Browse: Departments   Dates   Agencies  

CFR Citation: 16 CFR Parts 1307, 1410, 1500 and 1515

NOTICE: Part II

DOCUMENT ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUBJECT CATEGORY: Standards for All Terrain Vehicles and Ban of Three-Wheeled All Terrain Vehicles; Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

DATES: Written comments in response to this document must be received by the Commission no later than October 24, 2006. Comments on elements of the proposed rule that, if issued in final form would constitute collection of information requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act, may be filed with the Office of Management and Budget (``OMB'') and with the Commission. Comments will be received by OMB until October 10, 2006.

DOCUMENT SUMMARY: To address the unreasonable risks of injury and death associated with all terrain vehicles (``ATVs''), the Commission is proposing rules for adult and youth ATVs. The proposed rules include requirements concerning the mechanical operation of ATVs, requirements for providing safety information about operating ATVs (such as through labeling and training), and requirements for certification, testing and recordkeeping. The proposed standards would apply to adult singlerider and tandem ATVs and to youth ATVs. The Commission is also proposing a rule to ban threewheeled ATVs. The proposed rules are issued under the authority of both the Consumer Product Safety Act (``CPSA'') and the Federal Hazardous Substances Act (``FHSA'').

SUMMARY: Consumer Product Safety Commission,

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

The Commission is proposing rules that will cover singlerider ATVs, tandem ATVs (intended for two people) and ATVs intended for children under 16 years of age.\1\ These proposed rules include proposed standards that specify mechanical requirements for ATVs and informational requirements so that ATV purchasers and operators will have safety information about ATVs. The Commission is also proposing to ban threewheeled ATVs. The Commission believes that these proposed rules are necessary to address an unreasonable risk of injury and death associated with ATVs.
\1\ The Commission voted unanimously to issue the notice of proposed rulemaking with changes to address youth and adult ATV training (subsection (g)). Commissioner Nancy A. Nord and
Commissioner Thomas H. Moore voted for additional changes not included in Chairman Stratton's vote, including additional instructions to staff and request for comments, a new subsection and modifying language in the preamble. Commissioners Nord and Moore issued statements which are available from the Commission's Office of the Secretary or from the Commission's Web site, http://www.cpsc.gov .

ATVs were first available in this country in the early 1970's, and became increasingly popular in the early 1980's. With their rise in popularity, the number of ATVrelated incidents also rose. On May 31, 1985, the Commission published an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (``ANPR'') stating the Commission's safety concerns and outlining options the Commission was considering to address ATVrelated hazards. 50 FR 23139. In 1987, the Commission filed a lawsuit under section 12 of the CPSA against the five companies that were major ATV distributors at that time to declare ATVs an imminently hazardous consumer product, see 15 U.S.C. 2061(b)(1).\2\ The lawsuit was settled by Consent Decrees filed on April 28, 1988 that were effective for ten years.
\2\ The five distributors were American Honda Motor Co., Inc., American Suzuki Motor Corp., Polaris Industries, L.P., Yamaha Motor Corp., USA, and Kawasaki Motors Corp., USA. In 1996, Arctic Cat, Inc. began manufacturing ATVs and entered into an Agreement and Action Plan with the Commission in which the company agreed to take substantially the same actions as required under the Consent Decrees.

1. The Consent Decrees

In the Consent Decrees, the distributors agreed to: (1) Halt the distribution of threewheel ATVs, (2) attempt ``in good faith'' to devise a voluntary performance standard satisfactory to the Commission; (3) label ATVs with four types of warnings, the language and format of which were specified in the Consent Decrees; (4) supplement existing owners manuals with safety text and illustrations specified in the Consent Decrees and to prepare new owners manuals with specified safety information; (5) provide point of purchase safety materials meeting guidelines specified by the Consent Decrees, including hangtags, a safety video, and other safety information; (6) and offer a rider training course to ATV purchasers and members of their immediate families at no cost. In addition, the Consent Decrees contained several media and marketing provisions.

The distributors also agreed in the Consent Decrees that they would ``represent affirmatively'' that ATVs with engine sizes between 70 and 90 cc should be used only by those age 12 and older, and that ATVs with engine sizes larger than 90 cc should be used only by those 16 and older. Because distributors did not sell their products directly to consumers but through dealerships (which were not parties to the Consent Decrees), distributors agreed to ``use their best efforts to reasonably assure'' that ATVs would ``not be purchased by or for the use of'' anyone who did not meet the age restrictions. While the Consent Decrees were in effect, the distributors entered into agreements with the Commission and the Department of Justice agreeing to monitor their dealers to determine whether they were complying with the age recommendations and to terminate the franchises of dealers who repeatedly failed to provide the appropriate age recommendations. 2. Development of the Voluntary Standard for SingleRider ATVs

Industry had begun work on a voluntary standard before the Consent Decrees were in place. Distributors that were parties to the Decrees agreed to work in good faith to develop a voluntary standard that was satisfactory to the Commission within four months of the signing of the Consent Decrees. The five companies, working through the Specialty Vehicle Institute of America (``SVIA''), submitted a standard [[Page 45905]]
for approval as an American National Standards Institute (``ANSI'') standard in December 1988. On January 13, 1989, the Commission published a notice in the Federal Register concluding that the voluntary standard was ``satisfactory'' to the Commission.\3\ 54 FR 1407. The standard, known as ANSI/SVIA 12001, The American National Standard for Four Wheel AllTerrain VehiclesEquipment, Configuration, and Performance Requirements, was first published in 1990, and was revised in 2001. The ANSI standard has requirements for the mechanical operation of ATVs, but does not contain any provisions concerning labeling, owners manuals or other information to be provided to the purchaser because such requirements were stated in the Consent Decrees that were in effect when the ANSI standard was developed. As discussed in section G.3, ANSI now has a draft voluntary standard for tandem ATVs.
\3\ In the FR notice, the Commission noted that it
``specifically reserved its rights under the consent decrees to institute certain enforcement or rulemaking proceedings in the future.'' 54 FR 1407.

3. ATV Action Plans/Letters of Undertaking

The Consent Decrees expired in April 1998. The Commission entered into voluntary ``Action Plans,'' also known as ``Letters of Undertaking'' or ``LOUs,'' with eight major ATV distributors (the five who had been parties to the Consent Decrees, plus Arctic Cat, Inc., Bombardier, Inc. and Cannnondale Corporation, which no longer makes ATVs) See 63 FR 48199 (summarizing Action Plans).\4\ Except for Bombardier's, all of the Action Plans took effect in April 1998 at the expiration of the Consent Decrees. (Bombardier's took effect in 1999 when the company began selling ATVs.) The companies agreed to continue many of the actions the Consent Decrees had required concerning the age recommendations, point of sale information (i.e., warning labels, owners manuals, hang tags, safety alerts, and safety video), advertising and promotional materials, training, and stopping distribution of threewheeled ATVs.
\4\ These documents are available on CPSC's Web site at http://www.cpsc.gov/library/foia/foia98/fedreg/honda.pdf; www.cpsc.gov/ library/foia/foia98/fedreg/suzuki.pdf; http://www.cpsc.gov/library/foia/foia98/fedreg/kawasaki.pdf ; www.cpsc.gov/library/foia/foia98/fedreg/
polaris; http://www.cpsc.gov/library/foia/foia98/fedreg/yamaha.pdf; http://www.cpsc.gov/library/foia/foia98/fedred/arctic.pdf; and http://www.cpsc.gov/library/foia/foia99/pubcom/bobard.pdf. 4. Termination of Previous Rulemaking

As mentioned above, the Commission issued an ANPR concerning ATVs in 1985, but chose to pursue legal action under section 12 of the CPSA instead of taking regulatory action. In 1991, the Commission terminated the rulemaking proceeding it had started with the 1985 ANPR. 56 FR 47166. The Commission observed in its termination notice that, at the time of the termination, the Consent Decrees were in effect, the five ATV distributors had agreed to conduct monitoring of dealers' compliance with the Consent Decrees' provisions, and ATVrelated injuries and deaths were declining. The ATVrelated injury rate for the general population (per ATV) had dropped by about 50 percent between 1985 and 1989, and ATVrelated fatalities had declined from an estimated 347 in 1986 to about 258 in 1989. Id. At 47170.

The Commission's termination of its rulemaking proceeding was challenged by the Consumer Federation of America (``CFA'') and U.S. Public Interest Research Group (``PIRG'') arguing that withdrawing the ANPR rather than pursuing a ban on the sale of new adultsize ATVs for use by children under 16 was arbitrary and capricious. The court upheld the Commission's decision. Consumer Federation of America v. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 990 F.2d 1298 (D.C. Cir. 1993). The court noted that it was reasonable for the Commission to determine the effectiveness of the Consent Decrees and monitoring activities before considering whether additional action would be necessary. Id. at 1306. 5. CFA's Petition and the Chairman's Memo

In August 2002, CFA and eight other groups requested that the Commission take several actions regarding ATVs. CPSC docketed the portion of the request that met the Commission's docketing requirements in 16 CFR Sec. 1051.5(a). That request asked for a rule banning the sale of adultsize four wheel ATVs for the use of children under 16 years old. The Commission solicited public comments on the petition. 67 FR 64353 (2002). In 2003, the Commission held a public hearing in West Virginia, and the Chairman held hearings in Alaska and New Mexico to hear oral presentations from the public about ATVs. The staff prepared a briefing package analyzing the petition and recommending that the Commission deny the petition (available on the Commission's Web site at http://www.cpsc.gov/library/foia/foia05/brief/briefing.html). (After an initial vote on October 6, 2005 to defer a decision on the petition, the Commission voted 21 to deny the petition when it voted on July 12, 2006 to issue this NPR. The statements issued by Commissioner Nord and Commissioner Moore, referenced in footnote 1, also discuss their votes on the petition.)

On June 8, 2005, Chairman Hal Stratton delivered a memorandum to the staff asking the staff to review all ATV safety actions and make recommendations on a number of issues. The memo directed the staff to consider whether: (1) The current ATV voluntary standards are adequate in light of trends in ATVrelated deaths and injuries; (2) the current ATV voluntary standards or other standards pertaining to ATVs should be adopted as mandatory standards by the Commission; and (3) other actions, including rulemaking, should be taken to enhance ATV safety. The memo also identified several specific issues for the staff to review, namely: (1) Presale training/certification requirements; (2) enhanced warning labels; (3) formal notification of safety rules by dealers to buyers; (4) the addition of a youth ATV model appropriate for 14year olds; (5) written notification of child injury data at the time of sale; (6) separate standards for vehicles designed for two riders; and (7) performance safety standards. The memo directed the staff to give particular attention to improving the safety of young riders.

6. 2005 ANPR

On October 14, 2005, the Commission published an ANPR that began this proceeding. 70 FR 60031. The ANPR reviewed the history of the Commission's involvement with ATVs, summarized the ANSI/SVIA12001 standard, described regulatory and nonregulatory options to address ATVrelated injuries and deaths, and requested comments from the public. Comments on the ANPR and the Commission's responses are discussed at section H.

B. Statutory Authority

This proceeding is conducted pursuant to the Consumer Product Safety Act (``CPSA'') and the Federal Hazardous Substances Act (``FHSA''). All Terrain Vehicles are ``consumer products'' which can be regulated by the Commission under the authority of the CPSA. See 15 U.S.C. 2052(a). However, the FHSA provides the Commission with regulatory authority over articles intended for use by children. See 15 U.S.C. 1261(f)(1)(D). See also 15 U.S.C. 2079(d) (requiring, that the Commission regulate under the FHSA if the risk of injury at issue can be eliminated or sufficiently reduced by action under the FHSA unless the Commission finds by rule that it is in the public interest to [[Page 45906]]
regulate under the CPSA). Thus, the Commission is proposing standards for adult 4wheel ATVs and a ban of adult threewheeled ATVs under the CPSA, and is proposing a standard for youth ATVs, which includes a ban of threewheeled ATVs, under the FHSA.

1. The CPSA

Section 7 of the CPSA authorizes the Commission to issue consumer product safety standards that consist of performance requirements and/ or requirements for warnings or instructions. Id. 2056(a). The requirements of the standard must be ``reasonably necessary to prevent or reduce an unreasonable risk of injury associated with such product.'' Id.

Section 8 of the CPSA authorizes the Commission to issue a rule declaring a consumer product a ``banned hazardous product'' when the Commission finds that: The product is being, or will be, distributed in commerce; the product presents an unreasonable risk of injury; and no feasible consumer product safety standard would adequately protect the public from the risk of injury. Id. 2057.

Section 9 of the CPSA specifies the procedure the Commission must follow to issue a consumer product safety standard or a ban under section 8. In accordance with section 9, the Commission commenced this rulemaking by issuing an ANPR identifying the product and the risk of injury, summarizing regulatory alternatives, and inviting comments or suggested standards from the public. Id. 2058(a). 70 FR 60031 (2005). The Commission considered the comments submitted in response to the ANPR, and has decided to issue these proposed rules and a preliminary regulatory analysis in accordance with section 9(c) of the CPSA. Next, the Commission will consider the comments received in response to the proposed rules and decide whether to issue final rules and a final regulatory analysis. 15 U.S.C. 2058(c)(f).

According to section 9(f)(1) of the CPSA, before promulgating a consumer product safety rule, the Commission must consider, and make appropriate findings to be included in the rule, concerning the following issues: (1) The degree and nature of the risk of injury that the rule is designed to eliminate or reduce; (2) the approximate number of consumer products subject to the rule; (3) the need of the public for the products subject to the rule and the probable effect the rule will have on utility, cost or availability of such products; and (4) means to achieve the objective of the rule while minimizing adverse effects on competition, manufacturing and commercial practices. Id. 2058(f)(1).

According to section 9(f)(3) of the CPSA, to issue a final rule, the Commission must find that the rule is ``reasonably necessary to eliminate or reduce an unreasonable risk of injury associated with such product'' and that issuing the rule is in the public interest. Id. 2058(f)(3)(A) & (B). In addition, if a voluntary standard addressing the risk of injury has been adopted and implemented, the Commission must find that (1) the voluntary standard is not likely to eliminate or adequately reduce the risk of injury, or that (2) substantial compliance with the voluntary standard is unlikely. Id. 2058(f)(3)(D). The Commission also must find that expected benefits of the rule bear a reasonable relationship to its costs and that the rule imposes the least burdensome requirements that would adequately reduce the risk of injury. Id. 2058(f)(3)(E) & (F).

Other provisions of the CPSA also authorize this rulemaking. Section 27(e) provides the Commission with authority to issue a rule requiring consumer product manufacturers to provide the Commission with such performance and technical data related to performance and safety as may be required to carry out the CPSA, and to give such performance and technical data to prospective and first purchasers. Id. 2076(e). This provision bolsters the Commission's authority under section 7 to require provision of safetyrelated information such as hangtags, instructional/owners manuals, safety videos, and training.

Section 14 of the CPSA authorizes the Commission to issue a rule requiring certification that a product meets a consumer product safety standard. Id. 2063(c). Section 14 also authorizes the Commission to prescribe, by rule, reasonable testing programs for consumer products subject to a consumer product safety rule. Id. 2063(b).

Finally, section 16 of the CPSA authorizes the Commission to issue rules requiring establishment and maintenance of records needed to implement the CPSA or to determine compliance with rules or orders issued under the CPSA. Id. 2065(b).

2. The FHSA

The FHSA requires proceedings and findings similar to those required by the CPSA. Section 2(f)(1)(D) of the FHSA defines ``hazardous substance'' to include any toy or other article intended for use by children that the Commission determines, by regulation, presents an electrical, mechanical, or thermal hazard. 15 U.S.C. 1261(f)(1)(D). An article may present a mechanical hazard if its design or manufacture presents an unreasonable risk of personal injury or illness during normal use or when subjected to reasonably foreseeable damage or abuse. 15 U.S.C. 1261(s).

Under section 2(q)(1)(A) of the FHSA, an article intended for use by children, which is a hazardous substance (as defined in the FHSA) accessible by a child, is banned. 15 U.S.C. 1261(q)(1)(A). Under this authority, the Commission can issue a rule stating that if a particular article intended for use by children does not meet requirements that the Commission specifies by rule, the item is banned. See Forester v. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 559 F.2d 774, 782 (D.C. Cir. 1977).

Section 3(f) through 3(i) of the FHSA, 15 U.S.C. 1262(f)(i), describes the procedures to promulgate a regulation determining that an article intended for children presents an electrical, mechanical, or thermal hazard. The procedures are the same as those required for a CPSA rule discussed above. 15 U.S.C. 1262(f) through (i).

Before the Commission can issue this type of final rule under the FHSA, it must make many of the same findings necessary for a final CPSA rule: (1) if an applicable voluntary standard has been adopted and implemented, that compliance with the voluntary standard is not likely to adequately reduce the risk of injury, or compliance with the voluntary standard is not likely to be substantial; (2) that benefits expected from the regulation bear a reasonable relationship to its costs; and (3) that the regulation imposes the least burdensome alternative that would adequately reduce the risk of injury. Id. 1261(i)(2).

Section 10 of the FHSA authorizes the Commission to issue regulations ``for the efficient enforcement of'' the FHSA. Id. 1269(a). This provision gives the Commission authority to issue the requirements for certification, testing and recordkeeping in the youth ATV standard. C. The Product

1. What's Covered by the Proposed Rules

An ATV is a motorized vehicle with three or four broad, low pressure tires (less than 10 pounds per square inch) a seat designed to be straddled by the operator, handlebars for steering, and it is designed for offroad use. Most ATVs are designed for use by only one person. However, some companies have developed ATVs intended for use by the operator and one passenger. These
[[Page 45907]]
ATVs are referred to in this notice as tandem ATVs. The proposed rules the Commission is issuing cover threewheeled ATVs, fourwheeled adult ATVs intended for single riders, fourwheeled adult tandem ATVs, and ATVs intended for children under 16 years of age (referred to here as youth ATVs).

2. Market and Sales Information

The market for ATVs has increased greatly since they were first introduced over thirty years ago. The SVIA, an ATV trade association, estimated that in 2005, there were 6.9 million ATVs in use. The market is made of seven major distributors of ATVs (the companies that have entered into voluntary LOUs with the Commission and are represented by SVIA) and new entrants that import ATVs to the U.S. Sales by both groups have increased over the past decade. U.S. retail sales of ATVs by the seven major distributors have increased from an estimated 293,000 ATVs sold in the U.S in 1995 to an estimated 921,000 ATVs sold in the U.S. in 2005. [4] \5\
\5\ Numbers in brackets refer to documents listed at the end of this notice. They are available from the Commission's Office of the Secretary (see ``Addresses'' section above) or from the Commission's web site (http://www.cpsc.gov/ library/foia/foia.html) 3. Imports

Imports for the new entrants have increased markedly in recent years. In the late 1990's, imports comprised a small portion of the ATV market, near zero. In 2001, imports were estimated to account for about 5 percent of total U.S. sales. By 2004, imports had increased to 10 percent of the total U.S. market. [4]

In 2006, Commission staff has identified over 80 importers of ATVs. Most of these firms import other products in addition to ATVs, such as powered scooters, dirt bikes, gocarts and snow mobiles. A recent trade report estimated that 100 to 150 Chinese manufacturers and an estimated 22 Taiwanese firms exported ATVs worldwide in 2005. The trade report does not indicate what share of these firms'' output is exported to the U.S., but based on another trade analysis, Commission staff estimates that approximately 80,000 ATVs were exported from China to the U.S. in 2004 and approximately 14,000 ATVs were exported from Taiwan in that year. There also appear to be imports from other countries in Europe and Southeast Asia (notably South Korea and Vietnam), but the staff does not have information on the extent of such imports. [4]

Staff has observed that imported ATVs may lack some or all of the labeling specified in the LOUs. On such ATVs, labels may be unclear, translated incorrectly, or in a language other than English. Staff has also found that owner's manuals for imported ATVs may not provide information that could be understood by U.S. consumers (e.g., information that conflicts with labeling, measurements in unfamiliar measuring systems). [8]

4. Marketing

The major distributors have traditionally marketed ATVs through franchises, either as freestanding locations or in conjunction with other related retail operations (such as motorcycle retailers). [4]

Imported ATVs are sold in a variety of ways. They may be sold through distributors, including some of the major distributors. Foreign firms also market through U.S. importer/wholesalers who, in turn, may market the products to retailers (including such mass marketers as Pep Boys, Fleet and Farm, WalMart, Sam's Club, and BJ's). Some importer/ suppliers also have dealer networks. [4]

Imported ATVs also are offered for sale directly to consumers through import brokers who transship imported units to retailers (or consumers), often without taking physical control of the products. Web sites offering ATVs for sale are ubiquitous. A recent CPSC surveillance effort reported that there were literally hundreds of Web sites offering ATVs for sale, but the staff does not know the extent of actual purchases through the Internet. [4]

5. Consumer Prices

The staff's 2004 market study observed that the major distributors' suggested retail price for ATVs ranged from about $2,000 to $8,000; the median suggested retail price was $5,150. As a subgroup, the price ranges for youth ATVs from these manufacturers was $1,800 to $2,500. The median suggested retail price for youth ATVs was about $2,300. [4]

A recent staff Internet search of new ATVs with brand names other than those of the North American distributors, offered for sale by business entities, found youth ATV models ranging from about $320 to $950 each, with an average price of about $630. Larger ATVs ranged from about $600 to $2,400, with an average of $1,340. The cited prices included the cost of shipping to points within the lower 48 states from the dealers' U.S. warehouses. Thus, it appears that ATVs from importers/new entrants may have a significant price advantage over the major distributors' products. [4]

D. Risk of Injury

As noted in the 2005 ANPR, the most recent annual report of ATV deaths and injuries that the Commission has issued is the 2004 Annual Report (which was issued in September 2005). According to that report, the Commission had reports of 6,494 ATVrelated deaths that have occurred since 1982. Of these, 2,019 (31 percent of the total) were to children under 16 years of age and 845 (13 percent of the total) were to children under 12 years of age. According to the 2004 Annual Report, 569 ATVrelated deaths were reported to the Commission for 2003. Deaths reported to the Commission represent a minimum count of ATVrelated deaths. To account for ATVrelated deaths that are not reported to the Commission, the staff calculates an estimated number of ATV deaths. The most recent estimate of ATVrelated deaths for 2003 is 740. [3]

CPSC collects information on hospital emergency room treated injuries. The estimated number of ATVrelated injuries treated in hospital emergency rooms in 2004 was 136,100. This is an increase of about eight percent over the 2003 estimate. The estimated number of injuries to children under 16 in 2004 was 44,700 (about 33 percent of the total estimated injuries for 2004). [3]

The staff also estimates the risk of injury and the risk of death per 10,000 ATVs in use. According to the 2004 Annual Report, the estimated risk of injury for fourwheel ATVs for 2004 was 187.9 injuries per 10,000 fourwheel ATVs in use. A recent high in the estimated risk of injury occurred at 200.9 in 2001. The estimated risk of death for fourwheel ATVs in 2003 was 1.1 deaths per 10,000 four wheel ATVs in use. In 1999, the earliest comparable year due to changes in data collection, the estimated risk of death was 1.4 deaths per 10,000 fourwheel ATVs in use. [3]

Based on injury and exposure studies conducted in 1997 and, most recently, in 2001, the estimated number of ATVrelated injuries treated in hospital emergency rooms rose from 52,800 to 110,100 (a 109 percent increase). Injuries to children under 16 rose 60 percent. During these years, the estimated number of ATV drivers rose from 12 to 16.3 million (a 36 percent increase); the estimated number of driving hours rose from 1,580 to 2,360 million (a 50 percent increase); and the estimated number of ATVs rose from 4 to 5.6 million (a 40 percent increase). The chief finding of the 2001 Report was that increases in the estimated [[Page 45908]]
numbers of drivers, driving hours and vehicles did not account for all of the increase in the estimated number of ATV injuries. [3] E. Children and ATVs

During its involvement with ATVs, the Commission has been particularly concerned with reducing the ATVrelated deaths and injuries suffered by children. The Consent Decrees established age guidelines, which the major distributors continue through their Letters of Undertaking. In the Consent Decrees, the major distributors agreed to represent and to make their best efforts to see that their dealers also abided by age recommendations in their dealings with purchasers. These age recommendations were based on the ATV's engine size (measured as cubic centimeter (``cc'') displacement). They established that an ATV with an engine that is larger than 90 cc should be used only by those 16 years of age and older, and that an ATV with an engine size between 70 and 90 cc should be used only by those 12 years of age and older. Thus, ATVs with engine sizes larger than 90 cc have been considered adult ATVs.

Yet, in spite of these efforts through the Consent Decrees and LOUs, recent Commission staff studies have shown that many children ride adult ATVs, and that injury rates are climbing. The Commission's injury and exposure studies indicate that injuries to children under age 16 rose 60 percent from 1997 to 2001. Although the number of children riding ATVs also rose during this period, that increase does not fully account for the rise in incidents.

The age delineations in the Consent Decrees made no mention of speed limits. However, the ANSI/SVIA12001 voluntary standard does categorize youth ATVs by reference to speed limits. The voluntary standard requires that Y6 ATVs (intended for ages 611) have devices to limit their speed to not more than 10 mph and allow upward adjustment to a maximum unrestricted speed of 15 mph. Y12 ATVs (intended for ages 1216) have similar requirements to limit speed to not more than 15 mph and allow upward adjustment to a maximum unrestricted speed of 30 mph.

The Commission is proposing to change the categorization of ATVs based on engine size that the Consent Decrees established. Instead the Commission proposes three categories of youth ATVs based on maximum speed of the ATV. The 90cc policy is design restrictive; engine size does not necessarily restrict ATV size, nor does it necessarily regulate maximum unrestricted speed; staff cannot make assumptions (e.g., speed, power, weight, or size) about all ATVs of a certain engine size based solely on the engine displacement values; and the current voluntary standard for ATVs categorizes youth ATVs by speed limiting characteristics, not engine size.

The Commission's ESHF staff considered several sources to determine appropriate categories of ATVs. Based on developmental characteristics, children are typically grouped as: age 5 through 7 or 8; age 8 or 9 through 11 or 12; age 12 through 15; and age 16 and up. Children, of course, do not all develop at the same rate, but these groupings are appropriate for most.

The CPSC staff's Age Determination Guidelines, state that children age 6 through 8 years can operate slowmoving motorized vehicles, and that children age 9 through 12 years can operate motorized vehicles with gear shifting up to 10 miles per hour. The guidelines state a clear demarcation with the teenage years: ``faster [than 10 mph] moving motorized [vehicles] are generally not appropriate even for 12year olds because of the difficulty associated with both balancing and steering the vehicle while moving.'' Since ATVs require significant balance and control, it seems most appropriate to have an age division around the late preteen/early teenage years. Based on youth attributes described in the Age Determination Guidelines, reasonable youth ATV categories would be Y6 (``slowmoving,'' no gear shifting), Y9 (speeds 515 mph, gear shifting acceptable) and Y13 (since the Age Determination Guidelines stop at age 12, no specifications can be made based on them). Additionally, the Age Determination Guidelines mention that 9to 12yearolds are generally ``aware of traffic laws, but they are very likely to engage in highrisk behaviors like riding in traffic and stunt riding.''

In addition to cognitive development, appropriate age groupings should account for children's physical size. Analysis of children's physical growth suggests groupings with breaks roughly at around ages 8 to 9 and 11 to 13, acknowledging that growth will be rapid between ages 11 and 16 for both males and females.

Groupings set out in the Age Determination Guidelines can be used to delineate three categories for youth ATVs based on maximum speed of the ATV. For the youngest category, the Age Determination Guidelines indicate that the ATV should be ``slowmoving.'' One method of defining ``slow moving'' could be slow enough to allow parents to walk or jog with the ATV to facilitate supervision. Under this premise, it would be reasonable to set the maximum speed for the slowest youth ATV between the jogging speed and running speed. Research indicates that is about 9 to 10 mph. Based on the Age Determination Guidelines, the next category should be roughly 10 to 15 mph. The Age Determination Guidelines do not extend past 12 years of age, but it is reasonable to assume that the third category could be faster than 10 mph and that older, more experienced teens may be able to handle speeds higher than 10 to 15 mph. The Commission's ESHF staff has found no scientific research to support either raising or lowering the current 30 mph speed limit for teens. Thus, 30 mph is a reasonable top speed for the third category of youth ATVs.
Proposed ATV Models and Intended Ages
ATV Model age (years) Speed range Junior 6 +................................ 10 mph or less. Preteen 9 +.............................. 10*15 mph.
Teen 12 +................................. 15*30 mph.
Adult 16 +................................ Not restricted. * With speed limiter.

Although the weight of the ATV can play a role in the suitability of an ATV for a youth, the Commission does not have sufficient information to set an appropriate weight for youth ATVs.

Frame size also plays a role in the appropriateness of an ATV for a child. Several commenters have expressed frustration with the current ATVs available for children because the smaller frames of these ATVs will not fit some 13 to 15 year olds. Establishing categories based on speed limit rather than engine size may encourage manufacturers to offer ATVs with larger frames (and larger engines), but with limited maximum speeds that would be appropriate for children.

The availability of such youth ATVs may shift a number of young riders to youth ATVs rather than larger adult models. This would increase safety. Commission analysis indicates that the injury rate for ATV riders under the age of 16 who are driving adult ATVs is about twice the expected injury rate of those who are driving ageappropriate ATVs. Moreover, these categories may enable more children to receive formal ATV training. The largest and best established formal training programs will not train children under age 16 unless they are riding an appropriate youth model. [8]

The proposed rule also requires that youth ATVs must have automatic [[Page 45909]]
transmissions. Based on the Age Determination Guidelines, ESHF staff believes that manual transmission ATVs are inappropriate for children under 9 years of age. Due to the high cognitive load required to operate complex motorized vehicles, HF staff believes it best to allow all children below 16 years of age to master driving skills before learning to coordinate gear shifting with the many other skills involved when riding.

F. Training

In the 1980s, Commission staff worked with the major ATV distributors to develop the predecessor to the current ATV training course that is offered through the ATV Safety Institute (``ASI''), the nonprofit training division of the SVIA. Training is important because operating an ATV seems deceptively easy; steering controls are similar to a bicycle, and the throttle is generally simply leveroperated with the thumb. ATVs are, however, highspeed motorized vehicles that require repeated practice to drive proficiently. Operating an ATV is somewhat comparable to operating other complex motorized vehicles. ATVs have top speeds approaching that of automobiles on highways, yet have as little protection from oncoming objects as a motorcycle. Even at relatively low speeds (2030 mph) they can take as much skill to operate as an automobile because the operator requires: (1) Situational awareness to negotiate unpaved terrain with both eyelevel hazards (trees, other ATVs) and traillevel hazards (ditches, rocks, hidden holes); and (2) quick judgments including not only steering, speed, and braking, but also terrain suitability, weight shifting and other active riding behaviors. [12]

Formal, handson training teaches drivers how the ATV responds in situations that are typically encountered. ATV training may act as a surrogate for experience because it exposes new ATV drivers to situations they will encounter when riding offroad and teaches them the proper driving behavior to navigate those situations.[12]

All of the major distributors offer training through the ASI. In spite of the offers of free training and other incentives, relatively few ATV riders take formal safety training. According to a 2004 study by SVIA, only about 7 percent of new purchasers actually took training. The newer entrants to the market do not offer any training with their ATVs. These manufacturers account for about 10 percent of domestic ATV sales, but their share of the market has been increasing. [4 & 12]

The Commission is proposing to require that manufacturers provide purchasers with a certificate for free training for the purchaser and any member of his/her immediate family who meets the age
recommendations for the ATV. The benefits of training to new ATV purchasers could be substantial. As stated above, training may act as a surrogate for experience. The greatest risk of injury occurs with inexperienced riders. Staff's analysis of ATV incident data has found a strong inverse relationship between driving experience and the risk of hospital emergency departmenttreated injury. The analysis indicates that risk in the first year of riding was about 65 percent higher than the risk in the second year, and about twice the risk of the third year. [8]

The proposed rules outline the basic content that a free training course must have. This curriculum is based on CPSC safety messages and the ``ATV Rider's Course Outline'' from the Consent Decrees. In addition to instruction about the basic maneuvers that are necessary to operate an ATV safely, the course must include instruction about the risks of ATVrelated deaths and injuries, the importance of safety equipment, and the importance of avoiding the warned against behaviors that are stated in the general warning label (such as children not riding ATVs, not driving on paved roads, etc.). [12]

In many ways, training is essentially an extension of the warning labels and owners instruction manuals. The training course provides the rider with a fuller understanding of the risks involved in riding an ATV and of the actions he/she can take to avoid or reduce these risks. G. Description of Proposed Standards

1. General

The proposed standards draw from the ANSI/SVIA 12001 standard for fourwheel ATVs (for single rider ATVs), the draft voluntary standard for tandem ATVs, the Consent Decrees, and the LOUs. The Commission has pulled together elements from all of these sources to construct proposed standards with the goal of reducing ATVrelated deaths and injuries. Both the adult and youth standards require that ATVs meet requirements for the mechanical operation of the ATV, informational/ point of sale requirements, and certification and recordkeeping requirements.

The Commission believes that the reduction of deaths and injuries from both adult and youth ATVs will require the active participation and cooperation of the ATV industry and we encourage their recommendations for additional safety provisions to the proposed mandatory standards. The creation of viable, safer youth ATVs will be an important component of any final rule.
2. Requirements for Adult Single Rider ATVs

a. Definitions

All terrain vehicle or ATV is defined as ``a threeor fourwheeled motorized vehicle that travels on low pressure tires, has a seat designed to be straddled by the operator (and a passenger if provision is made for carrying a passenger), has handlebars for steering, and is intended for offroad use on nonpaved surfaces.'' The definition of ATV states that for purposes of this part, an ATV is one that is intended for an operator 16 years of age or older. The term ``manufacturer'' is defined to include an importer for purposes of the ATV standards. Many of the definitions in the proposed standard are derived from the ANSI/SVIA12001 standard.

b. Equipment and Configuration Requirements

General. Section 1410.5 proposes requirements for various aspects of the mechanical operation of adult singlerider ATVs. Many of these requirements are substantially the same as requirements of the ANSI/ SVIA12001 voluntary standard. However, the CPSA requires that consumer product safety standards be stated as performance rather than design standards. Thus, some requirements that were stated in the ANSI standard in terms of design have been modified to establish performance requirements.

The provisions of this section ensure that there will be uniformity in the basic operation of ATVs from one make or model to another. Proposed configuration requirements for vehicle controls, indicators, and gearing ensure the standardized instrumentation and safety features of current ATVs. It is important that the location and method of operation of safety related controls, such as brake controls and engine stop switch, be standardized to reduce operator confusion. The specified requirements are consistent with current ATV practice which is based on the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration requirements for motorcycle control location and operation requirements (49 CFR 571.123). [5]

Operator Foot Environment. Proposed performance requirements for operator foot environment ensure adequate vehicle configuration that reduces inadvertent contact between the
[[Page 45910]]
operator's feet and the ground or the ATV's rear wheels. Operator foot contact with the ground or the ATV's rear wheels has been identified as a hazard pattern among ATVrelated injuries. Differing zones are defined for ATVs equipped with footpegs (designed to support the operator's foot with a relatively narrow bar), and footboards (designed to support the operator's foot with a platformtype structure). [5]

Lighting. Proposed lighting requirements mandate headlamps, tail lamps, and stop lamps on all adult ATVs. The lighting equipment must conform to applicable referenced standards. This provision was adopted from the ANSI/SVIA12001 standard. Nighttime riding can be expected with adult ATVs and requirements for industry standard headlamps will ensure minimum illumination for nighttime or safer operation of the vehicle. [5 & 7]

VIN or PIN. The proposed standard requires that each ATV have assigned a unique vehicle identification number (``VIN'') in accordance with 49 CFR Part 565 or a product identification number (``PIN'') in accordance with Recreation OffRoad Vehicle Product Identification Numbering System, SAE International Consortium Standard, ICS1000, issued 20049. If the ATV has a VIN number, the characters in location 4 and 5 of the number must be ``A'' and ``T'', respectively to identify the vehicle as an ATV and an off road vehicle. Having a VIN or PIN on every ATV can be helpful if an ATV is the subject of a corrective action. The VIN or PIN should also permit tracing the ATV back to its retailer to determine compliance with applicable requirements.

Maximum speed capability and brake requirements. Procedures are outlined for the measurement of a loaded vehicle's maximum speed. The maximum speed is used to determine the brake test speed and conformance to the youth ATV speed restriction requirements. [5]

The proposed standard establishes performance tests for service brakes and parking brakes. Reliable brake performance is critical to the safety of an ATV operator. The requirements specify a braking deceleration of 5.88m/s\2\ (0.6g) or greater for service brakes and brake holding power up to a 30 percent grade for parking brakes. [5]

These proposed requirements establish minimum brake performance to ensure that brake systems are adequate for stopping the vehicle and holding the vehicle on an incline. The specified requirements are consistent with current ANSI/SVIA12001 voluntary standard
requirements which are patterned after those in the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 122 Motorcycle Brake Systems (49 CFR 571.122).

The proposed requirements deviate from the current ANSI/SVIA12001 requirements in terms of the vehicle test weight used to perform service brake tests. The current voluntary standard specifies the test weight as the unloaded vehicle weight plus 91 kg (200 lb) if the vehicle load capacity is specified as 91 kg (200 lb) or more. The proposed requirements specify the test weight as the unloaded vehicle weight plus the vehicle load capacity. This will ensure that larger vehicles with larger load capacities do not have a less stringent brake requirement (by using a comparatively lower test weight during brake tests).

Stability requirements. The standard proposes the same pitch stability requirements as the ANSI/SVIA12001 voluntary standard. The pitch stability for singlerider ATVs is based on the longitudinal tilt angle of a vehicle without an operator. A vehicle's longitudinal tilt angle can be calculated by measuring the vehicle's front and rear weights and balancing angle (angle at which vehicle is balanced on its rear wheels) or it can be measured on a tilt table. The ANSI/SVIA1 2001 voluntary standard requires calculation of a vehicle's longitudinal pitch angle which must be 45 degrees or higher to meet the pitch stability requirement. The proposed requirements adopt this test procedure and minimum tilt angle for singlerider ATVs, and add a tilt table option to address larger ATVs whose weights could make it unsafe to follow the voluntary standard procedures for measuring and calculating the pitch stability.

The proposed pitch stability requirements deviate from ANSI/SVIA1 2001 in terms of the test conditions of the vehicle. The current voluntary standard specifies that the vehicle tires be inflated to the ATV manufacturer's lowest recommended pressure. The proposed requirements specify that the tires be inflated to the ATV manufacturer's highest recommended pressure. This will ensure that the vehicle configuration with the highest expected center of gravity will be tested.

Over the years, the Commission has analyzed the issue of ATV stability. Because ATVs are rideractive vehicles (that is, their performance is affected by the rider's movements), it is difficult to evaluate an ATV's actual stability. A satisfactory static test has been developed to measure an ATV's pitch stability (movement from front to back). At this point in time, the industry has not been able to develop a satisfactory test of lateral stability (movement from side to side). Thus, the ANSI/SVIA12001 standard has a requirement for pitch stability, but not for lateral stability. The Commission's proposed standard likewise contains requirements only for pitch stability. However, the Commission encourages the industry to continue to pursue an accurate and reliable test for lateral stability.

c. Information/Point of Sale Requirements

The proposed standard mandates by rule many similar information/ point of sale requirements as were specified in the Consent Decrees and subsequently continued in the LOUs. This subpart of the proposed standard contains requirements for labeling, hangtags, age acknowledgment forms, instructional/owner's manuals, a safety video, and instructional training.

Warning labels. The Consent Decrees specified four labels to appear on all ATVs: (1) a general warning label, (2) an age recommendation label, (3) a passenger warning label, and (4) a tire pressure and overloading warning label. Most ATVs include these or substantially equivalent labels as well as other discretionary warning labels. However, imported ATVs may not have all of these warning labels, the labels may be unclear or they may not be in English.

The proposed rule requires labels that are similar to those required by the Consent Decrees, but allows more flexibility. The warning labels have evolved since the Consent Decrees, and the major distributors currently use their own copyrighted labels that present substantially the same warnings. In the case of the general warning label and the passenger label, the distributors sought Commission approval for new labels that included pictograms and somewhat different wording than had been specified in the Consent Decrees.

Like the Consent Decrees, the proposed rule requires a general warning label, an age recommendation warning label, a passenger warning label and a tire pressure/overloading label (or labels). All of the warning labels must display the safety alert symbol in accordance with section 4.1 of ANSI Z535.42002, American National Standard for Product Safety Signs and Labels, and the word ``WARNING'' in capital letters. The format for all of the labels must be consistent with the ANSI Z535.42002 standard. The proposed rule requires the same location for the singlerider ATVs as was required by the Consent Decrees. The proposed rule
[[Page 45911]]

requires the warning labels to be in English.

The proposed rule specifies statements for these warning labels and requires that the warning labels provide these, or substantially equivalent, statements. This should enable provision of the vital safety information but allow some flexibility to manufacturers who are using labels that are consistent with, but not identical to, the Consent Decree labels.

General warning label. The proposed rule requires a general warning label that contains the same statements, or substantially equivalent ones, as the general warning label required by the Consent Decrees. This label warns that ATVs can be hazardous to operate and that severe injury or death can result if the operator does not follow instructions to: Read the owners manual and all labels; never operate the ATV without proper instruction; never carry a passenger; never operate the ATV on paved surfaces or on public roads; always wear a helmet and protective clothing; never consume alcohol or drugs before or while operating ATVs; never operate the ATV at excessive speeds; and never attempt wheelies, jumps or other stunts. The proposed rule states that the warning statements may be arranged on the label to group the prohibited actions together and the required actions together. This is how many of the current general warning labels are arranged. The location is to be the same as specified in the Consent Decrees.

Age recommendation warning labels. The content of the age recommendation warning labels differs from the Consent Decree labels. The Commission's Human Factors staff concluded that the Consent Decree age labels for adult ATVs are vague about the nature of the hazard they are warning against and may not be as persuasive as they could be. The primary reasons for the age recommendations are children's lack of experience and, particularly, their immature judgment. If the reasons for the age recommendations are not explicitly described in the label, parents may rationalize why their children are exceptions to the recommendations. Thus, the proposed rule requires the following, or substantially similar statement: ``Even youth with ATV experience have immature judgment and should never drive an adult ATV.'' The proposed age recommendation label also differs from the Consent Decree label by directing the message to the supervising parents rather than to the child, who is likely to ignore it. Thus, the proposed rule requires the following, or substantially equivalent, statement: ``Letting children under the age of 16 operate this ATV increases their risk of severe injury or death. NEVER let children under age 16 operate this ATV.'' [10]

Passenger warning label. The proposed rule specifies different wording for the passenger warning label than the Consent Decrees required. The major distributors are currently using a passenger label that differs from the Consent Decrees. As with the general warning label, they asked for and received approval from the Commission for a different passenger label. Both the current label and the Consent Decree label identify that the hazard caused by a passenger is that the ATV may go out of control, but the labels do not state how the presence of a passenger can lead to loss of control. To address this, the proposed standard requires the following, or substantially similar, statement: ``Passengers can affect ATV balance and steering. The resulting loss of control can cause SEVERE INJURY or DEATH.'' The proposed standard also requires the statement (or a substantially similar one): ``NEVER ride on this ATV as a passenger.'' The proposed language inserts the phrase ``on this ATV'' because, with the development of tandem ATVs, some ATVs are intended to carry passengers. [10]

Tire pressure and overloading label(s). Like the Consent Decrees, the proposed standard allows the option of having the tire pressure warning and the overloading warning in separate warning labels or combined into one label. The proposed content of the label(s) is the same as specified in the Consent Decrees.

Label durability. The proposed rule requires that all of the warning labels must meet the durability requirements of Underwriters Laboratories Standard UL 969, fourth edition, October 3, 1995. This should ensure that the labels will remain on the ATVs and legible for operators to see.

Discretionary warning labels. The proposed standard allows manufacturers to display additional warning labels on ATVs so long as they are consistent with ANSI Z535.42002, American National Standard for Product Safety Signs and Labels ANSI Z535.4 (2002) and are affixed to the ATV in an appropriate location that does not detract from the required warning labels. [10]

Hangtags. Like the Consent Decrees, the proposed standard requires that certain hangtags be present on the ATV at the point of sale. The hangtags must provide the contents of the general warning label, a statement that the hangtag is not to be removed before sale, and a statement directing the purchaser to check with the ATV dealer about state or local laws concerning ATVs. The hangtags must be conspicuous and must be at least 4 by 6 inches.

Age acknowledgement form. The proposed rule requires that before the sales transaction, the ATV retailer must provide the purchaser with an age acknowledgement form, the content of which is specified in the proposed rule. The form tells the purchaser that the ATV he/she is considering is for adults and that children have immature judgment and should never drive an adult ATV. The form states the number of children who have died and who have been injured on adult ATVS in each year since 2001 and informs the purchaser that youth ATVs are available. The retailer must require the purchaser to sign the acknowledgement form before the sales transaction; must provide the purchaser and manufacturer with a copy of the form; and must maintain the original for at least five years. The signed forms must be available for Commission inspection upon request.

The purpose of the age acknowledgment form is to ensure that everyone who purchases an adult ATV is aware that it is not intended to be ridden by anyone under 16 and that children can be severely injured or die when riding an adult ATV. The Commission has received comments from parents indicating that they were unaware of the hazard adult ATVs pose for children until their child became injured or killed while riding one. Even with the current warning labels on ATVs stating this hazard and with the LOU provisions that voluntarily continue the major distributors' agreement to follow the age guidelines of the Consent Decrees, apparently some consumers purchase adult ATVs without knowing that a child should not ride them. Requiring purchasers to sign a form which states the age recommendations will inform the purchaser of the risks to children riding adult ATVs and could influence them to prohibit children under 16 from riding one. [8 & 11]

Instructional/owners manuals. Like the Consent Decrees, the proposed rule requires that ATVs be provided with an instructional/ owners manual. The proposed rule continues many of the Consent Decrees' requirements for the manuals. They must be written to convey information about the safe operation and maintenance of the ATV, be written plainly in language that is comprehensible to a 7th grader, and be consistent with other required safety messages. The basic content of the
[[Page 45912]]
manual is specified much as it was in the Consent Decrees. The proposed rule adds a requirement that the manuals be in English.

An introductory safety section must contain certain specified safety messages. This section concludes with CPSC's website and phone number, and the manufacturer must provide a contact number for the purchaser to obtain further ATV safety information. The manufacturer also must provide a phone number or email address for the owner to report any safety issues (this could be the same phone number). The section of the manual that describes proper operating procedures must include narrative text identifying potential hazards, possible consequences, and describing how to avoid or reduce the risk of those hazards. This text must also include relevant warning statements required by the standard. The manufacturer must retain a copy of the manual for each model for 5 years and make it available for CPSC inspection upon request.

Safety Video. The proposed rule requires the retailer to provide the purchaser with a safety video before the sales transaction is completed. The requirements for the safety video are substantially the same as those set out in the Consent Decrees. The video is to include the contents of the hang tag, the concept of knowing one's limitations when operating an ATV, the importance of gradually progressing from basic to more complex maneuvers, and the importance of remaining alert while operating the ATV. The video also must include ATVrelated death and injury statistics, both for all riders and for children under the age of 16, which can be stated in rolling fiveyear averages. These must be updated when there is a statistically significant change in the statistics. The video must be made available to the purchaser in at least one commonly used format, such as VHS or DVD. The manufacturer must retain a copy of the video for 5 years and make it available for CPSC inspection upon request.

The Commission believes that providing the safety video is an extension of the safety messages specified in the warning labels and the instructional/owners manual. The video provides safety information through a readily accessible medium. It can impart more detailed safety information than a warning label can. A purchaser might be more inclined to watch a safety video shortly after purchasing an ATV than he/she would be to read the entire owner's manual with all of its safety information.

Instructional Training. The proposed rule requires ATV manufacturers to provide to purchasers a training course (at no cost) for the purchaser and each member of the purchaser's immediate family who meets the minimum age recommendation for the ATV that is being purchased. At the time of sale, the retailer must deliver to the purchaser a certificate which is valid for attendance at a training course that meets the requirements in the proposed rule. The retailer also must have the purchaser sign a form indicating that ATVs are complex vehicles to drive and that he/she is aware that free training is available. The retailer must retain the original of the training disclosure form and provide the purchaser and the manufacturer each with a copy.

As discussed above, the Commission believes that training can play an important role in reducing ATVrelated deaths and injuries. The curriculum specified in the proposed rule is similar to training that is currently offered by SVIA. It includes instruction on the maneuvers necessary for operation of the ATV and information about behaviors to avoid in order to reduce the rider's risk of injury. The course must include classroom, field and trail activities. The course content must include information on ATVrelated deaths and injuries; the role of safety equipment; rider responsibilities and safety messages; identifying displays and controls on the ATV itself; recognizing one's limitations while driving; evaluating a variety of situations to predict a proper course of action, including terrain obstacles and behavior of other riders; demonstrating successful learning of riding skills, including starting, stopping, and negotiating turns of all types; stopping in a turn; emergency braking; negotiating fulltrack and partialtrack obstacles; driving up hills; and combining skills together in a nonpredictable manner. No course duration is specified, but it must be sufficient to cover all of the topics outlined in the proposed rule and to allow for students to individually master the riding skills covered in the course and to allow for written and riding skills tests.[12]

Although no specific time or location is stated, the course must be provided within a reasonable time from the date of purchase of the ATV and a reasonable distance from the place the ATV is purchased.

Recordkeeping, testing and certification. The proposed rule requires manufacturers to provide near the VIN or PIN number a statement certifying that the ATV meets the requirements of the standard. The manufacturer must perform, or cause to be performed, tests sufficient to demonstrate on an objectively reasonable basis that each ATV produced by the manufacturer meets the mechanical operation requirements of the proposed rule (sections 1410.5 through 1410.9). (This requirement is not intended to mandate testing of every ATV of a particular model.)

The proposed rule requires ATV manufacturers (including importers) to keep records sufficient to show that each ATV the manufacturer produces meets the requirements of the proposed standard. The records must be in English and must be kept at a U.S. location for five years after the manufacturer ceases production of that model. Retailers must keep records of the age recommendations acknowledgment form and the training acknowledgment form for five years after the purchase. 3. Requirements for Tandem ATVs

a. Background

Tandem ATVs are a relatively recent development. The Consent Decrees did not contemplate ATVs designed for more than one rider. The ANSI/SVIA12001 standard does not cover tandem ATVs. However, in 2002 the International 2Up ATV Manufacturers Association (I2AMA) began working on a voluntary standard for tandems, which subsequently became a draft ANSI voluntary standard, ANSI/I2AMA1XXXX, Draft American National Standard for Four Wheel, Two Person, AllTerrain Vehicles Equipment, Configuration, Performance, Safety Information and Training Requirements. Recently, I2AMA agreed to suspend its development of a tandem standard and will instead work with SVIA to include tandem ATVs in the existing ANSI/SVIA standard. [5]

The Commission covers tandem ATVs in its proposed standard for adult ATVs. Most of the requirements for single rider ATVs also apply to tandems. A few provisions in the equipment and configuration requirements and the information requirements are different in order to make them appropriate for tandems. The certification, testing and recordkeeping requirements specified above also apply to tandem ATVs. b. Equipment and Configuration Requirements

Most of the proposed equipment and configuration requirements for

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Elizabeth Leland, Project Manager, ATV Safety Review, Directorate for Economic Analysis, Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, Maryland 20814 4408; telephone (301) 5047706 or email: eleland@cpsc.gov.