[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 189 (Monday, September 30, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61376-61378]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-24726]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration


Denial of Motor Vehicle Defect Petition, DP02-006

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

ACTION: Denial of petition for a defect investigation.

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

SUMMARY: This notice sets forth the reasons for the denial of a 
petition submitted to NHTSA under 49 U.S.C. 30162, requesting that the 
agency commence a proceeding to determine the existence of a defect 
related to motor vehicle safety in model year (MY) 2000 Kia Sportage 
vehicles with respect to their propensity to roll over. After reviewing 
the petition and other information, NHTSA has concluded that further 
expenditure of the agency's investigative resources on the issue raised 
by the petition does not appear to be warranted. The agency accordingly 
has denied the petition. The petition is hereinafter identified as 
DP02-006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jonathan White, Office of Defects 
Investigation (ODI), NHTSA, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 
20590. Telephone: (202) 366-5226.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Ms. Anne Marie Terrone of Franklin Square, 
New York, submitted a petition by letter dated April 17, 2002, 
requesting that NHTSA commence an investigation to determine the 
existence of a defect related to motor vehicle safety in MY 2000 Kia 
Sportage vehicles. The petitioner alleges that as she was making a 
left-hand turn, her MY 2000 Kia Sportage vehicle rolled over twice, 
causing her serious injuries.
    In response to ODI's inquiry, Kia Motors America, Inc (KMA) 
provided ODI with information concerning the aforementioned rollover 
incident. KMA's information included a copy of the lawsuit filed by the 
petitioner and a copy of the police accident report (PAR). The lawsuit 
states that the petitioner's vehicle rolled over twice while changing 
lanes on Route 135 in Nassau County, New York. The PAR states that the 
incident occurred at 1:45 p.m., on March 16, 2001, on Route 135, an 
expressway with a posted speed limit of 55 mph. A non-scaled rough 
diagram in the PAR appears to show that the vehicle was initially in 
the right hand lane of the three-lane roadway, overturned between the 
right and middle lanes and came to a stop at an angle between the left 
and middle lanes. The PAR indicates that no other vehicle was involved 
and that ``unsafe speed'' was an apparent contributing factor.
    Two variables that have significant influence on a vehicle's 
resistance to rollover are its track width and center-of-gravity (CG). 
Wider track width and/or lower CG increases the vehicle's resistance to 
rollover. According to KMA, the Kia Sportage vehicle's track width and 
CG are the same from MY 1995 (first model year) to MY 2002. 
Accordingly, ODI has reviewed NHTSA's consumer complaint database, the 
Fatality Analysis Reporting System database (FARS), and available state 
data for the MY 1995-2000 Kia Sportage vehicles (subject vehicles) to 
search for reported rollover incidents. ODI did not include MY 2001-
2002 since state crash data and FARS data are either not available or 
incomplete at this time. For comparison purposes, ODI also reviewed 
similar data for the MY 1995-2000 Chevrolet/Geo Tracker, MY 1997-2000 
Honda CR-V, MY 1999-2000 Suzuki Vitara/Grand Vitara, MY 1998-2000 Isuzu 
Amigo, and MY 1996-2000 Toyota RAV4 (hereinafter ``peer vehicles''). 
These vehicles were selected as peers of the subject vehicles because 
of their general characteristics rather than specific dimensions. ODI 
also compared the rollover risk of the subject vehicles with those of 
certain model year 2001 Sport Utility Vehicles (SUV) evaluated under 
NHTSA's New Car Assessment Program (NCAP).
    Table 1, below, compares the number of complaints ODI has received 
for the subject vehicles and the peer vehicles of rollover incidents 
that appeared to have occurred on the road surface and did not involve 
another vehicle (Single-Vehicle On-Road (``SVOR'') rollovers). This 
data does not suggest that the Kia Sportage has a higher propensity of 
SVOR rollover than the peer vehicles.

                         Table 1.--ODI Compliant Comparison on SVOR Rollover Between the Subject Vehicles and the Peer Vehicles
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                Model year
                        Make and model                        ------------------------------------------------------------------------------    Total
                                                                   1995         1996         1997         1998         1999         2000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kia Sportage.................................................            0            0            0            1            0            1            2
Isuzu Amigo..................................................          n/a          n/a          n/a            0            0            0            0
Honda CR-V...................................................          n/a          n/a            0            0            0            1            1

[[Page 61377]]

 
Toyota RAV4..................................................          n/a            0            0            1            1            0            2
Chevrolet/GeoTracker.........................................            3            2            1            1            0            0            7
Suzuki Vitara*...............................................          n/a          n/a          n/a          n/a            0            0           0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 ``n/a'' denotes here and hereinafter that the model vehicle was not produced in that model year.
* Including the Grand Vitara model here and hereinafter.

    Table 2, below, shows the number of all SVOR fatal crashes in FARS 
between calendar years 1994 through 2000 involving the subject vehicles 
and the peer vehicles. Also shown are the number of these crashes that 
involved rollovers, and the percentage of rollovers in these crashes. 
These SVOR crashes do not include first harmful event collisions with 
pedestrians, pedal-cyclists, trains, or animals. FARS appears to 
indicate that the subject vehicles have a lower propensity of SVOR 
rollover per fatal crash than the peer vehicles.

                                     Table 2.--SVOR Rollover Rate Per Fatal Crash for the Subject Vehicles and the Peer Vehicles Based on 1994-2000 ARS Data
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                     Model year                                                           Total         Percent
                                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------     of
                  Vehicle model                          1995               1996               1997               1998               1999               2000                           rollovers
                                                 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------  Crash   Rollover   in SVOR
                                                   Crash   Rollover   Crash   Rollover   Crash   Rollover   Crash   Rollover   Crash   Rollover   Crash   Rollover                      crashes
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sportage........................................        1         1        1         1        0         0        1         0        4         3        1         1        8         6         75
Amigo...........................................      n/a       n/a      n/a       n/a      n/a       n/a        0         0        1         1        0         0        1         1        100
CR-V............................................      n/a       n/a      n/a       n/a        1         1        1         1        1         1        0         0        3         3        100
RAV4............................................      n/a       n/a        1         1        1         1        4         3        1         1        1         1        8         7         87
Tracker.........................................        4         4        2         2        2         2        1         1        1         1        0         0       10        10        100
Vitara..........................................      n/a       n/a      n/a       n/a      n/a       n/a      n/a       n/a        0         0        0         0        0         0    unknown
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 3, below, shows the number of SVOR crashes and the percentage 
of SVOR crashes involving rollovers using state crash data from 
Florida, Maryland, Missouri, North Carolina (calendar year 2000 data 
not available), Pennsylvania, and Utah for crashes that occurred in 
calendar years 1994 through 2000. These states were chosen because 
their crash records included the vehicle identification number and 
identified all rollover crashes. The state crash data appears to 
indicate that the subject vehicles have a comparable propensity of SVOR 
rollover as the peer vehicles.

                   Table 3.--Percentage of the SVOR Rollovers in SVOR Crashes From Six States
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                   Percentage of
                                                                                   SVOR rollover   the rollovers
                 Make and model                     Model year     SVOR crashes       crashes         in SVOR
                                                                                                      crashes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kia Sportage....................................           95-00             260              94              36
Isuzu Amigo.....................................           98-00             264             116              44
Honda CR-V......................................           97-00             195              42              21
Toyota RAV4.....................................           96-00             237              76              32
Chevrolet/Geo Tracker...........................           95-00            2560             932              36
Suzuki Vitara...................................           99-00              81              24              30
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ODI also compared the rollover resistance of the subject vehicles 
to that of other MY 2001 SUVs by utilizing NCAP's evaluation of the 
static stability factor (SSF) for each of the other vehicles listed in 
Table 4. SSF is one-half the track width of a vehicle divided by the 
height of its center of gravity; a higher SSF value corresponds to 
greater rollover resistance in single-vehicle crashes. Table 4, below, 
shows that the SSF of the subject vehicles ranks favorably among the MY 
2001 SUVs evaluated under NCAP.

 Table 4.--NCAP Static Stability Factor for Model Year 2001 Sport Utility Vehicles Compared to SSF for MY 1995-
                                       2002 Kia Sportage Calculated by KMA
                     NCAP Static Stability Factor for Model Year 2001 Sport Utility Vehicles
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Make and model                        4x2                Make and model                 4x4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pontiac Aztek.................................            1.21  Pontiac Aztek...................            1.26
Dodge Durango.................................            1.20  Toyota RAV4.....................            1.22
Lexus RX300...................................            1.20  Lexus RX300.....................            1.21
Toyota RAV4...................................            1.19  Mazda Tribute...................            1.21
Honda CR-V....................................            1.17  Honda CR-V......................            1.19
Mazda Tribute.................................            1.17  Isuzu Rodeo.....................            1.18
Chevrolet Tracker.............................            1.16  Kia Sportage....................            1.18
Suzuki Grand Vitara...........................            1.16  Honda Passport..................            1.18

[[Page 61378]]

 
Honda Passport................................            1.15  Dodge Durango...................            1.16
Isuzu Rodeo...................................            1.15  Infiniti QX4....................            1.16
Kia Sportage..................................            1.14  Nissan Pathfinder...............            1.16
Chevrolet Suburban............................            1.13  Chevrolet Tracker...............            1.15
GMC Yukon XL..................................            1.13  Suzuki Vitara...................            1.15
Chevrolet Tahoe...............................            1.12  Chevrolet Suburban..............            1.14
GMC Yukon.....................................            1.12  Chevrolet Tahoe.................            1.14
Ford Expedition...............................            1.11  GMC Yukon/Yukon XL..............            1.14
Lincoln Navigator.............................            1.11  Jeep Wrangler...................            1.13
Jeep Grand Cherokee...........................            1.09  Nissan Xterra...................            1.12
Nissan Xterra.................................            1.09  Lincoln Navigator...............            1.11
Toyota 4Runner................................            1.08  Ford Expedition.................            1.11
Mitsubishi Montero Sport......................            1.07  Jeep Grand Cherokee.............            1.11
Nissan Pathfinder.............................            1.07  Mitsubishi Montero Sport........            1.11
Mercury Mountaineer...........................            1.06  Chevrolet Blazer................            1.09
Ford Explorer.................................            1.06  GMC Jimmy.......................            1.09
Chevrolet Blazer..............................            1.02  Oldsmobile Bravada..............            1.09
GMC Jimmy.....................................            1.02  Jeep Cherokee...................            1.08
                                                ..............  Ford Explorer...................            1.06
                                                ..............  Mercury Mountaineer.............            1.06
                                                ..............  Toyota 4Runner..................            1.06
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In view of the foregoing, it is unlikely that NHTSA would issue an 
order for the notification and remedy of the alleged defect as defined 
by the petitioner at the conclusion of the investigation requested in 
the petition. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize 
NHTSA's limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety 
mission, the petition is denied.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30162(d); delegations of authority at CFR 
1.50 and 501.8.

    Issued on: September 23, 2002.
Kenneth N. Weinstein,
Associate Administrator for Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 02-24726 Filed 9-27-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P