[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 138 (Thursday, July 18, 2002)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 47321-47333]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-16874]



[[Page 47321]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 572

[Docket No. NHTSA-02-12541]
RIN 2127-AI00


Anthropomorphic Test Devices; Six-Year-Old Crash Test Dummy

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

ACTION: Final rule; response to petitions for reconsideration.

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

SUMMARY: This document responds to petitions for reconsideration of the 
final rule that adopted a new, more advanced 6-year-old child dummy 
(HIII-6C). That final rule was published January 13, 2000 (65 FR 2059, 
Docket No. NHTSA-99-6714). Adopting the dummy was the first step toward 
using the dummy to evaluate the safety of air bags for children. The 
petitions are granted in part and denied in part.

DATES: Effective Date: The amendments made in this rule are effective 
August 19, 2002.
    Petitions: Petitions for reconsideration must be received by 
September 3, 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 call 
Stan Backaitis, Office of Crashworthiness Standards, at 202-366-4912.
    For legal issues, you may call Rebecca MacPherson, Office of the 
Chief Counsel, at 202-366-2992.
    You may send mail to both of these officials at National Highway 
Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh St., SW., Washington, DC 
20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Summary of Decision

    Most of the issues raised in the petitions were minor and involved 
technical changes to either the dummy specifications or to the drawing 
package. In some cases, the petitioners requested the specifications be 
tightened to ensure more accurate measurements in the tests in which 
the dummy is used to measure injury criteria. More significant issues 
were raised regarding the thoracic peak force criteria, the need for a 
specified mass moment of inertia (MMI) and resonant frequency of the 
impactors, and the need for a post-test calibration.
    Our review of the petitions also uncovered several minor errors in 
the drawings package that are resolved here. In addition, issues raised 
in the petitions for reconsideration of the final rule incorporating 
the Hybrid III 3-year-old child dummy into 49 CFR part 572 on the 
acceptable materials for load cells are addressed in this document 
since the same force and moment measuring load cells or load cells of 
similar construction are used in both dummies.
    Further changes to the dummy will be designated as beta, gamma, 
etc., to assure that modifications can be easily tracked and 
identified. The new dummy is defined by a drawing and specification 
package, an updated procedures document for disassembly, assembly and 
inspection (PADI), and performance parameters including associated 
calibration procedures.

II. Summary of Petitions for Reconsideration

    Petitions for reconsideration were received from the Alliance of 
Automobile Manufacturers (Alliance), Toyota, Denton (a manufacturer of 
load cells), and TRW (a manufacturer of air bags). One dummy 
manufacturer, FTSS also filed a petition which was dated February 28, 
2000, the deadline for filing petitions. The petition was apparently 
never received by the agency. In a letter dated April 17, 2000, FTSS 
resubmitted its February 28 petition. This document was not placed into 
the docket until July 20, 2000. Because we cannot determine why FTSS' 
timely petition was not placed in the docket until well after the date 
for filing petitions had passed, this document addresses the concerns 
raised in the FTSS petition.
    Significant issues were raised regarding the thoracic peak force 
criteria, the pendulum MMI and free air resonance frequency of the 
impactors, and the post-test calibration requirements. Additionally, 
petitioners raised issues related to the specifications for dummy 
clothing, the thoracic hysteresis corridor, the corridor for the knee 
impactor, the torso flexion test, and the instrumentation for measuring 
neck tension and extension. Finally, some petitioners pointed out 
apparent errors in the drawing package.

III. Thoracic Peak Force Criterion

    The final rule provided a requirement for peak thoracic force in 
the compression transition zone (defined as sternum displacement 
relative to the spine between 12.5 mm and 38 mm) not to exceed 5% of 
the value of the peak force (1150-1380 N) measured in the specified 
maximum displacement zone. The Alliance and TRW both argued that this 
criterion was not proposed in the NPRM. Additionally, they argued that 
most of the dummy tests used to support the rulemaking measured peak 
forces in the transition zone that exceeded the new criterion. The 
Alliance stated that the new criterion does not improve the fit of the 
dummy response into the biomechanical corridor. Instead, it believed a 
peak force that did not exceed 1,560 N in the transitional zone between 
12.5 mm and 38 mm of sternum displacement would better represent the 
demonstrated dummy responses. After discounting the outliers and dummy 
tests based on earlier versions of the dummy, the Alliance amended its 
position on the acceptable level of peak force and urged the agency to 
adopt a peak force of 1500 N. With this level, it determined that a 
much greater proportion of the data could stay within the biomechanical 
corridors.
    While the Alliance and TRW are correct that a peak force 
specification was not explicitly proposed in the NPRM for the H-III6C, 
the issue of peak force specification in the transition zone was raised 
by TRC in its comments on the NPRM for the H-III6C dummy in general 
terms and in considerably more detail in its response to the NPRM for 
the 5th percentile adult female dummy (H-III5F), which did specify peak 
force in the transition zone. Peak acceleration response requirements 
for the dummy's thorax is a function of the impact force applied to the 
sternum as measured by the accelerometer mounted on the impactor. If 
the impactor force has a wide variation, the level of thoracic response 
variation would be expected to increase proportionally. The force 
levels within the maximum deflection zone, as specified in the final 
rule, allow thorax acceleration level variations of approximately 
 1 g, based on the mean weight of the upper torso of 26.5 
lb. The specification in the final rule that the maximum force in the 
transition zone not exceed the force measured in the specified 
deflection corridor by more than 5% allows a maximum force in the 
transition zone of 1450 N. A thorax with this type of response could be 
responsible for adding one more g to thorax acceleration measurements. 
The Alliance's original request to increase the maximum allowable force 
in the transition zone to 1560 N would likely cause the dummy's upper 
thoracic response to increase by still another g. However, the revised 
suggestion that the

[[Page 47322]]

peak force be limited to 1500 N would reduce the latter increase to 
approximately 0.5 g. Thus, we agree with the Alliance that the 
additional 50 N may generate a slightly higher, but inconsequential, g 
level thorax response. While the small increase is not particularly 
desirable, it is a tolerable change with some positive safety aspects. 
Users who employ test dummies with elevated peak forces in compliance 
tests will run a greater risk of exceeding the acceleration tolerance 
levels specified for the thorax in those tests. We also note that the 
biomechanical impact response corridors for the human thorax allow a 
localized peak force to rise to 1500 N just before the sternum 
compression reaches the minimum required value of 38 mm. Accordingly, a 
limited increase in force levels is justified on a biomechanical 
response basis. For these reasons, we have decided to amend the 
regulatory text to allow a maximum peak force in the compression 
transition zone of 1500 N.

IV. Pendulum Mass Moment of Inertia and Free Air Resonance Frequency of 
Impactors

    In its comments on the NPRM, TRC requested that the agency specify 
a generic impactor for use in the calibration tests. A generic impactor 
definition would allow users to construct various size impactors using 
the building block concept. This approach is consistent with the 
intent, expressed first in the NPRM and then in the final rule, that 
sensors be defined generically so as to avoid being unnecessarily 
design-restrictive. TRC stated, and we agreed, that the impactor should 
not be defined by a specific design, but rather by relevant engineering 
parameters. The relevant parameters are mass, stiffness, MMI, CG 
location, and minimum free air resonance frequency. The Alliance stated 
in its petition that the specifications for free air resonance 
frequency and MMI were not proposed in the NPRM. It did not challenge 
any of the other parameters that serve as the basis for a generic 
impactor. It also claimed that we had failed to provide data or a clear 
explanation demonstrating that these parameters were necessary. The 
Alliance further noted that when its members reviewed their own data 
they determined the parameters were irrelevant. It provided summaries 
of its members' data to support its position. The Alliance concluded 
that the two parameters (free air resonance and MMI) should be deleted 
until substantial data to justify their need had been generated. TRW 
stated that the final rule failed to specify a procedure for measuring 
free air resonance.
    As noted above, parameters for minimum free air resonance frequency 
and MMI were specified in the final rule because we believed they were 
necessary parameters for defining a generic impactor. The NPRM had 
merely specified that the impactor be perfectly cylindrical in shape 
and of a certain diameter. This specification approach had been used in 
most SAE user's manuals. However, in practice, the probes are often not 
perfectly cylindrical and may be made up of multiple pieces, indicating 
that in the real world both SAE and existing agency specifications are 
insufficient for a generic impactor definition. We did not propose 
parameters for minimum free air resonance frequency and MMI in the NPRM 
because this generic impactor definition was developed partly in 
recognition of comments provided by TRC that the impactor specified in 
the NPRM was inconsistent with the probes regularly used by test 
laboratories. While we believe our explanation in the final rule as to 
why the parameters were necessary was sufficient, we are happy to 
further explain our rationale here. The definition uses three 
principles as guides:
     Because the overall shape and materials of the impactor 
may differ among users, its mass, size, MMI, natural resonance, and the 
shape of the impacting face are the only reliable indicators to assure 
that an impactor will be sufficiently rigid, capable of repeatable and 
non-distorted impact measurements;
     The minimum resonance requirement is needed to assure that 
a multiple-piece impactor does not produce separate interactions 
between its constituent parts that could distort the responses produced 
by the dummy; and
     The mounting structure for the accelerometer must be 
sufficiently rigid and not affect the pendulum-mounted accelerometer 
output (this requirement is also in SAE recommended practice J211).
    We have examined the pendulum response data provided by the 
Alliance. Those data indicate that the pendulum has two resonant 
frequencies: One at 430 Hz and one at 6 kHz. The 430 Hz response is the 
result of beam bending(first mode) about the CG of the impactor, and 
the 6kHz response is the natural resonance of the impactor along its 
longitudinal axis (second mode). During beam bending, the ends of the 
beam experience maximum lateral translation with respect to the beam's 
undistorted longitudinal axis. Typically, longitudinally oriented 
accelerometers mounted at the end of the beam have less than three 
percent cross axis sensitivity. Accordingly, the effects on the signal 
of a longitudinally oriented accelerometer during the dummy impact 
would be nearly imperceptible. In contrast, resonance along the axis of 
the impactor is of primary interest for the thorax and knee tests, 
because vibrational characteristics of the impactor in the longitudinal 
direction could greatly affect the measured impact response. The 6 kHz 
response found in the data submitted by the Alliance demonstrates that 
our specified parameter for free air resonance is both practicable and 
relevant. Accordingly, we have decided to amend the regulatory text by 
specifying that the minimum free air resonance requirements for the 
thoracic and knee impactors be measured in line with the longitudinal 
axis of the impactor.
    The data provided by the Alliance supporting their position that 
the MMI should not be specified at this time actually demonstrates the 
need for such a requirement. The data show a very wide spread of MMI 
values among various impactors. The moment of inertia of 
DaimlerChrysler's thoracic impactor is about six times lower than those 
of TRW, TRC, GM, and FTSS. Likewise, the moment of inertia of GM's knee 
impactor is approximately eight times that of FTSS. Other than the 
DaimlerChrysler thoracic impactor and the FTSS knee impactor, all the 
impactors in the data set were well above the minimum moment of inertia 
values specified in the final rule. Upon our request, DaimlerChrysler 
lent the agency the thoracic impactor for performance evaluation. We 
conducted an assessment of the probe at our Vehicle Research and 
Testing Center (VRTC) and found that the 164 kg cm\2\ MMI presented in 
the Alliance petition was marginal in impact response. During its free 
flight, the probe had difficulty maintaining a stable trajectory and 
barely met the kinematic alignment specifications at impact with the 
dummy. While this may be largely a result of the probe's low moment of 
inertia, it is possible that an optimized probe's guidance and 
suspension system could resolve the problem. Thus, we concluded that a 
minimum moment of inertia of 160 kg cm\2\ is barely sufficient as long 
as the probe's guidance and suspension systems can assure a stable free 
flight and impact alignment specifications at contact with the dummy. 
Accordingly, the regulatory

[[Page 47323]]

text has been changed to specify a minimum MMI of 160 kg cm\2\.
    As for TRW's request that the agency specify a procedure for 
measuring free air resonance, we have placed a test procedure in the 
Docket No. 6714-14 and in the PADI document that explains how NHTSA 
conducts impact tests to determine the resonance of the impactor. Other 
methods for making such a determination, both analytical and 
experimental, may be equally suitable for this purpose. Accordingly, we 
are not specifying a particular procedure in the regulatory text.
    Although not addressed in its petition for reconsideration of the 
final rule adopting the H-III6C, the Alliance argued in the petitions 
for reconsideration of the final rules on the CRABI 12-month-old test 
dummy, the Hybrid III three-year-old child dummy and the H-III5F dummy 
that the provisions for concentricity and symmetry about the 
longitudinal axis are unrealistic since the pendulum is often fitted 
with velocity vanes or other hardware, causing asymmetry. The Alliance 
recommended revision of the probe specification to read, ``The primary 
test probe, less any additional hardware, for [body region] impacts 
shall be of rigid metallic construction.'' FTSS supported the Alliance 
petitions, stating that the addition of velocity vanes, cable 
attachment points, or other hardware will result in asymmetry and cause 
the center of gravity (CG) to be slightly offset from the geometrical 
center of the probe. FTSS recommended a limitation on the CG offset 
from the longitudinal axis.
    NHTSA agrees with the Alliance and FTSS that the test probe 
specification should include provisions for mounting velocity vanes and 
suspension hardware if a cable system is used for impacts. However, the 
agency does not agree with FTSS that the possible CG offset from the 
longitudinal axis is needed and should be specified. NHTSA believes the 
specifications in the final rule for MMI in pitch and yaw provide 
sufficient controls to assure stable kinematics during the probe's free 
flight and impact with the dummy.
    Accordingly, the agency is revising Sec. 572.127 (a) and (b) to 
allow asymmetrical attachments needed for probe suspension and guidance 
as well as velocity vanes.

V. Post-test Calibration Requirements

    The NPRM proposed that conformance of the dummy's structural 
properties would be checked before and after any compliance testing. 
When we published the NPRM for the Hybrid III 5th percentile adult 
small female dummy on September 3, 1998 (63 FR 46981, Docket No. NHTSA-
98-4283) we decided to specify that the dummy conform to this part in 
every respect before its use in any test, but not after. We stated our 
intention to make the same change for the other dummies. The NPRMs for 
the Hybrid III 3-year-old child test dummy (64 FR 4385, January 28, 
1999, Docket No. NHTSA-99-5032) and the 12-month-old infant dummy 
(CRABI) (64 FR 10965, March 8, 1999, Docket No. NHTSA-99-5156) proposed 
the same specification as the one proposed for the small adult female 
dummy. A full explanation of the agency's rationale can be found in the 
NPRM for the small adult female dummy. The agency rationale for the 
change in when to check for structural conformance is as applicable for 
the H-III6C as it is for the other dummies. Accordingly, in the Final 
Rule, section 572.121(c) was changed to adopt the language used in the 
NPRMs for the other pending dummy rulemakings.
    All commenters on the NPRM for the H-III6C dummy, as well as all 
petitioners on the final rule, commented on this issue when it was 
first proposed as part of the NPRM for the 5th percentile adult female 
dummy. The comment period for that NPRM closed over a month before the 
final rule was issued on the H-III6C dummy and those comments were 
considered in determining whether to eliminate the post-test 
calibration requirements for the H-III6C dummy. The commenters' 
concerns with the proposed regulatory text were addressed in the final 
rule for the 5th percentile adult female dummy. No new issues or 
concerns have been raised in the context of the petitions for 
reconsideration of the final rule on the H-III6C dummy other than an 
allegation that the provision was outside of the scope of the NPRM. 
However, since the comments on the new language were received and 
considered before the final rule was issued, we do not believe that 
commenters were denied an opportunity to comment on the issue.

VI. Other Issues

1. Thoracic Hysteresis Corridor

    The Alliance noted that the internal hysteresis corridor of the rib 
cage was specified in the NPRM at ``not less than 69 percent but not 
more than 85 percent.'' As pointed out by the Alliance, the final rule 
adopted a slightly broader corridor of not less than 65 percent and not 
more than 85 percent. Assuming the change was a typographical error, 
the Alliance requested the agency revise the specification to the 
narrower corridor proposed in the NPRM. The petitioner also asked for a 
justification for the broader corridor if the change was intentional.
    The broader corridor is not the result of a typographical error. 
Instead, our review of the test data that had been used to establish 
the corridor specified in the NPRM led us to believe that the 
hysteresis corridor could be broadened slightly without degrading the 
dummy response. The change in specifications was intended to make it 
easier for dummy users to comply with the calibration specifications 
for the dummy. While we have no objection to narrowing the corridor to 
the parameters specified in the NPRM, we do not see a need to do so. 
Companies not represented by the Alliance will also need to comply with 
the calibration requirements of part 572. These companies may wish to 
take advantage of the broader corridor. Accordingly, no change is being 
made to the corridor specified in the final rule.

2. Knee Impact Corridor

    The Alliance noted that the upper force limit of the knee impact 
test contains a conversion error and should be 3.0 kN (674 lbf) rather 
than 3.0 kN (625 lbf). The Alliance is correct. The regulatory test has 
been changed to specify the proper force in pounds-force.

3. Neck Flexion/Extension Test Instrumentation

    NHTSA did not specify using a rotary potentiometer to measure head 
rotation for head/neck calibration testing because there are number of 
methods to measure rotation, all of which are acceptable. The Alliance 
petitioned the agency to specify a channel frequency class (CFC) of 60 
that would apply if a rotary potentiometer is used to measure head 
rotation.
    SAE J211, recommended practice for impact test instrumentation, 
does not designate a CFC for this application. However, the SAE user's 
manual for the H-III6 does specify a CFC 60 and NHTSA used a CFC 60 to 
filter the head rotation signal measured by potentiometers. Thus, it 
appears that both industry and NHTSA have reached a consensus that a 
channel frequency class of 60 is appropriate if a rotary potentiometer 
is used to generate data for this purpose. It should also be noted that 
our review of the raw data found no high frequency signals which would 
require a channel frequency class higher than 60. Accordingly, we 
believe it is appropriate to specify a CFC 60 filter if a potentiometer 
is used to measure head rotation. We reiterate our position that

[[Page 47324]]

head rotation may be measured using methods other than a potentiometer.

4. Torso Flexion Test

    Section 572.135 specifies procedures for the torso flexion test. 
The temperature range for the test is specified at 66 to 78 degrees F. 
The Alliance and FTSS stated that this range is too wide and could 
result in test variability because of the sensitivity of the dummy 
materials to temperature. The Alliance noted, for example, that the 
dummy's lumbar spine should be maintained at 69 to 72 degrees F for 
proper behavior. The Alliance and FTSS recommended that the agency 
change the temperature range specification to 69 to 72 degrees F to be 
consistent with other dummy component tests.
    To determine whether there is a need for a narrower temperature 
range in torso flexion tests, NHTSA's Vehicle Research and Test Center 
(VRTC) performed two series of temperature sensitivity tests on the 
HIII-3C dummy: One at a temperature range between 66 and 78 degrees F, 
and the other between 69 and 72 degrees F. In both series of tests, the 
average resistance force to flexion was slightly higher at the lower 
temperature.\1\ However, the test results also indicated a resistance 
force difference of less than 2 pounds over the full temperature range 
for both series. In addition, plots of force vs. angle showed a very 
consistent and uniform slope with considerable overlap of measurements 
over the entire range of temperatures tested, indicating that 
temperature is not a significant factor. Based on these test data, VRTC 
concluded that variations in temperature have virtually no influence on 
the test results due to torso flexion in a crash test.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The test results can be found in Docket No. NHTSA-2000-7051.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although these tests were performed with the HIII-3C dummy and not 
the HIII-6C dummy, the agency believes that the similarities of design 
and test methods between the HIII-3C and HIII-6C dummies would lead to 
the same temperature sensitivity conclusions for the HIII-6C dummy.
    To address the petitioners' concern with the ``consistency'' of 
temperature specifications, the agency has reviewed all temperature 
ranges for crash test dummies currently specified in 49 CFR part 572. 
Except for the Hybrid III neck and thorax, all specifications for 
Hybrid II, Hybrid III, and side impact (SID) dummies call for a test 
temperature range of 66 to 78 degrees F. The narrower temperature 
specification (69 to 72 degrees F) for the Hybrid III neck and thorax 
is due to a greater temperature sensitivity of these components, which 
highly influences the head kinematics and chest compression in crash 
tests. However, impact responses of the head, torso flexion, and femurs 
are not sensitive to temperature variations in the 66 to 78 degrees F 
range, and therefore allow a wider temperature spread. Thus, specifying 
a narrower temperature range exclusively for the torso flexion test for 
the HIII-6C dummy would create an inconsistency with respect to all 
other dummy torso flexion tests in part 572.
    Moreover, to change the temperature specifications to a narrower 
range for dummies that already have a temperature specification of 66 
to 78 degrees F, the agency would have to initiate rulemaking to 
determine the desirability of such a change. The agency notes that 
there are a number of dummy users, other than the petitioners, who may 
neither see a need for nor want to have a narrower temperature range 
specification. Some test facilities do not have the torso flexion test 
fixtures set up in a tight temperature control environment. These 
facilities would have to make capital expenditures to accommodate a 
narrower range specification.
    In addition, the agency would have to provide a rationale for 
narrowing the temperature specification. Inasmuch as VRTC could not 
show a need for a narrower temperature range, and the petitioners have 
not provided data that would support the need for such a change, the 
agency would not be able to justify the requested revision.
    In view of these considerations, the agency is denying this part of 
the Alliance and FTSS petitions.

5. Dummy Clothing

    The final rule specifies that the dummy be clothed in ``a light-
weight cotton stretch, short-sleeve shirt and above-the-knee pants.'' 
The Alliance maintained in its petition that this does not describe the 
clothing currently used by the automotive industry. Accordingly, it 
petitioned the agency to require that the dummy be clothed in ``a 
thermal knit, waffle-weave polyester and cotton underwear or 
equivalent, a size 5 long-sleeved shirt having a mass not exceeding 
0.090 kg, and a size 4 pair of long pants having a mass not more than 
0.090 kg, and cut off just far enough above the knee to allow the knee 
target to be visible.''
    We do not believe we need to specify the weave or type of fabric of 
the dummy clothing, although we have no objection to designating sizes. 
We note, however, that size can vary based on clothing manufacturer and 
due to repeated washings. Generally, we do not believe there would be a 
problem with some amount of variation. We do believe it is appropriate, 
however, to specify a particular neck opening since shirts come with 
various neck styles (e.g., v-necked, round-necked) and because the 
different neck openings could have an effect on calibration. 
Accordingly, we are adding a requirement that the shirt have a neck 
opening that is large enough to fit over the dummy's head, but small 
enough to prevent contact between shoulder belts and the dummy's torso 
skin.

6. Changes in ``N'' Figures

    The following changes are being made to the figures included as 
part of 49 CFR part 572, Subpart N to correct inaccuracies or 
ambiguities in those figures.
     Figure N2: (1) Relocate the 26.1 mm reference to the 
centerline of the posterior attachment bolt to reflect dimensional 
proportionality; (2) change reference from ``Neck Flexion Pendulum 46 
CFR 572.33 FIG 22'' to ``Neck Flexion Pendulum 49 CFR 572.33 FIG 22''; 
and (3) add part number for bolt ``9001265 Screw, SHCS 
10-24 x 7/16''.
     Figure N3: (1) relocate the 26.1 mm reference to the 
centerline of the posterior attachment bolt to reflect dimensional 
proportionality; and (2) add part number for bolt ``9001265 
Screw, SHCS 10-24 x 7/16''.
     Figure N5: change bracket dimensions from ``89.9 mm (3.54 
in) x 161.3 mm (6.35 in) x 31.8 mm (1.251 in)'' to ``90.4 mm (3.56 in) 
x 175.5 mm (6.91 in) x 31.8 mm (1.25 in)''.
     Figure N6: (1) remove note SA572-S4; and (2) change the 
weight tolerance on the knee probe from ``0.82  0.01 kg 
(1.80  .02 lb)'' to ``0.82  0.02 kg (1.80 
 .05 lb)''.

7. Errors and Corrections in Drawings

    In its petition for reconsideration, Denton noted that drawings 
SA572-S12, SA572-S13-L&R, and SA572-S26,\2\ which provide a generic 
description of the load cells used for the H-III6 dummy, contain 
specification problems. Denton maintains that the specifications 
provided in those drawings will render many acceptable load cells 
obsolete. The Alliance has supported Denton's petition to change those 
drawings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ In this petition for reconsideration Denton noted a problem 
with drawing SA572-S25. That drawing depicts a shoulder load cell 
for the HIII-3C dummy. We contacted Deneton for clarification, and 
Denton agreed that its concern was with drawing SA572-S26.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The changes suggested by Denton reflect either errors in the 
drawing

[[Page 47325]]

package or changes that are so nominal as to have no detrimental 
effects on the dummy's impact response. Accordingly, the drawings have 
been changed, as reflected in Table 1.
    In addition to the concerns raised by Denton, several minor 
inconsistencies and call-out errors were noted either by petitioners or 
by agency staff in the review process. Accordingly, the changes noted 
in Table 1 have been made to the drawing package. We are also issuing a 
new drawing series 127-DRL, which will summarize all of changes made to 
the drawing package for this dummy. We are providing this new drawing 
series to provide dummy users with a clear picture of corrections to 
the drawings. No changes have been made to the dummy. The first drawing 
is 127-DRL-1. Subsequent drawing changes will be summarized in a 
drawing bearing the number 127-DRL in dated sequence (e.g., 127-DRL-2). 
This drawing series will be maintained and updated as long as 49 CFR 
part 572, subpart N remains in effect.

                                                                         Table 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Drawing/Part No.                                     Description                                      Revision description
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
127-SBL......................................  6 year H3 standard build level......................  Deleted drawing.
SA572-127DRL-1...............................  Drawing revision list...............................  New drawing.
127-0000.....................................  Hybrid III 6 year old complete assembly.............  Corrected location of ``I'' dimension (on sheet 5
                                                                                                      of 6), all sheets revised to change letter ``K''
127-1009.....................................  Skin cap, skull.....................................  Added ``reference'' to item 1, corrected title.
127-2011.....................................  Sternum pad.........................................  Corrected angle dimensions.
127-2550.....................................  Chest--accelerometer assembly (SA572-S4)............  Corrected accelerometer mount drawing number from
                                                                                                      127-2110 to 127-2150.
127-4002.....................................  Upper leg flesh.....................................  Defined angular orientation of 0.5 dia. ``Posts'';
                                                                                                      Assigned missing hole diameters for load cell
                                                                                                      installation.
127-8210.....................................  6 yr old abdominal insert...........................  Changed dimension 1.40 to 1.90 (notch depth),
                                                                                                      changed dimension 3.81 to 4.30 (overall height).
SA572-S4.....................................  Uniaxial piezorestive accelerometer.................  Changed single decimal place tolerance from  0.1/2.54 to  0.1/2.5, corrected
                                                                                                      metric equivalents, and added dimensions.
SA572-S10....................................  Femur load cell.....................................  Revised tolerance format, changed single decimal
                                                                                                      place tolerance from  0.1/2.54 to
                                                                                                       0.1/2.5, changed reference note from
                                                                                                      ``Subpart E'' to ``Subpart N'', added material
                                                                                                      note, changed output at capacity from 1 mV/V min.
                                                                                                      to 0.75 mV/V min., added ``weight includes . . .''
                                                                                                      note, and removed ``+'' from the Fz axis.
SA572-S11....................................  Upper neck load cell................................  Revised tolerance format, changed single decimal
                                                                                                      place tolerance from  0.1/2.54 to
                                                                                                       0.1/2.5, added material note, changed
                                                                                                      output at capacity from 1 mV/V min. to 0.75 mV/V
                                                                                                      min.
SA572-S12....................................  Lumbar load cell....................................  Changed hole dimension from 0.75/.1905 x .37/.89 to
                                                                                                      0.63/16.0 x .35/8.9, changed weight from 1.3 lb/
                                                                                                      0.59 kg max to 1.35 lb/0.61 kg max, revised
                                                                                                      tolerance format, changed single decimal place
                                                                                                      tolerance from  0.1/2.54 to  0.1/2.5, changed reference note from
                                                                                                      ``Subpart E'' to ``Subpart N'', added material
                                                                                                      note, changed output at capacity from 1 mV/V min.
                                                                                                      to 0.75 mV/V min., added ``weight includes . . .''
                                                                                                      note, and revised hole dimensions.
SA572-S13-L&R................................  Anterior-superior iliac spine load cell.............  Changed output at capacity from 1 mV/V min. to 0.75
                                                                                                      mV/V min., revised tolerance format, changed
                                                                                                      reference note from ``Subpart E'' to ``Subpart
                                                                                                      N'', added material note, changed single decimal
                                                                                                      place tolerance from  0.1/2.54 to
                                                                                                       0.1/2.5, and added ``weight includes
                                                                                                      . . .'' note.
SA572-S26....................................  Lower neck load cell................................  Revised tolerance format, changed single decimal
                                                                                                      place tolerance from  0.1/2.54 to
                                                                                                       0.1/2.5, added material note, changed
                                                                                                      output at capacity from 1 mV/V min. to 0.75 mV/V
                                                                                                      min., added ``(does not include cables)'' to the
                                                                                                      weight note, added hole dimensions, and changed
                                                                                                      reference note from subpart E to subpart N.
SA572-S50....................................  Chest potentiometer.................................  Changed single decimal tolerance from 
                                                                                                      0.1/2.54 to  0.1/2.5, added/corrected
                                                                                                      metric equivalents, added ``Dia. Of hard shell
                                                                                                      housing'' and ``in rotary rigid shaft'' to notes,
                                                                                                      added ``signal connector pins'' note, and added
                                                                                                      ``locating'' and ``0'' to pin note.
SA572-S80....................................  S4 triaxial accelerometer mounting block............  Changed single decimal place tolerance from  0.1/2.54 to  0.1/2.5, corrected
                                                                                                      metric equivalents, revised hole note, and
                                                                                                      relocated holes.
TE-2208-001..................................  Neck adapter bracket--6 year old....................  Added part 9001265 and note 3,
                                                                                                      changed single decimal place tolerance from  0.1/2.54 to  0.1/2.5.
9001373......................................  Bushing, shoulder...................................  New drawing.
9000000 & 6000000............................  Hardware used on 3YR. 6YR. & 5th female.............  Added part 9001265, removed part 9001373.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

8. Availability of Drawings and Specifications Package and PADI

    The drawings and specifications package and the PADI document 
referred to in this final rule are available for viewing and copying at 
the Department's public docket area, located at Plaza 401, 400 Seventh 
St., SW., Washington, DC. Additionally, these documents may be 
downloaded from the docket website, DMS.DOT.GOV. After accessing the 
website, click under the ``Search'' heading, and then under the 
``search form'' to conduct a web search for the documents. When filling 
out the search form, enter NHTSA as the appropriate agency. Select 
``rulemaking'' as the appropriate category, and ``Crashworthiness 
Drawings and Equipment'' as the appropriate subcategory. Enter the name 
of the test dummy under the ``subject'' category and then conduct your 
search by

[[Page 47326]]

clicking on the ``search'' heading. This will retrieve the entire PADI 
and drawings and specifications package for the H-III6C. The PADI and 
each drawing may be individually retrieved once you have accessed that 
docket. The drawings and specifications package and the PADI document 
are also available from Reprographic Technologies, 9107 Gaither Rd., 
Gaithersburg, MD 20877, (301)419-5070.

Regulatory Analyses and Notices

Executive Order 12866 and DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' (58 FR 
51735, October 4, 1993), provides for making determinations whether a 
regulatory action is ``significant'' and therefore subject to Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) review and to the requirements of the 
Executive Order. The Order defines a ``significant regulatory action'' 
as one that is likely to result in a rule that may:
    (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or 
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the 
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public 
health or safety, or State, local, or Tribal governments or 
communities;
    (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an 
action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, 
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients 
thereof; or
    (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal 
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in 
the Executive Order.
    We have considered the impact of this rulemaking action under 
Executive Order 12866 and the Department of Transportation's regulatory 
policies and procedures. This rule is not considered a significant 
regulatory action under section 3(f) of the Executive Order 12866. 
Consequently, it was not reviewed by the Office of Management and 
Budget under E.O. 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review.'' The 
rulemaking action is also not considered to be significant under the 
Department's Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 
26, 1979).
    This document amends 49 CFR part 572, subpart N. This rule 
indirectly imposes requirements on only those businesses that choose to 
manufacture or test with the dummy, in that the agency will only use 
dummies for compliance testing that meet all of the criteria specified 
in this rule. It may indirectly affect vehicle and child seat 
manufacturers if it is incorporated by reference into the advanced air 
bag rulemaking or a future Child Seating Systems (FMVSS No. 213) 
rulemaking.
    The total cost of an uninstrumented H-III6C dummy is approximately 
$30,000. Instrumentation will add approximately $25,000 to $41,000 to 
the cost, depending on the number of data channels the user chooses to 
collect. The amendments made in this document will not affect the cost 
of the dummy.
    Because the economic impacts of this proposal are so minimal, no 
further regulatory evaluation is necessary.

Executive Order 13132

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

Executive Order 13045

    Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) 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 rule is not subject to the Executive Order because it is not 
economically significant as defined in E.O. 12866. It does indirectly 
involve decisions based on health risks that disproportionately affect 
children, namely, the risk of deploying air bags to children. However, 
this rulemaking serves to help vehicle and air bag manufacturers to 
take steps to reduce that risk.

Executive Order 12778

    Pursuant to Executive Order 12778, ``Civil Justice Reform,'' we 
have considered whether this rule will have any retroactive effect. 
This rule does not have any retroactive effect. A petition for 
reconsideration or other administrative proceeding will not be a 
prerequisite to an action seeking judicial review of this rule. This 
rule does not preempt the states from adopting laws or regulations on 
the same subject, except that it does preempt a state regulation that 
is in actual conflict with the federal regulation or makes compliance 
with the Federal regulation impossible or interferes with the 
implementation of the Federal statute.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., 
as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act 
(SBREFA) of 1996) whenever an agency is required to publish a notice of 
rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it must prepare and make 
available for public comment a regulatory flexibility analysis that 
describes the effect of the rule on small entities (i.e., small 
businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions). 
However, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required if the head of 
an agency certifies the rule will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. SBREFA amended the

[[Page 47327]]

Regulatory Flexibility Act to require Federal agencies to provide a 
statement of the factual basis for certifying that a rule will not have 
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities.
    I have considered the effects of this rulemaking action under the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) and certify that this 
proposal will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. The amendments made in this document will not 
affect the cost of the dummy. The rule does not impose or rescind any 
requirements for anyone. The Regulatory Flexibility Act does not, 
therefore, require a regulatory flexibility analysis.

National Environmental Policy Act

    We have analyzed this 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.

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.

National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272) 
directs us to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory 
activities unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or 
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical 
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling 
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by 
voluntary consensus standards bodies, such as the Society of Automotive 
Engineers (SAE). The NTTAA directs us to provide Congress, through OMB, 
explanations when we decide not to use available and applicable 
voluntary consensus standards.
    The H-III6C dummy that is the subject of this document was 
developed under the auspices of the SAE. All relevant SAE standards 
were reviewed as part of the development process. The following 
voluntary consensus standards have been used in developing the dummy:
     SAE Recommended Practice J211-1995, ``Instrumentation for 
Impact Tests--Parts 1 and 2'', dated March, 1995; and
     SAE J1733 Information Report, titled ``Sign Convention for 
Vehicle Crash Testing'', dated December 1994.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) 
requires Federal 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 in any one year (adjusted for inflation with base 
year of 1995). Before promulgating a NHTSA rule for which a written 
statement is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires us to 
identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives 
and adopt the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome 
alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of 
section 205 do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable 
law. Moreover, section 205 allows us to adopt an alternative other than 
the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative 
if we publish with the final rule an explanation why that alternative 
was not adopted.
    This rule does not impose any unfunded mandates under the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995. This rule does not meet the definition of 
a Federal mandate because it does not impose requirements on anyone. 
Further, it will not result in costs of $100 million or more to either 
State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or to the 
private sector. The amendments made in this document will not affect 
the cost of the dummy. Thus, this rule is not subject to the 
requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.

Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)

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

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 572

    Incorporation by reference. Motor vehicle safety.
    In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA amends 49 CFR part 572 as 
follows:

PART 572--ANTHROPOMORPHIC TEST DUMMIES

    1. The authority citation for part 572 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. By revising the title of subpart N to read as follows:

Subpart N--Six-year-old Child Test Dummy, Beta Version

    3. By revising Sec. 572.120(a)(1), (a)(2), and (c)(1) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 572.120  Incorporation by reference.

    (a) * * *
    (1) A drawings and inspection package entitled ``Parts List and 
Drawings, Hybrid III Six-year-old Child Test Dummy (H-III6C, Beta 
Version) (June 2002)'', consisting of:
    (i) Drawing No. 127-1000, 6-year H3 Head Complete,
    (ii) Drawing No. 127-1015, Neck Assembly,
    (iii) Drawing No. 127-2000, Upper Torso Assembly,
    (iv) Drawing No. 127-3000, Lower Torso Assembly,
    (v) Drawing No. 127-4000-1 and 4000-2, Leg Assembly,
    (vi) Drawing No. 127-5000-1 and 5000-2, Arm Assembly, and
    (vii) The Hybrid III Six-year-old Child Parts/Drawing List.
    (2) A procedures manual entitled ``Procedures for Assembly, 
Disassembly, and Inspection (PADI) of the Hybrid III 6-year-old Child 
Crash Test Dummy (H-III6C), Beta Version, June 2002'';
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (1) The drawings and specifications package and the PADI document 
referred to in subparagraph (a) are accessible for viewing and copying 
at the Department of Transportation Docket's public area, Plaza 401, 
400 Seventh St., SW., Washington, DC 20590, and may be downloaded from 
dms.dot.gov. They are also available from Reprographic Technologies, 
9107 Gaither Rd, Gaithersburg, MD 200877, (301) 419-5070.
* * * * *

    4. By revising Sec. 572.124(b) and (c) to read as follows:

[[Page 47328]]

Sec. 572.124  Thorax assembly and test procedure

* * * * *
    (b) When the anterior surface of the thorax of a completely 
assembled dummy (drawing 127-0000) is impacted by a test probe 
conforming to section 572.127(a) at 6.71  0.12 m/s (22.0 
 0.4 ft/s) according to the test procedure in paragraph (c) 
of this section:
    (1) The maximum sternum displacement (compression) relative to the 
spine, measured with chest deflection transducer (drawing SA572-S50), 
must be not less than 38.0 mm (1.50 in) and not more than 46.0 mm (1.80 
in). Within this specified compression corridor, the peak force, 
measured by the probe in accordance with section 572.127, shall not be 
less than 1150 N (259 lbf) and not more than 1380 N (310 lbf). The peak 
force after 12.5 mm (0.5 in) of sternum displacement but before 
reaching the minimum required 38.0 mm (1.5 in) sternum displacement 
limit shall not exceed 1500 N (337.2 lbf).
    (2) The internal hysteresis of the ribcage in each impact as 
determined by the plot of force vs. deflection in paragraph (b)(1) of 
this section shall be not less than 65 percent but not more than 85 
percent.
    (c) Test procedure. The test procedure for the thorax assembly is 
as follows:
    (1) Soak the dummy in a controlled environment at any temperature 
between 20.6 deg. and 22.2 deg.C (69 deg. and 72 deg.F) and a relative 
humidity between 10 and 70 percent for at least four hours prior to a 
test.
    (2) Seat and orient the dummy, wearing tight-fitting underwear or 
equivalent consisting of a size 5 short-sleeved shirt having a weight 
less than 0.090 kg (0.2 lb) and an opening at the top just large enough 
to permit the passage of the head with a tight fit, and a size 4 pair 
of long pants having a weight of less than 0.090 kg (0.2 lb) with the 
legs cut off sufficiently above the knee to allow the knee target to be 
visible, on a seating surface without back support as shown in Figure 
N4, with the limbs extended horizontally and forward, parallel to the 
midsagittal plane, the midsagittal plane vertical within  1 
degree and the ribs level in the anterior-posterior and lateral 
directions within  0.5 degrees.
    (3) Establish the impact point at the chest midsagittal plane so 
that the impact point of the longitudinal centerline of the probe 
coincides with the midsagittal plane of the dummy within  
2.5 mm (0.1 in) and is 12.7  1.1 mm (0.5  0.04 
in) below the horizontal-peripheral centerline of the No. 3 rib and is 
within 0.5 degrees of a horizontal line in the dummy's midsagittal 
plane.
    (4) Impact the thorax with the test probe so that at the moment of 
contact the probe's longitudinal center line falls within 2 degrees of 
a horizontal line in the dummy's midsagittal plane.
    (5) Guide the test probe during impact so that there is no 
significant lateral, vertical or rotational movement.
    (6) No suspension hardware, suspension cables, or any other 
attachments to the probe, including the velocity vane, shall make 
contact with the dummy during the test.
* * * * *
    5. By amending Sec. 572.126 and by revising paragraph (b) and 
adding paragraph (c)(6) to read as follows:


Sec. 572.126  Knees and knee impact test procedure.

* * * * *
    (b) When the knee assembly, consisting of knee machined (drawing 
127-4013), knee flesh (drawing 127-4011), lower leg (drawing 127-4014), 
the foot assembly (drawing 127-4030-1(left) and -2 (right)) and femur 
load transducer (drawing SA572-S10) or its structural replacement 
(drawing 127-4007) is tested according to the test procedure in section 
572.127(c), the peak resistance force as measured with the test probe 
mounted accelerometer must be not less than 2.0 kN (450 lbf) and not 
more than 3.0 kN (674 lbf).
    (c) Test procedure. * * *
    (6) No suspension hardware, suspension cables, or any other 
attachments to the probe, including the velocity vane, shall make 
contact with the dummy during testing.

    6. By revising Sec. 572.127(a), (b), (k), (l), (m), (n), (o), and 
(p) to read as follows:


Sec. 572.127  Test conditions and instrumentation

    (a) The test probe for thoracic impacts, except for attachments, 
shall be of rigid metal or metal alloy construction and concentric 
about its longitudinal axis. Any attachments to the impactor, such as 
suspension hardware, velocity vanes, etc., must meet the requirements 
of Sec. 572.124(c)(6). The impactor shall have a mass of 2.86 
 0.02 kg (6.3  0.05 lb) and a minimum mass 
moment of inertia of 160 kg-c\2\ (0.141 lb-in-sec\2\) in yaw and pitch 
about the CG of the probe. One third of the weight of suspension cables 
and any attachments to the impact probe must be included in the 
calculation of mass, and such components may not exceed five percent of 
the total weight of the probe. The impacting end of the probe, has a 
flat, continuous, and non-deformable 101.6  0.25 mm (4.00 
 0.01 in) diameter face with an edge radius of 7.6/12.7 mm 
(0.3/0.5 in). The impactor shall have a 101-103 mm (4.0-4.1 in) 
diameter cylindrical surface extending for a minimum of 12.5 mm (0.5 
in) to the rear from the impact face. The probe's end opposite to the 
impact face has provisions for mounting an accelerometer with its 
sensitive axis collinear with the longitudinal axis of the probe. The 
impact probe shall have a free air resonant frequency of not less than 
1000 Hz limited to the direction of the longitudinal axis of the 
impactor.
    (b) The test probe for knee impacts, except for attachments, shall 
be of rigid metal or alloy construction and concentric about its 
longitudinal axis. Any attachments to the impactor, such as suspension 
hardware, velocity vanes, etc., must meet the requirements of 
Sec. 572.126(c)(6). The impactor shall have a mass of 0.82  
0.02 kg (1.8  0.05 lb) and a minimum mass moment of inertia 
of 34 kg-cm2 (0.03 lb-in-sec2) in yaw and pitch about the CG of the 
probe. One third of the weight of suspension cables and any attachments 
to the impact probe must be included in the calculation of mass, and 
such components may not exceed five percent of the total weight of the 
probe. The impacting end of the probe, has a flat, continuous, and non-
deformable 76.2  0.2 mm (3.00  0.01 in) 
diameter face with an edge radius of 7.6/12.7 mm (0.3/0.5 in). The 
impactor shall have a 76-77 mm (3.0-3.1 in) diameter cylindrical 
surface extending for a minimum of 12.5 mm (0.5 in) to the rear from 
the impact face. The probe's end opposite to the impact face has 
provisions for mounting an accelerometer with its sensitive axis 
collinear with the longitudinal axis of the probe. The impact probe 
shall have a free air resonant frequency of not less than 1000 Hz 
limited to the direction of the longitudinal axis of the impactor.
* * * * *
    (k) The outputs of acceleration and force-sensing devices installed 
in the dummy and in the test apparatus specified by this part must be 
recorded in individual data channels that conform to SAE Recommended 
Practice J211, Rev. Mar95 ``Instrumentation for lmpact Tests,'' except 
that the lumbar measurements are based on CFC 600, with channel classes 
as follows:
    (1) Head acceleration--Class 1000.
    (2) Neck:
    (i) Forces--Class 1000;
    (ii) Moments--Class 600;
    (iii) Pendulum acceleration--Class 180;
    (iv) Rotation--Class 60 (if used).

[[Page 47329]]

    (3) Thorax:
    (i) Rib acceleration--Class 1000;
    (ii) Spine and pendulum accelerations--Class 180;
    (iii) Sternum deflection --Class 600.
    (4) Lumbar:
    (i) Forces--Class 1000;
    (ii) Moments --Class 600;
    (iii) Flexion --Class 60 if data channel is used.
    (5) Pelvis accelerations --Class 1000.
    (6) Femur forces--Class 600.
    (l) Coordinate signs for instrumentation polarity shall conform to 
the Sign Convention For Vehicle Crash Testing, Surface Vehicle 
Information Report, SAE J1733, 1994-12.
    (m) The mountings for sensing devices shall have no resonance 
frequency less than 3 times the frequency range of the applicable 
channel class.
    (n) Limb joints must be set at one G, barely restraining the weight 
of the limb when it is extended horizontally. The force needed to move 
a limb segment shall not exceed 2G throughout the range of limb motion.
    (o) Performance tests of the same component, segment, assembly, or 
fully assembled dummy shall be separated in time by period of not less 
than 30 minutes unless otherwise noted.
    (p) Surfaces of dummy components may not be painted except as 
specified in this subpart or in drawings subtended by this subpart.

    7. By revising Figures N1, N2, N3, and N6 to read as follows:

Figures to Subpart N

* * * * *

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P

[[Page 47330]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18JY02.000


[[Page 47331]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18JY02.001


[[Page 47332]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18JY02.002


[[Page 47333]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18JY02.003


    Issued: June 19, 2002.
Jeffrey W. Runge,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 02-16874 Filed 7-17-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-C