Document ID: NHTSA-2020-0088-0009
Agency: nhtsa
Document Type: Rule
Title: Anthropomorphic Test Devices: Q3s 3-Year-Old Child Side Impact Test Dummy
Posted Date: 2021-11-22T05:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 222 (Monday, November 22, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 66214-66218]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-25219]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 572

[Docket No. NHTSA-2020-0088]
RIN 2127-AM38

Anthropomorphic Test Devices; Q3s 3-Year-Old Child Side Impact 
Test Dummy; Incorporation by Reference

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

ACTION: Final rule, response to petition for reconsideration, technical 
corrections.

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

SUMMARY: This document responds to a petition for reconsideration from 
Humanetics Innovative Solutions Inc. (HIS) concerning a November 3, 
2020 final rule that amended NHTSA's regulation on anthropomorphic test 
devices to add design and performance specifications for a test dummy 
representing a 3-year-old child, called the ``Q3s'' test dummy. The Q3s 
is an instrumented dummy that can assess the performance of child 
restraint systems in protecting small children in side impacts. The 
petitioner asks for corrections to hole dimensions and tolerances in a 
few of the drawings of parts in the dummy torso, because they are in 
error. This final rule grants the petition and revises the drawing 
package, parts list, and procedures manual for assembling and 
inspecting the Q3s.

[[Page 66215]]

DATES: The effective date of this final rule is: December 22, 2021. The 
incorporation by reference of the publications listed in the rule has 
been approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of December 
22, 2021.
    Petitions for reconsideration: Petitions for reconsideration of 
this final rule must be received not later than January 6, 2022.
    Privacy Act: The petition will be placed in the docket. Anyone is 
able to search the electronic form of all documents received into any 
of the agency's dockets by the name of the individual submitting the 
comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an 
association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's 
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on 
April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477-78) or you may visit 
http://dms.dot.gov.
    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 a copy, from which you have deleted the 
claimed confidential business information, to Docket Management at the 
address given above. To facilitate social distancing due to COVID-19, 
NHTSA is treating electronic submission as an acceptable method for 
submitting confidential business information (CBI) to the agency under 
49 CFR part 512. https://www.nhtsa.gov/coronavirus.

ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration of this final rule must refer 
to the docket and regulatory information number (RIN) set forth above 
and be submitted to the Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590. Note 
that all petitions received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical issues: Peter Martin, 
NHTSA Office of Crashworthiness Standards (email [email protected]). 
For legal issues: Deirdre Fujita, NHTSA Office of Chief Counsel 
(telephone 202-366-2992) (email [email protected]). Mailing address: 
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, U.S. Department of 
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building, Washington, 
DC 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    This document responds to a petition for reconsideration of a 
November 3, 2020 final rule that amended NHTSA's regulation on 
anthropomorphic test devices (ATD) (49 CFR part 572) to add design and 
performance specifications for a test dummy representing a 3-year-old 
child, called the ``Q3s'' test dummy.\1\ The specifications and 
qualification tests for the Q3s are set forth in a new subpart W of 
part 572. The Q3s is an instrumented dummy that can assess the 
performance of child restraint systems in protecting small children in 
side impacts. The Q3s weighs 14.5 kilograms (kg) (32.0 pounds) and has 
a seated height of 556 millimeters (mm), and is representative of a 
50th percentile 3-year-old child. The Q3s dummy's main parts (head, 
thorax, neck, shoulder, spine, abdomen, pelvis, and relevant 
instrumentation) and biofidelity are described in detail in the 
November 2020 final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 85 FR 69898, Docket No. NHTSA-2020-0088.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Petition for Reconsideration

    Humanetics Innovative Solutions Inc. (HIS), submitted a timely 
petition for reconsideration to NHTSA on December 18, 2020. The 
petition explained the need for corrections to several of the Q3s 
drawings. First, HIS explained that on drawing 020-6100, LUMBAR SPINE 
CABLE ASSEMBLY, the dimension across the cable swage corners is 7.10 
millimeters (mm) maximum. HIS stated that it had made the determination 
in 2016 that this dimension would result in the cable interfering with 
the thru hole on parts 020-6002 and 020-6003, which have minimum thru 
hole dimensions of 6.97 mm. Although HIS corrected internal 
manufacturing drawings to reflect this change, these changes were 
``inadvertently missed in the updated Q3s drawings submitted to the 
NHTSA in the 2016 drawing package.'' As a result, HIS's petition 
recommends the following:

    (1) Drawing 020-6002, BRACKET, TOP LUMBAR SPINE, the THRU Hole 
7.00 +0.15/-0.03, should be 7.30 +0.1/-0.5 [sic] (dimensions in mm);
    (2) Drawing 020-6003, PLATE, BOTTOM LUMBAR SPINE, the THRU Hole 
7.00 +0.15/-0.03, should be 7.30 +0.1/-0.5 [sic] (dimensions in 
mm).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ As explained below, HIS meant the negative tolerance to be -
0.05 and not -0.5.

    In addition to the above, HIS states there is a typographical error 
in a tolerance value on drawing 020-6003. There is currently a 
specification of the outside diameter of a hole chamfer stated as 9.5 
 0.02 mm. HIS states that the 0.02 mm tolerance is an error 
and the correct tolerance resides in the ``tolerance box,'' which would 
make the tolerance on this dimension 0.2 mm.

III. Agency Response

    In response to the HIS petition, NHTSA investigated the dimensions 
in questions on the parts depicted in drawings 020-6002 and 020-6003. 
Upon initial analysis of the petition, it was apparent to the agency 
that HIS's recommended dimension and tolerance of 7.30 +0.1/-0.5 mm was 
meant to be 7.30 +0.1/-0.05 mm, i.e., the minus tolerance was supposed 
to be -0.05, not -0.5, as the suggestion by HIS would have increased 
the lower tolerance by nearly 17 times. The agency contacted HIS and 
the petitioner verified the ``-0.5'' was an error, and that it intended 
the value to be ``-0.05'' instead.\3\ Thus, the remainder of our 
analysis is based on a recommended dimension and tolerance of 7.30 
+0.1/-0.05 mm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ An email from HIS acknowledging the ``0.5'' dimension is an 
error is in the docket for this final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The agency measured the parts depicted on drawings 020-6002 and 
020-6003 on 4 sets of parts and found that the holes' outer diameters 
matched the 7.30 +0.1/-0.05 mm dimensions. Thus, the HIS recommended 
dimension and tolerance is acceptable. The agency notes that the 
specified dimension must also be modified on drawings 020-6001-U and 
020-6001-2.
    With respect to drawing 020-6003, NHTSA agrees that the tolerance 
should be 0.2 mm, as indicated in the tolerance block for 
the drawing.\4\ Accordingly, the 9.5 mm dimension on the drawing is now 
to have a range from 9.3 to 9.7 mm, inclusive.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Mechanical drawings typically have a title block in the 
lower right corner. This is a table providing a variety of 
information about the drawing, e.g., drawing number, scale of the 
drawing, revision level, etc. The title block of the Q3s drawings 
contain a cell (tolerance block) that provides tolerances for the 
drawing that are to be applied unless otherwise specified. In the 
case of drawing 020-6003, the tolerance block states that dimensions 
specified to one-tenth of a mm are to have a  0.2 mm 
tolerance.
    \5\ All of the parts of all dummies measured by NHTSA were 
within tolerance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While examining the drawings associated with the parts in question, 
NHTSA found minor errors in drawing 020-6000-S and 020-6001-S that we 
are correcting in this document. First, on drawing 020-6000-S, ITEM 2 
on the drawing (HEX JAM NUT, M6 X 1 ZINK, Part No. 5000144V) should be 
specified as a quantity of 2, rather than 1. Second, on drawing 020-
6001-S, NOTES 2 and 3, need revision to indicate a jam nut is

[[Page 66216]]

being used instead of a lock nut. These corrections are explained in 
more detail below.
    Currently, the NOTES 2 and 3 are set forth as follows:

    2. CABLE (020-6100), WASHER (5000094) & LOCK NUT (5000093) MUST 
BE INSTALLED FOR TESTING.
    3. PRE-LOAD SPINE MOLDING BY \1/2\ TURN OF NUT.

    These notes reference outdated assembly procedures that were 
appropriate for a lock nut. Prior to finalizing the Q3s dummy, the lock 
nut assembly was replaced by a jam nut assembly. This necessitated a 
change to the NOTES, but that was inadvertently overlooked. The 
corrected notes are as follows:

    2. CABLE (020-6100), WASHER (5000094), & JAM NUTS (5000144V) 
MUST BE INSTALLED FOR TESTING.
    3. APPLY TORQUE OF 2 IN.-LB. TO FIRST JAM NUT, THEN LOCK IN 
POSITION WITH SECOND JAM NUT.

    Finally, NHTSA became award of an error in the ``Procedures for 
Assembly, Disassembly, and Inspection'' (PADI) related to the pubic 
load cell of the dummy. This error is unrelated to the changes to 
lumbar spine and the revisions to the engineering drawings.
    The pubic load cell is contained within a subassembly that includes 
a rubber buffer block. It is a single-axis load cell which measures the 
lateral force (Fy) within the dummy's pelvis at its pubic symphysis. 
Depending on whether the dummy is used for a right side or a left side 
impact, the subassembly is flipped so that the buffer block is always 
placed between the load cell and the source of the impact force. Either 
way, the force registered by the load cell should always be negative 
when the pelvis is compressed. This convention is consistent with SAE 
J1733, Sign Convention for Vehicle Crash Testing, which is subtended by 
the regulatory text in Sec.  572.219 Test Conditions and 
Instrumentation.
    The PADI includes dummy manipulations to check all load cell 
polarities to assure that they wired correctly. The manipulations for 
the pubic load cell were mistakenly included in Table C-6, Polarity 
Check Data Sheet for Displacement Transducers. Also, the load cell was 
described as an ``external'' load cell, but it is actually an 
``internal'' load cell in accordance with SAE J1733. The difference 
between an external vs. an internal load cell is explained in SAE J1733 
and does affect the interpretation of a load.
    Moreover, the PADI included separate manipulations for the right 
side installation and the left side installation. The right side check 
produced the correct polarity. However, the left side manipulation 
indicated a (+) polarity for pubic compression, which is incorrect 
according the SAE J1733.
    In the revised PADI, the manipulations are moved to Table C-5, 
Polarity Check Data Sheet for Load Cells. The load cell is correctly 
categorized as an ``internal'' load cell, and a single manipulation 
covers the polarity check for either a right side or a left side 
installation. We note that a single manipulation is all that is needed 
to assure that the load cell registers a negative polarity when the 
pubic symphysis is compressed. SAE J1733 also describes a single 
manipulation to check the pubic load cell. The corrected manipulation 
is:

Pubic Load (internal load)
Channel: Fy
Dummy manipulation: Left femur rightward, right femur leftward
Polarity: (-)

IV. Summary of Corrections

    This final rule changes the regulatory text of part 572, subpart W 
to incorporate by reference a new drawing package, parts list, and PADI 
for the Q3s dummy, all dated January 2021. The new drawing package, 
parts list, and PADI will be placed in the same docket as the 
supporting material for the November 2020 file rule (Docket NHTSA-2020-
0088). Although only a few drawings have been corrected in the previous 
drawing package, we are issuing a new drawing package because we 
believe it is easier for users of the Q3s to change out the whole 
drawing package for the ATD than having to search for and replace 
various individual drawings.
    The following changes will be made to the drawings for the dummy:

    1. The date on the coversheet of the Drawing Package will be 
changed to January 2021 and the revision level of the main assembly 
will be updated from Rev. J to Rev. K.
    2. Drawing 020-6000-S will be updated to reflect a quantity of 2 
for ITEM 2, instead of a quantity of 1.
    3. Drawings 020-6001-S:
    a. Will be updated with the dimension of 7.30 mm replacing 7.00 
mm for the RUBBER MOLDING.
    b. Will be updated such that NOTES 2 and 3 will reflect the use 
of a jam nut instead of a lock nut.
    4. Drawings 020-6001-U will be updated with the dimension of 
7.30 mm replacing 7.00 mm for the RUBBER MOLDING.
    5. Drawing 020-6002 will be updated with the dimension 7.30 
+0.1/-0.05 mm replacing the dimension 7.00 +0.1/-0.03 mm.
    6. Drawing 020-6003:
    a. Will be undated with the dimension 7.30 +0.1/-0.05 mm 
replacing the dimension 7.00 +0.1/-0.03 mm.
    b. Will remove the 0.02 mm tolerance from the 
dimension of 9.5 mm.

    In addition, the date on the coversheet of the Parts List will be 
changed to January 2021 and the revision levels of the affected parts 
will be updated.
    The following changes will be made to the PADI for the dummy:

    1. Table C-5: Will be updated to include a manipulation for the 
pubic load cell so that the polarity of the Fy channel will be (-) 
when placed under compression.
    2. Table C-6: Pubic load cell manipulations will be removed from 
this table.

    In addition, the date on the coversheet of the PADI will be changed 
to January 2021.

V. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

Executive Order 12866, and DOT Regulatory Policies

    NHTSA has reviewed this final rule under the Department of 
Transportation's administrative rulemaking orders and procedures. This 
rulemaking is not significant under E.O. 12866 and was not reviewed by 
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The underlying final rule 
incorporating the Q3s test dummy into 49 CFR part 572 was not 
considered significant. Specifications in part 572 do not impose any 
requirements on anyone. Businesses are affected only if they choose to 
manufacture or test with an ATD in part 572. Further, this final rule 
simply corrects errors in the drawing package of the dummy to reflect 
how it has been manufactured for the past several years. As such, this 
final rule has minimal impact on costs or benefits. Accordingly, 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

[[Page 66217]]

operates primarily within the United States.'' (13 CFR 121.105(a)).
    NHTSA has considered the effects of this rulemaking under the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act. I hereby certify that this rulemaking 
action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. This action will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because this 
final rule simply corrects errors in the drawing package of the Q3s 
dummy to reflect how it has been manufactured for the past several 
years. Thus, this final rule has minimal impact on costs or benefits. 
In addition, specifications in part 572 do not impose any requirements 
on anyone. Businesses are affected only if they choose to manufacture 
or test with the dummy. NHTSA will use the ATD in agency testing but 
does not require anyone to manufacture the dummy or to test motor 
vehicles or motor vehicle equipment with it.

National Environmental Policy Act

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

Executive Order 13045 and 13132 (Federalism)

    Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any 
rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' as 
defined under E.O. 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental, health, or 
safety risk that NHTSA has reason to believe may have a 
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets 
both criteria, NHTSA must evaluate the environmental health or safety 
effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned 
regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably 
feasible alternatives considered by the agency. This final rule is not 
subject to the Executive Order because it is not economically 
significant as defined in E.O. 12866.
    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 
this final rule will not have federalism implications because the rule 
would not have ``substantial direct effects on the States, on the 
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government.'' This final rule will not impose any requirements on 
anyone. Businesses will be affected only if they choose to manufacture 
or test with the dummy.
    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, but this rule amends 49 CFR part 572 and is not a 
safety standard.\6\ This part 572 final rule will not impose any 
requirements on anyone.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 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 subdivision 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 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 will 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 consensus standards relevant to this final rule.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 
Public Law 104-4, 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). 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 will not impose any unfunded 
mandates under the UMRA. This rule does not meet the definition of a 
Federal mandate because it does not impose requirements on anyone.

Incorporation by Reference

    Under regulations issued by the Office of the Federal Register (1 
CFR 51.5(a)), an agency, as part of a final rule that includes material 
incorporated by reference, must summarize in the preamble of the final 
rule the material it incorporates by reference and discuss

[[Page 66218]]

the ways the material is reasonably available to interested parties or 
how the agency worked to make materials available to interested 
parties.
    In this final rule, NHTSA incorporates by reference a new technical 
data package for the Q3s consisting of a set of engineering drawings 
for the test dummy, and a parts list. Q3s dummies manufactured to meet 
the qualification requirements and the technical data package will be 
uniform in their design, construction, and response to impact forces.
    NHTSA has placed a copy of the updated technical data package in 
the docket listed at the beginning of this document. Interested persons 
can download a copy of the materials or view the materials online by 
accessing www.Regulations.gov. Telephone: 1-877-378-5457. The material 
is also available for inspection at the Department of Transportation, 
Docket Operations, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, 
DC. Telephone: 202-366-9826. The material is also available for 
inspection by contacting NHTSA's Chief Counsel's Office at the phone 
number and address set forth in the For Further Information section of 
this document. The material is available for review at NHTSA and is 
available for purchase from SAE International.

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.

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

PART 572--ANTHROPOMORPHIC TEST DEVICES

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 1.95.

Subpart W--Q3s Three-Year-Old Child Test Dummy

0
2. Section 572.210 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1), (2) and 
(3), to read as follows:
* * * * *

Sec.  572.210  Incorporation by reference.

    (a) * * *
    (1) A parts/drawing list entitled, ``Parts/Drawings List, Part 572 
Subpart W, Q3s Three-Year-Old Child Side Impact Dummy'' dated (and 
revised) January 2021 (Parts/Drawings List); IBR approved for Sec.  
572.211.
    (2) A drawings and inspection package entitled, ``Drawings and 
Specifications for Q3s Three-Year-Old Child Side Impact Dummy, Part 572 
Subpart W'' dated (and revised) January 2021 (Drawings and 
Specifications); IBR approved for Sec. Sec.  572.211, 572.212, 572.213, 
572.214, 572.215, 572.216, 572.217, 572.218, and 572.219.
    (3) A procedures manual entitled ``Procedures for Assembly, 
Disassembly, and Inspection (PADI) of the Q3s Child Side Impact Crash 
Test Dummy'' dated January 2021 (PADI); IBR approved for Sec. Sec.  
572.211, 572.215(b), 572.216(b), and 572.219(a).
* * * * *

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117 and 30166; 
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.95, 501.4, and 501.5.

Steven Cliff,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2021-25219 Filed 11-19-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P