[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 94 (Tuesday, May 14, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 24263-24265]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-12034]



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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. 88-06, Notice 25]
RIN 2127-AE49


Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Side Impact Protection--
Light Trucks, Buses and Multipurpose Passenger Vehicles

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

ACTION: Denial of petition for reconsideration.

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

SUMMARY: This document denies a petition from Toyota Motor Corporate 
Services of North America (``Toyota'') for reconsideration of the 
agency's final rule that extended Safety Standard 214's dynamic side 
impact testing requirements to light trucks, multipurpose passenger 
vehicles and buses with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of 6,000 
(lb) or less. Toyota requested that instead of using GVWR as the 
attribute for identifying vehicles to be excluded from the new 
requirements, NHTSA should exclude vehicles based on the height of 
their seating reference point. The agency is denying the petition 
because NHTSA believes Toyota's approach would exclude some vehicles 
that are and should remain subject to the dynamic side impact 
requirements.


[[Page 24264]]


FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For nonlegal issues: Dr. William Fan, 
Office of Vehicle Safety Standards, NPS-14, telephone (202) 366-4922. 
For legal issues: Deirdre Fujita, Office of Chief Counsel, NCC-20, 
(202) 366-2992. Both may be reached at the National Highway Traffic 
Safety Administration, 400 Seventh St., S.W., Washington, D.C., 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On July 28, 1995, NHTSA amended Federal Motor Vehicle Safety 
Standard No. 214, ``Side Impact Protection'' (49 CFR Sec. 571.214), to 
extend the standard's dynamic testing requirements to light trucks, 
multipurpose passenger vehicles (hereinafter referred to as ``MPVs''), 
and buses with a GVWR of 6,000 lb or less. (This group of vehicles is 
hereinafter referred to as ``LTVs''). The rule resulted from a 
rulemaking on LTV side impact safety that the agency was required to 
commence pursuant to the NHTSA Authorization Act of 1991 (sections 
2500-2509 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act 
(``ISTEA'')).
    Under the rule, an LTV must provide protection to an occupant's 
thoracic and pelvic regions, as measured by the accelerations 
registered on an instrumented side impact dummy (SID), in a full-scale 
crash test. In the test, the LTV (known as the ``target'' LTV) is 
struck in the side by a moving deformable barrier (MDB) simulating a 
passenger car. The SID is instrumented to measure accelerations in the 
ribs and spine and in the pelvic cavity. The values measured in the 
ribs and spine are used in determining the ``Thoracic Trauma Index 
(TTI(d)),'' an injury criterion that measures the risk of thoracic 
injury of an occupant in a side impact. The value measured in the 
pelvic cavity assesses the potential risk for pelvic injury. To meet 
Standard 214's side impact protection requirements, the TTI(d) and 
pelvis measurements must not exceed specified maximum values. For the 
thorax, TTI(d) must not exceed 85 g, and for the pelvis, peak lateral 
acceleration must not exceed 130 g's.
    The rule extended to LTVs virtually all of the dynamic side impact 
provisions of Standard 214 that currently apply to passenger cars. LTVs 
will be dynamically tested with the same MDB used to test passenger 
cars to the side impact requirements of Standard 214, under the same 
test conditions and procedures. (One minor variation relates to the 
procedure for specifying where on the target LTV the MDB must first 
contact in the dynamic test. See 60 FR at 38758-38759.) The 
instrumented SIDs used in the passenger car test will be used to test 
LTVs, and used in the same manner, placed in the front and rear seats 
on the side of the vehicle struck by the MDB. Performance criteria for 
the TTI(d) and pelvic acceleration measured by the SID are the same as 
those specified for passenger cars, with one exception. Two-door LTVs 
have an 85 g limit for the TTI(d), while two-door passenger cars have a 
90 g limit.
    NHTSA determined that the passenger car provisions are appropriate 
for LTVs because both passenger cars and LTVs are driven in the same 
environment and thus have the same exposure to striking vehicles. 
However, NHTSA acknowledged that the extension of the passenger car 
requirements resulted in few estimated benefits since all current LTVs 
already meet the requirements. Nevertheless, the agency decided that 
the extension was warranted given that increasing numbers of LTVs are 
used as passenger vehicles and that the percentage of LTVs is likely to 
increase significantly in the future. Further, information indicates 
that small LTVs, which are potentially vulnerable in side crashes, will 
comprise much of the LTV fleet by the year 2000. The extension will 
prevent any future LTV from providing side impact safety performance 
that is inferior to that of passenger cars.
    The decision to specify the barrier currently specified for 
passenger cars led the agency in turn to limit the extension of the 
rule to LTVs, thus excluding multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks 
and buses with a GVWR over 6,000 lb. This limit was adopted because the 
barrier simulates side crashes in which occupants of the vehicles with 
higher GVWRs would be relatively unlikely to suffer death or serious 
injury. NHTSA also believed inclusion of vehicles with GVWRs over 6,000 
lb would not result in any safety improvements since those vehicles 
would likely meet the adopted dynamic requirements without any 
modification. In the interest of avoiding unnecessarily requiring that 
those vehicles be certified to the dynamic side impact protection 
requirements, NHTSA did not extend the rule to larger vehicles. (60 FR 
at 38756.)

Petition for Reconsideration

    Using a similar rationale of avoiding unnecessary regulatory and 
compliance test burdens and costs, Toyota petitioned to exclude LTVs 
``whose seating reference points (SgRP) are 700 mm or greater.'' (The 
agency assumes this refers to the SgRP for the driver's position, 
although the petitioner did not specify the position.) Toyota believed 
that those vehicles will meet the new requirements without any problem 
because, according to the petitioner, the MDB will not impact the 
dummies' rib cage, where accelerometers are positioned. Toyota stated 
that ``NHTSA's own data indicates that the highest seating reference 
point of those vehicles (which did not meet the passenger car standard) 
was 655 mm.'' The petitioner said that it conducted tests of five of 
its current models. According to Toyota, all five passed the injury 
criteria. The only model that had a ``marginal'' TTI(d), as compared to 
the prescribed limit, was the vehicle that had an H-point height of 
less than 700 mm.

Agency Decision

    The agency is denying Toyota's petition because NHTSA believes 
Toyota's approach would exclude some vehicles that are and should 
remain subject to the dynamic side impact requirements. The agency 
believes Toyota might not be correct in suggesting that all vehicles 
with a SgRP height of 700 mm or greater would readily pass the 
standard.<SUP>1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ NHTSA notes that while Toyota used SgRP in its petition, the 
agency used the H-point in assessing the merits of Toyota's request. 
``SgRP'' is defined in 49 CFR Sec. 571.3 as ``the unique design H-
point as defined in [the Society of Automotive Engineers] SAE J1100 
(June 1984),'' and which also conforms to other factors. ``H-point'' 
is defined in 571.3 as the hinged hip point described in SAE 
Recommended Practice J826. For the purposes of this action, these 
two terms are essentially the same.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It should be noted that during the development of the final rule 
extending Standard 214's dynamic requirements to LTVs, NHTSA considered 
excluding vehicles with an H-point height of 685 mm, which is 
approximately the height suggested by Toyota. After analyzing available 
data, the agency decided against this approach. Adjusted test data from 
a multiple linear regression model (developed during the 214 rulemaking 
to study the effects of barrier weight and height on SID responses) 
indicated that some LTVs whose H-point heights are greater than 700 mm 
might not be able to pass the new dynamic side impact requirements. 
(See pages IV-2, 3 and 4 of the agency's Preliminary Economic 
Assessment, June 1994, for the rulemaking proposal for the July 1995 
rule. Docket 88-06-N23-001.) NHTSA tested seven LTVs that had an H-
point height of 27 inches (686 mm) or greater, impacting them with 
barriers that were heavier and higher than the adopted one. Applying 
the regression model to

[[Page 24265]]

these cases enabled NHTSA to estimate the TTI(d) and pelvic 
acceleration values that would have been obtained for the vehicles had 
they been tested with the barrier adopted by the final rule. The 
analysis indicates that, contrary to Toyota's assertion about 
widespread compliance of vehicles with SgRP are 700 mm or greater, 
three of the seven vehicles (`93 Plymouth Voyager, `89 Ford Ranger XLT, 
`89 Suzuki Sidekick) may require modifications to ensure compliance 
with the TTI(d) and pelvic g limits.
    NHTSA also does not agree with Toyota's assertion that vehicles 
whose SgRP point is higher than 700 mm would necessarily pass Standard 
214 due to the position of the SID's lower rib relative to the MDB in 
the crash test. The lower rib acceleration is not the only response 
used to determine the compliance of the vehicle. Accelerations of the 
upper spine, upper rib and pelvis also play an important role in 
determining compliance. Toyota did not address the effect that SgRP 
height might have on responses of those components. Further, the 
relative height between the MDB and the SgRP of the target vehicle is 
one of many factors that affect the vehicle performance during a side 
impact crash test. The vehicle weight, clearance between the side 
interior and the SID, side structure and/or padding properties are all 
important factors that could affect whether small LTVs, in particular, 
pass the performance criteria. Toyota did not address those factors 
either.
    For the reasons discussed above, NHTSA denies Toyota's petition for 
reconsideration.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117 and 30166; 
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.

    Issued on: May 8, 1996.
Barry Felrice,
Associate Administrator for Safety Performance Standards.
[FR Doc. 96-12034 Filed 5-13-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P