The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in the September 19, 2024 Federal Register (F.R. Vol. 89, No. 182; NHTSA-2024-0057). Data indicates pedestrian fatalities increasing substantially in recent years. This NPRM would ensure that passenger vehicles are designed to reduce the risk of serious to fatal child and adult head injury in pedestrian crashes. The new Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 228, Pedestrian Head Protection, would apply to passenger cars, light trucks (including pickups), Multipurpose Passenger Vehicles (MPVs) (MPVs include Sport Utility Vehicles (SUVs), crossover vehicles and vans) and buses with a GVWR of 4,536kg (10,000lb) or less. The standard would require vehicles to meet a Head Injury Criterion (HIC) when subjected to testing simulating a head-to-hood impact. The vehicles would have to reduce the risk of serious to fatal head injury to child and adult pedestrians in impacts at vehicle speeds up to 40km/h (25mph), which encompass about 70% of pedestrian injuries from vehicle impacts. It is expected the standard would be beneficial even at higher speeds.
This rulemaking initiates the process of adopting a Global Technical Regulation (GTR) on pedestrian protection as an FMVSS, with focused enhancements to the GTR to address safety problems and a regulatory framework unique to the US. This NPRM also furthers the goals and policies of the Department of Transportation (DOT) January 2022 National Roadway Safety Strategy, which describes the five key objectives of the Department's Safe System Approach: safer people, safer roads, safer vehicles, safer speeds, and post-crash care.
This NPRM is part of a multi-step approach to enhance vehicle performance against pedestrian injury:
- Initiates the process of adopting GTR 9), “Pedestrian safety” into the FMVSSs. NHTSA has collaborated with governments internationally to develop GTR 9, and numerous countries have adopted the GTR into their regulations. FMVSS 228 would ensure that all vehicles with a GVWR of 4,536kg (10,000lb.) or less manufactured in or imported into the United States mitigate the risk of serious head injury to pedestrians.
- Provides a regulatory counterpart to NHTSA's planned crashworthiness pedestrian protection testing program in the New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) in the near term. On May 26, 2023, NHTSA published an NCAP Request for Comment (NCAP RFC) proposing to adopt a crashworthiness pedestrian protection program into NHTSA's NCAP. NCAP would build on proposed FMVSS 228 and incorporate enhanced crashworthiness tests into NCAP that go beyond the specifications of proposed FMVSS 228. NCAP remains a consumer information program that provides consumers with vehicle safety information for their purchasing decisions. Providing this information encourages manufacturers to voluntarily make changes to vehicles that reflect positively in the NCAP safety information and thereby improves safety through the marketplace. The NHTSA has proposed a roadmap for the agency's plans to upgrade NCAP in phases over the next several years. The proposed NCAP pedestrian protection program would incorporate crashworthiness tests similar to those used by the European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP). Euro NCAP's tests are closely aligned with those in GTR 9.
- Proposes FMVSS 228 is intended to work hand-in-hand with the growth and expansion of Automatic Emergency Braking (AEB) technologies. An AEB system uses various sensor technologies and sub-systems that work together to detect when the vehicle is in a crash imminent situation, to automatically apply the vehicle brakes if the driver has not done so, or to apply more braking force to supplement the driver's braking. Pedestrian AEB (PAEB) systems are designed to stop the vehicle automatically before striking a pedestrian or reduce the speed at which an impact occurs if the vehicle's initial speed is too high to avoid impact. On May 9, 2024, NHTSA published a Final Rule requiring AEB and PAEB systems on light vehicles which adopt FMVSS 127. FMVSS 127 builds on a voluntary commitment, announced by NHTSA in March 2016, by 20 vehicle manufacturers to make lead-vehicle AEB a standard feature on light vehicles. That commitment did not include PAEB. When new vehicles are equipped with PAEB, the NHTSA anticipate that fewer pedestrians will be struck.
The NHTSA requests comments on the pros and cons of various aspects of the NPRM's regulatory text, particularly with respect to the areas of the vehicle that would be subject to headform testing strictly using the GTR procedure. Throughout the preamble, the NHTSA focuses readers on ways the NHTSA believes the proposed regulatory text could be enhanced in a Final Rule to achieve more safety benefits in the US. For example, the NHTSA discussed an approach of potentially extending the test area to the grille area on all large vehicles where the head of a child or shorter adult pedestrian may be struck. While the NPRM's regulatory text reflects the GTR's approaches and provides a framework for an FMVSS based on those provisions, the NHTSA may determine to make changes in any Final Rule in light of pedestrian injury and fatality rates climbing, and armed with lessons learned from the NHTSA's NCAP and other NCAP programs engaged in headform testing of vehicle front ends.
The need for pedestrian safety improvement, is supported by these statistics: in 2020, 38,824 people died on U.S. roads. Of this number, 25,536 were passenger vehicle occupant fatalities, a decrease from 32,225 in 2000. This reduction is notable, particularly in light of the fact that the total number of Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) in the U.S. has increased over time. However, during that same timeframe, pedestrian fatalities increased by 33%, from 4,739 in 2000 to 6,516 in 2020.
In drafting FMVSS 228, NHTSA's goal has been to produce a proposal that is true to the agency's understanding of GTR 9 and to the technical best practices provided by the GTR. The NHTSA believes that this NPRM achieves this objective, but at times have found challenges in relating the original GTR 9 language to the specificity necessary for the self-certification framework of the Safety Act. The Safety Act requires the FMVSS to be practicable, meet the need for motor vehicle safety, and be stated in objective terms. Additionally, the Safety Act requires that the NHTSA consider specific factors in prescribing an FMVSS. Given these requirements and considerations, in some instances the NHTSA have found the need to define terms and describe test procedures in a more precise way than GTR 9, but in a way that would add to the objectivity and clarity of the safety standard.
The NHTSA has determined that the location of the tested area is not dependent on where the engine is located, but rather is keyed to the front of the vehicle. They believe GTR 9 intended to apply no matter engine location. A similar assumption cannot be made about whether GTR 9 is intended to cover bidirectional vehicles. Certainly, there is no explicit mention of these vehicles. Nonetheless, it is the NHTSA's intent to apply FMVSS 228 to bidirectional vehicles. NHTSA believes that such vehicles may become more common, particularly with the advent of more automated vehicle platforms.
Pedestrian test dummies have been developed for crashworthiness research. In general, the repeatability of tests using a pedestrian dummy is relatively poor because small variations in initial positioning influence the head-to-hood contact as the dummy passes through its sequence of movements after being struck by the vehicle. Moreover, head impact locations are highly dependent on stature and gait, so use of a single pedestrian dummy for crashworthiness purposes would make it very difficult to assess hood areas that are likely to be struck by persons not represented by the dummy.
The NHTSA included many specific requests for comment in the NPRM including the Proposed Impact Angle (NHTSA belief is that the headform impact test would be the most stringent when the impact is normal to the hood surface). If the impact is normal (90°) and there is no glance-off, all of the headform's energy would have to be absorbed by the hood to stop its downward movement; however, a 90° angle of incidence to the surface may not be consistent with real world impacts at speeds up to 40km/h (25mph) and would require the impactor launch angle to vary by test location. The NHTSA requests comment on whether the standard should increase the impact angles to increase stringency notwithstanding a possible reduction in the representativeness of real-world crashes. The NHTSA believes a more consistent and reasonable approach could be one that determines the test area using data tied to where head impacts are likely to occur, rather than to an approach that determines test area by the length of a straight edge. Thus, NHTSA requests comments on an approach that establishes the Wrap Around Distance (WAD)1000 line as the front border of the test area for all vehicle testing. This determines the test area based on where head impacts would occur in the real world, rather than where a straight edge makes contact. Some of other areas the NHTSA asks for comments include a hood area definition for large vs small vehicles and large vs small pedestrians, unlimited HIC, transition zone, rear border and inclusion of the windshield.
NHTSA has examined the potential effect of this NPRM on other FMVSSs and programs. The agency has determined that FMVSS 228 would not affect the ability of a vehicle to meet all other FMVSSs applying to the vehicle. Comments are requested on this conclusion. Vehicles in the US already have hoods that meet GTR 9, which indicates the compatibility of the GTR (and proposed FMVSS) with applicable FMVSSs. Further, GTR 9 has been implemented by Contracting Parties worldwide that have standards that are similar to many of those discussed, which also show how pedestrian protective hoods meeting FMVSS 228 could be integrated into vehicle designs.
Comments must be received no later than November 18, 2024. The proposed compliance date is the first September 1, two years following the publication of a Final Rule in the Federal Register. Optional early compliance will be permitted. Final-stage manufacturers and alterers will be provided an additional year for compliance.