cpsc-yamaha.pdf - Reuters

'

•

-,..,...-

•

89/18/2888 12:15 3815848359

rt'A .. U.S. CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSTON

4330 EAST WEST HIQHWA Y

BETHESDA, MD 20814

Ofllc. ofCompllanc:o and Field OplrttloM Defoct lnvestlplionl Divillion Email; noplu@cJ*.pv

Certified MaiVTelecopy 202-303-2000

David Murray, Esquire Willkic Faa & Oallagher LLP Three Lafayette Centre J 875 K Street, N.W. WashiJlston, DC 20006

SEP l 0 2008

Re: CPSC FiJc No. CA080092 Yamaha Motor Corporatioo USA Rhino Utility Vehicle

Dear Mr. Murray:

PN!£. 01/84

t ... 78L Topb Taun lAd

Tel: 301-.504-7594 Fa; 301-.5~3.59

The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) has received information conccmiqlhe Rhino 660 and Rhino 450 Utility Vehicles (the "product'') distributed by Yamaha Motor Corporalion USA {"Yamaha ... or the "firm''). We have n:ceiw:d informadon which indicates mat the product can roll over at low speeds on evca tma1n, the pi"Oduct·s ltllio stability factor i:s Jow, tbe product .has • nmow trac:k widsh, the productlac:U paddina on the roll bus, and the opco cabin CIUI allow a ridct's mns Cld Jep to protNk ftom tho vdliclc. 1beK ~ indicate that the product may pose 1111 urnasonabJe risk of injury or death to ridca.

The Consumer Prochld Safety Act lhd the Commiuion's reauJdon, "Substanrlal Product Huard Report!." 16 C.F.R. Part lit S explain the Comrni:ssion's authority and policy regarding prodtacts that may present substantial prod~ hazards and also explain tbc firm's ri&bts and obligations Wider the AcL

One of tbe responsibilities of the Compliance staff is to determine preliminarily whether a defect u present in a product and, if so. whether that defect rises to the Jeve1 of a substantial product hazard under section J S(a) of the CoDSWllcr Product Safety Act (CPSA), 1 S U .S.C. § 2D64(a).

Deponeni---

Date Rptr. __ WWWJ:IGCeOCK 00M

CONFIDENTIAL RHINO-CPSC-00000029.0001

- ~-- . ~ :·~=-· ·- :-~---,~:-· __ _.. ·-~-·

--- - ~ :-"":.~· ,_. -- ..... : --:~ ~--

u0153570

Highlight

~9/10/2008 12:15 3015840359 C£MILIANtl:: FIELD CPE PAGE 02/04

• ·-

•

•

Pqe2 CA080092

lnforptatlop Begg•&sd

. For the staff to 1S3eS$ acc:watefy the potentiaJ safety hazwd, if BDY, assooialed with the subject produc;t, it noccb certain infomlation from tbc manutamrer or importer. White the: staff reco~ that your fum may not view its response to this request 8$ a report under Section 1 S(b) regarding a possible defect with this produc;1, the type of information requested for a full report is genetally the information n.eeded by the staff. Please follow 16 C • .F.R. f JJ1S.J3(d) (J .. 14} and pnwicle the spectfted lafonaadoa, to the extnt applicable to the prodad and problem dacribed above. Ia your rapoate, pleuc refereDU eacla qaesttoa number (l-l-4).

In addition to providina the infonnation requested above, please also submit the following infonnation: .

15(a) Repniing question 6, include coplet of all consumers or dealer complaints, inclu4ing electronic records, wattaDty claims, and repoJts of injury related to the subject produc;t. Include copies of aU court contplaints and related dQallDetJt.S for lawsuits involvin1 the procfuc:t and the ~lution ofthox lawsuits.

15(b)

IS( c)

IS( d)

15(e)

IS(f)

1 S(g)

If copies of consumer complaints and other documeftts requested above are unavailable, iftditatc the: reason they are unavailable and provide a summiD'}' containing the names, addresses and telephone numben of the c:onsumers or of the plaintiffs' attorneys.

I nclica\c: the status of each complaint or claim, whether resolved and, if so, the terms and date of any settlement

Indicatt: the date upon which Yamaha ~c: aware of each oomplaint, claim, or report ad tbe manner in wbJch it became aware.

Provide all engineering and ~pert reports regarding the subject product that were produced in laW3Uita related to tho product.

If the company altO distributes the product(s) to countries outside the United States, please provide a list of those countries and the number of products shipped to each.

Was the product engineered with a rear differential? Tf not, provide a rationale as to why it was not included in the design. lf a rear differential was added since the product's tint release ple&~~e provide the model yeu of its first we and provide an explaDation a to 'why it was added.

Provide an scrvic:e buiJetins and notification documenta related to this product. Provide a rationale, engineering reports, and all documents. internal or other.wise, for the Yamaha's September I 1, 20061etterto consumers, Yamaha.,s August 23, 2007 Technical Bulletin, and Yamaha's Auaust 27, 2001 lct'.er to consumers .

CONFIDENTIAL RH INO-CPSC-00000029. 0002

u0153570

Highlight

/1!14

B91lBI28B9 12:15 31!115e41!1359

• -

•

•

Page3 CA080092

J 5(h) Provide all engineering doaunents, test reports, and all documents, intcrnaJ or otherwise, relating to all dcstp dumga made to the subjea product from it$ tint release tbrou&h tbc current desip. Provide an cxpliiWion for all desip cbanps made to the product.

IS(i) Provide the static stability (K" F..:tor) for the subject product. include llll tat and/or engineering reports th&t support that finding. If the K.a has changed over time, provide a mtionale for that change.

150) Provide a clu'orlology of events from abe first rollover reportlnvol\':ing a Yamaha Rhino until present. lncludc on this chronoJoay all chanacs that were made, aiJ incidents reported. aU bulletins, all notifications to dealers and/or consumers, and aU lawsuhs involving the subject product.

I S(k) Explain on a stAtistical basis death and injury rates on the Rhino compared to death and injury rates on Yamaha A TV s. If rates arc higher on the Rhino please explaJn why.

15(1) Provide a tota111umber of injwies repottcd while seat belts were bcina used or allegedly being used. Provide a total number of iniuries reponed whlle seat belts were not being used.

IS{m) Has Yamaha seen a dec:roue in reported injuries since the August 23, 2007 Technical Bulletin was released?

J S(n) Provide a rationale u to why the Rhino does not have padded rollbars.

Jof.-ma!iop gjlcJ.va•"

Section 6(b)(S) oflhe CPSA. l5 U.S.C. § 20SS(b)(S), prohibits tiM release ofinfonnation :subltlitted under section 1 S(b) of the CPSA unless a remedial action plan has been accepted in writin& a complaint has been Issued, or a finn consenu to such release.

If the firm submiu lilY information that it con.siders to be a tmde secret. or confidential commercial or financial information. it must mark. it '"confidential" in accordance with ~tion 6(a)(3) of the CPSA, u amended. IS U.S.C. § 20S.5(a)(3). The Commi~on may not di$Close to the publi~ trade ~ret infotr~tation cr proprietary comrnorcial or financial da1a. If the firm does not ~~confidential treatment lt the time of its submission. or within ten days thereafter, the !tatf will assume that it does not consider information in the !Ubmission to be a trade secret or otherwise exempt nom disclosure under section 6(a) oftbe CPSA and the Freedom of Infonnation Act. 5 U.S.C. § SS2(b)(4) .


• -

•

PAGE 84/84 ~9/1B/2BeB 12:15 3815848359

CQ4FILIANCE FIELD CPE

-

Pap:4 CA080092

ContlpaiDc Qhliuttu

The firm bas a CODtinuina obligation to supplement or correct its nFull Report." If, after filing the "Full Report," the firm receives or learns ofinformation ~min& other incidents or injuries. or information thai affects the Stop!.', prevalence or seriousness of the defect or hazard. it must report that information to this Office immediately.

The Office of Compliance MCi Field Opm~tiooa requests that the firm rapond witlt;. tc• worldDs days of date staatped oa thb letter. Pleue refetmce the CPSC file number in your ~nse. lf yo~ seek assisbmce or if you have any questions, you may contact me at301-S04-7S94. To respond to this letter uslni the U.S. Postal Service, please address your correspondence to: Office of Compliance aDd Field Opetations. U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, Room 613, 4330 East West Hipway, Betht$da, MD 20814-4408. The Office of Compliance tcJcCax number is (301) S04-03S9.

Thank you for yow cooperation in this matter.

Sincerely,

~~ Tan)'l L. Tapb Team Lead Defect Investigations Division


• -

•

....._

•

\VILLKIE FARR & GALLAGHER LLP . . .: ,, : ~ '! :

, ,_: ' . ; I <I y•j ~- · . • • , ,

. ! · • . • ~, • ·,. . , •• ,. .,, I ~ -~"'

September 24, 2008

BJ' HANDDELJYERJ'

TanyaTopka

1 .. j . .'•,I .~ :, tt ,I t IIIJ' •

CONFIDENTIAL: This submission contain,, conjidenti•l and propriet11ry business injorm11tion. Conjldentit~l treatment Is requested.

Office of Compliance & Field Operations U.S . CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION 4330 East-West Highway Bethesda, MD 208 J 4

Re: CA080092 ·

Dear Ms. Topka:

This letter is submitted on behalf of Yamaha Motor Corporation. U.S.A. ("Yamaha''), in response to your September 10, 2008 request for infonnation about the Yamaha Rhino 660 and 450 model side· by·side vchides (''Rhino"). The response also includes information concerning the Rhino 700 model.

Introduction

A. The Rhino

Yamaha introduced the Rhino to the United States market in late 2003. The Rhino is a two person ofT-highway vehicle designed for utility and recreational purpose$. Since its introduction, the Rhino has proven to be popular. Rhino retail sales in the United States have increased from approximately 2,400 in the last quar1er of 2003 to more than 22,000 estimated sales in the first three quarters of 2008. To date, over 135,100 Rrunos have been sold nationwide.

More specifically, the Rhino is a four-wheeled vehicle that is configured to accommodate two riders (driver and passenger) seated side-by-side in bucket seats with cargo space in a rear mounted tilting bed. The vehicle is powered by a four·stroke engine that drives an automatic styled transmission. The Rhino can be operated in two and four wheel drive modes. It has both a high and low range transmission. The vehicle tires are specially-designed for the Rhino to provide traction and terrain handling capability suitable for multiple off-road surfaces including irregular surfaces. The Rhino also has an .. engjne braking" fealure.

/

A n F:XHmrr::}tl_ O.ponen._t ----


•

• I

•

Tanya Topka September 24. 2008 Page 2

11ris submission contains confldentilll Rntl proprietary business information. Confidential treatment is requested.

The Rhino represents an evolution from off-road utility and limited recreational use vehicles that have been in the market for more than 20 years. These vehicles include the Kawasaki Mule. the John Deere Gator, as well as other models. These vehicles weTe primarily utility focused vehicles with limited off-road terrain capability and performance. The Rhino and other more recent off-highway recreational vehicles ("ROVs'1 have been configured with more advanced suspensions. enhanced engine performance capabilities, improved handling and maneuverability, and o ther features that increase the capability to traverse terrain and expand the use for recreational and utility purposes.

B. Rhino Oc:c:upant Protection and Operator/Panenger Recommendations

The design of the Rhino affords significant additional protections that are not feasible for rideT-active vehicles like ATVs. Riders of the Rhino are positioned in a side-by-side configuration with threepoint lap and shoulder seal belts. A steel fi'ame structure (referred to in your Jetter as a "roJJ cage") extends around the passenger compartment. Hip restraints and head rests are also included in the vehicle configuration. In addition, passenger handholds and foot guards are provided to assist riders in remaining properly positioned.

Yamaha recommends the use of seat belts, helmets, and other safety gear for operators and passengers during operation of the vehicle. Rhino occupants are also warned to keep their hands and legs inside the cabin at all times, especially in the event of a vehicle rollover .

Rhinos are designated for two riders only. Yamaha recommends that tlle Rhino only be operated by persons who are 16 or olde.- and have a valid motor vehicle license. Passengers in the Rhino must be able both to place both feet flat on the floorboard (while seated upright with his or her baclc against the seatbacks) and 10 reach the occupant handholds when seated.

These various safety recommendations and warnings are contained in on-product labels, the Owner's Manual, orientation DYD, and other safety materials at the point-of-purchase. Copies of the main label. Owner's Manual. and orientation DVD are enclosed as Exhibit I. As described below, Yamaha has undertaken additional safety education and awareness efforts from time to time based on field experience and product developments (see Section D).

C. Rhino Users

Purchasers of Rhinos tend to be male, 40 years of age or older. with higher than average personal income and education, who enjoy an outdoors lifestyle. Rhino owners frequently have prior ATV riding experience and have gravitated to the Rhino because it is not rider-active, is viewed as easier to operate, can accommodate a passenger. and has additional cargo capacity. Rhino purchasers who are new to motorized recreation have selected the Rhino over A TVs for many of the same reasons .

Ql-ll Nl1-C:PSC-00000030. 0002

• -

•

.' .·.

•

Tanya Topka September 24, 2008 Page3

This submission contains confidential and propritltiTy business information. Ctmjidentialtreatment is r~qutst~d.

Rhino users have found numerous applications for the vehicle, such as exploring, camping. dune riding, trail riding, hunting, fishing, and generaJ recreational riding. Rhinos are also used for wide range of utility purposes, from transporting workers with tools and supplies co border patrolling. And the Rhino has been heavily used on ranches, farms. construction sires, orchards. vineyards. and other commercial operations.

Rhinos have also become a very important and necessary mode oftransportalion for police. firemen, and other first responders. To date. over 100 Yamaha deaters have participated in a law loan program sponsored by Yamaha. The prognm provides vehicles to first responders at no cost. Yamaha also has a government unit sales program that offers Rhinos at reduced price for use by federal, slate. and local agencies. Over 200 Rhinos have been distributed through this program to a wide range of paries and recreation depanments, lifeguards, animal shelters. health departments. wildlife refuges. and others.

The Rhino allows these critical first responders, in their words, "to be more mobile and capable of responding quickly to emergencies that are in extreme environments." Smith Valley Fire District Provides ATV Service, Reno Gazette Journal, Sept. 5, 2008; Sheriff's Depulies to Ride Rhinos. Rexburg (10) Standard Journal. June 5, 2008 ( .. This gives us the ability to get into areas that would be inaccessible to conventional vehicles."): New ATJis to bt "Grear Tool".for City. County Authorities, Aberdeen (SO) American News, Dec. 20, 2006 ("It's a win-win situation. It's going to be a great lOlli. It gives us the opportunity to serve the public in ways we haven't been able to do before."). Copies of these news ~icles are enclosed as Exhibit 2.

During the last few years, extensive after-market accessory options have emerged. These after-market accessories include larger tires/wheels, extended steel cages, windshields, roof and caTgo area covers. engine performance devices, doors/netting, and appearance related items. Copies of some recent enthusiast magazines reporting on the Rhino. its uses, and lhe availability or after-market accessories are enclosed as Exhibit 3.

D. Yamaha's Efforts to Promote Safe and Responsible Use of The Rhjno

Yamaha•s top priority in all of its products is the safety of users. This policy underlies all of Yamaha's design, testing, and manufacturing activities, as well as its efforts to promote safe and responsible use of its vehicles.

The Rhino has received universal acclaim from industry reviewers. The Rhino was rhe only vehicle in its class to achieve a five star safety rating. Among other awards, the Rhino was;

• Multiple winner, "Best in Class" UTV. 2005-2007, and Runner Up, "Best in Class:· 2007-2008. All· Terrain Vehicle ·s Readers' Poll.

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I CONFIDENTIAL RHINO-CPSC-00000030.0003 1

•


This submission t>ontains confld,ntial and proprietary busin,ss Information. Confidmtial trratment is requ~.<rtrd.

• The "2008 Sport Utility Vehicle of the Year'' and rated "S out of 5 stars for safety." Sidt X Side Action (Apr. 2008)~

• WiMer, 2008 ''Golden Bullseye Award" and " Vehicle of the Year," American Humer (May 2008)~

• Winner, ·•Best of the Best" award for off-road vehicles, Field & Strf'am (Sept. 2008);

As these and other prestigious indusrry awards and reviews reflect, the Rhino has proven to be a safe, reliable, and versatile vehicle for lens of thousands of owners and users.

But, as CPSC is aware, some Rhino operaton have engaged in aggressive driving (such as sliding, skidding, jumping, fishtailing, or doing "donuts'") or have made abrupt maneuvers (such as turning the steering wheel too far or too fast during rapid acceleration) that have resulted in side rollovers- even on flat, open areas. The advent of .. YouTube" has resulted in numerous postings of video showing the operators of Rhinos and other side-by-side vehicles engaging in such maneuvers and stunts. A sample of these videos is enclosed as Exhibit 4.

As some of these videos demonstrate, the Rhino's frame structure, three-point seat belts, handholds, and other safety features offer significant protection to occupants during vehicle rollovers. Helmeted occupants using the seat belts typically emerge from the cabin without any injury, simply right the vehicle, and continue to operate it.

Unfortunately, in some rollover incidents, Rhino occupants have been injured because of misuse of the product, including a failure to wear seat belts, helmets. or other protective gear, overly aggressive or reckless operation of the vehicle.; operation of the vehicle on public roads or pavement~ operation after conswning alcohol or drugs; operation by children; the presence of too many occupants~ overloading of cargo~ and other factors. ln addition, in some instances, occupants have intentionally put their arms or legs outside the vehicle in disregard of the on-product warnings and other safety instructions. Yamaha and independent expert testing has shown that d11ring the rollover scenarios alleged in many of these cases. inertial forces are insufficient to cause a seat-belted occupant's legs from moving laterally outside the vehicle. See, e.g., Response to I S(d) at CPSC/C A080092-I S(d) • 0000000 1-00000006; 00009341-9420~ 0000060 1·0000912. Some of the enclosed YouTube videos demonstrate the same point.

Based on this field experience, Yamaha believes that the most effective way to reduce Rhinoassociated ann and les injuries is through user safety awareness and education, as well as appropriate state legislation regulating use. As outlined below, Yamaha has taken several steps to reinforce safe and responsible riding practices, as well as the importance of wearing seat belts, helmets, and other protective gear and remaining inside the cabin at all times. In addition. Yamaha has been an industry


•

•. '

·-•

Tanya Topka September 24,2008 Page 5

This submission contains confidential and proprietflry business information. Confidential trefltment is requested.

leader in designing and developing features and benefits that enhance the safety and comfort of Rhino operators and passengers. Among other things, Yamaha was the first ROV manufacturer to recommend helmets, to install three-point seat belts and bucket seats, and to introduce side panel doors as standard equipment.

I. Additional Warnings and On-Product Labels

Yamaha developed new on-product warning labels reminding Rhino operators and passengers of the importance to keep their arms and leg, inside the cabin at all times, esp«:ially in the event of a vehicle rollover ("rollover labels"). The rollover labels are affixed to the upright tube of the frame structure on both the driver and passenger sides.

In September 2006, Yamaha mailed a safety letter and copies of the new labels to past purchasers with instructions for installation on their Rhinos. Yamaha also installed the labels on all new Rhinos ~ginning with the 2007 model year, u well as on all unsold dealer inventory. A copy of Yamaha's correspondcn<:e with dealers and past purchasers con<:eming the additional warning labels is enclosed as Exhibit 5.

l . Side Panel Doors, Additioaal Handholds, And Safety Guide

Yumaha designed, developed, and tested side panel doors and additional passenger handholds. The doors and handholds arc no substitute for wearing scat belts, helmets, and other protc<:tive gCIII". Even so, these new features may help keep some occupants from intentionally sticking arms or legs out of the vehicle during a side rollover. The doors also provide protection from the elements (i.e., splashing mud, branches, etc.).

As with any new product feature, it was critical to evaluate whether these additional components might create new potential hazards. For example, the doon had to be designed to discourage occupants from resting their arms or legs on the door strucl:w"c during operation, which might only compound the risk of injury in a rollover siruation. This led to a tapering design for the doors to discourage such behavior. Similarly, the doon had to be functional and permit ingress and egress for consumer acceptance.'

During the planning process, Yamaha considered but declined to install side panel doors or other side structures. for example, Yamaha is ~:~ware that side doors may impede efficient ingress and esress, may create potential tripping hazards, and may cause mispcrceptions that the vehicle is streetworthy.

CONFIDENTIAL RHINO-CPSC-Q0000030.0005

• -

•

•

TanyaTopka September 24, 2008 Page6

This submission ct~ntains confidentitzl and proprietary business infonnation. Confidential treatment is requested.

Before introducing these features, Yamaha developed a new main on-product warning label and a separate safety guide addressing all of the Rhino occupant protection components and providing other safety information. These communications reinforce the point that the doors and additional handholds arc only intended to enhance rider comfort and safety, and are not a substitule for safe riding practices or the use of seat belts, helmets, and other protective gear. Human factors and other c~perts at Applied Safety & Ergonomics ("ASE") assisted Yamaha in the development of these materials. ASE's report on lhcse efforts can be found in the Response to I S(d} at CPSC/CA080092-15(d)-00000007-00000456.

The doors and additional passenger handholds were introduced on late model 2007 and new model year 2008 vehicles and are now standard equipment. The doors and handholds were also installed by Yamaha dealers on all unsold inventory.

On August 27, 2007, Yamaha mailed a letter to Rhino owners aMouncing the development of the doors and additional passenger handholds, and offering installation of these features free of charge. The letter also enclosed copies of the new on-product label. The label includes instructions on how owners can obtain these features (new or replacement) free of charge. This ensures that subsequent owners of Rhinos will have notice of the offer. Copies of the letter, new main label, and safety guide are enclosed as Exhibit 6. Yamaha also posted the offer on its website .

1be Rhino is a safe and reliable vehicle - with or without doors - when operated pToperly and with appropriate safety gear and seat belts. To date, nearly fifty percent (50%) of Rhino owners have taken advantage of the door and handhold offer. Yamaha estimates that fifteen percent ( 15o/o) of Rhino owners had already modified their vehicles lo include aftc:r-markel doors or other accessories that may eliminate or diminish their interest in Yamaha's offer. In addition, some Rhino users have refrained from accepting the door offer, or even removed installed doors on models, based on their vehicle use preferences. This has been observed. for e:umple, among Rhino users on fanns, ranches, and other commercial locations.

3. ANSI ZS35.6-200kompliant Owner's Manual

The new ANSI Z535.6-2006 standard is the first ANSI standard to address how to present safety messages in collateral materials, such as product manuals. The standard is designed to enhance the effectiveness of safety communications. It provides a taxonomy of safety messages, including supplemental directives, grouped safe1y messages, section safety messages, and embedded safety messages as primary features. It also provides greater formatting tlcxibility to assist in its usage with a variety of collateral materials .

CONFIDENTIAL RHlNO-CPSC-00000030.0006

•

•

. .._.

•

Tanya Topka Septanber24,2008 Page 7

This submission contains confid~ntia/ and proprietary business information. Confidential treatment is requested.

Yamaha used this new standard as a guide for refonnaUing and revising the safely messages in the Rhino owner' s manual for model year 2008 and late model year 2007 production units. Yamaha is one of the first manufacturers to produce an ANSI Z535.6-2006-compliant manual.

4. Development of Industry Standards, Model State Legislation, and Safety Awareness

Yamaha is a founding member of the Recreational Off-Highway Vehicle Association ("'ROHV A"). Yamaha and other ROHVA members are actively involved in the development of voluntary technical and performance standards for the Rhino and other ROVs. See Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of /993-Development of Voluntary Standard (ANS/IROV-J-200X)for Recreational Off-Highway Vehicles, 73 Fed. Reg. 53,043 (Sept. 12, 2008) (enclosed as Exhibit 7). ROHVA has applied for accreditation by the American National Standards Institute ("ANSI" ). The standard setting activities are being conducted pursuant to ANSI procedures.

Yamaha is also working on model state legislation that promotes safe and responsible usc of the Rhino and other ROVs. As CPSC knows, it is impossible to eliminate any risk of accidents or injuries associated with the operation of a recreational motorized vehicle. Along with the enclosed You Tube videos, V amaha has identified numerous instances of operator misuse and other warned-against behaviors during investigations of Rhino-related accidents. Many of these factors arc similar to the warned-against behaviors found in A TV -related accidents (e.g., presence of alcohol/dl'\.lgs; failure to wear helmets; inappropriate--aged operators (often without adult supervision); excessive speed; driving on pavement or public roads; with poor visibility; operator inattention; etc.). Yamaha has also found evidence of operators using the Rhino to perform "donuts" or engaging in similar reckless operation.

As part of ROHV A, Yamaha is working with other industry members on model state legislation lo address these warned-against behaviors and to promote safe and responsible use of the Rhino and other ROVs. It is anticipated that the model state legislation will include provisions mandating helmet usage for recreational units, prohibiting operation by children under I 6, prohibiting or restricting use of the vehicles on public roads, prohibiting ope~ation while under the influence of alcohol or drugs, and other elements. Yamaha intends, through ROHV A, actively to promote and support passage of such legislation.

Yamaha also promotes operator responsibility and safety in other ways. For example, Yamaha recently launched a .. Keep Riding Responsibly" campaign that highlighlS safety gear. safe and envirorunentally responsible riding practices, and other safety information. A copy of the campaign advertisement is enclosed as Exhibit 8 .


•

•. ~

.._)

•


Thi~· .~ubmi~·ion contGins conjidrntitd and proprirtary busine:os information. ConjldentUII treatment is rtqur~1ed.

E. Yamaha's Communications and Meetings with CPSC Concerning the Rhiao

For the past two decades, Yamaha has worked cooperatively with CPSC on a wide range of safety and consumer usage issues involving ATVs, off-road motorcycles, and snowmobiles. Yamaha has similarly met and consulted with CPSC staff numerous times concerning the Rhino, its operation and usage. associated accidents and injuries, and significant product and safety-related developments. These communications include the following:

On August 3, 2006, Yamaha representatives (Emroy Watson and David Mumy) met with CPSC staff (Tanya Topka. Ronald Yelenik, Caroleene Paul, Michael Karen, Richard Stem, and Seth Popkin) and provided general product infonnation about the Rhino. The meeting included discussions about reported leg and arm injuries involving vehicle rollovers, Yamaha's possible development of new onproduct rollover labels, and the miscoding of Rhino-related lOis (as A TV- rather than General Utilityrelated incidents).

On September 8, 2006, Yamaha submitted (at CPSC statrs request) copies of complaints and claims alleging Rhino rollover accidents and injuries.

On May 30.2007, Yamaha invited CPSC staff(Mark Kumagai, Michael Karen, Carolecne Paul, and Sarah Brown) to operate Rhinos and other ROVs at Yamaha Motor Manufacturing Corporation's m~ufacturing and testing facilities in Newnan, Georgia. None: of the ROVs was equipped with side pttnel doors. Yamaha also reported on some recent alleged rollover claims and showed the CPSC stan· rowerPoint pn:sentations of some representative Rhino rollover claims. These presentations included evidence that Yamaha had obtained from law enforcement. first responders, and/or accident reconstructions revcaJing misuse of the product and disproving the vehicle stability/design flaw allegations made by claimants. Yamaha also reported on its then-ongoing efforts to design and test side panel doors to provide additional potential protection and enhanced comfort for Rhino occupants.

On August 2, 2007, Yamaha representatives (Emroy Watson and David MWTlly) again met with CPSC staff (Mark Kumagai, Caroleene Paul. and Sarah Brown) to report on the results ofY amaha 's design and testing of the side panel doors and additional passenger handholds. Yamaha informed CPSC of its decision to install the doors and handholds on late model 2007 and newer models, and of its discussions to oJTer past purchasers the option of having the new features installed on their vehicles for no charge. Yamaha also presented concepts of a new on-product warning label and safety guide addressing these additional features and related safety issues. The nc:w label and safety guide wc:Je subsequently sent to past Rhino purchasers, along with a cover letter offering free installation of the doors and additional passenger handholds.

On August 24, 2007, Yamaha provided CPSCwith copies of the customer letter. technical bulletin. label, and safety guide .


-

•

•

. '-"

•

Tanya Topka September 24, 2008 Page 9

This submission con111ins confidmtla/and proprietary business information. Confidential tre11tment is requested.

On Apri116, 2008, Yamaha representatives (Emroy Watson and David Murray) met with CPSC staff (Sarah Brown, Robcn franklin. Mark Kumagai, Elizabeth Leland, Robert Ochsman, Patricia Pollitzer, Timothy Smith, Robin Streeter, and Scott Wolfson) to report again on developments and issues relating to the Rhino. Yam aha also arranged for Paul Frantz and Charles Burhans of Applied Safety &. Ergonomics ("ASE") to the attend the meeting. The briefing included PowerPoint presentations (with video and photographs) on the design, occupant protection, and other safety features of1he Rhino models; a ''novice rider" study by ASE (disproving claims that the Rhino is •·unstable" or "prone to rollover" on flat surfaces during gentle turns at low speeds) (a copy of the "novice rider" study can be found in Exhibit 9 at CPSC/CA080092-L-00000159-00000203); and some recent rollover case investigations and mediations. In addition, Yamaha showed CPSC staff representative (I) YouTube videos depicting aggressive operation and rollovers ofRhioos and other ROVs; and (2) Internet sites sponsored by plaintiffs' lawyers (a) alleging that the Rhino and other ROVs arc "defectively designed" (i.e., unstable; lack padded roll bars; etc) and (b) soliciting clients to sue Yamaha and other manufacturers.l

On July 28,2008, Yamaha representatives (Emroy Watson and David Mumay) arranged another product demonstration for CPSC stafT(Eiizabeth Leland, Hugh Mclaurin, Caroleenc Paul. Sarah Brown. Sonia Hayes-Pleasant, and Randy Path) in Hagerstown, Maryland. CPSC staff bad the opportunity to ride on and operate three Rhino models. These were newe1 models equipped with the side doors and additional passenger handholds. Yamaha also provided a general overview of the vehicle's design, testing. and satety feat.ures.

Copies of Yamaha's correspondence. submissions, and presentations to CPSC concerning the Rhino are enclosed as Exhibit 9. Copies of Yamaha's Rule 37 reports covering Rhino-related claims arc enclosed as Exhibit 10.

Yamaha appreciates CPSC's continuing interesl in and close monitoring of the Rhino and Rhinorelated developments over the past several years. Yamaha will continue to consult with CPSC on material product developments and to work with the agency in promoting safe and responsible riding practices.

:? A recent Internet search revealed over 60 plaintiffs' law finns soliciting clients from ownen and operators of the Rhino and othet ROVs, including ROV models that have yet to reach the market. Many of these websites have direct Jinks 10 CPSC and urge visitors to send complaints to the agency with suggested language parroting tbe law finn's allegations and theories about the ROVs' stability and safety .


-

•

•


This submission contains confidmtial and proprietary bu.tiness informatitm. Confidential treatment is requested.

Yamaha is also well aware that CPSC has received claims and complaints about the Rhino, including various "design defect" theories, from shortly after the product's introduction in 2004 and throughout this same time period (e.g., references to www.rhinorollovers.com in early JDJs; numerous FOIA requests from plaintiffs• finns and representatives; anendance of plaintiffs• experts and consultants at the Rhino danonstration; plaintiffs' firm websites directing visitors to file complaints with the agency; etc.). As shown in materials accompanying this submission, the Rhino's design reflects Yamaha's decades of engineering experience and expertise, and was the subject of thousands of hours of testing. Tens of thousands of Rhino owners and operators have likewise proven the vehicle's safe design. performance capabilities, and utility during millions of hours of use on virtually all kinds of terrains and in all kinds of envirorunents. And the vehicle has received universal acclaim from industry reviewers since its introduction.

As CPSC knows firsl·hand. Yamaha has striven to enhance the safety, features, and benefits of the product based on market demand and field experience. Yamaha will continue to do so, despite the eil'ons of plaintiffs' attorneys and others wrongly to ponray these improvements as evidence of a design flaw or defect. Yamaha will also continue vigorously to defend the Rhino against such product liability and other safety-related claims.

Additional Requested Information

The following infonnation responds to the requests identified in your letter. Yamaha is providing this infonnation solely for purposes of assisting CPSC staff with its investigation and does not view this submission as a repon of a potential product defect under Section I S(a) or (b), IS U.S.C. § 2064(a)(b). In particular, Yamaha does not believe that the reported incidents resulted from any design or manufacturing defect. Nor does Yamaha believe that lhese incidents provide any basis to conclude that a substantial product hazard exists.

Timing a ad Form of Submission

The requested infonnation is voluminous and contained in different media (paper, DVO, CD, etc.) that, in some instances, include video, simulations, and other graphics. Yamaha has attempted to organize: the: submission to make review of the infonnation as efficient as possible. The information is organized by folders, which are labeled by exhibit or response number (i.e., "Exhibit_ .. or ''Response to _"). Please Jet us know if you en~untcr an~ difficulty opening or di~playin~ . information produced in electronic fonnat. As dascussed w1th CPSC staff, Yamaha IS prov1dmg as much of the requested information as practicable in this initial submission. Yamaha reserves the right to supplement its responses as may be appropriate .

CONFIDENTIAL RHINO-CPSC-00000030.001 0

u0153570

Highlight

•

• :

•

Tanya Topka September 24, 2008 Page II

This submission contains confidential and proprielllry business informatitJn. Ct~njidential treatment is requested.

I. These responses are based on the accompanying submissions and information currently known and provided by or through Emroy l. Watson, General Manager, Yamaha Motor Corporation, U.S .A., 6555 Kalella Avenue, Cypress, CA 90630.

2. Yamaha distributes various motorized vehicles, including Rhinos 1hat are manufactured by Yamaha Motor Manufacturing Corporation ("YMMC"') located atiOOO Georgia Highway 34. Newnan, Georgia 30265.

3. ·me subject Rhinos were sold under the model designation Rhino YXR450, YXR660. and YXR 700. The Rhino is a four-wheel, four-stroke vehicle equipped with four-wheel hydraulic disc brakes. The model numbers, VINs~ model years, model year codes, and suggested retail prices are contained in E~hibil 11 . Copies of color brochures depicting the Rhino are enclosed as Exhibitl2. The VJN for the Rhino is stamped into the frame.

4.

5.

6 .

7.

8.

NIA

Yamaha does not believe that any reported injuries resulted from a design or manufacturing defect.

N/A

N/A

The YXR Rhino was first sold in tho United States in the Fall 2003, as a 2004 model. Typically, units for a particular model year are tint sold in the Fall before the model year designation. The following chart indicates the number of the Rhino units sold (wholesale) in the UniJed States for the subject model yean:

MODELY,EAR SA bE~ 2004 12,142

2005 14,704

2006 39,449

2007 48,063

2008 (through August) 27,979


••

. ..._.,

•

Tanya Topka September 24. 2008 Page 13

This submission contain.t (Onfidential and proprietary bu5iness information. Confidential treatment it requested.

1 S(d). See Response to 15(d) at CPSC/CA080092-15(d)- 00000001-00010298 (engineering/expert repons produced by Yamaha in lawsuits).

lS(e). In addition to the United States, Yamaha distributes the Rhino in Canada, Europe, Australia, New Zealand, Latin America and other countries. The units distributed to these countries constitute approximately seventeen percent ( 17o/e) of Rhinos produced to date.

15(0.

IS(g).

The Rhino, like other ROVs (e.g., current model Polaris RZR, Kawasaki Teryx, and Arctic Cat Prowler), does not have a rear axle differential. The Rhino has a rear axle gear case that provides consistent and predictable power lo both rear wheels. This design allows both rear wheels to have independent suspension and to apply consistent power for better climbing and traction, especia11y on uneven terrain. A rear differential reduces terrainability and could result in the vehicle losing traction and possibly getting stuck in certain off-road situations. Moreover, if the vehicle is being operated in two-wheel drive with a rear differential, and the urut is steered to the right or left with sufficient suddenness to lift the inside rear wheel, the inside rear wheel could spin in the air with the engine revving up. Under this hypothesis, there is the potential for a jolting or jerking effect when the inside rear wheel again makes contact with the ground, which could lead to reduced (or a loss of) control .

Some general utility side-by-side units, like the Kawasaki Mule, Polaris Ranger, and Honda Big Red. have a rear differential that can be locked or unloclted. The unlocked feature allows for tighter turning of the vehicles while minimizing damage to (or .. tearing up" of) turf or other sensitive terrain. Yamaha has considered equipping a future model of the Rhino with an unlocking rear differential for similar grounds, garden, and estate-use purposes. To date, Yamaha has not introduced such a vehicle to the market.

See Response to IS( g) iu CPSC/C A080092-15(g) - 00000001-00000058 (serviceltcchnicaJ bulletins; referenced engineering reports). Th~ rationales for tbe referenced technical bulletins and letters to consumers are explained in Sections D.l and 2 above, and were also shared with CPSC staff durins the August 3, 2006, August 2. 2007, and August 24, 2007 meetings and communications described in Section F above.

15(h). See Response to IS(h) at CPSC/CA080092-15(h) • 00000001...()()00()556 (relating to doorslhandholds). The basic dimensions, layout. and performance of the base model Yamaha Rhino 660 has remained largely unchanged for model years 2004 through 2007. A 4SO model was added in 2006. A sport modc:l with a "piggy back'" suspension was added in 2007. Yamaha also introduced a 700 model for model year 2007 with the same basic dimensions and layout but with a larger engjnc and electronic fuel injec:tion (or .. EFI"). As lo specific component changes. the Rhino contains hundreds of components, many of which have subcomponents and subassemblies. Representative copies of the Parts Lists for the 2004-2008


I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I I

I

I

I

I

I

. _: Tanya Topka September 24, 2008 Page 14

This submission contains confidential and proprietary business information. Conjidentilll treatment is requested.

Rhinos are enclosed with the Response to 15(h) at CPSC/CA080092-15(h)- 00000557-00001226. Although these changes appear to be well beyond the scope of this investigation. Yamaha can produce (upon request} Product lnfonnation Guides that identify other principal differences from prior model years.

With respect to the side panel doors and additional passenger handholds, these features (as more fully explained above) may help keep some occupants from intemionally sticking arms or legs out of the vehicle during a side rollover. The doors also provide protection from the elements (i.e., splashing mud, branches, etc.). The doors and handholds are no substitute for wearing seat belts, helmets, and other protective gear. As also explained above, before introducing these features, Yamaha developed a new main on-product warning label and a separate safety guide addressing all of the Rhino occupant protection components and providing other safety information. These communications reinforce the point that the doors and additional handholds are only intended to enhance rider com fort and safety, and are not a substitute for safe riding practices or the use of seat belts, helmets, and other protective gear. The Rhino is a safe and reliable vehicle -- with or without doors -- when operated properly and with appropriate safety gear and seat belts.

15(i). Yamaha does not use such values for the Rhino and relies on static stability testing (tilt table) and thousands of hours of dynamic testing (see Response to 15( i) at CPSC/CA080092-J 5(i) -00000001-00000046). Even so, Yamaha will supplement this response per CPSC's request.

l5(j). Copies of all service bulletins {which include a description of relevant changes, notifications to dealers and, where applicable, consumers) are contained in chronological order in the Response to 15(g) at CPSC/CA080092-l5(g) - 00000001 -00000058. The complaints/claims list in Response to 15(b) includes all alleged dales of incident and claims.

lS(k). Yamaha does not have the requested rates or the data necessary to calculate them; even so, Yamaha will attempt to supplement its rC$pOnse based on available infonnation that is being collected

15(1). In many instances, persons involved in Rhino-related accidents either do not report or misreport the circumstances and facaors of the incident, including whdher helmets or seat belts were worn. Case-by-case: investigations are often required to detennine this information. Based on information currently known to Yamaha, a significant percentage of rollover incidents involve one or more warned-against behaviors. For example, Yamaha's investigations indicate a high incidence of the following one or more factors:

• failure to wear seat belts;


• -

-•

Tanya Topka September 24. 2008 Pugc 15

This submi)'Sfon contains confidential and propriet11ry bu~·iness informlltion. Confidential treatment is req11tsted.

• lack of protective gear/clothing;

• alcohol/drug use;

• .. donuts"/reckless driving;

• excessive speed;

• operator under 16 years old;

• operator inartention;

• driving on pavement;

• driving with poor visibility; and

• aftermarket modifications.

J 5(m). As discussed above, the doors and additional passenger handhoJds may provide some furthe£ protection from leg ~md ann injuries; however, as noted, any such protection is secondary to the occupant protection provided by the three-point seat belts, frame structure, and other cabin features ·- as well as the use of helmets and other safety gear. Yamaha has observed a decrease in claims alleging extremity injuries, but believes it is too early to determine the reasons for this decrease or whether it indicates a general trend. Yamaha believes that its safety education and awareness efforts, greater riding experience among Rhino users. and maturation of the Rhino product in the market are having a positive effect in reducing rollover incidents and/or instances of occupants sticking their anns or legs outside of the cabin.

15(n). 11aerc is no universal definition of .. padding." Materials which constitute padding range from thin to thick and from stiffer to softer. Padding can theoretically~ used for comfort or for injury mitigation.

Some manufacturers put soft, compressible padding on ROPS for comfort in order to mitigate potential conc.cts, e.g., ingress/egress head contacts. Yamaha did not use this type of padding because Rhino users should usc: helmets. Padding of this type would be of no added ~ncfit over the protection a heJrriet provides. This type o( padding does not mitigate serious injuries.

In rollovers, padding does not provide injury mitigation for bending-type injury mechanisms. For example, where a leg is supported at the knee and the ankle and the ROPS contacts the tibia at mid-shaft. an injury can occur if the tibia is bent beyond its tolerance. The presence of


• ._ .

. ..._

•

TanyaTopka September 24, 2008 rage 16

This submission rontains confidential and proprietary business information. Confidentiallretltment is requested.

•

•

ROPS padding will not mitigate this type of injury because the injury mechanism is the application of force to the leg-- the peak force is closely related to the weight of the vehicle and is not significantly changed by the presence of padding.

In rollovers on hard surfaces, padding will not significantly mitigate crushing-type injuries. For example, if an unbelted and unhelmeted driver is ejected and his leg comes into contact with a hard surface on one s ide and a padded ROPS on the other, an injury may nevertheless occur because of the leg·s contact with the ground as the force of the ROPS is applied to the other side of the leg. With or without padding, the force of the: ROPS is csscntiaJJy the same. Thus, in the case of a roiJova-, a helmet is a far superior method to mitigate potential head injury and the use of seat belts is far superior to reduce the potential for injury to the head, arms or legs.

In rollovers on soft surfaces (e.g., deep mud), firm, thick padding may theoretically mitigate crush-type injuries because the opposing contact surface is also yielding. However, this singular type of rollover incident may be rare and the benefits of padding may be limited depending on the softness of the terrain type. Moreover, the thickness of padding necessary to distribute the force over an area sufficient to mitigate crush injuries makes the concept practically infeasible because of its adverse impact on the Rhino's overall design and durabili ty. Spc~ific;dly;

The Rhino is designed to traverse challenging environs including driving between trees, along rocky ledges and through thickets. The materials utilized in the design (including plastics and metals) are capable of withstanding direct contact with these environs without significant damage or separation from the Rhino and without unduly impeding the path of travel or direction of the vehicle. Padding materials sufficiently soft enough to offer injury mitigation benefits could catch on branches, limbs. and other obstacles, which could cause the vehicle's motion to change or decelerate quickly, resulting in possible Joss of control. In addition. such padding materials would not withstand direct contacts with these environs. Exposure to these environs would likely damage padding and result in separation from the Rhino.

The Rhino was conceived as a two person off-road vehicle with excellent terrainability. The addition of a thickness of padding sufficient to offer crush-injury mitigation in rollovers on soft terrain would have an adverse affect on the Rhino's ability to fH on some: trails. If, alternatively. the ROPS was moved inboard to accommodate thick padding. then the occupancs would have a narrower ROPS which would cl'tpose them to a relatively higher likelihood of injury from direct contact with the ground in a rollover or with other objects, such as tree limbs, in normal use .

CONFIDENTIAL RHINO-GPSC-00000030. 0016

•

•

•


This submission contaitU confld6ntial and proprietary buslnes!llnformation. Confidential treatment is requ,sted.

• Padding of sufficient thickness to offer crush-injury mitigation in rollovers on soft terrain would create a significant vision obstruction while driving-- in the area around the front ("A") and back ("B'') pil\ars of the frame structure. This kind of obstruction would reduce the safety and utility of the Rhino.

• Padding of sufficient thickness to offer crush-injury mitigation in roll overs on soft 1errain would adversely affect ingress and egress. Padding on the upper side rail would require lhe occupant to duck lower. Padding along the rocker would require the occupant to step higher. Paddina on the A and 8 pillars would narrow the entry path. The combination of a duck and high step may increase the risk of ingress/egress injuries. The difficulty associated with ingress/egress would also reduce the Rhino's utility.

• Padding of sufficient thickness to offer crush-injury mitigation in roll overs on soft terrain would impair or prevent use ofthe passenger-side A-pillar and overhead handholds.

• For unrestrained, unhelmeted occupants, padding may increase the potential for certain injuries. Padding can act to "catch" an occupant's head in a roll event and hold it in place thereby increasing the likelihood ofa neck injury. Without padding, the head can move/slide and may avoid the injury .

• The Rhino is an open air vehicle designed to be exposed to the elements. The materials utilized in the design arc capable of withstanding exposure to heat, cold and moisture without failure or degradation. Padding materials soft enough to offer injury mitigation would be susceptible to degradation from the effects of exposure to heal, cold and moisture.

• The addition of padding of sufficient thickness to offer crush-injury mitigation in rollovers on soft terrain may reduce the usc of belts and helmets due to the user's perception that the padding provides sufficient occupant safety protection.

As previously shown, in other crash modes, ROPS padding provides no significant injury mitigation benefits for helmeted and belted occupants. Any benefits for unbclted or unhelmeted occupants in soft terrain rol1overs are outweighed by the potential risks of loss of vehicle control, the reduction in visibilily, utility, and durability, and the potential for reduced belt and helmet use with padded ROPS. Yamaha is not aware of any other manufacturer using paddin& as an injury mitigation device on a ROPS of a similar type of vehicle.

REQUEST FOR CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT

Pursuant to S U.S.C. § 552, IS U.S.C. § 20S5(a)(2), 16 C .F.R. § 1118 and 16 C.F.R. § 101 S, Yamaha hereby requesls that the infonnation contained herein (including its auachments and enclosures) and


-

•

•

TanyaTopka September 24, 2008 Page 18

Tlris submission contllins confidential tmd proprietary business information. Confidential treatment is requested.

d~signated as .. confidential'' be considered confidential information and exempt from disclosure under 5 U .S.C. § 552(b)(4), 15 U.S.C. § 2055(a)(2), and CPSC's Freedom of Information Act regulations. 'llle bases for confidential treatment include:

The submission contains confidential business infonnation, trade secrets, and commercial and financial infonnation that is proprietary and highly confidentiol. Disclosure ofthe infonnation would cause competitive and other irreparable harms to Yamaha.

The content and compilation of the confidential information produced by Yamaha has never been released in any manner to a person who is not an employee or in a confidential relationship with Yamaha, except in litigation and then only typically subject to a stipulated protective order to protect Yamaha's confidential information from disclosure to the genera) public, including Yamaha's competitors.

The content and compilation of the infonnation is not commonly known in the industry and is not readily ascertainable by outside persons.

Release of the infonnation would likely cause substantial harm to Yamaha's competitive position because it would make public information not otherwise available to competitors, potential claimants, and a claimant. The information includes the description of past claims and litigation. The release of this information would injure Yamaha's reputation and that of its products.

In addition, some of the information contains individual names. addresses, medical records, claims, and other information that is personal, confidential, and may be subject to protective orders and/or confidentiality agreements.

Yamaha is providing this information solely for the use of the Consumer Product Safety Commission with the expectation that the information will remain confidential. Yamaha further requests that should further clarification or justification of its request be required, it be promptly advised of such a need.

cc: Emroy l. Watson, Esq.


I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

••

••

-•

Message Page I of2

Mun-ay, David

From: Murray, David

Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 3:57PM To: 'Malihi, M. Reza'

Cc: Topka,Tanya

Subject: RE: CPSC File No. CA080092 -Yamaha Rhino UTV/ROV

Reza.

Are you available by telephone to discuss? Thanks,

David

---()rlglnal Message--from: Mallhi, M. Reza [mallto:MMallhiOcpsc.gov] Sent: Friday, Decembel OS, 2008 3:53PM To: Mwnsy, David Cc: Topka, Tanye SUbject: CPSC File No. CA080092 - YM'I8ha Rhino IJTV/ROV Importance: High

Dear Mr. Murray:

On Tu~day, the staff received your submission of four boxes of documents on behalf of Yamaha Motor Corporation, U.S.A. ("Yamaha" lin response to our November 18, 2008 email request for Information and documfi!ts. After staff review of the documents, however, It appears that the overwhelming majority of the submission Is duplicative of material you had previously sent In connection with this matter. 1 am told the only new Item seems to be a Model Year 2009 owner's manual for the Rhino. ·

In your cover letter, dated December 1, 2008, you state that the enclosed "hardcopies" reflect "the principal written form of communication among Yamaha, Yimaha Motor Company, Ltd. ("YMC") (Japan), <tnd Yamaha Motor Manufacturing Corporation ("YMMC") (GeOf'gfa) refatins to the items." Vou <1lso identified <1 number of Individuals who "were principally responsible for each of the spec:ifled Items," and proposed that CPSC staff "meet with some or all of these Individuals, who can answer questions and provide further bactcsround and non-prlvlle&ed Information about the specified Items." Atcordtns to your letter, "(t)hese Individuals can also explain the normal processes by whldl the different Yam<~ha tomp<~nles and personnel collaborate and communicate on such matters."

Please revisit the staffs November 18, 2008 email. To recap, it reqyested certain Information and documents that reference, relate to or comprise speciflt product chanaes to the Rhino (whether actually Implemented or considered b11t not Implemented), lncludlns without limitation:

• all communications (tndudl,., for example, letters, em ails, memoranda, and meetlns minutes) generated Internally by/between Yamaha Motor Corporatton USA, Yamaha Corporation, and their respective corporate aftlllat~, as applicable;

• 111/ communications by/between third parties and Yamaha Motor Corporation USA, Yamaha Corporation and their respective corporate affiliates, as applicable;

• 11/1 enatneertng change notifications or similar documents; and • 1111 deslsn, manufacturins, quality control, and technical bulletins and notifications. IEmphasn add~d.J

While the staff appreciates your offer to meet and may accept It at a future date, we believe It would not be fruitful to have such a meetlnc without the firm havlnJ first provided the underfylng lnfClrmatlon and documents that the staff presently seeks. OUr rr~lftt of tlw Iorge ...-,,..of docutnewts ptf1fl#dH to dOft! ~)'OUr dlent points to o

1215/2008 Deponent ____ _

Oc;rte ___ Rptr. __ ~


u0153570

Highlight

Message Page2of2

••

•

not#utJIJie a.buna of lnfonnatlolt/d«unwnts tltot would be raponslt/e to the staffs Ntwember Jf'h requnt. For example, without llmltinc thl! scope of the staffs request, there Is 1 dearth of documents which relate to or comprise Internal communications by and between Yamaha companies and personnel, such as letters, emaMs, memoranda, meeting minutes and similar documents regarding how and/or why the firm decided to Implement the referenced product changes. Although these may fall outside what your client would consider Its "prlndpal written form of communication," we nonetheless consider them pertinent to our Investigation.

Put simply, if responsive Information or documents are or were In the possession, custody or control of Yamaha, they should have been provided already to the staff. To the extent they have not vet been provided to us, we require that you promptly do so. Regarding any lnfOfmatlon and doc;umena withheld to date by the firm based upon a claim of privilege, we ask that you provide a complete prlvlle~ lag with sufficiently detailed entries for each item withheld so that we can ascertain the basis (If any) for the asserted prlvilege{s).

If Yamaha fails to respond In full to the staffs November 18111 request, or does not provide an applicable privilege log as requested above, bv not lar.T thfm Deqmbrr u. ZQOf. we wiP discuss with our manaaement the prospect of pursuing compulsory process In this matter, lncludin& (but not limited to) seeklns the issuance of a subpoena by the Commission.

Please copy me on further communications with CPSC regarding this case, and do not hesitate to contact me If you have any questions about the above. -Reza

A4. RnaMallhl TrWAttonwy DMslon d Campl'-:e Office of the Gentnl CCMIMt u.s. c-~~ s.tety Con'miDion Tel: l01 .504.nn fM: l01.SCM.OJ59 I!Jilll!bjkmc: . ....

•••••!!! Unless otherwise stated, any views or opinions expressed in this e-mail (and any attachments) are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission. Copies of product recall and product safety infonnation can be sent to you automatically via Internet e-mail, as they arc released by CPSC. To subscribe or unsubscribe to this service go to the foJlowing web page: https://www.cpsc.gov/cpsclist.aspx •••••!!!

121SJ2008

CONFIDENTIAL RHINO-CPSC-00000051 .0002

u0153570

Highlight

'-"'

Tlri"' subm;ssinn ~o11t11ins coRfltlelftial amJ propri~tllry bu!lilff!~ and per.mRal i11jnrmution. Cnnfldrlltilll ~atmmt i .... ~Yqur!;led.

In the \bt~r of

UNITE.D STATES OF AMERICA CONSll!\tER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION

) ) )

Y:\i\·IAHA MOTOR CORPORATION, U.S.A.. )

and

YAMAHA MOTOR MANUFACTURING CORPORATION

) } ) ) )

RESPQNSE TO SPECIAL ORDER AND SUBPOENA

Date..;.--n-.-~-

Yamaha Motor Corporation, U.S.A. ("YMUS") and Yamaha Motor Manufacturing <.oqxlfati<ln ( .. YMMC") (collectively. ··Yamaha") respectfully submit this response to the Commission's ("CPSC") special orduand subpoena. Yamaha has made diligent. good faith ctn1ns to respond to the questions and information and document requests in the Spet:ial Order and Sunpoena. In addition to identitying and catl-gorizing. to the best ofits ability and under.;tanding, information and documents rc5ponsive to individual requests, Yamaha is prtwiding CPSC with a hard drive and 62 DVDs which include all of the intbrmation and docwt1c.:nts ftom the tiles and records and databases ofYMUS. YMMC. and Yan1aha Motor Co., Ltd. { .. YMC'1 that Yamaha has produced in Rhino-related product liability litigation. including materi~:lls produced pursuant to judicial confidentiality protective orders. Much of this intbnnation is re.'\ponsive to the subpoena and is identified and categ\.'lrized by individual rctfUe:\ls. Howe\'er the hard drive contains scanned paper and electronic documents (arpro~Jmately 58.000 documents) converted to PDF (Portable Document fonnat) fimnat. OCR (Optic~ I Character Recognition) technology was applied to each PDF tonnattcd docuotent to make them text searchable. PDF files can be viewed, searched individually or multiple documl..'llts within the fulder structure can be searched using Adobe Acrobat or the Acrobat Rt.·adcr. Video files (e.g., documents with .mpg, .avi •. wmv tile extensions) can be viewed using the Windo'""S Media Player. Viewing Quick Time Movie files (docwnents \\ith a .mov file cxtensi\m) may require the QuickTime or similar media player. Yamaha is providing the hard dri"e and 62 DVDs in this fonnat both to demonstrate its good faith attempt to comply wilh the ~ubpoena and to avoid any misunderstanding about the scope of its etTorts in light of appar~nt past communications by plaintiffs and plaintitTs" lawyers to CPSC.

In addition, some of the instructions and requests are so broati or extensive that literal c;mlplian<:c is not feasible or overly burdensome (e.g ., the requirement that the identity of each pers.m include present or last kncnvn residential addresses. telephone numbers. e-mail addrc:s:-es c ;\.·. ; th.: requil'\;mcnt that the identity of each bu.,incss entity include :date of incorporation, n:gistn:tion or organization, its present otlicers, dirC\;tors. and shan:holders. etc.; the requirement to identifY ~h person who may have any knowledge of any of the subject matte~ covered by

. I·

CONFIDENTIAL R HINO-CPSC-00000060.0001

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I I

I

I

I

I

I

u0153570

Highlight

cpsc-yamaha.pdf - Reuters

Documents

Transcript of cpsc-yamaha.pdf - Reuters