[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 230 (Wednesday, November 29, 2000)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 71081-71085]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-30305]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 572

[Docket No. NHTSA-2000-8057]
RIN 2127-AH87


Anthropomorphic Test Dummy; Occupant Crash Protection

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: This document proposes to amend the neck lateral calibration 
specifications for the SID/HIII dummy. This dummy is employed in side 
impact pole tests which assess the effectiveness of dynamically 
deployed head impact protection systems. In these tests, the subject 
vehicle is towed sideways into a pole in such a way that the vehicle 
impacts the pole at a point corresponding to the center of gravity of 
the head of a seated SID/HIII dummy. Data collected from these tests 
are used to evaluate the performance of the head impact protection 
system.
    This document responds to a petition for rulemaking filed by the 
Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers. That petition indicates that the 
current neck lateral bending calibration corridor specified for the 
SID/HIII dummy is incorrectly defined. After reviewing the petition and 
various data, the agency is proposing that the corridor specifications 
be revised.

DATES: You should submit your comments early enough to ensure that

[[Page 71082]]

Docket Management receives them not later than January 16, 2001.

ADDRESSES: You should mention the docket number of this document in 
your comments and submit your comments in writing to: Docket 
Management, Room PL-401, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, 
20590.
    You may call Docket Management at 202-366-9324. You may visit the 
Docket from 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For non-legal issues, you may call 
Stan Backaitis, Office of Crashworthiness Standards at 202-366-4912.
    For legal issues, you may call Otto Matheke, Office of the Chief 
Counsel, at 202-366-2992.
    You may send mail to both of these officials at National Highway 
Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh St., SW., Washington, DC, 
20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Background

    Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 201, Head Impact 
Protection, provides a number of alternative performance requirements 
for manufacturers of vehicles with dynamically deployed interior head 
protection systems. One of these alternatives uses a test in which a 
vehicle is propelled sideways at a speed of 29 km/h (18 mph) into a 254 
mm (10 inch) diameter rigid pole. A Part 572 Subpart M anthropomorphic 
test dummy is placed in the outboard front seat on the struck side of 
the vehicle.
    The specifications for the Subpart M dummy, known as SID/HIII, were 
established by a final rule published in the Federal Register on August 
4, 1998 (63 FR 41466). The SID/HIII is based on two other dummies: (1) 
The Part 572, Subpart F anthropomorphic test device (Side Impact Dummy 
or SID) that is used in testing under FMVSS 214, Side Impact 
Protection, and (2) the Part 572, Subpart E anthropomorphic test device 
(Hybrid III or HIII) that is used in testing under FMVSS 208, Occupant 
Crash Protection. The SID/HIII combines the head and neck of the Hybrid 
III with the torso and lower extremities of the Side Impact Dummy 
through the use of a redesigned neck to torso adapter bracket.
    As the performance of the dummy is critical in any test, the 
specifications for the SID/HIII include calibration tests used to 
validate the characteristics of the individual device. One of these 
tests is the neck lateral bending corridor. It establishes maximum and 
minimum values for the dummy neck that it must meet when subjected to a 
calibration test in lateral impact direction.

B. Petition for Rulemaking

    On July 28, 1999, the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers 
(Alliance) submitted a Petition for Technical Correction indicating 
that the specified lateral impact neck corridor for the SID/HIII dummy 
does not reflect the neck stiffness of the Hybrid III dummy as 
originally specified by the SAE Side Impact Dummy Task Force (SIDTF) in 
the minutes of the Task Force meeting of April 15, 1989. According to 
the Alliance, subsequent to the April 5, 1989 meeting, the SIDTF made a 
transcription error when it drew up lateral calibration specifications 
for the Hybrid III neck. The Alliance stated that the erroneous 
calibration specifications were carried forward and incorporated by the 
SAE in the BioSID user manual in 1989. As the BioSid neck and the 
Hybrid III neck are identical and the BioSid user manual was the only 
publication available to the public containing the lateral neck 
calibration values, the erroneous values were used by NHTSA in 
rulemaking for the SID/HIII dummy.
    The agency proposed the SID/HIII dummy on December 8, 1997 and 
adopted it into Part 572 as Subpart M on August 4, 1998. The SID/HIII 
dummy incorporated the erroneous neck specifications that were 
contained in the BioSID user manual. As a result of this error, the 
lateral calibration corridor specified a neck that was stiffer in 
bending in the lateral direction than in the flexion and extension 
directions. Existing biomechanical data indicates that the human neck 
is not stiffer in the lateral direction but actually has similar 
bending stiffness in both directions. The Alliance petition of July 28, 
1999, based on recommendations from the SAE Dummy Test and Equipment 
Subcommittee (DTES), suggested that the lateral neck calibration 
corridor be revised so the allowable neck bending stiffness moment for 
the SID/HIII in the lateral direction would be limited to a range 
between 73 N-m (54 ft-lbs) and 97 N-m (72 ft-lbs).
    After receiving the Alliance petition, the agency reviewed the data 
and methodology used by that organization to determine the adequacy of 
the recommended change to the lateral neck calibration corridor. 
NHTSA's analysis of the corridor, suggested by the Alliance, revealed 
inconsistencies between the Alliance proposed corridor and the corridor 
specifications recommended by the DTES after the DTES discovered and 
revised the earlier error. The agency found that the corridor suggested 
by the Alliance was broader than could be justified by biomechanical 
data and would result in necks that are likely to be too stiff as well 
as having a wide degree of variability. Following discussions between 
agency representatives and the Alliance regarding these problems, the 
Alliance submitted a letter to the agency on January 12, 2000, 
indicating that it wished to revise its petition of July 28, 1999, and 
substitute new corridor specifications. The specifications suggested by 
the Alliance on January 12, 2000, and the current specifications for 
the SID/HIII are presented below:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Current  SID/H     Alliance
                                                III         suggestion
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum Rotation (degrees)..............           64-78           66-82
Decay time from max rotation to 0 (ms)..           50-70           58-67
Time between max moment and max rotation            0-20            2-15
 (ms)...................................
Max moment at occipital condyles (N-m)..          88-108           73-88
Decay time from max moment to 0 (ms)....           40-60           49-63
------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Proposed Rule

    After careful consideration of the Alliance petition and the 
revised specifications suggested by the Alliance on January 12, 2000, 
HTSA is proposing to amend the lateral neck calibration corridor for 
the SID/HIII dummy. The agency's proposal adopts the recommendations 
submitted by the Alliance in its January 12, 2000 letter with the 
exception of (1) the decay time from maximum rotation to zero rotation 
and (2) the time between maximum moment and maximum rotation.
    The agency proposal is based on the review of the calibration data 
submitted by the Alliance and the agency's own calibration tests on a 
number of Hybrid III necks. NHTSA's own test program

[[Page 71083]]

indicated that many of the specifications submitted by the Alliance in 
the January 12, 2000 were valid. However, the agency's testing also 
indicated that the upper time limits for the time between maximum 
moment and maximum rotation, and the decay time from max rotation to 
zero rotation should be increased by 1 ms from 15 ms to 16 ms and from 
63 to 64 ms, respectively. Accordingly, NHTSA is proposing that the 
neck lateral calibration corridor for the SID/HIII dummy be amended to 
specify the following values:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Current  SID/H       NHTSA
                                                III          proposal
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum Rotation (degrees)..............           66-82           66-82
Decay time from max totation to 0 (ms)..           58-67           58-67
Time between max moment and max rotation            2-15            2-16
 (ms)...................................
Max moment at occipital condyles (N-m)..           73-88           73-88
Decay time from max moment to 0 (ms)....           49-63           49-64
------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Comment Period

    The agency notes that the SID/HIII is currently being used to test 
the compliance of dynamic head protection systems that are both in 
production vehicles and under development. Existing data indicate that 
the current neck lateral calibration corridor is inappropriate and 
results in a dummy that is not as biofidelic as one that is calibrated 
using the proposed corridor. NHTSA believes that the proposed 
calibration corridor, as a correction of a corridor that was developed 
in error, should be adopted as soon as possible. Similarly, the agency 
also believes that the changes it is now proposing will be generally 
accepted as valid and should not generate significant comment or 
controversy. We have therefore decided that in the interest of 
expediting this rulemaking action, that any and all comments should be 
submitted within 30 days of the publication on this proposal.

Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    NHTSA has considered the impact of this rulemaking action under 
Executive Order 12866 and the Department of Transportation's regulatory 
policies and procedures. This rulemaking document was not reviewed by 
the Office of Management and Budget under E.O. 12866, ``Regulatory 
Planning and Review.'' The rulemaking action has been determined not to 
be significant under the Department's regulatory policies and 
procedures.
    This document proposes to amend 49 CFR part 572 by modifying the 
existing specifications for calibrating the dummy's neck to ensure that 
accurate and reliable data are generated in testing. If this proposed 
rule becomes final, it would affect only those businesses that choose 
to manufacture or test with the dummy. It does not impose any 
requirements on anyone.
    We believe that the economic impacts of this proposal, if any, 
would be limited to the costs of recalibrating and perhaps modifying 
existing dummy necks. We estimate that these costs, if they arise, 
would be limited to less than $100 per dummy.
    Because the economic impacts of this proposal are so minimal, no 
further regulatory evaluation is necessary.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    NHTSA has considered the effects of this rulemaking action under 
the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) I hereby certify 
that the proposed amendment would not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. This proposal would 
modify existing specifications for a dummy test device used by 
manufacturers if they decide to employ an optional test procedure under 
Standard 201. The costs associated with the changes to the neck lateral 
calibration corridor are minimal. Further, this rule primarily affects 
passenger car and light truck manufacturers which are not small 
entities under 5 U.S.C. 605(b). The Small Business Administration's 
regulations at 13 CFR Part 121 define a small business, in part, as a 
business entity ``which operates primarily within the United States.'' 
(13 CFR 121.105(a)). The agency estimates that there are at most five 
small manufacturers of passenger cars in the U.S. and no small 
manufacturers of light trucks, producing a combined total of at most 
500 cars each year. These small manufacturers, if they choose to 
perform the optional side impact pole test that employs this particular 
test device, would have to use the proposed neck lateral calibration 
corridor when validating the dummy for use in testing. As noted above, 
the agency believes that any costs associated with the use of the 
proposed calibration corridor would be minimal. Further, most small 
entities do not perform full scale crash tests themselves but instead 
rely on vehicle manufacturers or test laboratories to perform such 
tests. Both manufacturers and test laboratories are likely to have 
recalibrated dummy necks readily available at no increased cost when 
performing testing for small manufacturers.
    For these reasons, NHTSA believes that this final rule does not 
have a significant impact on any small business.

C. National Environmental Policy Act

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

D. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    The agency has analyzed this rulemaking in accordance with the 
principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 13132 and has 
determined that it does not have sufficient federalism implications to 
warrant consultation with State and local officials or the preparation 
of a federalism summary impact statement. The final rule has no 
substantial effects on the States, or on the current Federal-State 
relationship, or on the current distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various local officials.

E. Unfunded Mandates Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires agencies to 
prepare a written assessment of the costs, benefits and other effects 
of proposed or final rules that include a Federal mandate likely to 
result in the expenditure by State, local or tribal governments, in the 
aggregate, or by the private sector, of more than $100 million annually 
(adjusted for inflation with base year of 1995). This proposal does not 
meet the definition of a Federal mandate because it does not impose 
requirements on anyone. In addition, annual

[[Page 71084]]

expenditures would not exceed the $100 million threshold.

F. Executive Order 12778 (Civil Justice Reform)

    This proposed rule would not have any retroactive effect. Under 49 
U.S.C. 30103, whenever a Federal motor vehicle safety standard is in 
effect, a State may not adopt or maintain a safety standard applicable 
to the same aspect of performance which is not identical to the Federal 
standard, except to the extent that the state requirement imposes a 
higher level of performance and applies only to vehicles procured for 
the State's use. 49 U.S.C. 30161 sets forth a procedure for judicial 
review of final rules establishing, amending or revoking Federal motor 
vehicle safety standards. That section does not require submission of a 
petition for reconsideration or other administrative proceedings before 
parties may file suit in court.

G. Paperwork Reduction Act

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (P.L. 96-
511), there are no requirements for information collection associated 
with this proposed rule.

H. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272) 
directs us to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory 
activities unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or 
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical 
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling 
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by 
voluntary consensus standards bodies, such as the Society of Automotive 
Engineers (SAE). The NTTAA directs us to provide Congress, through OMB, 
explanations when we decide not to use available and applicable 
voluntary consensus standards.
    The neck lateral calibration corridor that is the subject of this 
document was developed under the auspices of the SAE Dummy Test and 
Equipment Subcommittee. The following voluntary consensus standards 
have been used in developing the proposed neck lateral calibration 
corridor: SAE J211 Recommended Practice for Crash Tests 
Instrumentation, SAE J1460 Human Mechanical Response Characteristics, 
and ISO/TR 9790-2 -Road Vehicles-Anthropomorphic Side Impact Dummy-Part 
2: Lateral Neck Impact Response Requirements to Assess Biofidelity of 
Dummy.

I. Executive Order 13045

    Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any 
rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' as 
defined under E.O. 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental, health or 
safety risk that NHTSA has reason to believe may have a 
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets 
both criteria, we must evaluate the environmental health or safety 
effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned 
regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably 
feasible alternatives considered by us.
    This proposal is not subject to the Executive Order because it is 
not economically significant as defined in E.O. 12866, and does not 
have a disproportionate effect on children. The proposed rule seeks to 
change the calibration values for a test dummy neck. Other than 
ensuring that the test dummy more accurately replicates the adult human 
neck in side impacts, the proposed rule has no impact on children.

Comments

How do I prepare and submit comments?

    Your comments must be written and in English. To ensure that your 
comments are correctly filed 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). 
We 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.

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 our confidential 
business information regulation. (49 CFR part 512.)

Will the agency consider late comments?

    We 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, we will also consider 
comments that Docket Management receives after that date. If Docket 
Management receives a comment too late for us to consider it in 
developing a final rule (assuming that one is issued), we 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 word 
search the Adobe pdf version of a comment by

[[Page 71085]]

clicking on the binocular symbol (Acrobat Find) and typing in a search 
term. You may also download the comments.
    Please note that even after the comment closing date, we will 
continue to file relevant information in the Docket as it becomes 
available. Further, some people may submit late comments. Accordingly, 
we recommend that you periodically check the Docket for new material.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 572

    Motor vehicle safety.
    In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA proposes to amend 49 CFR 
Part 572 as follows:

PART 572--ANTHROPOMORPHIC TEST DUMMIES

    1. The authority citation for Part 572 would continue to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 332, 30111, 30115, 30117; and 30166 
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.

Subpart M--Side Impact Hybrid Dummy 50th Percentile Male

    2. 49 CFR Part 572 would be amended by revising Sec. 572.113(b)(2), 
(b)(3) and (b)(4) to read as follows:
* * * * *


Sec. 572.113  Neck assembly.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) The maximum rotation of the midsagittal plane of the head shall 
be 66 to 82 degrees with respect to the pendulum's longitudinal 
centerline. The decaying head rotation vs. time curve shall cross the 
zero angle between 58 to 67 ms after reaching its peak value.
    (3) The moment about the x-axis which coincides with the 
midsagittal plane of the head at the level of the occipital condyles 
shall have a maximum value between 73 and 88 Nm. The decaying moment 
vs. time curve shall first cross zero moment between 49 and 64 ms after 
reaching its peak value. The following formula is to be used to 
calculate the moment about the occipital condyles when using the six-
axis neck transducer:

M = Mx + 0.01778 Fy

Where Mx and Fy are the moment and force measured by the transducer and 
expressed in terms of Nm and N, respectively.
    (4) The maximum rotation of the head with respect to the pendulum's 
longitudinal centerline shall occur between 2 and 16 ms after peak 
moment.

    Issued on November 21, 2000.
Noble N. Bowie,
Acting Associate Administrator for Safety Performance Standards.
[FR Doc. 00-30305 Filed 11-28-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P