[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 35 (Monday, February 23, 2004)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 8160-8161]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-3756]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. NHTSA-2003-16920]


Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Denial of Petition for 
Rulemaking

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

ACTION: Denial of petition for rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: NHTSA is denying a petition for rulemaking from the Insurance 
Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) to amend current seating position 
procedures for Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) Nos. 208, 
``Occupant crash protection,'' and 214, ``Side impact protection.'' 
IIHS had petitioned to adopt procedures based upon the University of 
Michigan Transportation Research Institute (UMTRI) Seating 
Accommodation Model.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The following persons at the National 
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW, 
Washington, DC 20590:
    For non-legal issues: Mr. Philip Oh, Office of Crashworthiness 
Standards, NVS-112, telephone (202) 493-0195, facsimile (202) 493-2290, 
electronic mail: [email protected]
    For legal issues: Ms. Rebecca MacPherson, Office of the Chief 
Counsel, NCC-112, telephone (202) 366-2992, facsimile (202) 366-3820, 
electronic mail: [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Summary of Petition

    On December 19, 2002, the agency received a petition from IIHS to 
amend the requirements of FMVSS No. 214 (S6.3 and S6.4) and FMVSS No. 
208 (S8.1.2 and S8.1.3), which specify the positioning of adjustable 
seats and adjustable seat backs during vehicle testing. Currently, the 
standards require the seat to be positioned at the full-forward 
position for the 5th percentile female dummy (FMVSS No. 208 only) and 
the midtrack position for the 50th percentile male dummy. Also, 
adjustable seat backs are set to the manufacturers' recommended 
adjustment angle. IIHS contends that the seating positions used in 
FMVSS Nos. 208 and 214 do not represent real-world occupant behavior. 
The petition referred to a study \1\ where the mean-selected seating 
positions of more than 600 adult volunteers were compared with the 
midtrack positions in 26 vehicles. Results showed that mean-selected 
seat positions were 46 mm rearward of midtrack for 50th percentile 
males, and 42 mm rearward of full-forward for 5th percentile females. 
In addition, IIHS contends that 44 percent of the vehicles tested in 
the IIHS crashworthiness evaluation program had chest-to-air-bag-module 
clearance measures of less than 250 mm. They believe this is an 
inappropriate seating position based on the NHTSA recommended clearance 
measure of 250 mm. As a result, IIHS petitioned to amend the standards 
by incorporating a new procedure to set the seat track and seat back 
adjustment based on the UMTRI Seating Accommodation Model. This model 
is based upon driver posture and position data collected in 36 
different vehicles, each with measurements for 60-120 driver subjects. 
IIHS stated that the proposed amendments would assure that the dummy 
test positions more accurately reflect real-world seating positions for 
all NHTSA-regulated crash tests that are not intended to address 
specific crash injury risks (e.g. out-of-position air bag injuries). 
Therefore, IIHS also petitioned to incorporate the UMTRI procedure in 
the New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) crash tests. In addition, IIHS 
suggested that the agency conduct a study of passenger seating 
positions to determine the most appropriate dummy placement. NHTSA 
denies this petition for the reasons described below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Manary, M.A. et al., ``ATD Positioning Based on Driver 
Posture and Position.'' SAE Technical Paper Series 983163. 
Warrendale, PA, Society Of Automotive Engineers, 1998.

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

[[Page 8161]]

Analysis and Conclusion

    NHTSA recognizes that current procedures do not replicate all real-
world seating positions of occupants similar in size to the 5th and 
50th percentile dummies. However, the agency believes that the current 
procedure appropriately represents positions where 5th and 50th 
percentile occupants may sit. NHTSA believes the full-forward position 
is appropriate for the 5th percentile female dummy because it best 
represents the worst-case scenario for air bag-induced injuries in high 
severity crashes. Although the full forward position does not replicate 
all real-world seating positions for small females, the agency believes 
that some drivers will position their seat full-forward, making it a 
realistic seating position. Likewise, the agency believes the mid-track 
positioning of the 50th percentile male dummy is an acceptable position 
that represents where an adult-sized occupant may sit. A further 
rearward displacement of the dummy reduces the likelihood that the 
dummy will significantly interact with the interior of the vehicle, 
particularly since braking dynamics in most real-world crashes will 
move the occupant forward of the pre-braking seating position. At 
present, the 5th and 50th percentile dummies are used in FMVSS No. 208 
to assess safety protection for all sizes of occupants.
    IIHS does not give compelling evidence to conclude that the UMTRI 
seating procedure is more reflective of real-world behavior compared to 
the current agency procedure. Because many results in Appendix D of the 
petition \2\ would place the seat outside the physical limitation of 
the seat track, the agency believes that the UMTRI results do not 
accurately depict real-world behavior in many cases. Appendix D shows 
eight of the fifteen vehicles having seat positions that do not 
physically exist on the vehicle seat track. For example, according to 
the UMTRI results, the seating position for a midsize male in a 2001 
Dodge Grand Caravan is 64 mm and -10 mm aft and above the reference 
positions, respectively. This seating position would place the seat 
vertically below the full-down position, which physically does not 
exist within the range of seat motion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See Docket Number NHTSA-2002-11398-9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Furthermore, in Appendix D, IIHS presents data on the results of 
the UMTRI seating procedure for fifteen different vehicles. The results 
are shown solely as a relationship to horizontal and vertical seating 
reference positions, which is full-forward and down for small females, 
mid-track and down for midsize males, and full-rear and down for large 
males. IIHS does not provide any data on real-world occupant seating 
preferences for these specified vehicles. Therefore, without existing 
occupant seating preferences for the fifteen vehicles, there is no 
basis upon which to compare the accuracy of the UMTRI procedure to the 
current agency procedure.
    NHTSA believes that the regression analysis used by UMTRI is an 
appropriate tool to observe trends in data, but is not by itself 
sufficient to define a procedure that will affect all vehicles under 
FMVSS Nos. 208 and 214. Several points support this agency belief. 
First, the formula representing the regression is based on a finite 
number of vehicles. Although different sizes of vehicles were included 
in the study, the formula would change as other vehicle seating 
positions are studied. Also, the regression formula would change as the 
fleet characteristics change over time. There is no guarantee that 
equations derived from data collected in the past would apply to 
vehicles in the future. Outlying data points in the data today may 
become more frequent, causing additional practicability issues. Lastly, 
using the UMTRI regression analysis as the basis for all seating 
procedures produces a best-fit line through all the vehicles' actual 
seating preference mean collected by UMTRI. Inherently, a margin of 
error is produced in the regression line as the actual data set becomes 
non-linear (scattered). This method does not necessarily provide the 
most accurate position for each individual vehicle.
    Finally, IIHS argues that many vehicles do not meet the NHTSA 
recommended minimum 250 mm steering wheel hub-to-chest clearance with 
the current seating procedure. However, the agency has found that IIHS 
measurement data do not necessarily correspond to measurements taken 
from NHTSA's NCAP tests. For example, as described in the NCAP frontal 
report for the model year 2000 Ford Taurus,\3\ the steering wheel hub-
to-chest measurement is recorded as 298 mm. The IIHS measurement was 
228 mm. According to NHTSA's NCAP test reports, the agency has not 
found any vehicles listed in Appendix B of the petition that have less 
than 250 mm of clearance, and therefore believes the current procedure 
is consistent with agency recommendations. Furthermore, the agency 
believes that some occupants may position themselves closer than the 
250 mm steering wheel hub-to-chest clearance, regardless of NHTSA's 
recommendation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Docket Number NHTSA-1999-4962-67.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In conclusion, NHTSA denies this petition for rulemaking based on a 
lack of compelling beneficial evidence supporting the UMTRI procedure 
and the agency's views about the adequacy of the current seating 
procedure. Also, NHTSA declines the suggestion to use the UMTRI 
procedure in its NCAP testing. The agency has no immediate plans to 
conduct research on an alternative seating method for either the driver 
or passenger positions. However, NHTSA may revisit the seat position 
issue at a later time depending on the agency's future research needs 
and priorities.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30162; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 
1.50 and 501.8.

    Issued on: February 17, 2004.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 04-3756 Filed 2-20-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P