[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 21 (Friday, January 31, 2003)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 4961-4965]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-2358]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 571
[Docket No. NHTSA 02-14270]
RIN 2127-AI71
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Occupant Crash Protection
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In May 2000, we published a rule to require advanced air bags
in light vehicles. The requirements of that rule
[[Page 4962]]
are being phased in during two stages, the first of which extends from
September 1, 2003, to August 31, 2006. In September 2002, in response
to petitions for rulemaking, we published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) to reduce the percentage of vehicles that must comply
with the advanced air bag requirements during the first year of the
first stage, i.e., from September 1, 2003, through August 31, 2004,
from 35 percent to 20 percent. This final rule adopts that proposed
change, which reflects the technical challenges being faced by the
vehicle manufacturers in meeting the new requirements and the fact that
two of the automotive suppliers dropped plans to offer devices that
suppress the passenger air bag when a child is present. In the NPRM, we
also requested comments on possible adjustments in the alternative
phase-in requirement available to limited line manufacturers. We plan
to address that issue in a separate document, in the near future.
DATES: Effective Date: The amendments made in this rule are effective
March 3, 2003.
Petitions: Petitions for reconsideration must be received by March
17, 2003.
ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration should refer to the docket and
notice number of this document and be submitted to: Administrator,
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street,
SW., Washington, DC 20590.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The following persons at the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW.,
Washington, DC, 20590:
For technical issues: Mr. Louis Molino, Office of Crashworthiness
Standards, NVS-112, telephone (202) 366-2264, facsimile (202) 493-2739.
For legal issues: Mr. Edward Glancy, Office of the Chief Counsel, NCC-
112, telephone (202) 366-2992, facsimile (202) 366-3820.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Background
A. The Advanced Air Bag Final Rule
B. September 2002 Proposal to Adjust Phase-in
II. Public Comments
III. Agency Decision
IV. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
I. Background
A. The Advanced Air Bag Final Rule
On May 12, 2000, we published in the Federal Register (65 FR 30680)
a rule to require advanced air bags. (Docket No. NHTSA 00-7013; Notice
1.) The rule amended Standard No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection, to
require that future air bags be designed so that, compared to current
air bags, they create less risk of serious air bag-induced injuries,
particularly for small women and young children, and provide improved
frontal crash protection for all occupants, by means that include
advanced air bag technology.
The rule will be phased in during two stages. The first stage
phase-in will improve protection by requiring vehicles to be certified
as passing the unbelted test requirements \1\ for both the 5th
percentile adult female and 50th percentile adult male dummies in a 32-
40 km/h (20-25 mph) rigid barrier crash, and belted test requirements
\2\ for the same two dummies in a rigid barrier crash with a maximum
test speed of 48 km/h (30 mph). In addition, the first stage will
minimize the risk of injury from air bags by requiring vehicles to
include technologies that will minimize the risk of air bag-induced
injuries for young children and small adults.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ``Unbelted test requirements'' are requirements that specify
the use of unbelted dummies in testing vehicles.
\2\ ``Belted test requirements'' are requirements that specify
the use of belted dummies in testing vehicles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
During the first stage phase-in, from September 1, 2003, to August
31, 2006, increasing percentages of motor vehicles will be required to
meet requirements for minimizing air bag risks,\3\ primarily by either
automatically turning off the air bag when young children are present
or deploying the air bag more benignly so that it is much less likely
to cause serious or fatal injury to out-of-position occupants.\4\ If
they so wish, manufacturers may choose to use a combination of those
approaches.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The complete phase-in schedule was: 9/1/03 to 8/31/04--35
percent; 9/1/04 to 8/31/05--65 percent; 9/1/05 to 8/31/06--100
percent (manufacturers may use credits for early compliance); 9/1/
06--all vehicles must comply (no use of credits).
\4\ The rule also establishes very general performance
requirements for dynamic automatic suppression systems (DASS) and a
special expedited petitioning and rulemaking process for considering
procedures for testing advanced air bag systems incorporating a
DASS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manufacturers that decide to design their passenger air bags to
turn off will use weight sensors and/or other means of detecting the
presence of young children. To test the ability of those means to
detect the presence of children, the rule specifies that child dummies
be placed in child seats that are, in turn, placed on the passenger
seat in both proper and (to simulate misuse) improper ways. It also
specifies tests that are conducted with unrestrained child dummies
sitting, kneeling, standing, or lying on the passenger seat.
The ability of air bags to deploy in a low-risk manner will be
tested using child dummies on the passenger side and the small adult
female dummy on the driver side. For manufacturers that decide to
design their passenger air bags to deploy in a low risk manner, the
rule specifies that unbelted child dummies be placed against the
instrument panel in two different positions. The air bag is then
deployed with the dummies in each position. This placement was
specified because pre-crash braking can cause unrestrained children to
move forward into or near the instrument panel before the air bag
deploys. The ability of driver air bags to deploy in a low risk manner
will be tested by placing the 5th percentile adult female dummy against
the steering wheel in two different positions and then deploying the
air bag with the dummy in each position.
The second stage phase-in will require vehicles to be certified as
passing the belted test requirements for the 50th percentile adult male
dummy at a test speed up to 56 km/h (35 mph). This requirement will
provide improved protection for belted occupants.
B. September 2002 Proposal To Adjust Phase-in
On September 24, 2002, we published in the Federal Register (67 FR
59800) a document responding to petitions for rulemaking from the
Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, Toyota, and DaimlerChrysler
requesting changes in the advanced air bag final rule. (Docket No.
NHTSA 02-13393; Notice 1.)
In response to the petitions, we proposed to reduce the percentage
of vehicles that must comply with the advanced air bag requirements
during the first year of the phase-in, i.e., from September 1, 2003,
through August 31, 2004, from 35 percent to 20 percent. We stated that
the proposed change reflected the technical challenges being faced by
the vehicle manufacturers in meeting the new requirements and the fact
that two of the automotive suppliers had dropped plans to offer devices
that suppress the passenger air bag when a child is present. We also
stated that we had tentatively concluded that a reduction in the first
year's phase-in requirement from 35 percent to 20 percent strikes a
reasonable balance between ensuring that the industry provides advanced
air bags as quickly as is reasonably possible, while avoiding a
situation in which the industry must put new technologies into vehicles
before they have been fully tested.
[[Page 4963]]
We otherwise denied the petitions or, as to certain requests,
dismissed them because the agency had subsequently considered or was
considering the same requests in the context of another rulemaking
proceeding.
In addition, in response to a petition for rulemaking from Porsche,
we stated that we were considering possible adjustments in the
alternative phase-in requirements available to limited line
manufacturers.
II. Public Comments
We received a total of nine comments, seven from automobile
manufacturers and two from automotive suppliers. The automobile
manufacturer commenters were the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers
(Alliance) and six individual manufacturers--Subaru, Nissan, Porsche,
General Motors (GM), DaimlerChrysler (DC), and BMW. The automotive
supplier commenters were Delphi and Elesys.
The commenters were generally supportive of the agency's proposal
to reduce the percentage of vehicles that must comply with the advanced
air bag requirements during the first year of the first stage phase-in.
No commenter opposed reducing the percentage from 35 percent to 20
percent, although two, the Alliance and DC, argued that a greater
reduction should be provided.
Nissan stated that it supports the proposal. According to that
company, the developmental period for the occupant sensing technology
needed to meet the requirements has been longer than expected due to
the developmental capacity of the suppliers of this technology.
BMW cited the significant technical challenges it has faced and
will continue to face and stated that it believes that reducing the
first year percentage to 20 percent will provide the necessary
flexibility such that sufficiently robust advanced air bag systems will
be developed for new vehicles, as well as redesigned for current
production vehicles and implemented during the phase-in period.
Subaru stated that a reduction in the first year percentage to 20
percent or less would permit it to focus on applying its manpower
during the first year on implementing suppression functionality in a
single specific model. That company stated that it would then be in a
position to effectively develop systems with some certainty for
vehicles in the second and third years.
GM stated that it agrees with the agency's proposed reduction to 20
percent of the percentage of vehicles that must meet the first-year
phase-in requirements for advanced air bags. That company stated that
although it would be able to satisfy the original first-year
requirement of 35 percent, it agrees with the agency that the proposal
``strikes a reasonable balance between ensuring the industry provides
advanced air bags as quickly as is reasonably possible, while avoiding
a situation in which the industry must put new technologies into
vehicles before they have been fully tested.''
The Alliance stated that it is unaware of any new data or
information that would lead it to change its conclusion, presented in
its petition for rulemaking, that 10 percent is the correct phase-in
percentage requirement to be applied to the first year. That
organization argued that not every manufacturer could accede to a
phase-in percentage greater than 10 percent. The Alliance also stated
that, while it did not request modification of the second year
percentage in its petition, the continued difficulty in developing
effective and reliable air bag systems, including occupant
classification sensor technologies, supplier constraints, as well as
the significant challenge of implementing these new technologies might
require modification of the second year phase-in percentage as well.
DC stated that it believes the agency has underestimated the
complexity, difficulty, and technical challenges related to the phase-
in of the advanced air bag requirements. It stated that in its quest to
develop low risk air bag systems, which it believes minimizes real
world risk, and to reduce the uncertainty associated with occupant
classification systems in the real world, it continues to uncover
additional unforeseen technical development and vehicle integration
challenges. DC asked that the agency adopt a percentage of 10 percent
for the first year phase-in and reconsider its decision not to reduce
the second year percentage from 65 percent to 40 percent, as DC had
requested in its petition for rulemaking.
Delphi stated that it has, at this time, both technical capability
and production capacity to support its customers in meeting either the
original or the proposed advanced air bag regulatory volume
requirements. That company stated that its product enables compliance
with Standard No. 208's suppression requirements and meets real world
reliability requirements in calibrated production seats.
Elesys stated that its product meets or exceeds all applicable
Standard No. 208 requirements, as well as the significant real-world
durability, configuration, production and installation challenges posed
by its automotive customers. That company stated that it understands
why the agency proposed to reduce the first year percentage, but that
any further reduction in the required percentages for later years is
unnecessary for two reasons: (1) Viable, real-world-tested solutions
already exist in the marketplace, and (2) such a delay would unduly
penalize companies, including Elesys, who have invested heavily in
research and development to meet the implementation schedule as it is
currently configured.
Only one commenter, Porsche, commented on the issue of possible
adjustments in the alternative phase-in requirements available to
limited line manufacturers. That company suggested a revised approach
for addressing the issues it had raised in its petition.
III. Agency Decision
After carefully considering the comments, we have decided, for the
reasons discussed in the NPRM, to adopt as final our proposal to reduce
the percentage of vehicles that must comply with the advanced air bag
requirements during the first year of the phase-in, i.e., from
September 1, 2003, through August 31, 2004, from 35 percent to 20
percent. We are making this change in light of the technical challenges
being faced by the vehicle manufacturers in meeting the new
requirements and the fact that two of the automotive suppliers had
dropped plans to offer devices that suppress the passenger air bag when
a child is present. We have not yet reached a decision with respect to
possible adjustments in the alternative phase-in requirements available
to limited line manufacturers, and will address that issue in a
separate document, in the near future.
As noted above, no commenter opposed reducing the percentage from
35 percent to 20 percent, although two, the Alliance and DC, argued
that a greater reduction should be provided. These commenters
recommended that the agency reduce the first year percentage to 10
percent, and DC also recommended that the agency reduce the second year
percentage from 65 percent to 40 percent.
While we have considered the recommendations of the Alliance and
DC, they have not provided information or analysis demonstrating that a
further reduction is necessary, either for the first or second year. We
do not disagree with their contention that the advanced air bag final
rule poses significant technical challenges, but believe a reduction in
the first year percentage from 35 percent to 20 percent adequately
addresses that concern. We have had periodic discussions with
[[Page 4964]]
vehicle manufacturers over the past two years to assess our original
phase-in requirements, as well as the vehicle manufacturers'
projections for meeting the phase-in schedule. We have also monitored
the advanced air bag systems that they have been developing, as well as
met with individual restraint system suppliers. While DC has commented
that it is disappointed that the agency has denied its recommendation
of a 10 percent first year phase-in, GM has indicated an ability to
meet the original first-year requirement of 35 percent. As previously
noted, four of the five larger manufacturers that commented on the
NPRM, i.e., GM, Subaru, Nissan and BMW, specifically indicated that the
reduction of the first year phase-in to 20 percent would give them the
necessary flexibility and relief to meet the new phase-in schedule.
Thus, the remaining 15 percent of their respective fleets that no
longer need to meet the first year phase-in requirements could be
deferred to year two, if more development time is needed, or could be
certified in model year 2003 to earn advanced credits. Although the
Alliance represents many manufacturers, the only member that provided
specific comments supporting the Alliance position that the reduction
to 20 percent is not sufficient was DC.
DC noted that the agency's original driver automatic protection
rule included a phase-in of 10-25-40-100 percent, and argued that the
advanced air bag final rule raises issues of even greater complexity.
There is no reason, however, why the specific production year
percentages for phase-ins of different rules should be the same. We
also note that, as part of the May 2002 final rule for advanced air
bags, we eliminated altogether the first year of the phase-in schedule
we had proposed, which would have required 25 percent of each
manufacturer's light vehicles manufactured during the production year
beginning September 1, 2002, to comply with the advanced air bag
requirements.
Finally, for model year 2003, which began approximately one year
before the required phase-in begins, significant numbers of production
vehicles are being certified to comply with the advanced air bag
requirements. GM has announced introduction of a passenger sensing
system that is being installed in nearly 1.6 million vehicles. This
system is standard on most of GM's model year 2003 full-size pickups
and sport-utility vehicles, including the Chevrolet Silverado and GMC
Sierra pickups (except commercial models or chassis-cabs) and Chevrolet
Suburban, Tahoe and Avalanche; GMC Yukon XL, Yukon and Denali; and
Cadillac Escalade and Escalade EXT. GM has certified that the system
meets the advanced air bag requirements. NHTSA has performed some
compliance tests on three of the GM C/K trucks that were certified to
the advanced air bag requirements. These included the infant, three-
year-old and six-year-old child dummy suppression (presence) tests, the
5th percentile adult female driver low risk deployment tests, the
belted 5th percentile adult female offset deformable barrier crash
test, the frontal unbelted 5th percentile adult female and 50th
percentile adult male crash tests. The three units tested passed the
applicable performance requirements.
Other manufacturers are certifying, for purposes of the risk
minimization requirements for children, on the basis of a combination
of air bag suppression (for the infant and three-year-old child dummy
tests) and low risk deployment (for the six-year-old child dummy tests)
in model year 2003. This demonstrates that vehicle manufacturers are
not constrained to a particular advanced air bag technology, and that
both suppression and low risk deployment certification methods are
viable options for meeting the advanced air bag requirements ahead of
the required phase-in schedule. We are also aware that vehicle
manufacturers are working with multiple technology suppliers and are
not reliant upon a single entity for production.
As with the phase-in of any new requirement involving the use of
new technology, we will, of course, continue to monitor the ability of
the automobile manufacturers to meet the specified requirements.
V. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
NHTSA has considered the impact of this rule under Executive Order
12866 and the Department of Transportation's regulatory policies and
procedures. This rule was reviewed under E.O. 12866, ``Regulatory
Planning and Review.'' This action is ``significant'' under the
Department of Transportation's regulatory policies and procedures.
This rule reduces the percentage of vehicles that must comply with
the advanced air bag requirements during the first year of the phase-
in, i.e., from September 1, 2003, through August 31, 2004, from 35
percent to 20 percent. However, the rule does not change the
requirements for vehicles equipped with advanced air bags. Readers who
are interested in the costs and benefits of advanced air bags are
referred to the agency's Final Economic Assessment (FEA) for the May
2000 final rule. The estimated benefits compared to pre-model year 1998
(pre-depowered air bags) in that rule for the suppression technologies
were estimated to be 93 fatalities and 151 AIS 3-5 injuries. These
benefits can be considered to accrue over the 20-25 year lifetime of
one model year's fleet. As noted in the NPRM, the reduction in the
phase-in schedule for the model year 2004 fleet from 35 percent to 20
percent could result in the potential loss in benefits over the
lifetime of the model year 2004 fleet of 14 lives and 23 AIS 3-5
injuries.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
We have considered the effects of this rulemaking action under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). I certify that the
amendment will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. A Regulatory Flexibility Analysis was
prepared for the May 2000 final rule as part of the FEA. This action
will not have a significant economic impact on small businesses because
the only change it makes to the May 2000 final rule is to reduce the
percentage of vehicles that must comply with that rule during the first
year of the phase-in. Small organizations and small governmental units
will not be significantly affected since the potential cost impacts
associated with this amendment should only slightly affect the price of
new motor vehicles.
C. National Environmental Policy Act
NHTSA has analyzed this amendment 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.
D. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
The agency has analyzed this rulemaking action in accordance with
the principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 13132 and has
determined that it does not have sufficient federalism implications to
warrant consultation with State and local officials or the preparation
of a federalism summary impact statement. The rule will have no
substantial effects on the States, or on the current Federal-State
relationship, or on the current distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various local officials.
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires agencies to
prepare a written assessment of the costs, benefits and other effects
of proposed or final
[[Page 4965]]
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). While the May 2000 final rule is
likely to result in over $100 million of annual expenditures by the
private sector, the only effect of today's amendment will be to reduce
the percentage of vehicles that must comply with that rule during the
first year of the phase-in. Accordingly, this rule will not mandate any
expenditure by State, local or tribal governments, or by the private
sector.
F. Executive Order 12778 (Civil Justice Reform)
This rule does not have any retroactive effect. Under section 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. Section 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.
G. 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 OMB control number. This document does
not establish any new information collection requirements.
H. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)
The Department of Transportation assigns a regulation identifier
number (RIN) to each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of
Federal Regulations. The Regulatory Information Service Center
publishes the Unified Agenda in April and October of each year. You may
use the RIN contained in the heading at the beginning of this document
to find this action in the Unified Agenda.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR part 571
Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Tires.
In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA amends 49 CFR chapter V as
follows:
PART 571--FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS
1. The authority citation for part 571 of title 49 continues to
read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117, and 30166;
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.
2. Section 571.208 is amended by revising S14.1.1.1 to read as
follows:
Sec. 571.208 Standard No. 208, Occupant crash protection.
* * * * *
S14.1.1.1 Vehicles manufactured on or after September 1, 2003, and
before September 1, 2004. Subject to S14.1.2(a), for vehicles
manufactured by a manufacturer on or after September 1, 2003, and
before September 1, 2004, the amount of vehicles complying with
S14.5.1(a), S14.5.2, S15.1, S15.2, S17, S19, S21, S23, and S25, shall
be not less than 20 percent of:
(a) If the manufacturer has manufactured vehicles for sale in the
United States during both of the two production years prior to
September 1, 2003, the manufacturer's average annual production of
vehicles manufactured on or after September 1, 2001, and before
September 1, 2004, or
(b) The manufacturer's production on or after September 1, 2003,
and before September 1, 2004.
* * * * *
Issued: January 28, 2003.
Jeffrey W. Runge,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 03-2358 Filed 1-28-03; 5:03 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P