[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 77 (Thursday, April 22, 1999)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 19740-19741]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-10050]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 571


Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Denial of Petition for 
Rulemaking

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

ACTION: Denial of petition for rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: This document denies a petition for rulemaking submitted by 
Mr. Keith Gross to initiate an investigation to evaluate and regulate 
the ``high profile gas tank design'' on motorcycles relating to the 
rider's injury potential during a frontal crash. Specifically, Mr. 
Gross noted that Kawasaki does not crash test their Ninja model 
motorcycle to evaluate the effect that a high profile gas tank design 
has on the rider during a crash. Mr. Gross provided insufficient 
information to support his contention that the high profile fuel tank 
design on motorcycles presents a safety problem warranting 
investigation and possible regulation. Further, available data reviewed 
by NHTSA do not show that Kawasaki motorcycle riders suffered more 
injuries than other motorcycle riders.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For non-legal issues: Dr. William J.J. 
Liu, Office of Crashworthiness Standards, National Highway Traffic 
Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC, 20590. 
Telephone: (202) 366-4923. Facsimile (202) 366-4329. For legal issues: 
Ms. Nicole Fradette, Office of Chief Counsel, NCC-20, National Highway 
Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC, 
20590. Telephone: (202) 366-2992. Facsimile (202) 366-3820.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: By petition dated September 1, 1997, Mr. 
Keith Gross requested NHTSA to evaluate the effect that high profile 
gas tank designs have on a rider's injury potential during a frontal 
motorcycle crash and to promulgate a Federal motor vehicle safety 
standard to reduce the risk of injury to the driver. The petitioner 
asserted that a driver was more likely to suffer an injury in a frontal 
collision if the driver were operating a motorcycle with a high profile 
fuel tank design, than one with a ``tear drop'' fuel tank design, i.e., 
a wide-based gas tank design that rises gradually above the seat of the 
motorcycle. The high profile gas tanks rise up abruptly by 
approximately 3 to 4 inches above the level of the seat and the upper 
surface of these gas tanks differs from that of other gas tanks.
    Mr. Gross explained that, in a frontal collision, motorcycle riders 
move forward and contact both the gas tank and the handle bars before 
being separated from the motorcycle. The petitioner stated that high 
profile gas tank designs serve to enhance the maneuverability and 
handling of sporty motorcycles. However, the high profile gas tank 
designs prevent a rider's pelvis from sliding forward in a frontal 
crash. According to Mr. Gross, this impediment forces the rider's upper 
body to rotate against the gas tank, delaying separation and increase 
the potential for head and neck injuries. The petitioner explained that 
the more traditional ``tear drop'' wide-based gas tank design minimizes 
the risk of a groin injury to the rider by facilitating the rider's 
separation from the motorcycle without interference from the gas tank. 
Mr. Gross noted that neither Kawasaki nor the Department of 
Transportation (DOT) have crash tested a motorcycle to determine how 
much

[[Page 19741]]

force the male pelvis/groin can tolerate before permanent injury (such 
as impotence or infertility) can occur.
    The petitioner also argued that the risk of a post-collision 
motorcycle fire was greater with a high profile fuel tank design than 
with other fuel tank designs, such as a tear drop fuel tank. The 
petitioner based this argument on the alleged greater tendency of a 
high profile engine to detach from a motorcycle in a frontal collision, 
thereby increasing the potential for a fuel tank fire. Specifically, 
the petitioner suggested that this would occur in a frontal crash 
because opposing pressure would be exerted on the fuel tank from both 
the front (from the force generated by the crash) and the rear (from 
the force generated from the rider's forward motion), thereby causing 
the tank to disengage and spill fuel.
    The petitioner claimed that Kawasaki and other manufacturers 
continue to use the high profile gas tank design without conducting 
frontal crash tests because the agency does not have a crashworthiness 
standard to cover this area. The petitioner requested the agency to 
initiate an investigation to evaluate and to regulate the high profile 
gas tank design on motorcycles.
    NHTSA is responsible for issuing and enforcing Federal motor 
vehicle safety standards (FMVSS) to deal with safety problems on our 
nation's highways. Before promulgating or amending a vehicle safety 
requirement, NHTSA must decide that a safety problem exists, that the 
problem is significant enough to warrant regulation, and that the 
requirement would reduce the problem and thus meet the need for motor 
vehicle safety. In this instance, NHTSA has found no basis for 
concluding that there is a safety problem of any significance with 
respect to ``the high profile gas tank design'' on motorcycles.
    The petitioner asserted that the high profile gas tank design is 
detrimental to a rider's safety in a frontal collision; however, he did 
not provide sufficient data to substantiate that rider injuries were 
caused by such a design. In fact, the petitioner did not provide any 
data indicating that more rider injuries were caused by such a design. 
In that regard, the petitioner has not established a safety problem 
related to the high profile gas tank design on motorcycles.
    NHTSA's consumer complaint files could not establish a safety 
problem caused by the high profile gas tank design on motorcycles. 
Specifically, NHTSA's consumer compliant files showed no complaints on 
Kawasaki motorcycles related to riders impacting the gas tank of the 
motorcycle or causing the tank to disengage and spill fuel as suggested 
by the petitioner. There were 35 fuel system related complaints, only 
one had a fuel tank puncture in a frontal crash with no fire--a 1991 
Harley Davidson FXRS model. There were four non-collision fires--a 1994 
Harley Davidson XL model (a loose fuel tank problem), a 1994 Kawasaki 
EX500 model (electrical short), a 1991 Kawasaki, Kawasaki model (oil 
pump problem), and a 1994 Yamaha EZR600 model (electrical short). There 
was no fuel system related complaints on Kawasaki Ninja model.
    Further, NHTSA's motorcycle crash data indicate that Kawasaki 
riders did not suffer more groin injuries than riders of other 
motorcycles. Available data from several states showed that about 5.5% 
of all the injured motorcycle riders as compared to about 3.4% of 
Kawasaki injured riders, suffered groin injuries. There was no specific 
information on models or fuel tank designs.
    Finally, the agency also reviewed medical literature concerning 
motorcycle rider groin injuries due to frontal crashes. Most of the 
medical literature data was found in foreign publications. The reviewed 
literature showed that about 5.5% of injured patients with a pelvic 
fracture were motorcycle riders. Although the reviewed medical 
literature also showed that motorcycle fuel tanks can contribute to 
serious groin injuries in frontal impacts, the literature did not 
indicate that the fuel tanks of Kawasaki Ninja model (high profile gas 
tank designs) or other Kawasaki models are involved in more pelvic 
fracture injuries (groin injuries) in crashes than other motorcycles. 
In the reviewed medical literature, the types and attributes of the 
fuel tanks responsible for injury mechanisms or the impact velocities 
of the crashes were not reported.
    Although, currently NHTSA does not have a safety standard 
applicable to motorcycle fuel tanks, the agency has sponsored 
motorcycle crashworthiness and fuel system integrity test programs. 
These activities have induced the manufacturers to adopt safer fuel 
tank designs such as the ``tear drop'' tank design, the recessed filler 
cap design, the tank rupture resistance against fuel spillage design. 
The following are examples of NHTSA sponsored research addressing these 
issues: (1) a research program with 27 motorcycle crashes to study the 
safety aspects of motorcycle design and crash configurations, including 
frontal impacts, ``Dynamics of Motorcycle Impact, Volume II--Motorcycle 
Crash Test Program,'' by P.W. Bothwell, R.E. Knight, and H.C. Peterson, 
University of Denver, Denver Research Institute, Final Report, Contract 
No. FH-11-7307, July 1971 (DOT HS-800-587); and (2) an experimental 
safety motorcycle research program to study a number of motorcycle 
subsystems, including fuel system, ``Requirements Analysis and 
Feasibility Studies for an Experimental Safety Motorcycle,'' by J.A. 
Bartol, G.D. Livers, and R. Miennert, AMF Incorporated, Advanced 
Systems Laboratory, Final Report, Contract No. DOT-HS-4-00816, July 
1975 (DOT HS-801-654).
    Finally, for reducing deaths and injuries to motorcyclists 
resulting from head impacts, the agency has issued FMVSS No. 218, 
Motorcycle Helmets. Crash data show that injuries from head impacts are 
the most serious injuries in motorcycle crashes. The agency believes 
that head impacts produce the most serious injuries in motorcycle 
crashes. The agency believes and statistical data confirm that helmet 
usage is the most effective way to reduce head and perhaps neck 
injuries caused by motorcycle crashes.
    Although, the agency is denying this petition, it is noted that 
NHTSA has been very actively participating with other countries in the 
development of a motorcycle crash data base for global application to 
be used in analyzing motorcycle crashes and injuries. Since May 1997, 
the agency has been working with other countries on a research project 
that is being undertaken by the Organization for Economic Co-operation 
and Development to establish a ``common methodology'' for collection of 
motorcycle crash data. Currently, there are no established 
international procedures for collecting such data. The agency is 
hopeful that this internationally harmonized effort will provide more 
detailed data for further analysis of motorcycle crash and rider injury 
studies.
    In accordance with 49 CFR part 552, this completes the agency's 
review of the petition. The agency has concluded that there is no 
reasonable possibility that the amendment requested by the petitioner 
would be issued at the conclusion of a rulemaking proceeding. After 
considering all relevant factors, the agency has decided to deny the 
petition.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30103, 30162; delegation of authority at 49 
CFR 1.50 and 501.8.

    Issued on: April 16, 1999.
L. Robert Shelton,
Associate Administrator for Safety Performance Standards.
[FR Doc. 99-10050 Filed 4-21-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P