Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 76035 

Section Number and Title: 

90.242 Travelers’ information 

stations. 

Brief Description: Section 90.250 

describes how meteor burst 

communications may be authorized for 

the use of private radio stations. 

Need: This rule furthers the 

Commission’s interests in promoting the 

use of the radio spectrum by setting 

forth the frequency bands, technical 

requirements, and geographic use area 

for this particular type of radio 

communication. 

Legal Basis: 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 161, 

303(g), 303(r), 332(c)(7), 1401–1473. 

Section Number and Title: 

90.250 Meteor burst 

communications. 

Subpart N—Operating Requirements 

Brief Description: The part 90 rules 

govern private land mobile radio 

services. Subpart N sets forth operating 

requirements. Section 90.425 requires 

stations licensed under this part to 

transmit identification in accordance 

with the listed procedures. 

Need: Section 90.425(f) was added to 

provide special provisions for stations 

licensed under this part that are not 

classified as commercial mobile radio 

service providers under part 20 of this 

chapter, and the rule is needed on an 

ongoing basis. 

Legal Basis: 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 161, 

303(g), 303(r), 332(c)(7), 1401–1473. 

Section Number and Title: 

90.425 Station identification. 

Subpart R—Regulations Governing the 

Licensing and Use of Frequencies in 

the 763–775 and 793–805 MHz Bands 

Brief Description: These rules 

primarily address technical issues 

associated with the 758–769/788–799 

MHz band, which is licensed to the First 

Responder Network Authority (FirstNet) 

on a nationwide basis. 

Need: To set forth the regulations 

governing the licensing and operations 

of all systems operating in the 758–775 

MHz and 788–805 MHz frequency 

bands, including eligibility, operational, 

planning and licensing requirements 

and technical standards for stations 

licensed in these bands. 

Legal Basis: 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 161, 

303(g), 303(r), 332(c)(7), 1401–1473. 

Section Number and Title: 

90.523 Eligibility. 

90.533 Transmitting sites near the 

U.S./Canada or U.S./Mexico border. 

90.542 Broadband transmitting 

power limits. 

90.543 Emission limitations. 

90.549 Transmitter certification. 

90.555 Information exchange. 

PART 101—FIXED MICROWAVE 

SERVICES 

Subpart C—Technical Standards 

Brief Description: Section 101.129 

describes what a radio station applicant 

must determine with respect to 

technical considerations applicable to 

transmitter locations prior to filing its 

license application. 

Need: This rule furthers the 

Commission’s interest in managing the 

use of the radiofrequency spectrum as 

well as its statutory requirement to 

determine the location of individual 

stations. 

Legal Basis: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303. 

Section Number and Title: 

101.129 Transmitter location. 

[FR Doc. 2024–21111 Filed 9–16–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

49 CFR Part 595 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2024–0046] 

RIN 2127–AL64 

Make Inoperative Exemptions; Retrofit 

Air Bag On-Off Switches and Air Bag 

Deactivations 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: This Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking proposes amendments to 

the requirements and processes for 

individuals to request that the agency 

permit them to have an air bag on-off 

switch installed in their vehicle. The 

proposed amendments would eliminate 

the sunset date, and would also narrow 

the population of people eligible to have 

an on-off switch installed. Furthermore, 

the agency also proposes amendments 

to several appendices, and proposes the 

addition of a new appendix. Lastly, this 

NPRM proposes that NHTSA codify its 

process for reviewing requests for air 

bag deactivations, which are currently 

granted or denied through the agency’s 

enforcement discretion. In this 

document, NHTSA solicits feedback 

from the public to better inform the 

agency’s decision-making on the 

proposed amendments. 

DATES: You should submit your 

comments early enough to be received 

not later than November 18, 2024. 

Proposed effective date: We propose 

that the effective date for the 

amendments in this rulemaking action 

would be immediately after the date of 

publication of the final rule in the 

Federal Register. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

to the docket number identified in the 

heading of this document by any of the 

following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Mail: Docket Management Facility: 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590–0001. 

• Hand Delivery or Courier: 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, between 

9 a.m. and 5 p.m. EST, Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. 

• Fax: (202) 493–2251. 

Instructions: All submissions must 

include the agency name and docket 

number or Regulatory Information 

Number (RIN) for this rulemaking. Note 

that all comments received will be 

posted without change to https://

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided. (For 

more details, please see the Privacy Act 

discussion below.) We will consider all 

comments received before the close of 

business on the comment closing date 

indicated above. To the extent possible, 

we will also consider comments filed 

after the closing date. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments received, go to https://

www.regulations.gov at any time or to 

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West 

Building, Room W12–140, Washington, 

DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

Holidays. Telephone: (202) 366–9826. 

Privacy Act: Anyone can 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 https://www.dot.gov/ 

privacy.html. 

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 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
76036 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

1 49 CFR 571.208. 

2An advanced air bag senses or responds to 

differences in crash severity, occupant size or the 

position of the occupant relative to the air bag at 

the time of a crash. NHTSA amended FMVSS No. 

208 in 2000 to require advanced air bags at the front 

outboard seats in new passenger vehicles and light 

trucks, implementing the requirement on a twostage phase-in schedule (May 12, 2000 final rule, 65 

FR 30679). Per FMVSS No. 208, currently all new 

passenger vehicles and light trucks sold in the 

United States must meet the advanced air bag 

requirements. 

3Child Restraint Systems refers to devices such 

as rear-facing child seats, forward-facing child seats, 

and booster seats. 

business information, to the Chief 

Counsel, NHTSA, at the address given 

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. 

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). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

technical issues, you may contact Ms. 

Carla Rush, Office of Crashworthiness 

Standards, Telephone: (202) 366–4583, 

Facsimile: (202) 493–2739. For legal 

issues, you may contact Mr. Matthew 

Filpi, Office of the Chief Counsel, 

Telephone: (202) 366–2992, Facsimile: 

(202) 366–3820. The mailing address of 

these officials is: National Highway 

Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New 

Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 

20590. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Executive Summary 

II. Background 

A. Regulatory History of Air Bag On-Off 

Switches and Deactivation 

B. Background on Advanced Air Bag 

Systems 

C. Current Part 595 Subpart B 

Requirements and Procedures for 

Obtaining Exemptions for Retrofit On-Off 

Switches 

D. Air Bag Deactivations 

III. Proposed Amendments 

A. Removal of the Sunset Date Provision 

for Retrofit Air Bag On-Off Switches 

B. Adjustment of Criteria for At-Risk 

Occupants To Obtain a Retrofit Air Bag 

On-Off Switch for Vehicles Equipped 

With Advanced Air Bags 

i. Exemptions for Infants in Rear-Facing 

Child Restraint Systems Who Must Be 

Transported in the Front Passenger Seat 

ii. Exemptions for Children Ages 1 to 12 

Who Must Be Transported in the Front 

Passenger Seat 

C. Requests for Air Bag Deactivations 

(General Public) 

D. Exemptions for Law Enforcement and 

Emergency Vehicles 

i. On-Off Switches 

ii. Deactivations 

E. Update of Information Brochure 

IV. Estimates of Benefits and Costs 

V. Proposed Effective Date 

VI. Regulatory Notices and Analyses 

VII. Public Participation 

I. Executive Summary 

Since the late 1990s, NHTSA has 

permitted, under certain circumstances, 

both manufacturers and repair shops to 

install switches in motor vehicles that 

allow the occupant to turn on and off 

the vehicle’s air bag system. This 

installation would typically be a 

violation of the ‘‘make inoperative’’ 

provision of the National Traffic and 

Motor Vehicle Safety Act, but NHTSA 

added an express exemption to that 

provision for air bags because of the 

threat of injury that early air bag 

systems posed to children and smaller 

statured occupants. This exemption—49 

CFR part 595 subpart B—outlines the 

process by which an individual can 

petition the agency for an air bag on-off 

switch to be installed in their vehicle. 

NHTSA has stated repeatedly since 

creating part 595 subpart B that the 

solution to the dangers posed by early 

air bag systems was advanced air bag 

systems that could adapt or suppress 

their deployment based on the vehicle 

occupant. Accordingly, NHTSA has 

repeatedly put a sunset date on the onoff switch provision, with the most 

recent sunset date in 2015. Since then, 

NHTSA has continued to use its 

enforcement discretion to grant requests 

for air bag on-off switches. The agency 

has also used its enforcement discretion 

to grant air bag system deactivation in 

special circumstances, even though the 

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards 

(FMVSS) do not currently provide a 

formal process for requesting 

deactivation. This NPRM proposes 

several updates to part 595 to take into 

account the continued development and 

effectiveness of advanced air bag 

systems. Additionally, the NPRM 

proposes codifying the process by 

which individuals may petition the 

agency for air bag deactivation in 

special circumstances. The agency seeks 

public comment on the proposals listed 

below. 

II. Background 

A. Regulatory History of Air Bag On-Off 

Switches and Deactivation 

To prevent or mitigate the risk of 

injuries or fatalities in frontal crashes, 

FMVSS No. 208, Occupant Crash 

Protection,1 requires that passenger 

vehicles be equipped with seat belts and 

frontal air bags. Although FMVSS No. 

208 did not require frontal air bags on 

passenger cars until model year (MY) 

1998 and on multipurpose passenger 

vehicles and light trucks until MY 1999, 

air bags were already in widespread use 

by the early 1990s. These earlygeneration air bags were highly effective 

in protecting occupants in frontal 

crashes, but caused a number of 

fatalities to certain occupants who were 

especially vulnerable to air bag-related 

risks. 

NHTSA has long maintained that the 

long-term solution to the problem of air 

bag-related injuries to these at-risk 

populations was the development and 

widespread implementation of 

advanced air bag systems, which could 

sense the kind of occupant seated and 

adjust deployment to protect at-risk 

passengers. However, during the 1990s, 

when air bag-related injuries and 

fatalities emerged as a safety problem, 

advanced air bags were still a nascent 

technology.2 To provide time for the 

development and dissemination of 

advanced air bag systems into new 

vehicle production, and to address 

safety concerns posed by pre-advanced 

air bags in vehicles already on the road, 

NHTSA implemented an array of 

interim measures designed to protect 

those passengers most susceptible to air 

bag-related injuries. These measures 

focused both on behavioral changes 

(e.g., consumer education on the 

importance of seat belts and on putting 

children in rear seating positions) and 

relatively modest technological changes 

(e.g., amending FMVSS No. 208 to 

temporarily allow for depowered air 

bags and permitting installation of on/ 

off switches). 

Consumer Education Efforts 

A particular focus of these measures 

was efforts to protect children from air 

bag related injuries and fatalities. Early 

data indicated that children were at a 

significant risk of harm from air bags. 

The data indicated that children who 

were either seated in child restraint 

systems (CRS) 3 or seated without CRSs 

were at risk of serious injury or death 

when seated in a position with a frontal 

air bag. Because of the agency’s 

significant concern for the safety of 

children, NHTSA took multiple actions 

throughout the 1990s to protect children 

from potential harm from air bags. 

First, the agency began providing CRS 

recommendations informing caretakers 

how and where they should equip child 

restraints in a vehicle. NHTSA’s 

recommendation has always been to 

install CRSs in the back seat of vehicles. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 76037 

4For a detailed history of all actions NHTSA took 

before the 1997 final rule allowing for retrofit air 

bag on-off switches, see 61 FR 40784, 40787–88, 

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Occupant 

Crash Protection (July 26, 1996). 

5https://www.nhtsa.gov/older-drivers/drivingsafely-while-aging-gracefully#:∼:text=Sit%20at

%20least%20ten%20inches,to%20always%20wear

%20your%20seatbelt. 

6FMVSS 208 S4.5.4. 

7See id. 

8 62 FR 62406. 

Furthermore, there are different CRSs 

for children of different ages. NHTSA 

recommends that from birth to 12- 

months old a child should be secured in 

a rear-facing CRS. From 1 year old to 3 

years old NHTSA recommends keeping 

a child in a rear facing seat for as long 

as possible—the child’s height and 

weight will determine when they 

should be moved to a forward-facing 

CRS. From 4 years old to 7 years old 

NHTSA recommends keeping a child in 

a forward-facing CRS until they exceed 

the weight and height maximums for the 

respective seat. Once a child outgrows 

the forward-facing seat NHTSA 

recommends children be belted using 

the traditional seat belt, but with the use 

to a booster seat; children should 

remain in a booster seat until they are 

tall enough to fit in a seat belt properly 

without the assistance of a booster seat. 

NHTSA recommends that the child be 

belted in the back seat of a vehicle for 

all of these different stages. 

Second, the agency made several 

recommendations and took several 

actions to ensure children seated in the 

front were protected from air bags.4

Early on, the agency primarily 

encouraged behavioral changes from 

owners of vehicles with air bags. For 

example, in the early 1990s, agency 

testing showed that using a rear-facing 

child restraint in the front seat of a 

vehicle where frontal air bags were 

active presented a significant risk to 

child occupants. In December 1991 the 

agency issued a Consumer Advisory 

warning owners of rear-facing child 

restraints to not use such devices in the 

front seat of a vehicle equipped with a 

passenger air bag. Throughout the 

1990s, NHTSA released several 

additional News Releases on this issue. 

NHTSA also took regulatory action on 

this issue in 1993, when it issued a final 

rule which, in part, required that 

vehicles equipped with air bags include 

labels on sun visors providing specific 

cautions, including a statement not to 

install rearward-facing child seats in 

front passenger positions. The agency 

took further regulatory action in 1994, 

when it required rear-facing child 

restraints manufactured on or after 

August 15, 1994, to include a warning 

against using the restraint in any vehicle 

seating position equipped with an air 

bag. 

Third, the agency took a number of 

other communication-based actions to 

improve safety outcomes relating to 

children and air bags. On October 27, 

1995, after several fatalities to children 

seated in air bag-equipped seating 

positions, NHTSA issued a warning in 

a press release, ‘‘SAFETY AGENCY 

ISSUES WARNING ON AIR BAG 

DANGER TO CHILDREN.’’ In the press 

release, the agency warned that children 

sitting in air bag-equipped seating 

positions not restrained by a seat belt 

could be seriously injured or killed by 

an air bag. The release also stated in 

very strong terms that parents should 

ensure their children are belted in the 

back seat of a vehicle whenever 

possible. During the late 1990s, the 

agency also published several articles in 

widely circulated journals and 

periodicals on the dangers air bags pose 

to children. NHTSA has continued this 

education campaign by publishing 

information on the NHTSA website on 

the dangers air bags pose to children. 

In addition to these efforts to protect 

children, NHTSA also considered that 

certain adult passengers were at risk 

from air bag systems. As described in 

the paragraphs above, many of the 

agency’s attempts to both educate the 

public and improve vehicle technology 

countermeasures to increase the safety 

outcomes of early air bag systems were 

focused on children. The agency has 

also acknowledged in both informal 

guidance as well as previous 

rulemakings that certain adults may also 

be at risk of serious injury from air bag 

systems. For example, certain smallerstatured individuals may have to sit 

closer to the steering wheel to reach the 

foot pedals, which may put them at 

increased risk of injury if an air bag 

were to deploy. NHTSA’s website 

recommends that individuals sit at least 

10 inches away from the steering wheel 

to reduce the risk of injury from air bag 

deployment.5 Accordingly, individuals 

who must sit closer than 10 inches to 

the steering wheel to reach the pedals 

may need to have an air bag on-off 

switch installed. The 1997 final rule 

that allowed for air bag on-off switches 

to be installed (discussed below) 

explicitly discussed specific situations 

where adult passengers (including adult 

drivers) may need an on-off switch 

installed. 

Vehicle Technology Countermeasures 

Although NHTSA recommended (and 

continues to recommend) that children 

be placed in a rear seating position and 

that adults sit 10 inches or more away 

from the steering wheel, the agency 

recognized early on that there were 

instances where this guidance would 

not be helpful. For example, certain 

vehicles don’t have rear seats and 

certain adults can’t sit more than 10 

inches from the steering wheel without 

their feet reaching the foot pedals. When 

the agency first considered taking action 

to improve vehicle technology 

countermeasures in the mid-1990s to 

ensure children and shorter statured 

adults were protected from potential 

harm from air bags, advanced air bag 

systems were still a nascent technology. 

Starting in 1995, NHTSA began 

facilitating a few different types of 

vehicle technology countermeasures: 

original equipment on-off switches, 

retrofit on-off switches, and air bag 

deactivations. 

Original Equipment On-Off Switches. 

In 1995, NHTSA for the first time 

promulgated a final rule that allowed 

manufacturers the option of installing a 

manual device that motorists could use 

to deactivate the front passenger-side air 

bag in vehicles in which infant 

restraints could only be used in the 

front seat. This final rule was the first 

instance in which the agency allowed 

an original equipment manufacturer 

(OEM) to install an air bag on-off switch, 

but the scenario in which the OEM onoff switch could be installed was very 

narrow and left up to the discretion of 

the OEM.6 Because on-off switches were 

intended only as a temporary measure, 

the agency sunset this provision. The 

provision sunset on September 1, 2012.7

Retrofit on-off switches. In 1997, 

NHTSA published another final rule 

addressing air bag on-off switches.8 This 

rule broadened the 1995 final rule that 

had been extended in 1997, and focused 

on more than just children needing 

protections from on-off switches. 

Under National Traffic and Motor 

Vehicle Safety Act (Safety Act), 49 

U.S.C. 30122, no manufacturer, 

distributor, dealer, rental company, or 

motor vehicle repair business may 

knowingly make inoperative any part of 

a device or element of design installed 

or in a motor vehicle or motor vehicle 

equipment in compliance with an 

applicable motor vehicle safety 

standard. This provision is commonly 

referred to as the ‘‘make inoperative’’ 

provision of the Safety Act. Because of 

this provision, unless NHTSA explicitly 

exempts a manufacturer, distributor, 

dealer, rental company, or motor vehicle 

repair business from this requirement, 

those entities cannot knowingly make a 

compliant motor vehicle or motor 

vehicle part inoperative. In other words, 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
76038 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

9 62 FR 62406. 

10 49 CFR 595.5. 

11S5.1.1(b)(2), S5.1.2(b), S14.5.2, S15.1, 

S14.5.1(b), S16.1(b), S17. 

12Compare S19.2, S21.1, & S23.2 with S19.3, 

S21.4, & S23.4. 

13Unlike suppression and LRD, FMVSS No. 208 

contains no predefined test procedure associated 

with the DASS option. A manufacturer wishing to 

use DASS must petition the agency for an expedited 

rulemaking under subpart B of part 552. No 

manufacturer has ever successfully petitioned the 

agency for this option. 

14Based on model year 2023 compliance data, the 

agency estimates that 5 percent of the fleet chooses 

the LRD option for all required performance tests 

with child-sized dummies. The remaining vehicles 

use conventional suppression for all required 

performance tests with child-sized dummies or a 

combination of suppression and LRD. 

15 ‘‘Counts of Frontal Air Bag Related Fatalities 

and Seriously Injured Persons,’’ Special Crash 

Investigations, DOT HS 811 104, January 2009. The 

agency continues to monitor this issue and has not 

identified any new cases of air bag-related fatalities 

in advanced air bag compliant vehicles. 

without an explicit exemption from this 

requirement, the entities listed above 

could not knowingly make air bags 

inoperative, because they would be 

making a FMVSS No. 208 compliant 

motor vehicle part inoperative. 

Among additional details discussed 

below, the most notable action the 1997 

final rule 9 took was creating an explicit 

exemption for motor vehicle dealers and 

repair businesses from the make 

inoperative provision of the Safety Act. 

This exemption permitted on-off 

switches to be installed not just in new 

vehicles but also to be retrofitted into 

vehicles that had already been sold. It 

also meant that an additional entity— 

motor vehicle repair businesses—could 

now install on-off switches. Thus, 

NHTSA’s regulations, at that point, 

allowed for two different types of on-off 

switches: (1) original equipment air bag 

switches, installed as original 

equipment on a vehicle before the 

vehicle was sold other than for resale; 

and (2) retrofit air bag switches, 

installed after the vehicle had been 

produced and sold to the consumer. 

Because retrofit air bag switches are 

installed after purchase of a vehicle, the 

onus is on the vehicle owner to decide 

if they would like an on-off switch 

installed. However, as discussed below, 

air bags generally improve safety 

outcomes significantly for most 

individuals involved in crashes. So 

instead of leaving the decision up to the 

individual whether an on-off switch 

would produce a beneficial safety 

outcome for a specific individual, the 

1997 final rule created a process by 

which individuals could submit a 

request to NHTSA for an air bag on-off 

switch, and if approved, the individual 

could then have one installed. That 

process is discussed in more detail in 

Section II.C. As with original equipment 

on-off switches, the part 595 exemption 

for retrofit on-off switches was subject 

to a sunset provision; this exemption 

expired on September 1, 2015.10

Air bag deactivations. Although air 

bag on-off switches were an effective 

solution to protect individuals who may 

be vulnerable to air bag systems, there 

are certain scenarios where on-off 

switches cannot be installed in a 

vehicle. In situations where an on-off 

switch cannot be installed, the 1997 

final rule outlined that NHTSA would 

continue to use its enforcement 

discretion to allow air bag deactivation. 

The key distinction between an air bag 

switch and air bag deactivation is that 

the vehicle operator can turn the air bag 

system on or off with a switch, whereas 

once a repair shop or manufacturer 

deactivates an air bag system, the 

vehicle operator cannot turn the system 

back on. NHTSA has not codified a 

process for individuals to request an air 

bag system deactivation. 

B. Background on Advanced Air Bag 

Systems 

As discussed in the section above, 

early air bag technology presented 

several safety risks to both children and 

smaller-statured individuals. The 

agency has repeatedly expressed that 

the solution to the dangers from early 

air bag technology was to develop 

advanced air bag technology. This belief 

is also reflected in the sunset dates for 

air bag on-off switches. FMVSS No. 208, 

Occupant crash protection, requires that 

all new passenger vehicles and light 

trucks sold in the United States meet 

certain minimum performance criteria 

for protecting vehicle occupants during 

and after a collision. ‘‘Advanced air bag 

requirements’’ is a term used to refer 

collectively to a subset of these 

requirements that was added to FMVSS 

No. 208 as part of a May 12, 2000, final 

rule to protect children and other at-risk 

occupants from air bag-related injury. 

The advanced air bag requirements 

became fully phased-in on September 1, 

2010. 

Under the advanced air bag 

requirements, both the driver-side and 

passenger-side frontal air bag system 

must pass several barrier crash tests 

using 50th percentile adult male and 5th 

percentile adult female dummies in 

both belted and unbelted conditions 

(the tests require various test speeds, 

test conditions, and dummy 

placement).11 These tests must be 

performed at both the driver and right 

front passenger seating positions. In 

addition to barrier tests (which are 

designed to protect the adult-sized 

population at-large), passenger-side 

advanced air bag systems must also 

meet several requirements that are 

intended to protect children. 

Specifically, passenger-side frontal air 

bag systems must alter their deployment 

in the presence of three child-sized test 

dummies—representing a 12-month-old, 

a 3-year-old, and a 6-year-old—in 

multiple positions, both with and 

without the child restraints specified in 

Appendix A–1 of FMVSS No. 208. 

Unlike the barrier tests described above, 

the tests for deployment in the presence 

of children are static tests conducted in 

a stationary setting. 

The requirements and static tests 

related to child and smaller-statured 

occupants may be met using one of 

three strategies: suppression, low risk 

deployment (LRD), or a dynamic 

automatic suppression system (DASS). 

Suppression-based advanced air bag 

systems will suppress (i.e., not deploy) 

the passenger air bag in a crash if the 

system senses a child in a rear-facing 

CRS, a child in a forward-facing CRS, or 

a child not in a CRS but who is below 

a certain size or is out of position in the 

passenger seat. LRD-based advanced air 

bag systems will deploy the passenger 

air bag in all of these situations, but will 

do so in a low-risk manner that does not 

exceed certain injury assessment 

reference values for children.12 DASSbased advanced air bag systems 

dynamically suppress air bag 

deployment during a crash by sensing 

and interpreting the occupant 

characteristics and/or locations of 

occupants in relation to the air bag.13

Manufacturers are not required to use 

the same option for all three child 

dummy sizes. Currently, all vehicles 

equipped with advanced air bags use 

either ‘‘conventional’’ (i.e., non-DASS) 

suppression or LRD to meet advanced 

air bag requirements, with the vast 

majority of manufacturers choosing 

suppression.14 For the remainder of the 

discussion, unless indicated otherwise, 

‘‘suppression’’ systems are 

conventional, non-DASS systems. 

Data collected by NHTSA indicate 

that advanced air bags substantially 

reduce the risk of air bag-related injuries 

to children and smaller statured adults. 

In 1997, when air bag-related fatalities 

peaked in the era before advanced air 

bags were introduced, there were 52 air 

bag-related fatalities, 31 of which were 

children. Since the introduction of 

advanced air bags, air bag-related 

fatalities have declined significantly, 

and in fact there have been no 

confirmed air bag-related fatalities 

among children in vehicles equipped 

with certified advanced air bags.15


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 76039 

16 49 CFR 595.5, Appendix A Information 

Brochure, Appendix B Request Form, Appendix C 

Installation of Air Bag On-Off Switches. 

17At the request of the National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration, the Ronald Reagan Institute 

of Emergency Medicine, with the assistance of the 

National Crash Analysis Center (NCAC), both of 

The George Washington University (GW), convened 

an expert panel of physicians to formulate 

recommendations on specific medical indications 

for air bag deactivation. 

Although it is likely that much of this 

reduction can be attributed to child 

safety initiatives (i.e., air bag warning 

label requirements, changes to State 

laws, greater enforcement of those laws, 

and publicity campaigns) that have 

encouraged parents and caregivers to 

move children 12 and younger from the 

front seat to the rear seat of vehicles, the 

agency nonetheless believes that the 

complete absence of air bag-related 

fatalities in children over the last 

several years demonstrates that 

advanced air bags provide a crucial 

safety countermeasure backstop for 

situations in which children are placed 

in the front passenger seat. 

C. Current Part 595 Subpart B 

Requirements and Procedures for 

Obtaining Exemptions for Retrofit OnOff Switches 

The 1997 final rule created part 595 

subpart B. Subpart B sets out several 

requirements for vehicle owners who 

want to request a retrofit on-off switch. 

Specifically, it identifies five situations 

in which the agency will authorize onoff switches: 

• Medical condition: The driver has a 

medical condition and a doctor 

indicates that an air bag would pose a 

special risk of harm to that person and 

the risk of harm outweighs the risk of 

the passenger hitting the steering wheel 

or windshield in a crash; 

• Distance from driver air bag: 

Despite taking all reasonable steps to 

move back from the driver air bag, the 

driver is not able to maintain a 10-inch 

distance from the center of his or her 

breastbone to the center of the driver air 

bag cover; 

• Infant: An infant (less than 1 year 

old) must ride in the front seat because 

the vehicle has no rear seat, the 

vehicle’s rear seat is too small to 

accommodate a rear-facing infant seat, 

or the infant has a medical condition 

that makes it necessary for the infant to 

ride in the front seat so the driver can 

monitor the infant; 

• Child Age 1 to 12: A child age 1 to 

12 must ride in the front seat because 

the vehicle has no rear seat, children 

ages 1 to 12 must ride in the front seat 

of the vehicle because no space is 

available in the rear seat, or the child 

has a medical condition that makes it 

necessary for the child to ride in the 

front seat so the driver can monitor the 

child. 

These criteria were consistent with 

the general rationale of the 1997 final 

rule, as advanced air bag technology 

was still in the early stages of 

development. As discussed previously, 

the agency created the part 595 petition 

as a temporary measure to ensure 

vulnerable passengers were protected 

from potential harm from air bag 

systems. It was intended to be a 

temporary measure as advanced air bag 

technologies developed. Accordingly, 

the provision sunset in 2015. 

Subpart B of part 595 sets out the 

specific steps that a vehicle owner/ 

installation technician must follow to 

obtain an exemption for an on-off 

switch.16

If an individual wants an on-off 

switch installed in their vehicle, they 

must fill out the request form that can 

be found in appendix B to part 595. The 

first portion of this form provides 

instructions to individuals seeking the 

installation of an on-off switch, and part 

of these instructions directs the vehicle 

owner or lessee to read NHTSA’s 

information brochure on air bag on-off 

switches, which can be found in 

appendix A to part 595. After reviewing 

the brochure, if the vehicle owner/lessee 

is still interested in having an air bag 

on-off switch installed, the vehicle 

owner/lessee then fills the request form 

out, including an indication of which 

air bags (passenger or driver) they 

would like the on-off switch for. The 

request form includes a list of the 

eligibility criteria NHTSA deemed 

acceptable for a retrofit on-off switch in 

the 1997 final rule with a check box 

next to each justification. A list of these 

eligibility criteria is also included in the 

safety brochure (appendix A to part 

595). The applicant must check which 

justification they are requesting an onoff switch under as part of completing 

the request form. After completing the 

request form, the owner/lessee mails the 

form to NHTSA. NHTSA then reviews 

the request form and determines 

whether the owner/lessee should be 

granted their request to have an on-off 

switch installed. If NHTSA determines 

the information provided in the request 

is sufficient, the agency notifies the 

individual if the request is granted or 

denied in writing. If the request is 

missing information, the agency will 

request the necessary information from 

the requestor. In addition to the signed 

form, NHTSA also sends the installation 

form (appendix C to part 595) (to be 

filled out by the manufacturer or repair 

shop). 

The manufacturer or repair shop has 

several obligations that it must also 

comply with under part 595. These 

include ensuring a telltale light is 

installed and operating that indicates 

when the air bag switch is in the ‘‘off’’ 

mode and providing the owner/lessee of 

the vehicle with an insert for the vehicle 

owner’s manual that describes the 

operation of the switch, explains the atrisk groups set forth in Appendix B, and 

indicates that the on-off switch should 

only be used in the ‘‘off’’ mode if one 

of the at-risk groups is present in the 

relevant seat. The manufacturer or 

repair shop must also fill out the 

installation form that can be found in 

appendix C to part 595 and return it to 

NHTSA within seven (7) days of 

installation. 

D. Air Bag Deactivations 

As noted earlier, while part 595 does 

not provide for air bag deactivations, 

NHTSA has been considering requests 

for air bag deactivations on a case-bycase basis using its enforcement 

discretion. Under the existing process, 

vehicle owners who would like to have 

their air bag system (or part of the 

system) deactivated must submit their 

request in a letter to NHTSA with a 

detailed explanation for why 

deactivation is necessary. This letter 

must include information such as the 

subject vehicle’s make, model, and 

vehicle identification number. In 

addition, requests based on certain 

medical conditions other than those for 

which the National Conference on 

Medical Indications for Air Bag 

Deactivation has recommended air bag 

deactivation must be accompanied by a 

physician statement.17 This statement 

must indicate the particular medical 

condition of the patient, as well as the 

physician’s judgment that the condition 

causes air bags to pose a special risk to 

that person, and that the condition 

makes the potential harm to the person 

from contacting an air bag in a crash 

greater than the potential harm from 

turning off the air bag. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
76040 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

18 62 FR 62406. 

Once NHTSA reviews the 

deactivation request letter, it notifies the 

requestor in writing of its decision to 

either grant or deny the request. If 

NHTSA denies the request, it explains 

the basis for the denial; if the reason for 

the denial was a lack of information, the 

request may be resubmitted with the 

necessary information. If NHTSA grants 

the request, it provides the requestor 

with an authorization letter, a copy of 

the information brochure contained in 

appendix A to part 595, labels to be 

attached to the vehicle interior for 

alerting vehicle users about the 

deactivated air bag(s), and a form to be 

filled out and mailed back to the agency 

regarding the deactivation. The 

recipient can then take the authorization 

letter to a car dealer or a motor vehicle 

repair business to have their vehicle’s 

air bag deactivated. 

III. Proposed Amendments 

The changes proposed in this 

document would revise NHTSA’s 

policies and procedures regarding 

retrofit on-off switches and 

deactivations to account for the benefits 

of advanced air bags. Over the last two 

and a half decades, NHTSA has 

repeatedly stated in multiple 

rulemaking notices that its regulations 

permitting air bag on-off switches and 

deactivations were intended to be 

temporary. During the 1990s, NHTSA’s 

primary reason for allowing air bag onoff switches and deactivations was to 

provide time for manufacturers to 

develop advanced air bag technology. 

NHTSA also continued allowing air bag 

on-off switches and deactivations even 

after the phase-in of advanced air bag 

requirements to promote public 

acceptance of the technology and to give 

the agency time to study advanced air 

bags in real-world situations before 

making long-term policy decisions 

regarding the continued need for air bag 

on-off switches and deactivations. 

This rulemaking would complete 

NHTSA’s evaluation of current 

advanced air bag efficacy and the need 

for on-off switches and deactivations. 

Unlike our previous rulemakings in this 

area, the changes proposed in this 

document are not intended to be interim 

solutions. Rather, they represent 

NHTSA’s conclusions regarding the 

need for air bag switches and 

deactivations as it exists for the 

foreseeable future. NHTSA considered 

several factors in crafting the proposed 

amendments in this NPRM, including 

the interest in and need for retrofit air 

bag on-off switches and air bag 

deactivations, the degree to which 

advanced air bags mitigate the risk of air 

bag-related injuries, and the safety 

benefits of advanced air bags relative to 

retrofit on-off switches and 

deactivations. 

Furthermore, the changes proposed in 

the following sections will improve 

motor vehicle safety. As discussed 

above, data indicate that advanced air 

bag systems significantly improve safety 

outcomes for most vehicle occupants. 

NHTSA acknowledges that certain 

individuals have the potential to be 

harmed by air bags, primarily because of 

their stature; however, advancements in 

air bag suppression technology have 

resulted in most air bag suppression 

systems protecting smaller stature 

occupants without needing an air bag 

on-off switch. Retrofit on-off switches 

can be misused by consumers because 

they may forget to set the switch to the 

position appropriate for the passenger 

occupying the seat. By narrowing the 

eligibility criteria for obtaining an air 

bag on-off switch to only include groups 

that are at heightened risk of air bagrelated injuries even with advanced air 

bag systems, the proposed rule would 

result in fewer installations of 

unnecessary retrofit switches. By 

eliminating the sunset date provision, 

the proposed rule would increase 

NHTSA’s regulatory flexibility to allow 

the installation of retrofit air bag on-off 

switches to serve at-risk groups, 

regardless of when their vehicles were 

manufactured. In addition, the proposed 

rule improves overall agency 

transparency and public accountability 

by articulating and codifying NHTSA’s 

processes for approving requests for 

retrofit air bag on-off switches and, if 

necessary, for air bag deactivation, when 

warranted by a safety need. 

As the 1997 final rule indicates, the 

part 595 petition process has always 

focused on weighing the safety benefits 

that air bags provide vis-a`-vis the 

potential harm that air bag systems can 

do to at-risk populations.18 The 

development and widespread use of 

advanced air bag systems has 

significantly altered this calculus, 

which is why the agency is proposing 

changes to part 595’s substantive 

requirements as part of this NPRM. 

A. Removal of the Sunset Date Provision 

for Retrofit Air Bag On-Off Switches 

This rulemaking would remove from 

part 595 subpart B the language limiting 

the installation of retrofit air bag on-off 

switches to vehicles manufactured 

before September 1, 2015. As noted 

above, when NHTSA authorized air bag 

on-off switches in past rulemakings, the 

agency imposed a sunset date for their 

availability because it believed that 

advanced air bags would largely obviate 

the need for manual air bag on-off 

switches. NHTSA tried to set these 

sunset dates far enough in the future to 

provide sufficient time both for 

manufacturers to develop advanced air 

bags and for the agency to assess 

advanced air bags’ effect on safety. 

NHTSA has determined that, even 

with advanced air bags, there is and will 

be a continuing need for retrofit air bag 

on-off switches for the foreseeable 

future for at least some at-risk segments 

of the population. There is a small 

segment of the vehicle occupant 

population (e.g., those that meet our 

new eligibility criteria to obtain a 

retrofit air bag on-off switch, which are 

discussed below) to whom current 

frontal air bags pose a risk that 

outweighs a safety benefit, and whose 

risk characteristics are such that they 

cannot necessarily be detected or 

mitigated by current advanced air bag 

technology. Because the risks to this 

population are not addressed by 

advanced air bags, we tentatively 

believe that it would be safer in some 

instances for air bags to be suppressed 

by a manually operated air bag on-off 

switch than to deploy as designed. This 

population will likely need the 

continued availability of retrofit air bag 

on-off switches for the indefinite future, 

so NHTSA proposes to remove the 

sunset date of September 1, 2015, and 

to continue allowing retrofit air bag onoff switches for certain at-risk 

populations until further notice. 

Comments are requested on this 

proposal. 

B. Adjustment of Criteria for At-Risk 

Occupants To Obtain a Retrofit Air Bag 

On-Off Switch for Vehicles Equipped 

With Advanced Air Bags 

This rulemaking proposes to amend 

the eligibility criteria for owners and 

users of vehicles equipped with 

advanced air bags to obtain a retrofit air 

bag on-off switch under part 595 subpart 

B. We believe that advanced air bags 

have sufficiently addressed the safety 

concerns of some of the groups that 

were previously deemed at-risk for air 

bag-related injuries at the time that Part 

595 subpart B was established. This 

rulemaking would narrow the eligibility 

requirements for obtaining a retrofit air 

bag on-off switch under part 595 subpart 

B such that these groups would not all 

qualify for an air bag on-off switch on 

vehicles equipped with advanced air 

bags. The proposed amendments 

specifically relate to the categories 

concerning infants in rear-facing CRSs 

and children ages 1 to 12 who must be 

transported in the front passenger seat. 

Below we discuss each in turn. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 76041 

i. Exemptions for Infants in Rear-Facing 

Child Restraint Systems Who Must Be 

Transported in the Front Passenger Seat 

1. Vehicles Certified to the SuppressionBased Compliance Option Would No 

Longer Be Eligible for an Exemption 

This NPRM distinguishes between 

vehicles meeting the advanced air bag 

requirements by way of suppression 

versus via a low-risk deployment 

option. Under this NPRM, vehicles 

certified to meet the advanced air bag 

requirements for children in rear-facing 

CRSs in the front seat using suppression 

would not be eligible for a retrofit air 

bag on-off switch. This proposal reflects 

our tentative conclusion, based on over 

two and a half decades of field data, that 

air bag suppression is an extremely 

effective tool for protecting children in 

rear-facing CRSs from air bag-related 

injuries. Based on these data, NHTSA 

tentatively believes there is no longer a 

safety need to permit the installation of 

retrofit air bag on-off switches in these 

circumstances. 

Like on-off switches, suppressionbased advanced air bags mitigate the 

risk to children in rear-facing CRSs by 

eliminating the possibility of air bag/ 

CRS interaction entirely. Moreover, the 

automatic operation of suppressionbased advanced air bags makes the 

suppression systems safer overall as 

compared to retrofit air bag on-off 

switches, which do not operate 

automatically and are susceptible to 

misuse. Thus, NHTSA tentatively 

believes there is no longer a safety need 

to permit the installation of retrofit air 

bag on-off switches in vehicles 

equipped with suppression-based 

advanced air bags for the transport of 

children in rear-facing CRSs in the front 

passenger seat. NHTSA tentatively 

believes that this proposal would 

benefit safety by reducing the number of 

unneeded retrofit air bag on-off switches 

that would be present in the fleet that 

could potentially be misused. 

2. Vehicles Certified to the Low-Risk 

Deployment Compliance Option Would 

Still Be Eligible for an Exemption 

Under the proposed rule, vehicles 

certified to meet advanced air bag 

requirements for children in rear-facing 

CRSs in the front seat using low risk 

deployment (LRD) would continue to be 

eligible for a make inoperative 

exemption for a retrofit air bag on-off 

switch. 

The agency has decided to 

differentiate between suppression-based 

and LRD-based advanced air bag 

systems for children in rear-facing CRSs 

because, although NHTSA has 

confidence in both suppression and 

LRD technologies, LRD systems are not 

as prevalent in the fleet and have not 

had the same degree of field experience 

confirming their effectiveness as have 

suppression systems. 

There are several safety 

considerations specific to rear-facing 

CRSs interacting with LRD-based 

advanced air bags that NHTSA believes 

justify the agency’s cautious approach 

here. First, children in rear-facing CRSs 

are typically younger and more 

vulnerable than other at-risk groups. 

Second, children in rear-facing seats are 

always exceedingly close to a frontmounted air bag, especially compared to 

other categories of at-risk occupants. 

This proximity matters because the 

primary factor that determines a child’s 

risk of air bag-related injury is the 

child’s proximity to the air bag at the 

time of deployment. Given that children 

in rear-facing CRSs are especially at risk 

for air bag-related injuries because of 

their constant close proximity to the air 

bag risk zone as compared to other atrisk groups, NHTSA has determined 

that it would be prudent at this time to 

allow vehicle owners with LRD 

advanced air bag systems to have the 

option of an on-off switch if they must 

seat a child in the front seat of their 

vehicle. 

ii. Exemptions for Children Ages 1 to 12 

Who Must Be Transported in the Front 

Passenger Seat 

Under the proposed rule, vehicles 

meeting the advanced air bag 

requirements that are used to transport 

children ages 1 to 12 in the front 

passenger seat (including children 

secured in a forward-facing CRS) would 

not be eligible for a make inoperative 

exemption for a retrofit air bag on-off 

switch. This change would apply 

regardless of whether the vehicle is 

equipped with suppression-based or 

LRD-based advanced air bags. 

NHTSA originally designated 

children ages 1 to 12 an ‘‘at-risk’’ group 

for purposes of determining eligibility 

for an exemption under part 595, to 

address the dangers that early (nonadvanced) air bags posed to 

unrestrained older children. Identifying 

this risk group required NHTSA to 

establish an objective, practicable way 

of determining both when a child is 

large enough that the air bags deploying 

would not pose a significant safety risk, 

and when a child was behaviorally 

mature enough that the child was not 

likely to be out of position at the time 

an air bag deploys. NHTSA chose age as 

a proxy for making these 

determinations, because age normally 

correlates to a child’s size and level of 

maturity, and it is a simple and 

objective way to determine eligibility. 

However, a child’s age is, at best, an 

imperfect measure of whether the child 

is at risk for air bag-related injuries 

because age is an imperfect proxy for 

size or maturity. 

Advanced air bag systems do not rely 

on age as a proxy for a child’s size or 

likely position at the time of air bag 

deployment. Rather, they use sensors to 

detect a child’s size and use either 

sensors or other design features to safely 

account for children who are out of 

position at the time of a crash. Because 

a child’s size and position are the two 

most important indicators of whether it 

is safe to deploy the air bag (or whether 

to deploy it in a low-risk manner), 

advanced air bags can use that data to 

either suppress the air bag or tailor the 

air bag’s deployment to the child (as 

opposed to early generation air bags, 

which would always deploy the air bag 

at full force in a triggering crash, 

regardless of the size or position of the 

occupant). The agency is unaware of a 

single reported crash fatality of a child 

aged 1 to 12 (or a child in a forwardfacing CRS) that has been attributed to 

a certified advanced air bag since the 

technology was introduced. Based on 

available evidence, the agency believes 

there is no longer a safety need that 

justifies permitting the installation of 

retrofit air bag on-off switches for 

children ages 1 to 12 (or children in 

forward-facing CRSs) in vehicles 

equipped with advanced air bags solely 

on the basis of age. The agency would 

continue to approve requests for retrofit 

on-off switches for children ages 1 to 12 

(or children in forward-facing CRSs) in 

vehicles equipped with non-advanced 

air bags. 

Notwithstanding the agency’s 

tentative conclusion that children ages 1 

to 12 (or children in forward-facing 

CRSs) are not an at-risk group under 

part 595, subpart B in vehicles equipped 

with advanced air bags, NHTSA 

acknowledges that there is a remote 

possibility an air bag on-off switch may 

be permissible for these children under 

certain circumstances, such as if a 

specific child in that age range has 

unique characteristics that a vehicle’s 

advanced air bag system has difficulty 

detecting. Similarly, given the variety of 

forward-facing and rear-facing CRSs that 

exist, the agency acknowledges that 

there is a remote possibility that some 

advanced air bag systems may not be 

designed to detect certain models of 

forward-facing CRSs that have unusual 

footprints. To address these sorts of 

edge cases, the agency foresees using its 

enforcement discretion to permit the 

installation of retrofit on-off switches in 

these rare situations. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
76042 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

Comments are requested on the above 

issues. 

C. Requests for Air Bag Deactivations 

(General Public) 

NHTSA proposes to codify the 

process by which vehicle owners 

request a ‘‘make inoperative’’ exemption 

so that they may have their vehicles’ air 

bags deactivated. This informal process 

for requesting deactivations was 

initially intended to be used in a limited 

number of circumstances where the 

requestor was eligible for an exemption 

to install an air bag on-off switch, but an 

air bag on-off switch was not available 

from the manufacturer of the requestor’s 

vehicle. The agency believes it can 

improve on the deactivation request 

process with the proposals described in 

detail below. 

NHTSA’s proposal to codify the 

deactivation request process would 

improve transparency while keeping the 

process largely unchanged aside from a 

few slight modifications. First, NHTSA 

would require that deactivation 

requestors certify that they have read 

the information brochure contained in 

appendix A, since the safety 

justification underlying that 

requirement (e.g., ensuring the requestor 

is aware of the risks associated with 

switching off the air bag) applies to 

deactivations as well as on-off switches. 

Second, consistent with the 

requirements for on-off switch 

exemptions based on a medical need, 

we would no longer require a physician 

statement if the deactivation is for a 

medical purpose. Lastly, we would 

require that requestors specifically 

explain why an air bag on-off switch is 

insufficient for their needs. The reason 

for this requirement is that NHTSA 

considers deactivations to be a greater 

potential risk to overall vehicle safety 

than on-off switches. A deactivated air 

bag deprives all vehicle occupants of the 

safety benefits of air bags regardless of 

whether they are at-risk of air bagrelated injuries, whereas an on-off 

switch enables occupants who are not 

at-risk to keep the air bag activated. 

NHTSA will continue to evaluate 

deactivation requests on a case-by-case 

basis, and will only grant them if the 

agency believes that doing so is 

consistent with the Safety Act and is in 

the interest of motor vehicle safety. 

Comments are requested on the 

codification of the deactivation request 

process. 

D. Exemptions for Law Enforcement and 

Emergency Vehicles On-Off Switches 

NHTSA proposes amending part 595 

subpart B to add a process that 

specifically applies to air bag on-off 

switch requests for law enforcement and 

emergency vehicles, along with a 

corresponding request form. The form 

would be codified as appendix D to part 

595. 

For a number of years, NHTSA has 

granted requests from law enforcement 

and emergency service officials to 

install air bag on-off switches through 

the exercise of the agency’s enforcement 

discretion. In the 2012 final rule, the 

agency explained that one reason for 

extending the sunset date under part 

595 subpart B was to ‘‘consider other 

topics that have arisen over the years 

such as our continued use of our 

enforcement discretion for 

circumstances not covered by part 595 

(e.g., the application of retrofit switches 

for emergency and law enforcement 

vehicles).’’ The agency’s primary safety 

concern with air bags in law 

enforcement and emergency vehicles is 

that these vehicles are necessarily 

outfitted with job-related equipment 

that could pose a danger to occupants 

should the air bag deploy. This danger 

is not necessarily addressed by 

advanced air bags, since FMVSS No. 

208 does not require that advanced air 

bags be tested in the presence of this 

job-related equipment, nor would such 

a requirement be reasonably practicable 

at this time. Given this concern, we 

have used our enforcement discretion to 

permit the installation of retrofit on-off 

switches and air bag deactivations on 

law enforcement and emergency 

vehicles through a process similar to the 

process used to evaluate deactivation 

requests from the general public. 

In the interest of transparency of 

agency processes, NHTSA seeks to 

formalize the process by which law 

enforcement and emergency service 

providers obtain make inoperative 

exemptions for retrofit on-off switch 

installations. To this end, this NPRM 

proposes to add a new section to part 

595 subpart B specifically for 

‘‘Emergency Vehicles’’ along with a 

corresponding new form contained in 

appendix D. This new section would 

contain the procedures that emergency 

service providers must follow to obtain 

a make inoperative exemption for their 

law enforcement or emergency vehicles. 

The accompanying form would require 

that a requesting entity certify that the 

vehicle on which the air bag on-off 

switch will be installed is intended to 

be used for law enforcement, fire 

response, or medical response. 

Comments are requested on this 

proposal. 

ii. Deactivations 

As with exemption requests from the 

general public, if a retrofit air bag on-off 

switch is unavailable or inadequate for 

an emergency or law enforcement 

vehicle, officials may request approval 

for an air bag deactivation. The process 

for requesting an air bag deactivation for 

a law enforcement vehicle or an 

emergency vehicle would be the same as 

the process for the general public. 

Comments are requested on the above 

issues. A copy of the law enforcement 

and emergency response request form 

can be found in the docket for this 

NPRM. 

E. Update of Information Brochure 

NHTSA proposes to revise the 

Information Brochure contained in 

appendix A to part 595. Appendix A 

contains the Information Brochure that 

air bag on-off switch requestors must 

read as part of the application process 

for obtaining an exemption for a retrofit 

air bag on-off switch under subpart B. 

The purpose of the Information 

Brochure is to provide requestors with 

relevant information about the safety 

benefits and potential risks of air bags, 

so that they can make an informed 

decision whether to request an 

exemption under part 595 subpart B. 

NHTSA codified the Information 

Brochure as appendix A to part 595 as 

part of the same November 1997 final 

rule that established part 595 subpart B. 

In the more than two decades that have 

passed since then, air bag technology 

has evolved substantially. Given these 

changes, the Information Brochure 

currently found in appendix A to part 

595 is no longer complete or accurate. 

To address this problem, this NPRM 

proposes major revisions to the 

Information Brochure. The updated 

brochure would provide more complete 

and accurate information about current 

air bag technology to better ensure 

consumers will make an informed 

decision regarding whether to request 

an exemption under part 595 subpart B. 

The agency has also included stylistic 

changes, such as formatting changes that 

make the material more engaging and 

easier to read, and a 10-inch ruler 

printed on the outer cover so that 

drivers can measure their distance to the 

steering wheel. A copy of our proposed 

revised Information Brochure for at-risk 

passengers has been placed in the 

docket to this NPRM. 

The agency seeks comment on our 

proposed revisions to the Information 

Brochure contained in Appendix A to 

part 595. 

IV. Estimates of Benefits and Costs 

NHTSA performed an economic 

analysis for the proposed rule, and has 

determined that the proposed rule 

would be net beneficial. The agency 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 76043 

found that there would be significant 

cost savings as a result of the proposed 

rule. A summary of the economic 

analysis is below, and the full economic 

analysis can be found in the docket for 

this NPRM. 

Methodology. To determine the costs 

and safety impacts of this NPRM, 

NHTSA considered two baselines in its 

analysis. The first baseline is what the 

agency refers to as the Enforcement 

Discretion Baseline. This baseline 

considers the status quo, where NHTSA 

uses its enforcement discretion to grant 

air bag on-off switch requests since the 

last sunset for the on-off program for 

MY 2015 vehicles. This baseline 

assumes that there is potential for all 

vehicles (not just MY 2015 and earlier 

vehicles) to receive exemptions. In other 

words, this baseline includes analysis of 

all MY vehicles, rather than 

incorporating only MY 2015 and earlier 

vehicles not impacted by the 2015 

sunset. 

The second baseline is what the 

agency refers to as the Enforcement 

Non-Discretion Baseline. This baseline 

considers a scenario under which the 

sunset provision is strictly enforced. 

Under this baseline, the proposed rule 

has a smaller net effect because 

enforcing just the sunset provision 

would yield the same procedural 

changes as the proposed rule for all MY 

2016 and later vehicles. Thus, the net 

effect under the Enforcement NonDiscretion Baseline would be limited to 

pre-MY 2016 vehicles with advanced air 

bags. 

Air Bag On-Off Switch Cost Impacts. 

For this analysis, NHTSA assumed that 

the volume of annual exemption 

requests for air bag on-off switches will 

be equal to the annual average from 

2015–2017 (the most recent available 

data), or 58 requests per year under the 

Enforcement Discretion baseline. For 

the Enforcement Non-Discretion 

baseline, NHTSA assumed that the 

number of annual requests will be equal 

to the estimated share of all vehicles 

with advanced air bags comprised of 

pre-MY 2016 vehicles, multiplied by 58. 

The share of all vehicles with advanced 

air bags comprised of pre-MY 2016 

vehicles is estimated as the sum of 

surviving MY 2004 (i.e., the first year 

with mandatory advanced air bags) 

through MY 2015 vehicles, divided by 

the projected sum of MY 2004 through 

MY 2021 vehicles at the end of 2021. 

The resulting estimate of the relevant 

share comprised of pre-MY 2016 

vehicles is approximately 59 percent, 

yielding an estimate of 34.2 requests per 

year under the Enforcement NonDiscretion baseline. 

The total annual cost impact for the 

subset of on-off switch exemption 

requests that would be eliminated under 

the proposed rule compared to the costs 

under the Enforcement Discretion 

baseline is summarized in Table 1 (See 

the docketed economic analysis for this 

proposed rule for details): 

TABLE 1—ESTIMATED ANNUAL COST IMPACTS IN CASES WHERE THE ON-OFF SWITCH EXEMPTION IS ELIMINATED

[2022 Dollars, Enforcement Discretion Baseline] 

Cost item (entity) Status 

quo cost 

Cost under 

proposed 

rule 

Net cost 

impact 

Requests (Applicants) .................................................................................................................................. $686.14 $0.00 ¥$686.14 

On-Off Switch Installation (Applicants) ........................................................................................................ 8,186.32 0.00 ¥8,186.32 

Data Processing and Storage (Government) .............................................................................................. 61.39 0.00 ¥61.39 

Documentation and Reporting (Industry) .................................................................................................... 87.58 0.00 ¥87.58 

Total ...................................................................................................................................................... 9,021.43 0.00 ¥9,021.43 

The corresponding annual cost impact 

under the Enforcement Non-Discretion 

baseline is summarized in Table 2: 

TABLE 2—ESTIMATED ANNUAL COST IMPACTS IN CASES WHERE THE ON-OFF SWITCH EXEMPTION IS ELIMINATED

[2022 Dollars, Enforcement Non-Discretion Baseline] 

Cost item (entity) Status 

quo cost 

Cost under 

proposed 

rule 

Net cost 

impact 

Requests (Applicants) .................................................................................................................................. $404.06 $0.00 ¥$404.06 

On-Off Switch Installation (Applicants) ........................................................................................................ 4,820.80 0.00 ¥4,820.80 

Data Processing and Storage (Government) .............................................................................................. 36.15 0.00 ¥36.15 

Documentation and Reporting (Industry) .................................................................................................... 51.58 0.00 ¥51.58 

Total ...................................................................................................................................................... 5,312.60 0.00 ¥5,312.60 

The total annual cost impact is 

estimated to be ¥$9,021.43 under the 

Enforcement Discretion baseline and 

¥$5,312.60 under the Enforcement 

Non-Discretion baseline. 

Air Bag On-Off Switch Safety Impacts. 

Safety effects of the proposed rule in 

this category are assumed to be limited 

to the reduction in risk for front-seat 

passengers 13 years of age or older in 

vehicles with no on-off switch. NHTSA 

assumed that advanced air bags are 

estimated to be equally safe with or 

without an on-off switch for passengers 

12 years of age or younger, because 

advanced air bags are designed either 

not to deploy or to deploy in a low-risk 

manner when small children are present 

(i.e., the switch does not offer any 

benefit or detriment for small children). 

For passengers 13 years of age or older, 

reducing on-off switch exemption 

requests would improve safety by 

mitigating the risk of traveling while an 

on-off switch is in the off position, 

removing the protective effect of the air 

bag. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
76044 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

19 Kahane, C. J. (2015, January). Lives saved by 

vehicle safety technologies and associated Federal 

Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, 1960 to 2012— 

Passenger cars and LTVs—With reviews of 26 

FMVSS and the effectiveness of their associated 

safety technologies in reducing fatalities, injuries, 

and crashes. (Report No. DOT HS 812 069). 

Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration. 

20 Ibid. 

21The total estimated safety value per mitigated 

fatality is equal to a base value per fatality ($12.8 

million in 2022 dollars) adjusted by factors 

accounting for: (1) the share of comprehensive 

economic costs of crashes comprised of fatalities; 

and (2) the relative rate of front right seat 

occupation in non-fatal versus fatal crashes. This 

calculation is presented in more detail in the 

docketed accompanying economic analysis. 

The safety benefit per vehicle in this 

category is estimated as the reduction in 

fatality risk per mile for front-seat 

passengers 13 years of age or older, 

multiplied by the vehicle miles traveled 

(VMT) where such passengers are 

present and the monetized value of a 

unit reduction in fatality risk. Analyses 

of 2017–2021 Crash Reporting Sampling 

System data and Fatality Analysis 

Reporting System data indicate that the 

front seat of light-duty vehicles was 

occupied by a passenger 13 years of age 

or older approximately 12 percent of the 

time in non-fatal crashes and 14 percent 

of the time in fatal crashes. Studies have 

estimated an overall light-duty vehicle 

occupant fatality rate of 0.82 fatality per 

100 million VMT,19 which represents 

approximately 73 percent of the average 

overall fatality rate from 2009 through 

2012. The agency applied this ratio to 

the most recent overall fatality rate of 

1.34 fatalities per 100 million VMT to 

identify an estimated light-duty vehicle 

fatality rate of 0.98 fatalities per 100 

million VMT. Multiplying this fatality 

rate by 14 percent yields an estimated 

fatality rate for front-seat occupants 13 

years of age or older of 0.14 fatality per 

100 million VMT. 

Studies indicate the effectiveness of 

frontal air bags in reducing fatalities for 

front-seat occupants to be 12 percent for 

passenger cars and 14 percent for light 

trucks and vans (LTVs).20 Thus, 

traveling with an inactivated frontal air 

bag is estimated to be 1/(1–0.12), or 13.6 

percent, riskier in passenger cars (1/(1– 

0.14), or 16.3 percent, riskier in LTVs). 

Assuming a light-duty vehicle sales split 

of one-third passenger cars and twothirds LTVs for the vehicles affected by 

the proposed rule (which reflects recent 

vehicle sales splits), the average 

increase of risk of traveling in the front 

seat with an improperly deactivated 

frontal air bag is estimated to be 15.4 

percent. NHTSA assumed a 10.3 percent 

misuse rate for air bag on-off switches 

when adults travel in the front 

passenger seat. Multiplying this misuse 

rate by the estimated 15.4 percent 

increase in risk when on-off switches 

are misused yields an estimate of 

incremental risk of 1.6 percent for frontseat passengers 13 years of age or older 

in the presence of air bag on-off 

switches. In turn, multiplying the 

estimated incremental risk by the 

fatality rate for front-seat passengers 13 

years of age or older (0.14 fatality per 

100 million VMT) yields an estimate of 

incremental fatality risk for these 

passengers in the presence of an air bag 

on-off switch equal to 0.0022 fatality per 

100 million VMT. 

For the Enforcement Discretion 

baseline, the agency estimated expected 

per-vehicle annual VMT (i.e., expected 

VMT taking scrappage into account) by 

multiplying the average of the passenger 

car and LTV VMT schedules used in the 

analysis supporting the Corporate 

Average Fuel Economy Rulemaking by 

their corresponding vehicle survival 

schedules. Applying three-percent- and 

seven-percent discount rates yields 

estimates of discounted lifetime vehicle 

VMT equal to 13.0 times and 9.7 times 

the first-year VMT. 

TABLE 3—VMT SCHEDULE AND ESTIMATED DISCOUNTED VEHICLE VMT (FOR SELECTED VEHICLE AGES) 

Vehicle age 

Annual VMT 

for surviving 

vehicles 

Survival 

rate × 3% 

discount 

factor 

Survival 

rate × 7% 

discount 

factor 

Annual 

exposure 

(3% discount 

rate) 

Annual 

exposure 

(7% discount 

rate) 

1 ........................................................................................... 17,040 1.000 1.000 17,040 17,040 

5 ........................................................................................... 14,641 0.853 0.732 14,535 12,480 

10 ......................................................................................... 12,310 0.636 0.452 10,843 7,696 

15 ......................................................................................... 10,546 0.377 0.221 6,421 3,766 

20 ......................................................................................... 9,165 0.178 0.086 3,036 1,472 

25 ......................................................................................... 7,981 0.087 0.035 1,477 592 

30 ......................................................................................... 6,805 0.049 0.016 831 275 

35 ......................................................................................... 5,454 0.017 0.005 294 81 

Total/Year 1 .................................................................. ........................ ........................ ........................ 13.0 9.7 

The monetized (undiscounted) value 

of the per-vehicle safety benefit in the 

first year of vehicle use in this category 

is estimated to be $13.12 (0.0022 

mitigated fatality per 100 million VMT 

× 17,040/100 million VMT × $35.4 

million per mitigated fatality 21). Thus, 

at a three-percent discount rate, the 

estimated lifetime per-vehicle safety 

benefit is estimated to be approximately 

$171 ($13.12 × 13.0 = $170.58) under 

the Enforcement Discretion baseline. At 

a seven-percent discount rate, the 

estimated lifetime per-vehicle safety 

benefit is estimated to be approximately 

$127 ($13.12 × 9.7 = $127.28) under the 

Enforcement Discretion baseline. 

For the Enforcement Non-Discretion 

baseline, the above approach is used, 

with one key change: per-vehicle safety 

benefits are estimated as the above pervehicle safety benefits multiplied by the 

share of total lifetime discounted VMT 

comprised of pre-MY 2016 vehicles. In 

turn, the share of total lifetime 

discounted VMT comprised of pre-MY 

2016 vehicles is estimated as the sum of 

estimated discounted lifetime VMT for 

MY 2004 through 2015 vehicles, 

divided by the sum of estimated 

discounted lifetime VMT for MY 2004 

through MY 2021 vehicles. Using this 

approach, the estimated per-vehicle 

safety benefits are 67 percent lower than 

in the other baseline at a three-percent 

discount rate (0.33 × $170.58, or 

$56.29). The corresponding estimate at 

a seven-percent rate is 72 percent lower 

than in the other baseline (0.28 × 

$170.58, or $34.37). 

The total annual safety benefit in this 

category under the proposed rule is 

equal to the per-vehicle safety benefit 

multiplied by the number of affected 

vehicles. Thus, at a three-percent 

discount rate, the total annual safety 

benefit is estimated to be $9,893.80 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 76045 

22 44 FR 11034 (Feb. 26, 1979). 

under the Enforcement Discretion 

baseline ($170.58 per request × 58 

requests per year). At a seven-percent 

discount rate, the total annual safety 

benefit is estimated to be $7,382.30 

under the Enforcement Discretion 

baseline ($127.58 per request × 58 

requests per year). The total annual 

safety benefit under the Enforcement 

Non-Discretion baseline is $1,925.20 at 

a three-percent discount rate ($56.29 × 

34.2 = $1,925.20) and $1,175.31 at a 

seven-percent discount rate ($34.37 × 

34.2 = $1,175.31). 

Air Bag Deactivation. The proposed 

rule will formalize and modify the 

process by which vehicle owners or 

users can obtain an exemption from the 

‘‘make inoperative’’ provision for an air 

bag deactivation. The proposed rule will 

have a cost impact for requestors of air 

bag deactivation exemptions and 

business entities that deactivate air bags. 

For this analysis, the agency assumed 

that annual deactivation requests will be 

equal to the 2015–2017 annual average 

of deactivation requests under the 

proposed rule (seven per year). The 

agency felt there was no need to run a 

two-pronged analysis like it did for the 

on-off switch analysis because there was 

no change in the way the agency 

processed air bag deactivation requests; 

there has never been a formal process 

for requesting deactivation, and NHTSA 

has used its enforcement discretion to 

grant deactivations since the agency 

started doing so in the mid-1990s. 

Furthermore, because the agency is 

simply formalizing a process that is 

unlikely to result in a noticeable impact 

on the number of deactivation requests 

received, granted, or denied, NHTSA 

does not believe there will be a safety 

impact for this part of the proposed rule. 

Individuals requesting air bag 

deactivation exemptions under the 

status quo incur costs associated with 

preparing the request letter, acquiring 

supporting documentation, and having 

the deactivation performed. Under the 

status quo, a deactivation requestor 

must write a letter to NHTSA that 

includes information about the 

requestor’s vehicle and the requestor’s 

reason for requesting an air bag 

deactivation. 

The cost of deactivating an air bag 

system is unaffected by the proposed 

rule, meaning the proposed rule would 

have no impact on the costs associated 

with deactivation. Furthermore, the 

proposed rule does not include any 

additional requirements for businesses 

performing air bag deactivations, 

meaning the proposed rule would also 

have no impact on the costs businesses 

incur by performing deactivations. 

Table 4 below estimates the costs 

associated with the proposed 

amendments to the air bag deactivation 

process (see the docketed economic 

analysis for this proposed rule for 

details). 

TABLE 4—ESTIMATED ANNUAL COST IMPACTS FOR AIR BAG DEACTIVATION REQUESTS

[2022 Dollars] 

Cost item 

(entity) 

Status 

quo cost 

Cost under 

proposed 

rule 

Net cost 

impact 

Requests (Applicants) ...................................................................................................................................... $160.72 $186.69 $25.97 

Deactivation (Applicants) ................................................................................................................................. 542.50 542.50 0.00 

Distributing Forms and Labels, and Data Processing (Government) ............................................................. 61.81 61.81 0.00 

Return Form and Labels (Industry) ................................................................................................................. 18.90 18.90 0.00 

Safety (Occupants) .......................................................................................................................................... N/A N/A 0.00 

Total .......................................................................................................................................................... 722.12 748.09 25.97 

V. Proposed Effective Date 

We propose that the amendments in 

this rulemaking become effective 

immediately after publication of a final 

rule in the Federal Register. The 

proposed amendments would not 

markedly impact the current process or 

requestors’ ability to get approval for an 

air bag on-off switch or deactivation 

except regarding forward-facing 

children ages 1 to 12, children in 

forward-facing CRSs, and children in 

rear-facing CRSs in vehicles equipped 

with suppression-based advanced air 

bag systems. Because this final rule 

would have no impact on the public and 

only changes NHTSA processes, the 

agency does not believe that any lead 

time is necessary for this potential final 

rule. Comments are requested on this 

proposed effective date. 

VI. Regulatory Notices and Analyses 

Executive Order 12866, Executive Order 

14904, Executive Order 13563, and DOT 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

NHTSA has considered the potential 

impact of this proposed rule under 

Executive Order 12866, Executive Order 

14094, Executive Order 13563, DOT 

Order 2100.6A and the Department of 

Transportation’s regulatory policies and 

procedures. This NPRM is not 

considered to be significant under the 

Department of Transportation’s 

regulatory policies and procedures.22

This document proposes several 

changes to part 595 subpart B but does 

not impose any new costs. It proposes 

the elimination of the sunset date of an 

existing exemption for retrofit on-off 

switches for frontal air bags, slight 

narrowing of the eligibility requirement 

for obtaining that exemption going 

forward, and the codification of existing 

processes for obtaining retrofit air bag 

on-off switches for emergency vehicles 

and air bag deactivations for all 

vehicles. It also proposes changes to the 

information brochure contained in 

appendix A. The agency notes that part 

595 subpart B does not require a motor 

vehicle manufacturer, dealer, or repair 

business to take any action or bear any 

costs except in instances in which a 

dealer or repair business voluntarily 

agrees to deactivate or install an air bag 

on-off switch for an air bag. For 

consumers, the purchase and 

installation of a retrofit air bag on-off 

switch or the deactivation a vehicle’s 

frontal air bag is permissive, not 

prescriptive. 

When an eligible consumer obtains 

the agency’s authorization for the 

installation of a retrofit air bag on-off 

switch or air bag deactivation and 

enlists a dealer or repair business to 

modify their vehicle accordingly, there 

will be costs associated with that action. 

However, these are costs that the 

consumer chooses to bear if they want 

an air bag on-off switch or air bag 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
76046 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

deactivation, they are not costs 

prescribed by NHTSA’s regulation. 

Moreover, the agency notes that the 

amendments to part 595 that are 

proposed here would either only 

slightly amend existing processes for 

vehicle owners to request a make 

inoperative exemption or would codify 

longstanding procedures relating to 

requests for deactivations. Given that 

these proposed changes would not 

substantially change the process by 

which vehicle owners currently obtain 

make inoperative exemptions for retrofit 

air bag on-off switches and 

deactivations, and the fact that these 

changes will affect a relatively small 

number of vehicles, there are virtually 

no new costs imposed by this 

rulemaking. A detailed description of 

the costs and benefits can be found 

above. Furthermore, the agency 

prepared an economic analysis for this 

proposed rule, which can be found in 

the docket for this NPRM. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., as amended by 

the Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 

1996), whenever an agency is required 

to publish a notice of proposed 

rulemaking, it must prepare and make 

available for public comment a 

regulatory flexibility analysis that 

describes the effect of the rule on small 

entities (i.e., small businesses, small 

organizations, and small governmental 

jurisdictions) unless the head of an 

agency certifies the proposal will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

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 part 

121.105(a). SBREFA amended the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act to require 

Federal agencies to provide a statement 

of the factual basis for certifying that a 

proposal will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. 

I certify that the changes proposed in 

this NPRM would not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. The 

amendments proposed in this NPRM 

eliminate the sunset provision in 

Subpart B of part 595, make some 

relatively minor changes to on-off 

switch eligibly that only affect a small 

number of vehicles, and codify existing 

agency practices regarding treatment of 

law enforcement and emergency 

vehicles and air bag deactivations. 

This NPRM does not propose any 

changes that would significantly affect 

small entities. Small organizations and 

small governmental units would not be 

significantly affected by the proposed 

amendments of this NPRM since the 

potential cost impacts associated with 

this action are negligible. 

Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) 

NHTSA has examined this proposed 

rule pursuant to Executive Order (E.O.) 

13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) 

and concluded that no additional 

consultation with States, local 

governments or their representatives is 

mandated beyond the rulemaking 

process. The agency has concluded that 

the rulemaking would not have 

sufficient federalism implications to 

warrant consultation with State and 

local officials or the preparation of a 

federalism summary impact statement. 

This proposed rule would not have 

‘‘substantial direct effects on the States, 

on the relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government.’’ 

NHTSA rules can have preemptive 

effect in two ways. First, the National 

Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act 

contains an express preemption 

provision stating that, if NHTSA has 

established a standard for an aspect 

motor vehicle or motor vehicle 

equipment performance a State may 

only prescribe or continue in effect a 

standard for that same aspect of 

performance if the State standard is 

identical to the Federal standard. 49 

U.S.C. 30103(b)(1). It is this statutory 

command by Congress that preempts 

any non-identical State legislative and 

administrative law addressing the same 

aspect of performance. 

The express preemption provision 

described above is subject to a savings 

clause under which ‘‘[c]ompliance with 

a motor vehicle safety standard 

prescribed under this chapter does not 

exempt a person from liability at 

common law.’’ 49 U.S.C. 30103(e). 

Pursuant to this provision, State 

common law tort causes of action 

against motor vehicle manufacturers 

that might otherwise be preempted by 

the express preemption provision are 

generally preserved. 

NHTSA rules can also preempt State 

law if complying with the FMVSS 

would render the motor vehicle 

manufacturers liable under State tort 

law. Because most NHTSA standards 

established by an FMVSS are minimum 

standards, a State common law tort 

cause of action that seeks to impose a 

higher standard on motor vehicle 

manufacturers will generally not be 

preempted. However, if and when such 

a conflict does exist—for example, when 

the standard at issue is both a minimum 

and a maximum standard—the State 

common law tort cause of action is 

impliedly preempted. See Geier v. 

American Honda Motor Co., 529 U.S. 

861 (2000). 

Pursuant to E.O. 13132, NHTSA has 

considered whether this proposed rule 

could or should preempt State common 

law causes of action. The agency’s 

ability to announce its conclusion 

regarding the preemptive effect of one of 

its rules reduces the likelihood that 

preemption will be an issue in any 

subsequent tort litigation. To this end, 

the agency has examined the nature 

(e.g., the language and structure of the 

regulatory text) and objectives of this 

proposed rule and finds that this NPRM, 

like many NHTSA rules, prescribes only 

a minimum safety standard. 

Accordingly, NHTSA does not intend 

that this proposed rule preempt state 

tort law that would effectively impose a 

higher standard on motor vehicle 

manufacturers than that established by 

this proposed rule. Establishment of a 

higher standard by means of State tort 

law would not conflict with the 

minimum standard finalized in this 

document. Without any conflict, there 

could not be any implied preemption of 

a State common law tort cause of action. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

Under the procedures established by 

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), Federal 

agencies must obtain approval from the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) for each collection of 

information they conduct, sponsor, or 

require through regulations, and a 

person is not required to respond to a 

collection of information by a Federal 

agency unless the collection displays a 

valid OMB control number. This 

proposed rulemaking proposes changes 

to the existing information collection 

requirements under 49 CFR part 595.5, 

‘‘Retrofit On-Off Switches for Air Bags.’’ 

In compliance with the requirements 

of the PRA, NHTSA intends to request 

approval for a reinstatement with 

modification of a previously approved 

information collection request. 

Specifically, NHTSA is requesting 

reinstatement of the information 

collection request (ICR) with OMB 

Control No. 2127–0588. This ICR 

corresponds to appendix B to part 595, 

which is a form that any owner or lessee 

of a motor vehicle seeking the 

installation of an air bag on-off switch 

must complete and submit to NHTSA 

before NHTSA will grant or deny 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 76047 

approval for an on-off switch to be 

installed. Additionally, NHTSA plans to 

request that the previously approved 

ICR be modified in accordance with the 

proposals discussed in this NPRM. As 

discussed in the sections above, this 

NPRM proposes to amend several of the 

appendices in part 595, and proposes 

adding an additional appendix to part 

595, which means the burden on the 

public may be different from the 

originally approved ICR. 

As part of seeking approval to 

reinstate the ICR with OMB, NHTSA 

will separately publish a notice giving 

the public the opportunity to comment 

on the reinstatement and modification 

of the ICR. Those notices will provide 

significant detail on the ICR 

reinstatement, and on how the ICR will 

be modified based on the proposals 

discussed in this proposed rule. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) 

NHTSA has analyzed this NPRM for 

the purposes of the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The 

agency has determined that 

implementation of this action will not 

have any significant impact on the 

quality of the human environment. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

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 annually (adjusted annually for 

inflation, with base year of 1995). 

UMRA also requires an agency issuing 

an NPRM or final rule subject to the Act 

to select the ‘‘least costly, most costeffective or least burdensome alternative 

that achieves the objectives of the rule.’’ 

This NPRM would not result in a 

Federal mandate that will likely 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 annually for 

inflation, with base year of 1995). 

Executive Order 12778 (Civil Justice 

Reform) 

When promulgating a regulation, 

agencies are required under E.O. 12988 

to make every reasonable effort to 

ensure that the regulation, as 

appropriate: (1) specifies in clear 

language the preemptive effect; (2) 

specifies in clear language the effect on 

existing Federal law or regulation, 

including all provisions repealed, 

circumscribed, displaced, impaired, or 

modified; (3) provides a clear legal 

standard for affected conduct rather 

than a general standard, while 

promoting simplification and burden 

reduction; (4) specifies in clear language 

the retroactive effect; (5) specifies 

whether administrative proceedings are 

to be required before parties may file 

suit in court; (6) explicitly or implicitly 

defines key terms; and (7) addresses 

other important issues affecting clarity 

and general draftsmanship of 

regulations. 

Pursuant to this Order, NHTSA notes 

as follows. The preemptive effect of this 

NPRM is discussed above. NHTSA notes 

further that there is no requirement that 

an individual submit a petition for 

reconsideration or pursue other 

administrative proceedings before they 

may file suit in court. 

National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

Under the National Technology 

Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 

(NTTAA) (Pub. L. 104–113), all Federal 

agencies and departments shall use 

technical standards that are developed 

or adopted by voluntary consensus 

standards bodies, using such technical 

standards as a means to carry out policy 

objectives or activities determined by 

the agencies and departments. 

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 

International Organization for 

Standardization and the Society of 

Automotive Engineers. The NTTAA 

directs us to provide Congress, through 

OMB, explanations when we decide not 

to use available and applicable 

voluntary consensus standards. There 

are no voluntary consensus standards 

developed by voluntary consensus 

standards bodies pertaining to this 

proposed rule. 

Plain Language Requirement 

E.O. 12866 requires each agency to 

write all rules in plain language. 

Application of the principles of plain 

language includes consideration of the 

following questions: 

• Have we organized the material to 

suit the public’s needs? 

• Are the requirements in the rule 

clearly stated? 

• Does the rule contain technical 

language or jargon that isn’t clear? 

• Would a different format (grouping 

and order of sections, use of headings, 

paragraphing) make the rule easier to 

understand? 

• Would more (but shorter) sections 

be better? 

• Could we improve clarity by adding 

tables, lists, or diagrams? 

• What else could we do to make the 

rule easier to understand? 

NHTSA has considered these 

questions and attempted to use plain 

language in promulgating this proposed 

rule. If readers have suggestions on how 

we can improve our use of plain 

language, please write us. 

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. The RIN contained in the heading 

at the beginning of this notice may be 

used to find this action in the Unified 

Agenda. 

Privacy Act 

In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), 

DOT solicits comments from the public 

to better inform its decision-making 

process. DOT posts these comments, 

without edit, including any personal 

information the commenter provides, to 

www.regulations.gov, as described in 

the system of records notice (DOT/ALL– 

14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at 

www.transportation.gov/privacy. 

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). 

VII. Public Participation 

How do I prepare and submit 

comments? 

• To ensure that your comments are 

correctly filed in the Docket, please 

include the Docket Number in your 

comments. 

• Your comments must not be more 

than 15 pages long. 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, and there is no limit on the 

length of the attachments. 

• If you are submitting comments 

electronically as a PDF (Adobe) file, 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
76048 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

NHTSA asks that the documents be 

submitted using the Optical Character 

Recognition process, thus allowing 

NHTSA to search and copy certain 

portions of your submissions. 

• Please note that pursuant to the 

Data Quality Act, for substantive data to 

be relied on and used by NHTSA, it 

must meet the information quality 

standards set forth in the OMB and DOT 

Data Quality Act guidelines. 

Accordingly, NHTSA encourages you to 

consult the guidelines in preparing your 

comments. DOT’s guidelines may be 

accessed at https://

www.transportation.gov/regulations/

dot-information-dissemination-qualityguidelines. 

Tips for Preparing Your Comments 

When submitting comments, please 

remember to: 

• Identify the rulemaking by docket 

number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register date and page number). 

• Explain why you agree or disagree, 

suggest alternatives, and substitute 

language for your requested changes. 

• Describe any assumptions you make 

and provide any technical information 

and/or data that you used. 

• If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced. 

• Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns, and suggest 

alternatives. 

• Explain your views as clearly as 

possible, avoiding the use of profanity 

or personal threats. 

• To ensure that your comments are 

considered by the agency, make sure to 

submit them by the comment period 

deadline identified in the DATES section 

above. 

• For additional guidance on 

submitting effective comments, see 

https://www.regulations.gov/docs/Tips_

For_Submitting_Effective_

Comments.pdf. 

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 your complete 

submission, including the information 

you claim to be confidential business 

information (CBI), to the NHTSA Chief 

Counsel. When you send a comment 

containing CBI, you should include a 

cover letter setting forth the information 

specified in our CBI regulation (49 CFR 

part 572). In addition, you should 

submit a copy from which you have 

deleted the claimed CBI to the Docket 

by one of the methods set forth above. 

To facilitate social distancing due to 

COVID–19, NHTSA is treating 

electronic submission as an acceptable 

method for submitting CBI to the 

Agency under 49 CFR part 512. Any CBI 

submissions sent via email should be 

sent to an attorney in the Office of Chief 

Counsel at the address given above 

under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. 

Will the agency consider late 

comments? 

We will consider all comments 

received before the close of business on 

the comment closing date indicated 

above under DATES. To the extent 

possible, we will also consider 

comments that the docket receives after 

that date. If the docket receives a 

comment too late for us to consider 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 the docket 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, go to https:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for accessing the dockets. 

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. You can arrange with the 

docket to be notified when others file 

comments in the docket. See 

www.regulations.gov for more 

information. 

If you have any questions about CBI 

or the procedures for claiming CBI, 

please consult the person(s) identified 

in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section. 

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 595 

Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Motor 

vehicles. 

In consideration of the foregoing, 

NHTSA is proposing to amend 49 CFR 

part 595 as follows: 

PART 595—MAKE INOPERATIVE 

EXEMPTIONS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 595 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 

30117, 30122 and 30166; delegation of 

authority at 49 CFR 1.95. 

■ 2. Amend § 595.4 by adding in 

alphabetical order definitions for 

‘‘Deactivation’’, ‘‘Emergency vehicle’’, 

and ‘‘On-off switch’’ to read as follows: 

§ 595.4 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Deactivation means that a dealer or 

motor vehicle repair business disables 

an air bag system in a motor vehicle. 

* * * * * 

Emergency vehicle means law 

enforcement vehicles, as that term is 

defined in S7 of § 571.208 of this 

chapter, firefighting vehicles, and 

ambulances, as that term is defined in 

S3 of § 571.201 of this chapter. 

* * * * * 

On-off switch means a switch that 

allows an occupant to turn an air bag in 

the vehicle on or off. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Revise the heading to Subpart B to 

read as follows: 

Subpart B—Retrofit On-Off Switches 

for Air Bags and Air Bag Deactivations 

■ 4. Revise § 595.5 to read as follows: 

§ 595.5 Requirements. 

(a) Overview of general conditions for 

a vehicle owner or lessee to obtain 

approval to install a retrofit air bag onoff switch. For installing a retrofit air 

bag on-off switch on vehicles other than 

an emergency vehicle, prior to the 

installation of the retrofit air bag on-off 

switch either the owner or lessee of the 

motor vehicle reads the information 

brochure in appendix A to this part and 

submits the completed form in 

appendix B to this part to the National 

Highway Traffic Safety Administration 

(NHTSA) in accordance with the 

instructions on the form. For emergency 

vehicles, the authorized representative 

of the owner or lessee of the emergency 

vehicle submits the completed form in 

appendix D to this part to NHTSA in 

accordance with the instructions on the 

form. NHTSA will consider whether the 

request is consistent with motor vehicle 

safety and the purpose and policies of 

the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle 

Safety Act. If NHTSA agrees to the 

request, NHTSA sends a letter to the 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 76049 

requestor authorizing the installation of 

an on-off switch in that vehicle for that 

air bag. 

(b) Requirements for dealer or motor 

vehicle repair businesses when 

installing retrofit on-off switches for air 

bags. A dealer or motor vehicle repair 

business may modify a motor vehicle by 

installing an on-off switch subject to the 

conditions in paragraphs (b)(1) through 

(5) of this section. 

(1) The dealer or motor vehicle repair 

business receives from the owner or 

lessee of the motor vehicle a letter from 

the National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration that authorizes the 

installation of an on-off switch in that 

vehicle for that air bag. 

(2) The dealer or motor vehicle repair 

business installs the on-off switch in 

accordance with the instructions of the 

manufacturer of the switch. 

(3) The on-off switch meets all of the 

conditions specified in paragraphs 

(b)(3)(i) and (ii) of this section. 

(i) The on-off switch is operable solely 

by a key or a key-like object. The on-off 

switch shall be separate from the 

ignition switch for the vehicle, so that 

the driver must take some action other 

than inserting the ignition key or 

turning the ignition key in the ignition 

switch to turn off the air bag. Once 

turned off, the air bag shall remain off 

until it is turned back on by means of 

the device. If a single on-off switch is 

installed for more than one air bag in 

the vehicle, the on-off switch shall 

allow each air bag to be turned off 

without turning off the other air bag(s). 

The readiness indicator required by 

S4.5.2 of § 571.208 of this chapter shall 

continue to monitor the readiness of the 

air bags even when one or more air bags 

have been turned off. The readiness 

indicator light shall not be illuminated 

solely because an air bag has been 

deactivated by means of an on-off 

switch. 

(ii) A telltale light in the interior of 

the vehicle shall be illuminated 

whenever an air bag is turned off by 

means of the on-off switch. The telltale 

for a driver air bag shall be clearly 

visible to an occupant of the driver’s 

seating position. The telltale for a front 

passenger air bag shall be clearly visible 

to occupants of all front seating 

positions. The telltale for an air bag: 

(A) Shall be yellow; 

(B) Shall have the identifying words 

‘‘DRIVER AIR BAG OFF’’, 

‘‘PASSENGER AIR BAG OFF’’, or 

‘‘PASS AIR BAG OFF’’, as appropriate, 

on the telltale or within 25 millimeters 

of the telltale; 

(C) Shall remain illuminated for the 

entire time that the air bag is ‘‘off’’; 

(D) Shall not be illuminated at any 

time when the air bag is ‘‘on’’; and, 

(E) Shall not be combined with the 

readiness indicator required by S4.5.2 of 

§ 571.208 of this chapter. 

(4) The dealer or motor vehicle repair 

business provides the owner or lessee 

with an insert for the vehicle owner’s 

manual that— 

(i) Describes the operation of the onoff switch; 

(ii) Lists the risk groups on the request 

form set forth in appendix B to this part; 

(iii) States that an on-off switch 

should only be used to turn off an air 

bag for a member of one of those risk 

groups; and 

(iv) States the safety consequences of 

using the on-off switch to turn off an air 

bag for persons who are not members of 

any of those risk groups. The 

description of those consequences 

includes information, specific to the 

make, model, and model year of the 

affected vehicle, about any seat belt 

energy managing features, e.g., load 

limiters, that will affect seat belt 

performance when the air bag is turned 

off. 

(5) In the form included in the agency 

authorization letter specified in 

paragraph (b)(1) of this section, 

Appendix C of this part, the dealer or 

motor vehicle repair business fills in 

information describing itself and the onoff switch installation(s) it makes in the 

motor vehicle. The dealer or motor 

vehicle repair business then sends the 

form to the National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration within 7 working 

days after the completion of the 

described installations. 

(c) Overview of general conditions for 

a vehicle owner or lessee to obtain 

approval to deactivate an air bag. (1) 

For air bag deactivations, prior to the 

deactivation of the air bag the owner or 

lessee of the vehicle submits a written 

request to NHTSA with the following 

information: 

(i) The name and address of the 

vehicle owner or lessee; 

(ii) A request that an air bag be 

deactivated and whether the request 

applies to the driver air bag, front 

passenger air bag, or both; 

(iii) A certification that the owner or 

lessee has read the information brochure 

in appendix A to this part; 

(iv) A detailed justification why 

deactivation is necessary and why the 

installation of an on-off switch is not a 

viable option; and 

(v) Any documentation that supports 

the stated justification; and a 

certification that if the deactivation is 

no longer justified or if they sell the 

vehicle, the owner or lessee would have 

the air bag reactivated or would inform 

the buyer that the air bag has been 

deactivated prior to the sale. 

(2) The owner or lessee mails the 

request to the National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration, Attention: Air 

Bag Deactivation Requests, 1200 New 

Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 

20590 or faxes the request to 202–493– 

2833. NHTSA will consider whether the 

request is consistent with motor vehicle 

safety and the purpose and policy of the 

National Traffic and Motor Vehicle 

Safety Act. If NHTSA agrees to the 

request, NHTSA sends a letter to the 

requestor authorizing the deactivation of 

the specified air bag in the vehicle, with 

labels to be affixed by the dealer or 

motor vehicle repair business to both 

sides of the sun visor at each seating 

position with a deactivated air bag, 

alerting vehicle users about the 

deactivated air bag(s). 

(d) Requirements for dealers or motor 

vehicle repair businesses when 

performing air bag deactivations. A 

dealer or motor vehicle repair business 

may modify a motor vehicle by 

deactivating an air bag subject to the 

conditions in paragraphs (d)(1) through 

(3) of this section. 

(1) Prior to the deactivation of the air 

bag, the dealer or motor vehicle repair 

business receives from the owner or 

lessee of the motor vehicle a letter from 

NHTSA that authorizes the deactivation 

of the specified air bag in the vehicle 

and labels to be affixed by the dealer or 

motor vehicle repair business to both 

sides of the sun visor at each seating 

position with a deactivated air bag, 

alerting vehicle users about the 

deactivated air bag(s). 

(2) The dealer or motor vehicle repair 

business affixes the labels to both sides 

of the sun visor at each seating position 

with a deactivated air bag. 

(3) If a deactivated air bag gets 

reactivated the dealer or motor vehicle 

repair business shall remove the labels 

indicating the air bag was deactivated. 

■ 5. Revise Appendices A through C to 

read as follows: 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

Appendix A to Part 595—Advanced 

Frontal Air Bags and Air Bag On-Off 

Switch Information Brochure 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
76050 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1EP17SE24.020</GPH>

ADVANCED FRONTAL AIR BAGS AND AIR BAG 

ON-OFF SWITCH INFORMATION 

U.S~ Department of Transportation, 

NationalHighway Traffic Safety Administration 

INTRODUCTION 

Cor:isumerswho are inJ:ertain risk groups have the option to have a frontai afr hagori'Offswitch 

installed ihtheifvehide bv a vehicle dealeror tepait busii'iess, This brochurepto.vides thefatts 

you rieedto knowaboutairbagsaridretro:fitalr bagon-offswitchessoyoncanmakean 

ihformeddetisiohJ1boutwhethetltistalling'aswitch ilthetorrectchoice for you. 

NHTSAhas studledfhe effectiveness of advanced frontal. air· bags and determined thatthey can 

significantly r_educe the risk Cifcrash-relatedinjuryand death fur average-'Sizeand larger adults, 

and have,also eliminated these risks to child.passengers and small adults posed by earlier 

generation airbags; 

When an advanced frontal air bag dep.1oys in a crash, the most common airbag:" related itijfrries 

indude minorcuts, bruises, or abrasfo_ns. There:have been no confirmed atr0bag-related 

fatalities invehide!> equipped with. advanced airbags, which beg:airthelt iritrod1Jctibn to the 

market with 2004 modef year veh ides. Although advanced air bags gfve better protection to a 

widerrahge ofoctupaht$, NHTSA still tetomrnends thatfrontseatotcllpahtsmaihtaina l0°ihth 

mirHmun,distance between the frontal arr bagceiver-or dasl)board and theirbreastbone;and 

fasten their seat belKAil' hags are supplementatrestraints ahdare designed to work hestin 

combination withseatbelts. 

Most pepple can mlhimitethe risk of~etiQos air baginJury by makings,mpfo,chariges Jn 

behavior. Front seatadultpassengers can sitasafe distance from the. air bag; Shorter drivers can 

adjusttheirseating position to achieve a safe distance from the air bag; Infants. and children 

undernyeats old should sitinth-e. back seat whenever pos!>ible. And everyone can be property 

restrained. 

Those who mayhotbeableto tonowthese recornmehdationsmayface.anintreasedtiskof 

serious air bag injury. The limited categories of at-risk people who may betJefit;from havingthe 

option toti..lrn of'ftheitair bags indude: 

• DriVers.Who.cannotmaintain the recommended distance.from.the air hag cover; 

• Ddverswith a medical condition thatincreases the risk oh serious,air bag injury;: 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 76051 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1EP17SE24.021</GPH>

• Individuals who musHransport a child i11 a rear-facing car seat in the fronts eat with an 

active airbag} 

• Jndividuals whQ rnust:transport a forward 0fach:rg child in thefro11fseaHn aveh iGl'e: 

Without advanced airbags; and 

• lndividualswho IT1ust transport a p·assef:(ge! whq ti'as a medlcai condition :that a 

physician a$tees increases the risk ofa serious air bag injutyJnthefrontseat. 

HOWAIR BAGS WORK 

When there is a moderate to. severe-trash, a signal is sehlfrotri the air bag system's electro hie 

control unitto the inflator within the airbag module .. An igniter iri theJnflator starts a themkal 

reactionthatproduces a harmless_gas,which inflates theai[ bag within theblink:ofan eye -or 

less than 1/201:h of a second, Air bags have vents, so theydeflateimmediatelyafter cushioning 

you. They cannot smother you and they don't restrict your movement. 

Are all air bapthe$ame? 

No .. Air bags differ In design and performance, Differem:es.exlst 1ri ihecrash speeds that trigger 

aif bagdeployment,the.speed andfotteot deployment; the.size and .Shape ofafr bags; and the 

manner in whlchthey unfold and fnflate,Thatiswhyym.rshould contact your veh1de 

manufacturer ityouwantspetificintorrnatibtl about the arr bags ihyour-carortruck. 

ADVANCED FRONTALAIR BAGS 

What areadvanced frontal airbags? 

In a<lvanced frontal air bag systems, the electronk control unit utilizes addfbonal data inputto 

determine-with what ievel.ofpower~ or even if; the driver fi'ontalairbagot passenger frontal air 

bag will inflate"Advanced air bag deployment determina:liQnsare based on the system;s design 

and sensol'inputs, whith typically indude: site or weight of an occupant; lilihethertheotci:ipant 

is wearing a: seat belt, howfar back the occupant's seattrack is set; and the severity ofthe 

crash. 

Why do we need advanced frontal airbags? 

Advancedfronfalair bagswere designedpritriai:ffyfo Mhi}mlzethe rlskofair 0bagarelated lnjury 

or death to children.andsmaff-stature adults. tn crashes Where higher-powered air bag 

deployment would not be necessary and/or could causelnjury, such as in a low-speed crash or 

in a crash. where the occupant is leaningoutofposition, the systernreducesthe risk ot,anait 

bag injury byeifher: (l)shutting,off (suppressing)thefrontal air bag, or (2)deplo.yingthe frontal 

airbagln alow-r'isk manner (less than 100% offuH force deployment), 

Po all newvehiclescomewith advanced frc,ntal air hap? 
76052 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1EP17SE24.022</GPH>

Yes. All passenger cars andHght trucks {including pickup trucks, SUVs and vans) with a gross 

vehicle weight rating (GVWR)6f8,SOO pounds or less,.ahdari unloaded vehicle weight ofs,soo 

pounds or less, produced after September 1, 2006, have advanced frontal air bags. The GVWR is 

the weight ofthe empty\,ehicl e plus the maximum weightofcargo and passengers that can be 

safely loaded in the vehide, as specified by the rnanufacturer .. Sotne vehicles produced between 

September 1,2003, and September 1, 2006, will also have advanced frontal air bags. You Will 

k110wif your vehicle has advanced frontal air bags if the air bag warning label. on the sun visor 

begins withthe phrase"EVENWITHADVANCEDAIR BAGS." 

How does sensor technology classify the type of occupant? 

Most occupantdassificationsystems in use today classify the occupant based uponweight, 

Which is typit;illy determined Using pressure sensors in the seat cushion. Other tethnologieS: 

utilize pattern recognition ofd,e pressure pmfile onthe seat bottom. Still rnore sophisticated 

systemstould potentially be Utilized, such as op.tical, ihfrc1red, ultrasonice>r electric field sensors 

toclassifythe occupant type. You can check your owner's manual or contact your vehicle's 

manufacturer to determine what type ofoccupant classification technology you may have in 

your vehicle. 

Have advanced air bag systems been tested on child-size dummies? 

Yes. Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) l\lo. 208, which specifies theteq1Jirements 

for advanced air bag systems, requires that all light vehfdes (passenger cars and light duty 

tTl!cks} must meet specific safety performance criteria for dummies representing 12~month-Old 

infants, 3°year-old toddlers; 6~year0 old children~ andsmall0 stature females. For those 

manufacturers electing to provide a lower-powered air bagdep loyment to a chi Id or small 

female occupant in certain tow-speed crashes, the advanced frontal air bag must meet spedfic 

safety injury criteria as set forth in FMVSS No, 208. Forthose manufacturers electing to 

suppress (nOt deploy) a passenger air bag for an infant or child occupant in all crashes, their 

advanced frontal air bag systems must detect child-size dummies, representing infants in tar 

seats and small children in and out of car seats, and be suppressed when tested with those 

dummies. 

How do I kn()W if my child in a rear-facing car.seat is in front of an active air bag? 

(Note~ NHTSA recommends against placing a child in a rear-facing car seat in 

front of an active passenger air bag.) 

Parents and caregivers should verify the air bag.status forevery.childahd rear-facing car seat 

combination. lfyour vehicle is equipped with advanced frontal air bags (the vehicle has a 

warning label Oh the sun visor with the phrase "EVEN WITH ADVANCED AIR BAGS") and if the 

vehicle uses an automatic air bag sup.pression system; thenit wHI suppress. the air bag for 

infants and/or children and provide alightthatlndicatesthe.air bag is off; For a vehicle with a 

suppression system, if your child in a rear-facing car seat does not activatethe light indicating 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 76053 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1EP17SE24.023</GPH>

the air bag is off, then the air bag is active. If the vehicle is equipped with advanced frontal air 

bags, but does notliave a I ight indicatingthe.air bag suppression status, then the. air bag is. 

active, but it is d.eslgned to.deploy in a low risk manner in low-to-moderate speed crashes for 

children. lfyourvehicle is not equippedwitli advanced frontal air bags (the vehicle does .Mt 

have a warning label on the sun visor with tl:)ephrase "EVEN WITH ADVANCED AIR BAGS"); and 

achHd in a rear•facing tar seat is placed in the front passenger seat, the air bag will be active: 

and the child wilt be at r'isk from the fuH force oftheair bag deployment. Parents or caregivers 

rnay benefiffrom haViriga retrofit switch installed toturn off.the air hag ifthe child in a reat• 

facing car seat must be transported in the frontpassenger seat infront ofan active air bag, 

I Just bought a vehitl~ with advanced frontal air bags. Does this mean I can start 

putting my kids in the front seat again? 

No. Please keep:in mind that placing a child in the front seat, no matter what the circumstances, 

ce1mes with increased risk. NHTSA recommends that all children underB years old ride in the 

rear seatinfherightcar.s:eat. Select a car seat based on your child's age and size, and choose a 

seat that fits in your vehicle and use it every time. 

Do I still need to maintain 10 inches between the air bag cover and my 

breastbone? 

Yes; To rninil'Tlize the potential of any air-bag-related injury; NHTSAstill recommends maintaining 

a 10-inch minimum distance between theJrontal airbag cover and the driver's breastbone. This 

can be done by keeping a proper sea.ting positi:on and by moving the seat as. far back as 

possibte. 

AIR BAGON-OFFSWITCHES 

What does an air bag on-'off switch do? 

When an on-off switch is turned to the off posirldn, it deactivates the air bag system and the air 

bag wi Ii not d·eptoy in a crash ofany severity, When an on'-01:Y.switch•is turned oh,the system 

will function normally, te., it may depfoy rn a crash dependingonthe.crash severity; For vehicles 

with advanced frontal air bags, a switch turned on WI II alloWthe system to activate its advanced 

functions, which could mean shutting off the air bag for smaller passengers (seeAdva11ced 

Frontal Air Bag section belo:w). The on-off sWitch can be installed for the driver, passenger, .cir 

both. To limilmisuse, a key must be used to operate the on-off switch. Whentheair)ag is 

turhet:Loff, a irght cbmes on. lhere is a message on or nearthe fightsayrhg ''DRIVERAIR BAG 

OFF," ;'PASSENC:lE R AIR BAG OFF/'or "P.4$S AIR BAG OFF." The air bag will remain off until the key 

is used to turn it back oh. For vehideswith advanced frontal air bags, there maybe another air 

bag status light This status light will operate independently pf the.air bag switch status; based 

on inputfrom the occupant detectiontechnologyin thatseat briversshouid.rely oh theafr bag 

switch status to determine if the air bag has heen switched off. 
76054 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1EP17SE24.024</GPH>

What steps can you take to reduce air bag risk without buying an on-off switch? 

• Children in rearcfacingcarseats should never ride in front ofanactive passenger air bag. 

• Transport children under 13years old lnthe back seat and use the correct restrainHor 

theirweight and height. 

• Always buckle your seat belt, 

• Keep 10 inches between the center ofthe frontal air bag cover ordashboard, and your 

breastbone. 

Thernajority of peopfe don•t need an on-off switch. Almost everyone is safer with air bags than 

with6utthem. In fact, in advanced air bag vehicles! all people (including children 1 to 12 years 

old) who are. properly restrc1ined and who can sit far enough back from their advanced frontal 

air bag are safer, Ideally; you should sit with atleast.10rnchesbetween the center of your 

breastboneandthe covefofyourairbagordashboard, Thefarther back you can move,the 

l6wery6ur risk ofbeihg injured by the. deploying air bag. 

REDUClNG THE RISK 

What is the safest way to rideln front of a frontal air bag? 

First; move the seat as far back as possible and buckle up -every trip; everytlme. The lap belt 

needstofitoveryourhips -not your abdomen,and theshoulderbeltshould lie on your chest 

and over your shoulder, not across the neck or face, Remove any slack from the belt. In a crash, 

seat belts stretch and slow down your movement toward the steering Wheel or dashboard. 

Moving back and properly using seat belts give the frontal air bag a chance to inflate in a crash 

before you make contact With the air bag. 

How do I best protect children in my vehicle? 

NHTSArecommendsthatall children under 13 years old ride in the.rear seat in the appropriate 

child restraint system. Children are. saferln the rear seat, However, when children must sit in the 

front, because the vehicle. has no rear seat; there are too many children for all to ride in back, or 

a child has a medical conditionthatrequires monitoring, they should use the seatbelt and/or 

car seat appropriate for their age, weight and height (see the recommendations at the end. of 

this brochure) and avoid leaning forward. The vehideseatshould be moved as far back frorn the 

air bag as practical. Make sure the chi~d's shoulder b.eltis positibned pfoperly or the car seat 

ha mess is properly adjusted, If adult seat belts donotfit properly, use a booster seat NHTSA 

also recommends consultingyourvehicle's owner's manual for their recommendations on 

transporting children in the front passenger seat. Also,children should never ride on the laps of 

others orsharea seat belt withanother person; 

What should teenagers and adults do to be.safest on the passenger side? 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 76055 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1EP17SE24.025</GPH>

Always wear seat belts. This reduces the distance that they can move forward during a crash. 

Move the seat back as far as practical. The distance between a passenger's chest and the 

dashboard where the air bag is stored is usually more than 10 inches, even with the passenger 

seat all the way forward. 

Who should consider installing an on-off switch? 

• People who must transport children riding in rear-facing car seats in the front passenger 

seat of a vehicle with an active frontal air bag due to a medical condition or the lack of 

an available rear seat 

• People who must transport-forward-facing children (under 13 years old) in the front 

passenger seat due to a medical condition or the lack of an available rear seat in a 

vehicle without advanced frontal air bags 

• Drivers who cannot change their customary driving position and keep lOinches.between 

the air bag cover and the center of their breastbone 

• People (including children} who must.ride in the driver or front passenger seat and 

whose doctors say that, due to their medical condition, the air bag poses a special risk 

that outweighs the risk of hitting their head, neck on:hest in a crash if the frontal air bag 

is turned off 

If you cannot certify that you or any user of your vehicle is in one of these groups, you are not 

eligible for an on-off switch. If you are not in one of these groups, turning off your air bag will 

increase the risk of striking the steering wheel or dashboard in a moderate to severe crash. 

Keep in mind that for some vehicles with advanced air bags, the air bag will automatically turn 

off for some children and small stature adults, and a light indicating that the air bag is 

suppressed will illuminate. Checktosee if this is the case since this could eliminate your need 

for a manual on-off switch. 

THE ON-OFF SWITCH DECISION 

Vehicle owners and lessees can obtain an on-off switch for one or both frontal air bags only if 

they can certify thatthey or a user of their vehicle are in one of the risk groups listed below. 

• Children in rear-facing·car seats who must be transported in the front seat in front of 

an active air bag. A rear-facing car seat should never be placed in the path of an active 

front passenger air bag; therefore, in a vehicle. Without advanced air bags, parents and 

caregivers of children in rear-facing car seats that must be transported in the front 

passenger seat can opt to.have a retrofit on-off switch installed. For a front passenger 

advanced air bag that provides a telltale light indicating the air bag suppression status, if 

your child in a rear-fating car seat does not activate the light indicating the air bag is off, 

then the air bag is active. lfthe advanced front passenger air bag does not provide a 

light indicating the air bag suppression status, then the air bag is active, bot it is 
76056 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1EP17SE24.026</GPH>

d~signed to deploy in a low-risk manner,. These parents and caregivers that must 

transportchildreii iii rear0 faeiiigtar seats in front ofattiVe advanced alt bagscan also 

optto have a retrofit.on-off switch instaU~dtoturrrnff the frorit passenger air bag. 

• Drivers who c:annonit 10 inches away from the air bag. I~ despiteyour besteffotts, 

you cannot siUO.inches from the air bag, you mc1ywisl:i to consult your dealer orvehicl e 

manufatturedoradvite ormodifitations to help you move back or consider requesthig 

an on-off switch; 

• Drivers ofpassengerswith certain medic:afconditic,ns. These are people (indudiiigthitd 

fro11t passengers)who have been advfaed bya physician that, due to.a rne(!ical 

condition, they may benefit from turning off their airbag because an air bag depldyment 

poses greater injury risk to thern than that of hittingt!,eir !,ead, neck orchest in a crash 

lfthe fronti:ifair bag ii.turned off. Withoutan airbag,. even a belted octtipanttoold hit 

their head, neck or chest in a crash. 

o A national conference ofphysiciiiiis Considered all medical conditions:commonly 

cited as possible Jusfificationsfor turning off air bags. The physicians did NOT 

recommend turning off air bags fot people With pacemi!kers, supplemental 

oxygen1 eyeglassesimedlan stemotomy,anglna,chronicobstructive pulmonary 

disease, emphysema, asthma,.breast teconstruct'ion-, mastectomy; scolit!sis (if the 

person-can be positioned properly), previous back or neck surgery; previous facial 

reconstrucfive surgery or racial injlny, hyperacusis, tinnitus, advanced age, 

osteogenesis imperfecta,osteoporosisand arthritis (if the person cansita-safe 

distance from the frontal air bag), previousophthalmolc,gic surgery; Down 

syndrome and atlanfoaxialinstability (ifthe person can reliably sit properly 

aligned),orpregnancy. 

o The physicians recommended turning off an air bag ifa safe sitti ngdisfance or 

position cannot be rnaintai ned. by:a driver because of scoliosis or ac[:iondtoplasia, 

or-by a passenger because of scoliosis or D'own syndrome and atlantoaxial 

instability. The physiciansatso noted that a passengerfrontal air bag might have. 

to be turned off ifan infant.or-child has a medical condition and must rideln 

front so that he or she can be monitored. To obtain a copy of the 

recommendations,calLthe NHTSAVehicle Safety Hotline(888·327~4236)or visit 

the NHTSAwebsite;·www;nhtsa,govteguipmenttair-ba:gsitthe;to:pfo'<>ncoff~ 

switch. 

•· Fol'ward-fadngchiidrehwho must be: transported in the front passenger seat in:a 

vehicle Without advanced air bags. Chlldrenunder13years-old should be transported in 

the backseatwhenever possible.Chtldr.enunder 13yearsoldwho must be transported 

in the front passenger seat should be properly restrained With the seat moved as.far 

back as possible, and they should notlean forward. The vastmajodty of all fatally 

injured children in a vehicle withoutadvanced air bags were.completely unrestrained. If 

children sit or lean.forward, tbey may slip out oftheirshoulderbelts, which puts them at 

risk; ffavehicl e owner or I essee musHransport a ch Hd in the front seatof a veh i clec 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 76057 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1EP17SE24.027</GPH> EP17SE24.028</GPH>

Sinc!'!the air bagwiUnotautomaticallytum itselfbackonafter you tum it off with an oo-off 

switch, you mustfemembettoturh itonwheh someone who iShotatrisk iSsittihg in that seat. 

Every onsoffswitch has a light to rernind you whenttie c1ir bag:is Wmlld cjff, 

If I turn off my airbag:, wrn myseat belts provide enough protection? 

Air bags increase the protection provided by seat belts alone. lfthe air bag isturnedoff, you 

lose·this extra protection, 

lo some hewe.r vehicles;,tutnihg offyour air bag may have additional cohsequences. These 

vehicles have.seatbeltsthatwere specially designed to work together with airbags. lhhe crash 

forces becon:re too great, ttreseseat belts have pretensfoners and loadli miters that are 

designedto make: seat belts more effective, Pretensioners retractthe seat belt to. remove excess 

slack almosfinstantly upons·ensingthevehide-has crashed; load limitersallowthe beltfo 

''.giife!' or yield when forces on the belt rise above a.safe. levet. Most, if notaU! new cars and light 

truckssold in the UhitedStateshave been equipped withpretel'.fsionersand load limitersinthe 

driver's.and righMront passehger's seats.The arr bagpreventsyou frorn movingtoo fatforward 

aftertheseat belts yield. Withouttheair bag to cushion thisforward movement, th·e chance of 

the occupant hitting the vehicle interfor is.increased .. 

I What Restraint Is Right for Your Child? 

II 

~•._•)'!"ir.·'diild.•.~•·~~~~···~··~•t 

liami,os.mmtt.e ... :u~diti-liip•~""~ 

lliiilt~J;j,Jimr¥.•~~Ono~)'!!\ii'· 

iiliilll~~-..-~~ 

tt'itinie•lifln'id bi:••l>iioiiiri--.'!iiiitsllll·to;illiibiu; -
76058 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

Appendix B to Part 595—Request Form 

for Frontal Air Bag On-Off Switch 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1EP17SE24.029</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 76059 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1EP17SE24.030</GPH>

0 

U.S. Departmant 01 Trcnportallal 

NallOIIIII Hllllway Traffic: lalely 

Adffllnlllraflon 

Appendix B to Part 595 

Request for Frontal 

Air Bag On-Off Switch 

0MB No. 2127-0588 

Vehicle Owner or Lessee Instructions: Read the National Highway 11-:,ffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) information brochure, 

Ad,1ancedFtontalAir Bagi· & Air Bag011-0jf Swi1ch liiformatibn. If you want authorization for your driver air bag, passe11ger air bag, or both, :fill out 

Parts A, B, E, and F completely, fill out Parts C and Das appropriate, and send th.is form to: 

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 

Attention: Derrick Lewis (NIO-120) 

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE 

Washington, DC 20590-1000 

Please print: 

Incomplete forms will 'be returned to the owner or lessee. 

For faster response, fox to 202-493-2833 

or email derri.ck.lewis@dot.gov. 

If you -need a copy of the brochure or have any quest.ions about how to fill out this torm, ·call- the 

NHTSA Hotline at 888-327-4236. 

Part A, Name and Email Phone 

Contact Information 

First Middle Last 

Street Address (Residence) City State ZIP Code 

Part B. I own or lease the following vehicle (owners of multiple vehicles should consult the additional 

instructions at the end of this form): 

Make 

Model Year 

Model and Trim 

Date of Mfr. 

Vehicle Identification Number (located on driver's side of dashboard 

.near windshield and on certification label on driver', door frame) 

Part C. Switch for Driver Air Bag 

I request authorization for the installation of an on-off switch for the driver air bag in my vehicle. I certify that I or another driver 

of my vehicle meets the criteria for the risk group checked below. (At least one box must be checked.) 

Medical condition. The driver has a medical condition which, according to his or her physician: 

• Causes the driver air bag to pose a special risk for the driver; and 

• Makes the potential harm from the driver air bag in a crash greater than the potential harm from turning off that air bag and allowing the driver, even if bdted, to hit the steering wheel, dashboard, or 

windshield in a crash. 

Distance from driver air bag. Despite taking all reasonable steps to move back from the driver air 

bag, the driver is not able to maintain a i 0-inch distance from the center of his or her breastbone to the 

center of the driver air bag cover, 

HS Form603 

NRM•240718·001 

continued_,. 
76060 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1EP17SE24.031</GPH>

Part D. Switch for Passenger Air Bag 

I request authorization for the installation of an on-off switch for the passenger air bag in my vehicle. I certify that I or 

another passenger in my vehicle meets the criteria for the risk group checked below. (At least one box must be checked.) 

0 

Child in rear-facing car seat. I transport a child in a rear-facing car seat who must ride in the 

front seat in from of an active air bag (refer to the information brochure) because: 

My vehicle has no rear seat; 

My vehicle has a rear seat too small to accommodate a rear-facing car seat; or 

The child has a medical condition which, according to the infant\ physician, makes it necessary for 

the child to ride in the front seat so that the driver can constantly monitor the child's condition. 

Forward-facing child. A forward-facing child under 13 years old must ride in the front sear in a 

pre-advanced air bag vehicle (refer to the information brochure) because: 

My vehicle has no rear seat; 

Although children ages 1 to 12 ride in the rear seat(s) whenever possible, children ages 

1 to 12 sometimes must ride in the front because no space is available in the rear 

seat(s) of my vehicle; or 

111e child has a medical condition which, according to tht child's physician, makes 

it for the child to ride in the front seat so that the driver can cot1stanrly 

child's condition. 

Medical condition. A passenger (including children ages 1 to 12) has a medical condition which, 

according to his or her physician: 

Causes the passenger air bag to pose a special risk for the passenger; and 

Makes the potential harm from rhe passenger air bag in a crash greater than the potential harm from 

tnrning off that air bag and allowing the passenger, even if belted, .to hit the dashboard, or wind 

shield in a crash. 

Part E. I make this request based on the following understandings 

(check each box. below after reading carefully): 

0 

Information brochure. I certify that I have read the NHTSA information brochure, Admnced Frontal Afr 

Bags & On-Off Switch information. I understand that air bags should be turned off only for people at risk 

and tnrned back on for people not at risk. 

Loss of air bag protection. I understand that tnrning off an air bag may have serious safety consequences. 

\Vhen an air bag is off, even belted people may hit their head, neck, or chest on the steering wheel, 

dashboard, or windshield in a moderate to serious crash. That possibility may be increased in some newer 

vehicles with seat belts that are specially designed to work with the air bag. Those belts, which are designed 

to reduce the concentration of crash forces on any single part of the body, typically allow the occupant to 

move farther forward in a crash than older belts. Without the air bag to cushion this forward movement, the 

chance of the occupant hitting the vehicle interior is increased. 

Waiver. I understand that motor vehicle dealers and repair b,tsinesses may require me to sign a waiver of 

liability before they install an on-off switch. 

HS Form603 

NRM-240718-001 

continued-I! 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 76061 

Appendix C to Part 595—Installation of 

Air Bag On-Off Switches 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1EP17SE24.032</GPH>

Part F. Certification 

I certify to. the U.S. Departinent ofThmsportation that the infunnation, certifications, and understandings given or indicated by 

inc on this furmaretruthful, correct, and romplete to the best of my knowledge and belie£ I recognize that the statements I have 

made on this funn concetn a matter within the jurisdiction.of a department of the United States and iliattnaking a fuise, fictitious, 

or fraudnlem: stateme11t may render me·subject to criminal prosecution under Tttle 18, United States Code, Section 1001. 

Date I Signatute of owner/lessee 

Additional instructions and information fur whlcle owners and lessees, An owner or lessee of multiple vehicles (e.g., a fleet owner) who 

wants an on-off switch fonhe same air bag (e.g., just the pMsenger air bag) in more than one vehicle and for the. same reason·does not need 

to submit a separate form for each vehicle. Instead, the owner. or lessee may list the make, model, model year, and vehicle identification 

number for each of those ·vehicles and attach the list to a copy of th is form .. Each page of the list must be signed and dated by the owner <lr 

lessee. A list. may also be attached to a single copy of this form if the owner or lessee wishes to request authorization for on.off switches for 

both air bags in multiple vehicles. 

HS'Fimn603 

NRM-'240718--00:L 
76062 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

■ 6. Add Appendix D to read as follows: Appendix D to Part 595—Request Form 

for Air Bag On-Off Switch for 

Emergency Vehicles 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1EP17SE24.033</GPH>

0 

U.S. Deparlmanl cl Trcmportallcn 

Nllll-l HlgllwaY Trllffk: Slllely 

Aclmlnlllratlon 

Appendix C to Part 595 

Installation of 

Air Bag On-Off Switches 

0MB No. 2127-0588 

The form and ins.ructions be.low will be included in agency letters sent to vehicle own.ers or lessees authorizing the installation of air bag 

on.-oif switches. Each letter '1'.ill identify the owner or lessee and the vehicle for which instalLition is attthorized. 

The vehicle dealer or repair business identified below made the following on-off switch instal!ation(s) for the air bag(s) in the motor 

vehicle identified above: 

Name of motor vehicle dealer or repair business 

Street Address (Residence) City State ZIP Code 

On-off switch(es) were installed for the air bag(s) checked on this form: 

O Driver air bag 

O Passenger air bag 

Date of installation Signature of authoti7.ed representative of dealer or repair business 

Instructions for vehicle dealers and repair businesses: Within 7 days of your installation of an on-off switch in the vehicle 

identified ab(We, you must complete this form and send it to: 

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. 

Attention: Derrick Lewis (NIO-120) 

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE 

Washington, DC 20590-1000 

For faster response, fax to 202-493-2833 

or email derrick.lewis@dot.gov. 

Note: An agency may not conduct or sponsor, :llid a person is not required to .respond to, a collection of information unless it 

displays a currently valid 0MB controlnumber. T11at number appears above. 

HS Form 603 

NRM-240718~001 

15974o-071223-v2a 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 76063 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1EP17SE24.034</GPH>

U~DlpartrrW!rf.A'T11;1NjMlulka1 

Nllllliniil HlgllWiii, 1ililk tiiliily 

Adml~ 

Appendix D to Part 595 

Reque$t for 

Air llag On-off Switch 

For Emergency Vehicles· 

OMBNo. 2_127--0588 

!fan Emergency Services Departmertt or: Organitariony,imts authorization for-· front ~nger a.it bag on'°ffswitches fur its emttgency vehicles, the organitarionmmt 1ii1 out thl$ form completdyand send it to: •• • • 

National Highway'I'ralficSafety.Admfuiscration 

.Attentioh: Derrick Lewis (NIO-120). 

12.00 NewJerseyAveriueSE 

Washington,DC 20590-1000 

Please:·prfur, 

For-lasterresptmse, fax to 202-493°283-3 or email ·derricldewis@dor;gov. 

Please ttoredii:complete for.ms will not be protessed'cand>che te<J.uestet.mayhe contacted. 

If you need a copy ofthe brochure. or.have any questions about how to.fill out this form,ca:ilcl:ie 

NHTSA Hotlineat888-327-42~6. 

Please note that a FeJeralagency may .not conduct or sponsor, and a person is-.. not required to respond to; a collection of 

information unless-the form for such collection -ofinformation <lisplays a currently valid 0MB control.number, such.as 

the- number that appears at the top of-thts form,- • • 

. . ·· . ·· . .... ··.··-

Part A. Name and Email Phone 

contac::t' lnfc>iil'lation 

Name ofOrganization Ncame ofApplicant 

Street Address City State ZIP Code 

Part B. My department or company owns,or leases .. the.-following vehicle(s) (for multiple 

vehicles, please attach this-identifying information fur all ydiicles on a. separate piece of paper): 

Make 

Model. Model year 

Vehicle Identification Number {17 numbei,;/lette.-.locatedon .. the 

driver's; lide of tlre dashboard neat: ik wfndshidd, -and. on the certification 

label·on the··driver·side-door frame) 

Part C. Switch for Front F'assengel'.' Air Bag 

B$Fotm603. 

lrequest authorw.tlonfot the lnsrallatiorr of an on-off switch fur thefront passenger airbag in my·department's0or 

company's emergencyvehicle(s)to: delictivate: the frortt passenger air bag{s}· in the vehicle{s) to protect our personnel, 

computers and.related equipment frorn a deployment ofthefront passenger air b~s). 

contiiUied _. 
76064 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

Issued in Washington, DC, under authority 

delegated in 49 CFR 1.95 and 501.5. 

Sophie Shulman, 

Deputy Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2024–20651 Filed 9–16–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–C 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1EP17SE24.035</GPH>

Part D. I make this reci•est MSed on the fallowing certifications and understandings 

(md adt om: Wow ak ~ the sllll:l!mmllli ~}: 

Need fDr tile installation of ecpdpment. in the front passenger seating 

compartment. l certify that. my 4ep:tttl00llt or mmp:my mqrwm th!i! m!ltllllbt:il:m or oompi1w. or other 

jl:!b-Rb.md equipi:mmt in the depklyment mne of me froEl<t ~gee mix hag, md limits ·dw lllll! of too fm111t 

pui;enp- fflll:ing pmil:io,n. 

Ability to install equqament outside of cl~ent ane:. I mrtify·thu my~ 

or mmpmy ii .unmle m hau om oompulll!n m job-mlated equipml!llt illltaillm in a. mllfflll!!r that is 

i!!lfettive for ow: U!l!! ooai®; of the d,i!~oymmt mn.e of l:lm froM: pll.lm!tiger air bag, d111e to physiad 

oomi:llii;Jm oi: the partimlar: 'Mlrk~re!.iJm! ~ of our ~pirtment oi: wmp:imr. 

Loss of air bag protection. i undecstmd that tm:n:lfig ;;,If m Ilic bag may have -i.ou:s ~1 

oonsequ-. When m mr bag ilil Mf, 'l!'fil!tt belted poop~ may hlt. th!& h.ca4 nt'i.!i:k. m: cl:um: on the ·~ 

wheel, dashbailrd. or wiradrihield in a ~ w 2iimu auh. 1:bllit !Mell i"r t1mlffl! 

new-er 'ldikia; wuh i;eal: bi!llt! ffillt are ~y d,es,.igmd to '11/l!d with me air 

d!m,ig11,ed to r~m~ !he CMcellitml1on of cram~ on any ~le part of i:he allow ·the. 

occupmt m fflffi'I:'! fii.rd:w:· mrwimi :in 11 csadl ·than ~ belt!!. Without the air bag te amhmn tfm lonnrd 

iOOl'll!IDl!nt, !:Im di.moo of me oi::cupmt httruig me ftlhlde :ioterim ii m~ 

WBiver. I undimtmd ttw motor 'l'ffiic~ ~ amd mpilir ~· milj" mqwre me to sign a W!li\11!!' of 

liability befom tne)' imtllilJ! m oo-otr mtm