[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 113 (Monday, June 14, 2004)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 32932-32954]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-13241]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 563

[Docket No. NHTSA-2004-18029]
RIN 2127-AI72


Event Data Recorders

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: This proposal addresses event data recorders (EDRs), i.e., 
devices that record safety information about motor vehicles involved in 
crashes. Manufacturers have been voluntarily installing EDRs as 
standard equipment in increasingly larger numbers of light vehicles in 
recent years. They are now being installed in the vast majority of new 
vehicles. The information collected by EDRs aids investigations of the 
causes of crashes and injuries, and makes it possible to better define 
and address safety problems. The information can be used to improve 
motor vehicle safety systems and standards. As the use and capabilities 
of EDRs increase, opportunities for additional safety benefits, 
especially with regard to emergency medical treatment, may become 
available.
    We are not presently proposing to require the installation of EDRs 
in any motor vehicles. We are proposing to (1) require that the EDRs 
voluntarily installed in light vehicles record a minimum set of 
specified data elements useful for crash investigations, analysis of 
the performance of safety equipment, e.g., advanced restraint systems, 
and automatic collision notification systems; (2) specify requirements 
for data format; (3) increase the survivability of the EDRs and their 
data by requiring that the EDRs function during and after the front, 
side and rear vehicle crash tests

[[Page 32933]]

specified in several Federal motor vehicle safety standards; (4) 
require vehicle manufacturers to make publicly available information 
that would enable crash investigators to retrieve data from the EDR; 
and (5) require vehicle manufacturers to include a brief standardized 
statement in the owner's manual indicating that the vehicle is equipped 
with an EDR and describing the purposes of EDRs.

DATES: You should submit your comments early enough to ensure that 
Docket Management receives them not later than August 13, 2004.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments [identified by the docket number in 
the heading at the beginning of this document] by any of the following 
methods:
     Web Site: http://dms.dot.gov. Follow the instructions for 
submitting comments on the DOT electronic docket site.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of 
Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, Room PL-401, 
Washington, DC 20590-001.
     Hand Delivery: Room PL-401 on the plaza level of the 
Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, between 9 
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting 
comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The following persons at the National 
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., 
Washington, DC, 20590:
    For technical and policy issues: Dr. William Fan, Office of 
Crashworthiness Standards, telephone (202) 366-4922, facsimile (202) 
366-4329.
    For legal issues: J. Edward Glancy, Office of the Chief Counsel, 
telephone (202) 366-2992, facsimile (202) 366-3820.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Background
    A. Event Data Recorders
    B. Chronology of Events Relating to NHTSA's Consideration of 
Event Data Recorders
    C. Petitions for Rulemaking
    1. Petitions from Mr. Price T. Bingham and Ms. Marie E. Birnbaum
    2. Petition from Dr. Ricardo Martinez
    D. October 2002 Request for Comments
    1. Safety Benefits
    2. Technical Issues
    3. Privacy Issues
    4. NHTSA's Role in the Future of Event Data Recorders
    5. Other Comments
    E. Event Data Recorders and the Implementation of Automatic 
Collision Notification Systems
II. Proposal and Response to Petition
    A. Data Elements to be Recorded
    B. Data Standardization
    C. Data Retrieval
    D. Functioning of Event Data Recorders and Crash Survivability
    E. Privacy
    F. Leadtime
    G. Response to Petition from Dr. Martinez
III. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
IV. Submission of Comments

I. Background

A. Event Data Recorders

    Event data recorder devices have been used in other transportation 
sectors, such as railroads. Over the past several years, there has been 
considerable interest in the safety community regarding possible safety 
benefits from the use of event data recorders (EDRs) in motor vehicles.
    EDRs collect vehicle crash information.\1\ Some systems collect 
only vehicle acceleration/deceleration data, while others collect these 
data plus a host of complementary data, such as driver inputs (e.g., 
braking and steering) and vehicle systems status.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Since the term ``EDR'' can be used to cover many different 
types of devices, we believe it is important to explain the term for 
purposes of this document. When we use the term ``EDR'' in this 
document, we are referring to a device that is installed in a motor 
vehicle to record technical vehicle and occupant-based information 
for a brief period of time (i.e., seconds, not minutes) before, 
during and after a crash. For instance, EDRs may record (1) pre-
crash vehicle dynamics and system status, (2) driver inputs, (3) 
vehicle crash signature, (4) restraint usage/deployment status, and 
(5) certain post-crash data such as the activation of an automatic 
collision notification (ACN) system. We are not using the term to 
include any type of device that either makes an audio or video 
record, or logs data such as hours of service for truck operators.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The way in which this is accomplished may be described in the 
following somewhat simplified manner. The EDR monitors several of the 
vehicle's systems, such as speed, brakes, and several safety systems. 
It continuously records and erases information on these systems so that 
a record of the most recent 8-second period is always available. If an 
``event'' occurs, i.e., if a crash meeting a pre-determined threshold 
of severity occurs, then the EDR moves the last 8 seconds of pre-crash 
information into its long-term memory. In addition, it records and puts 
into its long-term memory up to 6 seconds of data relating to what 
happens after the start of the crash, such as the timing and manner of 
deployment of the air bags.
    The information collected by EDRs aids investigations of the causes 
of crashes and injury mechanisms, and makes it possible to better 
identify and address safety problems. Thus, the information can be used 
to improve motor vehicle safety.
    EDRs have been installed as standard equipment in an increasingly 
large number of light motor vehicles in recent years, particularly in 
vehicles with air bags. We estimate that 65 to 90 percent of model year 
2004 passenger cars and other light vehicles have some recording 
capability, and that more than half record such things as crash pulse 
data. We do not have more precise estimates because not all vehicle 
manufacturers have provided us detailed information on this topic.
    Vehicle manufacturers have made EDR capability an additional 
function of the vehicle's air bag control systems. The air bag control 
systems were necessarily processing a great deal of vehicle 
information, and EDR capability could be added to the vehicle by 
designing the air bag control system to capture, in the event of a 
crash, relevant data in memory.
    EDRs have become increasingly more advanced with respect to the 
amount and type of data recorded.

B. Chronology of Events Relating to NHTSA's Consideration of Event Data 
Recorders

    NHTSA's Special Crash Investigations (SCI) program first utilized 
EDR information in support of an agency crash investigation in 1991. 
This was done in cooperation with the vehicle's manufacturer, General 
Motors (GM). Throughout the 1990s, NHTSA's SCI team utilized EDRs as 
one of their investigative tools. From 1991 through 1997, SCI worked 
with manufacturers to read approximately 40 EDRs in support of its 
program.
    In 1997, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) issued 
Safety Recommendation H-97-18 to NHTSA, recommending that we ``pursue 
crash information gathering using EDRs.'' NTSB recommended that the 
agency ``develop and implement, in conjunction with the domestic and 
international automobile manufacturers, a plan to gather better 
information on crash pulses and other crash parameters in actual 
crashes, utilizing current or augmented crash sensing and recording 
devices.'' Also, in that year, the National Aeronautics and Space 
Administration (NASA) Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), in a study 
conducted for NHTSA about advanced air bag technology, recommended that 
we ``study the feasibility of installing and obtaining

[[Page 32934]]

crash data for safety analyses from crash recorders on vehicles.''
    In early 1998, NHTSA's Office of Research and Development (R&D) 
formed a Working Group comprised of industry, academia, and other 
government organizations. The group's objective was to facilitate the 
collection and utilization of collision avoidance and crashworthiness 
data from on-board EDRs.
    In 1999, NTSB issued a second set of recommendations to NHTSA 
related to EDRs, H-99-53 and 54, recommending that we require EDRs to 
be installed on school buses and motor coaches.
    In 2000, NHTSA sponsored a second working group related to EDRs, 
the NHTSA Truck & Bus EDR Working Group. This Working Group collected 
facts related to use of EDRs in trucks, school buses, and motor 
coaches.
    In August 2001, the NHTSA-sponsored EDR Working Group published a 
final report on the results of its deliberations.\2\ Highlights of the 
Working Group findings were the following:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Event Data Recorders, Summary of Findings by the NHTSA EDR 
Working Group, August 2001, Final Report (Docket No. NHTSA-99-5218-
9). Persons interested in additional information about EDRs may wish 
to examine section 12 of the final report, which sets forth a 
bibliography and references.

    1. EDRs have the potential to greatly improve highway safety, 
for example, by improving occupant protection systems and improving 
the accuracy of crash reconstructions.
    2. EDR technology has potential safety applications for all 
classes of motor vehicles.
    3. A wide range of crash related and other data elements have 
been identified which might usefully be captured by future EDR 
systems.
    4. NHTSA has incorporated EDR data collection in its motor 
vehicle research databases.
    5. Open access to EDR data (minus personal identifiers) will 
benefit researchers, crash investigators, and manufacturers in 
improving safety on the highways.
    6. Studies of EDRs in Europe and the U.S. have shown that driver 
and employee awareness of an on-board EDR reduces the number and 
severity of drivers' crashes.
    7. Given the differing nature of cars, vans, SUVs, and other 
lightweight vehicles, compared to heavy trucks, school buses, and 
motor coaches, different EDR systems may be required to meet the 
needs of each vehicle class.
    8. The degree of benefit from EDRs is directly related to the 
number of vehicles operating with an EDR and the current 
infrastructure's ability to use and assimilate these data.
    9. Automatic crash notification (ACN) systems integrate the on-
board crash sensing and EDR technology with other electronic 
systems, such as global positioning systems and cellular telephones, 
to provide early notification of the occurrence, nature, and 
location of a serious collision.
    10. Most systems utilize proprietary technology and require the 
manufacturer to download and analyze the data.

    In 2001, NHTSA developed a website about highway-based EDRs located 
at the following address: http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/edr-site/index.html.
    The final report of the NHTSA Truck and Bus EDR Working Group was 
published in May 2002.\3\ The record of this Working Group is in Docket 
No. NHTSA-2000-7699.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Event Data Recorders, Summary of Findings by the NHTSA EDR 
Working Group, May 2002, Final Report, Volume II, Supplemental 
Findings for Trucks, Motorcoaches, and School Buses. (Docket No. 
NHTSA-2000-7699-6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Petitions for Rulemaking

1. Petitions From Mr. Price T. Bingham and Ms. Marie E. Birnbaum
    In the late 1990s, the agency denied two petitions for rulemaking 
asking us to require the installation of EDRs in new motor vehicles. 
(63 FR 60270; November 9, 1998 and 64 FR 29616; June 2, 1999.)
    The first petitioner, Mr. Price T. Bingham, a private individual, 
asked the agency to initiate rulemaking to require air bag sensors to 
be designed so that data would be recorded during a crash, allowing it 
to be read later by crash investigators. The petitioner cited a concern 
about air bag deployments that might be ``spontaneous,'' but did not 
limit the petition to that issue.
    The second petitioner, Ms. Marie E. Birnbaum, also a private 
individual, asked us to initiate rulemaking to require passenger cars 
and light trucks to be equipped with ``black boxes'' (i.e., EDRs) 
analogous to those found on commercial aircraft.
    In responding to these petitions, NHTSA stated that it believed 
EDRs could provide information that is very valuable in understanding 
crashes, and that can be used in a variety of ways to improve motor 
vehicle safety. The agency denied the petitions because the motor 
vehicle industry was already voluntarily moving in the direction 
recommended by the petitioners, and because the agency believed ``this 
area presents some issues that are, at least for the present time, best 
addressed in a non-regulatory context.''
2. Petition From Dr. Ricardo Martinez
    In October 2001, the agency received a petition from Dr. Ricardo 
Martinez, President of Safety Intelligence Systems Corporation and 
former Administrator of NHTSA, asking us to ``mandate the collection 
and storage of onboard vehicle crash event data, in a standardized data 
and content format and in a way that is retrievable from the vehicle 
after the crash.''
    According to the petitioner, understanding what happens in a crash 
is essential to preventing injuries and deaths. Dr. Martinez stated 
that this information is the cornerstone of safety decision-making, 
whether it is designing the vehicle, making policy, identifying a 
potential problem or evaluating the effectiveness of safety systems.
    The petitioner argued, however, that despite the high-tech nature 
of motor vehicles today, current methods of crash investigation rely on 
``analyzing the `archaeology of the crash,' subjective witness 
statements, and expert opinion to determine the `facts.' '' Dr. 
Martinez also noted that the movement from mechanical to electrical 
systems and sensors means that physical evidence of the crash is 
diminishing. For example, anti-lock brakes reduce skid marks, making it 
more difficult to make determinations about wheel and vehicle behavior.
    According to Dr. Martinez, field investigations of motor vehicle 
crashes are costly, time consuming, laborious, and often inaccurate. 
The petitioner stated that there is a significant difference (sometimes 
more than 100%) between derived crash severity calculations and those 
directly measured by a vehicle. The petitioner also stated that because 
of costs and limitations of current crash investigations and 
reconstructions, the total number of cases available for analysis are 
limited and skewed toward the more serious crashes. Dr. Martinez stated 
that, as a result, current data bases are recognized to have major 
deficiencies because of the small number of crashes they contain and 
the bias of the information.
    The petitioner noted that today's vehicles generate, analyze and 
utilize tremendous amounts of vehicle-based information for operations 
such as engine and speed control, braking, and deployment of safety 
systems. For example, increasingly sophisticated air bag systems make 
``decisions'' based on vehicle speed, crash direction and severity, 
occupant size and position, and restraint use. However, not all 
vehicles capture and store this information. Further, not all of the 
data elements and formats for this information are standardized.
    Dr. Martinez argued that the increasing sophistication and 
decreasing costs of information technology has created the opportunity 
to now mandate the capture, storage, and retrieval of

[[Page 32935]]

onboard crash data. The petitioner stated that rulemaking should 
standardize the collection of existing information as a minimal data 
set in a standardized format for storage and retrieval. He stated that 
the NHTSA-sponsored Working Group on EDRs, the Institute of Electrical 
and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), and the Society of Automotive 
Engineers (SAE) have all begun work on minimum data sets for EDRs. The 
petitioner also called for requirements to ensure the crash 
survivability of the collected data.
    Dr. Martinez noted that the agency had previously denied similar 
petitions based the belief that the automotive industry was already 
voluntarily moving in the direction recommended by the petitioners and 
that some issues associated with this area are best addressed in a non-
regulatory context. The petitioner argued, however, that an agency 
rulemaking along the lines discussed above is necessary because overall 
the industry's response has been ``sluggish and disjointed.'' Dr. 
Martinez stated that much of the information is proprietary to each 
individual manufacturer and there is no standardization of the data 
elements or format of information. The petitioner also stated that 
while some manufacturers have provided EDRs in their vehicles, others 
have said they will only install EDRs if the government mandates the 
devices.
    The petitioner also argued that a NHTSA rulemaking would greatly 
accelerate the deployment of ACN. He noted that the FCC is currently 
implementing rules to require automatic location information for 
emergency calls made from wireless phones. According to Dr. Martinez, 
the nexus between vehicles and communications provides the basis for 
ACN. The petitioner stated that only a small amount of vehicle 
information, such as crash severity, restraint use, direction of force 
and location (if available) is of use to emergency providers. However, 
the advent of advanced ACN is dependent upon the standardized 
collection of crash information in the vehicle.
    Finally, the petitioner stated that he believes privacy issues can 
be overcome by ensuring that the vehicle owner is the one who owns the 
data collected by the EDR and can provide permission for its use and 
transmission. The petitioner stated that EDR data does not have 
personal identifier information and is only stored in the event of a 
crash. He also noted that current crash information in the form of 
police reports and insurance claims have much more personal identifying 
information than the information in EDRs.
    The petition from Dr. Martinez was submitted shortly after the 
NHTSA EDR Working Group had published its final report on the results 
of its deliberations. As discussed in more detail in the next section 
of this document, in October 2002, after the second working group had 
completed its work, we decided to request public comments on what 
future role the agency should take related to the continued development 
and installation of EDRs in motor vehicles. We decided to respond to 
Dr. Martinez's petition after considering those comments.

D. October 2002 Request for Comments

    On October 11, 2002, NHTSA published in the Federal Register (67 FR 
63493) (Docket No. NHTSA-02-13546), a request for comments concerning 
EDRs. The agency discussed its involvement with EDRs over the past few 
years, and explained that particularly since the two NHTSA-sponsored 
working groups had completed their work, it was requesting comments on 
what future role the agency should take related to the continued 
development and installation of EDRs in motor vehicles. The agency 
discussed a range of issues, including safety benefits, technical 
issues, privacy issues, and the role of the agency, and asked a number 
of questions.
    We received comments representing light and heavy vehicle 
manufacturers, equipment manufacturers, vehicle users, the medical 
community, advocacy organizations, safety research organizations, crash 
investigators, insurance companies, academia, and government agencies. 
We also received comments from a number of private individuals.
    A summary of the comments follows. To keep the summary short, we do 
not discuss all comments on particular topics, but instead discuss 
representative comments. In addition, since this NPRM concerns light 
vehicles and not heavy vehicles, the summary focuses primarily on 
comments relevant to EDRs in light vehicles.
1. Safety Benefits
    A wide variety of commenters expressed the belief that EDRs will 
improve vehicle safety by providing necessary and accurate data for 
crash analysis, information for potential injury prediction, and data 
for vehicle/roadway design improvement.
    NTSB stated that the issue of automatic recording devices for all 
modes of transportation has been on its ``Most Wanted'' list since 
1997. That organization noted that on-board recording devices have 
proven themselves to be extremely valuable in other modes of 
transportation, particularly aviation. NTSB stated that effective 
implementation of on-board recording in highway vehicles can have a 
similar, positive impact on highway safety.
    The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers (Alliance), which 
represents most large manufacturers of light vehicles, stated that its 
members recognize that EDRs have the potential to contribute to the 
quality of field performance data, roadway designs and emergency 
response systems. That organization also stated that it is possible 
that EDRs could improve existing safety databases both with respect to 
the accuracy of existing data elements and through the addition of new 
data elements that are not currently available.
    The Automotive Occupant Restraints Council, which represents 
manufacturers of safety belts and air bags, stated that it believes 
that the installation of EDRs and capture of data related to vehicle 
crashes has the potential to greatly improve highway safety by 
providing crash data that can be utilized in designing improved 
occupant restraint systems.
    The Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety stated that research 
literature and practical experience make it abundantly clear that data 
obtained from EDRs after crashes and near-crash events can be used to 
substantially improve traffic safety.
    The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) stated that EDRs 
have enormous potential to aid researchers in understanding the 
circumstances and precursors of crashes as well as in providing more 
reliable information on crash severities. That organization stated that 
a better understanding of these issues ultimately could lead to 
improved vehicle safety.
    The American Automobile Association (AAA) stated that in the effort 
to reduce the number and severity of crashes, not enough has been in 
the collection and analysis of scientific data to fully understand the 
dynamics and trends in crash causation. According to that association, 
data from EDRs provide an objective measurement of what actually 
occurred during those last seconds before a crash. AAA stated that 
obtaining information about the ``crash pulse'' should yield important 
benefits in vehicle design by identifying the types of changes that 
manufacturers could pursue to build more crash-friendly vehicles.
    A number of commenters from the medical community, including the 
National Association of EMS

[[Page 32936]]

Physicians, the American College of Emergency Physicians, the William 
Lehman Injury Research Center, and the University of Alabama Center for 
Injury Sciences, supported the emergency medical system (EMS) 
connection for improved medical treatment, including support for real 
time data transmission and easy download capability at a crash scene by 
EMS personnel.
    With regard to possible crash prevention aspects of EDRs, some 
commenters stated that they do not believe or know of any research 
supporting the premise that, by itself, a driver's knowledge of the 
presence of an EDR would have any appreciable direct effect on crash 
prevention. The Virginia Tech Transportation Institute stated that it 
had conducted two large instrumented truck-driving studies and based on 
the results their researchers believe that the commercial drivers would 
not change their driving behavior because of the existence of an on-
board EDR.
2. Technical Issues
    One technical issue addressed by commenters was the data elements 
that should be collected. Mitsubishi believes that the list should be 
narrow and focused on safety-related items only. Consumers Union and 
IIHS submitted lists of data elements. Some of the more common data 
elements discussed by those two include crash pulse information (such 
as x- and y-acceleration), safety belt usage, air bag deployment 
status, pre-crash data (such as brake application, engine rpm, throttle 
position, etc.), and the vehicle identification number. The American 
Trucking Association supported the 28 data elements listed by NHTSA-
sponsored truck and bus working group, but the Automotive Occupant 
Restraints Council doubts whether these data elements are technically 
and economically feasible. Public Citizen believes that NHTSA should 
determine a minimum set of data for light duty vehicles and another set 
for heavy trucks.
    Another technical issue addressed by a number of commenters was how 
much data should be recorded. Commenters generally agreed that EDRs 
should collect data for a very brief period of time. IIHS, Consumers 
Union, Veridian Engineering, and one individual indicated data 
collection periods up to 10 seconds for pre-crash and post-crash data 
and several tenths of a second for crash data. Bendix recommended 30 to 
60 seconds of pre- and post-crash data.
    On the issue of standardization of EDR data, many commenters stated 
that standardization is desired or helpful. The Truck Manufacturers 
Association believes that connectors, download protocols, and data 
output must be standardized. While Mitsubishi believes that 
standardization of EDR data is desirable, it is not sure about the 
safety benefits. The Virginia Tech Transportation Institute believes 
that the data elements of EDRs should be standardized to encourage the 
ease of use. Public Citizen believes that standardization is the 
primary determinant for the program's effectiveness and would enhance 
efforts to monitor emerging technologies. Both the SAE and IEEE 
commented that they are working on drafting standards for use with 
EDRs.
    Several commenters addressed survivability of EDRs and EDR data. 
Mitsubishi believes that the EDR survivability has already been 
demonstrated by the existing EDRs and vehicle manufacturers should be 
able to determine the EDR's survivability design conditions. Both 
Bendix and Automotive Occupant Restraints Council believe that EDRs 
should be installed in a secured location to survive almost all 
crashes. The Automotive Occupant Restraints Council also believes that 
a requirement for back-up power is essential, but commented that fire 
resistant design is not. New Jersey DOT believes that EDR designs 
should be able to function after a crash, tamper resistant, and 
waterproof. The Truck Manufacturers Association and Veridian believe 
that EDRs should be designed to withstand the ``standard automotive 
environment'' including crash and environmental effects and power 
failure. Veridian also believes that the EDR needs to be tamperproof. 
An individual said that EDRs should be mechanically tamperproof and 
should be designed to withstand the IIHS offset frontal crash tests.
3. Privacy Issues
    There were many comments related to NHTSA's questions regarding 
privacy. Mitsubishi believes that government should set regulations for 
EDR data usage to protect privacy. The Center for Injury Sciences, 
University of Alabama at Birmingham believes that privacy issues can be 
addressed by ensuring the vehicle owner also has ownership of the data 
and must consent to its use.
    Some commenters specifically commented that they believe that the 
owner of the vehicle owns the EDR data. Veridian Engineering stated 
that it obtains the owner's permission before collecting data for an 
investigation.
    Chalmers University of Technology (in Sweden) believes that safety 
improvement is more important than privacy concerns. It also argued 
that while EDRs can provide more complete and accurate information than 
thorough crash reconstruction aided by current simulation software and 
vehicle dynamics theory, it cannot provide new information that cannot 
already be estimated by such reconstruction. IIHS urged that NHTSA 
ensure that EDR data it obtains and makes available to researchers do 
not contain any personal information that would indicate the identities 
of the occupants involved. Public Citizen believes that the use of EDR 
data for statistical analysis does not involve privacy concerns, and 
that issues between safety and privacy can be addressed by partitioning 
technology (to separate any personally identifying data from other 
data) and other means best evaluated as part of the rulemaking process. 
The American Trucking Associations believe that certain EDR data 
elements should be accessible to rescue/medical personnel.
    Consumers Union presented several potential concerns it had 
regarding access to EDR data, including: Insurers requiring EDRs as a 
condition of coverage and the use of EDR data in crash-related 
litigation. It said that most consumers do not know about the existence 
of EDRs or how the data recorded by EDRs may be used in ways that 
directly affect them. That organization stated that consumers have 
``the right to know that EDRs are installed in the vehicles, that they 
are capable of collecting data recorded in a crash, and which parties 
may have access to this data.''
    Regarding encryption, Veridian Engineering supports encrypted EDR 
data and the need for security codes to gain access to the data. 
Consumers Union urged that NHTSA incorporate standards concerning 
encryption and data access into the agency EDR requirements.
    Mitsubishi and American Trucking Associations believe that the 
storage and collection of EDR data raises privacy issues, and that 
NHTSA should address the issue accordingly. They also said that NHTSA 
should work with other Federal agencies to develop the privacy 
protection status afforded other industries. New Jersey DOT believes 
that identification of specific vehicle crash location and time should 
be limited for emergency purposes to crash victims.
4. NHTSA's Role in the Future of Event Data Recorders
    There were many comments on this topic. The Alliance believes that 
NHTSA has an important role on how to incorporate EDR data into 
existing

[[Page 32937]]

databases. Mitsubishi believed that NHTSA should study the legal and 
privacy issues associated with the use of EDR technology.
    The Association of International Automobile Manufacturers (AIAM) 
stated that it would be premature for NHTSA to undertake regulation of 
EDRs at this time. That organization stated that rather than regulating 
this emerging application now, manufacturers should be permitted to 
develop systems on their own and work with voluntary standards 
organizations as a means of achieving consensus.
    The Center for Injury Sciences of the University of Alabama at 
Birmingham and Public Citizen commented that NHTSA should mandate the 
installation of EDRs with a minimum set of standardized data elements.
    The Truck Manufacturers Association and Veridian Engineering 
believe that NHTSA should perform research and encourage development of 
EDR standards. Along similar lines, the American Trucking Associations 
and Automotive Occupant Restraints Council believe that SAE and/or IEEE 
should issue common EDR standards and that NHTSA should remain 
technically engaged and act like a catalyst.
    IIHS believes that NHTSA should encourage manufacturers to develop 
and establish standard practices to download and interpret information 
from EDRs. They also believe that, in the short term, NHTSA should work 
with manufacturers to increase the availability of data that currently 
are recorded and include this information in NASS-CDS and FARS 
databases.
    New Jersey DOT believes that NHTSA should continue to meet its 
mandate for vehicle safety and leave the privacy issues to the public 
through its representatives in the legislative branch.
5. Other Comments
    One university submitted a survey of 437 mostly college-age people. 
Of those surveyed, 95 percent believe that EDRs have the potential to 
improve vehicle safety. Over 50 percent expected great safety 
improvement and 90 percent said EDRs have potential safety application 
to all classes of vehicles. About 60 percent of these students 
responded that they favored safety and privacy equally, but when asked 
to choose between safety and privacy, over 80 percent preferred safety. 
Regarding NHTSA's role, about 95 percent believed that NHTSA should 
continue participating in the development of EDRs.

E. Event Data Recorders and Implementation of Automatic Crash 
Notification Systems

    As noted above, ACN systems integrate on-board crash sensing and 
EDR technology with other electronic systems, such as global 
positioning systems and cellular telephones, to provide early 
notification of the occurrence, nature, and location of serious 
crashes. Early notification can save many lives. Each year, there are 
about 42,000 fatalities from motor vehicle traffic crashes in the 
United States. In these and other emergencies, more lives can be saved 
if emergency personnel can determine in advance the likely nature and 
severity of the injuries, take with them the right resources for 
treating those particular injuries, and more quickly locate and reach 
the scene of the crash.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Trauma System Agenda For The Future, Coordinated through the 
American Trauma Society Supported by the U.S. Department of 
Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 
October 2002. See http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/injury/ems/emstraumasystem03/.
    Enhanced communications among all members of the trauma care 
team during the pre-hospital phase will speed deployment of 
resources, produce more appropriate triaging, and result in better 
patient outcomes. Greater use of wireless technology should enable 
team members to speak to other hospitals and providers in the field 
and to give direction and assistance wherever the care is being 
provided. Discovery (Automatic Collision Notification-(ACN), Access 
(wireless), and Coordination (telemedicine) all will be enhanced 
through improved technology.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EDRs will help make this possible since they can provide the data 
necessary to determine crash severity, which can be used to predict 
injury severity. Software has been developed for evaluating crash data 
and predicting injury severity. Standardizing EDR data content and 
format would ensure that these predictions are based on the same 
foundation data across the entire spectrum of new makes and models of 
light vehicles.
    Implementation of ACN systems requires not only incorporating 
improved EDRs in vehicles, but also use of advanced information and 
communications technology. Implementation of wireless enhanced 911 
(E911) and ACN systems can result in:
     Faster incident detection and notification;
     Faster emergency response times; and
     Real-time wireless communications links among emergency 
response organizations.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Reducing Highway Deaths and Disabilities with Automatic 
Wireless Transmission of Serious Injury Probability Ratings from 
Crash Recorders to Emergency Medical Services Providers, Champion, 
Augenstein, Digges, Hunt, Larkin, Malliaris, Sacco, and Siegel. See 
http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/edr-site/uploads/Reducing_Hwy_Deaths_and_Disabilities_w-_Auto_Wireless_Trans-.pdf.
    Emergency medical care experience has shown that for many 
serious injuries, time is critical. As described by RD Stewart: 
Trauma is a time-dependent disease. ``The Golden Hour'' of trauma 
care is a concept that emphasizes this time dependency. That is in 
polytrauma (typically serious crash victims suffer multiple 
injuries) patients, the first hour of care is crucial, and the 
patient must come under restorative care during that first hour.* * 
* Pre-hospital immediate care seeks to apply supportive measures, 
and it must do so quickly, within what has been called the ``Golden 
Ten Minutes.''
    The goal in trauma care is to get seriously injured patients to 
a trauma center for diagnosis, critical care and surgical treatment 
within the ``Golden Hour''. To get the seriously injured patient 
into the operating room of a trauma center with an experienced team 
of appropriately specialized trauma surgeons within the ``Golden 
Hour'' requires a highly efficient and effective trauma care system. 
The time/life race of the ``Golden Hour'' to deliver patients to 
definitive care consists of the following elements:
    (1) Time between crash occurrence and EMS Notification,
    (2) Travel time to the crash scene by EMS,
    (3) On-scene EMS rescue time,
    (4) Transport time to a hospital or trauma center,
    (5) Emergency Department resuscitation time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The nation's existing 911 system is administered through thousands 
of Public Safety Answering Points (PSAPs). Prior to the advent of 
wireless telephones, the PSAPs were able to automatically locate nearly 
all 911 callers. Now, more than half of 911 calls in metropolitan areas 
cannot be located because they originate from mobile wireless 
telephones. Lack of location information is a particular problem with 
911 calls made from cell phones to report crashes, since the caller is 
often not able to determine and report precise location information.
    Under Federal Communication Commission rules adopted in 1996, 
wireless carriers must provide E911 service by 2005.\6\ This service 
will provide location information for all wireless 911 calls, provided 
that the local PSAP is equipped to receive and use the information. DOT 
has been

[[Page 32938]]

actively involved in providing stakeholder leadership, technical 
assistance, and technological innovation to accelerate full and 
effective implementation of E911.\7\ This includes not only regulating 
and coordinating the service provided by wireless carriers, but 
ensuring that local PSAPs are able to receive and effectively use the 
information.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See http://www.fcc.gov/911/enhanced/.
    The wireless E911 program is divided into two parts--Phase I and 
Phase II. Phase I requires carriers, upon appropriate request by a 
local Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP), to report the telephone 
number of a wireless 911 caller and the location of the antenna that 
received the call. Phase II requires wireless carriers to provide 
far more precise location information, within 50 to 100 meters in 
most cases.
    The deployment of E911 requires the development of new 
technologies and upgrades to local 911 PSAPs, as well as 
coordination among public safety agencies, wireless carriers, 
technology vendors, equipment manufacturers, and local wireline 
carriers. The FCC established a four-year rollout schedule for Phase 
II, beginning October 1, 2001 and to be completed by December 31, 
2005.
    \7\ See http://www.itspublicsafety.net/wireless.htm.
    \8\ In August 2002, the ITS Public Safety Advisory Group Medical 
Subcommittee issued a document titled ``Recommendations for ITS 
Technology in Emergency Medical Services.'' It may be viewed at 
http://www.itspublicsafety.net/docs/recommendations_itsems.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the meantime, efforts to provide ACN services have already 
begun. Current ACN systems, such as GM's OnStar system, provide 
automatic notification that a motor vehicle has been involved in a 
crash, information about the nature of the crash, and the location of 
the crash.\9\ While current ACN systems provide the information to a 
private call center, which then relays this information to 911 
dispatchers, future systems may be integrated with the 911 system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ For additional information about ACN systems, see 
``Enhancing Post-Crash Vehicle Safety Through an Automatic Collision 
Notification System,'' Joseph Kanianthra, Arthur Carter and Gerard 
Preziotti, paper presented at the 17th International Technical 
Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles, 2001, http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-01/esv/esv17/proceed/00085.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We note that in August 2003, General Motors (GM) announced the 
introduction of an advanced system on the new Chevrolet Malibu and 
Malibu Maxx. This system is part of the OnStar package. While that 
company's earlier ACN system provided automatic notification to the 
OnStar call center in the event of air bag deployment, its advanced ACN 
system provides automatic notification if the vehicle is involved in a 
moderate to severe frontal, rear or side-impact crash, regardless of 
air bag deployment. Also, the new system provides crash severity 
information.
    For these reasons, we believe that ACN systems offer great 
potential for reducing deaths and injuries from motor vehicle crashes, 
and that improving EDRs would make a contribution toward the continued 
development and implementation of these systems.

II. Proposal and Response to Petition

    As discussed earlier, in the late-1990s, NHTSA denied two petitions 
for rulemaking requesting the agency to require the installation of 
EDRs in new motor vehicles, because the motor vehicle industry was 
already voluntarily moving in the direction recommended by the 
petitioners, and because the agency believed ``this area presents some 
issues that are, at least for the present time, best addressed in a 
non-regulatory context.''
    Today, after the completion of the NHTSA-sponsored EDR Working 
Group's tasks and after considering the public comments and the 
petition from Dr. Martinez, we have tentatively concluded that motor 
vehicle safety can be advanced by a limited regulatory approach. In 
order to promote safety, we are particularly interested in ensuring 
that when an EDR is provided in a vehicle, the EDR will record the data 
necessary for effective crash investigations, analysis of the 
performance of advanced restraint systems, and ACN systems, and that 
these data can be easily accessed and used by crash investigators and 
researchers.
    Given what the motor vehicle industry is already doing voluntarily 
in this area, we are not at this time proposing to require the 
installation of EDRs in all motor vehicles. As indicated earlier, we 
estimate that 65 to 90 percent of model year 2004 passenger cars and 
other light vehicles have some recording capability, and that more than 
half record such things as crash pulse data.
    We are proposing a regulation that would specify requirements for 
light vehicles that are equipped with EDRs, i.e., vehicles that record 
information about crashes. The proposed regulation would (1) require 
the EDRs in these vehicles to record a minimum set of specified data 
elements; (2) specify requirements for data format; (3) require that 
the EDRs function during and after the front, side and rear vehicle 
crash tests specified in several Federal motor vehicle safety 
standards; (4) require vehicle manufacturers to make publicly available 
information that would enable crash investigators to retrieve data from 
the EDR; and (5) require vehicle manufacturers to include a brief 
standardized statement in the owner's manual indicating that the 
vehicle is equipped with an EDR and discussing the purposes of EDRs. A 
discussion of each of these items is provided in the sections that 
follow.
    The proposed regulation would apply to the same vehicles that are 
required by statute and by Standard No. 208 to be equipped with frontal 
air bags, i.e., passenger cars and trucks, buses and multipurpose 
passenger vehicles with a GVWR of 3,855 kg (8500 pounds) or less and an 
unloaded vehicle weight of 2,495 kg (5500 pounds) or less, except for 
walk-in van-type trucks or vehicles designed to be used exclusively by 
the U.S. Postal Service. This covers the vast majority of light 
vehicles. Moreover, these are the vehicles that will generally have 
advanced restraint systems, since they are the ones subject to the 
advanced air bag requirements now being phased in under Standard No. 
208.
    We are not addressing in this document what future role the agency 
may take related to the continued development and installation of EDRs 
in heavy vehicles. We will consider that topic separately. Any action 
we might take in that area would be done in consultation with the 
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration.
    Similar to our approach in the area of vehicle identification 
numbers, we are proposing a general regulation rather than a Federal 
motor vehicle safety standard. Thus, while a failure to meet EDR 
requirements would be subject to an enforcement action, it would not 
trigger the recall and remedy provisions of the National Traffic and 
Motor Vehicle Safety Act, currently codified at 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301.

A. Data Elements To Be Recorded

    As indicated above, we are proposing to require light vehicles that 
are equipped with EDRs to meet a number of requirements, including one 
for recording specified data elements.
    Before discussing the proposed set of specified data elements, we 
will briefly address the issue of the crash recording capability that 
would trigger application of the regulation's requirements. We are 
proposing to apply the regulation to vehicles that record any one or 
more of the following elements just prior to or during a crash, such 
that the information can be retrieved after the crash: The vehicle's 
longitudinal acceleration, the vehicle's change in velocity (delta-V), 
the vehicle's indicated travel speed, the vehicle's engine RPM, the 
vehicle's engine throttle position, service brake status, ignition 
cycle, safety belt status, status of the vehicle's frontal air bag 
warning lamp, the driver's frontal air bag deployment level, the right 
front passenger's frontal air bag deployment level, the elapsed time to 
deployment of the first stage of the driver's frontal air bag, and the 
elapsed time to deployment of the first stage of the right front 
passenger's frontal air bag. Thus, if a vehicle has a device that 
records any of the basic items of information typically recorded by 
EDRs, the proposed regulation would apply to that vehicle.
    In analyzing what minimum set of specified data elements to 
propose, we focused on the elements that would be most useful for 
effective crash investigations, analysis of the

[[Page 32939]]

performance of safety equipment, e.g., advanced restraint systems, and 
ACN systems. We believe these are the areas where information provided 
by EDRs can lead to the greatest safety benefits.
    EDRs can improve crash investigations by measuring and recording 
actual crash parameters. They can also measure and record the operation 
of vehicle devices whose operation cannot readily be determined using 
traditional post-crash investigative procedures. For example, EDRs 
could determine whether the ABS system functioned during the crash.
    EDRs can also directly measure crash severity. Currently, NHTSA 
estimates crash severity using crash reconstruction tools. One product 
of these tools is an estimate of the vehicle's delta-V. With an EDR, 
delta-V could be directly measured. Another assessment made by the 
crash investigators is the principal direction of force (PDOF). This is 
currently estimated based on physical damage. With x-axis and y-axis 
accelerometers, this could be measured or post-processed for planar 
(non-rollover) crashes, providing PDOF as a function of time.
    EDRs can be particularly helpful in analyzing the performance of 
advanced restraint systems. They can record important information that 
is not measurable by post-crash investigations such as time of 
deployment of pre-tensioners and the various stages of multi-level air 
bags, the position of a seat during the crash (a seat is often moved by 
EMS personnel during their extrication efforts), and whether seat belts 
were latched.
    Improved data from crash investigations will enable the agency and 
others to better understand the causes of crashes and injury 
mechanisms, and make it possible to better define and address safety 
problems. This information can be used to develop improved safety 
countermeasures and test procedures, and enhance motor vehicle safety.
    EDRs can also make ACN systems more effective. An important 
challenge of EMS is to find, treat, and transport to hospitals 
occupants seriously injured in motor vehicle crashes in time to save 
lives and prevent disabilities. ACN systems, such as the GM On-Star 
system, can automatically and almost instantly provide information 
about serious crashes and their location to EMS personnel, based on air 
bag deployment or other factors. GM has announced that it will begin 
equipping vehicles with advanced ACN systems that provide measurements 
of crash forces for improved EMS decision-making. Data from EDRs can be 
used as inputs for advanced ACN systems.
    As discussed earlier, vehicle manufacturers have made EDR 
capability an additional function of vehicles' air bag control systems. 
The air bag control systems necessarily process a great deal of vehicle 
information. EDR capability can be added to a vehicle by designing the 
air bag control system to capture, in the event of a crash, the 
relevant data in memory. The costs of EDR capability have thus been 
minimized, because it involves the capture into memory of data that is 
already being processed by the vehicle, and not the much higher costs 
of sensing much of that data in the first place.
    In developing our proposed regulation for EDRs, we have followed a 
similar approach. That is, we have focused on the recording of the most 
important crash-related data that care already being processed by 
vehicles, and not using this rulemaking to require such things as 
additional accelerometers. (The addition of an accelerometer to a 
vehicle could add costs on the order of $20 per vehicle.)
    For a variety of reasons, including the fact that the light 
vehicles covered by this proposal are subject to Standard No. 208's 
requirements for air bags, some of the most important crash-related 
data we have identified are already being processed (or will soon be 
processed) by all of these vehicles. Under our proposal, these data 
elements would be required to be recorded for all vehicles subject to 
the regulation.
    Other important crash-related data are currently processed by some, 
but not all vehicles. This reflects the fact that some advanced safety 
systems are provided on some but not all vehicles. Under our proposal, 
these data elements would be required to be recorded only if the 
vehicle is equipped with the relevant advanced safety system or sensing 
capability.
    The following table identifies the data elements that would be 
required to be recorded under our proposal. We note that the vast 
majority of the elements in the table are being considered by SAE and/
or IEEE in their ongoing efforts to develop standards for EDRs.

                                  Table I.--Data Elements That Must Be Recorded
                                          [R=Required; IE=If Equipped]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                               Condition for
            Data element                   R/IE            Recording interval / time         requirement (IE)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Longitudinal acceleration...........  R               -0.1 to 0.5 sec...................  N.A.
Maximum delta-V.....................  R               Computed after event..............  N.A.
Speed, vehicle indicated............  R               8.0 to 0 sec......................  N.A.
Engine RPM..........................  R               -8.0 to 0 sec.....................  N.A.
Engine throttle, % full.............  R               -8.0 to 0 sec.....................  N.A.
Service brake, on/off...............  R               -8.0 to 0 sec.....................  N.A.
Ignition cycle, crash...............  R               -1.0 sec..........................  N.A.
Ignition cycle, download............  R               At time of download...............  N.A.
Safety belt status, driver..........  R               -1.0 sec..........................  N.A.
Frontal air bag warning lamp, on/off  R               -1.0 sec..........................  N.A.
Frontal air bag deployment level,     R               Event.............................  N.A.
 driver.
Frontal air bag deployment level,     R               Event.............................  N.A.
 right front passenger.
Frontal air bag deployment, time to   R               Event.............................  N.A.
 deploy, in the case of a single
 stage air bag, or time to first
 stage deployment, in the case of a
 multi-stage air bag, driver.
Frontal air bag deployment, time to   R               Event.............................  N.A.
 deploy, in the case of a single
 stage air bag, or time to first
 stage deployment, in the case of a
 multi-stage air bag, right front
 passenger.
Multi-event, number of events         R               Event.............................  N.A.
 (1,2,3).
Time from event 1 to 2..............  R               As needed.........................  N.A.
Time from event 1 to 3..............  R               As needed.........................  N.A.

[[Page 32940]]

 
Complete file recorded (yes, no)....  R               Following other data..............  N.A.
Lateral acceleration................  IE              -0.1 to 0.5 sec...................  If vehicle is equipped
                                                                                           to measure
                                                                                           acceleration in the
                                                                                           vehicle's lateral (y)
                                                                                           direction.
Normal acceleration.................  IE              -0.1 to 0.5 sec...................  If vehicle is equipped
                                                                                           to measure
                                                                                           acceleration in the
                                                                                           vehicle's normal (z)
                                                                                           direction.
Vehicle roll angle..................  IE              -1.0 to 6.0 sec...................  If vehicle is equipped
                                                                                           to measure or compute
                                                                                           vehicle roll angle.
ABS activity (engaged, non-engaged).  IE              -8.0 to 0 sec.....................  If vehicle is equipped
                                                                                           with ABS.
Stability control status, on, off,    IE              -8.0 to 0 sec.....................  If vehicle is equipped
 engaged.                                                                                  with stability
                                                                                           control, ESP, or
                                                                                           other yaw control
                                                                                           system.
Steering input (steering wheel        IE              -8.0 to 0 sec.....................  If vehicle equipped to
 angle).                                                                                   measure steering
                                                                                           wheel steer angle.
Safety belt status, right front       IE              -1.0 sec..........................  If vehicle equipped to
 passenger (buckled, not buckled).                                                         measure safety belt
                                                                                           buckle latch status
                                                                                           for the right front
                                                                                           passenger.
Frontal air bag suppression switch    IE              -1.0 sec..........................  If vehicle equipped
 status, right front passenger (on,                                                        with a manual switch
 off, or auto).                                                                            to suppress the
                                                                                           frontal air bag for
                                                                                           the right front
                                                                                           passenger.
Frontal air bag deployment, time to   IE              Event.............................  If vehicle equipped
 Nth stage, driver *.                                                                      with a driver's
                                                                                           frontal air bag with
                                                                                           a second stage
                                                                                           inflator.
Frontal air bag deployment, time to   IE              Event.............................  If vehicle equipped
 Nth stage, right front passenger*.                                                        with a right front
                                                                                           passenger's frontal
                                                                                           air bag with a second
                                                                                           stage inflator.
Frontal air bag deployment, Nth       IE              Event.............................  If vehicle equipped
 stage disposal, Driver, Y/N                                                               with a driver's
 (whether the Nth stage deployment                                                         frontal air bag with
 was for occupant restraint or                                                             a second stage that
 propellant disposal purposes)*.                                                           can be ignited for
                                                                                           the sole purpose of
                                                                                           disposing of the
                                                                                           propellant.
Frontal air bag deployment, Nth       ..............  Event.............................  If vehicle equipped
 stage disposal, right front                                                               with a right front
 passenger, Y/N (whether the Nth                                                           passenger's frontal
 stage deployment was for occupant                                                         air bag with a second
 restraint or propellant disposal                                                          stage that can be
 purposes)*.                                                                               ignited for the sole
                                                                                           purpose of disposing
                                                                                           of the propellant.
Side air bag deployment, time to      ..............  Event.............................  If the vehicle is
 deploy, driver.                                                                           equipped with a side
                                                                                           air bag for the
                                                                                           driver.
Side air bag deployment, time to      ..............  Event.............................  If the vehicle is
 deploy, right front passenger.                                                            equipped with a side
                                                                                           air bag for the right
                                                                                           front passenger.
Side curtain/tube air bag             ..............  Event.............................  If the vehicle is
 deployment, time to deploy, driver                                                        equipped with a side
 side.                                                                                     curtain or tube air
                                                                                           bag for the driver.
Side curtain/tube air bag             ..............  Event.............................  If the vehicle is
 deployment, time to deploy, right                                                         equipped with a side
 side.                                                                                     curtain or tube air
                                                                                           bag for the right
                                                                                           front passenger.
Pretensioner deployment, time to      ..............  Event.............................  If the vehicle is
 fire, driver.                                                                             equipped with a
                                                                                           pretensioner for the
                                                                                           driver safety belt
                                                                                           system.
Pretensioner deployment, time to      ..............  Event.............................  If the vehicle is
 fire, right front passenger.                                                              equipped with a
                                                                                           pretensioner for the
                                                                                           right front passenger
                                                                                           safety belt system.
Seat position, driver (whether or     ..............  -1.0..............................  If the vehicle is
 not the seat is forward of a                                                              equipped to measure
 certain position along the seat                                                           the position of the
 track).                                                                                   driver's seat.
Seat position, passenger (whether or  ..............  -1.0..............................  If the vehicle is
 not the right front passenger seat                                                        equipped to measure
 is forward of a certain position                                                          the position of the
 along the seat track).                                                                    right front
                                                                                           passenger's seat.
Occupant size classification, driver  ..............  -1.0..............................  If the vehicle is
                                                                                           equipped to determine
                                                                                           the size
                                                                                           classification of the
                                                                                           driver.
Occupant size classification, right   ..............  -1.0..............................  If the vehicle is
 front passenger.                                                                          equipped to determine
                                                                                           the size
                                                                                           classification of the
                                                                                           right front
                                                                                           passenger.
Occupant position classification,     ..............  -1.0..............................  If the vehicle is
 driver.                                                                                   equipped to
                                                                                           dynamically determine
                                                                                           position of the
                                                                                           driver.
Occupant position classification,     ..............  -1.0..............................  If the vehicle is
 right front passenger.                                                                    equipped to
                                                                                           dynamically determine
                                                                                           position of the right
                                                                                           front occupant.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* List this element n-1 times, once for each stage of a multi-stage air bag system.

    As indicated above, in developing this list, we focused on the 
elements that would be most useful for effective crash investigations, 
analysis of the performance of safety equipment, e.g., advanced 
restraint systems, and ACN systems. Some of the data elements will be 
useful for all three of these purposes; others, for only one or two. 
The following table shows NHTSA's assessment of the application for 
each element.

                                    Table II.--Data Elements and Application
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                 Advanced
                   Data element name                           Crash            restraints            ACN
                                                           investigation        operation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Longitudinal acceleration..............................                 X                  X                  X
Maximum delta-V........................................                 X                  X                  X
Speed, vehicle indicated...............................                 X   .................  .................

[[Page 32941]]

 
Engine RPM.............................................                 X   .................  .................
Engine throttle, % full................................                 X   .................  .................
Service brake, on/off..................................                 X   .................  .................
Ignition cycle, crash..................................                 X   .................  .................
Ignition cycle, download...............................                 X   .................  .................
Safety belt status, driver.............................                 X                  X                  X
Frontal air bag warning lamp, on/off...................                 X                  X   .................
Frontal air bag deployment level, driver...............                 X                  X   .................
Frontal air bag deployment level, right front passenger                 X                  X   .................
Frontal air bag deployment, time to first stage, driver                 X                  X   .................
Frontal air bag deployment, time to first stage, right                  X                  X   .................
 front passenger.......................................
Frontal air bag deployment, time to second stage,                       X                  X   .................
 driver................................................
Frontal air bag deployment, time to second stage, right                 X                  X   .................
 front passenger.......................................
Frontal air bag deployment, second stage disposal,                      X                  X   .................
 driver, Y/N...........................................
Frontal air bag deployment, second stage disposal,                      X                  X   .................
 right front passenger, Y/N............................
Multi-event, number of events..........................                 X                  X   .................
Time from event 1 to 2.................................                 X   .................
Time from event 1 to 3.................................                 X   .................  .................
Complete file recorded.................................                 X                  X                  X
Lateral acceleration...................................                 X                  X                  X
Normal acceleration....................................                 X   .................  .................
Vehicle roll angle.....................................                 X   .................                 X
ABS activity...........................................                 X   .................  .................
Stability control, on, off, engaged....................                 X   .................  .................
Steering input.........................................                 X   .................  .................
Safety belt status, right front passenger..............                 X                  X                  X
Frontal air bag suppression switch status, right front                  X                  X   .................
 passenger.............................................
Side air bag deployment, time to deploy, driver........                 X                  X   .................
Side air bag deployment, time to deploy, right front                    X                  X   .................
 passenger.............................................
Side curtain/tube air bag deployment, time to deploy,                   X                  X   .................
 driver side...........................................
Side curtain/tube air bag deployment, time to deploy,                   X                  X   .................
 right side............................................
Pretensioner deployment, time to fire, driver..........                 X                  X   .................
Pretensioner deployment, time to fire, right front                      X                  X   .................
 passenger.............................................
Seat position, driver..................................                 X                  X   .................
Seat position, right front passenger...................                 X                  X   .................
Occupant size classification, driver...................                 X                  X   .................
Occupant size classification, right front passenger....                 X                  X   .................
Occupant position classification, driver...............                 X                  X   .................
Occupant position classification, right front passenger                 X                  X   .................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Several of the elements are associated with crash severity. These 
include longitudinal acceleration, lateral acceleration, normal 
acceleration, delta-V, and vehicle roll angle. The longitudinal, 
lateral, and normal accelerations are vehicle crash signatures in the 
x, y, and z directions. Delta-V represents the overall crash severity. 
These are important elements used in determining vehicle crash 
severity. Vehicle roll angle is important to determining crash severity 
in non-planar (rollover) crashes and useful for advanced ACN systems.
    The service brake on/off and steering input elements are important 
to understanding the human response to avoiding a pending crash. 
Several elements cover pre-crash vehicle dynamics and system status: 
Vehicle speed, engine RPM, engine throttle (% full), ABS activity, and 
stability control (on, off, or engaged). These elements are helpful in 
determining crash causation.
    The elements concerning ignition cycle provide data on how many 
times the ignition has been switched on since its first use. The 
difference in the two measurements provides the number cycles between 
the time when the data were captured and when they were downloaded. GM, 
in its EDRs, currently records these data. They aid investigators in 
determining the interval between the recorded event and the time when 
it occurred. Small differences between these data indicate that the 
event in the EDR was generated recently, while large differences 
indicate that they are from an earlier event that may not be associated 
with a current crash.
    Many of the data elements relate to the usage and operation of 
restraint systems. These elements are important in analyzing advanced 
restraint operations. For example, without an EDR, it may not be 
possible after a crash to determine whether a multi-stage air bag 
deployed at a low or high level.
    As discussed above, we are proposing to require some of the data 
elements to be recorded only if the vehicle is equipped with the 
relevant safety system or sensing capability. We note that as 
manufacturers equip greater numbers of their vehicles with advanced 
safety systems, a number of these data elements would be required to be 
recorded on an increasing number of vehicles, or even all vehicles. Of 
particular note, as manufacturers upgrade the side impact performance 
of their vehicles it is expected that all light vehicles will measure 
lateral acceleration.
    We request comments on the data elements listed in Table I, 
including whether the list sufficiently covers technology that is 
likely to be on vehicles in the next five to 10 years. NHTSA encourages 
manufacturers to develop, to the extent possible, additional data 
elements for inclusion in the EDR as these new technologies emerge.

[[Page 32942]]

B. Data Standardization

    As discussed earlier, one of our goals in this rulemaking is to 
ensure that data are recorded and can be accessed in a manner that 
enables crash investigators and researchers to use them easily. One 
aspect of this is the format of the recorded data. To increase the 
value of these data in assessing motor vehicle safety, the proposed 
regulation would require that the data be recorded in a standardized 
format.
    We believe that data standardization would enable crash 
investigators and researchers to more easily identify, interpret, and 
compare data retrieved from vehicles involved in a crash. Currently, 
the data format of an EDR is established by individual manufacturers 
and is based on that manufacturer's specific technical specifications. 
In the absence of any standardization, there is presently a wide 
variation among vehicle manufacturers as to the format of data recorded 
by an EDR. Comparisons between data recorded by different manufacturers 
are less precise when differences exist between the parameters recorded 
and the precision and accuracy specified. Such comparisons become even 
less useful if manufacturers do not rely on a common definition of a 
given data element.
    To address this issue, the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) 
established a committee to establish a common format for the display 
and presentation of the data recorded by an EDR. The SAE Vehicle Event 
Data Interface Committee (J1698-1), which held its first meeting in 
late February 2003, has been considering common data definitions for 
specific data elements, as well as other aspects of EDR 
standardization.
    The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) is 
also addressing the standardization of EDR data formats. The IEEE Motor 
Vehicle Event Data Recorder (MVEDR) working group (P1616) is drafting a 
data dictionary and standards document for EDRs. P1616 is considering 
specifying the data format with a set of attributes for each defined 
data element. IEEE stated that it expected to complete a standard to 
standardize data output and retrieval protocols by March 2004.
    In light of the current lack of adopted industry standards, we are 
proposing a standardized format that would ensure the usability of EDR 
data, while still providing manufacturers flexibility in design. The 
proposed regulation would define each data element and specify the 
corresponding recording interval/time, unit of measurement, sample 
rate, data range, data accuracy, data precision, and where appropriate, 
filter class.
    The proposed data format would require EDRs to capture crash data 
of sufficient detail and time duration to ensure the usefulness of the 
data in crash reconstruction without threatening its integrity. NHTSA 
crash testing has shown that the typical offset frontal crash may last 
as long as 250 milliseconds. We are also aware that underride and 
override crashes may last even longer. Furthermore, rollover crashes 
can last several seconds, depending on the number of rolls.
    The proposed time periods (set forth in Table I above) would 
establish a recording duration of 8 seconds prior to beginning of the 
event to capture relevant pre-crash and event data. Acceleration data 
would be required to be captured during the event. Finally, only 
rollover data would be required to be recorded for several seconds 
after the event. To the extent possible, the specified recording 
duration is limited to reduce the likelihood of data being corrupted by 
failure in the vehicle's electric system resulting from the crash
    The proposed format would not mandate storage or output parameters.

C. Data Retrieval

    A second aspect of accessibility is the necessity for crash 
investigators and researchers to have the capability of downloading 
crash data from the EDR. To ensure the availability of these data, we 
are proposing to require vehicle manufacturers to submit to the NHTSA 
docket specifications for accessing and retrieving the recorded EDR 
data that would be required by this regulation. We are also seeking 
comment on alternative approaches.
    At the present time, investigators and researchers can access crash 
data stored by EDRs for only a limited number of vehicles. Prior to 
2000, only vehicle manufacturers could access the EDR data for their 
vehicles. In 2000, Vetronix released its Crash Data Retrieval (CDR) 
tool for sale to the public. The CDR tool is a software and hardware 
device that allows someone with a computer to communicate directly with 
certain EDRs and download the stored data. It is estimated that about 
40 million vehicles on the road have EDRs that can be read using the 
CDR tool, including many late model GM vehicles and some new Ford 
vehicles.
    However, Vetronix is licensed by only a limited number of vehicle 
manufacturers to build these devices. Vetronix must presently use 
proprietary vehicle manufacturer information to develop and configure 
the hardware and software needed to allow the CDR tool to retrieve data 
from a vehicle's EDR. If a vehicle manufacturer declines to license or 
otherwise provide any proprietary information needed to build a device, 
tool companies will not be able to produce them.
    Both the SAE Vehicle Event Data Interface Committee (J1698-1) and 
the IEEE Motor Vehicle Event Data Recorder working group (P1616) 
discussed above have considered the downloading of EDR data by means of 
the On Board Diagnostic (OBD) connector developed in conjunction with 
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). EPA has established 
requirements for onboard diagnostic technologies, which manage and 
monitor a vehicle's engine, transmission, and emissions. The EPA 
regulations include a new standardized communications protocol for the 
next generation of onboard diagnostic technology that allows a single 
common interface between the OBD connector and diagnostic tools used to 
read and interpret vehicle data and convert them into engineering 
units.
    The EPA communications protocol utilizes a Controller Area Network 
(CAN) to provide a standardized interface between the OBD connector and 
the tools used by service technicians and vehicle emission inspections 
stations. CAN employs a serial bus for networking computer modules as 
well as sensors. The standardized interface allows technicians to use a 
single communications protocol to download data to pinpoint problems 
and potential problems related to a vehicle's emissions.
    Full implementation of the CAN protocol is required by 2008. 
Because it is a universal system, the use of the OBD connector and the 
CAN serial bus could assure uniform access to EDR data and alleviate 
concerns that the data would only be accessible through the use of 
multiple interfaces and different kinds of software, if at all.
    While standardizing the means of downloading EDR data, possibly 
using the OBD connector, offers potential benefits, we are at this time 
proposing only to require vehicle manufacturers to submit to the agency 
docket specifications necessary for building a device for accessing and 
retrieving recorded EDR data. This approach will help ensure that EDR 
data can be accessed in a manner readily usable by crash investigators 
and researchers. It will also allow motor vehicle manufacturers the 
flexibility to standardize protocols for data extraction.
    We note that the context of NHTSA's proposal is quite different 
from the

[[Page 32943]]

context of EPA's requirements for collecting, storing, and downloading 
emissions-related data. The EPA approach is very structured. It needed 
to be appropriate for facilitating the routine monitoring and servicing 
of mandated emission control systems on motor vehicles, thus helping to 
ensure that those systems perform properly over the useful life of 
those vehicles. Establishing that approach has required many years of 
effort and the development of numerous industry standards.
    On the other hand, we are proposing a standard for voluntarily 
installed EDRs, and need to ensure that it is appropriate for the much 
more limited purpose of crash investigations. We are interested in a 
simple, flexible approach, while maintaining the ability to extract 
data efficiently from a motor vehicle's voluntarily installed EDR. To 
obtain the desired outcome, NHTSA believes that it need not and should 
not become involved in managing the interface between the auto industry 
and the companies that may manufacture EDR download tools. But it is 
evident that some interface is needed, and to that extent we are 
proposing that certain information be provided.
    We are proposing to require that each manufacturer of vehicles 
equipped with EDRs provide information of sufficient detail to permit 
companies that manufacture diagnostic tools to develop and build 
devices for accessing and retrieving the data stored in the EDRs. The 
vehicle manufacturer would be required to specify which makes and 
models (by model year) of its vehicles utilize the corresponding EDR 
system and to specify the interface locations. The leadtime we are 
providing for implementing this proposed regulation (discussed below) 
would enable vehicle manufacturers to design their EDRs so that the 
data may be accessed by use of a standardized interface and 
communications protocol. In the event that SAE, IEEE, or other 
voluntary standard organization establishes a standard for a protocol 
to be used in downloading EDR data, manufacturers would be able to 
reference the industry protocol in their submissions.
    Manufacturers would be required to submit this information in a 
timely manner to ensure that the specifications were received by 
NHTSA's docket not less than 90 days before the start of production of 
makes and models utilizing EDR systems. This would give tool companies 
time to develop a tool before an EDR-equipped vehicle is used on public 
roads.
    We are also seeking comment on alternative approaches to providing 
access to EDR crash data, such as permitting the vehicle manufacturer 
to demonstrate that a reasonably priced tool is publicly available for 
a particular make/model or to offer to licence at a reasonable price 
any proprietary information needed to build such tools. We note that 
EPA permits manufacturers to request a reasonable price for provided 
OBD-related information. See EPA final rule at 68 FR 38427, June 27, 
2003. Comments are requested on the similarities and differences 
between OBD and EDR related information, the uses of that information, 
and relevant statutory authorities, and on whether this type of 
approach would be appropriate for EDR information. We note that one 
difference is that OBD tools are used as part of commercial activity, 
i.e., routine servicing and repair of motor vehicles, while EDR tools 
as used in crash investigations. The market for EDR tools would likely 
be much smaller. If we were to adopt an approach along these lines, 
what factors should be used for determining a ``reasonable price?''
    Commenters supporting any of these or other alternative approaches 
are encouraged to suggest specific regulatory text and to explain how 
the recommended approach would ensure that crash investigators and 
researchers have the capability of downloading data from EDRs. 
Depending on the comments, we may adopt an alternative approach in the 
final rule.

D. Functioning of Event Data Recorders and Crash Survivability

    If an EDR is to provide useful information, it must function 
properly during a crash, and the data must survive the crash. We are 
proposing several requirements related to the functioning of the EDR 
and survivability.
    Performance of EDRs in crash tests. First, we are proposing to 
require EDRs to meet the requirements for applicable data elements and 
format in the crash tests specified in Standards No. 208, 214, and 301. 
These tests are (some have been issued as final rules, but not yet 
taken effect) a frontal barrier crash test conducted at speeds up to 35 
mph, a frontal offset test conducted at 25 mph, a rear-impact crash 
test conducted at 50 mph, and a side impact test conducted at 33.5 mph. 
Data would be required to be retrievable by the method specified by the 
vehicle manufacturer (discussed above) after the crash test.
    This requirement would provide both a check on EDR performance and 
also ensure a basic level of survivability. Manufacturers are familiar 
with these crash tests since they are specified in the Federal motor 
vehicle safety standards.
    As to the issue of survivability, the EDRs of light vehicles are 
currently part of the air bag module. These modules are located in the 
occupant compartment of vehicles, providing protection against crush in 
all but the most severe crashes. Moreover, because EDRs are part of the 
air bag module, their electronics are designed to operate in a shock 
environment. However, current EDRs lack protection from fire and 
immersion in water and motor vehicle fluids.
    While requiring EDRs to function properly during and after the 
crash tests specified in Standards No. 208, 214, and 301 would ensure a 
basic level of survivability, it would not ensure that EDR data survive 
extremely severe crashes or ones involving fire or fluid immersion. 
While EDR data would be useful to crash investigators and researchers 
analyzing such crashes, we do not have sufficient information to 
propose survivability requirements that would address such crashes. 
Research is needed to develop such requirements, and information on the 
costs of countermeasures to meet these additional requirements would 
need to be developed. Countermeasures that would ensure the 
survivability of EDR data in fires may be costly. For all of these 
reasons, we are not including such requirements in this proposal.
    Trigger threshold. We are also proposing requirements concerning 
the level of crashes for which EDRs must capture \10\ data. These 
requirements would ensure that EDRs capture information about crashes 
of interest to crash investigators and researchers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Capturing is the process of saving recorded data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EDR operates in two modes. One is the steady state monitoring 
of pre-crash data. EDRs operate continuously in this mode whenever the 
vehicle is operating. This process allows momentary recording \11\ of 
the pre-crash data. EDRs operate in the second mode when the vehicle is 
involved in a crash. In this mode, two decisions are made. The first is 
the determination of the occurrence of a crash and is accomplished by 
use of a trigger threshold. The second is the decision to capture the 
recorded data and accomplished using a comparative process. Based on 
the outcome of this process, the recorded data associated with a crash 
are captured or deleted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Recording is the process of storing data into volatile 
memory for later use.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In current light-duty vehicle applications, the trigger threshold 
is

[[Page 32944]]

associated with the air bag crash severity analyzer. The circumstances 
that cause the threshold to be met are called an ``event.'' The 
beginning of the event that causes current EDRs to start capturing data 
in its permanent memory is sometimes defined as the vehicle's exceeding 
a specified deceleration threshold, typically around 2 g's. After the 
event is over, and the air bags are deployed, the data are stored in 
the EDR, if appropriate.
    For determination of the beginning of an event, we are proposing to 
require the EDR to start recording data when the vehicle's change in 
velocity during any 20 millisecond (ms) time interval equals or exceeds 
0.8 km/h. That is equivalent to slightly more than 1 g of steady-state 
deceleration.
    The vehicle's change in velocity is determined in one of two ways, 
depending on the data collected by the EDR. In the case of a vehicle 
that does not record and capture lateral acceleration, the delta-V is 
based on the longitudinal acceleration only. In the more complex case 
of a vehicle whose EDR records and captures both longitudinal and 
lateral acceleration, the delta-V is calculated based on both sets of 
data, or, simply stated, change in velocity of the vehicle in the 
horizontal plane.
    Timing of the unique, non-recurrent actions like the deployment of 
an air bag in an event is very important. The trigger threshold is used 
to define time zero. Time zero is used to determine many of the 
parameters required for collection by the EDR, such as the time when 
the front air bag deploys. Time zero is defined as the beginning of the 
first 20 ms time interval in which the trigger threshold is met during 
an event. Time zero is used to determine many of the parameters 
required for collection by the EDR, such as the time of front air bag 
deployment.
    Recording multi-event crashes. A crash may encompass several 
events. For example, a vehicle may sideswipe a guardrail and then hit a 
car, or a vehicle may hit one vehicle, then another, and finally a 
tree. In fact, analysis of crash data from NHTSA's NASS-CDS data system 
shows that while 54 percent of the crashes involve a single event, 28 
percent involve 2 events, and 18 percent involve 3 or more events.\12\ 
Thus, if an EDR captures only a single event as the depiction of a 
multi-event crash, in nearly one-half of the cases, it could be 
difficult to determine the event of the crash with which the EDR record 
was associated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Gabler and Roston, ``Estimating Crash Severity: Can Event 
Data Recorders Replace Crash Reconstruction,'' ESV Paper 490, 2003, 
http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-01/esv/esv18/CD/Files/18ESV-000490.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Current EDRs vary with respect to the number of events they 
capture. For example, current Ford systems capture single events. GM 
systems can capture two events, one non-deployment event and one 
deployment event. These two events can be linked ones under certain 
circumstances. If they are linked, the amount of time between events is 
recorded. Current Toyota EDRs can capture up to three events. These can 
also be linked to a chain of events making up a single crash sequence.
    We are proposing to require that EDRs be capable of capturing up to 
3 events in a multi-event crash. For any given event that generates a 
change in velocity that equals or exceeds the trigger threshold, the 
EDR would be required to record and possibly capture that event and any 
subsequent events, up to a total of three, that begin within a 5 second 
window from time zero of the first event. Subsequent events are events 
that meet the trigger threshold more than 500 milliseconds after time 
zero of the immediately preceding event. We note it is very likely that 
in a crash, the trigger threshold could be met or exceeded many times 
Thus, we are requiring that when the EDR is currently recording event 
data, the exceeding of the trigger threshold be disregarded until 500 
milliseconds has elapsed.
    To prevent unassociated events from being captured in the multi-
event EDR, we are proposing that the maximum time from the beginning of 
the first event to the beginning of the third event be limited to 5.0 
seconds. To understand the timing between the associated events, we are 
proposing to require that the number of associated events be included 
as a data element, and that the time from the first to the second event 
and the time from the first to the third event also be included as a 
data element.
    The pre-event data, such as vehicle speed and engine RPM, need to 
be recorded continuously. Similarly, pre-event acceleration data need 
to be recorded continuously. Finally, pre-event statuses, such as 
safety belt usage, determined at -1.0 second, need a similar treatment. 
The recording of these data is sometimes referred to as a circular 
buffer; that is, data are continuously updated as they are generated. 
When the trigger threshold is met, additional types of data are 
recorded, including acceleration data and rollover angle.
    Capture of EDR data. Once the trigger threshold has been met or 
exceeded, the data discussed above are recorded by the EDR. The EDR 
continues to analyze the acceleration signal(s) to determine if a 
second or third event, determined by the trigger threshold's being 
equaled or exceeded more than 500 milliseconds after time zero of the 
immediately preceding event, will occur in a possible multi-event 
crash. This continues for 5 seconds after time zero of the first event.
    A decision is then required to determine if these recorded data 
should be captured in the EDR's memory bank or discarded in favor of a 
previously captured data set. This decision is based on the maximum 
delta-V in the sequence of up to 3 events and air bag deployment 
status.
    The maximum delta-V for a multi-event crash would be defined as the 
absolute value of the maximum of the individual delta-Vs from each of 
the events in the crash. Since events in a multi-event crash may occur 
from the front, side, or rear, we are proposing that the maximum delta-
V be based on the magnitude of the value, that is, irrespective of the 
direction, or sign of the value.
    We are proposing that the recorded data be captured in the EDR's 
memory only if the maximum delta-V for the recorded crash sequence 
exceeds that of the maximum delta-v associated with the data currently 
stored in the EDR's memory. We are making this proposal to prevent the 
capturing of EDR crash data with data from new events that may occur 
subsequent to the event of greatest interest. In the absence of such a 
requirement, the trigger threshold might be exceeded when the vehicle 
is towed from the scene or moved in a salvage yard, thus capturing a 
new record and erasing data regarding the event of greatest interest.
    With regard to air bag deployment status, we are proposing that an 
event that generates information related to an air bag deployment, 
either frontal or side bag systems, must be captured by the EDRs and 
cannot be overwritten.
    We note that on current GM systems, the EDR locks the data in 
memory after a crash that involves an air bag deployment. This results 
in the air bag control system's needing replacement as part of the 
vehicle's repair after an air bag deployment. On Ford vehicles, the 
file is not locked when an air bag deploys. However, it is Ford's 
current service policy that the control module must be replaced after 
each deployment event.
    In the case of multi-event crashes, some of the pre-crash data will 
be common to each event. For example, vehicle speed data would be 
collected for 8 seconds prior to the first event. If the second event 
occurs 1 second later, an additional sample of speed data

[[Page 32945]]

would be recorded before the second event. For these cases, only the 
additional pre-crash data that occur during and between the events 
would need to be recorded as part of the subsequent event.
    To prevent confusion between different multi-event crashes, we are 
proposing that if a crash includes an event that has a maximum delta-V 
of sufficient magnitude to warrant capturing the data relating to that 
event, all previously captured data in the EDR memory must be erased 
and replaced with that new data. We believe that unless this is done, 
events that occur days or months apart may be mistakenly interpreted as 
being part of the same crash.

E. Privacy

    The recording of information by EDRs raises a number of potential 
privacy issues.\13\ These include the question of who owns the 
information that has been recorded, the circumstances under which other 
persons may obtain that information, and the purposes for which those 
other persons may use that information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ We note that, in some press articles and op-ed pieces, 
persons have cited privacy issues as a reason for opposing the basic 
concept of EDRs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We recognize the importance of these legal issues. The EDR Working 
Group, too, recognized their importance and devoted a considerable 
amount of time to discussing them. It also included a chapter on them 
in its August 2001 final report. Among other things, the chapter 
summarizes the positions that various participants in the EDR Working 
Group took on privacy issues.
    We also recognize the importance of public acceptance of this 
device, whether voluntarily provided by vehicle manufacturers or 
required by the government. We note that General Motors informed the 
EDR Working Group (Docket No. NHTSA-99-5218-9; section 8.3.5) that it 
believes the risk of private citizens reacting negatively to the 
``monitoring'' function of the EDR can be addressed through honest and 
open communications to customers by means of statements in owners' 
manuals informing them that such data are recorded. That company 
indicated that the recording of these data is more likely to be 
accepted if the data are used to improve the product or improve the 
general cause of public safety.
    While we believe that continued attention to privacy issues is 
important, we observe that, from the standpoint of statutory authority, 
our role in protecting privacy is a limited one. For example, we do not 
have authority over such areas as who owns the information that has 
been recorded. Some of these areas are covered by a variety of Federal 
and State laws not administered by NHTSA.
    Moreover, we believe that our proposed requirements would not 
create any privacy problems. We are not proposing to require the 
recording of any data containing any personal or location identifiers. 
In addition, given the extremely short duration of the recording of the 
information and the fact that it is only recorded for crashes, the 
required information could not be used to determine hours of service of 
commercial drivers.
    The recorded information would be technical, vehicle-related 
information covering a very brief period that begins a few seconds 
before a crash and ends a few seconds afterwards. Many of these same 
data are routinely collected during crash investigations, but are based 
on estimations and reconstruction instead of direct data. For example, 
investigators currently estimate vehicle speed based on a variety of 
factors such as damage to the vehicle. The proposal would simply help 
ensure a more accurate determination of these factors by providing 
direct measurements of vehicle operation during a crash event.
    To help address possible concerns about public knowledge about 
EDRs, we are proposing to require manufacturers of vehicles equipped 
with EDRs to include a standardized statement in the owner's manual 
indicating that the vehicles are equipped with an EDR and that the data 
collected in EDRs is used to improve safety.\14\ The proposed statement 
would read as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ On September 20, 2003, the Governor of California approved 
a law requiring that manufacturers of new motor vehicles that are 
manufactured on or after July 1, 2004 and are equipped with EDRs 
must disclose the existence of the EDRs in the vehicle owner's 
manual.

    This vehicle is equipped with an event data recorder. In the 
event of a crash, this device records data related to vehicle 
dynamics and safety systems for a short period of time, typically 30 
seconds or less. These data can help provide a better understanding 
of the circumstances in which crashes and injuries occur and lead to 
the designing of safer vehicles. This device does not collect or 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
store personal information.

    Moreover, while access to data in EDRs is generally a matter of 
state law, we believe that access is and will continue to be possible 
in only limited situations. While the proposal would require public 
access to information on the protocol for downloading EDR data, this 
will not result in public access to EDR data. The interfaces for 
downloading EDR data will most likely be in a vehicle's passenger 
compartment. The interface locations will not be accessible to 
individuals unless they have access to the passenger compartment.
    Further, in our own use of information from EDRs, we are careful to 
protect privacy. As part of our crash investigations, including those 
that utilize EDRs, we often obtain personal information. In handling 
this information, the agency complies with applicable provisions of the 
Privacy Act of 1974, the Freedom of Information Act (section (b)(6)), 
and other statutory requirements that limit the disclosure of personal 
information by Federal agencies. In order to gain access to EDR data to 
aid our crash investigations, we obtain a release for the data from the 
owner of the vehicle. We assure the owner that all personally 
identifiable information will be held confidential.

F. Leadtime

    We are proposing an effective date of September 1, 2008. This would 
enable manufacturers to make design changes to their EDRs as they make 
other design changes to their vehicles, thereby minimizing costs.

G. Response to Petition From Dr. Martinez

    As discussed earlier, in October 2001, the agency received a 
petition from Dr. Ricardo Martinez, President of Safety Intelligence 
Systems Corporation, asking us to ``mandate the collection and storage 
of onboard vehicle crash event data, in a standardized data and content 
format and in a way that is retrievable from the vehicle after the 
crash.'' We are granting the petition in part and denying it in part.
    As discussed above, our proposed regulation would specify 
requirements concerning the collection and storage of onboard vehicle 
crash event data by EDRs, in a standard data and content format, and in 
a way that is retrievable from the vehicle after the crash. To that 
extent, we are granting Dr. Martinez's petition. We are not proposing 
to mandate EDRs, however, and to that extent we are denying the 
petition.
    We believe that the motor vehicle industry is continuing to move 
voluntarily in the direction of providing EDRs. As indicated earlier, 
we estimate that 65 to 90 percent of model year 2004 passenger cars and 
other light vehicles have some recording capability, and that more than 
half record such things as crash pulse data.
    The trends toward installation of EDRs in greater numbers of motor 
vehicles, and toward designing EDRs to record greater amounts of crash 
data, are

[[Page 32946]]

continuing ones. General Motors (GM) first began installing EDRs in its 
air bag equipped vehicles in the early 1990's. In 1994, that company 
began phasing in upgraded EDRs that record crash pulse information. GM 
upgraded its EDRs again around 1999-2000 to begin recording pre-crash 
information such as vehicle speed, engine RPM, throttle position, and 
brake status.
    Also around 1999-2000, Ford began equipping the Taurus with EDRs 
that recorded both longitudinal and lateral acceleration and several 
parameters associated with the restraint systems, including safety belt 
use, pretensioner deployment, air bag firing, and others. Also in the 
past few years, Toyota began installing EDRs in its vehicles.
    As of now, GM, Ford and Toyota record what would be considered a 
large amount of crash data. Honda, BMW and some other vehicle 
manufacturers record small amounts of crash data.
    Given these trends, we do not believe it is necessary for us to 
propose to require EDRs at this time.\15\ Moreover, we believe that as 
manufacturers provide advanced restraint systems in their vehicles, 
such as advanced air bags, they will have increased incentives to equip 
their vehicles with EDRs. Vehicle manufacturers will want to understand 
the real world performance of the advanced restraint systems they 
provide. EDRs will provide important data to help them understand that 
performance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ If our expectations prove incorrect, we may revisit this 
issue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We believe our focus should be on helping to ensure that when an 
EDR is provided in a vehicle, it will record appropriate data in a 
consistent format and will be accessible in a manner that makes it 
possible for crash investigators and researchers to use them easily.
    We note that we believe our proposed regulation would not adversely 
affect the numbers of EDRs provided in motor vehicles.\16\ We recognize 
that, if a regulation made EDRs costly, it could act as a disincentive 
to manufacturers' providing EDRs. However, as discussed earlier, 
vehicle manufacturers have minimized the costs of adding EDR capability 
by designing the air bag control system to capture into memory data 
that are already being processed by the vehicle. Similarly, in 
developing our proposal, we focused on the recording of the most 
important crash-related data that are already being processed by 
vehicles, and not using the rulemaking to require such things as 
additional accelerometers. The additional costs associated with an EDR 
meeting the proposed requirements, compared with those currently being 
provided voluntarily by the vehicle manufacturers, would therefore be 
small.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See the immediately previous footnote.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    NHTSA has considered the potential impacts of this proposed rule 
under Executive Order 12866 and the Department of Transportation's 
regulatory policies and procedures. This document was reviewed by the 
Office of Management and Budget under E.O. 12866, ``Regulatory Planning 
and Review.'' This document has been determined to be significant under 
the Department's regulatory policies and procedures. While the 
potential cost impacts of the proposed rule are far below the level 
that would make this a significant rulemaking, the rulemaking addresses 
a topic of substantial public interest.
    The agency has prepared a separate document addressing the benefits 
and costs for the proposed rule. A copy is being placed in the docket.
    As discussed in that document and in the preceding sections of this 
NPRM, the crash data that would be collected by EDRs under the proposed 
rule would be extremely valuable for the improvement of vehicle safety 
by improving and facilitating crash investigations, the evaluation of 
safety countermeasures, advanced restraint and safety countermeasure 
research and development, and advanced ACN. However, the improvement in 
vehicle safety would not occur directly from the collection of crash 
data by EDRs, but instead from the ways in which the data are used by 
researchers, vehicle manufacturers, ACN and EMS providers, government 
agencies, and other members of the safety community. Therefore, it is 
not presently practical to quantify the safety benefits.
    We estimate that about 67 to 90 percent of new light vehicles are 
already equipped with EDRs. As discussed earlier, vehicle manufacturers 
have provided EDRs in their vehicles by adding EDR capability to their 
vehicles' air bag control systems. The costs of EDRs have been 
minimized, because they involve the capture into memory of data that is 
already being processed by the vehicle, and not the much higher costs 
of sensing much of that data in the first place.
    The costs of the proposed rule would be the incremental costs for 
vehicles equipped with EDRs to comply with the proposed requirements. 
As discussed in the agency's separate document on benefits and costs, 
we estimate the total annual costs of the proposed rule to range from 
$5.7 to $8.6 million. While the potential costs include technology 
costs, paperwork maintenance costs, and compliance costs, the paperwork 
maintenance and compliance costs are estimated to be negligible. The 
proposal would not require additional sensors to be installed in 
vehicles, and the major technology cost would result from a need to 
upgrade EDR memory chips. The total cost for the estimated 11.2 to 15.2 
million vehicles that already have an EDR function to comply with the 
proposed regulation is estimated to be $5.7 to $7.7 million. If 
manufacturers were to provide EDRs in all 16.8 million light vehicles, 
the estimated total cost is $8.6 million. A complete discussion of how 
NHTSA arrived at these costs may be found in the separate document on 
benefits and costs.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    NHTSA has considered the impacts of this rulemaking action under 
the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). I certify that 
the proposed amendment would not have a significant economic impact on 
a substantial number of small entities.
    The following is the agency's statement providing the factual basis 
for the certification (5 U.S.C. 605(b)). If adopted, the proposal would 
directly affect motor vehicle manufacturers, second stage or final 
manufacturers, and alterers. SIC code number 3711, Motor Vehicles and 
Passenger Car Bodies, prescribes a small business size standard of 
1,000 or fewer employees. SIC code No. 3714, Motor Vehicle Part and 
Accessories, prescribes a small business size standard of 750 or fewer 
employees.
    Only four of the 18 motor vehicle manufacturers affected by this 
proposal would qualify as a small business. Most of the intermediate 
and final stage manufacturers of vehicles built in two or more stages 
and alterers have 1,000 or fewer employees. However, these small 
businesses adhere to original equipment manufacturers' instructions in 
manufacturing modified and altered vehicles. Based on our knowledge, 
original equipment manufacturers do not permit a final stage 
manufacturer or alterer to modify or alter sophisticated devices such 
as air bags or EDRs. Therefore, multistage manufacturers and alterers 
would be able to rely on the certification and information provided by 
the original equipment manufacturer. Accordingly, there would be no 
significant impact on small businesses, small organizations, or small

[[Page 32947]]

governmental units by these amendments. For these reasons, the agency 
has not prepared a preliminary regulatory flexibility analysis.

C. 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. For the 
standardization and information collection requirements, NHTSA has 
submitted to OMB a request for approval of the following collection of 
information. Public comment is sought on the proposed collection.
    Agency: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).
    Title: Event Data Recorder Information Collection Requirements.
    Type of Request: New collection.
    OMB Clearance Number: None assigned.
    Form Number: This collection of information will not use a standard 
form.
    Requested Expiration Date of Approval: Three years from the date of 
approval.
    Summary of the Collection of Information: To improve the 
availability and usability of data collected by motor vehicle sensors 
during a crash event, the proposed regulation would require 
manufacturers that voluntarily equip vehicles with an EDR to record 
specified data elements and to standardize the format of the resulting 
data.
    Motor vehicle manufacturers voluntarily equipping vehicles with an 
EDR would also be required to submit information to the agency on 
accessing and retrieving the stored data. The technical specifications 
would be required to be of sufficient detail to permit an individual to 
design and build a tool for accessing and downloading the data in the 
specified format. This information would be required to be submitted 
not later than 90 days before the beginning of the production year in 
which the EDR equipped vehicles are to be offered for sale.
    Description of the Need for the Information and Proposed Use of the 
Information: The information sought by NHTSA in this collection would 
be used by the agency and crash investigators (e.g., other government 
agencies, police investigators, motor vehicle crash researchers, etc.) 
to access and retrieve standardized crash data from voluntarily 
installed EDRs. Improving the availability of crash event data would 
permit the agency to improve analysis of a restraint system's crash 
protection performance and the determination of crash-avoidance system 
effectiveness. Improving the data elements and data available to the 
agency would allow NHTSA to make more targeted rulemaking decisions, 
thus improving overall vehicle safety in the future.
    Description of the Likely Respondents (Including Estimated Number, 
and Proposed Frequency of Response to the Collection of Information): 
NHTSA estimates that a maximum of 18 vehicle manufacturers would submit 
the required information. The manufacturers are makers of passenger 
cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks and buses that have a 
GVWR of 3,855 kg (8,500 pounds) or less and an unloaded vehicle weight 
of 2,495 kg (5,500 pounds). For each report, a manufacturer would 
provide, in addition to its identity: (1) Non-proprietary technical 
information of sufficient detail to permit an individual to design and 
build a tool to download the EDR data in the specified format and (2) 
information of sufficient detail to permit access to the data in each 
vehicle make and model produced by the manufacturer that is equipped 
with an EDR.
    Manufacturers would be required to submit the above information 
once per year.
    Estimate of the Total Annual Reporting and Recordkeeping Burden 
Resulting from the Collection of Information: NHTSA estimates that each 
manufacturer would incur a total of 30 burden hours per year under this 
collection. The agency estimates that each manufacturer would incur 20 
burden hours per year to comply with the information collection and 10 
burden hours per year for data standardization. The estimate for the 
hour burden arising from the information submission is based on the 
fact that manufacturers would be submitting existing information from 
its vehicle production data and equipment specification data. As the 
industry voluntarily standardizes EDR output, the agency anticipates 
this burden would decrease because manufacturers will be able to cite 
voluntary industry standards in place of technical specifications. The 
burden arising from the recordkeeping portion of this request would be 
a result of manufacturers reprogramming existing sensor systems to meet 
the data standardization requirements of this program. Given the lead 
time of the proposed regulation, this reprogramming could be 
accomplished during a scheduled upgrade of a motor vehicle's sensor 
systems. This one time reprogramming cost is estimated between $100,000 
and $180,000, for the entire industry. Once a manufacturer has 
standardized all of the existing sensors, we would anticipate this 
burden to be reduced to a minimal number.
    NHTSA estimates the total annual burden hours to be $18,900. (30 
burden hours x 18 manufacturers x $35/burden hour)
    If a manufacturer needed to increase the electronic storage 
capability of the existing sensors to comply with the proposal, this 
would result in an additional cost of $0.50 per vehicle. As discussed 
above and in the separate document on costs and benefits, the estimated 
cost for the entire industry from the increased memory and software 
reprogramming is $5.7 to $8.6 million.
    Persons desiring to submit comments on the information collection 
requirements should direct them to the Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Room 10235, New Executive Office Building, 
Washington, DC, 20503; Attention: Desk Officer for U.S. Department of 
Transportation.
    The agency will consider comments by the public on this proposed 
collection of information in:
     Evaluating whether the proposed collection of information 
is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of NHTSA, 
including whether the information will have a practical use;
     Evaluating the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the 
burden of the proposed collection of information, including the 
validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
     Enhancing the quality, usefulness, and clarity of the 
information to be collected; and
     Minimizing the burden of collection of information on 
those who are to respond, including collection techniques or other 
forms of information technology; e.g., permitting electronic submission 
of responses.
    OMB is required to make a decision concerning the collection of 
information contained in the proposed regulation between 30 and 60 days 
after publication of this document in the Federal Register. Therefore, 
a comment to OMB is best assured of having its full effect if OMB 
receives it within 30 days of publication. This does not affect the 
deadline for the public to comment to NHTSA on the proposed regulation.
    NHTSA requests comments on its estimates of the total annual hour 
and cost burdens resulting from this collection of information. Please 
submit comments according to the instructions under the Comments 
heading of this

[[Page 32948]]

notice. Comments are due by August 13, 2004.

E. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    Executive Order 13132 requires NHTSA to develop an accountable 
process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input by State and local 
officials in the development of regulatory policies that have 
federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism 
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations 
that have ``substantial direct effects on the States, on the 
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government.'' Under Executive Order 13132, the agency may not issue a 
regulation with Federalism implications, that imposes substantial 
direct 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, or the agency consults 
with State and local officials early in the process of developing the 
proposed regulation. NHTSA may also not issue a regulation with 
Federalism implications and that preempts State law unless the agency 
consults with State and local officials early in the process of 
developing the proposed regulation.
    The agency has analyzed this rulemaking action in accordance with 
the principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 13132 and has 
determined that, although the proposed regulation would preempt 
conflicting State law, 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 proposed 
rule would have 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.

F. Executive Order 12778 (Civil Justice Reform)

    This proposed rule would 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. This section would not apply to 
the proposed rule, because it would not be a Federal motor vehicle 
safety standard. General principles of preemption law would apply, 
however, to displace any conflicting state law or regulations. If the 
proposed rule were made final, there would be no requirement for 
submission of a petition for reconsideration or other administrative 
proceedings before parties could file suit in court.

G. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272) 
directs us to use voluntary consensus standards in 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.
    As discussed above, both the SAE Vehicle Event Data Interface 
(J1698-1) Committee and the IEEE Motor Vehicle Event Data Recorder 
(MVDER) working group (P1616) are developing standards specific to 
EDRs. While there are currently no voluntary consensus standards for 
EDR data elements or data format, the agency will consider such 
standards when they are available. Where appropriate, the agency has 
incorporated by reference SAE J211, Class 60 for the specified data 
filtering requirements.

H. 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 rule for which a written statement 
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires NHTSA 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 NHTSA to adopt an alternative other than the least 
costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative if the 
agency publishes with the final rule an explanation why that 
alternative was not adopted. If adopted, this proposed rule would not 
impose any unfunded mandates under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 
1995. This proposed rule would not result in costs of $100 million or 
more to either State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, 
or to the private sector. Thus, this proposed rule is not subject to 
the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.

I. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)

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

IV. Submission of Comments

How Do I Prepare and Submit Comments?

    Your comments must be written and in English. To ensure that your 
comments are filed correctly in the Docket, please include the docket 
number of this document in your comments.
    Your comments must not be more than 15 pages long. (49 CFR 553.21) 
NHTSA established this limit to encourage you to write your primary 
comments in a concise fashion. However, you may attach necessary 
additional documents to your comments. There is no limit on the length 
of the attachments.
    Please submit two copies of your comments, including the 
attachments, to Docket Management at the address given above under 
ADDRESSES. You may also submit your comments to the docket 
electronically by logging onto the Docket Management System (DMS) Web 
site at http://dms.dot.go. Click on ``Help & Information'' or ``Help/
Info'' to obtain instructions for filing your comments electronically. 
Please note, if you are submitting comments electronically as a PDF 
(Adobe) file, we ask that the documents submitted be scanned using 
Optical Character Recognition (OCR) process, thus allowing the agency 
to

[[Page 32949]]

search and copy certain portions of your submissions.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Optical character recognition (OCR) is the process of 
converting an image of text, such as a scanned paper document or 
electronic fax file, into computer-editable text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

How Can I Be Sure That My Comments Were Received?

    If you wish Docket Management to notify you upon its receipt of 
your comments, enclose a self-addressed, stamped postcard in the 
envelope containing your comments. Upon receiving your comments, Docket 
Management will return the postcard by mail.

How Do I Submit Confidential Business Information?

    If you wish to submit any information under a claim of 
confidentiality, you should submit three copies of your complete 
submission, including the information you claim to be confidential 
business information, to the Chief Counsel, NHTSA, at the address given 
above under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. In addition, you should 
submit two copies, from which you have deleted the claimed confidential 
business information, to Docket Management at the address given above 
under ADDRESSES. When you send a comment containing information claimed 
to be confidential business information, you should include a cover 
letter setting forth the information specified in NHTSA's confidential 
business information regulation (49 CFR Part 512).

Will the Agency Consider Late Comments?

    NHTSA will consider all comments that Docket Management receives 
before the close of business on the comment closing date indicated 
above under DATES. To the extent possible, the agency will also 
consider comments that Docket Management receives after that date. If 
Docket Management receives a comment too late for the agency to 
consider it in developing a final rule (assuming that one is issued), 
the agency will consider that comment as an informal suggestion for 
future rulemaking action.

How Can I Read the Comments Submitted by Other People?

    You may read the comments received by Docket Management at the 
address given above under ADDRESSES. The hours of the Docket are 
indicated above in the same location.
    You may also see the comments on the Internet. To read the comments 
on the Internet, take the following steps:

    1. Go to the Docket Management System (DMS) Web page of the 
Department of Transportation (http://dms.dot.gov).
    2. On that page, click on ``search.''
    3. On the next page (http://dms.dot.gov/search), type in the 
four-digit docket number shown at the beginning of this document. 
Example: If the docket number were ``NHTSA-1998-1234,'' you would 
type ``1234.'' After typing the docket number, click on ``search.''
    4. On the next page, which contains docket summary information 
for the docket you selected, click on the desired comments. You may 
download the comments. Although the comments are imaged documents, 
instead of word processing documents, the ``pdf'' versions of the 
documents are word searchable.

    Please note that even after the comment closing date, NHTSA will 
continue to file relevant information in the Docket as it becomes 
available. Further, some people may submit late comments. Accordingly, 
the agency recommends that you periodically check the Docket for new 
material.
    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments 
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual 
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf 
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's 
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on 
April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477-78) or you may visit 
http://dms.dot.gov.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 563

    Motor vehicle safety, Motor vehicles, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.
    In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA proposes to amend chapter 
V of title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations by adding 49 CFR part 
563 to read as follows:

PART 563--EVENT DATA RECORDERS

Sec.
563.1 Scope.
563.2 Purpose.
563.3 Application.
563.4 Incorporation by reference.
563.5 Definitions.
563.6 Requirements for vehicles.
563.7 Data elements.
563.8 Data format.
563.9 Data capture.
563.10 Crash test performance and survivability.
563.11 Information in owner's manual.
563.12 Data retrieval information.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30111, 30115, 30117, 30166, 30168; 
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.


Sec.  563.1  Scope.

    This part specifies uniform, national requirements for vehicles 
equipped with event data recorders (EDRs) concerning the collection, 
storage and retrievability of onboard motor vehicle crash event data. 
It also specifies requirements for vehicle manufacturers to make 
publicly available information that would enable crash investigators 
and researchers to retrieve data from EDRs.


Sec.  563.2  Purpose.

    The purpose of this part is to help ensure that EDRs record, in a 
readily usable manner, the data necessary for effective crash 
investigations, analysis of the performance of safety equipment, e.g., 
advanced restraint systems, and automatic crash notification systems. 
These data will help provide a better understanding of the 
circumstances in which crashes and injuries occur and will lead to the 
designing of safer vehicles.


Sec.  563.3  Application.

    This part applies to passenger cars, multipurpose passenger 
vehicles, trucks, and buses with a GVWR of 3,855 kg (8500 pounds) or 
less and an unloaded vehicle weight of 2,495 kg (5500 pounds) or less, 
except for walk-in van-type trucks or vehicles designed to be sold 
exclusively to the U.S. Postal Service, that are equipped with an event 
data recorder (EDR) and to manufacturers of these vehicles.


Sec.  563.4  Incorporation by reference.

    The Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) Recommended Practice 
J211-1, March 1995, ``Instrumentation For Impact Test--Part 1--
Electronic Instrumentation'' (SAE J211-1) is incorporated by reference, 
and is hereby made part of this regulation. The Director of the Federal 
Register approved the material incorporated by reference in accordance 
with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51 (see Sec.  571.5 of this part). 
A copy of SAE J211-1 may be obtained from SAE at the Society of 
Automotive Engineers, Inc., 400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 
15096. A copy of SAE J211-1 may be inspected at NHTSA's technical 
reference library, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Room 5109, Washington, DC, 
or at the Office of the Federal Register, 900 North Capitol Street, 
NW., Suite 700, Washington, DC.


Sec.  563.5  Definitions.

    (a) Motor vehicle safety standard definitions. Unless otherwise 
indicated, all terms that are used in this part and are defined in the 
Motor Vehicle Safety

[[Page 32950]]

Standards, part 571 of this subchapter, are used as defined therein.
    (b) Other definitions.
    ABS activity means the anti-lock brake system (ABS) is actively 
controlling the vehicle's brakes.
    Capture means the process of saving recorded data.
    Delta-v means, for vehicles with only longitudinal acceleration 
measurement capability, the change in velocity of the vehicle along the 
longitudinal axis, and for vehicles with both longitudinal and lateral 
acceleration measurement capability, the change in velocity of the 
resultant of the longitudinal and lateral vehicle velocity time-
histories, within the time interval starting from the time zero and 
ending 500 ms after time zero.
    Deployment level means the highest-level inflator ignited in an air 
bag deployment.
    Disposal means the deployment of the second (or higher, if present) 
stage of a frontal air bag for the purpose of disposing the propellant 
from the air bag device.
    Engine RPM means, for vehicles powered by internal combustion 
engines, the number of revolutions per minute of the main crankshaft of 
the vehicle's engine, and for vehicles not powered by internal 
combustion engines, the number of revolutions per minute of the motor 
shaft at the point at which it enters the vehicle transmission gearbox.
    Engine throttle, percent full means, for vehicles powered by 
internal combustion engines, the percent of the engine throttle opening 
compared to the full open position of the engine throttle opening, and 
for vehicles not powered by internal combustion engines, the percent of 
vehicle accelerator depression compared to the fully depressed 
position.
    Event means a crash or other physical occurrence that causes the 
trigger threshold to be met or exceeded after the end of the 500 ms 
period for recording data regarding the immediately previous event.
    Event data recorder (EDR) means a device or function in a vehicle 
that records any vehicle or occupant-based data just prior to or during 
a crash, such that the data can be retrieved after the crash. For 
purposes of this definition, vehicle or occupant-based data include any 
of the data elements listed in Table I of this part.
    Forward seat position means a seat position that is in the 
forwardmost third of the measured distance between the full forward and 
the mid-track positions of the seat.
    Frontal air bag means the primary inflatable occupant restraint 
device that is designed to deploy in a frontal crash to protect the 
front seat occupants.
    Ignition cycle, crash means the number (count) of the ignition key 
applications sufficient to start the engine and/or the power vehicle 
accessories, from the date of manufacture to and including the time of 
the event.
    Ignition cycle download means the number (count) of the ignition 
key applications sufficient to start the engine and/or the power 
vehicle accessories, from the date of manufacture to and including the 
time when the data are downloaded from the EDR.
    Lateral acceleration means the component of the vector acceleration 
of a point in the vehicle in the y-direction. The lateral acceleration 
is positive from left to right, from the perspective of the driver when 
seated in the vehicle facing the direction of forward vehicle travel.
    Longitudinal acceleration means the component of the vector 
acceleration of a point in the vehicle in the x-direction. The 
longitudinal acceleration is positive in the direction of forward 
vehicle travel.
    Multi-event crash means the occurrence of 2 or more events, the 
first and last of which begin not more than 5 seconds apart.
    Normal acceleration means the component of the vector acceleration 
of a point in the vehicle in the z-direction. The normal acceleration 
is positive in a downward direction.
    Occupant size classification means, for the right front passenger, 
the classification of an occupant as an adult or a child occupant, and 
for the driver, the classification of the driver as being or not being 
a small female.
    Pretensioner means a device that is activated by a vehicle's crash 
sensing system and removes slack from a vehicle belt system.
    Record means the process of storing data into volatile memory for 
later use.
    Safety belt status means an occupant's safety belt is buckled or 
not buckled.
    Seat position means the position of a seat along the track for 
moving the seat in a forward or rearward direction.
    Service brake, on, off means the vehicle's service brake is being 
applied or not being applied.
    Side air bag means any inflatable occupant restraint device that is 
mounted to the seat or side structure of the vehicle interior at or 
below the window sill, and that is designed to deploy and protect the 
occupants in a side impact crash.
    Side curtain/tube air bag means any inflatable occupant restraint 
device that is mounted to the side structure of the vehicle interior 
above the window sill, and that is designed to deploy and protect the 
occupants in a side impact crash or rollover.
    Speed, vehicle indicated means the speed indicated on the vehicle's 
speedometer.
    Stability control means any device that is not directly controlled 
by the operator (e.g., steering or brakes) and is intended to prevent 
loss of vehicle control by sensing, interpreting, and adjusting a 
vehicle's driving and handling characteristics.
    Steering wheel angle means the angular displacement of the steering 
wheel measured from the straight-ahead position (position corresponding 
to zero average steer angle of a pair of steered wheels).
    Suppression switch status means the status of the switch indicating 
whether an air bag suppression system is on or off.
    Time to deploy means the elapsed time between time zero and the 
time when the inflator of a side air bag or side curtain/tube air bag 
is fired.
    Time to first stage means the elapsed time between time zero and 
the time when the first stage of a frontal air bag is fired.
    Time to nth stage means the elapsed time between time zero and the 
time when the second stage of a frontal air bag is fired.
    Time zero means the beginning of the first 20 ms interval in which 
the trigger threshold is met during an event.
    Trigger threshold means a change in vehicle velocity, in the 
longitudinal direction for vehicles with only longitudinal acceleration 
measurements or in the horizontal plane for vehicles with both 
longitudinal and lateral measurements, that equals or exceeds 0.8 km/h 
within a 20 ms interval.
    Vehicle roll angle means the angle between the vehicle y-axis and 
the ground plane.
    X-direction means in the direction of the vehicle X-axis, which is 
parallel to the vehicle's longitudinal centerline.
    Y-direction means in the direction of the vehicle Y-axis, which is 
perpendicular to its X-axis and in the same horizontal plane as that 
axis.
    Z-direction means in the direction of the vehicle Z-axis, which is 
perpendicular to its X and Y-axes.


Sec.  563.6  Requirements for vehicles.

    Each vehicle equipped with an EDR must meet the requirements 
specified in Sec.  563.7 for data elements, Sec.  563.8 for data 
format, Sec.  563.9 for data capture, Sec.  563.10 for crash test 
performance and survivability, and Sec.  563.11 for information in 
owner's manual.

[[Page 32951]]

Sec.  563.7  Data elements.

    (a) Data elements required for all vehicles. Each vehicle equipped 
with an EDR must record all of the data elements listed in Table I, 
during the interval/time and at the sample rate specified in that 
table.

                     Table I.--Data Elements Required for all Vehicles Equipped With an EDR
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                    Data sample
                 Data element                   Recording interval/time (relative to time zero)    rate samples
                                                                                                    per second
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Longitudinal acceleration....................  -0.1 to 0.5 sec..................................             500
Maximum delta-V..............................  Computed after event.............................            N.A.
Speed, vehicle indicated.....................  -8.0 to 0 sec....................................               2
Engine RPM...................................  -8.0 to 0 sec....................................               2
Engine throttle, % full......................  -8.0 to 0 sec....................................               2
Service brake, on/off........................  -8.0 to 0 sec....................................               2
Ignition cycle, crash........................  -1.0 sec.........................................            N.A.
Ignition cycle, download.....................  At time of download..............................            N.A.
Safety belt status, driver...................  -1.0 sec.........................................            N.A.
Frontal air bag warning lamp, on/off.........  -1.0 sec.........................................            N.A.
Frontal air bag deployment level, driver.....  Event............................................            N.A.
Frontal air bag deployment level, right front  Event............................................            N.A.
 passenger.
Frontal air bag deployment, time to deploy,    Event............................................            N.A.
 in the case of a single stage air bag, or
 time to first stage deployment, in the case
 of a multi-stage air bag, driver.
Frontal air bag deployment, time to deploy,    Event............................................            N.A.
 in the case of a single stage air bag, or
 time to first stage deployment, in the case
 of a multi-stage air bag, right front
 passenger.
Multi-event, number of events (1, 2, 3)......  Event............................................            N.A.
Time from event 1 to 2.......................  As needed........................................            N.A.
Time from event 1 to 3.......................  As needed........................................            N.A.
Complete file recorded (yes, no).............  Following other data.............................            N.A.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b) Data elements required for vehicles under specified conditions. 
Each vehicle equipped with an EDR must record each of the data elements 
listed in column 1 of Table II for which the vehicle meets the 
condition specified in column 2 of that table, during the interval/time 
and at the sample rate specified in that table.

                    Table II.--Data Elements Required for Vehicles Under Specified Conditions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                          Data
                                           Condition for        Recording interval/time (relative to     sample
          Data element name                 requirement                      time zero)                rate (per
                                                                                                        second)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lateral acceleration................  If vehicle is equipped  -0.1 to 0.5 sec........................        500
                                       to measure
                                       acceleration in the
                                       vehicle's lateral (y)
                                       direction.
Normal acceleration.................  If vehicle is equipped  -0.1 to 0.5 sec........................        500
                                       to measure
                                       acceleration in the
                                       vehicle's normal (z)
                                       direction.
Vehicle roll angle..................  If vehicle equipped to  -1.0 to 6.0 sec........................         10
                                       measure or compute
                                       vehicle roll angle.
ABS activity (engaged, non-engaged).  If vehicle equipped     -8.0 to 0 sec..........................          2
                                       with ABS.
Stability control, on, off, engaged.  If vehicle equipped     -8.0 to 0 sec..........................          2
                                       with stability
                                       control, ESP, or
                                       other yaw control
                                       system.
Steering input (steering wheel        If vehicle equipped to  -8.0 to 0 sec..........................          2
 angle).                               measure steering
                                       wheel steer angle.
Safety belt status, right front       If vehicle equipped to  -1.0 sec...............................       N.A.
 passenger (buckled, not buckled).     measure safety belt
                                       buckle latch status
                                       for the right front
                                       passenger.
Frontal air bag suppression switch    If vehicle equipped     -1.0 sec...............................       N.A.
 status, right front passenger (on,    with a manual switch
 off, or auto).                        to supress the
                                       frontal air bag for
                                       the right front
                                       passenger.
Frontal air bag deployment, time to   If vehicle equipped     Event..................................       N.A.
 nth stage, driver \1\.                with a driver's
                                       frontal air bag with
                                       a multi-stage
                                       inflator.
Frontal air bag deployment, time to   If vehicle equipped     Event..................................       N.A.
 nth stage right front passenger \1\.  with a right front
                                       passenger's frontal
                                       air bag with a multi-
                                       stage inflator.
Frontal air bag deployment, nth       If vehicle equipped     Event..................................       N.A.
 stage disposal, driver, Y/N           with a driver's
 (whether the nth stage deployment     frontal air bag with
 was for occupant restraint or         a multi-stage that
 propellant disposal purposes) \1\.    can be ignited for
                                       the sole purpose of
                                       disposing of the
                                       propellant.
Frontal air bag deployment, nth       If vehicle equipped     Event..................................       N.A.
 stage disposal, right front           with a right front
 passenger, Y/N (whether the nth       passenger's frontal
 stage deployment was for occupant     air bag with a
 restraint or propellant disposal      multistage that can
 purposes) \1\.                        be ignited for the
                                       sole purpose of
                                       disposing of the
                                       propellant.
Side air bag deployment, time to      If the vehicle is       Event..................................       N.A.
 deploy, driver.                       equipped with a side
                                       air bag for the
                                       driver.
Side air bag deployment, time to      If the vehicle is       Event..................................       N.A.
 deploy, right front passenger.        equipped with a side
                                       air bag for the right
                                       front passenger.

[[Page 32952]]

 
Side curtain/tube air bag             If the vehicile is      Event..................................       N.A.
 deployment, time to deploy, drive     equipped with a side
 side.                                 curtain or tube air
                                       bag for the driver.
Side curtain/tube air bag             If the vehicile is      Event..................................       N.A.
 deployment, time to deploy, drive     equipped with a side
 side.                                 curtain or tube air
                                       bag for the right
                                       front passenger.
Pretensioner deployment, time to      If the vehicle is       Event..................................       N.A.
 fire, driver.                         equipped with a
                                       pretensioner for the
                                       driver safety belt
                                       system.
Pretensioner deployment, time to      If the vehicle is       Event..................................       N.A.
 fire, right front passenger.          equipped with a
                                       pretensioner for the
                                       right front passenger
                                       safety belt system.
Seat position, driver (whether or     If the vehicle is       -1.0...................................       N.A.
 not the seat is in a forward seat     equipped to determine
 position).                            whether or not the
                                       seat is in a forward
                                       seat position.
Seat position, passenger (whether or  If the vehicle is       -1.0...................................       N.A.
 not the right front passenger seat    equipped to determine
 is in a forward seat position).       whether or not the
                                       right front passenger
                                       seat is in a forward
                                       seat position.
Occupant size classification, driver  If the vehicle is       -1.0...................................       N.A.
                                       equipped to determine
                                       the size
                                       classification of the
                                       driver.
Occupant size classification, right   If the vehicle is       -1.0...................................       N.A.
 front passenger.                      equipped to determine
                                       the size
                                       classification of the
                                       right front passenger.
Occupant position classification,     If the vehicle is       -1.0...................................       N.A.
 driver.                               equipped to
                                       dynamically determine
                                       position of the
                                       driver.
Occupant position classification,     If the vehicle is       -1.0...................................      N.A.
 right front passenger.                equipped to
                                       dynamically determine
                                       position of the right
                                       front occupant.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ List this element n-1 times, once for each stage of a multi-stage air bag system.

Sec.  563.8  Data format.

    (a) The data elements listed in Tables I and II, as applicable, 
must be recorded in accordance with the range, accuracy, precision, and 
filter class specified in Table III.

                                    Table III.--Recorded Data Element Format
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Data element                   Range             Accuracy            Precision         Filter class
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Longitudinal acceleration.......  -100G to +100G....  1G....  1G................  SAE J211, Class
                                                                                               60.
Lateral acceleration............  -100G to +100G....  1G....  1G................  SAE J211, Class
                                                                                               60.
Normal acceleration.............  -100G to +100G....  1G....  1G................  SAE J211, Class
                                                                                               60.
Delta-v.........................  -100km/h to 100 km/ 1 km/h  1 km/h............  N.A.
                                   h.
Vehicle roll angle..............  -1080deg to         10 deg  10 deg............  N.A.
                                   +1080Deg.
Speed, vehicle indicated........  0 km/h to 200 km/h  1 km/h  1 km/h............  N.A.
Engine rpm......................  0 to 10,000 rpm...  100     100 km/h..........  N.A.
                                                       rpm.
Engine throttle, percent full...  0 to 100%.........  5%....  5 %...............  N.A.
Service brake, on, off..........  On and Off........  N.A...............  On and Off........  N.A.
ABS activity....................  On and Off........  N.A...............  On and Off........  N.A.
Stability control, on, off,       On, Off, Engaged..  N.A...............  On, Off, Engaged..  N.A.
 engaged.
Steering wheel angle............  -250 deg CW to      5 deg.  5 deg.............  N.A.
                                   +250 deg CCW.
Ignition cycle, crash...........  0 to 60,000.......  1       1 cycle...........  N.A.
                                                       cycle.
Ignition cycle, download........  0 to 60,000.......  1       1 cycle...........  N.A.
                                                       cycle.
Safety belt status, driver......  On or Off.........  N.A...............  On or Off.........  N.A.
Safety belt status, right front   On or Off.........  N.A...............  On or Off.........  N.A.
 passenger.
Frontal air bag suppression       On or Off.........  N.A...............  On or Off.........  N.A.
 switch status, right front
 passenger.
Frontal air bag warning lamp,     On of Off.........  N.A...............  On or Off.........  N.A.
 on, off.
Frontal air bag deployment        1 to 100..........  0.....  1.................  N.A.
 level, driver.
Frontal air bag deployment        1 to 100..........  0.....  1.................  N.A.
 level, right front passenger.
Frontal air bag deployment, time  0 to 250 ms.......  2 ms..  2 ms..............  N.A.
 to deploy/first stage, driver.
Frontal air bag deployment, time  0 to 250 ms.......  2 ms..  2 ms..............  N.A.
 to deploy/first stage, right
 front passenger.

[[Page 32953]]

 
Frontal air bag deployment, time  0 to 250 ms.......  2 ms..  2 ms..............  N.A.
 to nth stage, driver.
Frontal air bag deployment, time  0 to 250 ms.......  2 ms..  2 ms..............  N.A.
 to nth stage, right front
 passenger.
Frontal air bag deployment, nth   Yes/No............  N.A...............  Yes/No............  N.A.
 stage disposal, driver, y/n.
Frontal air bag deployment, nth   Yes/No............  N.A...............  Yes/No............  N.A.
 stage disposal, right front
 passenger, y/n.
Side air bag deployment, time to  0 to 250 ms.......  2 ms..  2 ms..............  N.A.
 deploy, driver.
Side air bag deployment, time to  0 to 250 ms.......  2 ms..  2 ms..............  N.A.
 deploy, right front passenger.
Side curtain/tube air bag         0 to 250 ms.......  2 ms..  2 ms..............  N.A.
 deployment, time to deploy,
 driver side.
Side curtain/tube air bag         0 to 250 ms.......  2 ms..  2 ms..............  N.A.
 deployment, time to deploy,
 right side.
Pretensioner deployment, time to  0 to 250 ms.......  2 ms..  2 ms..............  N.A.
 fire, driver.
Pretensioner deployment, time to  0 to 250 ms.......  2 ms..  2 ms..............  N.A.
 fire, right front passenger.
Seat position, driver...........  Yes/No............  N.A...............  Yes/No............  N.A.
Seat position, right front        Yes/No............  N.A...............  Yes/No............  N.A.
 passenger.
Occupant size driver occupant     Yes/No............  N.A...............  Yes/No............  N.A.
 5th female size y/n.
Occupant size right front         Yes/No............  N.A...............  Yes/No............  N.A.
 passenger child y/n.
Occupant position                 Yes/No............  N.A...............  Yes/No............  N.A.
 classification, driver oop y/n.
Occupant position                 Yes/No............  N.A...............  Yes/No............  N.A.
 classification, right front
 passenger oop y/n.
Multi-event, number of events     1,2 or 3..........  N.A...............  1,2 or 3..........  N.A.
 (1,2,3).
Time from event 1 to 2..........  0 to 5.0..........  0.1 sec...........  0.1 sec...........  N.A.
Time from event 1 to 3..........  0 to 5.0..........  0.1 sec...........  0.1 sec...........  N.A.
Complete file recorded (Yes/No).  Yes/No............  N.A...............  Yes/No............  N.A.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b) Acceleration Time-History data and format: The longitudinal, 
lateral, and normal acceleration time-history data, as applicable, must 
be recorded to include:
    (1) The Time Step (TS) that is the inverse of the sampling 
frequency of the acceleration data and which has units of seconds;
    (2) The number of the first point (NFP), which is an integer that 
when multiplied by the TS equals the time relative to time zero of the 
first acceleration data point;
    (3) The number of the last point (NLP), which is an integer that 
when multiplied by the TS equals the time relative to time zero of the 
last acceleration data point; and
    (4) NLP-NFP+1 acceleration values sequentially beginning with the 
acceleration at time NFP*TS and continue sampling the acceleration at 
TS increments in time until the time NLP*TS is reached.


Sec.  563.9  Data capture.

    The EDR must collect and store the data elements for events in 
accordance with the following conditions and circumstances:
    (a) The EDR collects data for an event, starting at time zero and 
ending 500 ms later.
    (b) The EDR must be capable of recording not less than 3 events in 
a multi-event crash.
    (c) The highest delta-v of any of the events in a crash sequence is 
used to quantify the maximum delta-v for a multi-event crash.
    (d) If an air bag, either side or frontal, deployment occurs in a 
single or multi-event crash, the data captured from any previous crash 
must be deleted, the data related to that deployment must be captured 
and the memory must be locked to prevent any future overwriting of 
these data.
    (e) If an air bag deployment does not occur and if the absolute 
value of the maximum delta-v recorded from a multi-event crash is 
greater than the absolute value of the maximum delta-v currently stored 
in the EDR's memory, delete all previously captured data in the EDR's 
memory and capture the current data.
    (f) If an air bag deployment does not occur and if the absolute 
value of the maximum delta-v from a multi-event crash is less than or 
equal to the

[[Page 32954]]

absolute value of the maximum delta-v currently in the EDR's memory, do 
not capture the recorded data.


Sec.  563.10  Crash test performance and survivability.

    (a) Each vehicle subject to the requirements of S13 of Sec.  
571.208, Occupant crash protection, must comply with the requirements 
in subpart (d) of this section when tested according to S13 of Sec.  
571.208. Any vehicle subject to the requirements of S5, S14.5 or S17 of 
Sec.  571.208 must comply with the requirements in subpart (d) of this 
section when tested according to S5, S8, and S18 of Sec.  571.208.
    (b) Any vehicle subject to the requirements of Sec.  571.214, Side 
impact protection, must comply with the requirements of subpart (d) of 
this section when tested in a 33.5 miles per hour impact in which the 
car is struck on either side by a moving deformable barrier under the 
test conditions in S6 of Sec.  571.214.
    (c) Any vehicle subject to the requirements of S6.2 of Sec.  
571.301, Fuel system integrity, must comply with the requirements in 
subpart (d) of this section when tested according to the conditions in 
S7.3 of Sec.  571.301.
    (d) The data elements required by Sec.  563.7 must be recorded in 
the format specified by Sec.  563.8, exist at the completion of the 
crash test, and be retrievable by the methodology specified by the 
vehicle manufacturer under Sec.  563.12 for not less than 30 days after 
the test and without external power, and the complete data recorded 
element must read yes after the test.


Sec.  563.11  Information in owner's manual.

    The owner's manual must contain the following statement: ``This 
vehicle is equipped with an event data recorder. In the event of a 
crash, this device records data related to vehicle dynamics and safety 
systems for a short period of time, typically 30 seconds or less. These 
data can help provide a better understanding of the circumstances in 
which crashes and injuries occur and lead to the designing of safer 
vehicles. This device does not collect or store personal information.''


Sec.  563.12  Data retrieval information.

    (a) Information filing requirements.
    (1) Each manufacturer of a motor vehicle equipped with an EDR must 
furnish non-proprietary technical specifications at a level of detail 
sufficient to permit companies that manufacture diagnostic tools to 
develop and build a device capable of accessing, retrieving, 
interpreting, and converting the data stored in the EDR that are 
required by this part.
    (2) The technical information provided under paragraph (a)(1) must 
identify the make, model, and model year of each vehicle equipped with 
an EDR, specify the interface locations and permit the access, 
retrieval, interpretation and conversion of the data in an identifiable 
manner consistent with the requirements of this part for each vehicle 
of every identified make, model, and model year. If the information 
differs for different vehicles of same make, model, and model year, the 
information provided must explain how the VINs for the vehicles of that 
make, model and model year can be used to determine which aspects of 
the information apply to a particular vehicle.
    (b) Submission of information.
    (1) This information must be submitted to Docket No. (a specific 
docket number would be included in the final rule) Docket Management, 
Room PL-401, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. 
Alternatively, the information may be submitted electronically by 
logging onto the Docket Management System (DMS) Web site at http://dms.dot.gov, using the same docket number.
    (2) The manufacturer must submit such information not later than 90 
days prior to the start of production of the EDR-equipped makes and 
models to which that information relates. In addition, the manufacturer 
must update the information, as necessary to keep it accurate, not 
later than 90 days prior to any changes that would make the previously 
submitted information no longer valid.

    Issued on: June 7, 2004.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 04-13241 Filed 6-9-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P