Department of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Friday, January 12, 2001 Part XIII Department of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 49 CFR Part 575 Consumer Information Regulations; Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Rollover Resistance; Final Rule VerDate 11<MAY>2000 22:28 Jan 11, 2001 Jkt 194001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\12JAR10.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 12JAR10 3388 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 9 / Friday, January 12, 2001 / Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION reached by phone at (202) 366±5559 or note vehicles that are equipped with by facsimile at (202) 493±2739. For ``electronic stability control'' National Highway Traffic Safety public comments and other information technology, which may reduce the risk Administration related to previous notices on this of a vehicle getting into an incipient subject, please refer to: rollover situation. 49 CFR Part 575 DOT Docket No. NHTSA±2000±6859, The agency requested comments on Docket Management, Room PL±401, 400 its tentative decision to implement such [Docket No. NHTSA±2000±8298] Seventh Street, SW, Washington, D.C. a program on June 1, 2000.1 The closing Consumer Information Regulations; 20590 (hours 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. date for comments was August 30, 2000. Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Monday through Friday) or on the Twenty-five commenters responded. Standards; Rollover Resistance internet at www.dms.gov/search, and This notice addresses the major issues Docket No. 91±68; Notice 3, NHTSA presented by the commenters, our AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Docket, Room 5111, 400 Seventh Street, response to those comments, and the Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT. SW, Washington, DC 20590. NHTSA procedures and protocol we will use to ACTION: Response to Comments, Notice Docket hours are from 9:30 am to 4:00 implement a rollover consumer of Final Decision. pm Monday through Friday. information program based on SSF. For SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: complete background and rationale for SUMMARY: The agency has concluded I. Introduction the program, please see the June 1, 2000 that consumer information on the II. Background notice. III. Discussion of Commenters' Issues rollover risk of passenger cars and light II. Background multipurpose passenger vehicles and A. SSF as a Measure of Rollover Risk B. NHTSA's Statistical Analysis Linking trucks will reduce the number of Rollover crashes are complex events SSF to Rollover Rates that reflect the interaction of driver, rollover crashes and the number of C. Comments on Practical Problems with injuries and fatalities from rollover SSF Ratings road, vehicle, and environmental crashes. This information will enable D. Consumer's Ability to Understand SSF factors. We can describe the relationship prospective purchasers to make choices as a Measure of Rollover Risk in the between these factors and the risk of about new vehicles based on differences Event of a Single-vehicle Crash rollover using information from the in rollover risk and serve as a market E. The Question of Electronic Stability agency's crash data programs. We limit Control our discussion here to light vehicles, incentive to manufacturers in striving to F. Alternative Programs Suggested by design their vehicles with greater which consist of (1) passenger cars and Commenters (2) multipurpose passenger vehicles and rollover resistance. The consumer G. Commenters' Desire for a Minimum information program will also inform Standard Based on a Dynamic Test trucks under 4,536 kilograms (10,000 drivers, especially those who choose IV. Rollover Information Dissemination using pounds) gross vehicle weight rating 2 vehicles with poorer rollover resistance, SSF in NCAP (collectively, ``light trucks''). that their risk of harm can be greatly V. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices According to the 1999 Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), reduced with seat belt use to avoid Appendix I Statistical Analysis in Response to Comments 10,142 people were killed as occupants ejection. Appendix II Proposed List of Test Vehicles in light vehicle rollovers, including The agency has decided to use the for MY2001 8,345 killed in single-vehicle rollovers. Static Stability Factor to indicate Eighty percent of the people who died rollover risk in single-vehicle crashes I. Introduction in single-vehicle rollovers were not and to incorporate the new rating into This notice outlines the plan the using a seat belt, and 64 percent were NHTSA's New Car Assessment Program National Highway Traffic Safety ejected from the vehicle (including 53 (NCAP). As part of these ratings, the Administration (NHTSA) will use to percent who were completely ejected). agency also has decided to note vehicles incorporate a new rollover rating of new FARS shows that 55 percent of light that are equipped with ``electronic cars and light trucks into its existing vehicle occupant fatalities in single- stability control'' technology, which New Car Assessment Program (NCAP). vehicle crashes involved rollover. The may reduce the risk of a vehicle getting NCAP currently gives consumers proportion differs greatly by vehicle into an incipient rollover situation. This crashworthiness ratings for new light type: 46 percent of passenger car notice summarizes the comments vehicles in frontal and side crashes. The occupant fatalities in single-vehicle received in response to the agency's ratings are based on vehicle crashes involved rollover, compared to June 1, 2000 Request for Comment performance with respect to occupant 63 percent for pickup trucks, 60 percent regarding the addition of rollover ratings injury criteria gathered in crash tests for vans, and 78 percent for sport utility based on SSF to NCAP, our response to and are presented using one to five vehicles (SUVs). those comments, and the procedures stars, one star for the highest risk and Using data from the 1995±1999 and protocol we will use to implement five for the lowest. We intend to use the National Automotive Sampling System a new rollover consumer information same star rating system to present the (NASS) we estimate that 253,000 light program. risk of rollover in the event of a single- vehicles were towed from a rollover FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For vehicle crash. One star would represent crash each year (on average), and that the most up to date vehicle star ratings a Static Stability Factor (SSF) 27,000 occupants of these vehicles were call the Auto Safety Hotline at 888±327± corresponding to a 40 percent or greater seriously injured (defined as an 4236 or refer to NHTSA's website at risk of a single-vehicle crash resulting in Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) rating of www.nhtsa.dot.gov. For technical rollover, while five stars would at least 3).3 This includes 205,000 questions you may contact Gayle represent an SSF corresponding to a risk Dalrymple, NPS±23, Office of Safety of less than 10 percent. Static Stability 1 65 FR 34999 (June 1, 2000). Performance Standards, National Factor is one-half the track width of a 2 Light trucks include vans, minivans, sport utility vehicles (SUVs), and pickup trucks under Highway Traffic Safety Administration, vehicle divided by the height of its 4,536 kilograms (10, 000 pounds) gross vehicle 400 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, center of gravity. As part of the rating weight rating. DC 20590. Ms. Dalrymple can be based on SSF, the agency also has to 3 A broken hip is an example of an AIS 3 injury. VerDate 11<MAY>2000 22:28 Jan 11, 2001 Jkt 194001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\12JAR10.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 12JAR10 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 9 / Friday, January 12, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 3389 single-vehicle tow-away rollovers with rollover (trial attorney, consumer basic parameters of [sic] influencing 19,000 serious injuries. Sixty-five groups). The commenters raised issues resistance.'' percent of those people who suffered a in four areas: In 1973, all of the manufacturers serious injury in single-vehicle tow- The suitability of SSF as a measure of opposed NHTSA's plans for a standard away rollovers were not using a seat rollover risk, regarding rollover prevention in extreme belt, and 50 percent were ejected • Whether NHTSA's statistical accident avoidance maneuvers because (including 41 percent who were analysis linking SSF to single-vehicle of their expectation of negligible completely ejected). Estimates from rollover rates was correct, benefits, concern about banning vehicle NASS are that 81 percent of tow-away • Whether consumers are capable of types, degradation of vehicle rollovers occurred in single-vehicle understanding the concept of single- capabilities including braking traction crashes, and 87 percent (178,000) of the vehicle crash as exposure to rollover, and handling performance, and single-vehicle rollover crashes occurred and unresolved problems with maneuver • after the vehicle left the roadway. The need for a minimum standard, testing. General Motors presented a very Based on the 1995±1999 General or consumer information, for rollover detailed set of comments that remain Estimates System (GES) data we based on a dynamic test. relevant today. For example, its estimate that 241,000 light vehicles Alternative consumer information observations on the effect of restraint rolled over each year (on average) in programs for rollover prevention were use on rollover fatality rates and on the police-reported crashes, and that 57,000 also offered by some commenters. Those breakdown of the rollover problem occupants in rollover crashes received four issues and the alternative programs between multi-vehicle and single- injuries rated as K or A on the police are discussed in this section. vehicle crashes and on-road and off- injury scale. (The police KABCO scale A. SSF as a Measure of Rollover Risk road incidences are largely supported by calls these injuries ``incapacitating,'' but present data. Likewise, its discussion of their actual severity depends on local Many respondents to the RFC believe the problems of maintaining consistent practice.