Anthropomorphic Test Devices; Hybrid III 6-Year-Old Child Test Dummy, Hybrid III 6-Year-Old Weighted Child Test Dummy, 76636-76646 [2010-30357]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
76636
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
10. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
Dated: December 1, 2010.
Dennis J. McLerran,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 10.
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629
(Feb. 16, 1994) establishes Federal
executive policy on environmental
justice. Its main provision directs
Federal agencies, to the greatest extent
practicable and permitted by law, to
make environmental justice part of their
mission by identifying and addressing,
as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or
environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority
populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
EPA has determined that this action
will not have disproportionately high
and adverse human health or
environmental effects on minority or
low-income populations because it does
not affect the level of protection
provided to human health or the
environment. This action addresses a
revision of the authorized hazardous
waste program in the State of Oregon.
EPA has determined that the action is
not subject to EO 12898.
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
[FR Doc. 2010–31012 Filed 12–8–10; 8:45 am]
11. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as amended by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this document and
other required information to the U.S.
Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller
General of the United States prior to
publication in the Federal Register. A
major rule cannot take effect until 60
days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ‘‘major
rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This
action will be effective February 7,
2011.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Confidential business information,
Hazardous materials transportation,
Hazardous waste, Indians—lands,
Intergovernmental relations, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Authority: This action is issued under the
authority of sections 2002(a), 3006 and
7004(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6926, 6974(b).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:52 Dec 08, 2010
Jkt 223001
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
49 CFR Part 572
[Docket No. NHTSA–2010–0147]
RIN 2127–AK34
Anthropomorphic Test Devices; Hybrid
III 6-Year-Old Child Test Dummy,
Hybrid III 6-Year-Old Weighted Child
Test Dummy
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, Department of
Transportation.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This final rule makes two
changes to the agency’s specifications
for the Hybrid III six-year-old child
dummy, and the Hybrid III six-year-old
weighted child test dummy. First, to
improve the durability of the dummies’
femurs we are changing the design of
and material used for the femur
assembly. Second, we correct the
drawings for the abdomen insert so that
the abdominal insert dimensions on the
drawings reflect actual parts in the field.
The correction responds to a petition for
rulemaking submitted by Denton ATD
and First Technology Safety Systems.
DATES: The effective date of this final
rule is June 7, 2011. The incorporation
by reference of certain publications
listed in the regulations is approved by
the Director of the Federal Register as of
June 7, 2011.
Petitions for reconsideration: Petitions
for reconsideration of this final rule
must be received not later than January
24, 2011.
Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search
the electronic form of all submissions
received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the
comment (or signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may
review DOT’s complete Privacy Act
Statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (Volume
65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78).
ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration
of this final rule must refer to the docket
and notice number set forth above and
be submitted to the Administrator,
National Highway Traffic Safety
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. (A
copy of the petition will be placed in
the docket.)
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
non-legal issues, you may call Peter
Martin, NHTSA Office of
Crashworthiness Standards (telephone
202–366–5668) (fax 202–493–2990). For
legal issues, you may call Deirdre Fujita,
NHTSA Office of Chief Counsel
(telephone 202–366–2992) (fax 202–
366–3820). The mailing address for
these officials is the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC
20590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Overview
II. Femur Improvements
a. Femur Design Changes
b. Analysis of the New Femur Design
1. Stress Analysis of the Fillet Effect
2. Dynamic Evaluation
i. Comparing Test Results of the Modified
HIII–6C Test in the Marathon, Boulevard,
and Decathlon Child Restraint Systems
ii. Comparing the Results of the Britax
Marathon Test of the Modified HIII–6C
(test H06337) to Those of a Test of an
Original HIII–6C Where Femur Failure
Occurred (test H06120)
iii. Effect on FMVSS No. 213 Injury Metrics
iv. Effect on Dummy Kinematics
v. Dummy Response Biofidelity
vi. Hip Lock
III. Abdominal Insert
IV. Effective Date
V. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
I. Overview
This final rule makes two changes to
the agency’s specifications for the
Hybrid III six-year-old child dummy
(HIII–6C) set forth in 49 CFR part 572,
Subpart N, and for the Hybrid III sixyear-old weighted child test dummy
(HIII–6CW) in 49 CFR part 572, Subpart
S. The notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) upon which this final rule is
based was published October 21, 2009,
74 FR 53987, Docket No. NHTSA–09–
0166.
First, to improve the durability of the
dummies’ femurs, we are changing the
design of and material used for the
femur assembly. The primary
modifications include the addition of a
@-inch (6.35 millimeter (mm)) fillet
between the femur clamp and the
connecting segment (these components
are described in detail in section II.b of
the NPRM preamble) of the machined
femur, removal of material from the
connecting segment, and a material
change from aluminum bronze to 4340
steel. These changes are made by
replacing the drawings of the femur in
E:\FR\FM\09DER1.SGM
09DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
76637
NHTSA received no comments on the
October 21, 2009 NPRM. We are
adopting the changes proposed in the
NPRM for the reasons discussed in that
document.
Failures of the HIII–6C femur appear
to have initiated at a sharp corner
between the femur clamp and
connecting segment sections of the
machined femur. The approximate
location of the femur failure is depicted
in Figure 1. The fracture was observed
from this corner to the bolt hole within
the femur clamp, at an angle of
approximately 45°. The failure
continued through the thin section of
material directly beneath the bolt hole,
causing complete separation of the
machined femur. Additionally, in one
failed component, small indents on the
inner diameter of the retaining flange
were observed, indicating potential
contact between the flange and shaft.
Pictures of a fractured part can be found
in the technical report docketed with
the NPRM (Docket NHTSA–09–0166–
0007.1).
a. Femur Design Changes
The modification made today to
improve the femur’s durability increases
the strength and durability of the femur
assembly by fabricating the machined
femur and shaft from 4340 steel, which
has a higher yield strength than the
original material, Aluminum Bronze C–
624 AMC0–18, while keeping the ball
and retaining flange as the original
aluminum bronze material. A 1⁄4-inch
(6.35 mm) fillet is added between the
1 Complete drawings for the current HIII–6C
femur can be found in Docket No. NHTSA–2002–
12541.
2 The HIII–6CW is based on the HIII–6C, with
weight added (10 pounds) to represent larger
children. The femur assembly is the same for both
the HIII–6CW and the HIII–6C dummies. The
discussion set forth in this section applies to the
HIII–6CW as well, unless otherwise noted.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:52 Dec 08, 2010
Jkt 223001
II. Femur Improvements
The present design of the HIII–6C
femur is specified in 49 CFR part 572,
Subpart N.1 2 The HIII–6C machined
femur, which is one of the femur
assembly parts, is illustrated in Figure 1
below. This one-piece part is machined
from bar stock and serves to couple the
main femur shaft to a smaller shaft
protruding from the femur ball (a
representation of a human femur head).
The portion of the part that is attached
to the femur shaft is referred to as the
‘‘femur clamp’’ and the portion that is
attached to the ball shaft is referred to
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
as the ‘‘connecting segment.’’ The femur
ball shaft, retaining flange, and femur
ball connect the machined femur to the
dummy’s pelvis. Similar to a human hip
joint, the ball in the HIII–6C femur
assembly allows for rotation of the
dummy hip joint. The flange is used to
attach the femur assembly to the pelvis.
The entire femur assembly is found
within the lower torso, and the material
specification for this assembly,
including the machined femur, shaft,
flange and ball was originally
Aluminum Bronze C–624 AMC0–18.
(The femur load cell, the response of
which is discussed in the ‘‘dynamic
evaluation’’ section below, is located in
the distal portion of the upper leg (i.e.,
farther from the pelvis) and not in the
area of the machined femur.)
E:\FR\FM\09DER1.SGM
09DER1
ER09DE10.031</GPH>
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
the drawing package specified in 49
CFR part 572, Subpart N (‘‘Six-year-old
child test dummy’’) and in Subpart S
(‘‘Six-year-old weighted child test
dummy’’), the parts lists, and the
‘‘Procedures for Assembly, Disassembly,
and Inspection’’ (‘‘PADI’’) documents
incorporated by reference into those
regulations.
The second change corrects the
drawings for the abdomen insert so that
the abdominal insert dimensions on the
drawings reflect actual parts in the field.
The October 21, 2009 NPRM provided
a detailed discussion of the femur
failures that were occurring with the
HIII–6C dummy, the proposed solution
to those failures, and how the agency
proposed to amend the specifications
for the HIII–6C and the HIII–6CW
dummies.
76638
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
femur clamp and the connecting
segment to eliminate stress risers that
were present on the original femur, and
a portion of the connecting segment
material near the femur clamp is
removed. The weight of the modified
femur is only 0.002 lb (0.001 kilograms
(kg)) heavier than the original femur.
Table 1 below compares the weights and
material properties of the original femur
and the new femur.
TABLE 1—WEIGHT AND MATERIAL PROPERTIES FOR THE ORIGINAL AND NEW HIII–6C FEMUR DESIGN
Femur design measured weight
Original ..........................
New ................................
Material and yield strength
0.532 lb (0.241 kg) .................................................
0.534 lb (0.242 kg) .................................................
To implement this change in femur
design and material, the following
changes are made to the materials
describing the HIII–6C in 49 CFR part
572. Drawings 127–3017–1&–2, ‘‘6 YR
H3–FEMUR MACHINED’’ is replaced
with drawings 127–3017–1S&–2S,
which show the new machined femur.3
The femur assembly drawings (127–
3016–1&–2) are also replaced due to the
new femur design, with new part
numbers 127–3016–1S&–2S. Higher
assembly drawings including 127–3000,
‘‘LOWER TORSO ASSEMBLY’’ and the
complete assembly drawings (127–0000)
are amended to show the modified part.
These revisions are noted on drawing
SA572–127DRL–2. The PADI is also
updated so that it shows the new
machined femur in figures, and reports
the proper lower torso assembly and
total weight for the dummy. Finally, the
part numbers for the machined femur
and the femur assembly are changed in
the Parts/Drawings list, along with the
revision letters for higher assembly
drawings, as appropriate.
Copies of the HIII–6C drawing
package, PADI, and Parts/Drawings list
that include the change in femur design
can be obtained online at https://
www.regulations.gov, in the same
docket as this final rule.
Aluminum Bronze C–624 AMC0–18 ......................
4340 Steel ..............................................................
of dynamic test results, as discussed
below.
1. Stress Analysis of the Fillet Effect
The one-piece HIII–6C machined
femur—which couples the main femur
shaft to the femur ball shaft—forms a
ninety-degree angle where the femur
clamp intersects the connecting
segment. Originally, the corner radius at
this intersection was very sharp. This
sharp corner led to high stresses when
the femur was loaded. We have
estimated that adding a fillet to increase
the corner radius will reduce stresses by
approximately 1.6 to two times those in
the femur without the fillet. It is noted
that this is only an estimate, as the
loading conditions present in the femur
during a FMVSS No. 213 type sled test
were highly simplified in order to
provide a rough estimate of the fillet
benefit. Details about the stress
reduction approximation can be found
in the technical report accompanying
the NPRM (Docket NHTSA–09–0166–
0007.1). Because the fillet design results
in substantially reduced stress in the
femur of the dummy, we believe that
adding the fillet and using the 4340
steel material will avoid femur failure.
48,000 psi
114,000 psi
loading experienced by the femur
assembly, instrumentation was added to
the dummy to allow measurement of
triaxial accelerations in the pelvis and
forces and moments in the femurs.
Additionally, to determine the effect of
the new femur, we compared test results
from a test in which the femur had
failed to those of a test with a modified
dummy, under conditions that had
previously caused failure, i.e., the
modified HIII–6C dummy was tested in
the Britax Marathon to the FMVSS No.
213 sled pulse.
In all tests of the new femurs, there
were no femur failures. In addition, test
data relating to left and right femur
moments, FMVSS No. 213 injury
measures, dummy kinematics, and other
factors concerning the performance of
the dummy raised no concerns about
the new femur design. The testing
indicated that use of the new femur in
the HIII–6C and the HIII–6CW will not
affect FMVSS testing, except to make
the dummies more durable.
i. Comparing Test Results of the
Modified HIII–6C Test in the Marathon,
Boulevard, and Decathlon Child
Restraint Systems
NHTSA has determined that the
changes to the femur prevent the femur
from failing and do not compromise the
utility of the test dummy. This
determination is based on an analysis
showing the stress is reduced by the
addition of the fillet, and on an analysis
2. Dynamic Evaluation
NHTSA evaluated the new femur in
April 2006 at the MGA testing facility.
To assess the effect of the component
modification, we tested a HIII–6C with
the new femurs (which we refer to as a
‘‘modified HIII–6C’’ or ‘‘modified
dummy’’) in a Britax Marathon child
restraint, Britax Boulevard and Britax
Decathlon to the FMVSS No. 213 test
conditions, and compared the results.4
To obtain a greater understanding of the
NHTSA measured and compared
maximum forces and moments
measured in the femur load cells (over
both legs) of the modified HIII–6C
dummy in the Britax Marathon,
Boulevard, and Decathlon. The
Marathon and Boulevard showed
similar maximum forces, while the
Decathlon had a higher maximum femur
force. All maximum forces occurred
along the Z-axis, and all maximum
moments were about the Y-axis.
3 The femur shaft, drawing 127–3021, with
material specification Aluminum Bronze 3/8 rnd C–
624 AMC0–18, is replaced with drawing 127–3021S
with material specification 4340 Steel.
4 The Boulevard and Decathlon models were each
tested with a modified HIII–6C and with a HIII–
6CW with the modified femur design. No femur
failure occurred in any of the tests. For simplicity
and because the test results of the HIII–6CW are not
comparable to those of the HIII–6C, tests of the
HIII–6CW dummy are not generally discussed in
this preamble. However, results for all tests of the
HIII–6CW are discussed in the technical report
accompanying the NPRM (Docket NHTSA–09–
0166–0007.1), including test numbers, maximum
head, chest and pelvis accelerations and left and
right femur maximum moments and forces.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
b. Analysis of the New Femur Design
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:52 Dec 08, 2010
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\09DER1.SGM
09DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
76639
TABLE 2—MAXIMUM FORCES AND MOMENTS MEASURED IN THE FEMUR LOAD CELLS OF MODIFIED HIII–6C DUMMIES IN A
FMVSS NO. 213 COMPLIANCE TESTING ENVIRONMENT
Britax
Marathon *
Femur measure
Max Force (N) ..........................................................................................................................................
Max Moment (Nm) ...................................................................................................................................
1492.9
¥78
Britax
Decathlon *
2264.7
¥63.9
Britax
Boulevard
1578.4
¥70
* Marathon: Restraint changed from upright to reclined during test. Decathlon: Top tether webbing separated at the attachment clip and the restraint changed position from upright to reclined.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
At the time of maximum moment
there were visible differences in the
degree of knee extension (test video
pictures are provided in the technical
report accompanying the NPRM, Docket
NHTSA–09–0166–0007.1). These visual
differences in response are consistent
with the differences in force and
moment magnitude seen in the tests.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:52 Dec 08, 2010
Jkt 223001
Maximum left and right femur forces
from the tests of the modified HIII–6C
dummy with the new femur are
displayed in Figure 2, while Figure 3
shows the maximum moments
measured in the left and right legs
during each test. In general, force and
moment measurements made in the left
and right femurs were similar, though
not identical. This may give some
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
insight into why failures were observed
in the left leg, right leg, or both legs in
any given test. We believe that the
failures were caused by stresses
exceeding the material strength of the
femur, so the occurrence of one femur
failure, rather than both, may be due to
the fact that the forces present during
the test were unevenly distributed.
E:\FR\FM\09DER1.SGM
09DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
ii. Comparing the Results of the Britax
Marathon Test of the Modified HIII–6C
(test H06337) to Those of a Test of an
Original HIII–6C Where Femur Failure
Occurred (test H06120)
Both tests were performed using the
same dummy (S/N 158).5 In test H06120
5 Both
tests were performed using the same
dummy (S/N 158). However, because FMVSS No.
213 does not require measurement of femoral loads,
no femoral force data was available for test H06120
with the original femurs. Therefore, comparisons
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:52 Dec 08, 2010
Jkt 223001
(with the original femurs), the left femur
failed and detached completely. The
right knee of this dummy was in a fully
extended position, which could have
resulted from the change in kinematics
due to loss of one leg. In test H06337
(modified dummy), there were no femur
iii. Effect on FMVSS No. 213 Injury
Metrics
were made between pre- and post-test positioning,
head and chest measurements, and dummy position
throughout the test, as indicated by the test videos.
This is discussed in the technical report
accompanying the NPRM.
6 We note that in test H06337 (modified dummy),
the child restraint had multiple cracks in its base
following the test, and during the test the restraint
position shifted from upright to reclined. However,
these factors are not likely linked to the
performance of the new femur.
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
failures and both legs remained attached
to the dummy.6
In these two tests, we compared the
maximum head and chest accelerations.
E:\FR\FM\09DER1.SGM
09DER1
ER09DE10.032</GPH>
76640
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
the modified HIII–6C resulted in a 5.65
percent decrease in HIC over the
response of the original HIII–6C. These
relatively low changes in response
suggest that HIC and chest g’s are not
significantly altered by the femur
replacement.
Table 3: HIC 36 and peak chest
acceleration values for matched FMVSS
No. 213 tests. (These results are
presented in Figures 5 and 6, below.)
ER09DE10.034</GPH>
accelerations occurred after the time of
femur failure in test H06120. Therefore,
it is possible that the acceleration
magnitude or response in time was
affected by the loss of one limb.
We also compared the 36 millisecond
(ms) head injury criterion (HIC) values.
These values are displayed in Table 3
and Figure 5, along with the previouslydiscussed peak chest accelerations
(Figure 6). The response measured in
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:52 Dec 08, 2010
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\09DER1.SGM
09DER1
ER09DE10.033</GPH>
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
As seen in Figure 4, these measures
were similar for both tests, suggesting
that the new femur does not affect the
dummy head or chest response
significantly. Specifically, peak chest
resultant acceleration, an FMVSS No.
213 injury criterion, increased only 2.42
percent from 41.4 g with the current
Part 572 femur to 42.4 g with the new
femur. However, we note that the
maximum head Z and resultant
76641
76642
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
iv. Effect on Dummy Kinematics
We have determined that use of the
new femur does not change the
dummy’s kinematic response. We
analyzed test video comparing the
kinematics of the dummy in tests
H06337 (modified dummy) and H06120
(femur failure). (Photographs from the
video are presented in the technical
report accompanying the NPRM, Docket
NHTSA–09–0166–0007.1.) Until the
time of maximum femur force, the
position of the dummy in each test is
fairly similar. At maximum force, the
dummy’s knees in H06337 (modified
dummy) are only slightly more
extended and lower than the knees in
H06120 (femur failure). Although at the
approximate time of femur failure in test
H06120 the positions of the two
dummies are different, they are only
slightly so, and the fully extended left
knee of the dummy in test H06120
(femur failure) and the additional
excursion of the leg (as noted by the
position of the knee marker) may be
indicative of the failing femur
component. Similarly, after femur
failure at 100 ms, there are slight
differences in dummy position which
could be attributable to the loss of one
leg in the test H06120. All in all, there
is no indication that the new femur
significantly alters dummy response.
v. Dummy Response Biofidelity
Since the new femur has the same
geometry as the original femurs where it
interfaces with the pelvis, the new
femur does not behave any differently
than the original femur. As discussed in
the previous sections, little difference in
head and chest measurements and
dummy kinematics was observed in the
dummy with the new versus the current
Part 572 femur. There is no indication
that the slight modification in femur
design and material affects dummy
biofidelity.
vi. Hip Lock
The new femur was inspected for
indications of susceptibility to hip lock.
Hip lock is a condition where flexion of
the dummy’s hip joint is mechanically
limited due to contact between the
femur and the retaining ring or other
pelvis structure.7 There was no
evidence of excessive wear near the
retaining ring/ball joint of the new
femurs. Some wear was noticed on the
upper leg of dummy S/N 155 where the
femur clamp was fastened to the upper
leg weldment. However, because this
wear is located at a fastening site, metalto-metal contact is inevitable and is not
indicative of hip lock.
III. Abdominal Insert
This final rule changes Drawing No.
127–8210 of the HIII–6C drawing
package, which depicts the abdominal
insert for the dummy. It makes a similar
change to the HIII–6CW drawing
package.8 This change responds to a
petition from FTSS and Denton. Both
manufacturers sought to revise the
abdomen insert drawing to match the
part mold dimensions.
In the NPRM, the agency granted the
request but proposed to revise the
drawing of the abdominal insert based
on dimensions of actual abdominal
inserts, rather than dimensions of the
mold for the inserts. Nearly all changes
were in agreement with the petitioners’
mold-based dimensions.
Table 4 shows the changes this final
rule makes to key abdomen dimensions.
‘‘Fig. Ref’’ numbers in the table refer to
Figure 7, which shows the original
dimensions.
TABLE 4—HIII–6C KEY ABDOMEN DIMENSIONS
Adopted
spec.
1 ...............................................
2lt .............................................
3.81 +/¥.20
1.53 +/¥.20
7 Hip lock in the HIII–50th percentile male femur
led to design modifications that prevented ‘‘hard’’
(i.e., metal-to-metal contact) hip lock from
occurring (61 FR 67953, Dec. 26, 1996). In that adult
dummy, hard hip lock was characterized by spikes
in the unfiltered pelvis and chest accelerometer
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:52 Dec 08, 2010
Jkt 223001
readings, high and sharply-pointed chest z
acceleration traces, non-unimodal chest x and
resultant accelerations, and a high tension
component in the lumbar z force (Klinich et al,
‘‘Evaluation of a Proposed Hybrid III Hip
Modification,’’ Stapp Paper No. 952730, 1995).
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
8 The HIII–6CW is the HIII–6C with weight added
(10 pounds) to represent larger children. The
abdominal insert drawing is the same for both the
HIII–6CW and the HIII–6C dummies. Thus, the
discussion set forth in this section applies to the
HIII–6CW as well.
E:\FR\FM\09DER1.SGM
09DER1
ER09DE10.035</GPH>
Fig. ref.
Overall height (in.) .............................................................................................................................
Ledge height (in.) ...............................................................................................................................
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Description
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
76643
TABLE 4—HIII–6C KEY ABDOMEN DIMENSIONS—Continued
Fig. ref.
Adopted
spec.
3rt ............................................
4 ...............................................
5 ...............................................
6lt .............................................
7rt ............................................
8 ...............................................
9 ...............................................
10 .............................................
1.53 +/¥.20
2.80 +/¥.20
2.80 +/¥.20
121/129
121/129
1.50 +/¥.20
1.40 +/¥.20
5.40 +/¥.40
Description
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Notch Half Width (in.) ........................................................................................................................
Notch Depth (in.) ...............................................................................................................................
Width Bottom of Cone (in.) ................................................................................................................
IV. Effective Date
The changes to the femur design of
the HIII–6C and HIII–6CW are effective
180 days after publication of this final
rule. The changes to the abdomen insert
drawing are effective on the same date.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:52 Dec 08, 2010
Jkt 223001
Although the NPRM proposed that the
corrections to the abdomen insert
drawing be effective 45 days after
publication of a final rule, the agency
has decided to make all the changes to
the drawing package effective on the
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
same date to simplify the incorporation
by reference of the changed drawings in
the drawing package.
E:\FR\FM\09DER1.SGM
09DER1
ER09DE10.036</GPH>
Depth excl.plug (in.) ...........................................................................................................................
Depth incl. plug (in.) ..........................................................................................................................
Taper angle of cone (degrees) ..........................................................................................................
76644
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
V. Rulemaking Analyses And Notices
Executive Order 12866 and DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures
This rulemaking action is not
considered a significant regulatory
action under Executive Order 12866 or
the Department of Transportation’s
(DOT’s) regulatory policies and
procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26,
1979).
This rule will only affect the HIII–6C
and HIII–6CW test dummies by adding
a 1⁄4-inch fillet between the femur clamp
and the connecting segment of the
machined femur, removing material
from the connecting segment, and
changing the material from Aluminum
Bronze C–624 AMC0–18 to 4340 steel.
We stated in the final rule 9 that adopted
the HIII–6C into 49 CFR part 572 that
the cost of an uninstrumented HIII–6C
dummy is approximately $30,000 and
that instrumentation will add
approximately $25,000 to $40,000 to the
cost, depending on the number of data
channels the user chooses to collect. We
do not expect the amendments of this
final rule to significantly affect the cost
of the dummy.
Further, this final rule does not
impose any requirements on anyone.
NHTSA will only use HIII–6C and HIII–
6CW dummies for compliance testing
that meet all of the criteria specified in
this rule, but the agency does not
require manufacturers to test with the
Part 572 test dummies. Businesses will
only be indirectly affected by this final
rule, to the extent that they choose to
manufacture or test with the dummy.
Because the economic impacts of this
final rule are so minimal, no further
regulatory evaluation is necessary.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Regulatory Flexibility Act
Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., as amended by
the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of
1996), whenever an agency is required
to publish a proposed or final rule, it
must prepare and make available for
public comment a regulatory flexibility
analysis that describes the effect of the
rule on small entities (i.e., small
businesses, small organizations, and
small governmental jurisdictions),
unless the head of the agency certifies
the rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. The Small
Business Administration’s regulations at
13 CFR part 121 define a small business,
in part, as a business entity ‘‘which
9 65 FR 2059; January 13, 2000; Docket NHTSA–
99–6714.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:52 Dec 08, 2010
Jkt 223001
operates primarily within the United
States.’’ (13 CFR 121.105(a)).
We have considered the effects of this
rulemaking under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act. I hereby certify that this
final rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Changing the
femur design and correcting the
abdominal insert drawing will not
impose any requirements on anyone.
NHTSA does not require anyone to
manufacture or redesign the HIII–6C or
HIII–6CW or to test vehicles or child
restraints with the devices.
National Environmental Policy Act
NHTSA has analyzed this final rule
for the purposes of the National
Environmental Policy Act and has
determined that it will not have any
significant impact on the quality of the
human environment.
Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
NHTSA has examined today’s final
rule pursuant to Executive Order 13132
(64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) and
concluded that no additional
consultation with States, local
governments or their representatives is
mandated beyond the rulemaking
process. The agency has concluded that
the final rule does not have federalism
implications because the rule does not
have ‘‘substantial direct effects on the
States, on the relationship between the
national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.’’ This rule does
not impose any requirements on
anyone. Businesses will be affected only
if they choose to manufacture or test
with the HIII–6C or HIII–6CW dummies.
Further, no consultation is needed to
discuss the preemptive effect of today’s
final rule. NHTSA’s safety standards can
have preemptive effect in two ways.
This final rule would amend 49 CFR
part 572 and is not a safety standard.10
10 With respect to the safety standards, the
National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act
contains an express preemptive provision: ‘‘When a
motor vehicle safety standard is in effect under this
chapter, a State or a political subdivison of a State
may prescribe or continue in effect a standard
applicable to the same aspect of performance of a
motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment only if
the standard is identical to the standard prescribed
under this chapter.’’ 49 U.S.C. 30103(b)(1). Second,
the Supreme Court has recognized the possibility of
implied preemption: State requirements imposed
on motor vehicle manufacturers, including
sanctions imposed by State tort law, can stand as
an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of
a NHTSA safety standard. When such a conflict
exists, the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution
makes the conflicting State requirements
unenforceable. See Geier v. American Honda Motor
Co., 529 U.S. 861 (2000).
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
This Part 572 final rule does not impose
any requirements on anyone.
Civil Justice Reform
With respect to the review of the
promulgation of a new regulation,
section 3(b) of Executive Order 12988,
‘‘Civil Justice Reform’’ (61 FR 4729,
February 7, 1996) requires that
Executive agencies make every
reasonable effort to ensure that the
regulation: (1) Clearly specifies the
preemptive effect; (2) clearly specifies
the effect on existing Federal law or
regulation; (3) provides a clear legal
standard for affected conduct, while
promoting simplification and burden
reduction; (4) clearly specifies the
retroactive effect, if any; (5) adequately
defines key terms; and (6) addresses
other important issues affecting clarity
and general draftsmanship under any
guidelines issued by the Attorney
General. This document is consistent
with that requirement. Pursuant to this
Order, NHTSA notes as follows.
The issue of preemption is discussed
above in connection with E.O. 13132.
NHTSA notes further that there is no
requirement that individuals submit a
petition for reconsideration or pursue
other administrative proceeding before
they may file suit in court.
Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995, a person is not required to
respond to a collection of information
by a Federal agency unless the
collection displays a valid control
number from the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB). This final rule does
not have any requirements that are
considered to be information collection
requirements as defined by the OMB in
5 CFR part 1320.
National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104–
113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272)
directs NHTSA to use voluntary
consensus standards in its regulatory
activities unless doing so would be
inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary
consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications,
test methods, sampling procedures, and
business practices) that are developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies. The NTTAA directs
NHTSA to provide Congress, through
OMB, explanations when the agency
decides not to use available and
applicable voluntary consensus
standards. There are no voluntary
E:\FR\FM\09DER1.SGM
09DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
consensus standards relevant to this
final rule.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Section 202 of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA),
Pub. L. 104–4, Federal requires agencies
to prepare a written assessment of the
costs, benefits, and other effects of
proposed or final rules that include a
Federal mandate likely to result in the
expenditure by State, local, or tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of more than $100
million annually (adjusted for inflation
with base year of 1995). Before
promulgating a NHTSA rule for which
a written statement is needed, section
205 of the UMRA generally requires the
agency to identify and consider a
reasonable number of regulatory
alternatives and adopt the least costly,
most cost-effective, or least burdensome
alternative that achieves the objectives
of the rule.
This final rule would not impose any
unfunded mandates under the UMRA.
This final rule does not meet the
definition of a Federal mandate because
it does not impose requirements on
anyone. It amends 49 CFR part 572 by
changing the femur design of two test
dummies that the agency uses, and
corrects a drawing of an abdominal
insert for the dummies. This final rule
affects only those businesses that choose
to manufacture or test with the
dummies. It does not result in costs of
$100 million or more to either State,
local, or tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or to the private sector.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Plain Language
Executive Order 12866 requires each
agency to write all rules in plain
language. Application of the principles
of plain language includes consideration
of the following questions:
—Has the agency organized the material
to suit the public’s needs?
—Are the requirements in the rule
clearly stated?
—Does the rule contain technical
language or jargon that is not clear?
—Would a different format (grouping
and order of sections, use of headings,
paragraphing) make the rule easier to
understand?
—Would more (but shorter) sections be
better?
—Could the agency improve clarity by
adding tables, lists, or diagrams?
—What else could the agency do to
make this rulemaking easier to
understand?
If you have any responses to these
questions, please send them to NHTSA.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:52 Dec 08, 2010
Jkt 223001
Regulation Identifier Number
The Department of Transportation
assigns a regulation identifier number
(RIN) to each regulatory action listed in
the Unified Agenda of Federal
Regulations. The Regulatory Information
Service Center publishes the Unified
Agenda in April and October of each
year. You may use the RIN contained in
the heading at the beginning of this
document to find this action in the
Unified Agenda.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 572
Motor vehicle safety, Incorporation by
reference.
■ In consideration of the foregoing,
NHTSA amends 49 CFR Part 572 as
follows:
PART 572—ANTHROPOMORPHIC
TEST DUMMIES
1. The authority citation for Part 572
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115,
30117 and 30166; delegation of authority at
49 CFR 1.50.
Subpart N—Six-Year-Old Child Test
Dummy, Beta Version
2. Section 572.120 is amended by
revising the introductory paragraph of
(a)(1), paragraph (a)(1) through (a)(4),
and paragraphs (b) and (c)(1), to read as
follows:
■
§ 572.120
Incorporation by reference.
(a) * * *
(1) A drawings and inspection
package entitled, ‘‘Parts List and
Drawings, Part 572 Subpart N, Hybrid III
Six-Year Old Child Crash Test Dummy
(H–III6C, Beta Version), June 2009,’’
consisting of:
(i) Drawing No. 127–1000, 6-year H3
Head Complete, incorporated by
reference in § 572.122,
(ii) Drawing No. 127–1015, Neck
Assembly, incorporated by reference in
§ 572.123,
(iii) Drawing No. 127–2000, Upper
Torso Assembly, incorporated by
reference in § 572.124,
(iv) Drawing No. 127–3000, Lower
Torso Assembly, incorporated by
reference in § 572.125,
(v) Drawing No. 127–4000–1 and
4000–2, Leg Assembly, incorporated by
reference in § 572.126,
(vi) Drawing No. 127–5000–1 and
5000–2, Arm Assembly, incorporated by
reference in §§ 572.121, 572.124, and
572.125 as part of a complete dummy
assembly, and,
(vii) Parts List and Drawings, Hybrid
III Six-year-old Child Test Dummy (H–
III6C, Beta Version), dated June 1, 2009,
incorporated by reference in § 572.121;
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
76645
(2) A procedures manual entitled
‘‘Procedures for Assembly, Disassembly,
and Inspection (PADI) of the Hybrid III
6-year-old Child Crash Test Dummy (H–
III6C), Beta Version, June 1, 2009,’’
incorporated by reference in § 572.121;
(3) SAE Recommended Practice J211–
1995, ‘‘Instrumentation for Impact
Tests—Parts 1 and 2, dated March,
1995,’’ incorporated by reference in
§ 572.127;
(4) SAE J1733 Information Report,
titled ‘‘Sign Convention for Vehicle
Crash Testing,’’ dated December 1994,
incorporated by reference in § 572.127.
(b) The Director of the Federal
Register approved the materials
incorporated by reference in accordance
with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
Copies of the materials may be
inspected at the Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations,
Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590,
telephone (202) 366–9826, and at the
National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA), and in
electronic format through
Regulations.gov. For information on the
availability and inspection of this
material at NARA, call 202–741–6030,
or go to: https://www.archives.gov/
federal_register/code_of_federal_
regulations/ibr_locations.html. For
information on the availability and
inspection of this material at
Regulations.gov, call 1–877–378–5457,
or go to: https://www.regulations.gov.
(c) * * *
(1) The drawings and specifications
package, the parts list, and the PADI
document referred to in paragraphs
(a)(1), and (a)(2) of this section, are
available in electronic format through
www.Regulations.gov and in paper
format from Leet-Melbrook, Division of
New RT, 18810 Woodfield Road,
Gaithersburg, MD 20879, (301) 670–
0090.
*
*
*
*
*
3. Section 572.121 is amended by
revising paragraph (a)(2) introductory
text (the table is not amended) to read
as follows:
■
§ 572.121
General description.
(a) * * *
(2) Procedures for Assembly,
Disassembly, and Inspection (PADI) of
the Hybrid III 6-year-old child crash test
dummy (H–III6C), Beta version, dated
June 1, 2009, incorporated by reference
in § 572.120.
*
*
*
*
*
E:\FR\FM\09DER1.SGM
09DER1
76646
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
Subpart S—Hybrid III Six-Year-Old
Weighted Child Test Dummy
4. Section 572.160 is amended by
revising the introductory paragraph of
(a)(1), paragraph (a)(1)(iii), paragraph
(a)(1)(v), (a)(2), and (a)(3), to read as
follows:
■
§ 572.160
Incorporation by reference.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
(a) * * *
(1) A drawings and specifications
package entitled, ‘‘Parts List and
Drawings, Part 572 Subpart S, Hybrid III
6–Year-Old Child Weighted Crash Test
Dummy (H–III6CW),’’ dated June 2009,
incorporated by reference in § 572.161
and consisting of:
*
*
*
*
*
(iii) Drawing No. 167–2020, Revision
A, Spine Box Weight, incorporated by
reference in §§ 572.161, 572.164, and
572.165 as part of a complete dummy
assembly;
*
*
*
*
*
(v) Drawing No. 167–3010, Revision
A, Lumbar Weight Base, incorporated by
reference in §§ 572.161 and 572.165 as
part of a complete dummy assembly;
and
*
*
*
*
*
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:52 Dec 08, 2010
Jkt 223001
(2) A procedures manual entitled,
‘‘Procedures for Assembly, Disassembly,
And Inspection (PADI) of the Part 572
Subpart S, Hybrid III 6–Year-Old Child
Weighted Crash Test Dummy (H–
III6CW), revised June 2009,’’
incorporated by reference in § 572.161;
(3) The Director of the Federal
Register approved the materials
incorporated by reference in accordance
with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
Copies of the materials may be
inspected at the Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations,
Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590,
telephone (202) 366–9826, and at the
National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA), and in
electronic format through
Regulations.gov. For information on the
availability and inspection of this
material at NARA, call 202–741–6030,
or go to: https://www.archives.gov/
federal_register/code_of_federal_
regulations/ibr_locations.html. For
information on the availability and
inspection of this material at
PO 00000
Regulations.gov, call 1–877–378–5457,
or go to: https://www.regulations.gov.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 5. Section 572.161 is amended by
revising paragraph (a)(1) and paragraph
(a)(3) introductory text (the table is not
amended), to read as follows:
§ 572.161
General description.
(a) * * *
(1) ‘‘Parts List and Drawings, Part 572
Subpart S, Hybrid III 6–Year-Old Child
Weighted Crash Test Dummy (H–
III6CW),’’ dated June 2009 (incorporated
by reference, see § 572.160);
*
*
*
*
*
(3) ‘‘Procedures for Assembly,
Disassembly, And Inspection (PADI) of
the Part 572 Subpart S, Hybrid III 6–
Year-Old Child Weighted Crash Test
Dummy (H–III6CW), revised June 2009’’
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 572.160).
*
*
*
*
*
Issued: November 26, 2010.
David L. Strickland,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2010–30357 Filed 12–8–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\09DER1.SGM
09DER1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 236 (Thursday, December 9, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 76636-76646]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-30357]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 572
[Docket No. NHTSA-2010-0147]
RIN 2127-AK34
Anthropomorphic Test Devices; Hybrid III 6-Year-Old Child Test
Dummy, Hybrid III 6-Year-Old Weighted Child Test Dummy
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of
Transportation.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule makes two changes to the agency's
specifications for the Hybrid III six-year-old child dummy, and the
Hybrid III six-year-old weighted child test dummy. First, to improve
the durability of the dummies' femurs we are changing the design of and
material used for the femur assembly. Second, we correct the drawings
for the abdomen insert so that the abdominal insert dimensions on the
drawings reflect actual parts in the field. The correction responds to
a petition for rulemaking submitted by Denton ATD and First Technology
Safety Systems.
DATES: The effective date of this final rule is June 7, 2011. The
incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the
regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of
June 7, 2011.
Petitions for reconsideration: Petitions for reconsideration of
this final rule must be received not later than January 24, 2011.
Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
submissions received into any of our dockets by the name of the
individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted
on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may
review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477-78).
ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration of this final rule must refer
to the docket and notice number set forth above and be submitted to the
Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. (A copy of the petition will
be placed in the docket.)
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For non-legal issues, you may call
Peter Martin, NHTSA Office of Crashworthiness Standards (telephone 202-
366-5668) (fax 202-493-2990). For legal issues, you may call Deirdre
Fujita, NHTSA Office of Chief Counsel (telephone 202-366-2992) (fax
202-366-3820). The mailing address for these officials is the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Overview
II. Femur Improvements
a. Femur Design Changes
b. Analysis of the New Femur Design
1. Stress Analysis of the Fillet Effect
2. Dynamic Evaluation
i. Comparing Test Results of the Modified HIII-6C Test in the
Marathon, Boulevard, and Decathlon Child Restraint Systems
ii. Comparing the Results of the Britax Marathon Test of the
Modified HIII-6C (test H06337) to Those of a Test of an Original
HIII-6C Where Femur Failure Occurred (test H06120)
iii. Effect on FMVSS No. 213 Injury Metrics
iv. Effect on Dummy Kinematics
v. Dummy Response Biofidelity
vi. Hip Lock
III. Abdominal Insert
IV. Effective Date
V. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
I. Overview
This final rule makes two changes to the agency's specifications
for the Hybrid III six-year-old child dummy (HIII-6C) set forth in 49
CFR part 572, Subpart N, and for the Hybrid III six-year-old weighted
child test dummy (HIII-6CW) in 49 CFR part 572, Subpart S. The notice
of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) upon which this final rule is based was
published October 21, 2009, 74 FR 53987, Docket No. NHTSA-09-0166.
First, to improve the durability of the dummies' femurs, we are
changing the design of and material used for the femur assembly. The
primary modifications include the addition of a [frac14]-inch (6.35
millimeter (mm)) fillet between the femur clamp and the connecting
segment (these components are described in detail in section II.b of
the NPRM preamble) of the machined femur, removal of material from the
connecting segment, and a material change from aluminum bronze to 4340
steel. These changes are made by replacing the drawings of the femur in
[[Page 76637]]
the drawing package specified in 49 CFR part 572, Subpart N (``Six-
year-old child test dummy'') and in Subpart S (``Six-year-old weighted
child test dummy''), the parts lists, and the ``Procedures for
Assembly, Disassembly, and Inspection'' (``PADI'') documents
incorporated by reference into those regulations.
The second change corrects the drawings for the abdomen insert so
that the abdominal insert dimensions on the drawings reflect actual
parts in the field.
The October 21, 2009 NPRM provided a detailed discussion of the
femur failures that were occurring with the HIII-6C dummy, the proposed
solution to those failures, and how the agency proposed to amend the
specifications for the HIII-6C and the HIII-6CW dummies.
NHTSA received no comments on the October 21, 2009 NPRM. We are
adopting the changes proposed in the NPRM for the reasons discussed in
that document.
II. Femur Improvements
The present design of the HIII-6C femur is specified in 49 CFR part
572, Subpart N.1 2 The HIII-6C machined femur, which is one
of the femur assembly parts, is illustrated in Figure 1 below. This
one-piece part is machined from bar stock and serves to couple the main
femur shaft to a smaller shaft protruding from the femur ball (a
representation of a human femur head). The portion of the part that is
attached to the femur shaft is referred to as the ``femur clamp'' and
the portion that is attached to the ball shaft is referred to as the
``connecting segment.'' The femur ball shaft, retaining flange, and
femur ball connect the machined femur to the dummy's pelvis. Similar to
a human hip joint, the ball in the HIII-6C femur assembly allows for
rotation of the dummy hip joint. The flange is used to attach the femur
assembly to the pelvis. The entire femur assembly is found within the
lower torso, and the material specification for this assembly,
including the machined femur, shaft, flange and ball was originally
Aluminum Bronze C-624 AMC0-18. (The femur load cell, the response of
which is discussed in the ``dynamic evaluation'' section below, is
located in the distal portion of the upper leg (i.e., farther from the
pelvis) and not in the area of the machined femur.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Complete drawings for the current HIII-6C femur can be found
in Docket No. NHTSA-2002-12541.
\2\ The HIII-6CW is based on the HIII-6C, with weight added (10
pounds) to represent larger children. The femur assembly is the same
for both the HIII-6CW and the HIII-6C dummies. The discussion set
forth in this section applies to the HIII-6CW as well, unless
otherwise noted.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09DE10.031
Failures of the HIII-6C femur appear to have initiated at a sharp
corner between the femur clamp and connecting segment sections of the
machined femur. The approximate location of the femur failure is
depicted in Figure 1. The fracture was observed from this corner to the
bolt hole within the femur clamp, at an angle of approximately 45[deg].
The failure continued through the thin section of material directly
beneath the bolt hole, causing complete separation of the machined
femur. Additionally, in one failed component, small indents on the
inner diameter of the retaining flange were observed, indicating
potential contact between the flange and shaft. Pictures of a fractured
part can be found in the technical report docketed with the NPRM
(Docket NHTSA-09-0166-0007.1).
a. Femur Design Changes
The modification made today to improve the femur's durability
increases the strength and durability of the femur assembly by
fabricating the machined femur and shaft from 4340 steel, which has a
higher yield strength than the original material, Aluminum Bronze C-624
AMC0-18, while keeping the ball and retaining flange as the original
aluminum bronze material. A \1/4\-inch (6.35 mm) fillet is added
between the
[[Page 76638]]
femur clamp and the connecting segment to eliminate stress risers that
were present on the original femur, and a portion of the connecting
segment material near the femur clamp is removed. The weight of the
modified femur is only 0.002 lb (0.001 kilograms (kg)) heavier than the
original femur. Table 1 below compares the weights and material
properties of the original femur and the new femur.
Table 1--Weight and Material Properties for the Original and New HIII-6C Femur Design
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Femur design measured Material and yield strength
weight
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Original.......................... 0.532 lb (0.241 kg)....... Aluminum Bronze C-624 AMC0- 48,000 psi
18.
New............................... 0.534 lb (0.242 kg)....... 4340 Steel................ 114,000 psi
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To implement this change in femur design and material, the
following changes are made to the materials describing the HIII-6C in
49 CFR part 572. Drawings 127-3017-1&-2, ``6 YR H3-FEMUR MACHINED'' is
replaced with drawings 127-3017-1S&-2S, which show the new machined
femur.\3\ The femur assembly drawings (127-3016-1&-2) are also replaced
due to the new femur design, with new part numbers 127-3016-1S&-2S.
Higher assembly drawings including 127-3000, ``LOWER TORSO ASSEMBLY''
and the complete assembly drawings (127-0000) are amended to show the
modified part. These revisions are noted on drawing SA572-127DRL-2. The
PADI is also updated so that it shows the new machined femur in
figures, and reports the proper lower torso assembly and total weight
for the dummy. Finally, the part numbers for the machined femur and the
femur assembly are changed in the Parts/Drawings list, along with the
revision letters for higher assembly drawings, as appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The femur shaft, drawing 127-3021, with material
specification Aluminum Bronze 3/8 rnd C-624 AMC0-18, is replaced
with drawing 127-3021S with material specification 4340 Steel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copies of the HIII-6C drawing package, PADI, and Parts/Drawings
list that include the change in femur design can be obtained online at
https://www.regulations.gov, in the same docket as this final rule.
b. Analysis of the New Femur Design
NHTSA has determined that the changes to the femur prevent the
femur from failing and do not compromise the utility of the test dummy.
This determination is based on an analysis showing the stress is
reduced by the addition of the fillet, and on an analysis of dynamic
test results, as discussed below.
1. Stress Analysis of the Fillet Effect
The one-piece HIII-6C machined femur--which couples the main femur
shaft to the femur ball shaft--forms a ninety-degree angle where the
femur clamp intersects the connecting segment. Originally, the corner
radius at this intersection was very sharp. This sharp corner led to
high stresses when the femur was loaded. We have estimated that adding
a fillet to increase the corner radius will reduce stresses by
approximately 1.6 to two times those in the femur without the fillet.
It is noted that this is only an estimate, as the loading conditions
present in the femur during a FMVSS No. 213 type sled test were highly
simplified in order to provide a rough estimate of the fillet benefit.
Details about the stress reduction approximation can be found in the
technical report accompanying the NPRM (Docket NHTSA-09-0166-0007.1).
Because the fillet design results in substantially reduced stress in
the femur of the dummy, we believe that adding the fillet and using the
4340 steel material will avoid femur failure.
2. Dynamic Evaluation
NHTSA evaluated the new femur in April 2006 at the MGA testing
facility. To assess the effect of the component modification, we tested
a HIII-6C with the new femurs (which we refer to as a ``modified HIII-
6C'' or ``modified dummy'') in a Britax Marathon child restraint,
Britax Boulevard and Britax Decathlon to the FMVSS No. 213 test
conditions, and compared the results.\4\ To obtain a greater
understanding of the loading experienced by the femur assembly,
instrumentation was added to the dummy to allow measurement of triaxial
accelerations in the pelvis and forces and moments in the femurs.
Additionally, to determine the effect of the new femur, we compared
test results from a test in which the femur had failed to those of a
test with a modified dummy, under conditions that had previously caused
failure, i.e., the modified HIII-6C dummy was tested in the Britax
Marathon to the FMVSS No. 213 sled pulse.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The Boulevard and Decathlon models were each tested with a
modified HIII-6C and with a HIII-6CW with the modified femur design.
No femur failure occurred in any of the tests. For simplicity and
because the test results of the HIII-6CW are not comparable to those
of the HIII-6C, tests of the HIII-6CW dummy are not generally
discussed in this preamble. However, results for all tests of the
HIII-6CW are discussed in the technical report accompanying the NPRM
(Docket NHTSA-09-0166-0007.1), including test numbers, maximum head,
chest and pelvis accelerations and left and right femur maximum
moments and forces.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In all tests of the new femurs, there were no femur failures. In
addition, test data relating to left and right femur moments, FMVSS No.
213 injury measures, dummy kinematics, and other factors concerning the
performance of the dummy raised no concerns about the new femur design.
The testing indicated that use of the new femur in the HIII-6C and the
HIII-6CW will not affect FMVSS testing, except to make the dummies more
durable.
i. Comparing Test Results of the Modified HIII-6C Test in the Marathon,
Boulevard, and Decathlon Child Restraint Systems
NHTSA measured and compared maximum forces and moments measured in
the femur load cells (over both legs) of the modified HIII-6C dummy in
the Britax Marathon, Boulevard, and Decathlon. The Marathon and
Boulevard showed similar maximum forces, while the Decathlon had a
higher maximum femur force. All maximum forces occurred along the Z-
axis, and all maximum moments were about the Y-axis.
[[Page 76639]]
Table 2--Maximum forces and Moments Measured in the Femur Load Cells of
Modified HIII-6C Dummies in a FMVSS No. 213 Compliance Testing
Environment
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Britax Britax Britax
Femur measure Marathon * Decathlon * Boulevard
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Max Force (N).................... 1492.9 2264.7 1578.4
Max Moment (Nm).................. -78 -63.9 -70
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Marathon: Restraint changed from upright to reclined during test.
Decathlon: Top tether webbing separated at the attachment clip and the
restraint changed position from upright to reclined.
At the time of maximum moment there were visible differences in the
degree of knee extension (test video pictures are provided in the
technical report accompanying the NPRM, Docket NHTSA-09-0166-0007.1).
These visual differences in response are consistent with the
differences in force and moment magnitude seen in the tests.
Maximum left and right femur forces from the tests of the modified
HIII-6C dummy with the new femur are displayed in Figure 2, while
Figure 3 shows the maximum moments measured in the left and right legs
during each test. In general, force and moment measurements made in the
left and right femurs were similar, though not identical. This may give
some insight into why failures were observed in the left leg, right
leg, or both legs in any given test. We believe that the failures were
caused by stresses exceeding the material strength of the femur, so the
occurrence of one femur failure, rather than both, may be due to the
fact that the forces present during the test were unevenly distributed.
[[Page 76640]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09DE10.032
ii. Comparing the Results of the Britax Marathon Test of the Modified
HIII-6C (test H06337) to Those of a Test of an Original HIII-6C Where
Femur Failure Occurred (test H06120)
Both tests were performed using the same dummy (S/N 158).\5\ In
test H06120 (with the original femurs), the left femur failed and
detached completely. The right knee of this dummy was in a fully
extended position, which could have resulted from the change in
kinematics due to loss of one leg. In test H06337 (modified dummy),
there were no femur failures and both legs remained attached to the
dummy.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Both tests were performed using the same dummy (S/N 158).
However, because FMVSS No. 213 does not require measurement of
femoral loads, no femoral force data was available for test H06120
with the original femurs. Therefore, comparisons were made between
pre- and post-test positioning, head and chest measurements, and
dummy position throughout the test, as indicated by the test videos.
This is discussed in the technical report accompanying the NPRM.
\6\ We note that in test H06337 (modified dummy), the child
restraint had multiple cracks in its base following the test, and
during the test the restraint position shifted from upright to
reclined. However, these factors are not likely linked to the
performance of the new femur.>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
iii. Effect on FMVSS No. 213 Injury Metrics
In these two tests, we compared the maximum head and chest
accelerations.
[[Page 76641]]
As seen in Figure 4, these measures were similar for both tests,
suggesting that the new femur does not affect the dummy head or chest
response significantly. Specifically, peak chest resultant
acceleration, an FMVSS No. 213 injury criterion, increased only 2.42
percent from 41.4 g with the current Part 572 femur to 42.4 g with the
new femur. However, we note that the maximum head Z and resultant
accelerations occurred after the time of femur failure in test H06120.
Therefore, it is possible that the acceleration magnitude or response
in time was affected by the loss of one limb.
We also compared the 36 millisecond (ms) head injury criterion
(HIC) values. These values are displayed in Table 3 and Figure 5, along
with the previously-discussed peak chest accelerations (Figure 6). The
response measured in the modified HIII-6C resulted in a 5.65 percent
decrease in HIC over the response of the original HIII-6C. These
relatively low changes in response suggest that HIC and chest g's are
not significantly altered by the femur replacement.
Table 3: HIC 36 and peak chest acceleration values for matched
FMVSS No. 213 tests. (These results are presented in Figures 5 and 6,
below.)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09DE10.033
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09DE10.034
[[Page 76642]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09DE10.035
iv. Effect on Dummy Kinematics
We have determined that use of the new femur does not change the
dummy's kinematic response. We analyzed test video comparing the
kinematics of the dummy in tests H06337 (modified dummy) and H06120
(femur failure). (Photographs from the video are presented in the
technical report accompanying the NPRM, Docket NHTSA-09-0166-0007.1.)
Until the time of maximum femur force, the position of the dummy in
each test is fairly similar. At maximum force, the dummy's knees in
H06337 (modified dummy) are only slightly more extended and lower than
the knees in H06120 (femur failure). Although at the approximate time
of femur failure in test H06120 the positions of the two dummies are
different, they are only slightly so, and the fully extended left knee
of the dummy in test H06120 (femur failure) and the additional
excursion of the leg (as noted by the position of the knee marker) may
be indicative of the failing femur component. Similarly, after femur
failure at 100 ms, there are slight differences in dummy position which
could be attributable to the loss of one leg in the test H06120. All in
all, there is no indication that the new femur significantly alters
dummy response.
v. Dummy Response Biofidelity
Since the new femur has the same geometry as the original femurs
where it interfaces with the pelvis, the new femur does not behave any
differently than the original femur. As discussed in the previous
sections, little difference in head and chest measurements and dummy
kinematics was observed in the dummy with the new versus the current
Part 572 femur. There is no indication that the slight modification in
femur design and material affects dummy biofidelity.
vi. Hip Lock
The new femur was inspected for indications of susceptibility to
hip lock. Hip lock is a condition where flexion of the dummy's hip
joint is mechanically limited due to contact between the femur and the
retaining ring or other pelvis structure.\7\ There was no evidence of
excessive wear near the retaining ring/ball joint of the new femurs.
Some wear was noticed on the upper leg of dummy S/N 155 where the femur
clamp was fastened to the upper leg weldment. However, because this
wear is located at a fastening site, metal-to-metal contact is
inevitable and is not indicative of hip lock.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Hip lock in the HIII-50th percentile male femur led to
design modifications that prevented ``hard'' (i.e., metal-to-metal
contact) hip lock from occurring (61 FR 67953, Dec. 26, 1996). In
that adult dummy, hard hip lock was characterized by spikes in the
unfiltered pelvis and chest accelerometer readings, high and
sharply-pointed chest z acceleration traces, non-unimodal chest x
and resultant accelerations, and a high tension component in the
lumbar z force (Klinich et al, ``Evaluation of a Proposed Hybrid III
Hip Modification,'' Stapp Paper No. 952730, 1995).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Abdominal Insert
This final rule changes Drawing No. 127-8210 of the HIII-6C drawing
package, which depicts the abdominal insert for the dummy. It makes a
similar change to the HIII-6CW drawing package.\8\ This change responds
to a petition from FTSS and Denton. Both manufacturers sought to revise
the abdomen insert drawing to match the part mold dimensions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ The HIII-6CW is the HIII-6C with weight added (10 pounds) to
represent larger children. The abdominal insert drawing is the same
for both the HIII-6CW and the HIII-6C dummies. Thus, the discussion
set forth in this section applies to the HIII-6CW as well.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the NPRM, the agency granted the request but proposed to revise
the drawing of the abdominal insert based on dimensions of actual
abdominal inserts, rather than dimensions of the mold for the inserts.
Nearly all changes were in agreement with the petitioners' mold-based
dimensions.
Table 4 shows the changes this final rule makes to key abdomen
dimensions. ``Fig. Ref'' numbers in the table refer to Figure 7, which
shows the original dimensions.
Table 4--HIII-6C Key Abdomen Dimensions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adopted
Description Fig. ref. spec.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Overall height (in.)............... 1..................... 3.81 +/-.20
Ledge height (in.)................. 2lt................... 1.53 +/-.20
[[Page 76643]]
3rt................... 1.53 +/-.20
Depth excl.plug (in.).............. 4..................... 2.80 +/-.20
Depth incl. plug (in.)............. 5..................... 2.80 +/-.20
Taper angle of cone (degrees)...... 6lt................... 121/129
7rt................... 121/129
Notch Half Width (in.)............. 8..................... 1.50 +/-.20
Notch Depth (in.).................. 9..................... 1.40 +/-.20
Width Bottom of Cone (in.)......... 10.................... 5.40 +/-.40
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09DE10.036
IV. Effective Date
The changes to the femur design of the HIII-6C and HIII-6CW are
effective 180 days after publication of this final rule. The changes to
the abdomen insert drawing are effective on the same date. Although the
NPRM proposed that the corrections to the abdomen insert drawing be
effective 45 days after publication of a final rule, the agency has
decided to make all the changes to the drawing package effective on the
same date to simplify the incorporation by reference of the changed
drawings in the drawing package.
[[Page 76644]]
V. Rulemaking Analyses And Notices
Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
This rulemaking action is not considered a significant regulatory
action under Executive Order 12866 or the Department of
Transportation's (DOT's) regulatory policies and procedures (44 FR
11034, February 26, 1979).
This rule will only affect the HIII-6C and HIII-6CW test dummies by
adding a \1/4\-inch fillet between the femur clamp and the connecting
segment of the machined femur, removing material from the connecting
segment, and changing the material from Aluminum Bronze C-624 AMC0-18
to 4340 steel. We stated in the final rule \9\ that adopted the HIII-6C
into 49 CFR part 572 that the cost of an uninstrumented HIII-6C dummy
is approximately $30,000 and that instrumentation will add
approximately $25,000 to $40,000 to the cost, depending on the number
of data channels the user chooses to collect. We do not expect the
amendments of this final rule to significantly affect the cost of the
dummy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ 65 FR 2059; January 13, 2000; Docket NHTSA-99-6714.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Further, this final rule does not impose any requirements on
anyone. NHTSA will only use HIII-6C and HIII-6CW dummies for compliance
testing that meet all of the criteria specified in this rule, but the
agency does not require manufacturers to test with the Part 572 test
dummies. Businesses will only be indirectly affected by this final
rule, to the extent that they choose to manufacture or test with the
dummy. Because the economic impacts of this final rule are so minimal,
no further regulatory evaluation is necessary.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.,
as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
(SBREFA) of 1996), whenever an agency is required to publish a proposed
or final rule, it must prepare and make available for public comment a
regulatory flexibility analysis that describes the effect of the rule
on small entities (i.e., small businesses, small organizations, and
small governmental jurisdictions), unless the head of the agency
certifies the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. The Small Business
Administration's regulations at 13 CFR part 121 define a small
business, in part, as a business entity ``which operates primarily
within the United States.'' (13 CFR 121.105(a)).
We have considered the effects of this rulemaking under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act. I hereby certify that this final rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. Changing the femur design and correcting the abdominal insert
drawing will not impose any requirements on anyone. NHTSA does not
require anyone to manufacture or redesign the HIII-6C or HIII-6CW or to
test vehicles or child restraints with the devices.
National Environmental Policy Act
NHTSA has analyzed this final rule for the purposes of the National
Environmental Policy Act and has determined that it will not have any
significant impact on the quality of the human environment.
Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
NHTSA has examined today's final rule pursuant to Executive Order
13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) and concluded that no additional
consultation with States, local governments or their representatives is
mandated beyond the rulemaking process. The agency has concluded that
the final rule does not have federalism implications because the rule
does not have ``substantial direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government.'' This rule does not impose any requirements on anyone.
Businesses will be affected only if they choose to manufacture or test
with the HIII-6C or HIII-6CW dummies.
Further, no consultation is needed to discuss the preemptive effect
of today's final rule. NHTSA's safety standards can have preemptive
effect in two ways. This final rule would amend 49 CFR part 572 and is
not a safety standard.\10\ This Part 572 final rule does not impose any
requirements on anyone.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ With respect to the safety standards, the National Traffic
and Motor Vehicle Safety Act contains an express preemptive
provision: ``When a motor vehicle safety standard is in effect under
this chapter, a State or a political subdivison of a State may
prescribe or continue in effect a standard applicable to the same
aspect of performance of a motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment
only if the standard is identical to the standard prescribed under
this chapter.'' 49 U.S.C. 30103(b)(1). Second, the Supreme Court has
recognized the possibility of implied preemption: State requirements
imposed on motor vehicle manufacturers, including sanctions imposed
by State tort law, can stand as an obstacle to the accomplishment
and execution of a NHTSA safety standard. When such a conflict
exists, the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution makes the
conflicting State requirements unenforceable. See Geier v. American
Honda Motor Co., 529 U.S. 861 (2000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Civil Justice Reform
With respect to the review of the promulgation of a new regulation,
section 3(b) of Executive Order 12988, ``Civil Justice Reform'' (61 FR
4729, February 7, 1996) requires that Executive agencies make every
reasonable effort to ensure that the regulation: (1) Clearly specifies
the preemptive effect; (2) clearly specifies the effect on existing
Federal law or regulation; (3) provides a clear legal standard for
affected conduct, while promoting simplification and burden reduction;
(4) clearly specifies the retroactive effect, if any; (5) adequately
defines key terms; and (6) addresses other important issues affecting
clarity and general draftsmanship under any guidelines issued by the
Attorney General. This document is consistent with that requirement.
Pursuant to this Order, NHTSA notes as follows.
The issue of preemption is discussed above in connection with E.O.
13132. NHTSA notes further that there is no requirement that
individuals submit a petition for reconsideration or pursue other
administrative proceeding before they may file suit in court.
Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a person is not required
to respond to a collection of information by a Federal agency unless
the collection displays a valid control number from the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB). This final rule does not have any
requirements that are considered to be information collection
requirements as defined by the OMB in 5 CFR part 1320.
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272)
directs NHTSA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory
activities unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs NHTSA to
provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the agency decides not
to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards. There
are no voluntary
[[Page 76645]]
consensus standards relevant to this final rule.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA),
Pub. L. 104-4, Federal requires agencies to prepare a written
assessment of the costs, benefits, and other effects of proposed or
final rules that include a Federal mandate likely to result in the
expenditure by State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or by the private sector, of more than $100 million annually (adjusted
for inflation with base year of 1995). Before promulgating a NHTSA rule
for which a written statement is needed, section 205 of the UMRA
generally requires the agency to identify and consider a reasonable
number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the least costly, most
cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative that achieves the
objectives of the rule.
This final rule would not impose any unfunded mandates under the
UMRA. This final rule does not meet the definition of a Federal mandate
because it does not impose requirements on anyone. It amends 49 CFR
part 572 by changing the femur design of two test dummies that the
agency uses, and corrects a drawing of an abdominal insert for the
dummies. This final rule affects only those businesses that choose to
manufacture or test with the dummies. It does not result in costs of
$100 million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector.
Plain Language
Executive Order 12866 requires each agency to write all rules in
plain language. Application of the principles of plain language
includes consideration of the following questions:
--Has the agency organized the material to suit the public's needs?
--Are the requirements in the rule clearly stated?
--Does the rule contain technical language or jargon that is not clear?
--Would a different format (grouping and order of sections, use of
headings, paragraphing) make the rule easier to understand?
--Would more (but shorter) sections be better?
--Could the agency improve clarity by adding tables, lists, or
diagrams?
--What else could the agency do to make this rulemaking easier to
understand?
If you have any responses to these questions, please send them to
NHTSA.
Regulation Identifier Number
The Department of Transportation assigns a regulation identifier
number (RIN) to each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of
Federal Regulations. The Regulatory Information Service Center
publishes the Unified Agenda in April and October of each year. You may
use the RIN contained in the heading at the beginning of this document
to find this action in the Unified Agenda.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 572
Motor vehicle safety, Incorporation by reference.
0
In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA amends 49 CFR Part 572 as
follows:
PART 572--ANTHROPOMORPHIC TEST DUMMIES
0
1. The authority citation for Part 572 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117 and 30166;
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.
Subpart N--Six-Year-Old Child Test Dummy, Beta Version
0
2. Section 572.120 is amended by revising the introductory paragraph of
(a)(1), paragraph (a)(1) through (a)(4), and paragraphs (b) and (c)(1),
to read as follows:
Sec. 572.120 Incorporation by reference.
(a) * * *
(1) A drawings and inspection package entitled, ``Parts List and
Drawings, Part 572 Subpart N, Hybrid III Six-Year Old Child Crash Test
Dummy (H-III6C, Beta Version), June 2009,'' consisting of:
(i) Drawing No. 127-1000, 6-year H3 Head Complete, incorporated by
reference in Sec. 572.122,
(ii) Drawing No. 127-1015, Neck Assembly, incorporated by reference
in Sec. 572.123,
(iii) Drawing No. 127-2000, Upper Torso Assembly, incorporated by
reference in Sec. 572.124,
(iv) Drawing No. 127-3000, Lower Torso Assembly, incorporated by
reference in Sec. 572.125,
(v) Drawing No. 127-4000-1 and 4000-2, Leg Assembly, incorporated
by reference in Sec. 572.126,
(vi) Drawing No. 127-5000-1 and 5000-2, Arm Assembly, incorporated
by reference in Sec. Sec. 572.121, 572.124, and 572.125 as part of a
complete dummy assembly, and,
(vii) Parts List and Drawings, Hybrid III Six-year-old Child Test
Dummy (H-III6C, Beta Version), dated June 1, 2009, incorporated by
reference in Sec. 572.121;
(2) A procedures manual entitled ``Procedures for Assembly,
Disassembly, and Inspection (PADI) of the Hybrid III 6-year-old Child
Crash Test Dummy (H-III6C), Beta Version, June 1, 2009,'' incorporated
by reference in Sec. 572.121;
(3) SAE Recommended Practice J211-1995, ``Instrumentation for
Impact Tests--Parts 1 and 2, dated March, 1995,'' incorporated by
reference in Sec. 572.127;
(4) SAE J1733 Information Report, titled ``Sign Convention for
Vehicle Crash Testing,'' dated December 1994, incorporated by reference
in Sec. 572.127.
(b) The Director of the Federal Register approved the materials
incorporated by reference in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR
part 51. Copies of the materials may be inspected at the Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, telephone (202) 366-9826, and at the
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), and in electronic
format through Regulations.gov. For information on the availability and
inspection of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to:
https://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html. For information on the availability
and inspection of this material at Regulations.gov, call 1-877-378-
5457, or go to: https://www.regulations.gov.
(c) * * *
(1) The drawings and specifications package, the parts list, and
the PADI document referred to in paragraphs (a)(1), and (a)(2) of this
section, are available in electronic format through www.Regulations.gov
and in paper format from Leet-Melbrook, Division of New RT, 18810
Woodfield Road, Gaithersburg, MD 20879, (301) 670-0090.
* * * * *
0
3. Section 572.121 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(2) introductory
text (the table is not amended) to read as follows:
Sec. 572.121 General description.
(a) * * *
(2) Procedures for Assembly, Disassembly, and Inspection (PADI) of
the Hybrid III 6-year-old child crash test dummy (H-III6C), Beta
version, dated June 1, 2009, incorporated by reference in Sec.
572.120.
* * * * *
[[Page 76646]]
Subpart S--Hybrid III Six-Year-Old Weighted Child Test Dummy
0
4. Section 572.160 is amended by revising the introductory paragraph of
(a)(1), paragraph (a)(1)(iii), paragraph (a)(1)(v), (a)(2), and (a)(3),
to read as follows:
Sec. 572.160 Incorporation by reference.
(a) * * *
(1) A drawings and specifications package entitled, ``Parts List
and Drawings, Part 572 Subpart S, Hybrid III 6-Year-Old Child Weighted
Crash Test Dummy (H-III6CW),'' dated June 2009, incorporated by
reference in Sec. 572.161 and consisting of:
* * * * *
(iii) Drawing No. 167-2020, Revision A, Spine Box Weight,
incorporated by reference in Sec. Sec. 572.161, 572.164, and 572.165
as part of a complete dummy assembly;
* * * * *
(v) Drawing No. 167-3010, Revision A, Lumbar Weight Base,
incorporated by reference in Sec. Sec. 572.161 and 572.165 as part of
a complete dummy assembly; and
* * * * *
(2) A procedures manual entitled, ``Procedures for Assembly,
Disassembly, And Inspection (PADI) of the Part 572 Subpart S, Hybrid
III 6-Year-Old Child Weighted Crash Test Dummy (H-III6CW), revised June
2009,'' incorporated by reference in Sec. 572.161;
(3) The Director of the Federal Register approved the materials
incorporated by reference in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR
part 51. Copies of the materials may be inspected at the Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, telephone (202) 366-9826, and at the
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), and in electronic
format through Regulations.gov. For information on the availability and
inspection of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to:
https://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html. For information on the availability
and inspection of this material at Regulations.gov, call 1-877-378-
5457, or go to: https://www.regulations.gov.
* * * * *
0
5. Section 572.161 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(1) and
paragraph (a)(3) introductory text (the table is not amended), to read
as follows:
Sec. 572.161 General description.
(a) * * *
(1) ``Parts List and Drawings, Part 572 Subpart S, Hybrid III 6-
Year-Old Child Weighted Crash Test Dummy (H-III6CW),'' dated June 2009
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 572.160);
* * * * *
(3) ``Procedures for Assembly, Disassembly, And Inspection (PADI)
of the Part 572 Subpart S, Hybrid III 6-Year-Old Child Weighted Crash
Test Dummy (H-III6CW), revised June 2009'' (incorporated by reference,
see Sec. 572.160).
* * * * *
Issued: November 26, 2010.
David L. Strickland,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2010-30357 Filed 12-8-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
