Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Occupant Crash Protection, 40252-40262 [E7-13565]

Agencies

• National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
• DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 141 (Tuesday, July 24, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 40252-40262]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-13565]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. NHTSA-2007-28707]
RIN 2127-AJ59


Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Occupant Crash Protection

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

ACTION: Final rule; denial of petition for rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: This final rule establishes specific test procedures for 
installing child restraints to a child restraint anchorage system, 
commonly referred to as a ``LATCH'' system, in a front passenger 
seating position in vehicles certified to meet advanced air bag 
requirements through the use of a suppression system or a low risk 
deployment (LRD) system.\1\ The test procedures ensure that the child 
restraints are installed in a repeatable and reproducible manner.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The LRD option involves deployment of the air bag in the 
presence of a Child Restraint Air Bag Interaction (CRABI) test 
dummy, representing a 12-month-old child, in a rear-facing child 
restraint.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because vehicle manufacturers need sufficient time to certify that 
their vehicles meet FMVSS No. 208 suppression or LRD requirements when 
tested with these procedures, the compliance date of this final rule is 
September 1, 2008. NHTSA will apply these test procedures to vehicles 
manufactured on or after September 1, 2008 that have a LATCH system in 
a frontal seating position and that are certified to meet advanced air 
bag requirements through the use of a suppression or LRD system.

DATES: The amendments made by this final rule are effective September 
1, 2007. The compliance date for this final rule is September 1, 2008.
    Petitions for reconsideration: Petitions for reconsideration of 
this final rule must be received not later than September 7, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Note that NHTSA's address has changed. Petitions for 
reconsideration of this final rule must refer to the docket number set 
forth above and be submitted to the Administrator, National Highway 
Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West 
Building, Washington, DC. 20590, with a copy to Docket Management, 1200 
New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building, Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 
Washington, DC 20590. Note that all comments received will be posted 
without change to https://dms.dot.gov, including any personal 
information provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading under 
Rulemaking Analyses and Notices.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents, go 
to https://dms.dot.gov, or to 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West 
Building, Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC. 20590, between 9 
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Carla Cuentas, Office of 
Crashworthiness Standards, Light Duty Vehicle Division (telephone 202-
366-4583, fax 202-493-2739). For legal issues, contact Ms. Deirdre 
Fujita, Office of Chief Counsel (telephone 202-366-2992, fax 202-366-
3820). Both of these officials can be reached at the National Highway 
Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West 
Building, Washington, DC 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. Comments on the NPRM and Agency Responses Thereto
    a. Objectivity of the Test Procedure
    1. Variability in Sensor Outcomes
    2. Distance Measurement
    3. Passive Occupant Detection System B
    b. Adjustments to Test Procedure
    1. Tightening (cinching) the Lower Anchor Straps
    2. Order of Steps
    3. Seat in Full Rearmost Position--Rigid LATCH
    4. Load Angle tolerance--Rigid LATCH
    5. Reduction of Load--Rigid LATCH
    6. 600 N Force--Correction
    c. Suggestions Not Taken By NHTSA
    1. Base
    2. Foot Prop
    3. Seat Back Contact
III. Compliance Date
IV. Denial of Petition for Rulemaking
V. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

I. Background

    Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 208, ``Occupant 
crash protection'' (49 CFR 571.208), requires passenger vehicles to be 
equipped with safety belts and frontal air bags for the protection of 
vehicle occupants in crashes. On May 12, 2000, NHTSA published a final 
rule to require that air bags be designed to provide improved frontal 
crash protection for all occupants, by means that include advanced air 
bag technology (``Advanced Air Bag Rule,'' 65 FR 30680, Docket No. 
NHTSA 00-7013). Under the Advanced Air Bag Rule, manufacturers are 
provided several compliance options in order to minimize the risk to 
infants and small children from deploying air bags, including options 
to suppress an air bag in the presence of a child restraint system 
(CRS) or to provide an LRD system.
    Manufacturers choosing to rely on an air bag suppression system or 
LRD system to minimize the risk to children in a CRS must ensure that 
the vehicle complies with the suppression or LRD requirements when 
tested with the CRSs specified in Appendix A of the standard (see S19, 
S21 and S23 of FMVSS No. 208). On November 19, 2003, NHTSA revised 
Appendix A by adding two CRSs that are equipped with components that 
attach to a vehicle's LATCH \2\ system (68 FR 65179, Docket No. NHTSA 
03-16476). Vehicles that have a LATCH system in a front designated 
seating position and are certified as meeting the suppression or LRD 
requirements must meet the requirements when tested with the CRSs 
installed on the LATCH system.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ ``LATCH'' stands for ``Lower Anchors and Tethers for 
Children,'' a term that was developed by industry to refer to the 
standardized user-ready child restraint anchorage system that 
vehicle manufacturers must install in vehicles pursuant to FMVSS No. 
225, Child Restraint Anchorage Systems (49 CFR 571.225). The LATCH 
system is comprised of two lower anchorages and one tether 
anchorage. Each lower anchorage is a rigid round rod or bar onto 
which the connector of a child restraint system can be attached. The 
upper anchorage is configured to permit the attachment of a tether 
hook of a CRS. FMVSS No. 225 (paragraph S5(d)) does not permit 
vehicle manufacturers to install LATCH systems in front designated 
seating positions unless the vehicle has an air bag on-off switch 
meeting the requirements of S4.5.4 of FMVSS No. 208.
    \3\ The compliance date of the provision specifying testing with 
CRSs equipped with components that attach to a LATCH system 
(hereinafter referred to as ``LATCH-equipped CRSs'') was originally 
delayed from September 1, 2004 to September 1, 2006 (69 FR 51598, 
Docket 18905) and was later delayed to September 1, 2007 (71 FR 
51129, Docket 21244). A new compliance date will be set by today's 
final rule.

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

[[Page 40253]]

    When the two child restraints were added to Appendix A by the 2003 
final rule, the agency believed that the CRS manufacturer's 
installation instructions could be used to install the child restraints 
in a test vehicle. It became apparent, however, that more specific 
installation instructions were needed to provide a repeatable means of 
installing the restraints for suppression and LRD testing. To address 
this need for more specific instructions, NHTSA published the NPRM 
preceding this final rule (May 19, 2005, 70 FR 28878, Docket 21244; 
extension of comment period, July 13, 2005, 70 FR 40280). The NPRM 
proposed a specific procedure for installing the CRSs that the agency 
believed would ensure repeatable and reproducible installation of the 
child restraints for compliance test purposes. The procedure was based 
on how CRSs are installed by trained technicians in the real world.

Proposed Test Procedure

    There are two types of LATCH-equipped child restraint systems: 
those that have the LATCH components attached to them by means of 
flexible belt webbing (hereinafter ``flexible LATCH CRSs''); and those 
using a rigid ratchet mechanism built into the CRS (``rigid LATCH 
CRSs''). The NPRM proposed two sets of procedures for attaching LATCH-
equipped CRSs to the LATCH system in subject vehicles, one set for each 
of these two types of LATCH-equipped child restraint systems. A test 
report describing the procedures was placed in the docket for the NPRM 
(``Test Report, FMVSS No. 208; LATCH Equipped Child Restraint Test 
Procedures, Revision 1,'' Docket 21244-2; 21255-5).

Proposed Test Procedure for Flexible LATCH CRSs

    The test procedure for installing flexible LATCH CRSs was developed 
by NHTSA to replicate real-world CRS installations in vehicles by 
experienced installers, particularly with respect to the appropriate 
load vector to be applied and the amount of load relief when LATCH 
belts were manually tightened (``Test Report,'' id.). Child restraints 
installed by experienced installers are usually more tightly fastened 
against the vehicle seat than restraints installed by those less 
experienced. The agency believed that the more tightly fastened a CRS 
is to the vehicle seat, the greater the likelihood that the suppression 
system will fail to suppress the air bag (i.e., the greater the 
likelihood that the air bag system will misread the load on the seat to 
be that of an adult passenger rather than a load generated by a 
tightly-cinched CRS). Thus, the agency believed that the tightly-
cinched CRS represented a worst-case scenario for the harm addressed by 
this rulemaking, as compared to a more loosely fastened CRS, and that 
the worst-case scenario was desirable to ensure that the air bags would 
be suppressed in more circumstances in the presence of a child 
restraint than not.
    Under the proposed procedure, a flexible LATCH CRS would be 
centered between the vehicle seat's two lower LATCH anchor bars, and 
the child restraint's LATCH components connected to the vehicle's 
anchor bars with slack in the straps. A loading device, consisting of a 
loading bar, load cell, and loading bar foot, would be placed at the 
CRS seat bight (the intersection of the CRS seat cushion and seat back) 
at an angle of 153 degrees from vertical. It was proposed 
that the device would apply a load to the CRS, replicating installers 
using their weight to install a CRS. The loading device would first 
apply a preload of 50 to 100 Newtons (N) to the CRS, which would be 
then increased to 87510 N. It was proposed that after the 
load settled to between 845 and 855 N, the flexible LATCH straps, 
already attached to the anchor bars but not yet in tension, would be 
manually tightened (cinched) such that the change in the preload is not 
more than 25 N.
    The procedure was developed to replicate installations of four 
experienced installers who worked with three vehicles and four CRSs.\4\ 
Agency tests had demonstrated that the proposed procedure resulted in a 
CRS installation representative of a real-world installation by these 
installers. The distance of a target on the side of the CRS to the 
LATCH anchor bars was measured to determine the positioning of the CRS 
after various installations. There was no statistically significant 
difference in the test results between tests in which the installations 
were made by the technicians using the test procedure and tests in 
which the CRSs were installed in real-world fashion, i.e., without 
using the proposed procedure. When the loading device and test 
procedure were used by individual technicians, the level of positioning 
repeatability achieved was similar to that achieved by any single 
installer without the device and procedure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The vehicles used were: (a) The 2003 GMC Sierra Regular Cab 
C1500 Truck, certified to the advanced air bag requirements; (b) the 
2003 Toyota Tacoma Regular Cab Truck, certified with depowered air 
bags; and (c) the 2004 Ford F150 Regular Cab Truck, certified to the 
advanced air bag requirements. The CRSs used were: (a) The Cosco 
Forerunner convertible child restraint; (b) the Cosco Alpha-Omega 
convertible child restraint; (c) the Graco SnugRide rear-facing 
child restraint; and (d) the Britax Expressway convertible child 
restraint.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, the agency tentatively concluded that installing a CRS 
with the test device:
     Results in a CRS installation reflective of real-world 
installation by experienced CRS installers;
     Results in a repeatable installation independent of the 
installer; and
     Can result in a suppression system test failure 
representative of real-world use. 70 FR at 28880.

Test Procedure for Rigid LATCH CRSs

    Rigid LATCH CRS systems typically have a ratchet mechanism built 
into a rigid structure to obtain a tight/snug fit between the CRS and 
the vehicle seat. Because flexible webbing material is not used to 
attach the LATCH components, rigid LATCH CRSs limit the potential 
variability in installation. They also do not exhibit the tendency of 
flexible LATCH CRSs to load the vehicle seat cushion with a distinct 
downward force that some suppression systems have interpreted as being 
generated by an adult occupant.
    In the proposed installation procedure for rigid LATCH CRSs, the 
rigid LATCH CRS would be centered in a vehicle seat. The lower anchor 
attachments would then be connected to the vehicle's anchor bars 
pursuant to the CRS manufacturer's instruction. The CRS would then be 
moved rearward (relative to the vehicle seat) until it contacted the 
vehicle seat back. If the CRS were equipped with a linear sliding or 
ratcheting mechanism that requires the application of force to securely 
install the CRS, a force of 600 N would be applied to the CRS in a 
plane parallel to the plane formed by the linear mechanism. The load 
would then be removed and the suppression or LRD test performed.

II. Comments on the NPRM and Agency Responses Thereto

    NHTSA received comments on the NPRM from the Alliance of Automobile 
Manufacturers (``the Alliance'' \5\) dated August 17, 2005 and January 
20, 2006. In addition, representatives from General Motors (GM) met 
with NHTSA staff to discuss GM's evaluation of various procedures for 
installing LATCH-equipped child restraints,

[[Page 40254]]

including the NPRM procedure (Docket 21244-9).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Members of the Alliance are BMW Group, DaimlerChrysler, Ford 
Motor Company, General Motors, Mazda, Mitsubishi Motors, Porsche, 
Toyota, and Volkswagen.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed below, the Alliance did not support the proposed test 
procedure for attaching flexible LATCH CRSs. The commenter did not 
oppose the test procedures for attaching rigid LATCH child restraints, 
but did suggest changes to the procedures (some of which NHTSA has 
adopted in this final rule).
a. Objectivity of the Test Procedure
1. Variability in Sensor Outcomes
    The Alliance opposed the proposed test procedure for attaching 
flexible LATCH CRSs, believing that the procedure ``allows too much 
variability in test outcomes in otherwise identical test circumstances, 
making the procedure insufficiently objective.'' The Alliance stated 
that it did not believe that the procedure was repeatable and 
reproducible because many of the installations performed by the 
installers, with and without the device, resulted in non-suppression of 
the passenger air bag for both the Sierra and the F-150. Overall, 36 
installations resulted in suppression, and 32 installations resulted in 
non-suppression. The commenter stated that it did ``not understand how 
a test program that yielded a `pass/fail' ratio of approximately 50/50 
could be deemed to support a conclusion that the test procedure is 
repeatable and reproducible.'' The commenter believed that the data 
suggest that NHTSA has not yet defined a sufficiently objective test 
procedure to differentiate between passing and failing performance in 
the test.
    Response: The agency does not agree that the inconsistent 
performance of seat sensors leading to suppression or non-suppression 
of the air bag demonstrates the lack of repeatability of the test 
procedure used to install the LATCH restraints. The installation 
procedure is intended to, and achieves, consistent and repeatable CRS 
installations on the vehicle seat. As explained in the May 2005 NPRM, 
NHTSA used the procedure to install four child restraints multiple 
times in several vehicles, and compared those installations to those 
done without the procedure by four experienced installers. When the 
same CRS model was installed in the same vehicle, the child restraints 
were installed comparably, as indicated by the angle of the installed 
CRS and the distance between the lower anchor bars and a defined 
reference point on the CRS. These two parameters were selected as 
criteria which were reliable and readily determined. (The ``distance 
measurement,'' the average of the inboard and outboard distance values, 
was used in the analysis since the angle of the installed seat was 
positively correlated with the distance measurement.) There was no 
statistically significant difference between the installations achieved 
using the test procedure and those done by the technician alone, 
following the CRS manufacturer's installation instructions. (``Test 
Report, FMVSS No. 208, LATCH Equipped Child Restraint Installation 
Procedures, Revision 1,'' supra.)
    Moreover, as also discussed in the Test Report, id., when the same 
CRS model was installed in the same vehicle using the test procedure 
for installing the LATCH restraints, the air bag suppression systems 
performed consistently; i.e., air bags in the vehicles were suppressed 
using the procedure in all but one instance. The exception was the 
installation of the Britax Expressway in the GMC Sierra, which resulted 
in a suppressed air bag in one trial and a failed suppression in a 
second trial. This same phenomenon occurred with one of the certified 
installers not using the device. Because the only instances of a failed 
suppression occurred with the one vehicle, the difference in air bag 
suppression status appears to be a reflection of the characteristics of 
the suppression system rather than that of the repeatability of the 
test procedure.
    The commenter believes that the inconsistent performance of the 
seat sensors across vehicles should be attributed to the test procedure 
used to install the child restraints on the vehicle seats. We do not 
agree. The use of the seat sensors as the instrument for evaluating 
repeatability of the CRS installation across platforms assumes that 
seat sensors are designed to evaluate LATCH-installed child restraints. 
There is no basis for that assumption. There are a variety of different 
sensors for manufacturers to choose from, and a number of design 
features that can differ from design to design, such as differences in 
location, shape, algorithms, etc. Therefore, one cannot base the 
repeatability of this installation procedure on the output of an 
unknown sensor.
    In its comment, the Alliance said it did not understand NHTSA's 
decision to evaluate an advanced air bag test procedure for LATCH CRS 
installations in the 2003 Toyota Tacoma regular cab truck, a vehicle 
that has depowered air bags and no advanced air bag system. The 
agency's test of this vehicle was not at all related to the presence or 
absence of an advanced air bag system. Instead, we tested this vehicle 
because the vehicle had a LATCH system in the front passenger seating 
position, and the agency wished to assess whether the test procedure 
under consideration resulted in consistent and repeatable installation 
of the child restraint. Since we were testing the repeatability of the 
CRS installations, it was of no consequence that the vehicle did not 
have an air bag suppression system.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ We note that NHTSA conducted follow-up testing on a 2005 
Toyota Tacoma with LATCH and a front seat suppression sensing 
system. As a matter of interest, the 2005 Toyota Tacoma's sensing 
system was able to properly classify several child restraints used 
in previous tests and suppress the air bag, when installed using 
both the NPRM procedure and the procedure in this final rule (the 
differences between the two are minor and are discussed in the next 
section of this preamble).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It should also be noted that the very tight child restraint 
installations achieved by the test procedure presented worst-case 
scenarios (in producing loads on the vehicle seat that were most likely 
to be misread by a sensor as being generated by an adult occupant). 
From the information obtained on sensor performance in the 
aforementioned test program, some sensors may need to be enhanced to 
distinguish between a tightly-cinched flexible LATCH child restraint 
and an adult occupant. This final rule provides sufficient lead time 
for manufacturers to adjust sensing systems to make this distinction 
using the installation procedures of this final rule.
2. Distance Measurement
    The Alliance disagreed with the agency's conclusion that there was 
no statistically significant difference between the installations 
performed by the installers with and without the use of the loading 
device per the final procedure. The commenter stated that ``this 
conclusion apparently reflects only the `distance between the lower 
anchor bars and a defined reference point on the CR,' measured at both 
the inboard and outboard locations, and then averaged.'' The commenter 
said that NHTSA never explains the significance of the ``distance 
measurement'' as a suitable parameter for measuring any performance 
expectation for the vehicle's air bag system.
    Response: As explained above, the distance measurement is not meant 
to be correlated to air bag system performance. It is an independent 
measure of the CRS installation, i.e., it is intended to correlate to 
how tightly the CRS was installed. For instance, the tighter the CRS 
installation is, the shorter the distance measurement. As such, NHTSA 
continues to believe that the distance measurement used for that 
purpose is valid and meaningful, since the purpose of the test 
procedure is to

[[Page 40255]]

assure consistent installation of the LATCH CRS.
3. Passive Occupant Detection System B
    General Motors (GM) informed NHTSA that it independently 
constructed the proposed CRS loading bar device according to the 
specifications provided in the NPRM (item 9 in NPRM docket). 
GM stated that it conducted 30 installations according to the proposed 
procedure, all of which resulted in suppression of the passenger air 
bag. GM stated that the vehicles it tested used the Passive Occupant 
Detection System B (PODS-B) for their passenger automatic suppression 
systems. This sensing system classifies the seat as empty, or the 
occupant as an adult or child, based on the loading force on the seat.
    While the occupant classification outcome was consistent in all of 
GM's tests, GM stated that they noticed that the PODS-B output varied 
significantly. GM believed that the variance in the output of the PODS-
B was mostly a function of the cinching procedure. It stated that when 
cinching the straps according to the proposed test procedure, the PODS-
B pressure counts were not well correlated with the value of the post 
cinch load, which caused a variance in the PODS-B output.
    Response: We believe that the PODS-B pressure counts may not be 
valid for use as an indicator of the repeatability or objectivity of 
the LATCH seat installation procedure, because the expected level of 
variability in the PODS-B output for a consistent LATCH seat 
installation has not been shown. NHTSA reviewed the data supplied by GM 
to try to understand why the results from the GM data-set differed from 
the NHTSA data-set (item 5 in NPRM docket) for the same 
vehicle model regarding suppression status of the air bags. On 
September 21, 2005, a NHTSA engineer evaluated both the NHTSA loading 
device and the GM loading device at the GM Proving Grounds. The results 
of the testing performed are included in a memorandum entered into the 
docket for this final rule. When compared in side-by-side tests, the 
devices produced comparable installations. While the testing revealed 
no explanation for the differences between the NHTSA NPRM data set and 
the GM data set entered into the docket, it appears that the PODS-B 
systems used in the test vehicles at GM were not in the factory-
calibrated production condition. Discussions with GM (see docketed 
memorandum) indicated that adjustment of key parameters may have 
occurred for the PODS-B software after factory calibration. Post-
production calibration of the system could account for the disagreement 
of the NHTSA NPRM data set and the GM data set with respect to 
suppression status.
    NHTSA also calibration checked our test device to make sure that 
the complete loading system accurately reflected the true load applied 
by the loading device to the CRS. The calibration tests showed that the 
setup was accurate within 2 N for the entire load range from 0-900 N. 
The agency also applied exaggerated eccentric or off-axis loads to the 
device, to evaluate whether the device was accurate even under the most 
extreme conditions. The tests showed negligible (1-3 N) off-axis 
affects. NHTSA later obtained a used 2004 Chevrolet Silverado in the 
fall of 2005 and conducted tests using both the NPRM procedure and the 
final rule test procedure. Both procedures produced similar results and 
closely matched the original NHTSA test results. Id. Based on the 
agency's follow-on testing, NHTSA has concluded that the original 
testing performed in support of this rule was valid.
b. Adjustments To Test Procedure
1. Tightening (Cinching) the Lower Anchor Straps
    The NPRM proposed that the loading device would first apply a 
preload of 7525 N to the CRS, and that the preload would 
then be increased to 87510 N. The proposed procedure 
specified that after the load settles to between 8505 N, 
the flexible LATCH straps would be manually tightened such that the 
load would only be reduced by 1510 N within 2 seconds 
(proposed S20.2.1.6.1(f) and (g); S22.2.1.6.1(g) and (h)). In its 
August 17, 2005 comment, the Alliance observed that sometimes it was 
difficult to tighten the flexible straps before the load would drop 
below 825 N. The commenter indicated that seat cushion stiffness can 
cause the load on the test device to decrease at a fairly significant 
rate within the time window provided.
    Response: We have observed in our follow-up test program that for 
certain vehicles (see ``Test Report, FMVSS No. 208 LATCH Installation 
Procedures, Follow-on Testing in Response to NPRM Comments,'' April 5, 
2007, placed in the docket for this final rule), after achieving the 
appropriate load condition, the applied load measured on the CRS 
continued to drop if the seat cushion was not very stiff, making it 
difficult to tighten the flexible straps to a consistent tension before 
the load dropped below 825 N. To address this observed load drift, we 
have added two one-minute settling periods to the test procedure. Under 
the revised procedure (see S20.2.1.6.1(g) through (j) of this final 
rule), after achieving the 875 N load for the first time, we will allow 
the load to settle for 60 seconds, after which the load will be 
increased to 87525 N within 10 seconds. The load will again 
be allowed to settle until 120 seconds has elapsed since first 
achieving 87525 N, after which it will be increased to 
87525 N within 10 seconds. When the load settles to 
8505 N, or when 180 seconds has elapsed since first 
achieving the 87525 N load, whichever comes first, we will 
tighten the lower anchor strap(s) such that the load as measured by the 
load cell on the loading device is reduced 1510 N within 2 
seconds. These changes do not significantly affect the installation 
location of the CRS, but they do make it easier for a technician to 
perform the cinching action.
    In addition, after testing various vehicles, we also determined 
that settling times could be better stabilized if the loading device 
were supported by a rigid mount against the upper door frame structure, 
rather than the vehicle's roof structure as specified in the NPRM (see 
April 5, 2007 test report). The roof structure has padding and other 
materials that can affect the loads applied to the child restraint when 
the loading bar support is mounted against it. Using a rigid mount 
against the upper door frame structure improves the ability to achieve 
the proper loads for the cinching procedure. Thus, the agency's 
compliance test procedure will specify that the loading bar is 
supported by a rigid mount against the upper door frame structure.
2. Order of Steps
    The Alliance has recommended that we switch the order of steps 
S20.2.1.6.1(c) and (d), as well as steps S22.2.1.6.1(c) and (d). The 
commenter stated that, based on GM's testing experience, it is easier 
to connect the lower anchor straps before the restraint is moved 
rearward.
    Response: Based on our testing and analysis, we concur with the 
recommendation and have made the appropriate changes to the procedure 
in this final rule.
3. Seat in Full Rearmost Position--Rigid LATCH
    The Alliance stated that, while in some cases it is possible to fit 
a force gauge between the instrument panel and the child restraint at 
mid-track position, the space for loading is not conducive for 
achieving the proposed 600 N load. The Alliance recommended that the

[[Page 40256]]

installation be conducted with the seat in the full rearward position.
    Response: Based on our test experience, we agree that the 
installation can be difficult in the forward and mid-track positions. 
Therefore, NHTSA has changed the procedure to specify that the CRS is 
installed with the vehicle seat in the rearmost position and that the 
vehicle seat is moved forward for the suppression or LRD test after CRS 
installation. This change has been made to sections S20.2.1.6.2(a), 
S20.2.1.6.2(i), S22.2.1.6.2(a), and S22.2.1.6.2(i) of the final rule 
regulatory text.
4. Load Angle Tolerance--Rigid LATCH
    The Alliance stated that it is difficult to control loading when 
applying the handheld force gage ``in a parallel plane located within 
100 mm of the plane formed by the linear mechanism,'' as 
stated in S20.2.1.6.2(f) and S22.2.1.6.2(g) of the proposed regulatory 
text. The Alliance recommended that a tolerance be applied to the 
required loading angle.
    Response: NHTSA concurs with the suggestion. Based on agency 
testing and in consideration of the tolerances included in FMVSS No. 
210 and No. 225, we are incorporating a 10 degree tolerance 
to the required loading angle in sections S20.2.1.6.2(g) and 
S22.2.1.6.2(h) of today's regulatory text.
5. Reduction of Load--Rigid LATCH
    The Alliance suggested that we change the applied load value from 
600 N to 47525N for installation of rigid mount LATCH 
seats. The commenter believes that it is ``extremely difficult'' to 
apply 600 N of load without using a reaction surface somewhere in the 
vehicle, but that a reaction surface on or in front of the instrument 
panel ``could potentially cause damage to vital vehicle components and 
is not recommended.'' In addition, the commenter stated that an 
installer can apply 600 N of load, but once the force on the seat is 
released, the load backs off to the last ``click'' on the ratcheting 
device of the CRS. For these reasons, the Alliance believed that an 
applied load of 47525 N would be more reasonable than the 
proposed load, ``yet it still requires a substantial amount of effort 
by the installer.''
    Response: The commenter did not provide any data supporting this 
request for the reduction in the applied load. However, as a result of 
our own testing, we agree with the suggestion to adjust the applied 
load value to 47525N. The April 5, 2007 test report 
discusses additional tests supporting the adjusted change to 47525N for the applied load. The data indicate that using a load of 
47525N achieves an installation comparable to that of 
certified CPS technicians.
6. 600 N Force--Correction
    The proposed procedure specified that ``to securely install the 
child restraint, in 255 seconds, apply a 600N force * * *'' 
The Alliance stated that it interprets this phrase as meaning that the 
force will be applied within 255 seconds, not maintained 
for 255 seconds.
    Response: The commenter's understanding is correct. We have 
clarified the regulatory text of this final rule in sections 
S20.2.1.6.2(g) and S22.2.1.6.2(h).
c. Suggestions Not Taken By NHTSA
1. Base
    The Alliance recommended that the suppression testing installation 
procedures include instructions on removing the carrier from the base 
and to attach the base to the vehicle separately. The commenter 
suggested adding the phrase ``Place the child restraint, or removable 
base'' to the installation procedures.
    Response: In the testing performed by NHTSA, this step has not been 
necessary to install these types of infant restraints. Further, the 
commenter did not provide any specific examples of CRSs that would 
require the use of the suggested procedure. Because the procedure is 
not needed for the test procedure, we are declining the request.
2. Foot Prop
    The Alliance suggested an additional step for CRSs, such as the 
Britax Baby-Safe, that include a foot prop that needs to be adjusted 
after the base has been attached. The additional step would instruct 
the installer to install these items per the manufacturer's 
instructions.
    Response: We are declining this request. A step about adjusting a 
foot prop is not necessary. If a particular CRS incorporates features 
and adjustments, the agency will continue to follow the CRS 
manufacturer's installation instructions to the extent possible in 
positioning the adjustments as specified in S20.2.1.6.1(b) and other 
similar sections of the standard. We also note that the CRS in question 
is no longer in production in the U.S. market.
3. Seat Back Contact
    The NPRM included the following statement in sections 
S20.2.1.6.1(c), S20.2.1.6.2(e), S22.2.1.6.1(c), and S22.2.1.6.2(d): 
``Move the child restraint rearward until it contacts the seat back.'' 
The Alliance considered this statement redundant to the CRS 
manufacturer's installation instructions and recommended eliminating 
it. The commenter also stated that there may be instances where the CRS 
contacts the head restraint before contacting the seat back. The 
Alliance did not refer to any specific examples of CRSs that raised the 
concern.
    Response: Although the statement at issue may in some cases be 
redundant, we are retaining this step for cases where the CRS 
manufacturer's instructions are silent on the issue. With regard to 
head restraint contact, NHTSA has specifications for positioning the 
head restraint in the general provisions of the test setup. Further, we 
view the head restraint to be a part of the seat back setup. Thus, 
under the installation procedures adopted today, the CRS would be 
placed in a stable position with the planes aligned per step 
S20.2.1.6.1(a) on the seat cushion and moved rearward following the 
surface of the seat cushion until contact is made between the CRS and 
the seat back (including the head restraint).

III. Compliance Date

    The compliance date for this final rule is September 1, 2008. This 
compliance date provides enough lead time for manufacturers to evaluate 
and certify their vehicles using the test procedures specified in this 
final rule, while ensuring the satisfactory performance of vehicles' 
suppression and LRD systems in an expeditious manner.

IV. Denial of Petition for Rulemaking

    On March 20, 2006, the Alliance petitioned NHTSA to remove the 
Britax Expressway ISOFIX CRS from FMVSS No. 208, Appendix A, Section C. 
The Britax Expressway ISOFIX CRS was one of the two LATCH CRSs added by 
the November 19, 2003 FMVSS No. 208 final rule (supra). The Alliance 
believed that this CRS should be removed from Appendix A because it is 
no longer available on the market, few were sold, and because its 
inclusion is inconsistent with the principles and criteria that the 
agency announced that it would use to select CRSs for Appendix A. (In a 
November 2003 final rule responding to petitions for reconsideration of 
the amendments made in December 2001 to our May 2000 Advanced Air Bag 
rule, we stated that we would limit Appendix A to those restraints that 
represented large portions of the CRS market, while including 
exceptionally large or small restraints. See 68 FR 65188.)
    Response: NHTSA has decided to deny the petition. The agency is 
undertaking an assessment of the CRSs

[[Page 40257]]

currently on the market to assure the CRS fleet is adequately 
represented in Appendix A. Information provided by the Alliance in its 
petition in support of removing the Britax Expressway ISOFIX will be 
included in our assessment. Upon completion of that assessment, NHTSA 
will determine whether revisions to Appendix A are warranted, including 
the appropriateness of the inclusion of the Britax Expressway ISOFIX. 
We prefer to take a comprehensive evaluation of the CRSs in Appendix A 
rather than focusing on a solitary restraint such as the Britax 
Expressway ISOFIX, to best ensure the robustness of air bag suppression 
or LRD systems when tested with CRSs under conditions representative of 
real world use. Prior to the comprehensive assessment, we cannot agree 
that a particular CRS should be excluded, and so we are denying the 
Alliance's petition on the Britax Expressway ISOFIX. NHTSA will be 
issuing an NPRM proposing to update Appendix A shortly.

V. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    This rulemaking document was not reviewed by the Office of 
Management and Budget under E.O. 12866. It is not considered to be 
significant under E.O. 12866 or the Department's Regulatory Policies 
and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979). This document 
establishes procedures for installing LATCH-equipped CRSs to 
demonstrate compliance with the advanced air bag requirements. The 
procedures will provide a repeatable and reproducible method for 
installing LATCH-equipped CRSs in a manner representative of a secure 
attachment in the real world. This final rule specifies procedures that 
NHTSA will use; it does not require manufacturers to use the 
procedures. The equipment necessary for the procedure will cost vehicle 
manufacturers and testing laboratories choosing to use the procedure 
less than $50. The minimal impacts of today's amendment do not warrant 
preparation of a regulatory evaluation.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    In compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 60l et 
seq., NHTSA has evaluated the effects of this action on small entities. 
I hereby certify that this final rule will not have a significant 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The rule affects 
motor vehicle manufacturers, multistage manufacturers and alterers. 
Those entities that qualify as small businesses will not be 
significantly affected by this rule because they are already required 
to comply with the advanced air bag requirements. This final rule does 
not establish new requirements, but instead provides specific 
procedures that NHTSA will use to determine compliance with existing 
requirements.

C. Executive Order 13132

    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 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.''
    Further, no consultation is needed to discuss the preemptive effect 
of today's rule. NHTSA rules can have preemptive effect in at least two 
ways. First, 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). It is this statutory 
command that preempts State law, not today's rulemaking, so 
consultation would be inappropriate.
    In addition to the express preemption noted above, the Supreme 
Court has also recognized that 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 is discerned, the Supremacy 
Clause of the Constitution makes their State requirements 
unenforceable. See Geier v. American Honda Motor Co., 529 U.S. 861 
(2000). NHTSA has not outlined such potential State requirements in 
today's rulemaking, however, in part because such conflicts can arise 
in varied contexts, but it is conceivable that such a conflict may 
become clear through subsequent experience with today's standard and 
test regime. NHTSA may opine on such conflicts in the future, if 
warranted. See id. at 883-86.

D. National Environmental Policy Act

    NHTSA has analyzed this rule for the purposes of the National 
Environmental Policy Act. The agency has determined that implementation 
of this action would not have any significant impact on the quality of 
the human environment.

E. Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under the procedures established by 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 final rule does not establish any new 
information collection requirements.

F. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Under the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 
(NTTAA) (Pub. L. 104-113), ``all Federal agencies and departments shall 
use technical standards that are developed or adopted by voluntary 
consensus standards bodies, using such technical standards as a means 
to carry out policy objectives or activities determined by the agencies 
and departments.'' There are no voluntary consensus standards that 
address the installation of LATCH-equipped CRSs.

G. Executive Order 12988

    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 (7) 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 preemptive 
effect of this rule is discussed above. 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.

[[Page 40258]]

H. 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 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). This final rule will 
not result in expenditures by State, local or tribal governments, in 
the aggregate, or by the private sector in excess of $100 million 
annually.

I. Executive Order 13045

    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. This final rule is not subject to 
the Executive Order because it is not economically significant as 
defined in E.O. 12866.

J. Executive Order 13211

    Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 18, 2001) applies to any 
rule that: (1) Is determined to be economically significant as defined 
under E.O. 12866, and is likely to have a significantly adverse effect 
on the supply of, distribution of, or use of energy; or (2) that is 
designated by the Administrator of the Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs as a significant energy action. This final rule is 
not subject to E.O. 13211.

K. Plain Language

    Executive Order 12866 and the President's memorandum of June 1, 
1998, require each agency to write all rules in plain language. 
Application of the principles of plain language includes consideration 
of the following questions:
     Have we 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 
isn't 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 we improve clarity by adding tables, lists, or 
diagrams?
     What else could we do to make the rule easier to 
understand?
    If you have any responses to these questions, please include them 
in your comments on this proposal.

L. 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.

M. Privacy Act

    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments 
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) or you may visit 
https://dms.dot.gov.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571

    Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Motor vehicles, and Tires.

0
In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA amends 49 CFR part 571 as set 
forth below.

PART 571--FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS

0
1. The authority citation for part 571 continues to read as follows:

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

0
2. Section 571.208 is amended by:
0
a. Revising S20.2.1.1 through S20.2.1.5, S20.4.6, S22.2.1, S22.2.1.4, 
S22.2.1.5, S22.2.1.6 through S22.2.1.6.2, S22.2.1.7, S22.2.1.8, S24.2, 
S24.2.2, and section C of Appendix A;
0
b. Adding S20.2.1.6, S20.2.1.6.1, S20.2.1.6.2, S22.2.1.7.1 through 
S22.2.1.7.3, S22.2.1.8.1 through S22.2.1.8.4, Figures A1 and A2 at the 
end of Appendix A; and
0
c. Removing S22.2.1.5.1, S22.2.1.5.2, S22.2.1.5.3, S22.2.1.6.3, 
S22.2.1.6.4, to read as follows:


Sec.  571.208  Standard No. 208; Occupant crash protection.

* * * * *
    S20.2.1.1 The vehicle shall comply in tests using any child 
restraint specified in section B and section C of Appendix A of this 
standard, installed in the front outboard passenger vehicle seat in the 
following orientations:
    (a) With the section B and section C child restraints facing 
rearward as appropriate; and
    (b) With the section C child restraints facing forward.
    S20.2.1.2 The vehicle shall comply with the child restraint 
attached to the vehicle in the following manner:
    (a) Using the vehicle safety belts as specified in S20.2.1.5; and
    (b) If the child restraint is certified to S5.9 of Sec.  571.213, 
and the vehicle seat has an anchorage system as specified in Sec.  
571.225, using only the mechanism provided by the child restraint 
manufacturer for attachment to the lower anchorages as specified in 
S20.2.1.6.
    S20.2.1.3 Locate a vertical plane through the longitudinal 
centerline of the child restraint. This will be referred to as ``Plane 
A.''
    S20.2.1.4 For bucket seats, ``Plane B'' refers to a vertical plane 
parallel to the vehicle longitudinal centerline through the 
longitudinal centerline of the front outboard passenger vehicle seat 
cushion. For bench seats, ``Plane B'' refers to a vertical plane 
through the front outboard passenger vehicle seat parallel to the 
vehicle longitudinal centerline the same distance from the longitudinal 
centerline of the vehicle as the center of the steering wheel.
    S20.2.1.5 Installation with vehicle safety belts.
    (a) Place any adjustable seat belt anchorages at the vehicle 
manufacturer's nominal design position for a 50th percentile adult male 
occupant.
    (b) Without attaching the child restraint anchorage system 
components specified in S5.9 of Sec.  571.213 to a vehicle child 
restraint anchorage system specified in Sec.  571.225, align the child 
restraint system facing rearward or forward, depending on the 
orientation being tested, such that Plane A is aligned with Plane B.
    (c) While maintaining the child restraint positions achieved in 
S20.2.1.5(b), secure the child restraint by following, to the extent 
possible, the child restraint manufacturer's directions regarding 
proper installation of the restraint for the orientation being tested. 
Cinch the vehicle belts to any tension from zero up to 134 N to secure 
the child restraint. Measure belt tension in a flat, straight section 
of the lap belt between the child restraint belt path and the contact 
point with the belt anchor or vehicle seat, on the side away from the 
buckle (to avoid interference from the shoulder portion of the belt).
    (d) Position the 49 CFR part 572 subpart R 12-month-old CRABI dummy 
in the child restraint by following, to the

[[Page 40259]]

extent possible, the manufacturer's instructions provided with the 
child restraint for seating infants.
    (e) Start the vehicle engine or place the ignition in the ``on'' 
position, whichever will turn on the suppression system, and close all 
vehicle doors. Wait 10 seconds, then check whether the air bag is 
deactivated.
    S20.2.1.6 Installation using the lower anchor bars and the child 
restraint manufacturer provided attachment mechanism.
    S20.2.1.6.1 If the attachment mechanism provided by the 
manufacturer incorporates a strap(s), use the following procedure:
    (a) Place the child restraint on the vehicle seat facing rearward 
or forward, depending on the orientation being tested, with Plane A of 
the child restraint aligned within 10 mm with a 
longitudinal vertical plane passing though a point midway between the 
centers of the two lower anchor bars.
    (b) Position any adjustments on the child restraint, to the extent 
possible according to the child restraint manufacturer's instructions.
    (c) Connect the lower anchor straps of the restraint to the lower 
anchor bars of the seat and remove the slack, but do not apply any load 
using these straps.
    (d) Move the child restraint rearward until it contacts the seat 
back.
    (e) Use the loading device equipped with the loading foot shown in 
Figure A1 and position it as shown in Figure A2 of Appendix A of this 
section. The 153 degree angle of the loading device 
illustrated in Figure A2 is determined with an initial preload of 
7525N.
    (f) Over a period of 9030 seconds, increase the load to 
875N25 N.
    (g) After achieving the 875 N load in step (f) of this section, 
hold the bar length at present position and allow the load to settle 
for 60 seconds.
    (h) Following the one-minute settling period specified in step (g) 
of this section, increase the load to 87525 N such that the 
87525 N load is achieved within 10 seconds of the settling 
period.
    (i) Hold the bar length at present position and allow the load to 
settle for 120 seconds after achieving the load in step (f) of this 
section.
    (j) Following the settling period specified in step (i) of this 
section, increase the load to 87525 N such that the 
87525 N load is achieved within 10 seconds of the settling 
period.
    (k) Observe the settling of the load and tighten the lower anchor 
straps when the load is 8505N or 180 seconds has elapsed 
since achieving the 87525 N load in step (f) of this 
section, whichever comes first. Tighten the lower anchor straps at the 
same time such that the load is reduced 1510 N and the 
change occurs within 2 seconds.
    (l) Remove the loading device and position the 49 CFR part 572 
subpart R 12-month-old CRABI dummy in the child restraint by following, 
to the extent possible, the manufacturer's instructions provided with 
the child restraint for seating infants.
    (m) Start the vehicle engine or place the ignition in the ``on'' 
position, whichever will turn on the suppression system, and close all 
vehicle doors. Wait 10 seconds, then check whether the air bag is 
deactivated.
    S20.2.1.6.2 If the mechanism provided by the manufacturer does not 
incorporate a strap(s), use the following procedure:
    (a) Place the vehicle seat in the rearmost and mid-height position.
    (b) Place the child restraint on the vehicle seat facing rearward 
or forward, depending on the orientation being tested, with Plane A of 
the child restraint aligned within 10 mm with a 
longitudinal vertical plane passing though a point midway between the 
centers of the two lower anchor bars.
    (c) Position any adjustments on the child restraint, to the extent 
possible, according to the child restraint manufacturer's instructions.
    (d) Connect the lower anchor attachments to the lower anchor bars 
following, to the extent possible, the child restraint manufacturer's 
instructions.
    (e) Move the child restraint rearward until it contacts the seat 
back.
    (f) If the child restraint does not use a linear sliding or 
ratcheting mechanism that requires the application of force to securely 
install the child restraint, follow, to the extent possible, the CRS 
manufacturer's instructions for installing the child restraint onto the 
seat. Do not load the seat as provided in S20.2.1.6.2(g).
    (g) If the child restraint uses a linear sliding or ratcheting 
mechanism that requires the application of force to securely install 
the child restraint, within 25 5 seconds, apply a 475 N 
force, that has no lateral component, aligned angularly 10 
degrees with a parallel plane located within 100 mm of the 
plane formed by the linear mechanism. Release the force.
    (h) Position the 49 CFR part 572 subpart R 12-month-old CRABI dummy 
in the child restraint by following, to the extent possible, the 
manufacturer's instructions provided with the child restraint for 
seating infants.
    (i) Move the vehicle seat to the seat position being tested (full 
rear, mid, full forward).
    (j) Start the vehicle engine or place the ignition in the ``on'' 
position, whichever will turn on the suppression system, and close all 
vehicle doors. Wait 10 seconds, then check whether the air bag is 
deactivated.
* * * * *
    S20.4.6 If the child restraint is certified to S5.9 of Sec.  
571.213, and the vehicle seat has an anchorage system as specified in 
Sec.  571.225, attach the child restraint to the vehicle seat anchorage 
as specified in S20.2.1.6. Do not attach the top tether of the child 
restraint system. Do not attach the vehicle safety belt.
* * * * *
    22.2.1 Belted test with forward facing or booster seat child 
restraint
* * * * *
    S22.2.1.4 The vehicle shall comply with the child restraint belted 
to the vehicle in the following manner:
    (a) Using the vehicle safety belts as specified in S22.2.1.5 with 
section C and section D child restraints of Appendix A of this section 
designed to be secured to the vehicle seat even when empty; and
    (b) If the child restraint is certified to S5.9 of Sec.  571.213, 
and the vehicle seat has an anchorage system as specified in Sec.  
571.225, using only the mechanism provided by the child restraint 
manufacturer for attachment to the lower anchorage as specified in 
S22.2.1.6.
    S22.2.1.5 Installation with vehicle safety belts.
    (a) Place any adjustable safety belt anchorages at the vehicle 
manufacturer's nominal design position for a 50th percentile adult male 
occupant.
    (b) Without attaching the child restraint anchorage system 
components specified in S5.9 of Sec.  571.213 to a vehicle child 
restraint anchorage system specified in Sec.  571.225, align the child 
restraint system facing forward, such that Plane A is aligned with 
Plane B.
    (c) While maintaining the child restraint positions achieved in 
S22.2.1.5(b), secure the child restraint by following, to the extent 
possible, the child restraint manufacturer's directions regarding 
proper installation of the restraint. Cinch the vehicle belts to any 
tension from zero up to 134 N to secure the child restraint. Measure 
belt tension in a flat, straight section of the lap belt between the 
child restraint belt path and the contact point with the belt anchor or 
vehicle seat, on the side away from the buckle (to avoid interference 
from the shoulder portion of the belt).
    S22.2.1.6 Installation using the lower anchor bars and the 
attachment mechanism provided by the child restraint manufacturer.

[[Page 40260]]

    S22.2.1.6.1 If the mechanism provided by the manufacturer 
incorporates a strap(s), use the following procedure.
    (a) Place the child restraint on the vehicle seat facing forward, 
with Plane A of the child restraint aligned within 10 mm 
with a longitudinal vertical plane passing through a point midway 
between the centers of the two lower anchor bars.
    (b) Position any adjustments on the child restraint, to the extent 
possible, according to the child restraint manufacturer's instructions.
    (c) Connect the lower anchor straps to the lower anchor bars and 
remove most of the slack, but do not apply any load using these straps.
    (d) Move the child restraint rearward until it contacts the seat 
back.
    (e) Do not attach any top tethers.
    (f) Use the loading device equipped with the loading foot shown in 
Figure A1 and position it as shown in Figure A2 of Appendix A of this 
standard. The 153 degree angle of the loading device is 
determined with an initial preload of 7525 N.
    (g) Over a period of 9030 seconds, increase the load to 
87525 N.
    (h) After achieving the 875 N load in step (g) of this section, 
hold the bar length at the present position and allow the load to 
settle for 60 seconds.
    (i) Following the one-minute settling period specified in step (h) 
of this section, increase the load to 875 25 N such that 
the 875 25 N load is achieved within 10 seconds of the 
settling period.
    (j) Hold the bar length at present position and allow the load to 
settle for 120 seconds after achieving the load in step (g) of this 
section.
    (k) Following the settling period specified in step (j) of this 
section, increase the load to 875 25 N such that the 
875 25 N load is achieved within 10 seconds of the settling 
period.
    (l) Observe the settling of the load and tighten the lower anchor 
straps when the load is 8505N or 180 seconds has elapsed 
since achieving the 875 25 N load in step (g) of this 
section, whichever comes first. Tighten the lower anchor straps at the 
same time such that the load is reduced 15 10 N and the 
change occurs within 2 seconds.
    (m) Remove the loading device.
    S22.2.1.6.2 If the mechanism provided by the manufacturer does not 
incorporate a strap(s), use the following procedure.
    (a) Place the vehicle seat in the rear-most and mid-height 
position.
    (b) Place the child restraint on the vehicle seat facing forward 
with Plane A of the child restraint aligned within 10 mm 
with a longitudinal vertical plane passing through a point midway 
between the centers of the two lower anchor bars.
    (c) Position any adjustments on the child restraint, to the extent 
possible, according to the child restraint manufacturer's instructions.
    (d) Connect the lower anchor attachments to the lower anchor bars 
following, to the extent possible, the child restraint manufacturer's 
instructions.
    (e) Move the child restraint rearward until it contacts the seat 
back.
    (f) Do not attach any top tethers.
    (g) If the child restraint does not use a linear sliding or 
ratcheting mechanism that requires the application of force to securely 
install the child restraint, follow, to the extent possible, the 
manufacturer's instructions for installing the child restraint onto the 
seat. Do not load the seat as provided in S22.2.1.6.2(h).
    (h) If the child restraint uses a linear sliding or ratcheting 
mechanism that requires the application of force to securely install 
the child restraint, within 255 seconds apply a 475 N 
force, that has no lateral component, aligned angularly 10 
degrees with a parallel plane located within 100 mm of the 
plane formed by the linear mechanism. Release the force.
    (i) Move the vehicle seat to the seat position being tested (full 
rear, mid, full forward).
    S22.2.1.7 Forward facing child restraint.
    S22.2.1.7.1 After installation of a forward facing child restraint, 
position the 49 CFR part 572 subpart P 3-year-old child dummy in the 
child restraint such that the dummy's lower torso is centered on the 
child restraint and the dummy's spine is against the seat back of the 
child restraint. Place the arms at the dummy's sides.
    S22.2.1.7.2 Attach all belts that come with the child restraint 
that are appropriate for a child of the same height and weight as the 
3-year-old child dummy, if any, by following, to the extent possible, 
the manufacturer's instructions provided with the child restraint for 
seating children.
    S22.2.1.7.3 Start the vehicle engine or place the ignition in the 
``on'' position, whichever will turn on the suppression system, and 
close all vehicle doors. Wait 10 seconds, then check whether the air 
bag is deactivated.
    S22.2.1.8 Booster seat child restraint.
    S22.2.1.8.1 After installation of a booster seat child restraint, 
position the 49 CFR part 572 subpart P 3-year-old child dum