|
|---|
|
Damon Motors Inc.; Receipt of Petition for Temporary Exemption From a Rear Wheel Brake Requirement of FMVSS No. 123 Publication: Federal Register Agency: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Byline: Sophie Shulman Date: 9 September 2024 Subject: American Government  , Motorcycles, Safety
Topic: Damon |
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 174 (Monday, September 9, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73186-73188]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-20195]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2024-0053]
Damon Motors Inc.; Receipt of Petition for Temporary Exemption
From a Rear Wheel Brake Requirement of FMVSS No. 123
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of receipt of a petition for a temporary exemption;
request for comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Damon Motors Inc. (Damon) has petitioned the agency for a
temporary exemption from a rear wheel brake control requirement of
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 123, Motorcycle
controls and displays. The petitioner seeks to install the rear brake
control on the left handlebar instead of the right foot control
required by FMVSS No. 123. NHTSA is publishing this document in
accordance with statutory and administrative provisions and requests
comment on the merits of Damon's exemption petition. NHTSA has made no
judgment at this time on the merits of the petition.
DATES: You should submit your comments not later than October 9, 2024.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Natasha Reed, Office of the Chief
Counsel, NCC-200, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590. Telephone: (202) 366-2992;
Fax: (202) 366-3820.
ADDRESSES: We invite you to submit comments on the application
described above. You may submit comments identified by docket number in
the heading of this notice by any of the following methods:
Fax: 1 (202) 493-2251.
Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington,
DC 20590.
Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and
docket number. Note that all comments received will be posted without
change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information provided. Please see the Privacy Act discussion below. We
will consider all comments received before the close of business on the
comment closing date indicated above. To the extent possible, we will
also consider comments filed after the closing date.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or to
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. Telephone: (202) 366-9826.
Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT
posts these comments, without edit, to www.regulations.gov, as
described in the system of records notice, DOT/ALL-14 FDMS, accessible
through www.dot.gov/privacy. To facilitate comment tracking and
response, we encourage commenters to provide their name, or the name of
their organization; however, submission of names is completely
optional. Whether or not commenters identify themselves, all timely
comments will be fully considered. If you wish to provide comments
containing proprietary or confidential information, please contact the
agency for alternate submission instructions.
Confidential Business Information: If you wish to submit any
information under a claim of confidentiality, submit these materials to
NHTSA's Office of the Chief Counsel in accordance with 49 CFR part 512.
All requests for confidential treatment must be submitted directly to
the Office of the Chief Counsel. NHTSA is currently treating electronic
submission as an acceptable method for submitting confidential business
information to the agency under part 512. If you claim that any of the
information or documents provided in your response constitutes
confidential business information within the meaning of 5 U.S.C.
552(b)(4), or are protected from disclosure pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1905,
you may submit your request via email to Dan Rabinovitz in the Office
of the Chief Counsel at Daniel.Rabinovitz@dot.gov. Do not send a
hardcopy of a request for confidential treatment to NHTSA's
headquarters.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. The Motorcycle Rear Brake Control Requirement in FMVSS No. 123 and
Its Purpose
FMVSS No. 123, Motorcycle Controls and Displays, specifies
requirements for the location, operation, identification, and
illumination of motorcycle controls and displays. The purpose of FMVSS
No. 123 is to minimize crashes caused by operator error in responding
to the motoring environment by standardizing certain motorcycle
controls and displays. Among other requirements, FMVSS No. 123 S5.2.1
(table 1) requires the control for a motorcycle's rear brakes to be
located on the right side of the motorcycle and to be operable by the
rider's right foot.
In 2005, NHTSA issued a final rule amending FMVSS No. 123 to
require scooter-type motorcycles with automatic transmissions (i.e.,
scooters without a clutch lever) to have a left-hand rear brake
control.\1\ NHTSA chose not to allow the option of placing the rear
brake control on either the left handlebar or right foot pedal,
explaining it had concerns that permitting manufacturers to choose
between two different arrangements could result in a loss of
standardization, as similar or even identical clutchless motorcycles
could have different rear brake controls. Further, NHTSA stated that
while some commenters asserted such an outcome would not have any
safety consequences, without probative data, the agency believed the
goal of standardization was better served via FMVSS No. 123
specifically requiring one brake control location. Thus, the final rule
made the left-hand rear brake control a requirement, not an option, on
scooter-type motorcycles with automatic transmissions (i.e., without a
clutch lever). The final rule continued to require non-scooter
motorcycles with combined brake systems to have their single-point
control located at the right foot, the required location for the rear
brake control. For supplemental rear brake controls, the final rule
continued
[[Page 73187]]
to require all non-scooter motorcycles to have a right foot pedal
control for rear brakes, with supplemental rear brake control located
on the left handlebar if no clutch lever is present.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 70 FR 51286.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The subject of Damon's petition is this motorcycle rear brake
control. Per the requirements of table 1 of FMVSS No. 123, as a
motorcycle, rather than a motor-driven cycle or scooter, Damon's
HyperSport must have rear wheel brakes located on the vehicle's right
foot control. However, Damon explains in its petition that the rear
brake control and advanced safety feature design aspects of its
HyperSport motorcycle (including all variants) preclude the vehicle
from meeting the requirement for a foot-operated control. Damon
indicates that the placement of the rear brake control solely on the
left handlebar will provide at least an equivalent level of safety as
that required by FMVSS No. 123, pointing to the findings of a motor
scooter study and European regulations allowing the placement of the
rear brake control on the left handlebar for motor scooters. Damon
further states that the absence of a rear brake control at the right
foot location does not significantly reduce the motorcycle's level of
safety, and that added safety features, including an advanced warning
and anti-lock braking system (ABS), actually improve the overall safety
of the motorcycle. Damon contends that granting its petition will
benefit the public interest by allowing it to introduce for
demonstration, development, and field evaluation a new zero emission
vehicle with advanced safety features aimed at improving the overall
level of safety within the motorcycling industry.
II. Statutory Authority for Temporary Exemptions
The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (Safety Act),
codified at 49 U.S.C. chapter 301, provides the Secretary of
Transportation authority to exempt, on a temporary basis and under
specified circumstances, motor vehicles from a motor vehicle safety
standard or bumper standard. This authority is set forth at 49 U.S.C.
30113. The Secretary has delegated the authority for implementing this
section to NHTSA.
The Act authorizes the Secretary to grant a temporary exemption to
a vehicle manufacturer under certain conditions. The first relevant
condition for this petition request requires a finding that the
exemption would make easier the development or field evaluation of a
new motor vehicle safety feature providing a safety level at least
equal to the safety level of the standard. The second relevant
condition for this petition request requires a finding that the
exemption would make the development or field evaluation of a low-
emission motor vehicle easier and would not unreasonably lower the
safety level of the vehicle.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 49 U.S.C. 30113(b)(3)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NHTSA established 49 CFR part 555, Temporary Exemption from Motor
Vehicle Safety and Bumper Standards, to implement the statutory
provisions concerning temporary exemptions. The requirements in 49 CFR
555.5 state that the petitioner must set forth the basis of the
petition by providing the information required under 49 CFR 555.6, and
the reasons why the exemption would be in the public interest and
consistent with the objectives of the Safety Act.
A petition on the basis that the exemption would make easier the
development or field evaluation of a new motor vehicle safety or impact
protection features must include the information specified in 49 CFR
555.6(b). The main requirements of that section include: (1) a
description of the safety or impact protection features along with
research, development, and testing documentation establishing the
innovative nature of such features; (2) an analysis establishing the
level of safety or impact protection of the feature is equivalent to or
exceeds the level of safety or impact protection established in the
standard from which exemption is sought; (3) substantiation that a
temporary exemption would facilitate the development or field
evaluation of the vehicle; and (4) a statement of whether the
manufacturer intends to conform to the standard at the end of the
exemption period, apply for a further exemption, or petition for
rulemaking to amend the standard to incorporate the safety or impact
protection features.
A petition on the basis that the exemption would make easier the
development or field evaluation of a low-emission motor vehicle must
include the information specified in 49 CFR 555.6(c). The main
requirements of that section include: (1) substantiation that the
vehicle is a low-emission vehicle; (2) documentation establishing that
a temporary exemption would not unreasonably degrade the safety of a
vehicle; (3) substantiation that a temporary exemption would facilitate
the development or field evaluation of the vehicle; and (4) a statement
of whether the petitioner intends to conform to the standard at the end
of the exemption period.
III. Overview of Petition
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 30113 and the procedures in 49 CFR
part 555, Damon submitted a petition asking the agency for a temporary
exemption from the motorcycle rear brake control requirement in FMVSS
No. 123 S5.2.1 (table 1). Damon states the requested two-year exemption
will allow it to introduce for demonstration, development, and field
evaluation the ``Hypersport,'' a multi variant zero-emission motorcycle
equipped with advanced safety features aimed at improving the overall
level of safety within the motorcycle industry. Damon notes all
HyperSport variants are designed to utilize the left handlebar position
to control the rear brake, which prevent it from meeting the motorcycle
rear brake location requirement in S5.2.1 (table 1) of FMVSS No. 123,
which, as described above, requires motorcycle rear wheel brake
controls to be located at the rider's right foot.
Damon requests the exemption for 2 years, stating it will not
produce more than 2,500 exempted motorcycles within any 12-month period
during the exemption. Damon explains it intends to use data gathered
through the grant of this petition to submit a petition for rulemaking
to reduce the complexity of the regulation at issue and allow
manufacturers the ability to locate rear wheel brake controls on either
the right foot or left handlebar.
Damon seeks exemption under two alternative bases. The first basis
is that an exemption would make the development or field evaluation of
a new motor vehicle safety feature easier while providing a safety
level at least equal to the safety level of the standard.\3\ In support
of this basis Damon states its design will incorporate several advanced
safety features normally only found in the automotive industry to
increase rider situational awareness, provide warnings of potential
dangers around motorcyclists, and maximize the available rider response
time. Damon explains these features include an advanced warning system,
anti-lock braking (to reduce the chance of an accident caused by the
user's application of excessive braking force), and an adjustable
ergonomics system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 49 U.S.C. 30113(b)(3)(B)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Damon states that many of these features are already commonplace in
the automotive sector and studies have shown they save lives. However,
Damon relays that integrating these systems into motorcycles presents
new challenges because the dynamics of the vehicle are
[[Page 73188]]
distinct. For example, Damon states that unlike the fixed ergonomics of
conventional motorcycles, its adjustable ergonomics system (SHIFT)
provides the user more freedom and control for different riding styles.
Damon explains that using the left handlebar rear brake position to
accommodate and implement this adjustable ergonomics system will be
less complex and avoid the challenges of having the foot brake also
change position. Further, Damon states that locating SHIFT on the
handlebar brake position will allow it more design freedom to optimize
bodywork for the vehicle to reduce drag and increase the overall
efficiency of the HyperSport.
The second basis is that an exemption would make the development or
field evaluation of a low-emission vehicle easier without unreasonably
lowering the safety of that vehicle.\4\ In support of this basis, Damon
states that its HyperSport qualifies as a low-emission vehicle because
no emissions are produced during operation. Damon explains that the
HyperSport has an all-electric powertrain.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ 49 U.S.C. 30113(b)(3)(B)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To demonstrate that the HyperSport meets the minimum safety levels
required for an exemption under either 49 CFR 555.6(b) \5\ or 49 CFR
555.6(c),\6\ Damon states that the absence of a rear brake control at
the right foot location does not significantly reduce the level of
safety afforded to the user, and that the HyperSport's added safety
features, including an advanced warning system and ABS, improve the
overall level of safety of the motorcycle. Damon states the
HyperSport's brake system is designed to surpass the performance
requirements of FMVSS No. 122, which measures braking performance.
Further, Damon points out that from 1999-2005 NHTSA granted exemptions
for motor scooters with rear brake controls on the left handlebar, and
that a 2000 Carter Engineering study submitted with a similar petition
for exemption found no response-time detriment in moving the rear brake
control from the right foot location to the left handlebar. Damon
states the study found operators responded 21 percent faster to the
braking stimulus with handlebar-mounted rear brake controls.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ The exemption would make easier the development or field
evaluation of a new motor vehicle safety or impact protection
features providing a safety or impact protection level at least
equal to that of the standard.
\6\ The exemption would make the development or field evaluation
of a low-emission vehicle easier and would not unreasonably lower
the safety or impact protection level of that vehicle.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Damon contends that based on this report there is likely no
difference in the physical response time for operators of motorcycles
compared to operators of scooters. Damon also points out that motor
scooter manufacturers were afforded the opportunity to bring their
vehicles to market in support of gathering future data, and that the
granting of this petition would allow Damon's HyperSport to do the
same. Finally, Damon notes that although FMVSS No. 123 reserves the
left handlebar for the clutch lever or as a supplemental position for
the rear brake on motorcycles with an automatic transmission, other
markets like Europe and Canada allow manufacturers to use the left
handlebar for the rear brake control, and that this exemption would
promote international harmonization.
IV. Comment Period
The agency seeks comment from the public on the merits of Damon's
application for a temporary exemption from the motorcycle rear brake
control requirements in paragraph S5.2.1 (table 1) of FMVSS No. 123.
The agency has not made any judgment on the merits of the application
and is placing a non-confidential copy of the petition in the docket.
We are providing a 30-day comment period. After considering public
comments and other available information, we will publish a notice of
final action on the application in the Federal Register.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30113; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.95
and 501.5.
Sophie Shulman,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2024-20195 Filed 9-6-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P