[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 174 (Monday, September 9, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73186-73188]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-20195]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2024-0053]


Damon Motors Inc.; Receipt of Petition for Temporary Exemption 
From a Rear Wheel Brake Requirement of FMVSS No. 123

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

ACTION: Notice of receipt of a petition for a temporary exemption; 
request for comment.

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

SUMMARY: Damon Motors Inc. (Damon) has petitioned the agency for a 
temporary exemption from a rear wheel brake control requirement of 
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 123, Motorcycle 
controls and displays. The petitioner seeks to install the rear brake 
control on the left handlebar instead of the right foot control 
required by FMVSS No. 123. NHTSA is publishing this document in 
accordance with statutory and administrative provisions and requests 
comment on the merits of Damon's exemption petition. NHTSA has made no 
judgment at this time on the merits of the petition.

DATES: You should submit your comments not later than October 9, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Natasha Reed, Office of the Chief 
Counsel, NCC-200, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590. Telephone: (202) 366-2992; 
Fax: (202) 366-3820.

ADDRESSES: We invite you to submit comments on the application 
described above. You may submit comments identified by docket number in 
the heading of this notice by any of the following methods:
    <bullet> Fax: 1 (202) 493-2251.
    <bullet> Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket 
Operations, M-30, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, 
DC 20590.
    <bullet> Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building 
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    <bullet> Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting 
comments.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and 
docket number. Note that all comments received will be posted without 
change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal 
information provided. Please see the Privacy Act discussion below. We 
will consider all comments received before the close of business on the 
comment closing date indicated above. To the extent possible, we will 
also consider comments filed after the closing date.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or 
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or to 
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 
except Federal holidays. Telephone: (202) 366-9826.
    Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits 
comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT 
posts these comments, without edit, to www.regulations.gov, as 
described in the system of records notice, DOT/ALL-14 FDMS, accessible 
through www.dot.gov/privacy. To facilitate comment tracking and 
response, we encourage commenters to provide their name, or the name of 
their organization; however, submission of names is completely 
optional. Whether or not commenters identify themselves, all timely 
comments will be fully considered. If you wish to provide comments 
containing proprietary or confidential information, please contact the 
agency for alternate submission instructions.
    Confidential Business Information: If you wish to submit any 
information under a claim of confidentiality, submit these materials to 
NHTSA's Office of the Chief Counsel in accordance with 49 CFR part 512. 
All requests for confidential treatment must be submitted directly to 
the Office of the Chief Counsel. NHTSA is currently treating electronic 
submission as an acceptable method for submitting confidential business 
information to the agency under part 512. If you claim that any of the 
information or documents provided in your response constitutes 
confidential business information within the meaning of 5 U.S.C. 
552(b)(4), or are protected from disclosure pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1905, 
you may submit your request via email to Dan Rabinovitz in the Office 
of the Chief Counsel at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e9ad8887808c85c7bb888b8087869f809d93a98d869dc78e869f"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c581a4abaca0a9eb97a4a7acabaab3acb1bf85a1aab1eba2aab3">[email protected]</span></a>. Do not send a 
hardcopy of a request for confidential treatment to NHTSA's 
headquarters.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. The Motorcycle Rear Brake Control Requirement in FMVSS No. 123 and 
Its Purpose

    FMVSS No. 123, Motorcycle Controls and Displays, specifies 
requirements for the location, operation, identification, and 
illumination of motorcycle controls and displays. The purpose of FMVSS 
No. 123 is to minimize crashes caused by operator error in responding 
to the motoring environment by standardizing certain motorcycle 
controls and displays. Among other requirements, FMVSS No. 123 S5.2.1 
(table 1) requires the control for a motorcycle's rear brakes to be 
located on the right side of the motorcycle and to be operable by the 
rider's right foot.
    In 2005, NHTSA issued a final rule amending FMVSS No. 123 to 
require scooter-type motorcycles with automatic transmissions (i.e., 
scooters without a clutch lever) to have a left-hand rear brake 
control.\1\ NHTSA chose not to allow the option of placing the rear 
brake control on either the left handlebar or right foot pedal, 
explaining it had concerns that permitting manufacturers to choose 
between two different arrangements could result in a loss of 
standardization, as similar or even identical clutchless motorcycles 
could have different rear brake controls. Further, NHTSA stated that 
while some commenters asserted such an outcome would not have any 
safety consequences, without probative data, the agency believed the 
goal of standardization was better served via FMVSS No. 123 
specifically requiring one brake control location. Thus, the final rule 
made the left-hand rear brake control a requirement, not an option, on 
scooter-type motorcycles with automatic transmissions (i.e., without a 
clutch lever). The final rule continued to require non-scooter 
motorcycles with combined brake systems to have their single-point 
control located at the right foot, the required location for the rear 
brake control. For supplemental rear brake controls, the final rule 
continued

[[Page 73187]]

to require all non-scooter motorcycles to have a right foot pedal 
control for rear brakes, with supplemental rear brake control located 
on the left handlebar if no clutch lever is present.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 70 FR 51286.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The subject of Damon's petition is this motorcycle rear brake 
control. Per the requirements of table 1 of FMVSS No. 123, as a 
motorcycle, rather than a motor-driven cycle or scooter, Damon's 
HyperSport must have rear wheel brakes located on the vehicle's right 
foot control. However, Damon explains in its petition that the rear 
brake control and advanced safety feature design aspects of its 
HyperSport motorcycle (including all variants) preclude the vehicle 
from meeting the requirement for a foot-operated control. Damon 
indicates that the placement of the rear brake control solely on the 
left handlebar will provide at least an equivalent level of safety as 
that required by FMVSS No. 123, pointing to the findings of a motor 
scooter study and European regulations allowing the placement of the 
rear brake control on the left handlebar for motor scooters. Damon 
further states that the absence of a rear brake control at the right 
foot location does not significantly reduce the motorcycle's level of 
safety, and that added safety features, including an advanced warning 
and anti-lock braking system (ABS), actually improve the overall safety 
of the motorcycle. Damon contends that granting its petition will 
benefit the public interest by allowing it to introduce for 
demonstration, development, and field evaluation a new zero emission 
vehicle with advanced safety features aimed at improving the overall 
level of safety within the motorcycling industry.

II. Statutory Authority for Temporary Exemptions

    The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (Safety Act), 
codified at 49 U.S.C. chapter 301, provides the Secretary of 
Transportation authority to exempt, on a temporary basis and under 
specified circumstances, motor vehicles from a motor vehicle safety 
standard or bumper standard. This authority is set forth at 49 U.S.C. 
30113. The Secretary has delegated the authority for implementing this 
section to NHTSA.
    The Act authorizes the Secretary to grant a temporary exemption to 
a vehicle manufacturer under certain conditions. The first relevant 
condition for this petition request requires a finding that the 
exemption would make easier the development or field evaluation of a 
new motor vehicle safety feature providing a safety level at least 
equal to the safety level of the standard. The second relevant 
condition for this petition request requires a finding that the 
exemption would make the development or field evaluation of a low-
emission motor vehicle easier and would not unreasonably lower the 
safety level of the vehicle.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 49 U.S.C. 30113(b)(3)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NHTSA established 49 CFR part 555, Temporary Exemption from Motor 
Vehicle Safety and Bumper Standards, to implement the statutory 
provisions concerning temporary exemptions. The requirements in 49 CFR 
555.5 state that the petitioner must set forth the basis of the 
petition by providing the information required under 49 CFR 555.6, and 
the reasons why the exemption would be in the public interest and 
consistent with the objectives of the Safety Act.
    A petition on the basis that the exemption would make easier the 
development or field evaluation of a new motor vehicle safety or impact 
protection features must include the information specified in 49 CFR 
555.6(b). The main requirements of that section include: (1) a 
description of the safety or impact protection features along with 
research, development, and testing documentation establishing the 
innovative nature of such features; (2) an analysis establishing the 
level of safety or impact protection of the feature is equivalent to or 
exceeds the level of safety or impact protection established in the 
standard from which exemption is sought; (3) substantiation that a 
temporary exemption would facilitate the development or field 
evaluation of the vehicle; and (4) a statement of whether the 
manufacturer intends to conform to the standard at the end of the 
exemption period, apply for a further exemption, or petition for 
rulemaking to amend the standard to incorporate the safety or impact 
protection features.
    A petition on the basis that the exemption would make easier the 
development or field evaluation of a low-emission motor vehicle must 
include the information specified in 49 CFR 555.6(c). The main 
requirements of that section include: (1) substantiation that the 
vehicle is a low-emission vehicle; (2) documentation establishing that 
a temporary exemption would not unreasonably degrade the safety of a 
vehicle; (3) substantiation that a temporary exemption would facilitate 
the development or field evaluation of the vehicle; and (4) a statement 
of whether the petitioner intends to conform to the standard at the end 
of the exemption period.

III. Overview of Petition

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 30113 and the procedures in 49 CFR 
part 555, Damon submitted a petition asking the agency for a temporary 
exemption from the motorcycle rear brake control requirement in FMVSS 
No. 123 S5.2.1 (table 1). Damon states the requested two-year exemption 
will allow it to introduce for demonstration, development, and field 
evaluation the ``Hypersport,'' a multi variant zero-emission motorcycle 
equipped with advanced safety features aimed at improving the overall 
level of safety within the motorcycle industry. Damon notes all 
HyperSport variants are designed to utilize the left handlebar position 
to control the rear brake, which prevent it from meeting the motorcycle 
rear brake location requirement in S5.2.1 (table 1) of FMVSS No. 123, 
which, as described above, requires motorcycle rear wheel brake 
controls to be located at the rider's right foot.
    Damon requests the exemption for 2 years, stating it will not 
produce more than 2,500 exempted motorcycles within any 12-month period 
during the exemption. Damon explains it intends to use data gathered 
through the grant of this petition to submit a petition for rulemaking 
to reduce the complexity of the regulation at issue and allow 
manufacturers the ability to locate rear wheel brake controls on either 
the right foot or left handlebar.
    Damon seeks exemption under two alternative bases. The first basis 
is that an exemption would make the development or field evaluation of 
a new motor vehicle safety feature easier while providing a safety 
level at least equal to the safety level of the standard.\3\ In support 
of this basis Damon states its design will incorporate several advanced 
safety features normally only found in the automotive industry to 
increase rider situational awareness, provide warnings of potential 
dangers around motorcyclists, and maximize the available rider response 
time. Damon explains these features include an advanced warning system, 
anti-lock braking (to reduce the chance of an accident caused by the 
user's application of excessive braking force), and an adjustable 
ergonomics system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 49 U.S.C. 30113(b)(3)(B)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Damon states that many of these features are already commonplace in 
the automotive sector and studies have shown they save lives. However, 
Damon relays that integrating these systems into motorcycles presents 
new challenges because the dynamics of the vehicle are

[[Page 73188]]

distinct. For example, Damon states that unlike the fixed ergonomics of 
conventional motorcycles, its adjustable ergonomics system (SHIFT) 
provides the user more freedom and control for different riding styles. 
Damon explains that using the left handlebar rear brake position to 
accommodate and implement this adjustable ergonomics system will be 
less complex and avoid the challenges of having the foot brake also 
change position. Further, Damon states that locating SHIFT on the 
handlebar brake position will allow it more design freedom to optimize 
bodywork for the vehicle to reduce drag and increase the overall 
efficiency of the HyperSport.
    The second basis is that an exemption would make the development or 
field evaluation of a low-emission vehicle easier without unreasonably 
lowering the safety of that vehicle.\4\ In support of this basis, Damon 
states that its HyperSport qualifies as a low-emission vehicle because 
no emissions are produced during operation. Damon explains that the 
HyperSport has an all-electric powertrain.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 49 U.S.C. 30113(b)(3)(B)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To demonstrate that the HyperSport meets the minimum safety levels 
required for an exemption under either 49 CFR 555.6(b) \5\ or 49 CFR 
555.6(c),\6\ Damon states that the absence of a rear brake control at 
the right foot location does not significantly reduce the level of 
safety afforded to the user, and that the HyperSport's added safety 
features, including an advanced warning system and ABS, improve the 
overall level of safety of the motorcycle. Damon states the 
HyperSport's brake system is designed to surpass the performance 
requirements of FMVSS No. 122, which measures braking performance. 
Further, Damon points out that from 1999-2005 NHTSA granted exemptions 
for motor scooters with rear brake controls on the left handlebar, and 
that a 2000 Carter Engineering study submitted with a similar petition 
for exemption found no response-time detriment in moving the rear brake 
control from the right foot location to the left handlebar. Damon 
states the study found operators responded 21 percent faster to the 
braking stimulus with handlebar-mounted rear brake controls.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The exemption would make easier the development or field 
evaluation of a new motor vehicle safety or impact protection 
features providing a safety or impact protection level at least 
equal to that of the standard.
    \6\ The exemption would make the development or field evaluation 
of a low-emission vehicle easier and would not unreasonably lower 
the safety or impact protection level of that vehicle.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Damon contends that based on this report there is likely no 
difference in the physical response time for operators of motorcycles 
compared to operators of scooters. Damon also points out that motor 
scooter manufacturers were afforded the opportunity to bring their 
vehicles to market in support of gathering future data, and that the 
granting of this petition would allow Damon's HyperSport to do the 
same. Finally, Damon notes that although FMVSS No. 123 reserves the 
left handlebar for the clutch lever or as a supplemental position for 
the rear brake on motorcycles with an automatic transmission, other 
markets like Europe and Canada allow manufacturers to use the left 
handlebar for the rear brake control, and that this exemption would 
promote international harmonization.

IV. Comment Period

    The agency seeks comment from the public on the merits of Damon's 
application for a temporary exemption from the motorcycle rear brake 
control requirements in paragraph S5.2.1 (table 1) of FMVSS No. 123. 
The agency has not made any judgment on the merits of the application 
and is placing a non-confidential copy of the petition in the docket. 
We are providing a 30-day comment period. After considering public 
comments and other available information, we will publish a notice of 
final action on the application in the Federal Register.
    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30113; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.95 
and 501.5.

Sophie Shulman,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2024-20195 Filed 9-6-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>