Reclassification of Motorcycles (Two and Three Wheeled Vehicles) in the Guide to Reporting Highway Statistics |
|---|
Topics: Federal Highway Administration
|
Victor M. Mendez (Federal Register)
April 28, 2011
[Federal Register: April 28, 2011 (Volume 76, Number 82)]
[Notices]
[Page 23854-23859]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr28ap11-92]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
[FHWA Docket No. FHWA-2010-0010]
Reclassification of Motorcycles (Two and Three Wheeled Vehicles)
in the Guide to Reporting Highway Statistics
AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.
ACTION: Final Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This Notice announces the revision to FHWA's guidance
regarding State reporting of motorcycle registration information
disseminated to the public in FHWA's annual publication Guide to
Reporting Highway Statistics. The intent of this action is to improve
FHWA's motorcycle registration data to assist in the analysis of crash
data relating to these vehicles. Thus, it is critical that the
motorcycle registration data collected and published by FHWA is
accurate, comprehensive, and timely. The FHWA's Guide to Reporting
Highway Statistics (Guide) is the document that FHWA uses to instruct
States about what data is required by FHWA to perform its mission of
informing Congress, the highway community, and the general public on a
wide variety of highway extent, condition, use, and performance
measures.
DATES: Effective Date: 90 days after date of publication in the
Federal Register.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ralph Erickson, Highway Funding and
Motor Fuels Team Leader, Office of Policy, HPPI-10, (202) 366-9235, or
Adam Sleeter, Office of the Chief Counsel, (202) 366-8839, Federal
Highway Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC
[[Page 23855]]
20590. Office hours are from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. e.t., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Electronic Access
An electronic copy of this document, the original notice, and
comments received may be downloaded from the Office of the Federal
Register's home page at: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html and the
Government Printing Office's Web page at: http://www.gpoaccess.gov.
Background
The information collected in accordance with the Guide \1\ is
authorized under 23 U.S.C. 315, which authorizes the Secretary of
Transportation to prescribe and promulgate rules and regulations to
carry out the requirements of Title 23 of the United States Code. Under
23 CFR 1.5, FHWA has the ability to request data that is used to relate
highway system performance to investment under FHWA's strategic
planning and performance reporting process in accordance with the
requirements of the Government Performance and Results Act.\2\
Additionally, 23 CFR 420.105(b) requires States to provide data that
support FHWA's responsibilities to the Congress and the public. The
Guide has approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under
the control number 2125-0032.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Guide, Chapter 3, Report Identifying Motor-Vehicle
Registrations and Taxation, page 3-2.
\2\ Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA), Sec.
3 and 4, Public Law 103-62.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FHWA's current definition of a motorcycle is two-fold: (1)
Motorcycles, and (2) motor bicycles and scooters. The specific language
for defining motorcycles, provided in FHWA's Guide, follows:
Item I.E.2. Motorcycles: This item includes two-wheeled and three-
wheeled motorcycles. Sidecars are not regarded as separate
vehicles--a motorcycle and sidecar are reported as a single unit.
Item I.E.3. Motor bicycles and scooters: Mopeds should be included
with motor-driven cycles (motor bicycles) in the States that require
their registration.
States annually report data to FHWA from their motor vehicle
registration systems. As a result, such data is based on the
definitions developed by States which may or may not approximate FHWA's
definition of motorcycles, motor bicycles, scooters or personalized
conveyances.
The FHWA researched State legislation (including the District of
Columbia, but not Puerto Rico) for definitions of motorcycles and
similar vehicles. We found several characteristics that specifically
differentiated motorcycle-type vehicles from other vehicle types.
Several States further defined the difference between motorcycles and
mopeds, or in a few States, motor scooters. The characteristics for
defining motorcycles included vehicles: With two to three wheels in
contact with the ground (48 States), with a seat or saddle for the
passenger(s) (36 States), with a sidecar or trailer (4 States), and
with a steering handlebar (2 States). Additionally, one State defined
motorcycles as having no enclosure on the vehicle for the operator
(driver) or passenger.
The following characteristics were used by some States to define
the difference between motorcycles, mopeds, and in a few cases, motor
scooters: Speeds not in excess of 25 to 45 miles per hour (MPH) (3
States mention 25 MPH, 13 mention 30 MPH, 1 State each mentions 35 or
45 MPH); engine displacement of not greater than 50 to 150 cubic
centimeters (cc) (21 States mention 50 cc, 1 State mentions 55 cc, and
1 State mentions 150 cc). Some States used brake horsepower (HP)
instead of, or in addition to, displacement to identify vehicle power
(4 States mention 1.5 HP, 12 mention 2.0 HP, 1 State mentions 2.7 HP,
and 1 State mentions 5 HP). Wheel diameter for differentiating
motorcycles and mopeds from motor scooters is mentioned by 5 States (2
States mention wheel diameter greater than 10 inches, 1 State mentions
wheel diameter greater than 14 inches, and 2 States mention wheel
diameter greater than 16 inches); and 4 States mentioned a platform or
deck for a standing driver as a characteristic of a motor scooter.
History
The FHWA has collected motorcycle registration data since 1914.
This data reveals that in the last few years the population of
motorcycles and related vehicle types has risen dramatically. In turn,
the crash data for motorcycles has shown dramatic increase due to many
factors including, but not limited to, rider experience, rider
impairment, decreased use of helmets, and increased exposure. Exposure
is a statistical term of reference that indicates increasing
performance of a given activity yields an increase in the chance that
some related event will occur, in this case crashes related to
motorcycle riding activity will occur.
Data from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's
(NHTSA) Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) \3\ indicated in
2009, motorcycle rider fatalities decreased for the first time after 11
consecutive years of increases: From 2,116 in 1997 to 5,312 in 2008,
and then down to 4,462 in 2009. Other trends include a dramatic rise in
motorcycle ownership and changes in other factors such as motorcycle
size and new designs for these vehicles. However, this increase in
fatality data is disproportionate to reported increases in motorcycle
registration and in reported miles traveled. Due to this disconnect,
safety advocates have encouraged improving the data collection process
in order to better analyze and identify rider exposure and crash
causality.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ FARS data can be viewed at: http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/
Main/index.aspx.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On October 3, 2007, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB)
sent a letter to FHWA containing an NSTB Safety Recommendation H-07-34,
which states:
Following the 2007 Motorcycle Travel Symposium, develop
guidelines for the states to use to gather accurate motorcycle
registrations and motorcycle vehicle miles traveled data. The
guidelines should include information on the various methods to
collect registrations and vehicle miles traveled data and how these
methods can be put into practice.
The FHWA is committed to improving both sets of data identified in the
NTSB safety recommendation. This final notice addresses the NTSB
recommendation to gather more accurate motorcycle registration data. To
achieve this goal, FHWA established an interagency review team
consisting of experts from FHWA's Offices of Safety and Research, and
various NHTSA offices, to assist in the following activities:
1. Review State laws to determine the State of practice for
motorcycle registrations by documenting State laws and practices;
2. Improve the definition of motorcycles in the Guide to Reporting
Highway Statistics;
3. Develop guidelines for the States to use to gather and report
more accurate motorcycle registration data;
4. Include information on the various methods to collect and report
registrations in the guidelines; and
5. Initiate actions to bring the best methods in wider practice.
The FHWA is seeking to provide better registration data for other
agencies and the general public to analyze motorcycle crash data. For
FHWA, the issue is two-fold: FHWA must provide the States complete and
comprehensive instructions on the data
[[Page 23856]]
FHWA needs to collect to perform its responsibilities, and FHWA must
work with the States to assure that they are providing accurate data to
the extent that they can in accordance with FHWA instructions. A
corollary to both issues is that FHWA's instructions should allow the
States to provide the data that they actually collect and not to demand
data that they do not already gather.
The FHWA will refine its definition of motorcycles and related two-
and three-wheeled vehicles to better differentiate motorcycles, mopeds
and motor scooters. This document was coordinated with NHTSA. As
indicated above, this document addresses State reporting of motorcycle
registration information. It should be understood that the definitions
used for reporting purposes do not comport in all particulars with the
definitions used by NHTSA. For example, NHTSA has specific definitions
for ``motorcycle'' and ``motor driven cycle'' as part of the Federal
motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSSs) (see 49 CFR 571.3). The issue
of whether a product is considered a motorcycle for purposes of the
FMVSSs is dependent on NHTSA's regulations and the statutes
administered by NHTSA. Any questions about motorcycles in the context
of NHTSA's regulations or programs should be directed to NHTSA.
Reference Material
The Guide to Reporting Highway Statistics is FHWA's guidance to the
States for reporting a variety of data items, including two categories
of motorcycles: Motorcycles and motorized bicycles.
The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) D 16.1 \4\ defines
a motorcycle as any motor vehicle having a seat or saddle for the use
of its operator and designed to travel on not more than three wheels in
contact with the ground. This includes large motorcycles, motor-driven
cycles, speed limited motor-driven cycles, mopeds, motor scooters, and
motorized or motor assisted bicycles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ American National Standards Institute, http://
webstore.ansi.org.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The definitions of motorcycle type vehicles found in 49 CFR 571.3
state that:
Motorcycle means a motor vehicle with motive power having a seat or
saddle for the use of the rider and designed to travel on not more than
three wheels in contact with the ground.
Motor-driven cycle means a motorcycle with a motor that produces 5-
brake horsepower or less.
The Model Minimum Uniform Crash Criteria (MMUCC) \5\ defines a
motorcycle as a two- or three-wheeled motor vehicle designed to
transport one or two people. Included are motor scooters, mini-bikes,
and mopeds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Model Minimum Uniform Crash Criteria: http://www.mmucc.us/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FARS and National Automotive Sampling System (NASS) General
Estimates System (GES) follows the ANSI D 16.1 definition. The FARS and
GES data are used in traffic safety analyses by NHTSA as well as other
public and private entities. The information is used to estimate how
many motor vehicle crashes of different kinds take place, and is also
used in the analyses by researchers and highway safety professionals in
order to determine the factors involved in the crashes.
Discussion of Comments
The comment period opened on March 23, 2010, and closed on June 24,
2010. Ninety-six comments were received.
Commenters on the notice fell into several categories: An
organization representing States and State registration administrators,
individual States, a major private manufacturer, individuals
representing motorcycle ``clubs,'' and many individuals. Commenters
addressed a range of subjects.
Concerns About Varied Motorcycle Definitions
The American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, (AAMVA),
listed a number of vehicle characteristics for which there are
discrepancies among States' motorcycle definitions. Some States require
a motorcycle to have a seat that the rider straddles, while others do
not. Some State laws allow a steering wheel. Other States do not
specify, meaning they do not restrict registration to vehicles with
handlebars. Many States do not include a requirement for wheel rim
diameters exceeding 10 inches. Many States do not disqualify vehicles
with a full enclosure for rider or passenger. Most States do not regard
sidecars as separate vehicles, although most States would consider a
trailer a separate vehicle and may require a separate registration. In
terms of mopeds, the same difficulties exist regarding the
characteristics of a seat, saddle, and steering handle as those noted
for motorcycles. The AAMVA also noted that some States do not require
mopeds to have pedals, and that many do not have a brake horsepower
requirement in their definition.
A number of commenters discussed problems that may arise due to the
different State laws and regulations classifying motorcycles and other
similar vehicles. Some of these commenters expressed concerns about
vehicles that would not fit any of FHWA's proposed definitions and
therefore would be left without a means for certification for road and
highway use. Enclosed and three-wheeled vehicles are of primary
concern, because some States do not classify them as motorcycles.
Therefore, if the new definitions exclude them from the definition of
motorcycle, States will need to create new regulations to certify these
types of vehicles for driving. Additionally, a commenter from Oregon
stated that a handlebar requirement for motorcycles would leave certain
vehicles in Oregon without a classification for registration. Some
commenters also addressed the need to keep these smaller fuel-efficient
vehicles on the road, both for energy conservation reasons and to allow
individuals with disabilities or older individuals an option for
driving similar to the experience of motorcycling.
Some commenters noted that new definitions are necessary due to the
proliferation of new vehicle types and the unintended consequences of
misclassification. Harley Davidson Motor Company (HDMC) stated that the
need to revise the regulations is timely as many new motorcycle-type
vehicles are reaching the market and traditional definitions do not
address these newer vehicles. One commenter stated that new regulations
are needed because classifying mopeds and scooters as motorcycles leads
to increased theft because it may require that these lighter weight
vehicles be parked on the street.
The FHWA's intent is to provide guidance in the form of suggested
categories to address the proliferation of motorcycle vehicle types for
data collection and analysis purposes. The FHWA recognizes the wide
variation of vehicles that are primarily described as motorcycles, and
does not want to impose rigid definitions. Rather, FHWA is organizing a
set of definitions more specific than the existing, general
descriptions of motorcycles to improve State data reporting.
Reporting and Registration Concerns: New Classifications
States expressed concerns about the administrative, logistical and
financial burdens of providing information based on the updated
guidance. The Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles,
(FDHSMV) referred to Bill 971, which was recently passed by
[[Page 23857]]
the Florida legislature and includes a definition for three-wheeled
vehicles. The FDHSMV suggested adding a category for three-wheeled
vehicles to accommodate the Florida classification. A commenter stated
that Oregon currently registers mopeds, but not motor scooters or
motor-assisted bicycles and that legislation would be required to
change this. The Washington Department of Licensing (WDOL) only records
and reports registrations for two classifications: Motorcycles and
mopeds. The Washington State Department of Transportation does not have
a means to determine which mopeds would be categorized as cycles or
scooters under FHWA's new categories. Accordingly, the WDOL estimated
that the cost of updating their computers to process the information
included in the new guidance would be over $620,000 in the first year.
The WDOL also pointed out that unless FHWA requires manufacturers to
report the new information required for categorization on the
Manufacturer's Statement of Origin or the Manufacturer's Certificate of
Origin, there is no mechanism for WDOL to collect the data.
The FHWA recognizes that some States may incur significant costs if
they choose to adopt the new definitions provided in FHWA's guidance.
However, this guidance is not mandatory, therefore, States may avoid
incurring any costs by continuing to collect and provide motorcycle
data according to their own existing legislative guidelines. If a State
determines that the costs outweigh the benefits of adopting the new
definitions, then the State may continue to provide motorcycle data
according to their own existing definitions.
Reporting Concerns: Vehicle Identification Numbers (VINs)
The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, (IIHS), supports the
use of VINs for reporting vehicle information. The IIHS has grouped
street legal motorcycles into 10 different classes: Scooter, cruiser,
chopper, touring, dual purpose, standard, sport touring, unclad sport,
sport, and super sports. These classifications consider design
characteristics such as intended use, riding position, engine power,
passenger comfort, and cost. Statistical analyses performed on this
data by IIHS and the Highway Loss Data Institute (HLDI), an affiliate
of IIHS, which was derived from VINs, revealed substantial differences
in accident data of these vehicle classifications. The IIHS stated that
using VINs will create the opportunity for more sophisticated
classification of motorcycle types than the limited categories in the
Guide. Therefore, using VINs will increase FHWA's ability to assess the
safety risks of new types of vehicles as they are used and enter the
market. Additionally, IIHS stated that VIN information may be easier
for many States to provide than vehicle classification.
The FHWA agrees that studies done by both the HLDI and the IIHS
establish the important conclusion that motorcycle classifications
reveal differing accident characteristics. The HLDI has offered to
license the software or provide the service to FHWA free of charge. The
FHWA appreciates this offer, and may pursue this cooperative research
outside the scope of this notice.
The FDHSMV commented that collecting VIN information would put a
substantial burden on the States. Additionally, AAMVA, and the FDHSMV,
questioned the value of reporting VIN information, stating that VINs
for motorcycles are far less standardized than VINs for cars and
trucks.
Commenters also cited privacy concerns associated with collecting
VINs and possible violations of the Drivers Privacy Protection Act.
The FHWA concurs with the view that collecting VINs from the States
would incur significant costs to the States and FHWA and the benefits
of this approach are not worth the cost of collection. By not
collecting VINs, FHWA will avoid potential privacy concerns raised in
the comments.
Safety Issues
Some comments addressed safety issues. Some stated that the lack of
safety features such as airbags and sidecars is a necessary requirement
for motorcycles, because simple two-wheeled vehicles do not require the
additional complexity of safety features. Additionally, some commenters
felt that seatbelts or other restraints should not be included in the
definition of a motorcycle, because in the event of a crash on that
type of vehicle the operator and the vehicle should part ways for
safety reasons. One commenter suggested that helmets should not be
required for enclosed three-wheeled vehicles that pass safety tests.
An individual representing the American Automobile Association
stated that the skill set for driving a three-wheeled vehicle is
different from the skill set required for driving a motorcycle.
Therefore, any attempt to make two- and three-wheeled vehicle
definitions all-inclusive for the new generation of three-wheeled
vehicles potentially endangers the public.
One commenter suggested that a distinction should be made between
on-road and off-road vehicles, because off-road vehicles may have
features that make them more dangerous in the event of an accident,
such as being low to the ground. Additionally, according to this
commenter, operators of off-road vehicles may be more inclined to
ignore the rules of the road than operators of on-road vehicles.
These comments are outside the scope of this notice, as FHWA is not
considering safety features or handling characteristics as descriptors
in the definition of motorcycle types. State registrations and FHWA
characteristics are based on the physical appearance of the vehicles.
International Classification System
The HDMC advocates synchronizing FHWA vehicle classes with classes
used internationally, specifically with the United Nations Economic
Commission for Europe's classification scheme. The FHWA researched the
suggested United Nations Economic Commission for Europe standards and
concludes that they suffer from the same lack of detail that makes
FHWA's current definitions insufficient.
Request for a Committee
The American Motorcyclist Association requested that FHWA create a
Motorcycle Definition Committee with representatives from FHWA and
State departments of transportation to overhaul the current
definition(s) of motorcycles and similar vehicles. The FHWA believes
the request for comments on this notice was sufficient notification and
that comments to the docket are sufficient for FHWA to understand the
issues involved.
Enclosed Vehicles
The AAMVA stated that States are currently struggling with how to
register enclosed two- and three-wheel vehicles, as well as how best to
test the drivers on their ability to drive those vehicles. AAMVA is
working to create a group to consider these issues, though some States
would already consider enclosed vehicles to be motorcycles because they
have no specific definition or requirements related to whether the
vehicle is enclosed or not. The AAMVA noted that most States would
currently consider three-wheeled vehicles that are small, lightweight,
and not enclosed motorcycles for registration purposes. These States
most likely could not distinguish them from other motorcycles for
purposes of reporting to FHWA. The FHWA agrees and has
[[Page 23858]]
decided to incorporate a separate category to capture these vehicles.
Steering Mechanisms
The HDMC notes that while steering handlebars are traditional for
motorcycles, the newer categories of motorcycles may have other
steering mechanisms, and they recommend that FHWA remove handlebars as
a motorcycle-defining characteristic. An individual representing the
ABATE (A Brotherhood Against Totalitarian Enactments) organization of
Maryland recommended that the definition of motorcycle require
handlebars. Additionally, a commenter from Oregon stated that requiring
handlebars for motorcycles would leave certain vehicles in Oregon
without a classification for registration. The FHWA concurs with HDMC
and will remove the handlebar characteristic from the motorcycle
classification.
Opinions on Motorcycle Definitions Generally
There were a number of comments by individuals representing
organizations expressing their opinions on the definition of a
motorcycle. The Vice-Chair of Oregon Governors' Advisory Commission on
Motorcycle Safety stated that a traditional motorcycle is a single-
track vehicle that is directed by a combination of counter-steering and
leaning, primarily the former, and a three wheel vehicle requires
neither. An individual representing the Minnesota Motorcycle Safety
Advisory Committee defined a motorcycle as a vehicle powered entirely
by a motor with two or three wheels, handlebars and without a roof.
These two comments are addressed in FHWA's motorcycle definition.
An individual representing the ABATE organization of Maryland
stated that the new definition of a motorcycle should be broken down
into three types: Two wheels, three wheels (``trikes,'' whether the
two-wheeled axle is in front or in back), and four wheel all terrain
vehicles (ATV or quad bike). Motorcycles would have the following
traits: Handlebars rather than a steering wheel, no side by side
seating for passengers, and the rider in a straddle position when
riding. The FHWA considered these vehicle characteristics in its
typology, removed the handlebar requirement as noted above, and did not
exclude side-by-side seating, which may or may not be a characteristic
of a motorcycle with an enclosure. The FHWA does not include four-
wheeled vehicles in this motorcycle typology, as a four-wheeled vehicle
licensed for highway use would in popular usage be described as an
automobile and not a motorcycle.
The Motorcycle Industry Council proposed that the moped and motor
bicycle classification vehicle engine size should not exceed 2 brake
horsepower, rather than 5 brake horsepower as proposed, which they
stated applies specifically to a ``motor-driven cycle.'' The FHWA
agrees and has incorporated this recommendation into the moped and
motor bicycle typology because horsepower is a useful distinguishing
characteristic between mopeds and the more powerful motorcycles.
The HDMC made specific comments on FHWA's proposed definitions.
FHWA concurs with HDMC's comment advocating removing handlebars as a
motorcycle-defining characteristic as discussed above. The HDMC does
not consider either a seat or saddle for driver and passengers nor a
wheel diameter suitable defining characteristics. The FHWA considers
both wheel diameter and seat arrangements appropriate defining
characteristics. The FHWA has changed the wheel diameter characteristic
to wheel rim diameter to better define wheel diameter.
The HDMC also stated that the distinction between motorcycles,
mopeds, and scooters is best made by distinguishing vehicles by design
speed (such as 30 miles per hour), rather than by vehicle physical
appearance. This concept has merit; vehicles used on the streets and
highways that have insufficient power to keep up with normal traffic
should not be registered for highway use. In those conditions they are
unsafe and highly disruptive to normal traffic flow. However, it will
be difficult to determine the level of speed that constitutes a
defining characteristic agreeable to the various stakeholders.
Many individuals commenting on their own behalf expressed strong
opinions on the definitions of motorcycles, often demonstrating their
passion for motorcycles and the motorcycle community. The majority of
individual commenters to the docket agreed that motorcycles are a two-
wheeled, powered vehicle for one or two people. For example, an
individual wrote that motorcycles should ``include all two wheeled
vehicles that the rider sits straddled the frame/motor or fuel tank
with passenger seating also straddled and behind the rider.'' The FHWA
believes this wording is overly specific and is not normally used by
States as distinguishing characteristics, and therefore does not
include them in the definition. Some individuals suggested that the
definition of motorcycle include all motorcycle type vehicles, with
multiple subdefinitions, to avoid certification and registration
issues. The FHWA concurs and believes the typology used in FHWA notice
adequately addresses this comment.
Beyond these comments, the comments on motorcycle characteristics
and attributes varied widely. The FHWA considered these comments.
However, these comments failed to address a comprehensive typology of
motorcycle and like vehicles, which was the focus of FHWA's request for
comments. Many of these comments are incorporated into FHWA's modified
categories. The remainder represented differing opinions such that no
consistent conclusions could be drawn from them. None of these
individual comments offered a considered, complete description of
motorcycle types. The FHWA concludes that these comments are
sufficiently incorporated into FHWA's modified definitions.
The current language for defining motorcycles in FHWA's Guide to
Reporting of Highway Statistics (Chapter 3, Report Identifying Motor
Vehicle Registration and Taxation, page 3-2) is as follows:
Item I.E.2. Motorcycles: This item includes two-wheeled and three-
wheeled motorcycles. Sidecars are not regarded as separate
vehicles-- a motorcycle and sidecar are reported as a single unit.
Item I.E.3. Motor bicycles and scooters: Mopeds should be included
with motor-driven cycles (motor bicycles) in the States that require
their registration.
Based on the comments received, the current language for defining
motorcycles in FHWA's Guide to Reporting of Highway Statistics (Chapter
3, Report Identifying Motor Vehicle Registration and Taxation, page 3-
2) is updated as follows:
Item I.E.2. Motorcycles (without enclosures): This item includes
vehicles with the following characteristics:
1. Two or three wheels in contact with the ground (excluding
trailers suitable for motorcycle hauling)
2. A seat or saddle for driver and passengers
3. Wheel rim diameters 10 inches or more
4. Do not include an enclosure for the driver or passengers
5. Sidecars and trailers are not regarded as separate vehicles--
a motorcycle and sidecar or trailer is reported as a single unit.
Item I.E.3. Motorcycles (with enclosures): This item includes
vehicles with the following characteristics:
1. Two or three wheels in contact with the ground (excluding
trailers suitable for motorcycle hauling)
2. A seat or saddle (in-line or side-by-side) for driver and
passengers
3. Wheel rim diameters 10 inches or more
4. Includes an enclosure for the driver or passengers
[[Page 23859]]
5. Sidecars and trailers are not regarded as separate vehicles--
a motorcycle and sidecar or trailer is reported as a single unit.
Item I.E.4 Mopeds or motor bicycles: This item includes vehicles
with the following characteristics:
1. Two wheels in contact with the ground
2. A seat or saddle for driver and passengers (if any)
3. A steering handle bar
4. Do not include an enclosure for the driver or passengers
5. Have a brake horsepower not exceeding 2 HP.
Item I.E.5 Personalized conveyances licensed for highway use: This
item includes vehicles with the following characteristics:
1. Two wheels in contact with the ground
2. Has a platform or deck for the use of a standing operator
3. A steering handle bar
4. Do not include an enclosure for the driver or passengers
5. Have a brake horsepower not exceeding 2 HP.
6. Have a direct drive energy transmission from the engine to
the drive wheel(s) (no transmission).
Issued on: April 20, 2011.
Victor M. Mendez,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2011-10258 Filed 4-27-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-P