Document ID: NHTSA-2010-0147-0001
Agency: nhtsa
Document Type: Rule
Title: Anthropomorphic Test Devices: Hybrid III 6-Year-Old Child Test Dummy, Hybrid III 6-Year-Old Weighted Child Test Dummy
Posted Date: 2010-12-09T05:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 236 (Thursday, December 9, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 76636-76646]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-30357]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 572

[Docket No. NHTSA-2010-0147]
RIN 2127-AK34

Anthropomorphic Test Devices; Hybrid III 6-Year-Old Child Test 
Dummy, Hybrid III 6-Year-Old Weighted Child Test Dummy

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This final rule makes two changes to the agency's 
specifications for the Hybrid III six-year-old child dummy, and the 
Hybrid III six-year-old weighted child test dummy. First, to improve 
the durability of the dummies' femurs we are changing the design of and 
material used for the femur assembly. Second, we correct the drawings 
for the abdomen insert so that the abdominal insert dimensions on the 
drawings reflect actual parts in the field. The correction responds to 
a petition for rulemaking submitted by Denton ATD and First Technology 
Safety Systems.

DATES: The effective date of this final rule is June 7, 2011. The 
incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the 
regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of 
June 7, 2011.
    Petitions for reconsideration: Petitions for reconsideration of 
this final rule must be received not later than January 24, 2011.
    Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all 
submissions received into any of our dockets by the name of the 
individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted 
on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may 
review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register 
published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477-78).

ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration of this final rule must refer 
to the docket and notice number set forth above and be submitted to the 
Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. (A copy of the petition will 
be placed in the docket.)

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For non-legal issues, you may call 
Peter Martin, NHTSA Office of Crashworthiness Standards (telephone 202-
366-5668) (fax 202-493-2990). For legal issues, you may call Deirdre 
Fujita, NHTSA Office of Chief Counsel (telephone 202-366-2992) (fax 
202-366-3820). The mailing address for these officials is the National 
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 
Washington, DC 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Overview
II. Femur Improvements
    a. Femur Design Changes
    b. Analysis of the New Femur Design
    1. Stress Analysis of the Fillet Effect
    2. Dynamic Evaluation
    i. Comparing Test Results of the Modified HIII-6C Test in the 
Marathon, Boulevard, and Decathlon Child Restraint Systems
    ii. Comparing the Results of the Britax Marathon Test of the 
Modified HIII-6C (test H06337) to Those of a Test of an Original 
HIII-6C Where Femur Failure Occurred (test H06120)
    iii. Effect on FMVSS No. 213 Injury Metrics
    iv. Effect on Dummy Kinematics
    v. Dummy Response Biofidelity
    vi. Hip Lock
III. Abdominal Insert
IV. Effective Date
V. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

I. Overview

    This final rule makes two changes to the agency's specifications 
for the Hybrid III six-year-old child dummy (HIII-6C) set forth in 49 
CFR part 572, Subpart N, and for the Hybrid III six-year-old weighted 
child test dummy (HIII-6CW) in 49 CFR part 572, Subpart S. The notice 
of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) upon which this final rule is based was 
published October 21, 2009, 74 FR 53987, Docket No. NHTSA-09-0166.
    First, to improve the durability of the dummies' femurs, we are 
changing the design of and material used for the femur assembly. The 
primary modifications include the addition of a [frac14]-inch (6.35 
millimeter (mm)) fillet between the femur clamp and the connecting 
segment (these components are described in detail in section II.b of 
the NPRM preamble) of the machined femur, removal of material from the 
connecting segment, and a material change from aluminum bronze to 4340 
steel. These changes are made by replacing the drawings of the femur in

[[Page 76637]]

the drawing package specified in 49 CFR part 572, Subpart N (``Six-
year-old child test dummy'') and in Subpart S (``Six-year-old weighted 
child test dummy''), the parts lists, and the ``Procedures for 
Assembly, Disassembly, and Inspection'' (``PADI'') documents 
incorporated by reference into those regulations.
    The second change corrects the drawings for the abdomen insert so 
that the abdominal insert dimensions on the drawings reflect actual 
parts in the field.
    The October 21, 2009 NPRM provided a detailed discussion of the 
femur failures that were occurring with the HIII-6C dummy, the proposed 
solution to those failures, and how the agency proposed to amend the 
specifications for the HIII-6C and the HIII-6CW dummies.
    NHTSA received no comments on the October 21, 2009 NPRM. We are 
adopting the changes proposed in the NPRM for the reasons discussed in 
that document.

II. Femur Improvements

    The present design of the HIII-6C femur is specified in 49 CFR part 
572, Subpart N.1 2 The HIII-6C machined femur, which is one 
of the femur assembly parts, is illustrated in Figure 1 below. This 
one-piece part is machined from bar stock and serves to couple the main 
femur shaft to a smaller shaft protruding from the femur ball (a 
representation of a human femur head). The portion of the part that is 
attached to the femur shaft is referred to as the ``femur clamp'' and 
the portion that is attached to the ball shaft is referred to as the 
``connecting segment.'' The femur ball shaft, retaining flange, and 
femur ball connect the machined femur to the dummy's pelvis. Similar to 
a human hip joint, the ball in the HIII-6C femur assembly allows for 
rotation of the dummy hip joint. The flange is used to attach the femur 
assembly to the pelvis. The entire femur assembly is found within the 
lower torso, and the material specification for this assembly, 
including the machined femur, shaft, flange and ball was originally 
Aluminum Bronze C-624 AMC0-18. (The femur load cell, the response of 
which is discussed in the ``dynamic evaluation'' section below, is 
located in the distal portion of the upper leg (i.e., farther from the 
pelvis) and not in the area of the machined femur.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Complete drawings for the current HIII-6C femur can be found 
in Docket No. NHTSA-2002-12541.
    \2\ The HIII-6CW is based on the HIII-6C, with weight added (10 
pounds) to represent larger children. The femur assembly is the same 
for both the HIII-6CW and the HIII-6C dummies. The discussion set 
forth in this section applies to the HIII-6CW as well, unless 
otherwise noted.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09DE10.031

    Failures of the HIII-6C femur appear to have initiated at a sharp 
corner between the femur clamp and connecting segment sections of the 
machined femur. The approximate location of the femur failure is 
depicted in Figure 1. The fracture was observed from this corner to the 
bolt hole within the femur clamp, at an angle of approximately 45[deg]. 
The failure continued through the thin section of material directly 
beneath the bolt hole, causing complete separation of the machined 
femur. Additionally, in one failed component, small indents on the 
inner diameter of the retaining flange were observed, indicating 
potential contact between the flange and shaft. Pictures of a fractured 
part can be found in the technical report docketed with the NPRM 
(Docket NHTSA-09-0166-0007.1).

a. Femur Design Changes

    The modification made today to improve the femur's durability 
increases the strength and durability of the femur assembly by 
fabricating the machined femur and shaft from 4340 steel, which has a 
higher yield strength than the original material, Aluminum Bronze C-624 
AMC0-18, while keeping the ball and retaining flange as the original 
aluminum bronze material. A \1/4\-inch (6.35 mm) fillet is added 
between the

[[Page 76638]]

femur clamp and the connecting segment to eliminate stress risers that 
were present on the original femur, and a portion of the connecting 
segment material near the femur clamp is removed. The weight of the 
modified femur is only 0.002 lb (0.001 kilograms (kg)) heavier than the 
original femur. Table 1 below compares the weights and material 
properties of the original femur and the new femur.

              Table 1--Weight and Material Properties for the Original and New HIII-6C Femur Design
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Femur design measured               Material and yield strength
                                               weight
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Original..........................  0.532 lb (0.241 kg).......  Aluminum Bronze C-624 AMC0- 48,000 psi
                                                                 18.
New...............................  0.534 lb (0.242 kg).......  4340 Steel................  114,000 psi
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To implement this change in femur design and material, the 
following changes are made to the materials describing the HIII-6C in 
49 CFR part 572. Drawings 127-3017-1&-2, ``6 YR H3-FEMUR MACHINED'' is 
replaced with drawings 127-3017-1S&-2S, which show the new machined 
femur.\3\ The femur assembly drawings (127-3016-1&-2) are also replaced 
due to the new femur design, with new part numbers 127-3016-1S&-2S. 
Higher assembly drawings including 127-3000, ``LOWER TORSO ASSEMBLY'' 
and the complete assembly drawings (127-0000) are amended to show the 
modified part. These revisions are noted on drawing SA572-127DRL-2. The 
PADI is also updated so that it shows the new machined femur in 
figures, and reports the proper lower torso assembly and total weight 
for the dummy. Finally, the part numbers for the machined femur and the 
femur assembly are changed in the Parts/Drawings list, along with the 
revision letters for higher assembly drawings, as appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The femur shaft, drawing 127-3021, with material 
specification Aluminum Bronze 3/8 rnd C-624 AMC0-18, is replaced 
with drawing 127-3021S with material specification 4340 Steel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Copies of the HIII-6C drawing package, PADI, and Parts/Drawings 
list that include the change in femur design can be obtained online at 
http://www.regulations.gov, in the same docket as this final rule.

b. Analysis of the New Femur Design

    NHTSA has determined that the changes to the femur prevent the 
femur from failing and do not compromise the utility of the test dummy. 
This determination is based on an analysis showing the stress is 
reduced by the addition of the fillet, and on an analysis of dynamic 
test results, as discussed below.
1. Stress Analysis of the Fillet Effect
    The one-piece HIII-6C machined femur--which couples the main femur 
shaft to the femur ball shaft--forms a ninety-degree angle where the 
femur clamp intersects the connecting segment. Originally, the corner 
radius at this intersection was very sharp. This sharp corner led to 
high stresses when the femur was loaded. We have estimated that adding 
a fillet to increase the corner radius will reduce stresses by 
approximately 1.6 to two times those in the femur without the fillet. 
It is noted that this is only an estimate, as the loading conditions 
present in the femur during a FMVSS No. 213 type sled test were highly 
simplified in order to provide a rough estimate of the fillet benefit. 
Details about the stress reduction approximation can be found in the 
technical report accompanying the NPRM (Docket NHTSA-09-0166-0007.1). 
Because the fillet design results in substantially reduced stress in 
the femur of the dummy, we believe that adding the fillet and using the 
4340 steel material will avoid femur failure.
2. Dynamic Evaluation
    NHTSA evaluated the new femur in April 2006 at the MGA testing 
facility. To assess the effect of the component modification, we tested 
a HIII-6C with the new femurs (which we refer to as a ``modified HIII-
6C'' or ``modified dummy'') in a Britax Marathon child restraint, 
Britax Boulevard and Britax Decathlon to the FMVSS No. 213 test 
conditions, and compared the results.\4\ To obtain a greater 
understanding of the loading experienced by the femur assembly, 
instrumentation was added to the dummy to allow measurement of triaxial 
accelerations in the pelvis and forces and moments in the femurs. 
Additionally, to determine the effect of the new femur, we compared 
test results from a test in which the femur had failed to those of a 
test with a modified dummy, under conditions that had previously caused 
failure, i.e., the modified HIII-6C dummy was tested in the Britax 
Marathon to the FMVSS No. 213 sled pulse.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Boulevard and Decathlon models were each tested with a 
modified HIII-6C and with a HIII-6CW with the modified femur design. 
No femur failure occurred in any of the tests. For simplicity and 
because the test results of the HIII-6CW are not comparable to those 
of the HIII-6C, tests of the HIII-6CW dummy are not generally 
discussed in this preamble. However, results for all tests of the 
HIII-6CW are discussed in the technical report accompanying the NPRM 
(Docket NHTSA-09-0166-0007.1), including test numbers, maximum head, 
chest and pelvis accelerations and left and right femur maximum 
moments and forces.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In all tests of the new femurs, there were no femur failures. In 
addition, test data relating to left and right femur moments, FMVSS No. 
213 injury measures, dummy kinematics, and other factors concerning the 
performance of the dummy raised no concerns about the new femur design. 
The testing indicated that use of the new femur in the HIII-6C and the 
HIII-6CW will not affect FMVSS testing, except to make the dummies more 
durable.
i. Comparing Test Results of the Modified HIII-6C Test in the Marathon, 
Boulevard, and Decathlon Child Restraint Systems
    NHTSA measured and compared maximum forces and moments measured in 
the femur load cells (over both legs) of the modified HIII-6C dummy in 
the Britax Marathon, Boulevard, and Decathlon. The Marathon and 
Boulevard showed similar maximum forces, while the Decathlon had a 
higher maximum femur force. All maximum forces occurred along the Z-
axis, and all maximum moments were about the Y-axis.

[[Page 76639]]

 Table 2--Maximum forces and Moments Measured in the Femur Load Cells of
     Modified HIII-6C Dummies in a FMVSS No. 213 Compliance Testing
                               Environment
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Britax       Britax       Britax
          Femur measure             Marathon *  Decathlon *   Boulevard
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Max Force (N)....................       1492.9       2264.7       1578.4
Max Moment (Nm)..................          -78        -63.9          -70
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Marathon: Restraint changed from upright to reclined during test.
  Decathlon: Top tether webbing separated at the attachment clip and the
  restraint changed position from upright to reclined.

    At the time of maximum moment there were visible differences in the 
degree of knee extension (test video pictures are provided in the 
technical report accompanying the NPRM, Docket NHTSA-09-0166-0007.1). 
These visual differences in response are consistent with the 
differences in force and moment magnitude seen in the tests.
    Maximum left and right femur forces from the tests of the modified 
HIII-6C dummy with the new femur are displayed in Figure 2, while 
Figure 3 shows the maximum moments measured in the left and right legs 
during each test. In general, force and moment measurements made in the 
left and right femurs were similar, though not identical. This may give 
some insight into why failures were observed in the left leg, right 
leg, or both legs in any given test. We believe that the failures were 
caused by stresses exceeding the material strength of the femur, so the 
occurrence of one femur failure, rather than both, may be due to the 
fact that the forces present during the test were unevenly distributed.

[[Page 76640]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09DE10.032

ii. Comparing the Results of the Britax Marathon Test of the Modified 
HIII-6C (test H06337) to Those of a Test of an Original HIII-6C Where 
Femur Failure Occurred (test H06120)
    Both tests were performed using the same dummy (S/N 158).\5\ In 
test H06120 (with the original femurs), the left femur failed and 
detached completely. The right knee of this dummy was in a fully 
extended position, which could have resulted from the change in 
kinematics due to loss of one leg. In test H06337 (modified dummy), 
there were no femur failures and both legs remained attached to the 
dummy.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Both tests were performed using the same dummy (S/N 158). 
However, because FMVSS No. 213 does not require measurement of 
femoral loads, no femoral force data was available for test H06120 
with the original femurs. Therefore, comparisons were made between 
pre- and post-test positioning, head and chest measurements, and 
dummy position throughout the test, as indicated by the test videos. 
This is discussed in the technical report accompanying the NPRM.
    \6\ We note that in test H06337 (modified dummy), the child 
restraint had multiple cracks in its base following the test, and 
during the test the restraint position shifted from upright to 
reclined. However, these factors are not likely linked to the 
performance of the new femur.>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

iii. Effect on FMVSS No. 213 Injury Metrics
    In these two tests, we compared the maximum head and chest 
accelerations.

[[Page 76641]]

As seen in Figure 4, these measures were similar for both tests, 
suggesting that the new femur does not affect the dummy head or chest 
response significantly. Specifically, peak chest resultant 
acceleration, an FMVSS No. 213 injury criterion, increased only 2.42 
percent from 41.4 g with the current Part 572 femur to 42.4 g with the 
new femur. However, we note that the maximum head Z and resultant 
accelerations occurred after the time of femur failure in test H06120. 
Therefore, it is possible that the acceleration magnitude or response 
in time was affected by the loss of one limb.
    We also compared the 36 millisecond (ms) head injury criterion 
(HIC) values. These values are displayed in Table 3 and Figure 5, along 
with the previously-discussed peak chest accelerations (Figure 6). The 
response measured in the modified HIII-6C resulted in a 5.65 percent 
decrease in HIC over the response of the original HIII-6C. These 
relatively low changes in response suggest that HIC and chest g's are 
not significantly altered by the femur replacement.
    Table 3: HIC 36 and peak chest acceleration values for matched 
FMVSS No. 213 tests. (These results are presented in Figures 5 and 6, 
below.)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09DE10.033

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09DE10.034

[[Page 76642]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09DE10.035

iv. Effect on Dummy Kinematics
    We have determined that use of the new femur does not change the 
dummy's kinematic response. We analyzed test video comparing the 
kinematics of the dummy in tests H06337 (modified dummy) and H06120 
(femur failure). (Photographs from the video are presented in the 
technical report accompanying the NPRM, Docket NHTSA-09-0166-0007.1.) 
Until the time of maximum femur force, the position of the dummy in 
each test is fairly similar. At maximum force, the dummy's knees in 
H06337 (modified dummy) are only slightly more extended and lower than 
the knees in H06120 (femur failure). Although at the approximate time 
of femur failure in test H06120 the positions of the two dummies are 
different, they are only slightly so, and the fully extended left knee 
of the dummy in test H06120 (femur failure) and the additional 
excursion of the leg (as noted by the position of the knee marker) may 
be indicative of the failing femur component. Similarly, after femur 
failure at 100 ms, there are slight differences in dummy position which 
could be attributable to the loss of one leg in the test H06120. All in 
all, there is no indication that the new femur significantly alters 
dummy response.
v. Dummy Response Biofidelity
    Since the new femur has the same geometry as the original femurs 
where it interfaces with the pelvis, the new femur does not behave any 
differently than the original femur. As discussed in the previous 
sections, little difference in head and chest measurements and dummy 
kinematics was observed in the dummy with the new versus the current 
Part 572 femur. There is no indication that the slight modification in 
femur design and material affects dummy biofidelity.
vi. Hip Lock
    The new femur was inspected for indications of susceptibility to 
hip lock. Hip lock is a condition where flexion of the dummy's hip 
joint is mechanically limited due to contact between the femur and the 
retaining ring or other pelvis structure.\7\ There was no evidence of 
excessive wear near the retaining ring/ball joint of the new femurs. 
Some wear was noticed on the upper leg of dummy S/N 155 where the femur 
clamp was fastened to the upper leg weldment. However, because this 
wear is located at a fastening site, metal-to-metal contact is 
inevitable and is not indicative of hip lock.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Hip lock in the HIII-50th percentile male femur led to 
design modifications that prevented ``hard'' (i.e., metal-to-metal 
contact) hip lock from occurring (61 FR 67953, Dec. 26, 1996). In 
that adult dummy, hard hip lock was characterized by spikes in the 
unfiltered pelvis and chest accelerometer readings, high and 
sharply-pointed chest z acceleration traces, non-unimodal chest x 
and resultant accelerations, and a high tension component in the 
lumbar z force (Klinich et al, ``Evaluation of a Proposed Hybrid III 
Hip Modification,'' Stapp Paper No. 952730, 1995).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Abdominal Insert

    This final rule changes Drawing No. 127-8210 of the HIII-6C drawing 
package, which depicts the abdominal insert for the dummy. It makes a 
similar change to the HIII-6CW drawing package.\8\ This change responds 
to a petition from FTSS and Denton. Both manufacturers sought to revise 
the abdomen insert drawing to match the part mold dimensions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The HIII-6CW is the HIII-6C with weight added (10 pounds) to 
represent larger children. The abdominal insert drawing is the same 
for both the HIII-6CW and the HIII-6C dummies. Thus, the discussion 
set forth in this section applies to the HIII-6CW as well.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the NPRM, the agency granted the request but proposed to revise 
the drawing of the abdominal insert based on dimensions of actual 
abdominal inserts, rather than dimensions of the mold for the inserts. 
Nearly all changes were in agreement with the petitioners' mold-based 
dimensions.
    Table 4 shows the changes this final rule makes to key abdomen 
dimensions. ``Fig. Ref'' numbers in the table refer to Figure 7, which 
shows the original dimensions.

                 Table 4--HIII-6C Key Abdomen Dimensions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Adopted
            Description                     Fig. ref.           spec.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Overall height (in.)...............  1.....................  3.81 +/-.20
Ledge height (in.).................  2lt...................  1.53 +/-.20

[[Page 76643]]

 
                                     3rt...................  1.53 +/-.20
Depth excl.plug (in.)..............  4.....................  2.80 +/-.20
Depth incl. plug (in.).............  5.....................  2.80 +/-.20
Taper angle of cone (degrees)......  6lt...................      121/129
                                     7rt...................      121/129
Notch Half Width (in.).............  8.....................  1.50 +/-.20
Notch Depth (in.)..................  9.....................  1.40 +/-.20
Width Bottom of Cone (in.).........  10....................  5.40 +/-.40
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                             [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09DE10.036
                                                             
IV. Effective Date

    The changes to the femur design of the HIII-6C and HIII-6CW are 
effective 180 days after publication of this final rule. The changes to 
the abdomen insert drawing are effective on the same date. Although the 
NPRM proposed that the corrections to the abdomen insert drawing be 
effective 45 days after publication of a final rule, the agency has 
decided to make all the changes to the drawing package effective on the 
same date to simplify the incorporation by reference of the changed 
drawings in the drawing package.

[[Page 76644]]

V. Rulemaking Analyses And Notices

Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    This rulemaking action is not considered a significant regulatory 
action under Executive Order 12866 or the Department of 
Transportation's (DOT's) regulatory policies and procedures (44 FR 
11034, February 26, 1979).
    This rule will only affect the HIII-6C and HIII-6CW test dummies by 
adding a \1/4\-inch fillet between the femur clamp and the connecting 
segment of the machined femur, removing material from the connecting 
segment, and changing the material from Aluminum Bronze C-624 AMC0-18 
to 4340 steel. We stated in the final rule \9\ that adopted the HIII-6C 
into 49 CFR part 572 that the cost of an uninstrumented HIII-6C dummy 
is approximately $30,000 and that instrumentation will add 
approximately $25,000 to $40,000 to the cost, depending on the number 
of data channels the user chooses to collect. We do not expect the 
amendments of this final rule to significantly affect the cost of the 
dummy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 65 FR 2059; January 13, 2000; Docket NHTSA-99-6714.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, this final rule does not impose any requirements on 
anyone. NHTSA will only use HIII-6C and HIII-6CW dummies for compliance 
testing that meet all of the criteria specified in this rule, but the 
agency does not require manufacturers to test with the Part 572 test 
dummies. Businesses will only be indirectly affected by this final 
rule, to the extent that they choose to manufacture or test with the 
dummy. Because the economic impacts of this final rule are so minimal, 
no further regulatory evaluation is necessary.

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 proposed 
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), unless the head of the agency 
certifies the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. The Small Business 
Administration's regulations at 13 CFR part 121 define a small 
business, in part, as a business entity ``which operates primarily 
within the United States.'' (13 CFR 121.105(a)).
    We have considered the effects of this rulemaking under the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act. I hereby certify that this final rule will 
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. Changing the femur design and correcting the abdominal insert 
drawing will not impose any requirements on anyone. NHTSA does not 
require anyone to manufacture or redesign the HIII-6C or HIII-6CW or to 
test vehicles or child restraints with the devices.

National Environmental Policy Act

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

Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    NHTSA has examined today's final rule pursuant to Executive Order 
13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) and concluded that no additional 
consultation with States, local governments or their representatives is 
mandated beyond the rulemaking process. The agency has concluded that 
the final rule does not have federalism implications because the rule 
does not have ``substantial direct effects on the States, on the 
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government.'' This rule does not impose any requirements on anyone. 
Businesses will be affected only if they choose to manufacture or test 
with the HIII-6C or HIII-6CW dummies.
    Further, no consultation is needed to discuss the preemptive effect 
of today's final rule. NHTSA's safety standards can have preemptive 
effect in two ways. This final rule would amend 49 CFR part 572 and is 
not a safety standard.\10\ This Part 572 final rule does not impose any 
requirements on anyone.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ With respect to the safety standards, the National Traffic 
and Motor Vehicle Safety Act contains an express preemptive 
provision: ``When a motor vehicle safety standard is in effect under 
this chapter, a State or a political subdivison of a State may 
prescribe or continue in effect a standard applicable to the same 
aspect of performance of a motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment 
only if the standard is identical to the standard prescribed under 
this chapter.'' 49 U.S.C. 30103(b)(1). Second, the Supreme Court has 
recognized the possibility of implied preemption: State requirements 
imposed on motor vehicle manufacturers, including sanctions imposed 
by State tort law, can stand as an obstacle to the accomplishment 
and execution of a NHTSA safety standard. When such a conflict 
exists, the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution makes the 
conflicting State requirements unenforceable. See Geier v. American 
Honda Motor Co., 529 U.S. 861 (2000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Civil Justice Reform

    With respect to the review of the promulgation of a new regulation, 
section 3(b) of Executive Order 12988, ``Civil Justice Reform'' (61 FR 
4729, February 7, 1996) requires that Executive agencies make every 
reasonable effort to ensure that the regulation: (1) Clearly specifies 
the preemptive effect; (2) clearly specifies the effect on existing 
Federal law or regulation; (3) provides a clear legal standard for 
affected conduct, while promoting simplification and burden reduction; 
(4) clearly specifies the retroactive effect, if any; (5) adequately 
defines key terms; and (6) addresses other important issues affecting 
clarity and general draftsmanship under any guidelines issued by the 
Attorney General. This document is consistent with that requirement. 
Pursuant to this Order, NHTSA notes as follows.
    The issue of preemption 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.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a person is not required 
to respond to a collection of information by a Federal agency unless 
the collection displays a valid control number from the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB). This final rule does not have any 
requirements that are considered to be information collection 
requirements as defined by the OMB in 5 CFR part 1320.

National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272) 
directs NHTSA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory 
activities unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or 
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical 
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling 
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by 
voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs NHTSA to 
provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the agency decides not 
to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards. There 
are no voluntary

[[Page 76645]]

consensus standards relevant to this final rule.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 
Pub. L. 104-4, Federal requires agencies to prepare a written 
assessment of the costs, benefits, and other effects of proposed or 
final rules that include a Federal mandate likely to result in the 
expenditure by State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, 
or by the private sector, of more than $100 million annually (adjusted 
for inflation with base year of 1995). Before promulgating a NHTSA 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 
cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative that achieves the 
objectives of the rule.
    This final rule would not impose any unfunded mandates under the 
UMRA. This final rule does not meet the definition of a Federal mandate 
because it does not impose requirements on anyone. It amends 49 CFR 
part 572 by changing the femur design of two test dummies that the 
agency uses, and corrects a drawing of an abdominal insert for the 
dummies. This final rule affects only those businesses that choose to 
manufacture or test with the dummies. It does not result in costs of 
$100 million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments, in 
the aggregate, or to the private sector.

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:

--Has the agency 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 is not 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 the agency improve clarity by adding tables, lists, or 
diagrams?
--What else could the agency do to make this rulemaking easier to 
understand?
    If you have any responses to these questions, please send them to 
NHTSA.

Regulation Identifier Number

    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.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 572

    Motor vehicle safety, Incorporation by reference.

0
In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA amends 49 CFR Part 572 as 
follows:

PART 572--ANTHROPOMORPHIC TEST DUMMIES

0
1. The authority citation for Part 572 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart N--Six-Year-Old Child Test Dummy, Beta Version

0
2. Section 572.120 is amended by revising the introductory paragraph of 
(a)(1), paragraph (a)(1) through (a)(4), and paragraphs (b) and (c)(1), 
to read as follows:

Sec.  572.120  Incorporation by reference.

    (a) * * *
    (1) A drawings and inspection package entitled, ``Parts List and 
Drawings, Part 572 Subpart N, Hybrid III Six-Year Old Child Crash Test 
Dummy (H-III6C, Beta Version), June 2009,'' consisting of:
    (i) Drawing No. 127-1000, 6-year H3 Head Complete, incorporated by 
reference in Sec.  572.122,
    (ii) Drawing No. 127-1015, Neck Assembly, incorporated by reference 
in Sec.  572.123,
    (iii) Drawing No. 127-2000, Upper Torso Assembly, incorporated by 
reference in Sec.  572.124,
    (iv) Drawing No. 127-3000, Lower Torso Assembly, incorporated by 
reference in Sec.  572.125,
    (v) Drawing No. 127-4000-1 and 4000-2, Leg Assembly, incorporated 
by reference in Sec.  572.126,
    (vi) Drawing No. 127-5000-1 and 5000-2, Arm Assembly, incorporated 
by reference in Sec. Sec.  572.121, 572.124, and 572.125 as part of a 
complete dummy assembly, and,
    (vii) Parts List and Drawings, Hybrid III Six-year-old Child Test 
Dummy (H-III6C, Beta Version), dated June 1, 2009, incorporated by 
reference in Sec.  572.121;
    (2) A procedures manual entitled ``Procedures for Assembly, 
Disassembly, and Inspection (PADI) of the Hybrid III 6-year-old Child 
Crash Test Dummy (H-III6C), Beta Version, June 1, 2009,'' incorporated 
by reference in Sec.  572.121;
    (3) SAE Recommended Practice J211-1995, ``Instrumentation for 
Impact Tests--Parts 1 and 2, dated March, 1995,'' incorporated by 
reference in Sec.  572.127;
    (4) SAE J1733 Information Report, titled ``Sign Convention for 
Vehicle Crash Testing,'' dated December 1994, incorporated by reference 
in Sec.  572.127.
    (b) The Director of the Federal Register approved the materials 
incorporated by reference in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR 
part 51. Copies of the materials may be inspected at the Department of 
Transportation, Docket Operations, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey 
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, telephone (202) 366-9826, and at the 
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), and in electronic 
format through Regulations.gov. For information on the availability and 
inspection of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: 
http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html. For information on the availability 
and inspection of this material at Regulations.gov, call 1-877-378-
5457, or go to: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (c) * * *
    (1) The drawings and specifications package, the parts list, and 
the PADI document referred to in paragraphs (a)(1), and (a)(2) of this 
section, are available in electronic format through www.Regulations.gov 
and in paper format from Leet-Melbrook, Division of New RT, 18810 
Woodfield Road, Gaithersburg, MD 20879, (301) 670-0090.
* * * * *

0
3. Section 572.121 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(2) introductory 
text (the table is not amended) to read as follows:

Sec.  572.121  General description.

    (a) * * *
    (2) Procedures for Assembly, Disassembly, and Inspection (PADI) of 
the Hybrid III 6-year-old child crash test dummy (H-III6C), Beta 
version, dated June 1, 2009, incorporated by reference in Sec.  
572.120.
* * * * *

[[Page 76646]]

Subpart S--Hybrid III Six-Year-Old Weighted Child Test Dummy

0
4. Section 572.160 is amended by revising the introductory paragraph of 
(a)(1), paragraph (a)(1)(iii), paragraph (a)(1)(v), (a)(2), and (a)(3), 
to read as follows:

Sec.  572.160  Incorporation by reference.

    (a) * * *
    (1) A drawings and specifications package entitled, ``Parts List 
and Drawings, Part 572 Subpart S, Hybrid III 6-Year-Old Child Weighted 
Crash Test Dummy (H-III6CW),'' dated June 2009, incorporated by 
reference in Sec.  572.161 and consisting of:
* * * * *
    (iii) Drawing No. 167-2020, Revision A, Spine Box Weight, 
incorporated by reference in Sec. Sec.  572.161, 572.164, and 572.165 
as part of a complete dummy assembly;
* * * * *
    (v) Drawing No. 167-3010, Revision A, Lumbar Weight Base, 
incorporated by reference in Sec. Sec.  572.161 and 572.165 as part of 
a complete dummy assembly; and
* * * * *
    (2) A procedures manual entitled, ``Procedures for Assembly, 
Disassembly, And Inspection (PADI) of the Part 572 Subpart S, Hybrid 
III 6-Year-Old Child Weighted Crash Test Dummy (H-III6CW), revised June 
2009,'' incorporated by reference in Sec.  572.161;
    (3) The Director of the Federal Register approved the materials 
incorporated by reference in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR 
part 51. Copies of the materials may be inspected at the Department of 
Transportation, Docket Operations, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey 
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, telephone (202) 366-9826, and at the 
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), and in electronic 
format through Regulations.gov. For information on the availability and 
inspection of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: 
http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html. For information on the availability 
and inspection of this material at Regulations.gov, call 1-877-378-
5457, or go to: http://www.regulations.gov.
* * * * *

0
5. Section 572.161 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(1) and 
paragraph (a)(3) introductory text (the table is not amended), to read 
as follows:

Sec.  572.161  General description.

    (a) * * *
    (1) ``Parts List and Drawings, Part 572 Subpart S, Hybrid III 6-
Year-Old Child Weighted Crash Test Dummy (H-III6CW),'' dated June 2009 
(incorporated by reference, see Sec.  572.160);
* * * * *
    (3) ``Procedures for Assembly, Disassembly, And Inspection (PADI) 
of the Part 572 Subpart S, Hybrid III 6-Year-Old Child Weighted Crash 
Test Dummy (H-III6CW), revised June 2009'' (incorporated by reference, 
see Sec.  572.160).
* * * * *

    Issued: November 26, 2010.
David L. Strickland,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2010-30357 Filed 12-8-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P