Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 119 / Wednesday, June 22, 2022 / Proposed Rules 37289 

when used as inert ingredients in 

pesticide formulations applied under 40 

CFR 180.910. The petitioner believes no 

analytical method is needed because it 

is not required for an exemption from 

the requirement of a tolerance. Contact: 

RD 

D. New Tolerances for Non-Inerts 

1. PP 1F8922. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2021– 

0433). Valent U.S.A. LLC, 4600 Norris 

Canyon Road, San Ramon, CA 94583, 

requests to establish a tolerance in 40 

CFR part 180 for residues of the 

fungicide, inpyrfluxam in or on cotton, 

undelinted seed at 0.01 ppm, cotton, gin 

byproducts (gin trash) at 0.02 ppm. The 

analytical method RM–50C–1 LC/MS/ 

MS and external standardization) is 

used to measure and evaluate the 

chemical inpyrfluxam. Contact: RD. 

2. PP 1F8924. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2021– 

0433). Valent U.S.A. LLC, 4600 Norris 

Canyon Road, San Ramon, CA 94583, 

requests to establish a tolerance in 40 

CFR part 180 for residues of the 

fungicide, inpyrfluxam in or on wheat, 

forage at 0.01 ppm, wheat, grain at 0.01 

ppm, wheat, hay at 1.5 ppm, and wheat, 

straw at 0.3 ppm. The analytical method 

RM–50C–1 LC/MS/MS and external 

standardization) is used to measure and 

evaluate the chemical inpyrfluxam. 

Contact: RD. 

3. PP 1F8942. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2021– 

0833). Valent U.S.A. LLC, 4600 Norris 

Canyon Road, San Ramon, CA 94583, 

requests to establish a tolerance in 40 

CFR part 180 for residues of the 

fungicide, inpyrfluxam in or on 

rapeseed, seed (crop subgroup 20A) at 

0.01 ppm. The analytical method RM– 

50C–1 LC/MS/MS and external 

standardization) is used to measure and 

evaluate the chemical inpyrfluxam. 

Contact: RD. 

4. PP 1F8979. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2022– 

0452). Gowan Company, LLC., 370 

South Main Street, Yuma, AZ 85364, 

requests to establish a tolerance in 40 

CFR part 180 for residues of the miticide 

Acynonapyr, 3-endo-[2-propoxy-4- 

(trifluoromethyl)phenoxy]-9-[5- 

(trifluoromethyl)-2-pyridyloxy]-9- 

azabicyclo[3.3.1]nonane) and its 

metabolites AP, 3-endo-[2-propoxy-4- 

(trifluoromethyl)phenoxy]-9- 

azabicyclo[3.3.1]nonane, and AY, 5- 

(trifluoromethyl)-2-pyridinol in or on 

almond at 0.03 ppm; almond, hulls at 

4.0 ppm; crop group 10, citrus fruits at 

0.3 ppm; citrus, oil at 15.0 ppm; orange, 

dried pulp at 0.7 ppm; grape at 0.6 ppm; 

raisins at 3.0 ppm; hops at 50.0 ppm; 

crop group 11, pome fruits at 0.2 ppm; 

and apple, wet pomace at 0.4 ppm. LC/ 

MS/MS is used to measure and evaluate 

the chemical acynonapyr and its 

metabolites (AP, AP–2, AY, AY–3, and 

AY–1-Glc). Contact: RD. 

5. PP 2F8996. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2021– 

0787). SePRO Corporation, 11550 North 

Meridian Street, Suite 600, Carmel, IN 

46032, requests to establish tolerances 

in 40 CFR part 180.420(a)(2) for residues 

of the herbicide fluridone, 1-methyl-3- 

phenyl-5-[3-(trifluoromethyl)phenyl]- 

4(1H)-pyridinone, including its 

metabolites and degradates, in or on the 

raw agricultural commodities of peanut 

at 0.1 ppm and peanut, hay at 0.15 ppm. 

ELISA, HLPC/UV, LC/MS/MS, and 

QuEChERS are used to measure and 

evaluate the chemical residues. Contact: 

RD. 

(Authority: 21 U.S.C. 346a) 

Dated: June 10, 2022. 

Delores Barber, 

Director, Information Technology and 

Resources Management Division, Office of 

Program Support. 

[FR Doc. 2022–13291 Filed 6–21–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

49 CFR Part 563 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2022–0021] 

RIN 2127–AM12 

Event Data Recorders 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: NHTSA is proposing to 

amend its regulations regarding Event 

Data Recorders (EDRs) to extend the 

EDR recording period for timed data 

metrics from 5 seconds of pre-crash data 

at a frequency of 2 Hz to 20 seconds of 

pre-crash data at a frequency of 10 Hz 

(i.e., increase from 2 samples per second 

to 10 samples per second). This NPRM 

begins the process of fulfilling the 

mandate of the Fixing America’s Surface 

Transportation Act (FAST Act) to 

establish the appropriate recording 

period in NHTSA’s EDR regulation. 

DATES: You should submit your 

comments early enough to be received 

not later than August 22, 2022. We are 

proposing an effective date of the first 

September 1st one year from the 

publication of the final rule. 

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. ET, Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

Instructions: All submissions must 

include the agency name and docket 

number. Note that all comments 

received will be posted without change 

to http://www.regulations.gov, including 

any personal information provided. 

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 Ground Floor, 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: 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. In 

order to facilitate comment tracking and 

response, we encourage commenters to 

provide their name, or the name of their 

organization; however, submission of 

names is completely optional. Whether 

or not commenters identify themselves, 

all timely comments will be fully 

considered. 

Confidential Business Information: If 

you wish to submit any information 

under a claim of confidentiality, you 

should submit three copies of your 

complete submission, including the 

information you claim to be confidential 

business information, to the Chief 

Counsel, NHTSA, at the address given 

under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. In addition, you should 

submit two copies, from which you 

have deleted the claimed confidential 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
37290 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 119 / Wednesday, June 22, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

1 In 2012, NHTSA proposed to convert part 563’s 

‘‘if equipped’’ requirements for EDRs into a new 

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 

mandating the installation of EDRs in most light 

vehicles. The NPRM did not propose making any 

changes to the current EDR regulation’s 

performance requirements, including those for the 

required data elements (77 FR 74145). In 2019, 

NHTSA withdrew this proposal due to the near 

universal installation of EDRs on light vehicles (84 

FR 2804). 

2Part 563 requires EDR data to survive the crash 

tests in FMVSS Nos. 208, ‘‘Occupant crash 

protection,’’ and 214, ‘‘Side impact protection.’’ 

3For the purposes herein, we are using the term 

‘‘imaging’’ to refer to the process by which data are 

retrieved from an EDR. When imaging the data on 

an EDR, the original data set remains intact and 

unchanged in the memory banks of the EDR. 

4NHTSA had originally proposed an 8-second 

duration in the NPRM. 69 FR 32942 (June 14, 2004). 

However, NHTSA decided to reduce the duration 

in response to public comments. 71 FR 51020 (Aug. 

28, 2006). 

5 In the 2012 NPRM it was estimated that about 

92 percent of model year 2010 light vehicles had 

some EDR capability. 

6National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. 

(2022, March) Results of event data recorders precrash duration study: A report to Congress (Report 

No. DOT HS 813 082A). 

business information, to the Docket 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 questions, please contact Ms. 

Carla Rush, Office of Crashworthiness 

Standards, National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590 

(telephone: 202–366–1740, fax: 202– 

493–2739). For legal questions, please 

contact Ms. Sara Bennett, Office of Chief 

Counsel, National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590 

(telephone: 202–366–2992, fax: 202– 

366–3820). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

A. Overview of Event Data Recorder 

Technology and Regulatory History 

B. The Fixing America’s Surface 

Transportation Act 

C. Event Data Recorders Duration Study 

II. Proposal 

A. Pre-Crash EDR Recording Duration 

B. Pre-Crash EDR Recording Frequency 

C. Benefits 

D. Costs 

E. Lead Time 

III. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices 

I. Background 

A. Overview of Event Data Recorder 

Technology and Regulatory History 

Event data recorders (EDRs) are 

devices that are used to record safety 

information about motor vehicle crashes 

immediately before and during a crash. 

The recorded information can aid crash 

investigators to assess the performance 

of specific safety equipment before and 

during a crash. This information can 

assist the agency and others with 

identifying potential opportunities for 

safety improvement in vehicles already 

on the road, as well as contributing to 

improve future vehicle designs and 

more effective safety regulations. This 

information could also aid first 

responders in assessing the severity of a 

crash and estimating the probability of 

serious injury in vehicles equipped with 

Advanced Automatic Crash Notification 

(AACN) systems and can improve defect 

investigations and crash data collection 

quality. (See the 2006 final rule 

establishing the EDR regulation 

(discussed below) for further details. (71 

FR 50998.) 

In August 2006, NHTSA established 

49 CFR part 563 (part 563), which sets 

forth requirements for data elements, 

data capture and format, data retrieval, 

and data crash survivability for EDRs. 

(71 FR 50998.) Part 563 does not 

mandate that vehicles have EDRs, but is 

instead an ‘‘if equipped’’ standard that 

applies only to light vehicles required to 

have frontal air bags that a manufacturer 

chooses to voluntarily equip with 

EDRs.1 Part 563 ensures that all EDRs 

subject to the regulation capture the 

same core set of data elements in a 

crash, standardizes the parameters 

(format, duration, etc.) of captured data 

elements, and sets minimum 

requirements for data survivability.2

Part 563 further requires that 

manufacturers of vehicles with EDRs 

that are subject to part 563 make 

commercially available a tool for the 

purpose of imaging 3 the data collected 

by the EDR. 

Tables I and II of part 563 list the 

various data elements that are covered 

under the standard. Table I lists data 

elements that all EDRs subject to part 

563 are required to record, along with 

the recording interval (duration) and 

sampling frequency. Table II lists data 

elements that EDRs subject to part 563 

are not required to record, but that are 

subject to part 563 if they are recorded. 

Table II also provides the recording 

interval (duration) and sampling 

frequency for each listed data element. 

In addition, all data elements in Tables 

I and II must be reported according to 

the range, accuracy, and resolution in 

Table III. As is relevant to this 

rulemaking, several data elements in 

both Table I and Table II must be 

captured for a duration of 5 seconds 

prior to the crash (speed, engine 

throttle, service brake, engine RPM, ABS 

activity, stability control, steering 

input). NHTSA established this 5- 

second duration because the agency 

concluded that it would be long enough 

to ensure the usefulness of the data in 

crash reconstruction while also 

minimizing the risk that the data 

capture process would over-tax the 

EDR’s microprocessor, which could 

cause a malfunction that could lead to 

a loss of data.4

Part 563 became fully effective on 

September 1, 2012. The agency 

estimates that 99.5 percent of model 

year 2021 passenger cars and other 

vehicles with a gross vehicle weight 

rating (GVWR) of 3,855 kilograms (kg) 

(8,500 pounds) or less have part 563 

compliant EDRs.5

B. The Fixing America’s Surface 

Transportation Act 

Section 24303 of the Fixing America’s 

Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act), 

Public Law 119–14 (Dec. 4, 2015), 

requires NHTSA to conduct a study ‘‘to 

determine the amount of time event data 

recorders installed in passenger motor 

vehicles should capture and record for 

retrieval [of] vehicle-related data in 

conjunction with an event in order to 

provide sufficient information to 

investigate the cause of motor vehicle 

crashes,’’ and to submit a report 

containing the findings of this study to 

Congress. Further, within two years of 

submitting this report to Congress, 

NHTSA ‘‘shall promulgate regulations 

to establish the appropriate period 

during which event data recorders 

installed in passenger motor vehicles 

may capture and record for retrieval 

vehicle-related data to the time 

necessary to provide accident 

investigators with vehicle-related 

information pertinent to crashes 

involving such motor vehicles.’’ 

As discussed in detail in section C 

below, NHTSA completed the Event 

Data Recorders Duration Study required 

by Section 24303. On September 28, 

2018, NHTSA submitted a Report to 

Congress summarizing the results of the 

study to the House Committee on 

Energy and Commerce and the Senate 

Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

Transportation.6 This NPRM begins the 

process of promulgating regulations to 

establish appropriate EDR data 

recording durations as mandated under 

the FAST Act. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 119 / Wednesday, June 22, 2022 / Proposed Rules 37291 

7Chen, R.J., Tatem, W.M., & Gabler, H.C. (2022, 

March) Event data recorder duration study 

(Appendix to a Report to Congress. Report No. DOT 

HS 813 082B). National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration. 

8 Ibid. Phase I did not analyze lane departure 

behavior prior to a road departure crash. 

9NASS–CDS was utilized because it contains 

over 9,000 EDR downloads. NASS–CDS sampling 

weights were used in the calculations unless 

otherwise specified. 10The National Motor Vehicle Crash Causation 

Study (NMVCCS) was also analyzed, but due to the 

small sample size distributions of pre-crash 

maneuvers were not conducted. However, the 

NMVCCS dataset was analyzed to determine the 

frequency of vehicle malfunctions in crashes, and 

none of the 50 vehicles in the final dataset were 

reported as having a vehicle malfunction by the onsite investigator. 

11 Intersection traversal time is not directly 

measured by a vehicle’s EDR; researchers calculated 

traversal time for this study by reconstructing crash 

events. 

12The two studies used were a 100-Car NDS 

conducted by Virginia Tech Transportation Institute 

[Neale, V.L., Klauer, S.G., Knipling, R.R., Dingus, 

T.A., Holbrook, G.T., and Petersen, A. (2002) The 

100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study, Phase 1— 

Experimental Design. (DOT Report HS 809 536) 

Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration], and the Second Strategic Highway 

Research Program (SHRP–2) NDS conducted by the 

Transportation Research Board of The National 

Academies, [Hankey, J.M., M.A. Perez, and J.A. 

McClafferty. Description of the SHRP 2 naturalistic 

database and the crash, near-crash, and baseline 

data sets, Task Report, Virginia Tech Transportation 

Institute, Blacksburg, VA, 2016]. 

13For rear-end crashes the striking vehicle was 

examined. 

14Up until 2015, NASS was comprised of two 

probability sampling systems: the General Estimates 

System (GES) and CDS. Then in 2016, the Crash 

Investigation Sampling System (CISS) replaced the 

CDS. 

15 Intersection boundaries were used as a 

reference point to divide the approach and traversal 

phase of an intersection (e.g., the edge of the stop 

bar or cross walk marking closest to the center of 

the intersection was used as the boundary). 

C. Event Data Recorders Duration Study 

To meet the agency’s obligations 

under Section 24303 of the FAST Act, 

NHTSA contracted with researchers at 

Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State 

University (Virginia Tech) to conduct a 

study to determine the recording 

duration that would be necessary for 

EDRs to provide sufficient vehiclerelated data to investigate the cause of 

motor vehicle crashes (the ‘‘EDR 

Duration Study’’).7 Because crash 

investigators must understand the 

events leading up to a crash to 

determine crash causation, the EDR 

Duration Study sought to determine the 

necessary recording duration to 

encompass a vehicle’s relevant 

maneuvers for three crash types that 

could benefit from more than 5 seconds 

of pre-crash recording time: rear-end, 

intersection, and road departure 

crashes.8 For all three of these crash 

types, the study hypothesizes that it is 

necessary to capture the initiation of 

crash avoidance maneuvers by the 

driver, if any, to better determine 

causation. The specific crash avoidance 

maneuvers examined in the study were 

the driver’s release of the accelerator, 

and the initiation of pre-crash braking 

and evasive steering. In addition, for 

intersection crashes, it is also necessary 

to capture vehicle data for the duration 

that the vehicle is approaching and 

traversing an intersection, since 

intersection crashes often have complex 

causes that extend back further than 

when the driver begins making crash 

avoidance maneuvers (e.g., a rolling 

stop at the stop sign or any indication 

of erratic driving during the approach). 

The EDR Duration Study was 

conducted in two phases. Phase I 

provided an estimate of how often EDRs 

fail to record a sufficient duration of 

pre-crash data; however, this analysis 

did not provide insight into what 

duration beyond 5 seconds of pre-crash 

data is needed to capture crash 

causation. The emphasis in Phase II was 

on using driver actions in normal 

driving to determine the complete 

duration of driver pre-crash actions. 

Phase I used cumulative distributions 

of the EDR data pulled from NHTSA’s 

National Automotive Sampling System 

Crashworthiness Data System (NASS– 

CDS) database 9 10 to estimate how 

frequently the current 5-second EDR 

duration requirement failed to capture 

the initiation of pre-crash driver 

maneuvers in rear-end, intersection, and 

road departure crashes. The Phase I 

study also estimated how frequently the 

5-second duration did not capture the 

vehicle’s approach and traversal phase 

of an intersection or road departure.11

The results of Phase I helped establish 

the need for an increase in the EDR 

recording duration by proving the 

inadequacy of the 5-second recording 

duration. 

For Phase II of the EDR Duration 

Study, researchers used data from two 

previously conducted naturalistic 

driving studies (NDS) to understand the 

complete duration (5 seconds or longer) 

of driver pre-crash actions and estimate 

the recording duration that would be 

necessary to capture the initiation of 

these actions in the same three types of 

crash scenarios examined in Phase I.12

1. Phase I Study 

The purpose of the Phase I study was 

to determine the frequency with which 

EDRs with a 5-second recording 

duration fail to record a sufficient 

duration of pre-crash data to determine 

crash causation for rear-end,13

intersection, and roadway departure 

crashes. Using EDR data pulled from 

NHTSA’s NASS–CDS database from 

2000–2015,14 Phase I researchers 

examined 1,583 raw cases. Of these 

cases, 329 were rear-end crashes, 839 

were intersection crashes, and 415 were 

road departure crashes. Based on these 

cases, researchers found that the current 

5-second recording duration required 

under part 563 failed to capture the 

initiation of driver crash avoidance 

maneuvers for a certain percentage of all 

three selected crash types. These 

findings are good indications that a 

5-second pre-crash recording duration is 

inadequate if the goal is to capture the 

complete pre-crash time history— 

principally the driver’s pre-crash 

behavior—so that NHTSA, crash 

investigators, and manufacturers can 

better understand the crash causation. 

To determine whether the EDR had 

captured an entire crash event, Phase I 

researchers examined the status of the 

available EDR pre-crash data elements— 

vehicle’s accelerator pedal, service 

brakes, and steering angle—over the 

course of the 5 seconds of data. The 

initiation of the crash event would be 

indicated by the release of the 

accelerator pedal, the initiation of 

braking, or a change in the steering 

angle from zero degrees. Again, 

cumulative distributions of the data 

were used to determine the percentage 

of crashes where the initiation of the 

driver’s pre-crash maneuver falls 

outside the 5-second pre-crash 

recording duration. 

For rear-end crashes, the Phase I 

researchers found that the current 5- 

second EDR recording duration failed to 

capture 9% of accelerator pedal 

releases, 35% of pre-crash braking 

initiations, and 80% of evasive steering 

initiations. For intersection crashes, the 

5-second recording duration failed to 

capture 4% of accelerator pedal release 

instances, 35% of pre-crash braking 

initiations, and 64% of evasive steering 

initiations. In addition, it did not 

capture 13% of initial intersection 

boundary crossings.15 Finally, for road 

departure crashes, the 5-second 

recording duration failed to capture 8% 

of accelerator pedal releases, 35% of 

pre-crash braking initiations, and 88% 

of evasive steering initiations. However, 

the analysis of road departure traversal 

time shows that, in nearly all road 

departure events, the time period 

between initial road departure to final 

rest was less than 5 seconds, which 

indicates that the pre-crash maneuvers 

that were not recorded by the 5-second 

duration likely took place before the 

vehicle went off-road. Table 1 below 

summarizes the Phase I findings. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
37292 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 119 / Wednesday, June 22, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

16A naturalistic driving study is a research 

method that involves equipping vehicles with 

unobtrusive cameras and instrumentation to record 

real-world driver behavior and performance. 

17Phase II of the study assumed that the driver’s 

behavior in near-miss driving events would 

correlate to actual crash avoidance driving 

maneuvers. 

18This duration is influenced heavily by the 

inclusion of intersection crashes. Without the 

inclusion of intersection crashes 12.3 seconds of 

data would encompass the 90th percentile 

recording duration for rear-end and road departure 

crashes. 

19The time to closest approach is calculated as 

the time between driver brake applications to time 

when the instrumented vehicle is at the closest 

longitudinal distance with respect to the lead 

vehicle. 

20SHRP–2 data were used to better capture the 

diversity of driver behavior nationwide. 21Final accelerator release was calculated as the 

time point prior to impact, where impact is time 0, 

when the driver releases the accelerator (accelerator 

status ‘‘0’’) for the final time. Final brake initiation 

was calculated as the time point prior to impact 

when the driver depresses the brake pedal. Time of 

evasive steering initiation was calculated as the 

time point prior to impact when the driver’s 

steering rate equaled or exceeded 500°/s for the first 

time. These metrics were not collected in the 100- 

car NDS. 

22The sequence of driver actions leading to and 

resulting in an intersection collision can be divided 

into four phases: the approach phase, the traversal 

phase, any evasive action, and finally the impact. 

For almost all intersection crash types, the driver 

actions which lead to the crash, e.g. running a red 

light, occurred during the approach phase. In most 

crashes once in the intersection, the error has 

already been committed. If an EDR can capture the 

approach phase of an intersection crash then the 

entire crash will be captured. However, EDRs, 

which record the time of transition between the 

approach and traversal phase, can capture stop sign 

running, rolling stops, and red-light running. 

23Cumulative distributions for the approach, 

traversal, and total times were analyzed for each 

traffic control device type, approach action, 

traversal action, and lane size. 

TABLE 1—PERCENTAGE OF EVENTS FOR WHICH 5 SECONDS OF EDR RECORDING DURATION WAS INSUFFICIENT FROM

NASS–CDS 

Driver pre-crash maneuver 

EDR failed to record 

maneuver initiation 

(percent) 

Rear-End: 

Braking Input .................................................................................................................................................................... 35% 

Steering Input ................................................................................................................................................................... 80 

Accelerator Release ......................................................................................................................................................... 9 

Intersection: 

Braking Input .................................................................................................................................................................... 35 

Steering Input ................................................................................................................................................................... 64 

Accelerator Release ......................................................................................................................................................... 5 

Road Departure: 

Braking Input .................................................................................................................................................................... 35 

Steering Input ................................................................................................................................................................... 88 

Accelerator Release ......................................................................................................................................................... 8 

Based on these findings, the EDR 

Duration Study concluded that in many 

cases, the 5-second recording duration 

may not be sufficient to determine the 

factors that led to the crash or the precrash actions taken by the driver to 

avoid the collision, meaning that EDRs 

currently would not always provide 

investigators crash-related information 

that could assist in the determination of 

crash causation. 

2. Phase II Study 

The purpose of the Phase II study was 

to determine an appropriate EDR 

recording duration to provide crash 

investigators with sufficient data to 

determine crash causation. NDS data 

were analyzed to understand the 

complete duration (5 seconds or longer) 

of driver pre-crash actions in car 

following, intersection traversal, and 

lane departure crashes. The Phase II 

study used data from two previously 

conducted naturalistic driving studies: a 

2002 100-Car study conducted by 

Virginia Tech, and the 2016 Second 

Strategic Highway Research Program 

(SHRP–2) NDS conducted by the 

Transportation Research Board of The 

National Academies.16 To estimate the 

recording duration needed to capture 

the initiation of a crash event, the Phase 

II researchers analyzed near-miss 

driving events as proxies for actual 

crash avoidance driving maneuvers that 

were analyzed in the Phase I study.17

The main finding in Phase II of the 

study was that 20 seconds of pre-crash 

data would encompass the 90th 

percentile recording duration required 

for the three crash modes and the crash 

avoidance maneuvers analyzed. A ‘‘90th 

percentile recording duration’’ means 

that, based on the cumulative 

distributions for all three crash modes 

and crash avoidance maneuvers 

analyzed, a minimum of 20 seconds of 

pre-crash data recording is necessary to 

investigate crash causation, as this 

period captures the driver pre-crash 

actions in 90% of the dataset.18

To determine the recording duration 

needed to capture rear-end crashes, the 

Phase II researchers examined the 

duration of ‘‘car following’’ braking 

events from the 100-car NDS. By looking 

at the time duration between the start of 

the braking event (i.e., when the driver 

applies the brake) and the vehicle’s 

closest approach to the lead vehicle, the 

Phase II researchers were able to 

approximate the duration of a rear-end 

crash event. The results were different 

depending on whether the lead vehicle 

was stopped or travelling (e.g., events 

with stopped lead vehicle are associated 

with longer time to closest approach). 

The findings in the study are that for 

braking events with a stopped lead 

vehicle, the median was 4.5 seconds 

and the 90th percentile time to closest 

approach 19 was 12.3 seconds. The 

SHRP–2 dataset was also used to 

characterize driver pre-crash behavior in 

striking rear-end crash events. The 

approach was to use striking rear-end 

crash events from the SHRP–2 NDS to 

provide a threshold to determine the 

required time duration to fully capture 

driver pre-crash behavior.20 The 

analysis of rear-end crashes in the 

SHRP–2 NDS resulted in 90th percentile 

distributions of final accelerator release, 

brake initiation, and evasive steering 

durations of 12, 10, and 3 seconds, 

respectively.21

To determine the recording duration 

needed to capture intersection crashes, 

the Phase II researchers examined the 

time duration for drivers to approach 

and traverse through an intersection 

during normal driving.22 This analysis 

used the 100-Car NDS data, and found 

that the current EDR pre-crash recording 

time of 5 seconds captures less than 1 

percent of the total intersection event 

time. The results of this analysis 

support that a recording time of 15 

seconds would capture approximately 

50 percent of the total intersection event 

time, and 18.6 seconds would capture 

90 percent.23 The proposed recording 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 119 / Wednesday, June 22, 2022 / Proposed Rules 37293 

24Both lane and road departures were analyzed, 

because, while most normal lane excursions do not 

result in crashes, lane excursions can lead to road 

departure crashes if the driver does not initiate 

corrective measures in time. Therefore, a 

characterization of normal lane excursions duration 

provides a baseline to establish sufficient EDR 

recording duration in order to capture driver lane 

keeping behavior prior to road departure crashes. 

25Note the range of time shown for intersection 

was derived from intersections with different 

number of lanes. The lower bound represents time 

for 2-lane intersections while the upper bound for 

7-lane intersections. 

26We note that, although SAE has specifications 

on them and some vehicle manufacturers have 

started to record crash avoidance EDR data 

elements, there are no required or optional EDR 

data elements specific to these crash avoidance 

technologies. However, knowing the status of 

required data elements such as service brake 

application and accelerator pedal percent and 

optional data elements such as steering input, will 

assist in understanding the performance of these 

technologies. 

27NHTSA Report No. NHTSA–NVS–2011–ETC, 

‘‘Technical Assessment of Toyota electronic 

Throttle Control (ETC) Systems,’’ January 2011. 

28NHTSA, Special Crash Investigation No. 

IN10013. https://crashviewer.nhtsa.dot.gov/nasssci/GetBinary.aspx?Report&ReportID=804261920&

CaseID=804261915&Version=-1. 

time of 20 seconds would capture 

approximately 99 percent of the total 

intersection event time. 

To determine the recording duration 

needed to capture road departure 

crashes, the Phase II researchers 

examined ‘‘lane excursion’’ events (i.e., 

minor lane departures which occur as a 

result of normal lane keeping behavior 

that do not result in crashes) in the 100- 

Car NDS. The duration of a lane 

excursion event was calculated as the 

time from the moment a vehicle began 

to drift, depart the lane, to the time 

when the vehicle fully recovers back 

within the lane lines. The finding of the 

study was that the median duration of 

all lane excursion events was about 3.2 

seconds, and the 90th percentile of the 

distribution was 6 seconds. The analysis 

of 14 road-departure crashes in SHRP– 

2 NDS showed that the median 

accelerator pedal release time to road 

departure was 23 seconds, the median 

brake application was at 1.9 seconds 

after road departure, but as early as 21 

seconds prior to road departure.24

Table 2 summarizes the pertinent 

Phase II findings: 

TABLE 2—SUMMARY OF TYPICAL DRIVER MANEUVER TIME

Driver pre-crash maneuver 

Duration of driver action 

(seconds) 

50th percentile 90th percentile 

Rear-End: 

Time to Closest Approach ........................................................................................................................ 4.5 12.3 

Intersection: 

Approach + Traversal ............................................................................................................................... 12.6–15.1 25 16.0–18.6 

Road Departure: * 

Drift out of lane to Recovery .................................................................................................................... 3.2 6.0 

* Lane excursion events were examined in the 100-car NDS. 

II. Proposal 

A. Pre-Crash EDR Recording Duration 

Widespread deployment of EDRs 

offers an opportunity to use EDR data to 

assist in the determination of crash 

causation and better understand driver 

pre-crash behavior. EDRs can provide a 

comprehensive snapshot of the driver 

inputs in the seconds prior to a crash 

(e.g., acceleration, brake application, 

and steering inputs). 

Pursuant to Section 24303 of the 

FAST Act, and in light of the 

conclusions of the EDR Duration Study, 

NHTSA is proposing to extend the EDR 

recording duration for timed data 

elements from 5 seconds of pre-crash 

data to 20 seconds. 

As noted above, Phase I of the EDR 

Duration Study found that, in a 

substantial percentage of crashes in 

which the EDR is triggered, the 

currently required 5-second recording 

duration was insufficient to record 

important information that would assist 

investigators with crash reconstruction, 

such as the initiation of crash avoidance 

driving maneuvers, e.g., pre-crash 

braking. Phase II of the EDR Duration 

Study found that 20 seconds of precrash data would encompass the 90th 

percentile recording duration required 

for the three crash modes and the crash 

avoidance maneuvers analyzed. 

The EDR Duration Study has 

determined that the 5-second recording 

duration is a limitation of current EDRs 

for the purposes of investigating crash 

causation. To assist investigators and 

vehicle manufacturers in determining 

crash causation, the research indicated 

that the EDR needs to be able to capture 

the driver’s pre-crash behavior. The 

study found that a better understanding 

of the driver’s pre-crash behavior will 

also assist in the evaluation of emerging 

crash avoidance systems (e.g., lane 

departure warning, lane keeping assist, 

forward collision avoidance, automatic 

emergency braking, and intersection 

safety assistance systems).26 Based on 

the study, it appears that extending the 

EDR recording duration to 20 seconds 

would help ensure that critical precrash data are captured. Therefore, 

based on the conclusions of the EDR 

Duration Study, NHTSA believes it is 

reasonable to propose requiring a 

minimum of 20 seconds of pre-crash 

data. 

Further, this proposal is also based on 

information NHTSA has learned from 

its defects investigation experience that 

EDR data can be used to assist the 

agency in assessing whether the vehicle 

was operating properly at the time of the 

event, or to help detect undesirable 

operations. For example, in March 2010, 

NHTSA began to obtain data from 

Toyota EDRs as part of its inquiry into 

allegations of unintended acceleration 

(UA), and as a follow-up to the recalls 

of some Toyota models for sticking and 

entrapped accelerator pedals. The 

Toyota unintended acceleration study 

helped determine the root cause of each 

crash.27 For NHTSA, this served as 

affirmation of the significant value that 

EDR pre-crash data can have. 

Finally, we believe a 20 second precrash recording duration is feasible. We 

are aware that, previously, several 

manufacturers’ EDRs recorded pre-crash 

data in excess of the minimum time 

intervals required in part 563. For 

example, a 2007 Ford was shown to 

have reported over 25 seconds of data 

(23.6 seconds pre-crash and 1.6 seconds 

post-crash) on five separate data 

elements, at a frequency of 5 data points 

per second (5 Hz).28 This includes all 

three required Table I elements and two 

optional Table II elements. We are 

seeking comment on the need and 

practicability of increasing the pre-crash 

recording duration. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
37294 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 119 / Wednesday, June 22, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

29The individual data elements collected from 

various sensors and modules may be running at 

different clock and processor speeds, and when 

recorded by the EDR during an event, they may not 

be precisely timed. A greater sampling rate for the 

pre-crash data elements can reduce the potential 

uncertainty related to the relative timing of data 

elements, specifically for correlating the driver’s 

commands and the vehicle’s performance. 

30NASS CDS Case 2010–82–045. EDR download 

FTP site: https://www.nhtsa.gov/node/97996/2921. 

Download nass2010.zip. 

31 DOT HS 812 929, Pg. 18. 

32NASS CDS Case 2012–12–075. EDR download 

FTP site: https://www.nhtsa.gov/node/97996/2921. 

Download nass2012.zip. 

33Five vehicle manufacturers and three suppliers 

were interviewed as part of the study. 

34 DOT HS 812 929, Pg. 39. 

35Even though crash investigators gather 

insightful information about the dynamics of 

crashes, some parameters cannot be determined or 

cannot be as accurately measured (such as the 

change in velocity) by traditional post-crash 

investigation procedures, such as visually 

examining and evaluating physical evidence, e.g., 

the crash-involved vehicles and skid marks. 

36NHTSA Report No. NHTSA–NVS–2011–ETC, 

‘‘Technical Assessment of Toyota electronic 

Throttle Control (ETC) Systems,’’ January 2011. 

B. Pre-Crash EDR Recording Frequency 

The current Table I in part 563 

requires an EDR to capture pre-crash 

data at a sample rate of 2 samples per 

second (Hz). The same sample rate 

applies to Table II elements of engine 

revolutions per minute (RPM), anti-lock 

braking system (ABS) status, electronic 

stability control (ESC) status and 

steering input. Generally, 5 seconds 

worth of pre-crash event data at 2 Hz 

sampling rate has been sufficient for the 

agency’s crash investigators to better 

understand the vehicle speed and driver 

inputs prior to the event. However, from 

the agency’s experience investigating 

allegations of unintended acceleration, 

NHTSA identified a need for the agency 

to consider improving the pre-crash data 

sample rate. Increasing the sampling 

rate in addition to the pre-crash 

recording duration, will be critical in 

determining crash causation. 

NHTSA believes that increasing the 

EDR sampling frequency would provide 

the agency with a more detailed 

representation of pre-crash actions 

because in some crash circumstances, 2 

Hz may be insufficient to identify crash 

causation factors and lead to 

misinterpretation of the data. For 

example, NHTSA is concerned that it is 

possible for rapid vehicle control inputs 

(e.g., brake application and release or 

rapid reversals in steering input of less 

than 0.5 seconds,) to be completely 

missed by an EDR that records data at 

2 Hz. Thus, although more crash 

causation information will be captured 

with the 20 second time duration, there 

is a concern that it could be 

misinterpreted without a refinement in 

acquisition frequency. An improved 

data sampling rate is also needed 

because of how fast the sequence of 

events leading to crashes can happen 

and how fast the vehicle’s systems need 

to activate, such as the activations of 

crash avoidance technologies (e.g., Antilock Braking System, and Electronic 

Stability Control). The current sampling 

rate is well below the timing necessary 

to understand the performance and 

effectiveness of such systems. 

In addition, the EDR output for the 

pre-crash data elements are not 

synchronized,29 even at the sampling 

rate of 2 Hz, which could result in 

uncertainty when it becomes necessary 

to compare the data at specific points in 

time with precision. A greater sampling 

rate for the pre-crash data elements 

would reduce the potential uncertainty 

related to the relative timing of data 

elements, specifically for correlating the 

driver’s commands and the vehicle’s 

performance. 

Furthermore, at least one vehicle 

manufacturer (Honda) has begun to 

voluntarily collect EDR data on the 

status and operation of advanced driver 

assistance systems, like the activation of 

forward crash warning alerts, automatic 

emergency braking activations, and 

similar lane keeping assist technologies. 

Generally, manufacturers have adopted 

the sampling rate used for pre-crash 

data elements that are voluntarily 

recorded by the EDR. An improved 

sampling rate of 10 Hz will provide the 

resolution to understand the real-world 

performance and effectiveness of these 

advanced crash avoidance systems that 

is not currently possible with the 

current 2 Hz sampling rate and nonsynchronized data collection. The 

combination of manufacturers’ 

voluntary integration of advanced driver 

assistance system data elements and the 

increased sampling frequency would 

provide valuable insight on the 

performance of new technologies. 

We believe a 10 Hz pre-crash 

recording frequency is feasible. We are 

aware of 10 Hz pre-crash recordings for 

steering angle and electronic stability 

control as far back as 2010.30 2012 EDRs 

in Chrysler vehicles recorded all Table 

I data elements and 5 Table II elements 

at 10 Hz.31 32 Also pointing to the 

practicability and appropriateness of 10 

Hz sampling are statements of vehicle 

manufacturers and suppliers made to 

Virginia Tech researchers during the 

2011–2013 timeframe (EDR Technology 

Study).33 When asked about near-term 

plans for EDR designs, these 

manufacturers and suppliers stated, 

‘‘Higher sampling frequency and longer 

recording interval for pre-crash data, 

i.e., sampling frequency better than 1/10 

of a second.’’ 34

As with the increased recording 

duration, we welcome comments on the 

need and practicability of increasing the 

sampling rate. 

C. Benefits 

Based on the EDR Duration Study 

findings, the current 5 second EDR precrash recording duration did not capture 

the initiation of pre-crash braking and 

steering maneuvers in a substantial 

percentage of cases. The proposed 

increased recording time for the precrash data would help ensure that data 

on the initiation of pre-crash actions 

and maneuvers are captured for most 

crashes. This increased data will 

enhance the usefulness of the recorded 

information and potentially lead to 

further improvements in the safety of 

current and future vehicles. 

The increase in data recording 

frequency will clarify the interpretation 

of recorded pre-crash information. 

Specifically, this proposed refinement 

in acquisition frequency can capture 

rapid vehicle control inputs (e.g., brake 

application and release or rapid 

reversals in steering input of less than 

0.5 seconds) and activation of crash 

avoidance technologies that would 

otherwise be completely missed in the 

data stream under the current 2 Hz 

frequency sampling rate. Furthermore, 

without the increase in the data 

recording frequency, even with the 

proposed 20 second duration, crash 

investigators and researchers could still 

misinterpret the recorded data. 

As discussed in past EDR rulemaking 

notices, EDR data improve crash 

investigations and crash data collection 

quality to assist safety researchers, 

vehicle manufacturers, and the agency 

to understand vehicle crashes better and 

to help determine crash causation.35

Similarly, vehicle manufacturers can 

utilize EDR data in improving vehicle 

designs and developing more effective 

vehicle safety countermeasures. In 

addition, the data can be used, by the 

vehicle manufacturers or the agency, to 

assess whether the vehicle was 

operating properly at the time of the 

event, or to help detect undesirable 

operations. For example, as discussed 

previously in Section II.A, the Toyota 

unintended acceleration study 36 served 

as affirmation of the significant value 

that EDR pre-crash data can have. 

EDR data can also aid in the 

improvement of existing safety 

standards and the development of new 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 119 / Wednesday, June 22, 2022 / Proposed Rules 37295 

37 DOT HS 812 929, Pg. 23. 38See Table 20 in DOT HS 812 929. 

39See Table 21 in DOT HS 812 929. 

40There are 3 data elements in Table I and 4 in 

Table II that are frequency based. We assume 1 Byte 

of memory for each data sample (11 Bytes for each 

data element). This results in 33 and 44 Bytes of 

frequency-based data in Tables I and II, 

respectively. 

41The frequency-based pre-crash data are 

assumed to increase from 11 to 41 Bytes per data 

element, based on a factor of 4 increase in duration. 

42The frequency-based pre-crash data are 

assumed to increase from 11 to 201 Bytes per data 

element, based on a factor of 4 increase in duration 

and a factor of 5 increase in recording frequency. 

43 Kreeb, R.M. and B.T. Nicosia (2005). ‘‘Vehicle 

Data Recorders,’’ (FMCSA–PSV–06–001). Federal 

Motor Carrier Safety Administration, Washington, 

DC. 

44Specifically, more memory and faster 

processors are critical to the performance of 

advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS), highly 

automated driving functions, and other electronic 

subsystems (such infotainment, navigation, 

communication) in vehicles. 

ones. For example, the requirement for 

EDRs to record parameters of advanced 

restraint systems during an event of 

interest could help industry and the 

agency monitor the real-world 

performance of these systems and detect 

injury trends. As a result, vehicle 

manufacturers could more quickly 

improve advanced restraint systems and 

other occupant protection 

countermeasures. The agency would 

promulgate the necessary vehicle 

standards to further protect vehicle 

occupants. An increasing number of 

vehicles in the fleet today have 

advanced safety technologies, including 

advanced driver assistance system 

technologies. We anticipate that a better 

understanding of driver pre-crash 

behavior may assist in the evaluation of 

these emerging crash avoidance systems 

(e.g., lane departure warning, lane 

keeping assist, forward collision 

avoidance, automatic emergency 

braking, and intersection safety 

assistance systems). 

D. Costs 

Increasing the recording time of the 

pre-crash data would improve the 

current part 563 data collection 

requirements, but could add additional 

cost for increased memory if there is 

little or no excess memory in the 

module. Another study on EDRs 

recently published by the agency 

(referred to throughout this document as 

the EDR Technologies Study) reported 

from information provided by industry 

that a typical recorded event requires 

about 2 kilobytes (Kb) of memory 

depending on the manufacturer.37

Information from manufacturers also 

indicated that the typical 

microprocessor used in vehicle 

applications, in approximately the 2013 

timeframe, had 32 Kb or 64 Kb of flash 

data as part of the air bag control 

module (ACM) and that only a fraction 

of the memory is dedicated to the EDR 

data. This study also estimated the total 

memory usage for all Table I 38 and 

Table II 39 data elements recorded for 

the minimum duration and frequency 

requirements in part 563. It reported 

that to record Table I and II data 

elements would require 0.072 Kb and 

0.858 Kb of memory storage, 

respectively.40 This would represent the 

baseline memory, both required (0.072 

Kb) and optional (0.858 Kb), needed for 

complying with part 563 and would 

account for only about 1.45 percent 

[0.93/64] of a 64 Kb microprocessor’s 

memory and 2.9 percent [0.93/32] of a 

32 Kb microprocessor’s memory. 

The table below specifies the Table I 

and II pre-crash data element memory 

usage under the current regulation 

(baseline memory) as well as the 

proposed increase in pre-crash 

recording duration from 5 seconds to 20 

seconds with no change in the 2 Hz 

frequency and the second scenario is an 

increase in recording frequency from 2 

Hz to 10 Hz, for a 20 second duration. 

The pre-crash duration-only increase 

requires 0.21 Kb [1.14 Kb–0.93 Kb] of 

additional memory (a factor of 1.23 

increase from the baseline).41 An 

increase in pre-crash recording duration 

from 5 seconds to 20 seconds with an 

increase in recording frequency from 2 

Hz to 10 Hz would require 1.33 Kb of 

additional memory (a factor of 2.43 

increase from the baseline).42

The EDR Technologies Study reported 

that the cost of flash memory (the type 

that could be used to permanently store 

an EDR image) was 0.000072 $/Kb 

(0.072 ¢/megabyte (Mb)) in 2013, with 

the projection of a drop to .00003 $/Kb 

(0.03 ¢/Mb) by 2020. Cost estimates 

from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration (FMCSA) for flash 

memory for commercial vehicle data 

recorders from 2005 gave a memory cost 

at $0.002/Kb (200 ¢/Mb).43 This 

estimate is more than 15 years old and 

likely overestimates current EDR 

memory cost. Nonetheless, if we use 

this conservative estimate, the cost of 

additional memory needed for 20 

seconds of pre-crash data collected at 10 

Hz would be $.003 [$.002/Kb x (2.26– 

0.93) Kb] per vehicle. 

TABLE 3—PRE-CRASH ELEMENT MEMORY USAGE

Configuration 

Pre-crash elements Required EDR memory (Kb) 

Duration Frequency 

(Hz) Table I Table II Total Increase factor 

Current Regulation ................................... 5 2 0.072 0.858 0.930 ........................

Duration Increase ..................................... 20 2 0.162 1.019 1.140 1.23 

Duration and Frequency Increase ........... 20 10 0.642 1.819 2.260 2.43 

According to the EDR Technology 

Study, the typical microprocessor used 

in vehicle applications for the ACM had 

32Kb or 64Kb of flash data. The baseline 

EDR Table I and II data elements only 

represent about 1.45 percent of a 64 Kb 

microprocessor’s memory and 2.9 

percent of a 32 Kb microprocessor’s 

memory. Increasing the duration to 20 

seconds and frequency to 10 Hz would 

utilize 3.5 percent [2.26/64] of a 64 Kb 

microprocessor’s memory and 7.06 

percent [2.26/32] of a 32 Kb 

microprocessor’s memory. 

Given how slight the proposed 

increase in memory would be, the 

agency believes that memory changes 

needed to accommodate the added EDR 

data storage can be incorporated into the 

existing or planned memory design in 

vehicles.44 NHTSA believes that in most 

cases the amount of additional memory 

necessary to comply with the proposed 

requirements would be less than the 

unused memory on a vehicle’s ACM 

chip. In such cases, there should be zero 

increase in memory cost. The rare 

exception to this would be a situation 

where an ACM is at its full memory 

usage (i.e., due to the collection of 

optional data elements) that does not 

have a few percent of memory to spare. 

In this situation, it is possible that there 

could be an additional cost to move to 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
37296 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 119 / Wednesday, June 22, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

45 In this situation, there could be an additional 

cost to move to a larger chip. According to the EDR 

Technologies Study reported that the cost of flash 

memory (the type that could be used to 

permanently store an EDR image) was 0.00072 

$/megabyte (Mb) in 2013, with the projection of a 

drop to 0.0004 $/Mb by 2017. 

46An internet search for automotive grade 

microprocessor chips with 64 Kb and 128 Kb flash 

memory capacity indicate that they also had 4 Kb 

of available Static Random-Access Memory (SRAM) 

integrated with the chip. SRAM is a popular choice 

for volatile storage because of its speed, reliability, 

low-power consumption and low cost (e.g., ideal for 

applications involving continuous data transfer, 

buffering, data logging, audio, video and other 

math- and data-intensive functions). https://

www.microchip.com/wwwproducts/en/ 

AT90CAN64. 

47The PRE is available in the same docket as this 

proposal. 

48BMW, Fiat/Chrysler (Ferrari and Maserati), 

Ford, Geely (Volvo), General Motors, Honda 

(Acura), Hyundai, Kia, Lotus, Mazda, Mercedes, 

Mitsubishi, Nissan (Infiniti), Porsche, Subaru, 

Suzuki, Tata (Jaguar and Land Rover), Tesla, Toyota 

(Lexus), and Volkswagen/Audi. 

a larger chip.45 Vehicle manufacturers 

could alternatively reduce the number 

of optional Table II data elements being 

recorded, until such time that the ACM 

chip is being enlarged for other reasons. 

We seek comment on whether current 

EDRs will need to increase their 

memory capacity or change the memory 

implementation strategy (i.e., short term 

memory buffer verse long-term storage) 

to meet the new requirements. We also 

seek comment on our cost estimates and 

whether our assumptions are accurate. 

Are there other costs (e.g., redesign for 

a larger unit, additional capacity for 

Random-Access Memory (RAM), etc.),46

or other factors we need to consider? 

Finally, we do not anticipate there 

being any additional processor speed or 

backup power needs associated with the 

proposed greater recording duration and 

frequency increase. As found in the EDR 

Technologies Study, more than a decade 

ago at least one vehicle manufacturer 

was recording 20 seconds of data at 5 

Hz. Since that time, manufacturers may 

have improved the processing speed of 

their ACM in order to handle additional 

crash deployable components, such as 

ejection mitigation curtains. Thus, the 

proposed changes would not be 

expected to burden the speed of the 

processor. Nonetheless, we seek 

comment on the potential impact on the 

ACM processor and associated cost. 

E. Lead Time 

We are proposing an effective date of 

the first September 1st one year from the 

publication of the final rule. For 

example, if the final rule is published 

on October 1, 2022, the effective date is 

September 1, 2024. The agency 

estimates that 99.5 percent of model 

year 2021 passenger cars and other 

vehicles with a GVWR of 3,855 kg or 

less have part 563-compliant EDRs. As 

discussed in the cost section, the agency 

believes that increasing the required 

pre-crash data recording time will not 

require any additional hardware or 

substantial redesign of the EDR or the 

vehicle and will likely only require 

minimal software changes. With that in 

mind, the agency believes a year of lead 

time is reasonable. Comments are 

requested on this proposed lead time. 

III. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices 

Executive Order 12866, Executive 

Order 13563, and DOT Regulatory 

Policies and Procedures 

We have considered the potential 

impact of this proposed rule under 

Executive Order 12866, Executive Order 

13563, and DOT Order 2100.6A. This 

NPRM is nonsignificant under E.O. 

12866 and was not reviewed by the 

Office of Management and Budget. It is 

also not considered ‘‘of special note to 

the Department’’ under DOT Order 

2100.6A, Rulemaking and Guidance 

Procedures. 

As discussed in this NPRM, the 

additional pre-crash data that would be 

collected by EDRs under the proposed 

rule would be valuable for the 

advancement of vehicle safety by 

enhancing and facilitating crash 

investigations, the evaluation of safety 

countermeasures, advanced restraint 

and safety countermeasure research and 

development, and certain safety defect 

investigations. Improvements in vehicle 

safety could occur indirectly from the 

collection of these data. 

We estimate that about that 99.5 

percent of model year 2021 passenger 

cars and other vehicles with a GVWR of 

3,855 kg or less are already equipped 

with part 563-compliant EDRs. As 

discussed in the above section on the 

cost impacts of this NPRM, the agency 

believes that no additional hardware 

would be required by the proposed 

amendment and that the compliance 

costs would be negligible, and we are 

seeking comment on the costs of the 

proposed rule. 

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 or final rule, it must prepare 

and make available for public comment 

a regulatory flexibility analysis that 

describes the effect of the rule on small 

entities (i.e., small businesses, small 

organizations, and small governmental 

jurisdictions). The Small Business 

Administration’s regulations at 13 CFR 

part 121 define a small business, in part, 

as a business entity ‘‘which operates 

primarily within the United States.’’ (13 

CFR 121.105(a)(1)). No regulatory 

flexibility analysis is required if the 

head of an agency certifies the proposed 

or final rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. SBREFA 

amended the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

to require Federal agencies to provide a 

statement of the factual basis for 

certifying that a proposed or final rule 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. 

This action proposes minor 

amendments to 49 CFR part 563, Event 

Data Recorders (EDRs) to extend the 

recording period for pre-crash elements 

in voluntarily installed EDRs from 5 

seconds of pre-crash data at a frequency 

of 2 Hz to 20 seconds of pre-crash data 

at a frequency of 10 Hz. The proposed 

rule applies to vehicle manufacturers 

who produce light vehicles with a 

GVWR not greater than 3,855 kg (8,500 

pounds) and voluntarily install EDRs in 

their vehicles. It also applies to finalstage manufacturers and alterers. 

NHTSA analyzed current small 

manufacturers in detail in the 

accompanying Preliminary Regulatory 

Evaluation (PRE) 47 and found that none 

of the entities listed in the analysis 

would be impacted by this proposal. If 

adopted, the proposal would directly 

affect 20 single stage motor vehicle 

manufacturers.48 None of these are 

qualified as small business. However, 

NHTSA analyzed current small 

manufacturers, multistage 

manufacturers, and alterers that 

currently have part 563 compliant EDRs 

and found that 13 motor vehicle 

manufacturers affected by this proposal 

would qualify as small businesses. 

While these 13 motor vehicle 

manufacturers qualify as small 

businesses, none of them would be 

significantly affected by this rulemaking 

for several reasons. First, vehicles that 

contain EDRs are already required to 

comply with part 563. This proposed 

rule would not require hardware 

changes, but would require adjusting 

the recording time and sampling rate for 

up to seven pre-crash data elements. 

The agency believes current or planned 

systems are capable of accommodating 

these changes. Additionally, NHTSA 

believes the market for the vehicle 

products of the 13 small vehicle 

manufacturers is highly inelastic, 

meaning that purchasers of their 

products are enticed by the desire to 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 119 / Wednesday, June 22, 2022 / Proposed Rules 37297 

49The 2006 final rule promulgating 49 CFR part 

563 discussed preemption at length. 71 FR 50907, 

51029 (Aug. 28, 2006). 

have a highly customized vehicle. 

Generally, under this circumstance, if 

any price increase, the price of 

competitor’s models will also need to be 

raised by a similar amount, since all 

light vehicles must comply with the 

standards. Therefore, any reasonable 

price increase will not have any effect 

on sales of these vehicles. Thus, I 

hereby certify that this proposed rule 

would not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. Additional details related to the 

basis of this finding can be found in the 

PRE for this rulemaking proposal. 

Executive Order 13132 

NHTSA has examined today’s 

proposed rule pursuant to Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999) and concludes that no additional 

consultation with states, local 

governments or their representatives is 

mandated beyond the rulemaking 

process. This NPRM proposes minor 

technical amendments to an already 

existing regulation.49 When 49 CFR part 

563 was promulgated in 2006, NHTSA 

explained its view that any state laws or 

regulations that would require or 

prohibit the types of EDRs addressed by 

part 563, or that would affect their 

design or operations, would create a 

conflict and therefore be preempted. As 

a result, regarding this NPRM, NHTSA 

does not believe there are current state 

laws or regulations for EDRs that 

conflict with part 563 or with the 

overall minor change to capture time 

proposed by this document. Further, the 

amendments proposed by this NPRM 

are directed by the FAST Act, which 

directs NHTSA to conduct a study to 

determine the amount of time EDRs 

should capture and record data to 

provide sufficient information for crash 

investigators, and conduct a rulemaking 

based on this study to establish the 

appropriate recording period in part 

563. NHTSA conducted an EDR 

Duration Study and submitted a Report 

to Congress summarizing the results of 

this study in September 2018. This 

NPRM initiates the rulemaking 

mandated by the FAST Act. To the 

extent there are state laws with different 

capture times than that proposed by this 

NPRM, Congress made the 

determination in the FAST Act that the 

capture time required by part 563 

should be extended. NHTSA is issuing 

this NPRM in accordance with that 

statutory mandate. NHTSA requests 

stakeholder input on this issue. 

Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice 

Reform) 

When promulgating a regulation, 

Executive Order 12988 specifically 

requires that the agency must 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 

proposed rule is discussed above in 

connection with E.O. 13132. NHTSA 

notes further that there is no 

requirement that individuals submit a 

petition for reconsideration or pursue 

other administrative proceeding before 

they may file suit in court. 

Executive Order 13609 (Promoting 

International Regulatory Cooperation) 

Executive Order 13609, ‘‘Promoting 

International Regulatory Cooperation,’’ 

promotes international regulatory 

cooperation to meet shared challenges 

involving health, safety, labor, security, 

environmental, and other issues and to 

reduce, eliminate, or prevent 

unnecessary differences in regulatory 

requirements. 

The agency is currently participating 

in the negotiation and development of 

technical standards for Event Data 

Recorders in the United Nations 

Economic Commission for Europe 

(UNECE) World Forum for 

Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations 

(WP.29). As a signatory member, 

NHTSA is obligated to initiate 

rulemaking to incorporate safety 

requirements and options specified in 

Global Technical Regulations (GTRs) if 

the U.S. votes in the affirmative to 

establish the GTR. No GTR for EDRs has 

been developed at this time. NHTSA has 

analyzed this proposed rule under the 

policies and agency responsibilities of 

Executive Order 13609, and has 

determined this proposal would have no 

effect on international regulatory 

cooperation. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

NHTSA has analyzed this NPRM for 

the purposes of the National 

Environmental Policy Act. The agency 

has determined that implementation of 

this action would not have any 

significant impact on the quality of the 

human environment. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

Under the Paperwork Reduction Act 

of 1995 (PRA), a person is not required 

to respond to a collection of information 

by a Federal agency unless the 

collection displays a valid Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) control 

number. This NPRM proposes 

requirements that relate to an 

information collection that is subject to 

the PRA, but the proposed requirements 

are not expected to increase the burden 

associated with the information 

collection. NHTSA is currently in the 

process of seeking approval for OMB for 

the information collection. In 

compliance with the requirements of the 

PRA, NHTSA published a notice in the 

Federal Register on August 26, 2021 (86 

FR 47719), seeking public comment and 

providing a 60-day comment period. 

NHTSA has now followed up with a 

second notice, published a notice on 

March 17, 2022 (87 FR 15302), 

announcing that the agency is 

submitting the information collection 

request to OMB for approval. 

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 

SAE International (SAE). The NTTAA 

directs us to provide Congress, through 

OMB, explanations when we decide not 

to use available and applicable 

voluntary consensus standards. The 

NTTAA requires agencies to use 

voluntary consensus standards in lieu of 

government-unique standards except 

where inconsistent with law or 

otherwise impractical. 

There are several consensus standards 

related to EDRs, most notably those 

standards published by SAE (J1698— 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
37298 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 119 / Wednesday, June 22, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

Event Data Recorder) and Institute of 

Electrical and Electronics Engineers 

(IEEE) (Standard 1616, IEEE Standard 

for Motor Vehicle Event Data Recorder). 

NHTSA carefully considered the 

consensus standards applicable to EDR 

data elements in establishing part 563. 

Consensus standards for recording time/ 

intervals, data sample rates, data 

retrieval, data reliability, data range, 

accuracy and precision, and EDR crash 

survivability were evaluated by NHTSA 

and adopted when appropriate. The 

FAST Act directed NHTSA to conduct 

a study to determine the amount of time 

EDRs should capture and record precrash data to provide sufficient 

information for crash investigators, and 

to conduct a rulemaking based on this 

study to establish the appropriate 

recording period in NHTSA’s EDR 

regulation. NHTSA conducted the EDR 

Duration Study and submitted a Report 

to Congress summarizing the results of 

this study in September 2018. This 

particular rulemaking exceeds the precrash data recording durations of the 

SAE and IEEE standards (i.e., SAE and 

IEEE recommend recording 8 seconds of 

pre-crash data) based upon the new 

information obtained from the EDR 

Duration Study. The results of the study 

on EDR recording duration suggest that 

the recommended recording duration by 

these standards would not capture the 

initiation of crash avoidance maneuvers. 

NHTSA declines to adopt the voluntary 

consensus standards for the pre-crash 

recording because such a decision 

would be inconsistent with the best 

available information to the agency and 

conflict with the outcome of a study 

required by the FAST Act. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

Section 202 of the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) 

requires Federal agencies to prepare a 

written assessment of the costs, benefits, 

and other effects of proposed or final 

rules that include a Federal mandate 

likely to result in the expenditure by 

State, local, or tribal governments, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector, of 

more than $100 million annually 

(adjusted for inflation with base year of 

1995). Adjusting this amount by the 

implicit gross domestic product price 

deflator for the year 2020 results in $158 

million (113.625/71.868 = 1.581). Before 

promulgating a rule for which a written 

statement is needed, section 205 of the 

UMRA generally requires the agency to 

identify and consider a reasonable 

number of regulatory alternatives and 

adopt the least costly, most costeffective, or least burdensome 

alternative that achieves the objectives 

of the rule. The provisions of section 

205 do not apply when they are 

inconsistent with applicable law. 

Moreover, section 205 allows the agency 

to adopt an alternative other than the 

least costly, most cost-effective, or least 

burdensome alternative if the agency 

publishes with the final rule an 

explanation of why that alternative was 

not adopted. 

This NPRM would not result in 

expenditures by State, local, or tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector in excess of $158 million 

(in 2020 dollars) annually. As a result, 

the requirements of Section 202 of the 

Act do not apply. 

Executive Order 13045 (Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks) 

Executive Order 13045, ‘‘Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks,’’ (62 FR 19885, April 

23, 1997) applies to any proposed or 

final rule that: (1) Is determined to be 

‘‘economically significant,’’ as defined 

in E.O. 12866, and (2) concerns an 

environmental health or safety risk that 

NHTSA has reason to believe may have 

a disproportionate effect on children. If 

a rule meets both criteria, the agency 

must evaluate the environmental health 

or safety effects of the rule on children 

and explain why the rule is preferable 

to other potentially effective and 

reasonably feasible alternatives 

considered by the agency. 

This rulemaking is not subject to the 

Executive order because it is not 

economically significant as defined in 

E.O. 12866. 

Executive Order 13211 

Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, 

May 18, 2001) applies to any 

rulemaking that: (1) is determined to be 

economically significant as defined 

under E.O. 12866, and is likely to have 

a significantly adverse effect on the 

supply of, distribution of, or use of 

energy; or (2) that is designated by the 

Administrator of the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs as a 

significant energy action. This 

rulemaking is not subject to E.O. 13211. 

Privacy 

The E-Government Act of 2002, 

Public Law 107–347, sec. 208, 116 Stat. 

2899, 2921 (Dec. 17, 2002), requires 

Federal agencies to conduct a Privacy 

Impact Assessment when they develop 

or procure new information technology 

involving the collection, maintenance, 

or dissemination of information in 

identifiable form or they make 

substantial changes to existing 

information technology that manages 

information in identifiable form. A PIA 

is an analysis of how information in 

identifiable form is collected, stored, 

protected, shared, and managed. The 

purpose of a PIA is to demonstrate that 

system owners and developers have 

incorporated privacy protections 

throughout the entire life cycle of a 

system. 

The Agency submitted a Privacy 

Threshold Analysis analyzing this 

rulemaking to the DOT, Office of the 

Secretary’s Privacy Office (DOT Privacy 

Office). The DOT Privacy Office has 

tentatively determined that this 

rulemaking does not create privacy risk 

because no new or substantially 

changed technology would collect, 

maintain, or disseminate information in 

an identifiable form because of this 

proposed rule. Even so, the Agency 

requests comment on this 

determination. 

Plain Language 

Executive Order 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? 

If you have any responses to these 

questions, please include them in your 

comments on this proposal. 

Regulation Identifier Number (RIN) 

The Department of Transportation 

assigns a regulation identifier number 

(RIN) to each regulatory action listed in 

the Unified Agenda of Federal 

Regulations. The Regulatory Information 

Service Center publishes the Unified 

Agenda in April and October of each 

year. You may use the RIN contained in 

the heading at the beginning of this 

document to find this action in the 

Unified Agenda. 

Proposed Regulatory Text 

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 563 

Motor vehicle safety, Motor vehicles, 

Reporting and record keeping 

requirements. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 119 / Wednesday, June 22, 2022 / Proposed Rules 37299 

In consideration of the forgoing, 

NHTSA is proposing to amend 49 CFR 

part 563 as follows: 

PART 563—EVENT DATA 

RECORDERS 

■ 1. Revise the authority citation for part 

563 to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30101, 30111, 

30115, 30117, 30166, 30168; delegation of 

authority at 49 CFR 1.95. 

■ 2. Revise § 563.3 to read as follows: 

§ 563.3 Application. 

This part applies to the following 

vehicles manufactured on or after [the 

first September 1st one year after 

publication of final rule], if they are 

equipped with an event data recorder: 

passenger cars, multipurpose passenger 

vehicles, trucks, and buses with a gross 

vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of 3,855 

kg (8,500 pounds) or less and an 

unloaded vehicle weight of 2,495 kg 

(5,500 pounds) or less, except for walkin van-type trucks or vehicles designed 

to be sold exclusively to the U.S. Postal 

Service. This part also applies to 

manufacturers of those vehicles. 

However, vehicles manufactured before 

September 1, 2013, that are 

manufactured in two or more stages or 

that are altered (within the meaning of 

49 CFR 567.7) after having been 

previously certified to the Federal motor 

vehicle safety standards (FMVSS) in 

accordance with part 567 of this chapter 

need not meet the requirements of this 

part. 

■ 3. In § 563.7, revise Table I in 

paragraph (a) and Table II in paragraph 

(b) to read as follows: 

§ 563.7 Data elements. 

(a) * * * 

TABLE I—DATA ELEMENTS REQUIRED FOR ALL VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH AN EDR 

Data element Recording interval/time 1

(relative to time zero) 

Data sample rate 

(samples per second) 

Delta-V, longitudinal ........................................................................... 0 to 250 ms or 0 to End of Event Time plus 30 

ms, whichever is shorter.

100 

Maximum delta-V, longitudinal ........................................................... 0–300 ms or 0 to End of Event Time plus 30 ms, 

whichever is shorter.

N/A 

Time, maximum delta-V ..................................................................... 0–300 ms or 0 to End of Event Time plus 30 ms, 

whichever is shorter.

N/A 

Speed, vehicle indicated .................................................................... ¥20.0 to 0 sec ....................................................... 10 

Engine throttle, % full (or accelerator pedal, % full) .......................... ¥20.0 to 0 sec ....................................................... 10 

Service brake, on/off .......................................................................... ¥20.0 to 0 sec ....................................................... 10 

Ignition cycle, crash ........................................................................... ¥1.0 sec ................................................................. N/A 

Ignition cycle, download ..................................................................... At time of download 3 .............................................. N/A 

Safety belt status, driver .................................................................... ¥1.0 sec ................................................................. N/A 

Frontal air bag warning lamp, on/off 2 ................................................ ¥1.0 sec ................................................................. N/A 

Frontal air bag deployment, time to deploy, in the case of a single 

stage air bag, or time to first stage deployment, in the case of a 

multi-stage air bag, driver.

Event ....................................................................... N/A 

Frontal air bag deployment, time to deploy, in the case of a single 

stage air bag, or time to first stage deployment, in the case of a 

multi-stage air bag, right front passenger.

Event ....................................................................... N/A 

Multi-event, number of event ............................................................. Event ....................................................................... N/A 

Time from event 1 to 2 ...................................................................... As needed ............................................................... N/A 

Complete file recorded (yes, no) ....................................................... Following other data ............................................... N/A 

1Pre-crash data and crash data are asynchronous. The sample time accuracy requirement for pre-crash time is ¥0.1 to 1.0 sec (e.g., T = ¥1 

would need to occur between ¥1.1 and 0 seconds). 2The frontal air bag warning lamp is the readiness indicator specified in S4.5.2 of FMVSS No. 208, and may also illuminate to indicate a malfunction in another part of the deployable restraint system. 3The ignition cycle at the time of download is not required to be recorded at the time of the crash, but shall be reported during the download 

process. 

(b) * * * 

TABLE II—DATA ELEMENTS REQUIRED FOR VEHICLES UNDER SPECIFIED MINIMUM CONDITIONS

Data element name Condition for requirement Recording interval/time 1

(relative to time zero) 

Data sample rate 

(per second) 

Lateral acceleration .................................................. If recorded 2 .................................. N/A ............................................... N/A 

Longitudinal acceleration ......................................... If recorded .................................... N/A ............................................... N/A 

Normal acceleration ................................................. If recorded .................................... N/A ............................................... N/A 

Delta-V, lateral ......................................................... If recorded .................................... 0–250 ms, or 0 to End of Event 

Time plus 30 ms, whichever is 

shorter.

100 

Maximum delta-V, lateral ......................................... If recorded .................................... 0–300 ms, or 0 to End of Event 

Time plus 30 ms, whichever is 

shorter.

N/A 

Time, maximum delta-V, lateral ............................... If recorded .................................... 0–300 ms, or 0 to End of Event 

Time plus 30 ms, whichever is 

shorter.

N/A 

Time, maximum delta-V, resultant ........................... If recorded .................................... 0–300 ms, or 0 to End of Event 

Time plus 30 ms, whichever is 

shorter.

N/A 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
37300 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 119 / Wednesday, June 22, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE II—DATA ELEMENTS REQUIRED FOR VEHICLES UNDER SPECIFIED MINIMUM CONDITIONS—Continued 

Data element name Condition for requirement Recording interval/time 1

(relative to time zero) 

Data sample rate 

(per second) 

Engine RPM ............................................................. If recorded .................................... ¥20.0 to 0 sec ............................. 10 

Vehicle roll angle ...................................................... If recorded .................................... ¥1.0 up to 5.0 sec 3 .................... 10 

ABS activity (engaged, non-engaged) ..................... If recorded .................................... ¥20.0 to 0 sec ............................. 10 

Stability control (on, off, engaged) ........................... If recorded .................................... ¥20.0 to 0 sec ............................. 10 

Steering input ........................................................... If recorded .................................... ¥20.0 to 0 sec ............................. 10 

Safety belt status, right front passenger (buckled, 

not buckled).

If recorded .................................... ¥1.0 sec ...................................... N/A 

Frontal air bag suppression switch status, right 

front passenger (on, off, or auto).

If recorded .................................... ¥1.0 sec ...................................... N/A 

Frontal air bag deployment, time to nth stage, driver 4.If equipped with a driver’s frontal 

air bag with a multi-stage inflator.

Event ............................................ N/A 

Frontal air bag deployment, time to nth stage, right 

front passenger 4.

If equipped with a right front passenger’s frontal air bag with a 

multi-stage inflator.

Event ............................................ N/A 

Frontal air bag deployment, nth stage disposal, 

driver, Y/N (whether the nth stage deployment 

was for occupant restraint or propellant disposal 

purposes).

If recorded .................................... Event ............................................ N/A 

Frontal air bag deployment, nth stage disposal, 

right front passenger, Y/N (whether the nth stage 

deployment was for occupant restraint or propellant disposal purposes).

If recorded .................................... Event ............................................ N/A 

Side air bag deployment, time to deploy, driver ...... If recorded .................................... Event ............................................ N/A 

Side air bag deployment, time to deploy, right front 

passenger.

If recorded .................................... Event ............................................ N/A 

Side curtain/tube air bag deployment, time to deploy, driver side.If recorded .................................... Event ............................................ N/A 

Side curtain/tube air bag deployment, time to deploy, right side.If recorded .................................... Event ............................................ N/A 

Pretensioner deployment, time to fire, driver ........... If recorded .................................... Event ............................................ N/A 

Pretensioner deployment, time to fire, right front 

passenger.

If recorded .................................... Event ............................................ N/A 

Seat track position switch, foremost, status, driver If recorded .................................... ¥1.0 sec ...................................... N/A 

Seat track position switch, foremost, right front 

passenger.

If recorded .................................... ¥1.0 sec ...................................... N/A 

Occupant size classification, driver .......................... If recorded .................................... ¥1.0 sec ...................................... N/A 

Occupant size classification, right front passenger If recorded .................................... ¥1.0 sec ...................................... N/A 

Occupant position classification, driver .................... If recorded .................................... ¥1.0 sec ...................................... N/A 

Occupant position classification, right front passenger.If recorded .................................... ¥1.0 sec ...................................... N/A 

1Pre-crash data and crash data are asynchronous. The sample time accuracy requirement for pre-crash time is ¥0.1 to 1.0 sec (e.g., T = ¥1 

would need to occur between ¥1.1 and 0 seconds). 2 ‘‘If recorded’’ means if the data are recorded in non-volatile memory for the purpose of subsequent downloading. 

3 ‘‘Vehicle roll angle’’ may be recorded in any time duration ¥1.0 to 5.0 seconds is suggested. 4 List this element n¥1 times, once for each stage of a multi-stage air bag system. 

Issued in Washington, DC, under authority 

delegated in 49 CFR 1.95 and 501.8. 

Steven S. Cliff, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2022–12860 Filed 6–21–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS