[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 221 (Thursday, November 17, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-28542]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: November 17, 1994]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
[Docket No. EA92-041; Notice 2]

 

General Motors Pickup Truck Defect Investigation

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.

ACTION: Identification of information sought at public meeting.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: On October 27, 1994, NHTSA published a notice that it will 
hold a public meeting on December 6, 1994 regarding the initial 
decision by the Secretary of Transportation that certain pickup trucks 
manufactured by General Motors Corporation (GM) with fuel tanks mounted 
outside the frame rails contain a defect that relates to motor vehicle 
safety. The purpose of the meeting is to permit any interested person, 
including General Motors, to present relevant information to NHTSA and 
the Secretary on the issue of whether a defect that relates to motor 
vehicle safety exists in these GM pickup trucks. This supplemental 
notice identifies particular information that the Secretary believes 
could be useful in making his final decision on whether to order a 
recall or to close the investigation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Berlin, Director, Office of 
Public and Consumer Affairs, National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration, 400 Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC 20590; (202) 
366-9550.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On October 17, 1994, Secretary of 
Transportation Federico Pena announced his initial decision that model 
year 1973-1991 full-sized GM pickup trucks and cab-chassis equipped 
with fuel tanks mounted outboard of the frame rails contain a defect 
related to motor vehicle safety. At the same time, he released a 
comprehensive Engineering Analysis (EA) Report that explains in detail 
the basis for the decision. A summary of that Report is set out in the 
Federal Register notice announcing that decision. 59 Fed. Reg. 54025 
(October 27, 1994).
    The EA Report makes two fundamental findings. First, on the basis 
of statistical analysis, laboratory crash tests, and a review of 
available information concerning specific real- world crashes, the EA 
Report demonstrates that the GM pickups at issue exhibit an increased 
risk of fire in side-impact crashes compared to similar vehicles 
(specifically, to contemporary Ford and Dodge full-sized pickups). 
Second, primarily on the basis of this increased risk and an analysis 
of GM's actions (both at the time it designed the trucks and during the 
period they were in production), the Secretary concluded that this 
increased risk is unreasonable. On the basis of these findings, and 
other supplementary information, the Secretary made his initial 
decision that the GM pickups contain a defect related to motor vehicle 
safety.
    The Secretary also announced that, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. Sec. 30118 
and 49 CFR 554.10, a public meeting will be held on December 6, 1994, 
in order to afford GM and other interested persons an opportunity to 
present information, views, and arguments on the issue of whether the 
vehicles covered by this initial decision contain a defect related to 
motor vehicle safety. Following the public meeting, the Secretary will 
decide whether to order a recall of the vehicles or to close the 
investigation.
    This defect investigation has raised many important and complex 
factual, legal, and public policy issues. Substantial interest in those 
issues has been expressed by affected individuals, auto manufacturers, 
and members of the general public. The Department believes that the 
December 6 public meeting will provide a valuable forum and opportunity 
for both General Motors and the public to address these issues, either 
in support of or in opposition to the initial decision.
    To assist in reaching a final decision, interested persons are 
requested to present relevant information and arguments on issues 
raised by the investigation and in particular on the issues identified 
below.

Issues Related to the Question of Increased Risk

    1. Is there additional information supporting or rebutting the 
finding in the EA Report that the GM pickups exhibit an increased risk 
of fire and fatalities/injuries due to fire in side-impact crashes?
    2. Is it appropriate in this investigation to focus only on side-
impact crashes as opposed to other crash modes? What is the most 
appropriate focus and why?
    3. Is it appropriate in this investigation to focus on fatal 
crashes, fatal crashes in which there was a fire, and/or fatal crashes 
in which the fatalities are due to fire? Would other data provide a 
more appropriate basis for reaching a decision on these issues?
    4. In ascertaining whether the design of the 1973-1987 GM pickups 
at issue here causes an increased risk of death and injury in 
accidents, is it appropriate to compare those pickups to other 
contemporary pickups (i.e., 1973-1987 Ford full-sized pickups)? To what 
other vehicles, if any, should these GM pickups be compared? Please 
explain.

Issues Related to the Question of Unreasonable Risk

    1. What factors should be considered in determining whether the 
design of the GM vehicles creates an ``unreasonable risk of death or 
injury'' due to post-crash fires?
    2. In materials submitted to NHTSA, GM presented a series of 
vehicle fire rate comparisons in an effort to demonstrate that many 
other pairs of vehicles experience differences in the rate of fire-
related fatalities that are greater than the difference between GM and 
Ford pickups. Do vehicle pair rate comparisons provide an appropriate 
basis for analyzing the issue of whether these vehicles present an 
unreasonable safety risk? If not, why not? If so, is the methodology 
used by GM the best way to analyze the issue? Are there better 
comparative rate methodologies for evaluating the existence of an 
unreasonable risk?
    3. Is the overall safety record of a vehicle relevant to the issue 
of unreasonable risk when the alleged defect relates to a particular 
component or type of crash? If so, how relevant?
    4. Are the extent of a manufacturer's awareness of a potential or 
ongoing safety risk, and the extent of a manufacturer's efforts to 
avoid that risk, relevant to the issue of whether an unreasonable risk 
exists? Is a manufacturer's failure to implement measures to mitigate 
or eliminate an increased safety risk relevant to that issue?
    5. What weight should be given to the foregoing three factors, and 
any other relevant factors, in deciding whether a vehicle contains a 
defect related to motor vehicle safety?

Other Information Sought

    1. Additional information concerning post-crash fires in real-world 
crashes involving the GM vehicles covered by this investigation and 
comparable vehicles.
    2. Additional information regarding GM's awareness of an increased 
risk of post-crash fires due to the placement of the fuel tanks outside 
of the frame rails of these trucks, both at the time of their design 
and afterward.
    3. Additional information regarding efforts by GM to eliminate or 
mitigate any safety risk associated with the location of the fuel tanks 
in these vehicles, both at the time of their design and afterward.
    4. Information regarding what remedy or remedies would be 
appropriate if the vehicles in question are finally determined to have 
a defect related to motor vehicle safety.
    As stated in the October 27 notice, persons wishing to make oral 
presentations are requested to notify Ms. Judy Taylor, Office of 
Defects Investigation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 
Room 5326, 400 Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC 20590, (202) 366-
2850, before the close of business on November 28, 1994. Written 
comments may be submitted to the same address and must be received not 
later than the beginning of the meeting on December 6, 1994.
    Because many people may be coming from other cities to appear at 
the public meeting, NHTSA intends to give each person who wishes to 
appear a reasonably precise idea of the day and time for his or her 
presentation. Therefore, the agency urges persons desiring to appear to 
notify Ms. Taylor as soon as possible in order to properly organize the 
meeting. Depending upon the number of persons who wish to appear, NHTSA 
may have to limit the time for each person's presentation or arrange 
for group appearances.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. Sec. 30118.

    Issued on: November 15, 1994.
Christopher A. Hart,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 94-28542 Filed 11-15-94; 3:00 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P