[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 161 (Friday, August 20, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45585-45587]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-21338]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA 99-5541; Notice 2]


Vectrix Corporation; Grant of Application for Temporary Exemption 
From Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 123

    For the reasons expressed below, we are granting the petition by 
Vectrix Corporation of New Bedford, Massachusetts, for a temporary 
exemption of two years from a requirement of S5.2.1 (Table 1) of 
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 123 Motorcycle Controls and 
Displays. The basis of the grant is our finding that ``the exemption 
would make the development or field evaluation of a low-emission 
vehicle easier and would not unreasonably

[[Page 45586]]

lower the safety level of that vehicle,'' 49 U.S.C. Sec. 
30113(b)(3)(B)(iii).
    We published notice of receipt of the application on April 26, 
1999, affording an opportunity for comment (64 FR 20353). No comments 
were received on this notice.
    The following discussion is based on information in Vectrix's 
application.

Argument Why an Exemption Would Make the Development or Field 
Evaluation of a Low-Emission Vehicle Easier and Would Not 
Unreasonably Lower the Safety Level of That Vehicle

    The Vectrix Electric Scooter is ``powered exclusively by an 
electric motor which draws current from ten 12-volt lead-acid batteries 
wired in series,'' and is a ``low-emission vehicle'' within the meaning 
of the statute.
    If a motorcycle is produced with rear wheel brakes, S5.2.1 of 
Standard No. 123 requires that the brakes be operable through the right 
foot control, though the left handlebar is permissible for motor driven 
cycles (Item 11, Table 1). Vectrix would like to use the left handlebar 
as the control for the rear brakes of its Electric Scooter whose ``peak 
motor output of 26 horsepower'' produces more than the 5 hp maximum 
that separates motor driven cycles from motorcycles. The Electric 
Scooter can attain speeds up to 60 mph. The gear ratio of the vehicle 
is fixed, and ``there is no need for the rider to shift gears, as on a 
standard motorcycle.'' Because of this, the Electric Scooter ``is 
equipped with neither a clutch nor a clutch lever, and the left hand of 
the rider is free to operate a brake lever.'' Vectrix states that it 
prefers this design, given its focus on European and Asian markets 
``where rear brake controls for scooters of all horsepower ratings are 
typically mounted on the left handlebar.''
    Vectrix argues that a left handlebar rear-brake control ``will not 
`unreasonably degrade the safety of the vehicle,' compared to a fully 
compliant vehicle equipped with a right foot, rear brake pedal.'' It 
believes that ``vehicle safety might be somewhat enhanced with the left 
hand brake lever, as the hand (bare or gloved) is generally more 
capable of sensitive modulation of the braking force than the foot.'' 
It also argues that the prevalence of this design in other countries 
attests to the fact that this type of vehicle ``can be operated 
safely.''
    Vectrix intends to field test ``a small fleet'' of Electric 
Scooters, to assess ``any weaknesses in the design before production 
begins in summer, 1999.'' Requiring it to redesign the Electric Scooter 
to incorporate a rear brake foot pedal would delay the road test 
program by six months. While an exemption is in effect, Vectrix would 
consider whether the U.S. scooter market offered sufficient sales 
potential to justify creation of a U.S.-specific design incorporating a 
right foot brake pedal. Alternatively, it might petition NHTSA for 
rulemaking to ``allow the rear brake to be operated by a lever mounted 
on the left handlebar for all motorcycles designed without a clutch.''
    The applicant anticipates sales of 600 Electric Scooters while an 
exemption is in effect.

Arguments Why an Exemption Would Be in the Public Interest and 
Consistent With the Objectives of Motor Vehicle Safety

    Vectrix believes that an exemption would be in the public interest 
and consistent with the objectives of traffic safety ``because it would 
maintain an acceptable level of safety while accelerating the 
advancement of an important new class of vehicles for use by consumers 
and businesses.''

Our Finding That an Exemption Would Make the Development or Field 
Evaluation of a Low-Emission Vehicle Easier and Would Not 
Unreasonably Lower the Safety Level of That Vehicle

    In adopting Standard No. 123 in April 1972, effective September 1, 
1974, we justified standardization of the location and operation of 
motorcycle controls as a means of minimizing operator error in 
responding to the motoring environment, saying that ``a cyclist, 
especially the novice and the cyclist who has changed from one make of 
machine to another, must not hesitate when confronted with an 
emergency'' (37 FR 7207). Therefore, we have traditionally regarded 
with concern any deviation from standardization.
    Recently, we granted a petition similar to that of Vectrix, a 
request by Aprilia, S.p.A., for a temporary exemption of its Leonardo 
150 that would allow the left hand control to serve as the control for 
the rear brake (64 FR 44264). We had asked Aprilia to comment on our 
concern that a left hand lever-operated rear brake may contribute to 
unfamiliarity and thus degrade a rider's overall braking reaction 
beyond what would exist on a motorcycle with conventionally configured 
controls. At the request of Aprilia's U.S. sales subsidiary, Aprilia 
U.S.A. Inc. of Woodstock, Georgia, Carter Engineering of Franklin, 
Tennessee, prepared a report on ``Motorscooter Braking Control Study'' 
(Report No. CE-99-APR-05, May 1999) comparing braking response times of 
riders using the left hand control of the Leonardo 150 and the right 
foot control of the Yamaha XC-125 Riva. We placed a copy of this report 
in Docket No. NHTSA-98-4357. Aprilia U.S.A. observed that ``[o]verall, 
the test subjects' reaction times on the Leonardo were approximately 
20% quicker than their reaction times on the conventional motorcycle.'' 
Aprilia believed that ``a less complex braking arrangement like that of 
the Leonardo will improve rider reaction in an emergency situation.''
    We interpreted the report as indicating that a Leonardo rider's 
braking response is not likely to be degraded by the different 
placement of the brake controls, thus directly addressing and meeting 
our safety concern. We believe it is also germane to consider that it 
applies to Vectrix's Electric Scooter as well. The maximum speed of the 
Vectrix, 60 mph, is slightly less than that of the Leonardo 150's 65.7 
mph. The principal difference between the two vehicles appears to be in 
the method of propulsion, which we do not deem relevant to the issue of 
rear brake control location and operation. An exemption would permit 
Vectrix to test market the 600 vehicles intended.
    Accordingly, we find that a temporary exemption would make the 
development and field evaluation of a low-emission motor vehicle 
easier, and that such an exemption would not unreasonably lower the 
safety level of the vehicle.

Our Finding That an Exemption Would Be in the Public Interest and 
Consistent With the Objectives of Motor Vehicle Safety

    We find that the entry into the nation's motor vehicle fleet of 600 
low-emission motor vehicles is in the public interest. We also find 
that allowing this limited number of motor vehicles whose rear brake 
controls allows braking performance at least equivalent to that of a 
conforming vehicle is consistent with the objectives of motor vehicle 
safety.
    Therefore, Vectrix Corporation is hereby granted NHTSA Temporary 
Exemption No. 99-10 from the requirement of Item 11, Column 2, Table 1 
of 49 CFR 571.123 Standard No. 123, Motorcycle Controls and Displays, 
that the rear wheel brakes be operable through the right foot control. 
This exemption applies only to the Electric Scooter and will expire on 
July 1, 2001.

(49 U.S.C. 30113; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.)


[[Page 45587]]


    Issued on: August 12, 1999.
Ricardo Martinez,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 99-21338 Filed 8-16-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P