 
label, and prohibits any additional information about air bags or the 
need to wear seat belts on either side of the sun visor. However, this 
was not our intent. Rather, as stated in the preamble to the final 
rule, we intended to allow additional, design-specific information on 
the sun visor and near the new air bag warning label. We did not 
believe such information should be automatically relegated to the 
owner's manual because we believed that people are more likely to read 
a highly visible warning label than an owner's manual.
    In response to the NPRM, DaimlerChrysler, GM, and the Alliance had 
all supported the position expressed in the preamble to the final rule. 
Indeed, the agency's decision to allow additional information was based 
on comments from these entities, as well as comments from the NTSB and 
the Center for Automotive Safety. GM, DaimlerChrysler, and the Alliance 
have now all changed their original position and now urge the agency 
not only to prohibit any additional information on the sun visor, but 
to limit such information to the owner's manual. The basis of the 
various petitions is that sun visor labels that carry different 
information may be confusing and may result in information overload. 
The petitioners also stated that allowing additional information would 
be inconsistent with our previous position that warning labels should 
be uniform to maximize the effectiveness of the message.
    We have decided to allow additional labels on the sun visor that 
provide design-specific information about a particular advanced air bag 
system. We note that advanced air bag systems are different from 
traditional air bag systems in that those systems may have unique 
design characteristics. Thus, a manufacturer could determine that 
additional labels may provide crucial information that the vehicle 
owner should be aware of.
    Some systems, particularly those that rely on automatic suppression 
technology, may allow the vehicle occupant to change the status of the 
air bag. For example, in the case of a vehicle certified to the 
automatic suppression requirement, the required telltale will not be 
illuminated in most instances. Under the regulation, the telltale must 
remain off if an occupant as large as the 5th percentile adult female 
is seated in the passenger seat. Additionally, the regulation allows 
manufacturers to have the telltale turned off if the passenger seat is 
empty, even though the air bag may be suppressed. Thus, an adult may 
not even be aware of the presence or purpose of the telltale until a 
child is placed in the passenger seat and the telltale illuminates. We 
are confident that our automatic suppression procedures are broad 
enough to ensure that the telltale will illuminate in most instances. 
However, those procedures are not representative of all possible 
seating positions or all child restraints. Thus, it is possible that a 
particular restraint would not be detected by an automatic suppression 
system, or that an unrestrained child could be in a position that was 
not detected by the automatic suppression system.
    If the driver of the vehicle or another occupant was aware that the 
telltale should be illuminated whenever the air bag is suppressed, then 
they could move the child to the back seat. If for some reason that 
were not possible, the driver would be aware of the need to either 
resecure the child restraint, replace the restraint if necessary, or 
place the child in the seat such that the air bag system is suppressed.
    While a detailed description of how the air bag system works would 
be contained in the owner's manual, we are concerned that people may 
not consult their owner's manual sufficiently to recognize that the 
absence of an illuminated telltale means the air bag is not suppressed. 
However, a vehicle manufacturer could place specific information about 
the air bag system next to the air bag label, where it may be more 
likely to be read. Alternatively, the manufacturer could determine that 
an additional label placed elsewhere in the vehicle, either permanently 
or as a temporary label, best informs vehicle occupants about the 
vehicle's air bag system. A manufacturer could also determine that no 
additional labels are needed.
    Accordingly, we have amended the regulatory text to clarify that 
such a label could be placed, at the manufacturer's option, on the sun 
visor alongside the air bag warning label. No change has been made to 
the regulatory text regarding the permissibility of labels elsewhere in 
the vehicle because we have never prohibited labels that convey 
specific, accurate information about air bags or seat belts in 
locations other than the sun visor. However, any additional labels, 
regardless of where they are placed in the vehicle, cannot be confusing 
or misleading when read in conjunction with other labels required by 
this or other standards. The regulatory text has accordingly been 
amended at S 4.5.1 (g).
    As discussed in the final rule, we have decided against allowing 
the existing labels in vehicles certified to the advanced air bag 
requirements. The new label uses a different pictogram and removed two 
of the warnings that are required on labels not certified to the 
advanced air bag requirements. The new label does not say that children 
should never be placed in front of an air bag, because the advanced air 
bag requirements are intended to specifically address that risk. We 
also removed the statement that one should

[[Page 65400]]

sit as far away from the air bag as possible because while this 
information is helpful, we did not believe it addressed a serious 
enough safety risk to merit overcrowding the label. We added an 
instruction to read the vehicle owner's manual to familiarize oneself 
with the advanced air bag system in the vehicle. Thus, we do not 
believe the new label is any weaker than the existing label, 
particularly since the vehicle manufacturer may provide more vehicle-
specific information in the form of a label on the sun visor or 
elsewhere in the vehicle.
    Additionally, the agency has discovered that when S4.5.1(b) was 
amended to remove the requirements for warning labels in vehicles 
manufactured before February 25, 1997, the cross-reference in 
S4.5.1(c)(2) was not changed. Previously S4.5.1(b) set forth the 
requirements for air bag warning labels in vehicles manufactured before 
February 25, 1997. S4.5.1(c)(1) set forth the requirements for the air 
bag alert label in those same vehicles and cross-referenced 
S4.5.1(b)(1). S4.5.1(b)(2) set forth the requirements for air bag 
warning labels in vehicles manufactured on or after February 25, 1997. 
S4.5.1(c)(2) set forth the requirements for the air bag alert label in 
those vehicles, and cross-referenced S4.5.1(b)(2). In the final rule 
S4.5.1(b) was amended to drop the requirements for a label in the older 
vehicles because there was no longer any need to retain the 
requirement. S4.5.1(b)(2) was redesignated S4.5.1(b)(1) and the new 
label required for vehicles certified to the advanced air bag 
requirements was designated as S4.5.1(b)(2). Because there were no 
changes to the air bag alert requirements, S4.5.1(c) was not amended.
    Under the current regulatory text, S4.5.2(c)(2) could be 
interpreted as being limited to vehicles certified to the advanced air 
bag requirements, even though the title to that section refers to all 
vehicles manufactured on or after February 25, 1997. S4.5.1(c)(1) 
should have been removed since the original cross-reference was 
removed. We are amending S4.5.1(c) to remove the reference to vehicles 
manufactured before February 25, 1997 and to clarify that an air bag 
alert is needed in any vehicle manufactured on or after that date 
whenever the required air bag label is not visible when the sun visor 
is in the stowed position.

B. Telltales

    The final rule requires a telltale for vehicles with automatic 
suppression systems. The telltale has a specified text and must be 
positioned in a location forward of and above the H-point of the 
driver's and passenger's seat in their forwardmost position. The final 
rule allowed for multiple levels of illumination as long as the 
telltale remains visible at all times to front-seat occupants of all 
ages. The telltale need not illuminate when the passenger seat is 
empty.
    The Alliance, DaimlerChrysler, and Mitsubishi petitioned the agency 
to revise the current requirement that the telltale be visible to 
occupants of all ages, and urged us instead to adopt the requirements 
of Standard No. 101, Controls and Displays. DaimlerChrysler also 
requested the regulatory text be clarified to assure that the telltale 
would be visible to all occupants seated in a forward-facing position, 
and that it not be obstructed by a rear-facing child restraint. The 
Alliance requested that they be allowed to use the abbreviation 
``pass'' in lieu of ``passenger'' in the message text, and 
DaimlerChrysler requested that manufacturers be allowed to use a 
universal symbol representing the status of the air bag rather than a 
specified text. Additionally, DaimlerChrysler requested the regulatory 
text be changed to clarify that a telltale is only required in vehicles 
with automatic suppression systems.
    We have removed the requirement that the telltale be visible to 
occupants of all ages, since such a requirement is nonobjective. We 
have, however, kept the requirement that it be visible to occupants 
whose eyes have adjusted to ambient light conditions. Otherwise, the 
regulatory text has been changed to be more consistent with Standard 
No. 101.
    While we do not believe it would be reasonable to expect an 
occupant who was not sitting in a forward-facing position to see a 
telltale that is forward of the H-point with the seat in its full-
forward position, we see no reason to adopt DaimlerChrysler's 
suggestion that the telltale only be visible to forward-facing 
occupants. We believe that implicit in the requirement is the 
recognition that a rear-facing individual would not be able to see the 
telltale. Since the vast majority of occupants who are not in the 
forward facing position are infants, who would not be able to interpret 
the message, we see no need to further specify that the telltale only 
be visible to forward facing occupants. We do agree, however, that 
there is a benefit to affirmatively stating that the telltale cannot be 
obscured by a rear facing child restraint. Accordingly, the regulatory 
text has been amended to prohibit the placement of a telltale in a 
location where such a restraint could prevent a properly-seated driver 
from seeing the telltale. We note that the portions of the regulatory 
text dealing with automatic suppression systems already specify that a 
telltale be installed in the vehicle. Neither the low risk deployment 
option nor the dynamic suppression option have such a requirement. 
Nevertheless, we believe it is worthwhile to clarify in the portion of 
the regulatory text dealing with telltale requirements that a telltale 
is only required in vehicles with automatic suppression systems.
    We have decided to allow manufacturers to abbreviate ``passenger'' 
to ``pass,'' since we do not believe the abbreviation will be confusing 
when combined with the rest of the required text. Allowing ``pass'' 
will also allow manufacturers to meet both the U.S. and Canadian 
requirements. However, we have decided against allowing manufacturers 
to use a universal symbol indicating that the passenger air bag is off 
in lieu of the written warning, because we believe such an action would 
be premature. We note that the agency has been working on harmonizing 
Standard No. 101, and that a universal ``air bag off'' symbol is being 
considered as part of this harmonization activity. It is possible that 
when Standard No. 101 is amended, the agency may decide to allow 
manufacturers to use a symbol rather than written text.

C. Owner's Manual Information

    The final rule requires certain information be placed in the 
owner's manual of vehicles with advanced air bag systems. 
DaimlerChrysler requested the regulatory text specify that some of the 
required information need only be included in the owner's manual of 
vehicles with automatic suppression systems. We believe DaimlerChrysler 
has raised a valid point and have amended the regulatory text 
accordingly.

VIII. Issues Related to Phase-in Requirements for Small Volume 
Manufacturers

    The final rule gave small volume manufacturers, as well as 
manufacturers of vehicles built in two or more stages, the maximum time 
allowable to certify to the new advanced air bag requirements. TEA 21 
requires us to specify that all vehicles manufactured after August 31, 
2006 must meet the new, advanced air bag requirements promulgated by 
the final rule. The rule defined a small vehicle manufacturer for 
purposes of this exclusion from the phase-in requirements as 
manufacturers that produce no more than 5,000 vehicles per year 
worldwide.

[[Page 65401]]

    The Coalition of Small Volume Automobile Manufacturers (COSVAM) 
petitioned us to expand that definition to manufacturers of no more 
than 10,000 vehicles per year. Alternatively, it petitioned that the 
5,000 vehicle cap be limited to vehicles sold in the United States per 
year or that the 5,000 vehicle cap be averaged over the phase-in 
period. Under the averaged proposal, if a manufacturer produced more 
than 5,000 vehicles in a single year, it could still take advantage of 
the exclusion as long as the average of production during the phase-in 
was not more than 5,000 vehicles per year.
    We previously rejected COSVAM's position that the appropriate 
vehicle cap for small manufacturers be 10,000. COSVAM has offered no 
new arguments that would lead us to change our position on this. 
However, we recognize that currently only the United States requires 
advanced air bag technology under any timeframe. It is highly unlikely 
that the advanced air bag requirements will be required in another 
country sooner than in the U.S. Thus, we believe it is reasonable to 
limit the vehicle cap to not more than 5,000 vehicles produced or 
assembled by the original vehicle manufacturer for the U.S. market per 
year. This provision does not apply to registered importers because 
they are not original vehicle manufacturers. Likewise it would not 
apply to vehicles produced or assembled by the original vehicle 
manufacturer in one production year and then imported to the U.S. in 
the following production year.
    We are rejecting the alternative that manufacturers be allowed to 
average vehicle production because we believe this alternative is more 
unwieldy than the one we have adopted, and because a dramatic increase 
in production over a short period of time could average out to 5,000 
vehicles and still constitute a production volume for a single year of 
substantially more than 5,000 vehicles. We note, however, that the new 
criteria would be easier to meet than this option for any small volume 
manufacturer that sold vehicles anywhere other than in the United 
States.

IX. Other Issues

A. Dummy Containment

    In the final rule, the agency defined the parameters for the dummy 
containment requirement that has long been part of Standard No. 208. 
Until the May 2000 final rule, the requirement read, ``all portions of 
the test dummy shall be contained within the outer surfaces of the 
vehicle passenger compartment throughout the test.'' The regulation did 
not define what was meant by ``throughout the test.'' In order to 
clarify the agency's longstanding position on this requirement, we 
amended this language in the final rule. The regulatory text now 
requires that the dummy be contained within the outer surfaces of the 
vehicle passenger compartment until both the dummies and the vehicle 
have stopped moving.
    DaimlerChrysler argued in its petition that this clarification 
constitutes a new test requirement that was not subject to notice and 
comment. It also stated that the change has no demonstrable benefit or 
safety need and could have unforeseen consequences.
    We disagree that the agency's characterization of when the test is 
over for the purpose of dummy containment was not subject to notice and 
comment. In the SNPRM, we noted that the requirement for dummy 
containment would remain in effect until the technician physically 
removed the dummy from the vehicle. We received no comments on this 
proposal. The requirement in the final rule that the dummy remain 
contained within the vehicle until both the dummies and the vehicle 
have stopped moving is actually less restrictive than the criteria 
presented in the SNPRM, although we believe the practical effect is the 
same. Additionally, we do not believe that specifying what ``throughout 
the test'' means imposes any additional burden on vehicle 
manufacturers. Rather, it merely clarifies the agency's longstanding 
position that the dummy remain fully contained within the vehicle until 
the test is definitively over. Since this is not a new requirement, 
there are neither any additional benefits nor any chance of unforseen 
consequences. However, we do believe that providing a specific frame of 
reference as to when the test is over helps manufacturers since there 
cannot be any doubt about what the agency means by requiring the dummy 
to remain inside the vehicle A``throughout the test.''

B. Partial Compliance

    In its petition, Toyota asked the agency to confirm its 
understanding that it could certify vehicles without advanced air bag 
technologies to the 32-40 km/h (20-25 mph) unbelted barrier test in 
lieu of the sled test. Toyota's understanding of the partial compliance 
option is correct.
    The final rule allows manufacturers to certify compliance with the 
unbelted performance requirements for the 50th percentile adult male 
dummy using the barrier at test speeds between 32 and 40 km/h (20-25 
mph) as long as the dummies satisfy the new injury criteria as maximum 
injury values even if the vehicles are not certified to the other 
advanced air bag requirements. Alternatively, manufacturers may 
continue to certify compliance using the sled test, with its existing 
injury criteria, or the up-to-48 km/h (30 mph) unbelted barrier test, 
using its existing injury criteria. For vehicles certified to the new, 
advanced air bag requirements, only the first test option will be 
allowed. We note that, as with all the other compliance options, the 
vehicle manufacturer must advise us of which option it has used to 
certify compliance, and that election will be irrevocable.

C. Cross Reference for Test Duration

    DaimlerChrysler noted that the regulatory text incorrectly 
references S4.10 as a cross reference for test duration for measuring 
injury criteria. DaimlerChrysler is correct that the proper cross-
reference is S4.11. The regulatory text has accordingly been changed.

D. Combination of Standard No. 208's Oblique Barrier Test and Standard 
No. 301's Oblique Barrier TestFerrari requested the test speed for the 
oblique barrier test in Standard No. 301 be reduced to 40 km/h (25 
mph). It stated that prior to the final rule, these two test 
requirements could be combined because the test configuration and test 
speed were the same. Ferrari believes that the adoption of a 40 km/h 
(25 mph) test speed for one, but not both tests, now requires 
additional tests. If it does not conduct separate tests, Ferrari claims 
it will be forced to design its vehicles to meet the Standard No. 208 
test at 48 km/h (30 mph).

    We recognize that vehicle manufacturers often ``piggyback'' dynamic 
compliance tests. They may run a single dynamic test that can be used 
to certify compliance to more than one safety standard. Nevertheless, 
we do not agree with Ferrari's contention that manufacturers will need 
to run additional tests or certify to the 48 km/h (30 mph) unbelted 
barrier test. The 48 km/h (30 mph) belted barrier test will remain in 
Standard No. 208 for all vehicles until September 1, 2007, when a 
higher belted barrier test speed of 56 km/h will be phased in for the 
50th percentile adult male.\13\ Since the Standard No. 301 barrier test 
does not measure injury criteria, there is no reason that a 
manufacturer could not continue to combine its Standard No.

[[Page 65402]]

301 test and Standard No. 208 belted barrier test until that time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ We hope to propose using the higher test speed for the 5th 
percentile adult female as well, beginning September 1, 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

E. Effective Date for New Data Filtering Technique

    The final rule specified that injury criteria be calculated using a 
phaseless digital filter. In its comments to the SNPRM, DaimlerChrysler 
had argued for using phaseless filters to measure Nij and had suggested 
the regulatory text specify the filters conform with SAE recommended 
practice J211. The final rule expanded on this request and, for the 
sake of consistency, specified the use of phaseless filters for 
measuring all injury criteria. Since no time frame was placed on the 
use of phaseless filters, the requirement became effective on June 12, 
2000, the effective date of the final rule.
    In its petition for reconsideration DaimlerChrysler urged that the 
effective date be changed to September 1, 2001. It argued that the June 
12, 2000 effective date could negatively affect a manufacturer's 
ability to certify compliance with vehicles that were under production 
as of that date. It also requested we change the formulation of V in 
the existing sled test (S13.1).
    The purpose of establishing an early effective date was two-fold. 
First, the early effective date allows manufacturers to earn credits 
for vehicles that meet the requirements of the advanced air bag final 
rule before the beginning of the phase-in. Second, the early effective 
date ensures that the final rule is published in the Code of Federal 
Regulations in a timely manner. However, the early effective date also 
imposed a new filtering requirement on all vehicles subject to Standard 
No. 208 on or after June 12, 2000.
    We decided to specify the use of phaseless filters in response to 
DaimlerChrysler's comment to the SNPRM that phaseless filters should be 
used for measuring neck injury. We believe it is worthwhile to be 
consistent in requiring phaseless filters for all injury measurements. 
Accordingly, the final rule did not distinguish between neck injury 
measurements and other injury measurements in specifying phaseless 
filters. We believe that there is only a negligible difference in 
calculated injury criteria between data collected with phaseless 
filters and data collected without phaseless filters (less than 1.0 
percent). Thus, we do not believe there should be any problem 
certifying compliance with the standard, even if the data was not 
collected using phaseless filters.
    While we do not believe the new requirement will have any effect on 
a manufacturer's ability to certify compliance with the standard, we 
accept that the data collection for 2001 model year vehicles may have 
been done without such filters. Accordingly, we are changing the 
effective date for that portion of the final rule to September 1, 2001.
6. Use of human child to detect the presence of an infant
    In the SNPRM to the May 2000 final rule, we proposed to allow 
manufacturers to certify compliance with the automatic suppression 
requirements using children and small adults because the existing test 
dummies are insufficiently biofidelic for all pattern recognition 
systems to recognize. We did not propose to allow manufacturers to use 
infants instead of the newborn or 12-month-old child dummies because 
all tests involving these dummies have the dummy placed in a child 
restraint. We received no comments on whether to use infants rather 
than test dummies, and we adopted the final rule without including 
infants in S29. Subsequent to the issuance of the final rule, we have 
become aware of occupant recognition technology that relies on the 
existence of a human to work. We believe this type of technology may 
be, in some respects, as good as or superior to technologies that rely 
solely on weight or the pattern of an object on the seat to determine 
whether to suppress the air bag. Since the absence of a provision 
allowing the use of a human infant would preclude this technology, and 
since our only reason for not including such a provision was because we 
were unaware of any emerging technology that required the use of a 
human infant, we have decided to amend S29 to allow the automatic 
suppression tests using a car bed and tests using a RFCRS or 
convertible child restraint be conducted with a child between 8.2 and 
9.1 kg (18-20 lb) and between 61 and 66 cm (24-26 in).
10. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    NHTSA has considered the impact of this rulemaking action under 
Executive Order 12866 and the Department of Transportation's regulatory 
policies and procedures. This rulemaking document has been reviewed by 
the Office of Management and Budget under E.O. 12866, ``Regulatory 
Planning and Review.'' The rulemaking action has also been determined 
to be significant under the Department's regulatory policies and 
procedures. The agency concludes that the impacts of today's amendments 
are so minimal that a regulatory evaluation is not required. Rather, 
readers who are interested in the costs and benefits of advanced air 
bags are referred to the agency's Final Economic Assessment for the May 
2000 final rule. NHTSA has determined that the costs and benefits 
analysis provided in that document remain unchanged in response to 
today's rule.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    We have considered the effects of this rulemaking action under the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) This action will not 
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
businesses because it does not significantly change the requirements of 
the May 2000 final rule. Small organizations and small governmental 
units will not be significantly affected since the potential cost 
impacts associated with this rule should only slightly affect the price 
of new motor vehicles.

C. National Environmental Policy Act

    NHTSA has analyzed this proposed amendment for the purposes of the 
National Environmental Policy Act and determined that it will not have 
any significant impact on the quality of the human environment.

D. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    The agency has analyzed this rulemaking in accordance with the 
principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 13132 and has 
determined that it does not have sufficient federalism implications to 
warrant consultation with State and local officials or the preparation 
of a federalism summary impact statement. The final rule has no 
substantial effects on the States, or on the current Federal-State 
relationship, or on the current distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various local officials.
    The final rule is not intended to preempt state tort civil actions, 
except that the required labels must contain the required text, and no 
additional text, and any additional labels cannot misleading or 
confusing, as specified in the regulatory text.

E. Unfunded Mandate Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 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

[[Page 65403]]

(adjusted for inflation with base year of 1995). While the May 2000 
final rule is likely to result in over $100 million of annual 
expenditures by the private sector, today's final rule makes only small 
adjustments to the May 2000 rule. Accordingly, there will not be a 
significant increase in cost to the private sector.

F. Executive Order 12778 (Civil Justice Reform)

    This final rule does not have any retroactive effect. Under section 
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.

G. Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a person is not required 
to respond to a collection of information by a Federal agency unless 
the collection displays a valid OMB control number. This rule does not 
propose any new information collection requirements.

H. 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.

I. Plain Language

    Executive Order 12866 requires each agency to write all rules in 
plain language. Standard No. 208 is extremely difficult to read as it 
contains multiple cross-references and has retained all of the 
requirements applicable to vehicle of different classes at different 
times. Because portions of today's rule amend existing text, much of 
that complexity remains. Additionally, the availability of multiple 
compliance options, differing injury criteria and a dual phase-in have 
added to the complexity of the regulation, particularly as the various 
requirements and options are accommodated throughout the initial phase-
in. Once the initial phase-in is complete, much of the complexity will 
disappear. At that time, it would be appropriate to completely revise 
Standard No. 208 to remove any options, requirements, and 
differentiations as to vehicle class that are no longer applicable.

J. Executive Order 13045

    Executive Order 13045 applies to any rule that: (1) Is determined 
to be ``economically significant'' as defined under E.O. 12866, and (2) 
concerns an environmental, health or safety risk that NHTSA has reason 
to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children. If the 
regulatory action meets both criteria, we must evaluate the 
environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on children, 
and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other 
potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered 
by us.
    This rulemaking directly involves decisions based on health risks 
that disproportionately affect children, namely, the risk of deploying 
air bags to children. However, this rulemaking serves to reduce, rather 
than increase, that risk.

K. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act (NTTAA) requires NHTSA to evaluate and use existing voluntary 
consensus standards \14\ in its regulatory activities unless doing so 
would be inconsistent with applicable law (e.g., the statutory 
provisions regarding NHTSA's vehicle safety authority) or otherwise 
impractical. In meeting that requirement, we are required to consult 
with voluntary, private sector, consensus standards bodies. Examples of 
organizations generally regarded as voluntary consensus standards 
bodies include the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), 
the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE), and the American National 
Standards Institute (ANSI). If NHTSA does not use available and 
potentially applicable voluntary consensus standards, we are required 
by the Act to provide Congress, through OMB, an explanation of the 
reasons for not using such standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards 
developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. 
Technical standards are defined by the NTTAA as ``performance-based 
or design-specific technical specifications and related management 
systems practices.'' They pertain to ``products and processes, such 
as size, strength, or technical performance of a product, process or 
material.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The agency is not aware of any new voluntary consensus standards 
addressing the changes made to the May 2000 final rule as a result of 
this final rule.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571

    Imports, Incorporation by reference, Motor vehicle safety, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Tires.


    In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA amends 49 CFR Chapter V as 
follows:

PART 571--FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS

    1. The authority citation for Part 571 of Title 49 continues to 
read as follows:

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


    2. Section 571.208 is amended as follows:
    A. By amending S4.5.1 by revising the heading, pearagraphs (b)(1), 
(b)(2) and (b)(3), (c), (f) and by adding paragraph (g).
    B. By revising S4.11(a), S4.13, S6.6, S14.1(d), S14.3, S15.3.6 
through S16.3.5.4, S18 and S18.1, S19 through S26.4, and S29 through 
S29.3.
    C. By revising Appendix A.
    The revisions and addition to Sec. 571.208 read as follows:


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

* * * * *
    S4.5.1  Labeling and owner's manual information. 
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) Except as provided in S4.5.1(b)(2), each vehicle shall have a 
label permanently affixed to either side of the sun visor, at the 
manufacturer's option, at each front outboard seating position that is 
equipped with an inflatable restraint. The label shall conform in 
content to the label shown in either Figure 6a or 6b of this standard, 
as appropriate, and shall comply with the requirements of 
S4.5.1(b)(1)(i) through S4.5.1(b)(1)(iv).
    (i) The heading area shall be yellow with the word ``WARNING'' and 
the alert symbol in black.
    (ii) The message area shall be white with black text. The message 
area shall be no less than 30 cm2 (4.7 in2).
    (iii) The pictogram shall be black with a red circle and slash on a 
white background. The pictogram shall be no less than 30 mm (1.2 in) in 
diameter.
    (iv) If the vehicle does not have a back seat, the label shown in 
Figure 6a or 6b

[[Page 65404]]

may be modified by omitting the statement: ``The BACK SEAT is the 
SAFEST place for children.''
    (2) Vehicles certified to meet the requirements specified in S19, 
S21, or S23, by means of an automatic suppression system, shall have a 
label permanently affixed to either side of the sun visor, at the 
manufacturer's option, at each front outboard seating position that is 
equipped with an inflatable restraint. The label shall conform in 
content to the label shown in Figure 8 of this standard and shall 
comply with the requirements of S4.5.1(b)(2)(i) through 
S4.5.1(b)(2)(iv).
    (i) The heading area shall be yellow with the word ``WARNING'' and 
the alert symbol in black.
    (ii) The message area shall be white with black text. The message 
area shall be no less than 30 cm2 (4.7 in2).
    (iii) The pictogram shall be black on a white background. The 
pictogram shall be no less than 30 mm (1.2 in) in length.
    (iv) If the vehicle does not have a back seat, the label shown in 
the figure may be modified by omitting the statement: ``The BACK SEAT 
is the SAFEST place for CHILDREN.''
    (3) The vehicle manufacturer may, at its option, affix an 
additional label adjacent to the label shown in Figure 8 that provides 
specific information about the vehicle's advanced air bag system as 
long as the information is not confusing or misleading when read in 
conjunction with Figure 8.
    (c) Air bag alert label. If the label required by S4.5.1(b) is not 
visible when the sun visor is in the stowed position, an air bag alert 
label shall be permanently affixed to that visor so that the label is 
visible when the visor is in that position. The label shall conform in 
content to the sun visor label shown in figure 6(c) of this standard, 
and shall comply with the requirements of S4.5.1(c)(1) through 
S4.5.1(c)(3).
    (1) The message area shall be black with yellow text. The message 
area shall be no less than 20 square cm.
    (2) The pictogram shall be black with a red circle and slash on a 
white background. The pictogram shall be no less than 20 mm in 
diameter.
    (3) If a vehicle does not have an inflatable restraint at any front 
seating position other than that for the driver, the pictogram may be 
omitted from the label shown in figure 6c.
* * * * *
    (f) Information to appear in owner's manual. 
    (1) The owner's manual for any vehicle equipped with an inflatable 
restraint system shall include an accurate description of the vehicle's 
air bag system in an easily understandable format. The owner's manual 
shall include a statement to the effect that the vehicle is equipped 
with an air bag and lap/shoulder belt at both front outboard seating 
positions, and that the air bag is a supplemental restraint at those 
seating positions. The information shall emphasize that all occupants, 
including the driver, should always wear their seat belts whether or 
not an air bag is also provided at their seating position to minimize 
the risk of severe injury or death in the event of a crash. The owner's 
manual shall also provide any necessary precautions regarding the 
proper positioning of occupants, including children, at seating 
positions equipped with air bags to ensure maximum safety protection 
for those occupants. The owner's manual shall also explain that no 
objects should be placed over or near the air bag on the instrument 
panel, because any such objects could cause harm if the vehicle is in a 
crash severe enough to cause the air bag to inflate.
    (2) For any vehicle certified to meet the requirements specified in 
S14.5, S15, S17, S19, S21, S23, and S25, the manufacturer shall also 
include in the vehicle owner's manual a discussion of the advanced 
passenger air bag system installed in the vehicle. The discussion shall 
explain the proper functioning of the advanced air bag system and shall 
provide a summary of the actions that may affect the proper functioning 
of the system. The discussion shall include, at a minimum, accurate 
information on the following topics:
    (i) A presentation and explanation of the main components of the 
advanced passenger air bag system.
    (ii) An explanation of how the components function together as part 
of the advanced passenger air bag system.
    (iii) The basic requirements for proper operation, including an 
explanation of the actions that may affect the proper functioning of 
the system.
    (iv) For vehicles certified to meet the requirements of S19.2, 
S21.2 or S23.2, a complete description of the passenger air bag 
suppression system installed in the vehicle, including a discussion of 
any suppression zone.
    (v) An explanation of the interaction of the advanced passenger air 
bag system with other vehicle components, such as seat belts, seats or 
other components.
    (vi) A summary of the expected outcomes when child restraint 
systems, children and small teenagers or adults are both properly and 
improperly positioned in the passenger seat, including cautionary 
advice against improper placement of child restraint systems.
    (vii) For vehicles certified to meet the requirements of S19.2, 
S21.2 or S23.2, a discussion of the telltale light, specifying its 
location in the vehicle and explaining when the light is illuminated.
    (viii) Information on how to contact the vehicle manufacturer 
concerning modifications for persons with disabilities that may affect 
the advanced air bag system.
    (g) Additional labels placed elsewhere in the vehicle interior. The 
language on additional air bag warning labels placed elsewhere in the 
vehicle interior shall not cause confusion or contradiction of any of 
the statements required in the air bag sun visor label, and shall be 
expressed in symbols, words and abbreviations required by this 
standard.
* * * * *
    S4.11  Test duration for purpose of measuring injury criteria.
    (a) For all barrier crashes, the injury criteria specified in this 
standard shall be met when calculated based on data recorded for 300 
milliseconds after the vehicle strikes the barrier. For low risk 
deployment tests, the injury criteria shall be met when calculated 
based on data recorded for 125 milliseconds after the initiation of the 
final stage of air bag deployment designed to deploy in a barrier crash 
up to 26 km/h (16 mph).
* * * * *
    S4.13  Data channels. For vehicles manufactured on or after 
September 1, 2001, all data channels used in injury criteria 
calculations shall be filtered using a phaseless digital filter, such 
as the Butterworth four-pole phaseless digital filter specified in 
Appendix C of SAE J211/1, rev. Mar 95, incorporated by reference in 
S4.7.
* * * * *
    S6.6  Neck injury. When measuring neck injury, each of the 
following injury criteria shall be met.
    (a) Nij.
    (1) The shear force (Fx), axial force (Fz), and bending moment (My) 
shall be measured by the dummy upper neck load cell for the duration of 
the crash event as specified in S4.11. Shear force, axial force, and 
bending moment shall be filtered for Nij purposes at SAE J211/1 rev. 
Mar 95 Channel Frequency Class 600 (see S4.7).
    (2) During the event, the axial force (Fz) can be either in tension 
or compression while the occipital condyle bending moment (Mocy) can be 
in either flexion or extension. This results in four possible loading 
conditions for Nij: tension-extension (Nte), tension-flexion (Ntf), 
compression-extension (Nce), or compression-flexion (Ncf).

[[Page 65405]]

    (3) When calculating Nij using equation S6.6(a)(4), the critical 
values, Fzc and Myc, are:

(i) Fzc = 6806 N (1530 lbf) when Fz is in tension
(ii) Fzc = 6160 N (1385 lbf) when Fz is in compression
(iii) Myc = 310 Nm (229 lbf-ft) when a flexion moment exists at the 
occipital condyle
(iv) Myc = 135 Nm (100 lbf-ft) when an extension moment exists at the 
occipital condyle.

    (4) At each point in time, only one of the four loading conditions 
occurs and the Nij value corresponding to that loading condition is 
computed and the three remaining loading modes shall be considered a 
value of zero. The expression for calculating each Nij loading 
condition is given by:

    Nij = (Fz/Fzc) + (Mocy/Myc)

    (5) None of the four Nij values shall exceed 1.0 at any time during 
the event.
    (b) Peak tension. Tension force (Fz), measured at the upper neck 
load cell, shall not exceed 4170 N (937 lbf) at any time.
    (c) Peak compression. Compression force (Fz), measured at the upper 
neck load cell, shall not exceed 4000 N (899 lbf) at any time.
* * * * *
    S14.1  Vehicles manufactured on or after September 1, 2003, and 
before September 1, 2006.
* * * * *
    (d) Vehicles that are manufactured by an original vehicle 
manufacturer that produces or assembles fewer than 5,000 vehicles 
annually for sale in the United States are not subject to the 
requirements of S14.1.
* * * * *
    S14.3  Vehicles manufactured on or after September 1, 2007, and 
before September 1, 2010.
    (a) For vehicles manufactured for sale in the United States on or 
before September 1, 2007, and before September 1, 2010, a percentage of 
the manufacturer's production, as specified in S14.3.1, shall meet the 
requirements specified in S14.5.1(b) (in addition to the other 
requirements of this standard).
    (b) Manufacturers that sell two or fewer carlines, as that term is 
defined at 49 CFR 583.4, in the United States may, at the option of the 
manufacturer, meet the requirements of this paragraph instead of 
paragraph (a) of this section. Each vehicle manufactured on or after 
September 1, 2008, and before September 1, 2010, shall meet the 
requirements specified in S14.5.1(b) (in addition to the other 
requirements specified in this standard).
    (c) Vehicles that are manufactured in two or more stages or that 
are altered (within the meaning of 49 CFR 567.7) after having been 
previously certified in accordance with Part 567 of this chapter are 
not subject to the requirements of S14.3.
    (d) Vehicles that are manufactured by an original vehicle 
manufacturer that produces or assembles fewer than 5,000 vehicles 
annually for sale in the United States are not subject to the 
requirements of S14.3.
* * * * *
    S15.3.6  Neck injury. When measuring neck injury, each of the 
following injury criteria shall be met.
    (a) Nij.
    (1) The shear force (Fx), axial force (Fz), and bending moment (My) 
shall be measured by the dummy upper neck load cell for the duration of 
the crash event as specified in S4.11. Shear force, axial force, and 
bending moment shall be filtered for Nij purposes at SAE J211/1 rev. 
Mar 95 Channel Frequency Class 600 (see S4.7).
    (2) During the event, the axial force (Fz) can be either in tension 
or compression while the occipital condyle bending moment (Mocy) can be 
in either flexion or extension. This results in four possible loading 
conditions for Nij: Tension-extension (Nte), tension-flexion (Ntf), 
compression-extension (Nce), or compression-flexion (Ncf).
    (3) When calculating Nij using equation S15.3.6(a)(4), the critical 
values, Fzc and Myc, are:

(i) Fzc = 4287 N (964 lbf) when Fz is in tension
(ii) Fzc = 3880 N (872 lbf) when Fz is in compression
(iii) Myc = 155 Nm (114 lbf-ft) when a flexion moment exists at the 
occipital condyle
(iv) Myc = 67 Nm (49 lbf-ft) when an extension moment exists at the 
occipital condyle.
    (4) At each point in time, only one of the four loading conditions 
occurs and the Nij value corresponding to that loading condition is 
computed and the three remaining loading modes shall be considered a 
value of zero. The expression for calculating each Nij loading 
condition is given by:

    Nij = (Fz/Fzc) + (Mocy/Myc)
    (5) None of the four Nij values shall exceed 1.0 at any time during 
the event.
    (b) Peak tension. Tension force (Fz), measured at the upper neck 
load cell, shall not exceed 2620 N (589 lbf) at any time.
    (c) Peak compression. Compression force (Fz), measured at the upper 
neck load cell, shall not exceed 2520 N (566 lbf) at any time.
    S15.3.7  Unless otherwise indicated, instrumentation for data 
acquisition, data channel frequency class, and moment calculations are 
the same as given for the 49 CFR Part 572, Subpart O Hybrid III 5th 
percentile female test dummy.
    S16. Test procedures for rigid barrier test requirements using 5th 
percentile adult female dummies.
    S16.1  General provisions. Crash testing to determine compliance 
with the requirements of S15 of this standard is conducted as specified 
in the following paragraphs (a) and (b).
    (a) Belted test. Place a 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart O 5th percentile 
adult female test dummy at each front outboard seating position of a 
vehicle, in accordance with the procedures specified in S16.3 of this 
standard. Impact the vehicle traveling longitudinally forward at any 
speed, up to and including 48 km/h (30 mph), into a fixed rigid barrier 
that is perpendicular within a tolerance of  5 degrees to 
the line of travel of the vehicle under the applicable conditions of 
S16.2 of this standard.
    (b) Unbelted test. Place a 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart O 5th percentile 
adult female test dummy at each front outboard seating position of a 
vehicle, in accordance with the procedures specified in S16.3 of this 
standard, except S16.3.5. Impact the vehicle traveling longitudinally 
forward at any speed, from 32 km/h (20 mph) to 40 km/h (25 mph), 
inclusive, into a fixed rigid barrier that is perpendicular within a 
tolerance of  5 degrees to the line of travel of the 
vehicle under the applicable conditions of S16.2 of this standard.
    S16.2  Test conditions.
    S16.2.1  The vehicle, including test devices and instrumentation, 
is loaded as in S8.1.1.
    S16.2.2  Movable vehicle windows and vents are placed in the fully 
closed position, unless the vehicle manufacturer chooses to specify a 
different adjustment position prior to the time the vehicle is 
certified.
    S16.2.3  Convertibles and open-body type vehicles have the top, if 
any, in place in the closed passenger compartment configuration.
    S16.2.4  Doors are fully closed and latched but not locked.
    S16.2.5  The dummy is clothed in form fitting cotton stretch 
garments with short sleeves and above the knee length pants. A size 7 
1/2W shoe which meets the configuration and size specifications of MIL-
S-21711E (see S4.7) or its equivalent is placed on each foot of the 
test dummy.

[[Page 65406]]

    S16.2.6  Limb joints are set at one g, barely restraining the 
weight of the limb when extended horizontally. Leg joints are adjusted 
with the torso in the supine position.
    S16.2.7  Instrumentation shall not affect the motion of dummies 
during impact.
    S16.2.8  The stabilized temperature of the dummy is at any level 
between 20.6 deg. C and 22.2 deg. C ( 69 deg. F to 72 deg. F).
    S16.2.9  Steering wheel adjustment.
    S16.2.9.1  Adjust a tiltable steering wheel, if possible, so that 
the steering wheel hub is at the geometric center of its full range of 
driving positions.
    S16.2.9.2  If there is no setting detent at the mid-position, lower 
the steering wheel to the detent just below the mid-position.
    S16.2.9.3  If the steering column is telescoping, place the 
steering column in the mid-position. If there is no mid-position, move 
the steering wheel rearward one position from the mid-position.
    S16.2.10  Driver and passenger seat set-up.
    S16.2.10.1  Lumbar support adjustment. Position adjustable lumbar 
supports so that the lumbar support is in its lowest, retracted or 
deflated adjustment position.
    S16.2.10.2  Other seat adjustments. Position any adjustable parts 
of the seat that provide additional support so that they are in the 
lowest or most open adjustment position.
    S16.2.10.3  Seat position adjustment. If the passenger seat does 
not adjust independently of the driver seat, the driver seat shall 
control the final position of the passenger seat.
    S16.2.10.3.1  If the seat is adjustable in the fore and aft and/or 
vertical directions, move the seat to the rearmost position at the full 
down height adjustment. If the seat cushion adjusts fore and aft, 
independent of the seat back, set this adjustment to the full rearward 
position. If the seat cushion contains a height adjustment, independent 
of the seat back, set this adjustment to the full down position. Record 
a seat cushion reference angle.
    S16.2.10.3.2  Using only controls which move the seat fore and aft, 
move the seat to the full forward position. If seat adjustments other 
than fore-aft are present and the seat cushion reference angle changes 
from that measured in S16.2.10.3.1, use those adjustments to maintain 
as closely as possible the angle recorded in S16.2.10.3.1.
    S16.2.10.3.3  If the seat height is adjustable, determine the 
maximum and minimum heights at this position, while maintaining, as 
closely as possible, the angle recorded in S16.2.10.3.1. Set the seat 
at the midpoint height with the seat cushion reference angle set as 
closely as possible to the angle recorded in S16.2.10.3.1. Mark 
location of the seat for future reference.
    S16.3  Dummy seating positioning procedures. The 49 CFR Part 572 
Subpart O 5th percentile adult female test dummy is positioned as 
follows:
    S16.3.1  General provisions and definitions.
    S16.3.1.1  All angles are measured with respect to the horizontal 
plane unless otherwise stated.
    S16.3.1.2  The dummy's neck bracket is adjusted to align the zero 
degree index marks.
    S16.3.1.3  The term ``midsagittal plane'' refers to the vertical 
plane that separates the dummy into equal left and right halves.
    S16.3.1.4  The term ``vertical longitudinal plane'' refers to a 
vertical plane parallel to the vehicle's longitudinal centerline.
    S16.3.1.5  The term ``vertical plane'' refers to a vertical plane, 
not necessarily parallel to the vehicle's longitudinal centerline.
    S16.3.1.6  The term ``transverse instrumentation platform'' refers 
to the transverse instrumentation surface inside the dummy's skull 
casting to which the neck load cell mounts. This surface is 
perpendicular to the skull cap's machined inferior-superior mounting 
surface.
    S16.3.1.7  The term ``thigh'' refers to the femur between, but not 
including, the knee and the pelvis.
    S16.3.1.8  The term ``leg'' refers to the lower part of the entire 
leg including the knee.
    S16.3.1.9  The term ``foot'' refers to the foot including the 
ankle.
    S16.3.1.10  The longitudinal centerline of a bucket seat cushion is 
determined at the widest part of the seat cushion. Measure 
perpendicular to the longitudinal centerline of the vehicle.
    S16.3.1.11  For leg and thigh angles use the following references:
    S16.3.1.11.1  Thigh--a straight line on the thigh skin between the 
center of the \1/2\-13 UNC-2B tapped hole in the upper leg femur clamp 
(see drawings 880105-504 (left thigh) and 880105-505 (right thigh), 
upper leg femur clamp) and the knee pivot shoulder bolt (part 880105-
527 in drawing 880105-528R & 528L, sliding knee assy. w/o pot).
    S16.3.1.11.2  Leg--a straight line on the leg skin between the 
center of the ankle shell (parts 880105-609 & 633 in drawing 880105-
660, ankle assembly) and the knee pivot shoulder bolt (part 880105-527 
in drawing 880105-528R & 528L, sliding knee assy. w/o pot).
    S16.3.2  Driver dummy positioning.
    S16.3.2.1  Driver torso/head/seat back angle positioning.
    S16.3.2.1.1  With the seat in the position determined in S16.2.10, 
use only the controls which move the seat fore and aft to place the 
seat in the rearmost position, without adjusting independent height 
controls. If the seat cushion reference angle automatically changes as 
the seat is moved from the full forward position, maintain, as closely 
as possible, the seat cushion reference angle in S16.2.10.3.1, for the 
final forward position when measuring the pelvic angle as specified in 
S16.3.2.1.11.
    S16.3.2.1.2.  Fully recline the seat back, if adjustable. Install 
the dummy into the driver's seat, such that when the legs are 
positioned 120 degrees to the thighs, the calves of the legs are not 
touching the seat cushion.
    S16.3.2.1.3  Bucket seats. Center the dummy on the seat cushion so 
that its midsagittal plane is vertical and coincides with the vertical 
longitudinal plane through the center of the seat cushion.
    S16.3.2.1.4  Bench seats. Position the midsagittal plane of the 
dummy vertical and parallel to the vehicle's longitudinal centerline 
and aligned with the center of the steering wheel rim.
    S16.3.2.1.5  Hold the dummy's thighs down and push rearward on the 
upper torso to maximize the dummy's pelvic angle.
    S16.3.2.1.6  Place the legs at 120 degrees to the thighs. Set the 
initial transverse distance between the longitudinal centerlines at the 
front of the dummy's knees at 160 to 170 mm (6.3 to 6.7 in), with the 
thighs and legs of the dummy in vertical planes. Push rearward on the 
dummy's knees to force the pelvis into the seat so there is no gap 
between the pelvis and the seat back or until contact occurs between 
the back of the dummy's calves and the front of the seat cushion.
    S16.3.2.1.7  Gently rock the upper torso relative to the lower 
torso laterally in a side to side motion three times through a 
5 degree arc (approximately 51 mm (2 in) side to side) to 
reduce friction between the dummy and the seat.
    S16.3.2.1.8  If needed, extend the legs slightly so that the feet 
are not in contact with the floor pan. Let the thighs rest on the seat 
cushion to the extent permitted by the foot movement. Keeping the leg 
and the thigh in a vertical plane, place the foot in the vertical 
longitudinal plane that passes through the centerline of the 
accelerator pedal. Rotate the left thigh outboard about the hip until 
the center of the knee is the same distance from the

[[Page 65407]]

midsagittal plane of the dummy as the right knee 5 mm 
(0.2 in). Using only controls which move the seat fore and 
aft, attempt to return the seat to the full forward position. If either 
of the dummy's legs first contacts the steering wheel, then adjust the 
steering wheel, if adjustable, upward until contact with the steering 
wheel is avoided. If the steering wheel is not adjustable, separate the 
knees enough to avoid steering wheel contact. Proceed with moving the 
seat forward until either the leg contacts the vehicle interior or the 
seat reaches the full forward position. (The right foot may contact and 
depress the accelerator and/or change the angle of the foot with 
respect to the leg during seat movement.) If necessary to avoid contact 
with the vehicles brake or clutch pedal, rotate the test dummy's left 
foot about the leg. If there is still interference, rotate the left 
thigh outboard about the hip the minimum distance necessary to avoid 
pedal interference. If a dummy leg contacts the vehicle interior before 
the full forward position is attained, position the seat at the next 
detent where there is no contact. If the seat is a power seat, move the 
seat fore and aft to avoid contact while assuring that there is a 
maximum of 5 mm (0.2 in) distance between the vehicle interior and the 
point on the dummy that would first contact the vehicle interior. If 
the steering wheel was moved, return it to the position described in 
S16.2.9. If the steering wheel contacts the dummy's leg(s) prior to 
attaining this position, adjust it to the next higher detent, or if 
infinitely adjustable, until there is 5 mm (0.2 in) clearance between 
the wheel and the dummy's leg(s).
    S16.3.2.1.9  For vehicles without adjustable seat backs, adjust the 
lower neck bracket to level the head as much as possible. For vehicles 
with adjustable seat backs, while holding the thighs in place, rotate 
the seat back forward until the transverse instrumentation platform of 
the head is level to within 0.5 degree, making sure that 
the pelvis does not interfere with the seat bight. Inspect the abdomen 
to ensure that it is properly installed. If the torso contacts the 
steering wheel, adjust the steering wheel in the following order until 
there is no contact: telescoping adjustment, lowering adjustment, 
raising adjustment. If the vehicle has no adjustments or contact with 
the steering wheel cannot be eliminated by adjustment, position the 
seat at the next detent where there is no contact with the steering 
wheel as adjusted in S16.2.9. If the seat is a power seat, position the 
seat to avoid contact while assuring that there is a maximum of 5 mm 
(0.2 in) distance between the steering wheel as adjusted in S16.2.9 and 
the point of contact on the dummy.
    S16.3.2.1.10  If it is not possible to achieve the head level 
within 0.5 degrees, minimize the angle.
    S16.3.2.1.11 Measure and set the dummy's pelvic angle using the 
pelvic angle gage (drawing TE-2504, incorporated by reference in 49 CFR 
Part 572, Subpart O, of this chapter). The angle shall be set to 20.0 
degrees 2.5 degrees. If this is not possible, adjust the 
pelvic angle as close to 20.0 degrees as possible while keeping the 
transverse instrumentation platform of the head as level as possible by 
adjustments specified in S16.3.2.1.9 and S16.3.2.1.10.
    S16.3.2.1.12  If the dummy is contacting the vehicle interior after 
these adjustments, move the seat rearward until there is a maximum of 5 
mm (0.2 in) between the contact point of the dummy and the interior of 
the vehicle or if it has a manual seat adjustment, to the next rearward 
detent position. If after these adjustments, the dummy contact point is 
more than 5 mm (0.2 in) from the vehicle interior and the seat is still 
not in its forwardmost position, move the seat forward until the 
contact point is 5 mm (0.2 in) or less from the vehicle interior, or if 
it has a manual seat adjustment, move the seat to the closest detent 
position without making contact, or until the seat reaches its 
forwardmost position, whichever occurs first.
    S16.3.2.2  Driver foot positioning.
    S16.3.2.2.1  If the vehicle has an adjustable accelerator pedal, 
adjust it to the full forward position. Rest the right foot of the test 
dummy on the undepressed accelerator pedal with the rearmost point of 
the heel on the floor pan in the plane of the pedal. If the foot cannot 
be placed on the accelerator pedal, set it initially perpendicular to 
the leg and then place it as far forward as possible in the direction 
of the pedal centerline with the rearmost point of the heel resting on 
the floor pan. If the vehicle has an adjustable accelerator pedal and 
the right foot is not touching the accelerator pedal when positioned as 
above, move the pedal rearward until it touches the right foot. If the 
accelerator pedal in the full rearward position still does not touch 
the foot, leave the pedal in that position.
    S16.3.2.2.2  If the ball of the foot does not contact the pedal, 
change the angle of the foot relative to the leg such that the toe of 
the foot contacts the undepressed accelerator pedal.
    S16.3.2.2.3  Place the left foot on the toe-board with the rearmost 
point of the heel resting on the floor pan as close as possible to the 
point of intersection of the planes described by the toe-board and 
floor pan, and not on the wheel-well projection or foot rest.
    S16.3.2.2.4  If the left foot cannot be positioned on the toe 
board, place the foot perpendicular to the lower leg centerline as far 
forward as possible with the heel resting on the floor pan.
    S16.3.2.2.5  If necessary to avoid contact with the vehicle's brake 
or clutch pedal, rotate the test dummy's left foot about the lower leg. 
If there is still pedal interference, rotate the left leg outboard 
about the hip the minimum distance necessary to avoid the pedal 
interference. If the left foot does not contact the floor pan, place 
the foot parallel to the floor and place the leg as perpendicular to 
the thigh as possible.
    S16.3.2.3  Driver arm/hand positioning.
    S16.3.2.3.1  Place the dummy's upper arms adjacent to the torso 
with the arm centerlines as close to a vertical longitudinal plane as 
possible.
    S16.3.2.3.2  Place the palms of the dummy in contact with the outer 
part of the steering wheel rim at its horizontal centerline with the 
thumbs over the steering wheel rim.
    S16.3.2.3.3  If it is not possible to position the thumbs inside 
the steering wheel rim at its horizontal centerline, then position them 
above and as close to the horizontal centerline of the steering wheel 
rim as possible.
    S16.3.2.3.4  Lightly tape the hands to the steering wheel rim so 
that if the hand of the test dummy is pushed upward by a force of not 
less than 9 N (2 lb) and not more than 22 N (5 lb), the tape releases 
the hand from the steering wheel rim.
    S16.3.3  Passenger dummy positioning. 
    S16.3.3.1   Passenger torso/head/seat back angle positioning.
    S16.3.3.1.1  With the seat in the position determined in S16.2.10, 
use only the controls which move the seat fore and aft to place the 
seat in the rearmost position, without adjusting independent height 
controls. If the seat cushion reference angle automatically changes as 
the seat is moved from the full forward position, maintain as closely 
as possible the seat cushion reference angle in S16.2.10.3.1, for the 
final forward position when measuring the pelvic angle as specified in 
S16.3.3.1.11.
    S16.3.3.1.2  Fully recline the seat back, if adjustable. Install 
the dummy into the passenger's seat, such that when the legs are 120 
degrees to the thighs, the calves of the legs are not touching the seat 
cushion.

[[Page 65408]]

    S16.3.3.1.3  Bucket seats. Center the dummy on the seat cushion so 
that its midsagittal plane is vertical and coincides with the vertical 
longitudinal plane through the center of the seat cushion.
    S16.3.3.1.4  Bench seats. Position the midsagittal plane of the 
dummy vertical and parallel to the vehicle's longitudinal centerline 
and the same distance from the vehicle's longitudinal centerline as the 
midsagittal plane of the driver dummy.
    S16.3.3.1.5  Hold the dummy's thighs down and push rearward on the 
upper torso to maximize the dummy's pelvic angle.
    S16.3.3.1.6  Place the legs at 120 degrees to the thighs. Set the 
initial transverse distance between the longitudinal centerlines at the 
front of the dummy's knees at 160 to 170 mm (6.3 to 6.7 in), with the 
thighs and legs of the dummy in vertical planes. Push rearward on the 
dummy's knees to force the pelvis into the seat so there is no gap 
between the pelvis and the seat back or until contact occurs between 
the back of the dummy's calves and the front of the seat cushion.
    S16.3.3.1.7  Gently rock the upper torso relative to the lower 
torso laterally side to side three times through a  5 
degree arc (approximately 51 mm (2 in) side to side).
    S16.3.3.1.8  If needed, extend the legs slightly so that the feet 
are not in contact with the floor pan. Let the thighs rest on the seat 
cushion to the extent permitted by the foot movement. With the feet 
perpendicular to the legs, place the heels on the floor pan. If a heel 
will not contact the floor pan, place it as close to the floor pan as 
possible. Using only controls which move the seat fore and aft, attempt 
to return the seat to the full forward position. If a dummy leg 
contacts the vehicle interior before the full forward position is 
attained, position the seat at the next detent where there is no 
contact. If the seats are power seats, position the seat to avoid 
contact while assuring that there is a maximum of 5 mm (0.2 in) 
distance between the vehicle interior and the point on the dummy that 
would first contact the vehicle interior.
    S16.3.3.1.9  For vehicles without adjustable seat backs, adjust the 
lower neck bracket to level the head as much as possible. For vehicles 
with adjustable seat backs, while holding the thighs in place, rotate 
the seat back forward until the transverse instrumentation platform of 
the head is level to within  0.5 degrees, making sure that 
the pelvis does not interfere with the seat bight. Inspect the abdomen 
to insure that it is properly installed.
    S16.3.3.1.10  If it is not possible to orient the head level within 
 0.5 degrees, minimize the angle.
    S16.3.3.1.11  Measure and set the dummy's pelvic angle using the 
pelvic angle gage (drawing TE-2504, incorporated by reference in 49 CFR 
Part 572, Subpart O, of this chapter). The angle shall be set to 20.0 
degrees  2.5 degrees. If this is not possible, adjust the 
pelvic angle as close to 20.0 degrees as possible while keeping the 
transverse instrumentation platform of the head as level as possible as 
specified in S16.3.3.1.9 and S16.3.3.1.10.
    S16.3.3.1.12  If the dummy is contacting the vehicle interior after 
these adjustments, move the seat rearward until there is a maximum of 5 
mm (0.2 in) between the contact point of the dummy and the interior of 
the vehicle or if it has a manual seat adjustment, to the next rearward 
detent position. If after these adjustments the dummy contact point is 
more than 5 mm (0.2 in) from the vehicle interior and the seat is still 
not in its forward most position, move the seat forward until the 
contact point is 5 mm (0.2 in) or less from the vehicle interior, or if 
it has a manual seat adjustment, move the seat to the closest detent 
position without making contact, or until the seat reaches its forward 
most position, whichever occurs first.
    S16.3.3.2  Passenger foot positioning.
    S16.3.3.2.1  Place the passenger's feet flat on the toe board.
    S16.3.3.2.2   If the feet cannot be placed flat on the toe board, 
set them perpendicular to the leg center lines and place them as far 
forward as possible with the heels resting on the floor pan.
    S16.3.3.3  Passenger arm/hand positioning.
    S16.3.3.3.1  Place the dummy's upper arms in contact with the seat 
back and the torso.
    S16.3.3.3.2  Place the palms of the dummy in contact with the 
outside of the thighs.
    S16.3.3.3.3  Place the little fingers in contact with the seat 
cushion.
    S16.3.4  Driver and passenger adjustable head restraints.
    S16.3.4.1.  If the head restraint has an automatic adjustment, 
leave it where the system positions the restraint after the dummy is 
placed in the seat.
    S16.3.4.2  Adjust each head restraint to its lowest position.
    S16.3.4.3  Measure the vertical distance from the top most point of 
the head restraint to the bottom most point. Locate a horizontal plane 
through the midpoint of this distance. Adjust each head restraint 
vertically so that this horizontal plane is aligned with the center of 
gravity (CG) of the dummy head.
    S16.3.4.3  If the above position is not attainable, move the 
vertical center of the head restraint to the closest detent below the 
center of the head CG.
    S16.3.4.4  If the head restraint has a fore and aft adjustment, 
place the restraint in the forwardmost position or until contact with 
the head is made, whichever occurs first.
    S16.3.5  Driver and passenger manual belt adjustment (for tests 
conducted with a belted dummy)
    S16.3.5.1  If an adjustable seat belt D-ring anchorage exists, 
place it in the manufacturer's design position for a 5th percentile 
adult female with the seat in the position specified in S16.2.10.3.
    S16.3.5.2  Place the Type 2 manual belt around the test dummy and 
fasten the latch.
    S16.3.5.3  Ensure that the dummy's head remains as level as 
possible, as specified in S16.3.2.1.9 and S16.3.2.1.10 and S16.3.3.1.9 
and S16.3.3.1.10.
    S16.3.5.4  Remove all slack from the lap belt. Pull the upper torso 
webbing out of the retractor and allow it to retract; repeat this 
operation four times. Apply a 9 N (2 lbf) to 18 N (4 lbf) tension load 
to the lap belt. If the belt system is equipped with a tension-
relieving device, introduce the maximum amount of slack into the upper 
torso belt that is recommended by the manufacturer. If the belt system 
is not equipped with a tension-relieving device, allow the excess 
webbing in the shoulder belt to be retracted by the retractive force of 
the retractor.
* * * * *
    S18  Test procedure for offset frontal deformable barrier 
requirements using 5th percentile adult female dummies.
    S18.1  General provisions. Place a 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart O 5th 
percentile adult female test dummy at each front outboard seating 
position of a vehicle, in accordance with the procedures specified in 
S16.3 of this standard. Impact the vehicle traveling longitudinally 
forward at any speed, up to and including 40 km/h (25 mph), into a 
fixed offset deformable barrier under the conditions and procedures 
specified in S18.2 of this standard, impacting only the left side of 
the vehicle.
* * * * *
    S19  Requirements to provide protection for infants in rear facing 
and convertible child restraints and car beds.
    S19.1  Each vehicle certified as complying with S14 shall, at the 
option of the manufacturer, meet the requirements specified in S19.2 or 
S19.3, under the test procedures specified in S20.

[[Page 65409]]

    S19.2  Option 1--Automatic suppression feature. Each vehicle shall 
meet the requirements specified in S19.2.1 through S19.2.3.
    S19.2.1  The vehicle shall be equipped with an automatic 
suppression feature for the passenger air bag which results in 
deactivation of the air bag during each of the static tests specified 
in S20.2 (using the 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart R 12-month-old CRABI child 
dummy in any of the child restraints identified in sections B and C of 
appendix A of this standard and the 49 CFR part 572 subpart K Newborn 
Infant dummy in any of the car beds identified in section A of appendix 
A, as appropriate), and activation of the air bag system during each of 
the static tests specified in S20.3 (using the 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart 
O 5th percentile adult female dummy).
    S19.2.2  The vehicle shall be equipped with at least one telltale 
which emits light whenever the passenger air bag system is deactivated 
and does not emit light whenever the passenger air bag system is 
activated, except that the telltale(s) need not illuminate when the 
passenger seat is unoccupied. Each telltale:
    (a) Shall emit yellow light;
    (b) Shall have the identifying words ``PASSENGER AIR BAG OFF'' or 
``PASS AIR BAG OFF'' on the telltale or within 25 mm (1.0 in) of the 
telltale; and
    (c) Shall not be combined with the readiness indicator required by 
S4.5.2 of this standard.
    (d) Shall be located within the interior of the vehicle and forward 
of and above the design H-point of both the driver's and the right 
front passenger's seat in their forwardmost seating positions and shall 
not be located on or adjacent to a surface that can be used for 
temporary or permanent storage where use of the storage space could 
obscure the telltale from either the driver's or right front 
passenger's view, or where the telltale would be obscured from the 
driver's view if a rear facing child restraint is installed in the 
right front passenger's seat.
    (e) Shall be visible and recognizable to a driver and right front 
passenger during night and day when the occupants have adapted to the 
ambient light roadway conditions.
    (f) Telltales need not be visible or recognizable when not 
activated.
    (g) Means shall be provided for making telltales and their 
identification visible and recognizable to the driver and right front 
passenger under all driving conditions. The means for providing the 
required visibility may be adjustable manually or automatically, except 
that the telltales and their identifications may not be adjustable 
under any driving conditions to a level that they become invisible or 
not recognizable to the driver and right front passenger.
    (h) The telltale must not emit light except when the passenger air 
bag is urned off or during a bulb check upon vehicle starting.
    S19.2.3  The vehicle shall be equipped with a mechanism that 
indicates whether the air bag system is suppressed, regardless of 
whether the passenger seat is occupied. The mechanism need not be 
located in the occupant compartment unless it is the telltale described 
in S19.2.2.
    S19.3  Option 2--Low risk deployment. Each vehicle shall meet the 
injury criteria specified in S19.4 of this standard when the passenger 
air bag is deployed in accordance with the procedures specified in 
S20.4.
    S19.4  Injury criteria for the 49 CFR Part 572, Subpart R 12-month-
old CRABI test dummy.
    S19.4.1  All portions of the test dummy and child restraint shall 
be contained within the outer surfaces of the vehicle passenger 
compartment.
    S19.4.2  Head injury criteria.
    (a) For any two points in time, t1 and t2, 
during the event which are separated by not more than a 15 millisecond 
time interval and where t1 is less than t2, the 
head injury criterion (HIC15) shall be determined using the 
resultant head acceleration at the center of gravity of the dummy head, 
ar, expressed as a multiple of g (the acceleration of 
gravity) and shall be calculated using the expression:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18DE01.000

    (b) The maximum calculated HIC15 value shall not exceed 
390.
    S19.4.3  The resultant acceleration calculated from the output of 
the thoracic instrumentation shall not exceed 50 g's, except for 
intervals whose cumulative duration is not more than 3 milliseconds.
    S19.4.4  Neck injury. When measuring neck injury, each of the 
following injury criteria shall be met.
    (a) Nij.
    (1) The shear force (Fx), axial force (Fz), and bending moment (My) 
shall be measured by the dummy upper neck load cell for the duration of 
the crash event as specified in S4.11. Shear force, axial force, and 
bending moment shall be filtered for Nij purposes at SAE J211/1 rev. 
Mar95 Channel Frequency Class 600 (see S4.7).
    (2) During the event, the axial force (Fz) can be either in tension 
or compression while the occipital condyle bending moment (Mocy) can be 
in either flexion or extension. This results in four possible loading 
conditions for Nij: tension-extension (Nte), tension-flexion (Ntf), 
compression-extension (Nce), or compression-flexion (Ncf).
    (3) When calculating Nij using equation S19.4.4(a)(4), the critical 
values, Fzc and Myc, are:

(i) Fzc = 1460 N (328 lbf) when Fz is in tension
(ii) Fzc = 1460 N (328 lbf) when Fz is in compression
(iii) Myc = 43 Nm (32 lbf-ft) when a flexion moment exists at the 
occipital condyle
(iv) Myc = 17 Nm (13 lbf-ft) when an extension moment exists at the 
occipital condyle.

    (4) At each point in time, only one of the four loading conditions 
occurs and the Nij value corresponding to that loading condition is 
computed and the three remaining loading modes shall be considered a 
value of zero. The expression for calculating each Nij loading 
condition is given by:

Nij ' (Fz / Fzc) + (Mocy / Myc)

    (5) None of the four Nij values shall exceed 1.0 at any time during 
the event.
    (b) Peak tension. Tension force (Fz), measured at the upper neck 
load cell, shall not exceed 780 N (175 lbf) at any time.
    (c) Peak compression. Compression force (Fz), measured at the upper 
neck load cell, shall not exceed 960 N (216 lbf) at any time.
    S19.4.5  Unless otherwise indicated, instrumentation for data 
acquisition, data channel frequency class, and moment calculations are 
the same as given for the 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart R 12-month-old CRABI 
test dummy.
    S20  Test procedure for S19.
    S20.1  General provisions.
    S20.1.1  Tests specifying the use of a car bed, a rear facing child 
restraint, or a convertible child restraint may be conducted using any 
such restraint listed in sections A, B, and C of Appendix A of this 
standard respectively. The car bed, rear facing child restraint, or 
convertible child restraint may be unused or have been previously used 
only for automatic suppression tests. If it has been used, there shall 
not be any visible damage prior to the test.
    S20.1.2  Each vehicle certified to this option shall comply in 
tests conducted with the right front outboard seating position, if 
adjustable fore and aft, at full rearward, middle, and full forward 
positions. If the child restraint or dummy contacts the vehicle 
interior,

[[Page 65410]]

move the seat rearward to the next detent that provides clearance. If 
the seat is a power seat, move the seat rearward while assuring that 
there is a maximum of 5 mm (0.2 in) clearance.
    S20.1.3  If the car bed, rear facing child restraint, or 
convertible child restraint is equipped with a handle, the vehicle 
shall comply in tests conducted with the handle at both the child 
restraint manufacturer's recommended position for use in vehicles and 
in the upright position.
    S20.1.4  If the car bed, rear facing child restraint, or 
convertible child restraint is equipped with a sunshield, the vehicle 
shall comply in tests conducted with the sunshield both fully open and 
fully closed.
    S20.1.5  The vehicle shall comply in tests with the car bed, rear 
facing child restraint, or convertible child restraint uncovered and in 
tests with a towel or blanket weighing up to 1.0 kg (2.2 lb) placed on 
or over the restraint in any of the following positions:
    (a) with the blanket covering the top and sides of the restraint, 
and
    (b) with the blanket placed from the top of the vehicle's seat back 
to the forwardmost edge of the restraint.
    S20.1.6  Except as otherwise specified, if the car bed, rear facing 
child restraint, or convertible child restraint has an anchorage system 
as specified in S5.9 of FMVSS No. 213 and is tested in a vehicle with a 
right front outboard vehicle seat that has an anchorage system as 
specified in FMVSS No. 225, the vehicle shall comply with the belted 
test conditions with the restraint anchorage system attached to the 
vehicle seat anchorage system and the vehicle seat belt unattached. It 
shall also comply with the belted test conditions with the restraint 
anchorage system unattached to the vehicle seat anchorage system and 
the vehicle seat belt attached. The vehicle shall comply with the 
unbelted test conditions with the restraint anchorage system unattached 
to the vehicle seat anchorage system.
    S20.1.7  If the car bed, rear facing child restraint, or 
convertible child restraint comes equipped with a detachable base, the 
vehicle shall comply in tests conducted with the detachable base 
attached to the child restraint and with the detachable base unattached 
to the child restraint.
    S20.1.8  Do not attach any tethers.
    S20.1.9  Seat set-up. Unless otherwise stated,
    S20.1.9.1  Lumbar support adjustment. Position adjustable lumbar 
supports so that the lumbar support is in its lowest, retracted or 
deflated adjustment position.
    S20.1.9.2  Other seat adjustments. Position any adjustable parts of 
the seat that provide additional support so that they are in the lowest 
or most open adjustment position.
    S20.1.9.3  If the seat cushion adjusts fore and aft, independent of 
the seat back, set this adjustment to the full rearward position.
    S20.1.9.4  If the seat height is adjustable, determine the maximum 
and minimum heights at the full rearward, middle, and full forward 
positions. Set the seat at the mid-point height for each of the three 
fore-aft test positions.
    S20.1.9.5  The seat back angle, if adjustable, is set at the 
manufacturer's nominal design seat back angle for a 50th percentile 
adult male as specified in S8.1.3.
    S20.1.9.6  If adjustable, set the head restraint at the full down 
and full forward position.
    S20.1.10  The longitudinal centerline of a bucket seat cushion is 
determined at the widest part of the seat cushion. Measure 
perpendicular to the longitudinal centerline of the vehicle.
    S20.2  Static tests of automatic suppression feature which shall 
result in deactivation of the passenger air bag. Each vehicle that is 
certified as complying with S19.2 shall meet the following test 
requirements.
    S20.2.1  Belted rear facing and convertible child restraints.
    S20.2.1.1  The vehicle shall comply in tests using any child 
restraint specified in section B and section C of Appendix A of this 
standard.
    S20.2.1.2  Locate a vertical plane through the longitudinal 
centerline of the child restraint. This will be referred to as 
``Plane''.
    S20.2.1.3  For bucket seats, ``Plane B'' refers to a vertical plane 
parallel to the vehicle longitudinal centerline through the 
longitudinal centerline of the right front outboard vehicle seat 
cushion. For bench seats, ``Plane B'' refers to a vertical plane 
through the right front outboard vehicle seat parallel to the vehicle 
longitudinal centerline the same distance from the longitudinal 
centerline of the vehicle as the center of the steering wheel.
    S20.2.1.4  Facing rear.
    (a) The vehicle shall comply in both of the following positions, if 
applicable:
    (1) Without attaching the child restraint anchorage system as 
specified in S5.9 of FMVSS No. 213 to a vehicle seat anchorage system 
specified in FMVSS No. 225, align the child restraint system facing 
rearward such that Plane A is aligned with Plane B.
    (2) If the child restraint is certified to S5.9 of FMVSS No. 213, 
and the vehicle seat has an anchorage system as specified in FMVSS No. 
225, attach the child restraint to the vehicle seat anchorage instead 
of aligning the planes. Do not attach the vehicle safety belt.
    (b) While maintaining the child restraint positions achieved in 
S20.2.1.4(a), secure the child restraint by following, to the extent 
possible, the child restraint manufacturer's directions regarding 
proper installation of the restraint in the rear facing mode.
    (c) Place any adjustable seat belt anchorages at the vehicle 
manufacturer's nominal design position for a 50th percentile adult male 
occupant. Cinch the vehicle belts to any tension from zero up to 134 N 
(30 lb) to secure the child restraint. Measure belt tension in a flat, 
straight section of the lap belt between the child restraint belt path 
and the contact point with the belt anchor or vehicle seat, on the side 
away from the buckle (to avoid interference from the shoulder portion 
of the belt).
    (d) Position the 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart R 12-month-old CRABI dummy 
in the child restraint by following, to the extent possible, the 
manufacturer's instructions provided with the child restraint for 
seating infants.
    (e) Start the vehicle engine or place the ignition in the ``on'' 
position, whichever will turn on the suppression system, and close all 
vehicle doors. Wait 10 seconds, then check whether the air bag is 
deactivated.
    S20.2.1.5  Facing forward (convertible restraints only).
    (a) The vehicle shall comply in both of the following positions, if 
applicable:
    (1) Without attaching the child restraint anchorage system as 
specified in S5.9 of FMVSS No. 213 to a vehicle seat anchorage system 
specified in FMVSS No. 225, align the child restraint system facing 
forward such that Plane A is aligned with Plane B.
    (2) If the child restraint is certified to S5.9 of FMVSS No. 213, 
and the vehicle seat has an anchorage system as specified in FMVSS No. 
225, attach the child restraint to the vehicle seat anchorage instead 
of aligning the planes. Do not attach the vehicle safety belt.
    (b) While maintaining the child restraint positions achieved in 
S20.2.1.5(a), secure the child restraint by following, to the extent 
possible, the child restraint manufacturer's directions regarding 
proper installation of the restraint in the forward facing mode.
    (c) Place any adjustable seat belt anchorages at the vehicle 
manufacturer's nominal design position for a 50th percentile adult male 
occupant. Cinch the vehicle belts to any tension from zero up to 134 N 
(30 lb) to

[[Page 65411]]

secure the child restraint. Measure belt tension in a flat, straight 
section of the lap belt between the child restraint belt path and the 
contact point with the belt anchor or vehicle seat, on the side away 
from the buckle (to avoid interference from the shoulder portion of the 
belt).
    (d) Position the 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart R 12-month-old CRABI dummy 
in the child restraint by following, to the extent possible, the 
manufacturer's instructions provided with the child restraint for 
seating infants.
    (e) Start the vehicle engine or place the ignition in the ``on'' 
position, whichever will turn on the suppression system, and close all 
vehicle doors. Wait 10 seconds, then check whether the air bag is 
deactivated.
    S20.2.2  Unbelted rear facing and convertible child restraints.
    S20.2.2.1  The vehicle shall comply in tests using any child 
restraint specified in section B and section C of appendix A of this 
standard.
    S20.2.2.2  Locate a vertical plane through the longitudinal 
centerline of the child restraint. This will be referred to as ``Plane 
A''.
    S20.2.2.3  For bucket seats, ``Plane B'' refers to a vertical plane 
parallel to the vehicle longitudinal centerline through the 
longitudinal centerline of the right front outboard vehicle seat 
cushion. For bench seats, ``Plane B'' refers to a vertical plane 
through the right front outboard seat parallel to the vehicle 
longitudinal centerline the same distance from the longitudinal 
centerline of the vehicle as the center of the steering wheel.
    S20.2.2.4  Facing rear.
    (a) Align the child restraint system facing rearward such that 
Plane A is aligned with Plane B and the child restraint is in contact 
with the seat back.
    (b) Position the 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart R 12-month-old CRABI dummy 
in the child restraint by following, to the extent possible, the 
manufacturer's instructions provided with the child restraint for 
seating infants.
    (c) Start the vehicle engine or place the ignition in the ``on'' 
position, whichever will turn on the suppression system, and close all 
vehicle doors. Wait 10 seconds, then check whether the air bag is 
deactivated.
    S20.2.2.5  Facing forward.
    (a) Align the child restraint system facing forward such that Plane 
A is aligned with Plane B and the child restraint is in contact with 
the seat back.
    (b) Position the 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart R 12-month-old CRABI dummy 
in the child restraint by following, to the extent possible, the 
manufacturer's instructions provided with the child restraint for 
seating infants.
    (c) Start the vehicle engine or place the ignition in the ``on'' 
position, whichever will turn on the suppression system, and close all 
vehicle doors. Wait 10 seconds, then check whether the air bag is 
deactivated.
    S20.2.3  Tests with a belted car bed.
    S20.2.3.1  The vehicle shall comply in tests using any car bed 
specified in section A of Appendix A of this standard.
    S20.2.3.2  (a) Install the car bed by following, to the extent 
possible, the car bed manufacturer's directions regarding proper 
installation of the car bed.
    (b) Place any adjustable seat belt anchorages at the vehicle 
manufacturer's nominal design position for a 50th percentile adult male 
occupant. Cinch the vehicle belts to secure the car bed.
    (c) Position the 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart K Newborn Infant dummy in 
the car bed by following, to the extent possible, the car bed 
manufacturer's instructions provided with the car bed for positioning 
infants.
    (d) Start the vehicle engine or place the ignition in the ``on'' 
position, whichever will turn on the suppression system, and close all 
vehicle doors. Wait 10 seconds, then check whether the air bag is 
deactivated.
    S20.3  Static tests of automatic suppression feature which shall 
result in activation of the passenger air bag system.
    S20.3.1  Each vehicle certified to this option shall comply in 
tests conducted with the right front outboard seating position, if 
adjustable fore and aft, at the full rearward, middle, and, subject to 
S16.3.3.1.8, full forward positions. All tests are conducted with the 
seat height, if adjustable, in the mid-height position.
    S20.3.2  Place a 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart O 5th percentile adult 
female test dummy at the right front outboard seating position of the 
vehicle, in accordance with procedures specified in S16.3.3 of this 
standard, except as specified in S20.3.1, subject to the fore-aft seat 
positions in S20.3.1. Do not fasten the seat belt.
    S20.3.3  Start the vehicle engine or place the ignition in the 
``on'' position, whichever will turn on the suppression system, and 
then close all vehicle doors.
    S20.3.4  Wait 10 seconds, then check whether the air bag system is 
activated.
    S20.4  Low risk deployment test. Each vehicle that is certified as 
complying with S19.3 shall meet the following test requirements.
    S20.4.1  Position the right front outboard vehicle seat in the full 
forward seat track position, adjust the seat height (if adjustable) to 
the mid-height position, and adjust the seat back (if adjustable) to 
the nominal design position for a 50th percentile adult male as 
specified in S8.1.3. Position adjustable lumbar supports so that the 
lumbar support is in its lowest, retracted or deflated adjustment 
position. Position any adjustable parts of the seat that provide 
additional support so that they are in the lowest or most open 
adjustment position. If the seat cushion adjusts fore and aft, 
independent of the seat back, set this adjustment to the full rearward 
position. If adjustable, set the head restraint at the full down 
position. If the child restraint or dummy contacts the vehicle 
interior, move the seat rearward to the next detent that provides 
clearance. If the seat is a power seat, move the seat rearward while 
assuring that there is a maximum of 5 mm (0.2 in) clearance.
    S20.4.2  The vehicle shall comply in tests using any child 
restraint specified in section B and section C of appendix A to this 
standard.
    S20.4.3  Locate a vertical plane through the longitudinal 
centerline of the child restraint. This will be referred to as ``Plane 
A''.
    S20.4.4  For bucket seats, ``Plane B'' refers to a vertical plane 
parallel to the vehicle longitudinal centerline through the geometric 
center of the right front outboard seat cushion. For bench seats, 
``Plane B'' refers to a vertical plane through the right front outboard 
seat parallel to the vehicle longitudinal centerline that is the same 
distance from the longitudinal centerline of the vehicle as the center 
of the steering wheel.
    S20.4.5  Align the child restraint system facing rearward such that 
Plane A is aligned with Plane B.
    S20.4.6  If the child restraint is certified to S5.9 of FMVSS No. 
213, and the vehicle seat has an anchorage system as specified in FMVSS 
No. 225, attach the child restraint to the vehicle seat anchorage 
instead of aligning the planes. Do not attach the vehicle safety belt.
    S20.4.7  While maintaining the child restraint position achieved in 
S20.4.5, secure the child restraint by following, to the extent 
possible, the child restraint manufacturer's directions regarding 
proper installation of the restraint in the rear facing mode. Place any 
adjustable seat belt anchorages at the manufacturer's nominal design 
position for a 50th percentile adult male occupant. Cinch the vehicle 
belts to any tension from zero up to 134 N (30 lb) to secure the child 
restraint. Measure belt tension in a flat, straight section of the lap 
belt between the child restraint belt path and the contact point with 
the belt anchor or vehicle seat, on the side away

[[Page 65412]]

from the buckle (to avoid interference from the shoulder portion of the 
belt).
    S20.4.8  Position the 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart R 12-month-old CRABI 
dummy in the child restraint by following, to the extent possible, the 
manufacturer's instructions provided with the child restraint for 
seating infants.
    S20.4.9  Deploy the right front outboard frontal air bag system. If 
the air bag system contains a multistage inflator, the vehicle shall be 
able to comply at any stage or combination of stages or time delay 
between successive stages that could occur in the presence of an infant 
in a rear facing child restraint and a 49 CFR Part 572, Subpart R 12-
month-old CRABI dummy positioned according to S20.4 in a rigid barrier 
crash test at speeds up to 64 km/h (40 mph).
    S21  Requirements using 3-year-old child dummies.
    S21.1  Each vehicle that is certified as complying with S14 shall, 
at the option of the manufacturer, meet the requirements specified in 
S21.2, S21.3, S21.4 or S21.5, under the test procedures specified in 
S22 or S28, as applicable.
    S21.2  Option 1--Automatic suppression feature. Each vehicle shall 
meet the requirements specified in S21.2.1 through S21.2.3.
    S21.2.1  The vehicle shall be equipped with an automatic 
suppression feature for the passenger air bag which results in 
deactivation of the air bag during each of the static tests specified 
in S22.2 (using a 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart P 3-year-old child dummy and, 
as applicable, any child restraint specified in section C and section D 
of appendix A to this standard), and activation of the air bag system 
during each of the static tests specified in S22.3 (using a 49 CFR Part 
572 Subpart O 5th percentile adult female dummy).
    S21.2.2  The vehicle shall be equipped with a telltale light 
meeting the requirements specified in S19.2.2.
    S21.2.3  The vehicle shall be equipped with a mechanism that 
indicates whether the air bag is suppressed, regardless of whether the 
passenger seat is occupied. The mechanism need not be located in the 
occupant compartment unless it is the telltale described in S21.2.2.
    S21.3  Option 2--Dynamic automatic suppression system that 
suppresses the air bag when an occupant is out of position. (This 
option is available under the conditions set forth in S27.1.) The 
vehicle shall be equipped with a dynamic automatic suppression system 
for the passenger air bag system which meets the requirements specified 
in S27.
    S21.4  Option 3--Low risk deployment. Each vehicle shall meet the 
injury criteria specified in S21.5 of this standard when the passenger 
air bag is deployed in accordance with both of the low risk deployment 
test procedures specified in S22.4.
    S21.5  Injury criteria for the 49 CFR Part 572, Subpart P 3-year-
old child test dummy.
    S21.5.1  All portions of the test dummy shall be contained within 
the outer surfaces of the vehicle passenger compartment.
    S21.5.2  Head injury criteria.
    (a) For any two points in time, t1 and t2, 
during the event which are separated by not more than a 15 millisecond 
time interval and where t1 is less than t2, the 
head injury criterion (HIC15) shall be determined using the 
resultant head acceleration at the center of gravity of the dummy head, 
ar, expressed as a multiple of g (the acceleration of 
gravity) and shall be calculated using the expression:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18DE01.001

    (b) The maximum calculated HIC15 value shall not exceed 
570.
    S21.5.3  The resultant acceleration calculated from the output of 
the thoracic instrumentation shall not exceed 55 g's, except for 
intervals whose cumulative duration is not more than 3 milliseconds.
    S21.5.4  Compression deflection of the sternum relative to the 
spine, as determined by instrumentation, shall not exceed 34 
millimeters (1.3 in).
    S21.5.5  Neck injury. When measuring neck injury, each of the 
following injury criteria shall be met.
    (a) Nij.
    (1) The shear force (Fx), axial force (Fz), and bending moment (My) 
shall be measured by the dummy upper neck load cell for the duration of 
the crash event as specified in S4.11. Shear force, axial force, and 
bending moment shall be filtered for Nij purposes at SAE J211/1 rev. 
Mar95 Channel Frequency Class 600 (see S4.7).
    (2) During the event, the axial force (Fz) can be either in tension 
or compression while the occipital condyle bending moment (Mocy) can be 
in either flexion or extension. This results in four possible loading 
conditions for Nij: Tension-extension (Nte), tension-flexion (Ntf), 
compression-extension (Nce), or compression-flexion (Ncf).
    (3) When calculating Nij using equation S21.5.5(a)(4), the critical 
values, Fzc and Myc, are:

(i) Fzc = 2120 N (477 lbf) when Fz is in tension
(ii) Fzc = 2120 N (477 lbf) when Fz is in compression
(iii) Myc = 68 Nm (50 lbf-ft) when a flexion moment exists at the 
occipital condyle
(iv) Myc = 27 Nm (20 lbf-ft) when an extension moment exists at the 
occipital condyle.

    (4) At each point in time, only one of the four loading conditions 
occurs and the Nij value corresponding to that loading condition is 
computed and the three remaining loading modes shall be considered a 
value of zero. The expression for calculating each Nij loading 
condition is given by:

Nij = (Fz / Fzc) + (Mocy / Myc)

    (5) None of the four Nij values shall exceed 1.0 at any time during 
the event.
    (b) Peak tension. Tension force (Fz), measured at the upper neck 
load cell, shall not exceed 1130 N (254 lbf) at any time.
    (c) Peak compression. Compression force (Fz), measured at the upper 
neck load cell, shall not exceed 1380 N (310 lbf) at any time.
    S21.5.6  Unless otherwise indicated, instrumentation for data 
acquisition, data channel frequency class, and moment calculations are 
the same as given in 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart P 3-year-old child test 
dummy.
    S22  Test procedure for S21.
    S22.1  General provisions and definitions.
    S22.1.1  Tests specifying the use of a forward facing child 
restraint, including a booster seat where applicable, may be conducted 
using any such restraint listed in section C and section D of Appendix 
A of this standard, respectively. The child restraint may be unused or 
have been previously used only for automatic suppression tests. If it 
has been used, there shall not be any visible damage prior to the test. 
Booster seats are to be used in the manner appropriate for a 3-year-old 
child of the same height and weight as the 3-year-old child dummy.
    S22.1.2  Unless otherwise specified, each vehicle certified to this 
option shall comply in tests conducted with the right front outboard 
seating position at the full rearward, middle, and the full forward 
positions. If the dummy contacts the vehicle interior, move the seat 
rearward to the next detent that provides clearance. If the seat is a 
power seat, move the seat rearward while assuring that there is a 
maximum of 5 mm (0.2 in) clearance.
    S22.1.3  Except as otherwise specified, if the child restraint has 
an anchorage system as specified in S5.9 of FMVSS No. 213 and is tested 
in a vehicle with a right front outboard

[[Page 65413]]

vehicle seat that has an anchorage system as specified in FMVSS No. 
225, the vehicle shall comply with the belted test conditions with the 
restraint anchorage system attached to the vehicle seat anchorage 
system and the vehicle seat belt unattached. It shall also comply with 
the belted test conditions with the restraint anchorage system 
unattached to the vehicle seat anchorage system and the vehicle seat 
belt attached.
    S22.1.4  Do not attach any tethers.
    S22.1.5  The definitions provided in S16.3.1 through S16.3.10 apply 
to the tests specified in S22.
    S22.1.6  For leg and thigh angles use the following references:
    (a) Thigh--a straight line on the thigh skin between the center of 
the \5/16\  x  \1/2\ in. screw (part 9001024, item 10 in drawing 210-
0000 sheet 2 of 7, complete assembly (HYB III 3 YR OLD)) and the knee 
bolt (part 210-5301 in drawing 210-5000-1 & -1, leg assembly).
    (b) Leg--a straight line on the leg skin between the center of the 
ankle bolt (part 210-5701 in drawing 210-5000-1 & -2, leg assembly) and 
the knee bolt (part 210-5301 in drawing 210-5000-1 & -2, leg assembly).
    S22.1.7  Seat set-up. Unless otherwise stated,
    S22.1.7.1  Lumbar support adjustment. Position adjustable lumbar 
supports so that the lumbar support is in its lowest, retracted or 
deflated adjustment position.
    S22.1.7.2  Other seat adjustments. Position any adjustable parts of 
the seat that provide additional support so that they are in the lowest 
or most open adjustment position.
    S22.1.7.3  If the seat cushion adjusts fore and aft, independent of 
the seat back, set this adjustment to the full rearward position.
    S22.1.7.4  If the seat height is adjustable, determine the maximum 
and minimum heights at the full rearward seat track position, the 
middle seat track position, and the full forward seat track position. 
Set the seat at the mid-point height for each of the three fore-aft 
test positions.
    S22.1.7.5  The seat back angle, if adjustable, is set at the 
manufacturer's nominal design seat back angle for a 50th percentile 
adult male as specified in S8.1.3.
    S22.1.7.6  If adjustable, set the head restraint at the full down 
and full forward position.
    S22.2  Static tests of automatic suppression feature which shall 
result in deactivation of the passenger air bag. Each vehicle that is 
certified as complying with S21.2 shall meet the following test 
requirements:
    S22.2.1  Belted test with forward facing child restraints or 
booster seats.
    S22.2.1.1  Install the restraint in the right front outboard seat 
in accordance, to the extent possible, with the child restraint 
manufacturer's instructions provided with the seat for use by children 
with the same height and weight as the 3-year-old child dummy.
    S22.2.1.2  Locate a vertical plane through the longitudinal 
centerline of the child restraint. This will be referred to as ``Plane 
A''.
    S22.2.1.3  For bucket seats, ``Plane B'' refers to a vertical 
longitudinal plane through the longitudinal centerline of the seat 
cushion of the right front outboard vehicle seat. For bench seats, 
``Plane B'' refers to a vertical plane through the right front outboard 
vehicle seat parallel to the vehicle longitudinal centerline the same 
distance from the longitudinal centerline of the vehicle as the center 
of the steering wheel.
    22.2.1.4  The vehicle shall comply in both of the following 
positions, if applicable:
    (a) Without attaching the child restraint anchorage system as 
specified in S5.9 of FMVSS No. 213 to a vehicle seat anchorage system 
specified in FMVSS No. 225 and without attaching any tethers, align the 
child restraint system facing forward such that Plane A is aligned with 
Plane B.
    (b) If the child restraint is certified to S5.9 of FMVSS No. 213, 
and the vehicle seat has an anchorage system as specified in FMVSS No. 
225, attach the child restraint to the vehicle seat anchorage instead 
of aligning the planes. Do not attach the vehicle safety belt.
    S22.2.1.5  Forward facing child restraint
    S22.2.1.5.1  Place any adjustable seat belt anchorages at the 
vehicle manufacturer's nominal design position for a 50th percentile 
adult male occupant. Cinch the vehicle belts to any tension from zero 
up to 134 N (30 lb) to secure the child restraint. Measure belt tension 
in a flat, straight section of the lap belt between the child restraint 
belt path and the contact point with the belt anchor or vehicle seat, 
on the side away from the buckle (to avoid interference from the 
shoulder portion of the belt).
    S22.2.1.5.2  Position the 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart P 3-year-old 
child dummy in the child restraint such that the dummy's lower torso is 
centered on the child restraint and the dummy's spine is against the 
seat back of the child restraint. Place the arms at the dummy's sides.
    S22.2.1.5.3  Attach all belts that come with the child restraint 
that are appropriate for a child of the same height and weight as the 
3-year-old child dummy, if any, by following, to the extent possible, 
the manufacturer's instructions provided with the child restraint for 
seating children.
    S22.2.1.6  Booster seat
    S22.2.1.6.1  Place any adjustable seat belt anchorages at the 
vehicle manufacturer's nominal design position for a 50th percentile 
adult male occupant. For booster seats designed to be secured to the 
vehicle seat even when empty, cinch the vehicle belts to any tension 
from zero up to 134 N (30 lb) to secure the booster seat. Measure belt 
tension in a flat, straight section of the lap belt between the child 
restraint belt path and the contact point with the belt anchor or 
vehicle seat, on the side away from the buckle (to avoid interference 
from the shoulder portion of the belt).
    S22.2.1.6.2  Position the 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart P 3-year-old 
child dummy in the booster seat such that the dummy's lower torso is 
centered on the booster seat cushion and the dummy's back is parallel 
to and in contact with the booster seat back or, if there is no booster 
seat back, the vehicle seat back. Place the arms at the dummy's sides.
    S22.2.1.6.3  If applicable, attach all belts that come with the 
child restraint that are appropriate for a child of the same height and 
weight as the 3-year-old child dummy, if any, by following, to the 
extent possible, the manufacturer's instructions provided with the 
child restraint for seating children.
    S22.2.1.6.4  If applicable, place the Type 2 manual belt around the 
test dummy and fasten the latch. Remove all slack from the lap belt 
portion. Pull the upper torso webbing out of the retractor and allow it 
to retract; repeat this four times. Apply a 9 to 18 N (2 to 4 lb) 
tension load to the lap belt. Allow the excess webbing in the upper 
torso belt to be retracted by the retractive force of the retractor.
    S22.2.1.7  Start the vehicle engine or place the ignition in the 
``on'' position, whichever will turn on the suppression system, and 
then close all vehicle doors.
    S22.2.1.8  Wait 10 seconds, then check whether the air bag is 
deactivated.
    S22.2.2  Unbelted tests with dummies. Place the 49 CFR Part 572 
Subpart P 3-year-old child dummy on the right front outboard seat in 
any of the following positions (without using a child restraint or 
booster seat or the vehicle's seat belts):
    S22.2.2.1  Sitting on seat with back against seat back

[[Page 65414]]

    (a) Position the dummy in the seated position and place it on the 
right front outboard seat.
    (b) In the case of vehicles equipped with bench seats, position the 
midsagittal plane of the dummy vertically and parallel to the vehicle's 
longitudinal centerline and the same distance from the vehicle's 
longitudinal centerline as the center of the steering wheel. In the 
case of vehicles equipped with bucket seats, position the midsagittal 
plane of the dummy vertically such that it coincides with the 
longitudinal centerline of the seat cushion. Position the torso of the 
dummy against the seat back. Position the dummy's thighs against the 
seat cushion.
    (c) Allow the legs of the dummy to extend off the surface of the 
seat.
    (d) Rotate the dummy's upper arms down until they contact the seat 
back.
    (e) Rotate the dummy's lower arms until the dummy's hands contact 
the seat cushion.
    (f) Start the vehicle engine or place the ignition in the ``on'' 
position, whichever will turn on the suppression system, and then close 
all vehicle doors.
    (g) Wait 10 seconds, then check whether the air bag is deactivated.
    S22.2.2.2  Sitting on seat with back against reclined seat back. 
Repeat the test sequence in S22.2.2.1 with the seat back angle 25 
degrees rearward of the manufacturer's nominal design position for the 
50th percentile adult male. If the seat will not recline 25 degrees 
rearward of the nominal design position, use the closest position that 
does not exceed 25 degrees.
    S22.2.2.3  Sitting on seat with back not against seat back.
    (a) Position the dummy in the seated position and place it on the 
right front outboard seat.
    (b) In the case of vehicles equipped with bench seats, position the 
midsagittal plane of the dummy vertically and parallel to the vehicle's 
longitudinal centerline and the same distance from the vehicle's 
longitudinal centerline as the center of the steering wheel. In the 
case of vehicles equipped with bucket seats, position the midsagittal 
plane of the dummy vertically such that it coincides with the 
longitudinal centerline of the seat cushion. Position the dummy with 
the spine vertical so that the horizontal distance from the dummy's 
back to the seat back is no less than 25 mm (1.0 in) and no more than 
150 mm (6.0 in), as measured along the dummy's midsagittal plane at the 
mid-sternum level. To keep the dummy in position, a material with a 
maximum breaking strength of 311 N (70 lb) may be used to hold the 
dummy.
    (c) Position the dummy's thighs against the seat cushion.
    (d) Allow the legs of the dummy to extend off the surface of the 
seat.
    (e) Position the upper arms parallel to the spine and rotate the 
dummy's lower arms until the dummy's hands contact the seat cushion.
    (f) Start the vehicle engine or place the ignition in the ``on'' 
position, whichever will turn on the suppression system, and then close 
all vehicle doors.
    (g) Wait 10 seconds, then check whether the air bag is deactivated.
    S22.2.2.4  Sitting on seat edge, spine vertical, hands by the 
dummy's sides.
    (a) In the case of vehicles equipped with bench seats, position the 
midsagittal plane of the dummy vertically and parallel to the vehicle's 
longitudinal centerline and the same distance from the vehicle's 
longitudinal centerline as the center of the steering wheel. In the 
case of vehicles equipped with bucket seats, position the midsagittal 
plane of the dummy vertically such that it coincides with the 
longitudinal centerline of the seat cushion.
    (b) Position the dummy in the seated position forward in the seat 
such that the legs are vertical and the back of the legs rest against 
the front of the seat with the spine vertical. If the dummy's feet 
contact the floor pan, rotate the legs forward until the dummy is 
resting on the seat with the feet positioned flat on the floor pan and 
the dummy spine vertical. To keep the dummy in position, a material 
with a maximum breaking strength of 311 N (70 lb) may be used to hold 
the dummy.
    (c) Place the upper arms parallel to the spine.
    (d) Lower the dummy's lower arms such that they contact the seat 
cushion.
    (e) Start the vehicle engine or place the ignition in the ``on'' 
position, whichever will turn on the suppression system, and then close 
all vehicle doors.
    (f) Wait 10 seconds, then check whether the air bag is deactivated.
    S22.2.2.5  Standing on seat, facing forward.
    (a) In the case of vehicles equipped with bench seats, position the 
midsagittal plane of the dummy vertically and parallel to the vehicle's 
longitudinal centerline and the same distance from the vehicle's 
longitudinal centerline as the center of the steering wheel rim. In the 
case of vehicles equipped with bucket seats, position the midsagittal 
plane of the dummy vertically such that it coincides with the 
longitudinal centerline of the seat cushion. Position the dummy in a 
standing position on the right front outboard seat cushion facing the 
front of the vehicle while placing the heels of the dummy's feet in 
contact with the seat back.
    (b) Rest the dummy against the seat back, with the arms parallel to 
the spine.
    (c) If the head contacts the vehicle roof, recline the seat so that 
the head is no longer in contact with the vehicle roof, but allow no 
more than 5 mm (0.2 in) distance between the head and the roof. If the 
seat does not sufficiently recline to allow clearance, omit the test.
    (d) If necessary use a material with a maximum breaking strength of 
311 N (70 lb) or spacer blocks to keep the dummy in position.
    (e) Start the vehicle engine or place the ignition in the ``on'' 
position, whichever will turn on the suppression system, and then close 
all vehicle doors.
    (f) Wait 10 seconds, then check whether the air bag is deactivated.
    S22.2.2.6  Kneeling on seat, facing forward.
    (a) In the case of vehicles equipped with bench seats, position the 
midsagittal plane of the dummy vertically and parallel to the vehicle's 
longitudinal centerline and the same distance from the vehicle's 
longitudinal centerline as the center of the steering wheel. In the 
case of vehicles equipped with bucket seats, position the midsagittal 
plane of the dummy vertically such that it coincides with the 
longitudinal centerline of the seat cushion.
    (b) Position the dummy in a kneeling position in the right front 
outboard seat with the dummy facing the front of the vehicle with its 
toes at the intersection of the seat back and seat cushion. Position 
the dummy so that the spine is vertical. Push down on the legs so that 
they contact the seat as much as possible and then release. Place the 
arms parallel to the spine.
    (c) If necessary use a material with a maximum breaking strength of 
311 N (70 lb) or spacer blocks to keep the dummy in position.
    (d) Start the vehicle engine or place the ignition in the ``on'' 
position, whichever will turn on the suppression system, and then close 
all vehicle doors.
    (e) Wait 10 seconds, then check whether the air bag is deactivated.
    S22.2.2.7  Kneeling on seat, facing rearward.
    (a) In the case of vehicles equipped with bench seats, position the 
midsagittal plane of the dummy vertically and parallel to the vehicle's 
longitudinal centerline and the same distance from the vehicle's 
longitudinal centerline as the center of the steering

[[Page 65415]]

wheel. In the case of vehicles equipped with bucket seats, position the 
midsagittal plane of the dummy vertically such that it coincides with 
the longitudinal centerline of the seat cushion.
    (b) Position the dummy in a kneeling position in the right front 
outboard seat with the dummy facing the rear of the vehicle. Position 
the dummy such that the dummy's head and torso are in contact with the 
seat back. Push down on the legs so that they contact the seat as much 
as possible and then release. Place the arms parallel to the spine.
    (c) Start the vehicle engine or place the ignition in the ``on'' 
position, whichever will turn on the suppression system, and then close 
all vehicle doors.
    (d) Wait 10 seconds, then check whether the air bag is deactivated.
    S22.2.2.8  Lying on seat. This test is performed only in vehicles 
with 3 designated front seating positions.
    (a) Lay the dummy on the right front outboard seat such that the 
following criteria are met:
    (1) The midsagittal plane of the dummy is horizontal,
    (2) The dummy's spine is perpendicular to the vehicle's 
longitudinal axis,
    (3) The dummy's arms are parallel to its spine,
    (4) A plane passing through the two shoulder joints of the dummy is 
vertical,
    (5) The anterior of the dummy is facing the vehicle front,
    (6) The head of the dummy is positioned towards the passenger door, 
and
    (7) The horizontal distance from the topmost point of the dummy's 
head to the vehicle door is 50 to 100 mm (2-4 in).
    (8) The dummy is as far back in the seat as possible.
    (b) Rotate the thighs as much as possible toward the chest of the 
dummy and rotate the legs as much as possible against the thighs.
    (c) Move the dummy's upper left arm parallel to the vehicle's 
transverse plane and the lower left arm 90 degrees to the upper arm. 
Rotate the lower left arm about the elbow joint and toward the dummy's 
head until movement is obstructed.
    (d) Start the vehicle engine or place the ignition in the ``on'' 
position, whichever will turn on the suppression system, and then close 
all vehicle doors.
    (e) Wait 10 seconds, then check whether the air bag is deactivated.
    S22.3  Static tests of automatic suppression feature which shall 
result in activation of the passenger air bag system.
    S22.3.1  Each vehicle certified to this option shall comply in 
tests conducted with the right front outboard seating position at the 
full rearward, middle, and, subject to S16.3.3.1.8, full forward 
positions. All tests are conducted with the seat height, if adjustable, 
in the mid-height position.
    S22.3.2  Place a 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart O 5th percentile adult 
female test dummy at the right front outboard seating position of the 
vehicle, in accordance with procedures specified in S16.3.3 of this 
standard, except as specified in S22.3.1. Do not fasten the seat belt.
    S22.3.3  Start the vehicle engine or place the ignition in the 
``on'' position, whichever will turn on the suppression system, and 
then close all vehicle doors.
    S22.3.4  Wait 10 seconds, then check whether the air bag system is 
activated.
    S22.4  Low risk deployment tests.
    S22.4.1  Each vehicle that is certified as complying with S21.4 
shall meet the following test requirements with the 49 CFR Part 572, 
Subpart P 3-year-old child dummy in both of the following positions: 
Position 1 (S22.4.2) and Position 2 (S22.4.3).
    S22.4.1.1  Locate and mark a point on the front of the dummy's 
chest jacket on the midsaggital plane which is 114 mm (4.5 in) 
 3 mm ( 0.1 in) along the surface of the skin 
from the top of the skin at the neck line. This is referred to as 
``Point 1.''
    S22.4.1.2  Locate the vertical plane parallel to the vehicle 
longitudinal centerline through the geometric center of the opening 
through which the right front air bag deploys into the occupant 
compartment. This is referred to as ``Plane D.''
    S22.4.1.3  Locate the horizontal plane through the geometric center 
of the opening through which the right front air bag deploys into the 
occupant compartment. This is referred to as ``Plane C.''
    S22.4.2  Position 1 (chest on instrument panel).
    S22.4.2.1  If a seat is adjustable in the fore and aft and/or 
vertical directions, move the seat to the rear-most seating position 
and full-down height adjustment. If the seat cushion adjusts fore and 
aft, independent of the entire seat, adjust the seat cushion to the 
full-rearward position. If the seat back is adjustable, place the seat 
back at the manufacturer's nominal design seat back angle for a 50th 
percentile adult male as specified in S8.1.3. Position any adjustable 
parts of the seat that provide additional support so that they are in 
the lowest or most open adjustment position. If adjustable, set the 
head restraint in the lowest position.
    S22.4.2.2  Place the dummy in the front passenger seat such that:
    S22.4.2.2.1  The midsagittal plane is coincident with Plane D.
    S22.4.2.2.2  The legs are initially vertical to the floor pan. The 
legs and thighs shall be adjusted to the extent necessary for the head/
torso to contact the instrument panel as specified in S22.4.2.3.
    S22.4.2.2.3  The upper arms are parallel to the torso and the hands 
are in contact with the thighs.
    S22.4.2.3  Without changing the seat position and with the dummy's 
thorax instrument cavity rear face vertical, move the dummy forward 
until the dummy head/torso contacts the instrument panel. If the dummy 
loses contact with the seat cushion because of the forward movement, 
maintain the height of the dummy and the angle of the thigh with 
respect to the torso. Once contact is made, raise the dummy vertically 
until Point 1 lies in Plane C. If the dummy's head contacts the 
windshield and keeps Point 1 from reaching Plane C, lower the dummy 
until there is no more than 5 mm (0.2 in) clearance between the head 
and the windshield. (The dummy shall remain in contact with the 
instrument panel while being raised or lowered, which may change the 
dummy's fore-aft position.)
    S22.4.2.  If possible, position the legs of the dummy so that the 
legs are vertical and the feet rest flat on the floor pan of the 
vehicle. If the positioning against the instrument panel does not allow 
the feet to be on the floor pan, the feet shall be parallel to the 
floor pan.
    S22.4.2.5  If necessary, material with a maximum breaking strength 
of 311 N (70 lb) and spacer blocks may be used to support the dummy in 
position. The material should support the torso rather than the head. 
Support the dummy so that there is minimum interference with the full 
rotational and translational freedom for the upper torso of the dummy 
and the material does not interfere with the air bag.
    S22.4.3  Position 2 (head on instrument panel).
    S22.4.3.1  Place the passenger seat in the full rearward seating 
position. Place the seat back at the manufacturer's nominal design seat 
back angle for a 50th percentile adult male as specified in S8.1.3. If 
adjustable in the vertical direction, place the seat in the mid-height 
position. If the seat cushion adjusts fore and aft, independent of the 
entire seat, adjust the seat cushion to the full rearward position. 
Position any adjustable parts of the seat that provide additional 
support so that they are in the lowest or most open adjustment 
position. If adjustable, set the head restraint in the lowest position.

[[Page 65416]]

    S22.4.3.2  Place the dummy in the front passenger seat such that:
    S22.4.3.2.1  The midsagittal plane is coincident with Plane D.
    S22.4.3.2.2  The legs are vertical to the floor pan, the back of 
the legs are in contact with the seat cushion, and the dummy's thorax 
instrument cavity rear face is vertical. If it is not possible to 
position the dummy with the legs in the prescribed position, rotate the 
legs forward until the dummy is resting on the seat with the feet 
positioned flat on the floor pan, and the back of the legs are in 
contact with the front of the seat cushion. Set the transverse distance 
between the longitudinal centerlines at the front of the dummy's knees 
at 86 to 91 mm (3.4 to 3.6 in), with the thighs and the legs of the 
dummy in vertical planes.
    S22.4.3.2.3  The upper arms are parallel to the torso and the hands 
are in contact with the thighs.
    S22.4.3.3  Move the seat forward, while maintaining the thorax 
instrument cavity rear face orientation until any part of the dummy 
contacts the vehicle's instrument panel.
    S22.4.3.4  If dummy contact has not been made with the vehicle's 
instrument panel at the full forward seating position of the seat, 
slide the dummy forward until contact is made. Maintain the thorax 
instrument cavity rear face vertical orientation, the height of the 
dummy, and the angle of the thigh with respect to the horizontal.
    S22.4.3.5  If head/torso contact with the instrument panel has not 
been made, maintain the angle of the thighs with respect to the 
horizontal while applying a force towards the front of the vehicle on 
the spine of the dummy between the shoulder joints until the head or 
torso comes into contact with the vehicle's instrument panel.
    S22.4.3.6  If necessary, material with a maximum breaking strength 
of 311 N (70 lb) and spacer blocks may be used to support the dummy in 
position. The material should support the torso rather than the head. 
Support the dummy so that there is minimum interference with the full 
rotational and translational freedom for the upper torso of the dummy 
and the material does not interfere with the air bag.
    S22.4.4  Deploy the right front outboard frontal air bag system. If 
the frontal air bag system contains a multistage inflator, the vehicle 
shall be able to comply with the injury criteria at any stage or 
combination of stages or time delay between successive stages that 
could occur in a rigid barrier crash test at or below 26 km/h (16 mph), 
under the test procedure specified in S22.5.
    S22.5  Test procedure for determining stages of air bag systems 
subject to low risk deployment (low speed crashes) test requirement.
    S22.5.1  The test described in S22.5.2 shall be conducted with an 
unbelted 50th percentile adult male test dummy in the driver seating 
position according to S8 as it applies to that seating position and an 
unbelted 5th percentile adult female test dummy either in the right 
front seating position according to S16 as it applies to that seating 
position or at any fore-aft seat position on the passenger side.
    S22.5.2  Impact the vehicle traveling longitudinally forward at any 
speed, up to and including 26 km/h (16 mph) into a fixed rigid barrier 
that is perpendicular  5 degrees to the line of travel of 
the vehicle under the applicable conditions of S8, S10, and S16 
excluding S10.7, S10.8, S10.9, and S16.3.5.
    S22.5.3  Determine which inflation stage or combination of stages 
are fired and determine the time delay between successive stages. That 
stage or combination of stages, with time delay between successive 
stages, shall be used in deploying the air bag when conducting the low 
risk deployment tests described in S22.4, S24.4, and S26.
    S22.5.4  If the air bag does not deploy in the impact described in 
S22.5.2, the low risk deployment tests described in S22.4, S24.4, and 
S26 shall be conducted with all stages using the maximum time delay 
between stages.
    S23  Requirements using 6-year-old child dummies.
    S23.1  Each vehicle that is certified as complying with S14 shall, 
at the option of the manufacturer, meet the requirements specified in 
S23.2, S23.3, or S23.4, under the test procedures specified in S24 or 
S28, as applicable.
    S23.2  Option 1--Automatic suppression feature. Each vehicle shall 
meet the requirements specified in S23.2.1 through S23.2.3.
    S23.2.1  The vehicle shall be equipped with an automatic 
suppression feature for the passenger frontal air bag system which 
results in deactivation of the air bag during each of the static tests 
specified in S24.2 (using a 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart N 6-year-old child 
dummy in any of the child restraints specified in section D of Appendix 
A of this standard), and activation of the air bag system during each 
of the static tests specified in S24.3 (using a 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart 
O 5th percentile adult female dummy).
    S23.2.2  The vehicle shall be equipped with a telltale light 
meeting the requirements specified in S19.2.2.
    S23.2.3  The vehicle shall be equipped with a mechanism that 
indicates whether the air bag is suppressed, regardless of whether the 
passenger seat is occupied. The mechanism need not be located in the 
occupant compartment unless it is the telltale described in S23.2.2.
    S23.3  Option 2--Dynamic automatic suppression system that 
suppresses the air bag when an occupant is out of position. (This 
option is available under the conditions set forth in S27.1.) The 
vehicle shall be equipped with a dynamic automatic suppression system 
for the passenger frontal air bag system which meets the requirements 
specified in S27.
    S23.4  Option 3--Low risk deployment. Each vehicle shall meet the 
injury criteria specified in S23.5 of this standard when the passenger 
air bag is statically deployed in accordance with both of the low risk 
deployment test procedures specified in S24.4.
    S23.5  Injury criteria for the 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart N 6-year-old 
child dummy.
    S23.5.1  All portions of the test dummy shall be contained within 
the outer surfaces of the vehicle passenger compartment.
    S23.5.2  Head injury criteria.
    (a) For any two points in time, t1 and t2, 
during the event which are separated by not more than a 15 millisecond 
time interval and where t1 is less than t2, the 
head injury criterion (HIC15) shall be determined using the 
resultant head acceleration at the center of gravity of the dummy head, 
ar, expressed as a multiple of g (the acceleration of 
gravity) and shall be calculated using the expression:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18DE01.001

    (b) The maximum calculated HIC15 value shall not exceed 
700.
    S23.5.3  The resultant acceleration calculated from the output of 
the thoracic instrumentation shall not exceed 60 g's, except for 
intervals whose cumulative duration is not more than 3 milliseconds.
    S23.5.4  Compression deflection of the sternum relative to the 
spine, as determined by instrumentation, shall not exceed 40 mm (l.6 
in).
    S23.5.5  Neck injury. When measuring neck injury, each of the 
following injury criteria shall be met.
    (a) Nij.
    (1) The shear force (Fx), axial force (Fz), and bending moment (My) 
shall be measured by the dummy upper neck load cell for the duration of 
the crash

[[Page 65417]]

event as specified in S4.11. Shear force, axial force, and bending 
moment shall be filtered for Nij purposes at SAE J211/1 rev. Mar95 
Channel Frequency Class 600 (see S4.7).
    (2) During the event, the axial force (Fz) can be either in tension 
or compression while the occipital condyle bending moment (Mocy) can be 
in either flexion or extension. This results in four possible loading 
conditions for Nij: tension-extension (Nte), tension-flexion (Ntf), 
compression-extension (Nce), or compression-flexion (Ncf).
    (3) When calculating Nij using equation S23.5.5(a)(4), the critical 
values, Fzc and Myc, are:

(i) Fzc = 2800 N (629 lbf) when Fz is in tension
(ii) Fzc = 2800 N (629 lbf) when Fz is in compression
(iii) Myc = 93 Nm (69 lbf-ft) when a flexion moment exists at the 
occipital condyle
(iv) Myc = 37 Nm (27 lbf-ft) when an extension moment exists at the 
occipital condyle.

    (4) At each point in time, only one of the four loading conditions 
occurs and the Nij value corresponding to that loading condition is 
computed and the three remaining loading modes shall be considered a 
value of zero. The expression for calculating each Nij loading 
condition is given by:

Nij = (Fz / Fzc) + (Mocy / Myc)

    (5) None of the four Nij values shall exceed 1.0 at any time during 
the event.
    (b) Peak tension. Tension force (Fz), measured at the upper neck 
load cell, shall not exceed 1490 N (335 lbf) at any time.
    (c) Peak compression. Compression force (Fz), measured at the upper 
neck load cell, shall not exceed 1820 N (409 lbf) at any time.
    S23.5.6  Unless otherwise indicated, instrumentation for data 
acquisition, data channel frequency class, and moment calculations are 
the same as given for the 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart N 6-year-old child 
test dummy.
    S24  Test procedure for S23.
    S24.1  General provisions and definitions.
    S24.1.1  Tests specifying the use of a booster seat may be 
conducted using any such restraint listed in section D of Appendix A of 
this standard. The booster seat may be unused or have been previously 
used only for automatic suppression. If it has been used, there shall 
not be any visible damage prior to the test. Booster seats are to be 
used in the manner appropriate for a 6-year-old child of the same 
height and weight as the 6-year-old child dummy.
    S24.1.2  Unless otherwise specified, each vehicle certified to this 
option shall comply in tests conducted with the right front outboard 
seating position at the full rearward seat track position, the middle 
seat track position, and the full forward seat track position. If the 
dummy contacts the vehicle interior, move the seat rearward to the next 
detent that provides clearance. If the seat is a power seat, move the 
seat rearward while assuring that there is a maximum of 5 mm (0.2 in) 
distance between the vehicle interior and the point on the dummy that 
would first contact the vehicle interior. All tests are conducted with 
the seat height, if adjustable, in the mid-height position, and with 
the seat back angle, if adjustable, at the manufacturer=s nominal 
design seat back angle for a 50th percentile adult male as specified in 
S8.1.3.
    S24.1.3  Except as otherwise specified, if the booster seat has an 
anchorage system as specified in S5.9 of FMVSS No. 213 and is tested in 
a vehicle with a right front outboard vehicle seat that has an 
anchorage system as specified in FMVSS No. 225, the vehicle shall 
comply with the belted test conditions with the restraint anchorage 
system attached to the vehicle seat anchorage system and the vehicle 
seat belt unattached. It shall also comply with the belted test 
conditions with the restraint anchorage system unattached to the 
vehicle seat anchorage system and the vehicle seat belt attached. The 
vehicle shall comply with the unbelted test conditions with the 
restraint anchorage system unattached to the vehicle seat anchorage 
system.
    S24.1.4  Do not attach any tethers.
    S24.1.5  The definitions provided in S16.3.1 through S16.3.10 apply 
to the tests specified in S24.
    S24.1.6  For leg and thigh angles, use the following references:
    S24.1.6.1  Thigh--a straight line on the thigh skin between the 
center of the 5/16-18 UNC-2B threaded access hole in the upper leg 
clamp (drawing 127-4004, 6 YR H3--upper leg clamp) and the knee screw 
(part 9000248 in drawing 127-4000-1 & -2, leg assembly).
    S24.1.6.2  Leg--a straight line on the leg skin between the center 
of the lower leg screw (part 9001170 in drawing 127-4000-1 & -2, leg 
assembly) and the knee screw (part 9000248 in drawing 127-4000-1 & -2, 
leg assembly).
    S24.2  Static tests of automatic suppression feature which shall 
result in deactivation of the passenger air bag. Each vehicle that is 
certified as complying with S23.2 shall meet the following test 
requirements.
    S24.2.1  Except as provided in S24.2.2, conduct all tests as 
specified in S22.2, except that the 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart N 6-year-
old child dummy shall be used.
    S24.2.2  Exceptions. The tests specified in the following 
paragraphs of S22.2 need not be conducted: S22.2.1.5, S22.2.2.3, 
S22.2.2.5, S22.2.2.6, S22.2.2.7, and S22.2.2.8.
    S24.2.3  Sitting back in the seat and leaning on the right front 
passenger door
    (a) Position the dummy in the seated position and place the dummy 
in the right front outboard seat. For bucket seats, position the 
midsagittal plane of the dummy vertically such that it coincides with 
the longitudinal center line of the seat cushion. For bench seats, 
position the midsagittal plane of the dummy vertically and parallel to 
the vehicle=s longitudinal centerline and the same distance from the 
longitudinal centerline of the vehicle as the center of the steering 
wheel.
    (b) Place the dummy's back against the seat back and rest the 
dummy's thighs on the seat cushion.
    (c) Allow the legs and feet of the dummy to extend off the surface 
of the seat. If this positioning of the dummy's legs is prevented by 
contact with the instrument panel, move the seat rearward to the next 
detent that provides clearance. If the seat is a power seat, move the 
seat rearward, while assuring that there is a maximum of 5 mm (0.2 in) 
distance between the vehicle interior and the part of the dummy that 
was in contact with the vehicle interior.
    (d) Rotate the dummy's upper arms toward the seat back until they 
make contact.
    (e) Rotate the dummy's lower arms down until they contact the seat.
    (f) Close the vehicle's passenger-side door and then start the 
vehicle engine or place the ignition in the ``on'' position, whichever 
will turn on the suppression system.
    (g) Push against the dummy's left shoulder to lean the dummy 
against the door; close all remaining doors.
    (h) Wait 10 seconds, then check whether the air bag is deactivated.
    S24.3  Static tests of automatic suppression feature which shall 
result in activation of the passenger air bag system.
    S24.3.1  Each vehicle certified to this option shall comply in 
tests conducted with the right front outboard seating position at the 
full rearward seat track position, the middle seat track position, and, 
subject to S16.3.3.1.8, the full forward seat track position. All tests 
are conducted with the seat height, if adjustable, in the mid-height 
position.

[[Page 65418]]

    S24.3.2  Place a 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart O 5th percentile adult 
female test dummy at the right front outboard seating position of the 
vehicle, in accordance with procedures specified in S16.3.3 of this 
standard, except as specified in S24.3.1. Do not fasten the seat belt.
    S24.3.3  Start the vehicle engine or place the ignition in the 
``on'' position, whichever will turn on the suppression system, and 
then close all vehicle doors.
    S24.3.4  Wait 10 seconds, then check whether the air bag system is 
activated.
    S24.4  Low risk deployment tests.
    S24.4.1  Each vehicle that is certified as complying with S23.4 
shall meet the following test requirements with the 49 CFR Part 572 
Subpart N 6-year-old child dummy in both of the following positions: 
Position 1 (S24.4.2) or Position 2 (S24.4.3).
    S24.4.1.1  Locate and mark a point on the front of the dummy's 
chest jacket on the midsagittal plane which is 139 mm (5.5 in) 
 3 mm ( 0.1 in) along the surface of the skin 
from the top of the skin at the neckline. This is referred to as 
``Point 1.''
    S24.4.1.2  Locate the vertical plane parallel to the vehicle 
longitudinal centerline through the geometric center of the opening 
through which the right front air bag deploys into the occupant 
compartment. This is referred to as ``Plane D.''
    S24.4.1.3  Locate the horizontal plane through the geometric center 
of the opening through which the right front air bag deploys into the 
occupant compartment. This is referred to as ``Plane C.''
    S24.4.2  Position 1 (chest on instrument panel). 
    S24.4.2.1  If a seat is adjustable in the fore and aft and/or 
vertical directions, move the seat to the rearmost seating position and 
full down height adjustment. If the seat cushion adjusts fore and aft, 
independent of the entire seat, adjust the seat cushion to the full 
rearward position. If the seat back is adjustable, place the seat back 
at the manufacturer's nominal design seat back angle for a 50th 
percentile adult male as specified in S8.1.3. Position any adjustable 
parts of the seat that provide additional support so that they are in 
the lowest or most open adjustment position. Position an adjustable 
head restraint in the lowest position.
    S24.4.2.2  Remove the legs of the dummy at the pelvic interface.
    S24.4.2.3  Place the dummy in the front passenger seat such that:
    (a) The midsagittal plane is coincident with Plane D.
    (b) The upper arms are parallel to the torso and the hands are next 
to where the thighs would be.
    (c) Without changing the seat position and with the dummy's thorax 
instrument cavity rear face 6 degrees forward of the vertical, move the 
dummy forward until the dummy head/torso contacts the instrument panel. 
If the dummy loses contact with the seat cushion because of the forward 
movement, maintain the height of the dummy while moving the dummy 
forward. If the head contacts the windshield before head/torso contact 
with the instrument panel, maintain the thorax instrument cavity angle 
and move the dummy forward such that the head is following the angle of 
the windshield until there is head/torso contact with the instrument 
panel. Once contact is made, raise or lower the dummy vertically until 
Point 1 lies in Plane C. If the dummy's head contacts the windshield 
and keeps Point 1 from reaching Plane C, lower the dummy until there is 
no more than 5 mm (0.2 in) clearance between the head and the 
windshield. (The dummy shall remain in contact with the instrument 
panel while being raised or lowered which may change the dummy's fore-
aft position.)
    S24.4.2.4  If necessary, material with a maximum breaking strength 
of 311 N (70 lb) and spacer blocks may be used to support the dummy in 
position. The material should support the torso rather than the head. 
Support the dummy so that there is minimum interference with the full 
rotational and translational freedom for the upper torso of the dummy 
and the material does not interfere with the air bag.
    S24.4.3  Position 2 (head on instrument panel). 
    S24.4.3.1  Place the passenger seat in the full rearward seating 
position. Place the seat back at the manufacturer's nominal design seat 
back angle for a 50th percentile adult male as specified in S8.1.3. If 
adjustable in the vertical direction, place the seat in the mid-height 
position. If the seat cushion adjusts fore and aft, independent of the 
entire seat, adjust the seat cushion to the full rearward position. 
Position any adjustable parts of the seat that provide additional 
support so that they are in the lowest or most open adjustment 
position. Position an adjustable head restraint in the lowest position.
    S24.4.3.2  Place the dummy in the front passenger seat such that:
    (a) The midsagittal plane is coincident with Plane D.
    (b) The legs are perpendicular to the floor pan, the back of the 
legs are in contact with the seat cushion, and the dummy's thorax 
instrument cavity rear face is 6 degrees forward of vertical. If it is 
not possible to position the dummy with the legs in the prescribed 
position, rotate the legs forward until the dummy is resting on the 
seat with the feet positioned flat on the floor pan and the back of the 
legs are in contact with the front of the seat cushion. Set the 
transverse distance between the longitudinal centerlines at the front 
of the dummy's knees at 112 to 117 mm (4.4. to 4.6 in), with the thighs 
and the legs of the dummy in vertical planes.
    (c) The upper arms are parallel to the torso and the hands are in 
contact with the thighs.
    S24.4.3.3  Move the seat forward, while maintaining the thorax 
instrument cavity rear face orientation until any part of the dummy 
contacts the vehicle's instrument panel.
    S24.4.3.4  If dummy contact has not been made with the vehicle's 
instrument panel at the full forward seating position of the seat, 
slide the dummy forward on the seat until contact is made. Maintain the 
thorax instrument cavity rear face orientation, the height of the 
dummy, and the angle of the thigh with respect to the horizontal.
    S24.4.3.5  If head/torso contact has not been made with the 
instrument panel, maintain the angle of the thighs with respect to the 
horizontal while applying a force towards the front of the vehicle on 
the spine of the dummy between the shoulder joints until the head/torso 
comes into contact with the vehicle's instrument panel.
    S24.4.3.6  If necessary, material with a maximum breaking strength 
of 311 N (70 lb) and spacer blocks may be used to support the dummy in 
position. Material should support the torso rather than the head. 
Support the dummy so that there is minimum interference with the full 
rotational and translational freedom for the upper torso of the dummy 
and the material does not interfere with the air bag.
    S24.4.4  Deploy the right front outboard frontal air bag system. If 
the frontal air bag system contains a multistage inflator, the vehicle 
shall be able to comply with the injury criteria at any stage or 
combination of stages and at any time delay between successive stages 
that could occur in a rigid barrier crash at speeds up to 26 km/h (16 
mph) under the test procedure specified in S22.5.
    S25  Requirements using an out-of-position 5th percentile adult 
female dummy at the driver position. 
    S25.1  Each vehicle certified as complying with S14 shall, at the 
option of the manufacturer, meet the

[[Page 65419]]

requirements specified in S25.2 or S25.3 under the test procedures 
specified in S26 or S28, as appropriate.
    S25.2  Option 1--Dynamic automatic suppression system that 
suppresses the air bag when the driver is out of position. (This option 
is available under the conditions set forth in S27.1.) The vehicle 
shall be equipped with a dynamic automatic suppression system for the 
driver air bag which meets the requirements specified in S27.
    S25.3  Option 2--Low risk deployment. Each vehicle shall meet the 
injury criteria specified by S15.3 of this standard, except as modified 
in S25.4, when the driver air bag is statically deployed in accordance 
with both of the low risk deployment test procedures specified in S26.
    S25.4  Neck injury criteria driver low risk deployment tests. When 
measuring neck injury in low risk deployment tests for the driver 
position, each of the following neck injury criteria shall be met.
    (a) Nij. 
    (1) The shear force (Fx), axial force (Fz), and bending moment (My) 
shall be measured by the dummy upper neck load cell for the duration of 
the crash event as specified in S4.11. Shear force, axial force, and 
bending moment shall be filtered for Nij purposes at SAE J211/1 rev. 
Mar 95 Channel Frequency Class 600 (see S4.7).
    (2) During the event, the axial force (Fz) can be either in tension 
or compression while the occipital condyle bending moment (Mocy) can be 
in either flexion or extension. This results in four possible loading 
conditions for Nij: tension-extension (Nte), tension-flexion (Ntf), 
compression-extension (Nce), or compression-flexion (Ncf).
    (3) When calculating Nij using equation S25.4(a)(4), the critical 
values, Fzc and Myc, are:

(i) Fzc = 3880 N (872 lbf) when Fz is in tension
(ii) Fzc = 3880 N (872 lbf) when Fz is in compression
(iii) Myc = 155 Nm (114 lbf-ft) when a flexion moment exists at the 
occipital condyle
(iv) Myc = 61 Nm (45 lbf-ft) when an extension moment exists at the 
occipital condyle.

    (4) At each point in time, only one of the four loading conditions 
occurs and the Nij value corresponding to that loading condition is 
computed and the three remaining loading modes shall be considered a 
value of zero. The expression for calculating each Nij loading 
condition is given by:

Nij = (Fz / Fzc) + (Mocy / Myc)

    (5) None of the four Nij values shall exceed 1.0 at any time during 
the event.
    (b) Peak tension. Tension force (Fz), measured at the upper neck 
load cell, shall not exceed 2070 N (465 lbf) at any time.
    (c) Peak compression. Compression force (Fz), measured at the upper 
neck load cell, shall not exceed 2520 N (566 lbf) at any time.
    (d) Unless otherwise indicated, instrumentation for data 
acquisition, data channel frequency class, and moment calculations are 
the same as given in 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart O 5th percentile female 
test dummy.
    S26  Procedure for low risk deployment tests of driver air bag. 
    S26.1  Each vehicle that is certified as complying with S25.3 shall 
meet the requirements of S25.3 and S25.4 with the 49 CFR Part 572 
Subpart O 5th percentile adult female dummy in both of the following 
positions: Driver position 1 (S26.2) and Driver position 2 (S26.3).
    S26.2  Driver position 1 (chin on module). 
    S26.2.1 Adjust the steering controls so that the steering wheel hub 
is at the geometric center of the locus it describes when it is moved 
through its full range of driving positions. If there is no setting at 
the geometric center, position it one setting lower than the geometric 
center. Set the rotation of the steering wheel so that the vehicle 
wheels are pointed straight ahead.
    S26.2.2  Locate the vertical plane parallel to the vehicle 
longitudinal axis which passes through the geometric center of the 
opening through which the driver air bag deploys into the occupant 
compartment. This is referred to as ``Plane E.''
    S26.2.3  Place the seat in the full rearward seating position. If 
adjustable in the vertical direction, place the seat in the mid-height 
position. If the seat cushion adjusts fore and aft, independent of the 
entire seat, adjust the seat cushion to the full rearward position. If 
the seat back is adjustable, place the seat back at the manufacturer's 
nominal design seat back angle for a 50th percentile adult male as 
specified in S8.1.3. If the seat cushion contains an independent seat 
cushion angle adjustment mechanism, adjust the seat cushion angle to 
the middle of the range of seat cushion angles. Position any adjustable 
parts of the seat that provide additional support so that they are in 
the lowest or most open adjustment position. Position an adjustable 
head restrain in the lowest position.
    S26.2.4  Place the dummy in the driver's seat such that:
    S26.2.4.1  The midsagittal plane is coincident with Plane E.
    S26.2.4.2  The legs are perpendicular to the floor pan and the back 
of the legs are in contact with the seat cushion. The legs may be 
adjusted if necessary to achieve the final head position.
    S26.2.4.3  The dummy's thorax instrument cavity rear face is 6 
degrees forward (toward the front of the vehicle) of the steering wheel 
angle (i.e., if the steering wheel angle is 25 degrees from vertical, 
the thorax instrument cavity rear face angle is 31 degrees).
    S26.2.4.4  The initial transverse distance between the longitudinal 
centerlines at the front of the dummy's knees is 160 to 170 mm (6.3 to 
6.7 in), with the thighs and legs of the dummy in vertical planes.
    S26.2.4.5  The upper arms are parallel to the torso and the hands 
are in contact with the thighs.
    S26.2.5  Maintaining the spine angle, slide the dummy forward until 
the head/torso contacts the steering wheel.
    S26.2.6  While maintaining the spine angle, adjust the height of 
the dummy so that a point on the chin 40 mm below the center of the 
mouth (chin point) is in the same horizontal plane as the geometric 
center of the opening through which the air bag deploys into the 
occupant compartment. If the seat prevents the chin point from being in 
the same horizontal plane, adjust the dummy height to as close to the 
prescribed position as possible.
    S26.2.7  If necessary, material with a maximum breaking strength of 
311 N (70 lb) and spacer blocks may be used to support the dummy in 
position. The material should support the torso rather than the head. 
Support the dummy so that there is minimum interference with the full 
rotational and translational freedom for the upper torso of the dummy 
and the material does not interfere with the air bag.
    S26.3  Driver position 2 (chin on rim). 
    S26.3.1  Place the seat in the full rearward seating position. If 
adjustable in the vertical direction, place the seat in the mid-height 
position. If the seat cushion adjusts fore and aft, independent of the 
entire seat, adjust the seat cushion to the full rearward position. If 
the seatback is adjustable, place the seat back at the manufacturer's 
nominal design seat back angle for a 50th percentile adult male as 
specified in S8.1.3. If the seat cushion contains an independent seat 
cushion angle adjustment mechanism, adjust the seat cushion angle to 
the middle of the range of seat cushion angles. Position any adjustable 
parts of the seat that provide additional support so that they are in 
the lowest or most open adjustment

[[Page 65420]]

position. Position an adjustable head restraint in the lowest position.
    S26.3.2  Adjust the steering controls so that the steering wheel 
hub is at the geometric center of the locus it describes when it is 
moved through its full range of driving positions. If there is no 
setting at the geometric center, position it one setting lower than the 
geometric center. Set the rotation of the steering wheel so that the 
vehicle wheels are pointed straight ahead.
    S26.3.3  Locate the vertical plane parallel to the vehicle 
longitudinal axis which passes through the geometric center of the 
opening through which the driver air bag deploys into the occupant 
compartment. This is referred to as ``Plane E.''
    S26.3.4  Place the dummy in the driver's seat position such that:
    S26.3.4.1  The midsagittal plane is coincident with Plane E.
    S26.3.4.2  The legs are perpendicular to the floor pan and the back 
of the legs are in contact with the seat cushion. The legs may be 
adjusted if necessary to achieve the final head position.
    S26.3.4.3  The dummy's thorax instrument cavity rear face is 6 
degrees forward (toward the front of the vehicle) of the steering wheel 
angle (i.e., if the steering wheel angle is 25 degrees from vertical, 
the thorax instrument cavity rear face angle is 31 degrees).
    S26.3.4.4  The initial transverse distance between the longitudinal 
centerlines at the front of the dummy's knees is 160 to 170 mm (6.3 to 
6.7 in), with the thighs and legs of the dummy in vertical planes.
    S26.3.4.5  The upper arms are parallel to the torso and the hands 
are in contact with the thighs.
    S26.3.5  Maintaining the spine angle, slide the dummy forward until 
the head/torso contacts the steering wheel.
    S26.3.6  While maintaining the spine angle, position the dummy so 
that a point on the chin 40 mm below the center of the mouth (chin 
point) is in contact with the rim of the uppermost portion of the 
steering wheel. If the dummy's head contacts the vehicle windshield or 
upper interior before the prescribed position can be obtained, lower 
the dummy until there is no more than 5 mm (0.2 in) clearance between 
the vehicle's windshield or upper interior, as applicable.
    S26.3.7  If the steering wheel can be adjusted so that the chin 
point can be in contact with the rim of the uppermost portion of the 
steering wheel, adjust the steering wheel to that position and readjust 
the spine angle to coincide with the steering wheel angle. Position the 
dummy so that the chin point is in contact with the rim of the 
uppermost portion of the steering wheel.
    S26.3.8  If necessary, material with a maximum breaking strength of 
311 N (70 lb) and spacer blocks may be used to support the dummy in 
position. The material should support the torso rather than the head. 
Support the dummy so that there is minimum interference with the full 
rotational and translational freedom for the upper torso of the dummy 
and the material does not interfere with the air bag.
    S26.4  Deploy the left front outboard frontal air bag system. If 
the air bag system contains a multistage inflator, the vehicle shall be 
able to comply with the injury criteria at any stage or combination of 
stages or time delay between successive stages that could occur in a 
rigid barrier crash at speeds up to 26 km/h (16 mph) under the test 
procedure specified in S22.5.
* * * * *
    S29  Manufacturer option to certify vehicles to certain static 
suppression test requirements using human beings rather than test 
dummies.
    S29.1  At the option of the manufacturer, instead of using test 
dummies in conducting the tests for the following automatic suppression 
and occupant recognition parts of the low risk deployment test 
requirements, human beings may be used as specified. If human beings 
are used, they shall assume, to the extent possible, the final physical 
position specified for the corresponding dummies for each test.
    (a) If a manufacturer decides to certify a vehicle using a human 
being for a test of the passenger automatic suppression, it shall use 
humans for the entire series of tests, e.g., 3-year-old children for 
each test of the system involving 3-year-old test dummies. If a 
manufacturer decides to certify a vehicle using a test dummy for a test 
of the system, it shall use test dummies for the entire series of 
tests, e.g., a Hybrid III 3-year-old child dummy for each test of the 
system involving 3-year-old child test dummies.
    (b) For S19.2, instead of using the 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart R 12-
month-old child dummy, a human child who weighs between 8.2 and 9.1 kg 
(18 and 20 lb), and who is between 61 and 66 cm (24 and 26 in) tall may 
be used.
    (c) For S19.2, instead of using the 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart K 
newborn infant dummy, a human child who weighs between 8.2 and 9.1 kg 
(18 and 20 lb), and who is between 61 and 66 cm (24 and 26 in) tall may 
be used.
    (d) For S21.2 and S21.5.1, instead of using the 49 CFR Part 572 
Subpart P 3-year-old child dummy, a human child who weighs between 13.4 
and 18 kg (29.5 and 39.5 lb), and who is between 89 and 99 cm (35 and 
39 in) tall may be used.
    (e) For S23.2 and S23.5.1, instead of using the 49 CFR Part 572 
Subpart N 6-year-old child dummy, a human child who weighs between 21 
and 25.6 kg (46.5 and 56.5 lb), and who is between 114 and 124.5 cm (45 
and 49 in) tall may be used.
    (f) For S19.2, S21.2, and S23.2, instead of using the 49 CFR Part 
572 Subpart O 5th percentile adult female test dummy, a female who 
weighs between 46.7 and 51.25 kg (103 and 113 lb), and who is between 
139.7 and 150 cm (55 and 59 in) tall may be used.
    S29.2  Human beings shall be dressed in a cotton T-shirt, full 
length cotton trousers, and sneakers. Specified weights and heights 
include clothing.
    S29.3  A manufacturer exercising this option shall upon request:
    (a) Provide NHTSA with a method to deactivate the air bag during 
compliance testing under S20.2, S20.3, S22.2, S22.3, S24.2, and S24.3, 
and identify any parts or equipment necessary for deactivation; such 
assurance may be made by removing the air bag; and
    (b) Provide NHTSA with a method to assure that the same test 
results would be obtained if the air bag were not deactivated.
* * * * *

Appendix A to Sec. 571.208--Selection of Child Restraint Systems

    A. The following car bed, manufactured on or after December 1, 
1999, may be used by the National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration to test the suppression system of a vehicle that has 
been certified as being in compliance with 49 CFR 571.208 S19:

Cosco Dream Ride 02-719

    B. Any of the following rear facing child restraint systems, 
manufactured on or after December 1, 1999, may be used by the 
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to test the 
suppression system of a vehicle that has been certified as being in 
compliance with 49 CFR 571.208 S19. When the restraint system comes 
equipped with a removable base, the test may be run either with the 
base attached or without the base.

Britax Handle with Care 191
Century Assura 4553
Century Avanta SE 41530
Century Smart Fit 4543
Cosco Arriva 02727
Cosco Opus 35 02603
Evenflo Discovery Adjust Right 212
Evenflo First Choice 204
Evenflo On My Way Position Right V 282
Graco Infant 8457

    C. Any of the following forward-facing convertible child 
restraint systems, manufactured on or after December 1, 1999,

[[Page 65421]]

may be used by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to 
test the suppression system of a vehicle that has been certified as 
being in compliance with 49 CFR 571.208 S19, or S21:

Britax Roundabout 161
Century Encore 4612
Century STE 1000 4416
Cosco Olympian 02803
Cosco Touriva 02519
Evenflo Horizon V 425
Evenflo Medallion 254

    D. Any of the following forward-facing toddler/belt positioning 
booster systems, manufactured on or after December 1, 1999, may be 
used by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration as test 
devices to test the suppression system of a vehicle that has been 
certified as being in compliance with 49 CFR 571.208 S21 or S23:

Britax Roadster 9004
Century Next Step 4920
Cosco High Back Booster 02-442
Evenflo Right Fit 245

    Issued on December 6, 2001.
Jeffery W. Runge,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 01-30754 Filed 12-17-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P