[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 248 (Monday, December 28, 1998)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 71390-71396]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-34249]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 571
[Docket No. NHTSA-98-4934]
RIN 2127--AH24
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Occupant Crash Protection
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule, correcting amendment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document amends a final rule that was published in March
1997 that expedites the depowering of air bags. This correcting
amendment clarifies that: The ``corridor'' defining the bounds of
permissible sled acceleration will be shifted to contain the time at
which the sled acceleration first reaches 0.5 g, to account for ``lag''
in the components of the sled system. This will make the sled test
easier to conduct because early variations in sled acceleration lag
will not in themselves cause the sled pulse to be outside the required
acceleration corridor. While the neck injury criteria for flexion
bending moment and extension bending moment are intended to be measured
by the six-axis load cell, located in the dummy head, the values
measured at that point will be mathematically corrected to reflect the
corresponding values at the occipital condyle, a lower point near the
base of the dummy's skull. Prior to testing, the engine, transmissions,
axles, exhaust, vehicle frame, and vehicle body must be rigidly secured
to the vehicle and/or the sled. Fluids, batteries and unsecured
components will be removed. These steps will prevent spikes in the
acceleration curve during the test that would result from these
components moving.
DATES: Effective Date: The amendments made to this final rule are
effective December 28, 1998.
Petitions: Petitions for reconsideration must be received by
February 11, 1999.
ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration should refer to the docket
number of this rule and be submitted to: Administrator, National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW,
Washington, DC 20590.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information about air bags and
related rulemaking: Visit the NHTSA web site at http://
www.nhtsa.dot.gov and click on the icon ``Air Bag Page''.
For technical issues: Mr. John Lee, Office of Safety Performance
Standards, NPS-10, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400
Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC 20590. Telephone (202) 366-4924.
Fax: (202) 493-2739.
For legal issues: Mr. Paul Atelsek, Office of Chief Counsel, NCC-
20, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street,
SW, Washington, DC 20590. Telephone (202) 366-2992. Fax: (202) 366-
3820.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On March 19, 1997, NHTSA published a final rule amending Federal
Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 208, ``Occupant Crash Protection'' to
temporarily permit a supplemental test procedure for air bag restraint
systems (62 FR 12960-12975). The intent of the optional test procedure,
known as the sled test, was to enable vehicle manufacturers to expedite
their efforts to depower the air bags in their vehicles by 20 to 35
percent. The agency estimated that this amount of depowering would
reduce the risk of injury and death to out-of-position child
passengers, and small statured drivers and passengers.
In the final rule, the agency added a new section to Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety Standard 208, ``Occupant Crash Protection,'' S13,
``Alternative unbelted test for vehicles manufactured before September
1, 2001.'' This new optional compliance test can be used as a
substitute for the 30 mile-per-hour unbelted barrier test for air bag-
equipped vehicles. The new sled test procedure involved mounting a full
(i.e., completed) vehicle equipped with two unbelted 50th percentile
adult male Hybrid III dummies on a sled. The sled is accelerated very
rapidly backwards (relative to the direction that the occupants would
be facing) by a piston mounted in front of the sled, thus simulating
the deceleration that would be experienced in a 30 mph crash. The
standard specifies the ranges within which the level of acceleration
must fall at stated time intervals. This is referred to as the ``sled
pulse.'' The standard specifies ranges, instead of an exact single
level of acceleration since defining an exact sled pulse is
impracticable due to vehicle and equipment variations. The ranges of
acceleration at each moment of the test collectively define a corridor
within which the actual test acceleration must fall. The air bags are
triggered 20 ms after the sled acceleration reaches 0.5 g. The standard
also specifies neck injury criteria for the dummies.
When the final rule was issued, neither the agency nor the
automotive industry had much experience with full-vehicle sled testing.
Therefore, some of the test conditions and definitions used in the
procedure were only partially defined. When manufacturers began to
follow the optional sled test procedure, they encountered problems.
Recently, several manufacturers approached the agency requesting
clarifications of technical issues involving the final rule. The
following is a discussion of these technical issues.
II. Issues
Two manufacturers and a vehicle test laboratory have approached the
agency with specific questions concerning the
[[Page 71391]]
sled test. In April, Morton International Automotive Safety Products
(Morton) approached the agency with questions concerning the test setup
and the neck injury criteria. On June 10, 1997, Honda visited NHTSA and
presented specific concerns similar to the Morton questions, dealing
with the test setup and the neck injury measurement. Honda has also
submitted a request for interpretation for three of their issues, in a
letter dated June 30, 1997. On September 12, 1997, the Motor Industry
Research Association (MIRA) sent NHTSA a letter reporting a problem
with the definition of ``time zero.'' The following is a discussion of
these issues.
1. Practicality of Sled Testing a Full Vehicle
Morton and Honda believe that a full vehicle may exceed the system
size and weight capacity of a smaller sled system powered by a 12-inch
piston. Sled systems are classified by the size of the propulsion
system. For example, they are referred to as a 12-inch or a 24-inch
diameter piston. The larger a piston's diameter, the more weight the
sled can handle without exceeding its design parameters. The agency's
Vehicle Research and Test Center uses the Transportation Research
Center (TRC) sled, which is equipped with a 24-inch piston. Most other
sled facilities are equipped with a 12-inch piston. Morton and Honda
suggested that the weight of a vehicle plus a 2000-pound carriage may
exceed the 7,000 pound capacity of some 12-inch sled systems.
The agency considered this issue in the final rule (at 62 FR
12971):
AAMA, Subaru, and Volvo stated that manufacturers typically
conduct partial vehicle tests. Nevertheless, AAMA stated that such
sled tests could be conducted on either the full vehicle or partial
vehicle. Similarly, Ford stated that ``audit testing with an entire
vehicle on a sled would be acceptable, even though vehicle
manufacturers typically test with only the passenger compartment or
the front portion of the passenger compartment.'' AVS [Technologies]
and Morton stated that it is impractical and infeasible to test the
entire vehicle on the sled given a vehicle's weight and size.
* * *
The agency's Vehicle Research Test Center (VRTC) has analyzed
the size and power of the equipment used to conduct sled tests.
Based on the available information, the agency believes that the
current-design sled at Transportation Research Center (TRC) can be
used to evaluate a full vehicle's response to a 125 ms pulse.
Memoranda in the docket summarize discussions between agency and
General Motors personnel indicating that the readily available 12
inch diameter cylinder sled is capable of producing the required
acceleration pulse for any complete vehicle subject to Standard No.
208.
The agency still does not have specific evidence to indicate that a
full range of vehicle sizes cannot be tested on the smaller test sleds.
Neither Morton nor Honda reported that the full-vehicle test would
exceed the power requirement or the safety parameters of their sleds.
The agency notes that manufacturers can reduce the weight of the
vehicles in their tests if they choose, because only the agency
compliance tests are required to use the full vehicle. Vehicle
manufacturers are sufficiently familiar with their vehicles to be able
to remove vehicle components during certification testing that would
not contribute to the vehicle structure, and therefore would not affect
the restraint system performance during NHTSA's compliance test. For
example, the agency does not believe that the engine block head
contributes to the performance of the restraint system during the sled
test. To stay within the corridor, NHTSA will normally have to secure
the engine. In addition, S13.4 specifies that NHTSA will remove the
tires and wheels prior to the sled test. Removing these components
could reduce the mass of the test vehicle, if the manufacturers so
chose.
Both Morton and Honda stated that the excessive weight would make
it difficult or impossible for their facilities to achieve the
specified pulse within the specified corridor. This final rule
clarifies the definition of ``Time-Zero,'' to make it easier for test
facilities to achieve the specified pulse.
Morton and Honda also raised the issue of whether the lengths of
some vehicles would exceed the 12-foot-sled length. Apparently, some
facilities are designed with the front of the sled directly in contact
with a wall. This is sufficient when testing partial vehicles, but a
full vehicle may hang over the front of the sled, and interfere with
the sled contacting the propulsion system. The agency believes any test
laboratory could overcome this problem by adding an extension either to
the front of the sled or to the end of the piston driving the sled.
2. Securing the Vehicle Parts
To ensure that the specified sled pulse is achieved, the vehicle
and its components must accelerate as a rigid unit. Both Morton and
Honda asked whether they could secure the transmission and engine to
the frame of the vehicle. Honda provided comparative sled pulse plots
showing the variation, including an acceleration trace spike, caused by
the ``floating'' components.
The agency agrees that it is appropriate to secure masses that are
not rigidly secured prior to the sled test. As Honda pointed out, large
parts that shift during a test will cause sled acceleration trace
variations and repeatability problems. Shifting masses will cause
vibrations and variations in the acceleration traces. These vibrations
will appear as ``blips'' in the traces. They may even be significant
enough to go outside of the test corridor. In one of the agency's
research sled tests, the agency observed shifting of the vehicle body.
This conclusion about the appropriateness of securing masses that
are likely to shift during the test was evident in the final rule, in
which the agency noted in response to similar concerns from Ford that
``if necessary, the frame of a vehicle will be rigidly attached to the
vehicle body during testing such that the specified pulse is registered
on the vehicle body.'' This conclusion was reflected in the agency
compliance test procedure (TP-208S-01, Laboratory Test Procedure for
FMVSS 208, Occupant Crash Protection Sled Test) which includes
instructions for securing ``the engine, transmission, axles, and
exhaust to either the vehicle body, vehicle frame, interface frame or
sled. If the vehicle has a frame, rigidly attach the body to the frame.
If the vehicle is not attached directly to the sled, rigidly attach the
vehicle/interface frame unit to the sled.''
However, the agency now agrees that the specification of rigid
securement should have been reflected in the standard itself, rather
than just in the compliance test procedure. Therefore, NHTSA is adding
a provision to the standard on vehicle securing. The agency emphasizes
that the sole objective of securing the vehicle components, and of
removing some unsecured components, is to produce a crash pulse within
the corridor. Which components are secured or removed and how they are
secured is within NHTSA's discretion. Any crash pulse within the
corridor is sufficient evidence that the test procedures were followed
and that the vehicle's components were rigidly secured and that
shifting of masses was adequately addressed.
Morton had suggested cutting the vehicle at the firewall and
welding it to a bulkhead-type fixture. The agency intended no such
radical alteration of the vehicle structure, and will not do this in
its compliance tests. There is no clear way of defining this
alteration. Further, the alteration may change the performance of the
vehicle restraint system. The agency notes again that the
[[Page 71392]]
vehicle manufacturer has the option of using data from certification
testing which deviates from NHTSA's compliance test procedure in the
way Morton suggests. However, in this case, the manufacturer may want
to have a larger margin of compliance to compensate for the greater
deviation from the test procedures.
3. Potential Residual Test-Buck Damage Resulting From ``Pulse Tuning''
In determining whether the sled pulse will stay within the
specified pulse corridor, laboratories have been conducting pre-test
sled runs. These ``dry runs'' may potentially result in residual
damage, such as roof deformation, that would affect test repeatability.
Morton requested permission to remove all non-structural underbody
components, the rear-end suspension assembly, and the engine, and then
add an L-shaped mounting surface and secure the structural stability of
the frame, including the roof line.
The agency does not intend to conduct pre-runs or preliminary sled
tests during compliance tests. The agency is concerned with the
repeatability of the results of a test using a vehicle that has already
been exposed to the effects of a pre-run or preliminary sled test.
Therefore, NHTSA will not base any enforcement action on the failure of
a vehicle to meet the sled test requirements unless that vehicle failed
its initial test.
As to the request by Morton to permit vehicle modifications to
ensure repeatability in multiple tests, a change in the test procedure
is not necessary to enable Morton to make those changes. While Morton
can deviate from the specified test procedure, vehicle modifications
such as the removal of structural components may lead to test setup
confusion and test variability. Since the agency does not plan to make
such modifications, it does not need to amend the standard to permit
the agency to make them.
4. Where to Measure for Neck Injury Criteria
Paragraph S13.2 of the final rule specifies the neck moments be
``measured with the six axis load cell.'' Morton and Honda pointed out
that the final rule's neck measurement procedure and the procedure
under S572.33 (the neck section in Part 572, Anthropomorphic Test
Devices, or test dummies) may appear to differ. In 572.33, the neck
moments are defined at the occipital condyle (Moment=My-0.058 x Fe).
(The occipital condyle is located on the skull where it meets the first
vertebra, instead of higher up where the load cell is located.) Morton
and Honda believe the proper procedure should have been the one
specified in S572.33.
Honda and Morton are correct. Although the measurement is indeed
made with the load cell, the value ultimately calculated is the moment
at the occipital condyle, instead of the moment at the load cell. The
NPRM, and the source document referenced in the NPRM (AGARD Conference
Proceedings of NATO, July 1996, titled ``Anthropomorphic Dummies for
Crash and Escape Systems'') base the criteria for the flexion bending
moment and the extension bending moment on the values measured by the
load cell as corrected to represent the moment at the dummy's occipital
condyle. However, there was no mention of this correction in the final
rule. Biomechanical references 1 deal with the measurement
at the occipital condyle, not at the transducer, as the appropriate
location when referring to neck-head movement on a dummy. Additionally,
the location of the transducer may shift, depending on the dummy
design, and may be difficult to define. An additional indication of the
agency's intention was the subsequent May 20, 1997 Interim Final Rule
(62 FR 27511), which upgraded the neck instrumentation on the Hybrid
III dummy. It specified the conversion calculation in S572.31(a)(3) for
adjusting the neck moment from the point of measurement within the
transducer to the occipital condyle. Therefore, there is ample evidence
that the neck moment injury criteria value was intended to be the value
at the occipital condyle, not at the transducer. The rule is being
amended to specify this explicitly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ``To assess the fore-and-aft bending biofidelity of the neck
* * *. The resulting moment about the occipital condylar axis versus
the head to pendulum angle must lie within the prescribed
corridor.'' Advisory Group for Aerospace Research and Development
(AGARD) Advisory Report 330, Anthropomorphic Dummies for Crash and
Escape System Testing, AGARD-AR-330, North Atlantic Treaty
Organization.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Definition of Time Zero
Honda and MIRA stated that the final rule was unclear regarding the
definition of the Time-Zero (T-0, or start) for the actual sled test.
They asked whether Time-Zero in Figure 6 of the final rule sled pulse
represents (a) the instant when the sled system in activated, or (b)
the instant when the sled reaches 0.5 g's. They believe there are
problems in either case. If T-0 is the time when the sled is activated,
some sleds will have extreme difficulty fitting in the corridor. If T-0
is the point at which the sled reaches 0.5 g's, initial noise in the
acceleration curve as the sled begins moving makes measurement
difficult. (This point was raised above, in issue 1). Some laboratories
reportedly use 1.0 g's as a timing point, with adjustments back to the
approximate 0.5 g point.
For the purposes of discussion, four start times could conceivably
be used: (1) T-0Activation, the moment the sled electronics
are activated, (2) T-0Movement, when the sled begins moving,
which also represents the start of the test calculating a Delta V
value, (3) T-0Test, which represents the start of the test
for fitting the pulse corridor to the acceleration curve, and (4) T-
0Air-bag, start of timing for the air bag deployment count-
down.
The time when the sled system is activated, T-
0Activation, is not relevant to the performance criteria of
the sled pulse. When the system is activated, there is a lag time until
the system actually starts moving. This response lag is due to the fact
that the electrical and mechanical systems of the sled do not react
instantaneously.
Figure 6 of the March 19 final rule indicates that the test begins
when the sled actually starts to move, at 0.0 g acceleration, but that
too is impractical. In its June 10 presentation, Honda provided initial
sled pulse traces for both the VRTC 24-inch piston and a 12-inch
piston. These traces indicated that the 24-inch cylinder sled took 18.1
milliseconds to achieve 0.5 g's, yet the corridor ends at the 0.5 g's
level at 6.5625 ms. Therefore, even the faster acceleration of the 24-
inch sled would be outside the corridor, if T-0Test started
at 0.0 g acceleration, when the sled starts to move. It appears that
even after the sled begins moving (although it moves only the width of
a pencil line), the time lag before it begins significant acceleration
is so great that no existing sled can produce an acceleration curve
that stays within the corridor. This time lag has no counterpart in
rigid barrier vehicle crash tests because the deceleration is
instantaneous when the vehicle hits the barrier. The figure in the
final rule portrayed unrealistically rapid increases in acceleration
from the start of movement.
The intent of the sled pulse corridor is to ensure a specific
change of acceleration (g) with respect to time. The important portion
of the curve for determining fit within the corridor is not the small
acceleration that occurs while the sled systems fully charge, but the
rapid acceleration that occurs afterward. The final rule assumed that
manufacturers would be able to produce
[[Page 71393]]
sled test acceleration curves within the corridor.
To carry out this intent, it makes sense to shift the corridor with
respect to time to align it with the true sled pulse, rather than
having the sled pulse aligned with the corridor. As long as the shape
of the corridor is not changed, the crash pulse will be no different
from the standpoint of designing safe air bags. It will just be easier
to run the test, without affecting the outcome. To accomplish the
process of fitting the corridor to the sled pulse, T-
0Test should be determined by a specific acceleration level
for the sled which corresponds to a time at which the most rapid
acceleration begins, at about 0.5 g's. Computationally shifting the
corridor to align with the curve is far easier than trying to
mechanically get the sled pulse curve to begin rapid acceleration
within the corridor. Starting at 0.5 g will also eliminate much of the
problem mentioned above in issue 1 concerning noise during the earliest
part of the test acceleration.
Therefore, S13.1 and Figure 6 are being amended to reflect that the
sled test start time for purposes of meeting the requirement of being
in the corridor, T-0Test, is when the sled achieves 0.5 g's.
Many test laboratories use T-0Test equal to a specific
acceleration (g) level, often 0.5 g's. The vehicle will still have to
achieve the specified range of acceleration during the test. Similarly,
the time at which the air bag fires is only relevant if it relates to
when the sled starts accelerating at a significant rate, such as 0.5
g's. Therefore, the air bag deployment timing should also be timed from
the time at which the sled reaches 0.5 g acceleration. T-
0Test and T-0Air-bag coincide.
6. Delta V Requirement
Honda asks whether the agency had intended to require the sled to
achieve a velocity of 28 to 30 miles per hour, or just to stay in the
corridor. In other words, it asks whether the final velocity specified
in S13.1 and Figure 6 of the final rule is a guideline or a
requirement. If the final velocity is a requirement, then Honda
believes it is very difficult to consistently stay in the corridor. It
also asks whether the velocity may be calculated by integrating the
acceleration data or must the actual velocities be measured with a
speed device.
The agency clearly intended the specifications for the final
velocity to be included in the standard as a requirement during agency
compliance testing. The change in velocity is specified in S13.1 and in
Figure 6 of the final rule as Delta V=30 (+0, -2 ) miles per hour, or
between 28 and 30 mph. As discussed in the preceding section, the
agency has made a correction that allows the pulse corridor to be moved
to fit the sled pulse. This should assist the test laboratories in
keeping within this sled pulse corridor.
The agency has not specified a method of determining the Delta V.
TRC measures the velocity directly. However, laboratories without the
capability to directly measure velocity may mathematically calculate
the change in velocity by integrating the entire sled pulse starting
from zero acceleration (T-0Movement). As in the March 19th
final rule, the agency does not recommend a specific procedure.
The agency notes that, even though the regulation is a
specification of the parameters to be used in agency compliance tests,
there is nothing to preclude vehicle manufacturers from actually
exceeding the change in velocity specified in the standard. The agency
would consider a test at a higher-than-required Delta V to be an
acceptable basis for certification.
7. Signal Problems, Filtering
Honda reports that it is hard for some laboratories to determine
the exact 0.5 g level, because of test startup noise. Probably the most
significant problem is that the air bag initiation time is determined
by adding 20 milliseconds (+/-2 ms) after the sled achieves 0.5 g
acceleration. If the instrumentation is incapable of discerning the
point at which 0.5 g acceleration is reached, the air bag activation
time may be incorrect. Honda pointed out that much of the noise in the
instrumentation occurs only at the beginning of the test, and that the
problem immediately clears up. Honda reports that some laboratories are
timing the air bag activation from 1.0 g, by applying a mathematical
time conversion factor to account for the time back to the approximate
0.5 g point, based on experience with the equipment.
NHTSA will follow the Standard No. 208 test requirements during
compliance testing. However, manufacturers may use any method during
testing that gives them confidence enough to assure that the vehicle
will comply when tested by the agency. No clarification of the rule is
necessary.
8. Loading Requirements and Test Attitude
Honda asks whether the loaded requirement should be applied to the
actual sled test, or to be used just prior to the test to determine the
vehicle attitude.
The load requirement specified in S8.1 of FMVSS 208, as it applies
to the sled test, is only specified for pre-test loading, to determine
the vehicle attitude. The vehicle attitude is then used for defining
the sled-mounting attitude. As discussed in Issues 1 and 2, the sled
configuration may be slightly modified by removing fluids, battery, and
unsecured weight, and securing loose parts, but these modifications
will not affect the test attitude.
III. Effective Date
The agency finds that there is good cause to make this rule
effective immediately. These amendments do not impose any new
requirements. Instead, they relieve some of the testing burden imposed
on the manufacturers by the March 19, 1997 final rule. It will be
easier for manufacturers to test by aligning the corridor with the sled
pulse, as specified in these amendments. Also, the smooth sled pulse
that will result from rigidly securing the engine, transmissions,
axles, exhaust, vehicle frame, and vehicle body and removing the
fluids, batteries and unsecured components will make testing easier. A
delayed effective date would impose a needless compliance burden on the
vehicle manufacturing industry and would provide no safety benefits.
IV. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
NHTSA has considered the impact of this correcting amendment under
Executive Order 12866 and the Department of Transportation's regulatory
policies and procedures. This rulemaking document was not reviewed by
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under E.O. 12866,
``Regulatory Planning and Review.'' This document amends an action that
was determined to be ``significant'' under the Department of
Transportation's regulatory policies and procedures because of the
degree of public interest in this subject. However, today's rule simply
clarifies the existing requirements and makes the test procedures
easier to perform. This correcting amendment does not alter the costs
or benefits of that rule significantly. It merely clarifies the
intended application of the rule and provides guidance regarding test
procedures. Therefore, a regulatory analysis is not warranted.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
NHTSA has considered the effects of this rulemaking action under
the
[[Page 71394]]
Regulatory Flexibility Act. I hereby certify that this rule will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. As explained above, this rule will not have an economic
impact on any manufacturer or other entity, except for a small
beneficial impact in promoting ease of testing.
This correcting amendment slightly increases manufacturer
flexibility in testing. Most of the changes are interpretations and
clarifications of the existing language, not changes in requirements
that impose new burdens. The changes in requirements are designed to
make vehicles with air bags easier for manufacturers to test their
vehicles, not to change the vehicle performance. As a result, some
businesses that otherwise would have had to buy sophisticated testing
equipment will not need to do so. Therefore, there will be no new
significant impact on small businesses.
Executive Order 12612 (Federalism)
NHTSA has analyzed this rule in accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in E.O. 12612, and has determined that this rule
will not have significant federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-
511), there are no requirements for information collection associated
with this final rule.
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4) 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. This rule does not meet the definition of a
Federal mandate, because it adds no additional cost to the completely
permissive final rule which it is clarifying.
Civil Justice Reform
This final rule has no retroactive effect. Under 49 U.S.C. 30103,
whenever a Federal motor vehicle safety standard is in effect, a State
may not adopt or maintain a safety standard applicable to the same
aspect of performance which is not identical to the Federal standard,
except to the extent that the State requirement imposes a higher level
of performance and applies only to vehicles procured for the State's
use. 49 U.S.C. 30161 sets forth a procedure for judicial review of
final rules establishing, amending or revoking Federal motor vehicle
safety standards. That section does not require submission of a
petition for reconsideration or other administrative proceedings before
parties may file suit in court.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 595
Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Motor vehicles.
In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA amends 49 CFR part 571 as
follows:
1. The authority citation for part 571 continues to read as
follows:
PART 571--FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117, 30122 and 30166;
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.
2. Section 571.208 is amended by replacing the 8th sentence of
Sec. 13.1 with the four sentences shown below, by revising Sec. 13.2,
and by adding Sec. 13.5 to read as follows:
* * * * *
Sec. 571.208 Occupant Crash Protection.
* * * * *
Sec. 13.1. Instrumentation Impact Test--Part 1--Electronic
Instrumentation. * * * The total change in velocity (Delta V) shall be
determined from the integration of the entire acceleration versus time
curve from the sled. The Delta V shall include the period of time in
which the sled is accelerating to 0.5 g. All points on the acceleration
versus time curve at and beyond 0.5 g must be contained within or on
the corridor defined in Figure 6. The agency may shift the curve with
respect to time in order to fit the curve within the corridor. * * *
Sec. 13.2 Neck injury criteria. A vehicle certified to this
alternative test requirement shall, in addition to meeting the criteria
specified in Sec. 13.1, meet the following injury criteria for the
neck, measured with the six axis load cell (ref. Denton drawing C-1709)
that is mounted between the bottom of the skull and the top of the neck
as shown in Drawing 78051-218, in the unbelted sled test:
(a) Flexion Bending Moment (calculated at the occipital condyle)--
190 Nm. SAE Class 600.
(b) Extension Bending Moment (calculated at the occipital
condyle)--57 Nm. SAE Class 600.
* * * * *
Sec. 13.5. Vehicle Securing. The engine, transmissions, axles,
exhaust, vehicle frame, and vehicle body may be rigidly secured to the
vehicle and/or the sled, and fluids, batteries and unsecured components
may be removed, in order to assure that all points on the crash pulse
curve are within the corridor defined in Figure 6.
* * * * *
3. Figure 6 is revised to appear as follows:
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
[[Page 71395]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28DE98.000
[[Page 71396]]
Issued on: December 18, 1998.
Ricardo Martinez,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 98-34249 Filed 12-24-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-C
