Notice of Receipt of Petition for Decision That Nonconforming 2005 Lamborghini Murcielago Roadster Passenger Cars Are Eligible for Importation, 71373-71375 [E5-6529]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 227 / Monday, November 28, 2005 / Notices
Ferrari stated that its inability to sell
the F430 in the United States through
2007 would lead to a substantial loss of
sales and revenue. Ferrari stated that in
2004, sales of the 8-cylinder 360
models, those models being replaced by
the F430, accounted for 86 percent of its
U.S. sales. Ferrari projected that if it
were unable to sell the F430 model in
the U.S., it would realize a decrease in
net profit of approximately 44 million
Euros ($53,000,000) in 2007. Ferrari
stated that such consequences
demonstrate ‘‘substantial economic
hardship’’ within the meaning of 49
U.S.C. 30113(b)(3)(B)(i).
Ferrari has requested that additional
specific details regarding its finances
and financial forecasts be afforded
confidential treatment under 49 CFR
512.4, Asserting a claim for confidential
information. We have determined that
this information is to be afforded such
treatment.
III. Why an Exemption Would Be in the
Public Interest
The petitioner put forth several
arguments in favor of a finding that the
requested exemption is consistent with
the public interest. Specifically:
1. Ferrari states that the vehicle is
equipped with a variety of ‘‘active
safety’’ systems beyond that required by
the FMVSSs and that these systems
‘‘significantly improve vehicle handling
and enhance controllability.’’ Such
systems include the Manettino control
system, which adjusts vehicle handling
and stability to specific driving
conditions; the Control Stability System,
an electronic stability control system;
Electro-Hydraulic Differential, a system
that manages torque distribution
between the two rear wheels to improve
stability; Continuous Damping Control,
a system that adjusts to road conditions
in order to improve braking; and ‘‘SkyHook’’ strategy.2
2. The petitioner states that the F430
also has a variety of passive safety
features not required under the FMVSS,
including seat belt pretensioners and a
fuel system that complies with the
upgraded fuel system integrity
requirements in advance of the
compliance date.
3. Ferrari notes that the requirements
for which the F430 does not comply are
primarily designed to protect children
from injuries due to air bag deployment.
Ferrari argues that it is unlikely that
2 The ‘‘Skyhook’’ strategy detaches the vehicle
body, as a sprung mass, from what is taking place
on the axles and wheels by calming the movement
of the body * * * In addition to improved comfort,
this provides for ‘‘optimal control of the vehicle
body at all times.’’ Page 10 of the petition.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:28 Nov 25, 2005
Jkt 208001
young children would be passengers in
the vehicles covered by the exemption.
4. Ferrari states that the F430 will
have a manual on/off switch for the
passenger air bag. Ferrari also notes that
a child restraint system that
automatically suppresses the passenger
air bag when properly installed would
be available upon request of a consumer
at no cost.
5. Ferrari states that the F430 was
designed and marketed as a high
performance, racing type vehicle, and
therefore would have negligible on-road
operation. Thus, Ferrari states, the
impact of the exemption is expected to
be minimal.
6. Ferrari argues that granting the
exemption would increase choices
available to the U.S. driving population
in the high-performance vehicle
segment.
7. The petitioner argues that granting
the exemption would maintain the
viability of U.S. firms associated with
the sales and maintenance associated
with the F430. Ferrari projects the F430
to be a major part of Ferrari sales in the
U.S. during the two-year period for
which an exemption has been
requested.
IV. How You May Comment on the
Ferrari Application
We invite you to submit comments on
the application described above. You
may submit comments [identified by the
DOT Docket number in the heading of
this document] by any of the following
methods:
• Web Site: https://dms.dot.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting
comments on the DOT electronic docket
site by clicking on ‘‘Help and
Information’’ or ‘‘Help/Info.’’
• Fax: 1–202–493–2251.
• Mail: Docket Management Facility,
U.S. Department of Transportation, 400
Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building,
Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590.
• Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on
the plaza level of the Nassif Building,
400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington,
DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal
Holidays.
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
online instructions for submitting
comments.
Instructions: All submissions must
include the agency name and docket
number or Regulatory Identification
Number (RIN) for this rulemaking. Note
that all comments received will be
posted without change to https://
dms.dot.gov, including any personal
information provided.
PO 00000
Frm 00112
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
71373
Docket: For access to the docket in
order to read background documents or
comments received, go to https://
dms.dot.gov at any time or to Room PL–
401 on the plaza level of the Nassif
Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search
the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the
comment (or signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may
review DOT’s complete Privacy Act
Statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (Volume
65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78) or you
may visit https://dms.dot.gov.
We shall consider all comments
received before the close of business on
the comment closing date indicated
below. To the extent possible, we shall
also consider comments filed after the
closing date. We shall publish a notice
of final action on the application in the
Federal Register pursuant to the
authority indicated below.
(49 U.S.C. 30113; delegations of authority at
49 CFR 1.50. and 501.8)
Issued on: November 18, 2005.
Roger A. Saul,
Director, Office of Crashworthiness
Standards.
[FR Doc. E5–6551 Filed 11–25–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2005–23083]
Notice of Receipt of Petition for
Decision That Nonconforming 2005
Lamborghini Murcielago Roadster
Passenger Cars Are Eligible for
Importation
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Notice of receipt of petition for
decision that nonconforming 2005
Lamborghini Murcielago roadster
passenger cars are eligible for
importation.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This document announces
receipt by the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA) of a
petition for a decision that 2005
Lamborghini Murcielago roadster
passenger cars that were not originally
manufactured to comply with all
applicable Federal motor vehicle safety
E:\FR\FM\28NON1.SGM
28NON1
71374
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 227 / Monday, November 28, 2005 / Notices
standards are eligible for importation
into the United States because (1) they
are substantially similar to vehicles that
were originally manufactured for
importation into and sale in the United
States and that were certified by their
manufacturer as complying with the
safety standards, and (2) they are
capable of being readily altered to
conform to the standards.
DATES: The closing date for comments
on the petition is December 28, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Comments should refer to
the docket number and notice number,
and be submitted to: Docket
Management, Room PL–401, 400
Seventh St. SW., Washington, DC
20590. [Docket hours are from 9 a.m. to
5 p.m.]. Anyone is able to search the
electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the
comment (or signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may
review DOT’s complete Privacy Act
Statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (Volume
65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78) or you
may visit https://dms.dot.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Coleman Sachs, Office of Vehicle Safety
Compliance, NHTSA (202–366–3151).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Under 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A), a
motor vehicle that was not originally
manufactured to conform to all
applicable Federal motor vehicle safety
standards shall be refused admission
into the United States unless NHTSA
has decided that the motor vehicle is
substantially similar to a motor vehicle
originally manufactured for importation
into and sale in the United States,
certified under 49 U.S.C. 30115, and of
the same model year as the model of the
motor vehicle to be compared, and is
capable of being readily altered to
conform to all applicable Federal motor
vehicle safety standards.
Petitions for eligibility decisions may
be submitted by either manufacturers or
importers who have registered with
NHTSA pursuant to 49 CFR part 592. As
specified in 49 CFR 593.7, NHTSA
publishes notice in the Federal Register
of each petition that it receives, and
affords interested persons an
opportunity to comment on the petition.
At the close of the comment period,
NHTSA decides, on the basis of the
petition and any comments that it has
received, whether the vehicle is eligible
for importation. The agency then
publishes this decision in the Federal
Register.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:28 Nov 25, 2005
Jkt 208001
Automobile Concepts, Inc. (‘‘AMC’’),
of North Miami, Florida (Registered
Importer 01–278) has petitioned NHTSA
to decide whether nonconforming 2005
Lamborghini Murcielago roadster
passenger cars are eligible for
importation into the United States. The
vehicles which AMC believes are
substantially similar are 2005
Lamborghini Murcielago roadster
passenger cars that were manufactured
for importation into, and sale in, the
United States and certified by their
manufacturer as conforming to all
applicable Federal motor vehicle safety
standards.
The petitioner claims that it carefully
compared non-U.S. certified 2005
Lamborghini Murcielago roadster
passenger cars to their U.S.-certified
counterparts, and found the vehicles to
be substantially similar with respect to
compliance with most Federal motor
vehicle safety standards.
AMC submitted information with its
petition intended to demonstrate that
non-U.S. certified 2005 Lamborghini
Murcielago roadster passenger cars, as
originally manufactured, conform to
many Federal motor vehicle safety
standards in the same manner as their
U.S. certified counterparts, or are
capable of being readily altered to
conform to those standards.
Specifically, the petitioner claims that
non-U.S. certified 2005 Lamborghini
Murcielago roadster passenger cars are
identical to their U.S. certified
counterparts with respect to compliance
with Standard Nos. 102 Transmission
Shift Lever Sequence, Starter Interlock,
and Transmission Braking Effect, 103
Windshield Defrosting and Defogging
Systems, 104 Windshield Wiping and
Washing Systems, 106 Brake Hoses, 109
New Pneumatic Tires, 113 Hood Latch
System, 116 Motor Vehicle Brake Fluids,
118 Power-Operated Window, Partition,
and Roof Panel Systems, 124
Accelerator Control Systems, 135
Passenger Car Brake Systems, 201
Occupant Protection in Interior Impact,
202 Head Restraints, 204 Steering
Control Rearward Displacement, 205
Glazing Materials, 206 Door Locks and
Door Retention Components, 207
Seating Systems, 212 Windshield
Mounting, 214 Side Impact Protection,
219 Windshield Zone Intrusion, 225
Child Restraint Anchorage Systems, 301
Fuel System Integrity, 302 Flammability
of Interior Materials, and 401 Interior
Trunk Release.
In addition, the petitioner claims that
the vehicles comply with the Bumper
Standard found in 49 CFR part 581.
The petitioner also contends that the
vehicles are capable of being readily
PO 00000
Frm 00113
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
altered to meet the following standards,
in the manner indicated:
Standard No. 101 Controls and
Displays: Installation of a U.S.-model
instrument cluster and associated
software, or installation of an indicator
lamp lens cover inscribed with the word
‘‘brake’’ in the instrument cluster in
place of the one inscribed with the
international ECE warning symbol and
conversion of the speedometer to read
in miles per hour.
Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective
Devices and Associated Equipment: (A)
Installation of rear side marker lamps
that incorporate rear side-mounted
reflex reflectors; and (b) inspection of all
vehicles and replacement of any non
U.S.-model components necessary to
meet the requirements of this standard
with U.S.-model components on
vehicles that are not already so
equipped.
Standard No. 110 Tire Selection and
Rims: Installation of a tire information
placard.
Standard No. 111 Rearview Mirrors:
Installation of a U.S.-model passenger
side rearview mirror, or inscription of
the required warning statement on the
face of that mirror.
Standard No. 114 Theft Protection:
Installation of U.S. version software, or
installation a supplemental warning
buzzer to meet the requirements of this
standard.
Standard No. 208 Occupant Crash
Protection: (a) Installation of U.S.
version software, or installation of a
supplemental buzzer system to ensure
that the seat belt warning system
conforms to the requirements of this
standard; and (b) inspection of all
vehicles and replacement of any non
U.S.-model components necessary to
meet the requirements of this standard
with U.S.-model components on
vehicles that are not already so
equipped.
Petitioner states that the restraint
systems used at the front outboard
seating positions include airbags and
knee bolsters as well as combination lap
and shoulder belts. These seat belt
systems are self-tensioning and release
by means of a single red pushbutton.
Standard No. 209 Seat Belt
Assemblies: Inspection of all vehicles
and replacement of any non-U.S.-model
seat belts with U.S.-model components
on vehicles that are not already so
equipped.
Standard No. 210 Seat Belt Assembly
Anchorages: Inspection of all vehicles
and replacement of any non-U.S.-model
seat belt anchorages with U.S.-model
components on vehicles that are not
already so equipped.
E:\FR\FM\28NON1.SGM
28NON1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 227 / Monday, November 28, 2005 / Notices
The petitioner additionally states that
a vehicle identification plate must be
affixed to the vehicles near the left
windshield post to meet the
requirements of 49 CFR part 565.
Interested persons are invited to
submit comments on the petition
described above. Comments should refer
to the docket number and be submitted
to: Docket Management, Room PL–401,
400 Seventh St., SW., Washington, DC
20590. [Docket hours are from 9 a.m. to
5 p.m.]. It is requested but not required
that 10 copies be submitted.
All comments received before the
close of business on the closing date
indicated above will be considered, and
will be available for examination in the
docket at the above address both before
and after that date. To the extent
possible, comments filed after the
closing date will also be considered.
Notice of final action on the petition
will be published in the Federal
Register pursuant to the authority
indicated below.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A) and
(b)(1); 49 CFR 593.8; delegations of authority
at 49 CFR 1.50 and 501.8.
Claude H. Harris,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. E5–6529 Filed 11–25–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2005–22654]
Notice of Tentative Decision To
Partially Rescind Decision That
Nonconforming 1990–1999 Nissan GTS
and GTR Passenger Cars Are Eligible
for Importation
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of tentative decision to
partially rescind decision that
nonconforming 1990–1999 Nissan GTS
and GTR passenger cars are eligible for
importation.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This document provides
notice that NHTSA has tentatively
decided to partially rescind its decision
that 1990–1999 Nissan GTS and GTR
passenger cars not originally
manufactured to comply with all
applicable Federal motor vehicle safety
standards (FMVSS) are eligible for
importation into the United States. If
NHTSA makes this rescission, Nissan
R33 model GTS and GTR passenger cars
manufactured between January 1996
and June 1998 would be eligible for
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:28 Nov 25, 2005
Jkt 208001
importation following the decision; the
others would not be eligible for
importation following the decision.
DATES: The closing date for comments
on the tentative decision is December
28, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Comments should refer to
the docket number and notice number,
and be submitted to: Docket
Management, Room PL–401, 400
Seventh St., SW., Washington, DC
20590. [Docket hours are from 9 a.m. to
5 p.m.] Anyone is able to search the
electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the
comment (or signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may
review DOT’s complete Privacy Act
Statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (Volume
65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78) or you
may visit https://dms.dot.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Coleman Sachs, Office of Vehicle Safety
Compliance, NHTSA (202–366–3151).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Under 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A), a
motor vehicle that was not originally
manufactured to conform to all
applicable Federal motor vehicle safety
standards (FMVSS) shall be refused
admission into the United States unless
NHTSA has decided that the motor
vehicle is substantially similar to a
motor vehicle originally manufactured
for importation into and sale in the
United States, certified under 49 U.S.C.
30115, and of the same model year as
the model of the motor vehicle to be
compared, and is capable of being
readily altered to conform to all
applicable FMVSS. Where there is no
substantially similar U.S.-certified
motor vehicle, 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(B)
permits a nonconforming motor vehicle
to be admitted into the United States if
its safety features comply with, or are
capable of being altered to comply with,
all applicable FMVSS based on
destructive test data or other evidence
(such as an engineering analysis) that
NHTSA decides is adequate.
Petitions for eligibility decisions may
be submitted by either manufacturers or
importers who have registered with
NHTSA pursuant to 49 CFR Part 592. As
specified in 49 CFR 593.7, NHTSA
publishes notice in the Federal Register
of each petition that it receives, and
affords interested persons an
opportunity to comment on the petition.
At the close of the comment period,
NHTSA decides, on the basis of the
petition and any comments that it has
PO 00000
Frm 00114
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
71375
received, whether the vehicle is eligible
for importation. The agency then
publishes this decision in the Federal
Register.
NHTSA was petitioned by a registered
importer to decide whether 1990–1999
Nissan GTS and GTR Passenger cars are
eligible for importation into the United
States. To afford an opportunity for
public comment, NHTSA published
notice of this petition under Docket
Number NHTSA–99–5507 on April 16,
1999 (64 FR 18963). As stated in the
notice, the petitioner claimed that 1990–
1999 Nissan GTS and GTR passenger
cars have safety features that comply
with many standards that apply to
passenger cars of the model years in
question, and are capable of being
altered to comply with other applicable
standards. With respect to FMVSS No.
208 Occupant Crash Protection, the
petitioner stated that the driver’s air
bags on 1990–1993 models, and the
driver and passenger’s air bags on 1994–
1999 models, would need to be replaced
with components manufactured to
petitioner’s specifications based on the
results of dynamic tests conducted by
MGA Research Corporation. As
indicated by the petitioner, these tests
were conducted after it had made
certain structural modifications to the
vehicles.
No comments were received in
response to the notice of petition. Based
on its review of the information
submitted by the petitioner, NHTSA
granted the petition on November 15,
1999, and assigned Vehicle Eligibility
Number VCP–17 to vehicles admissible
under its decision. The agency
published notice of the decision on
January 19, 2000 (65 FR 3002).
The agency has obtained information
from Nissan North America, Inc., on
behalf of Nissan Motor Company, LTD
(Nissan) of Tokyo, Japan, the
manufacturer of Nissan 1990–1999
Nissan GTS and GTR passenger cars.
Nissan informed the agency that it
manufactured three distinct GTS and
GTR models from 1990 to 1999,
designated as the R32, the R33, and the
R34 models, respectively. Nissan stated
that the R32, the R33, and the R34
models differ in terms of their
‘‘structural design and restraint
performance,’’ and that each of the
models, which followed a chronological
sequence, was ‘‘newly designed and
different from the type preceding it.’’
Nissan confirmed that the company
received official type approval from the
Japanese government for each model
separately, and that it was ‘‘highly likely
that each model type would perform
differently in the crash tests required by
the FMVSS.’’
E:\FR\FM\28NON1.SGM
28NON1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 227 (Monday, November 28, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 71373-71375]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E5-6529]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2005-23083]
Notice of Receipt of Petition for Decision That Nonconforming
2005 Lamborghini Murcielago Roadster Passenger Cars Are Eligible for
Importation
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Notice of receipt of petition for decision that nonconforming
2005 Lamborghini Murcielago roadster passenger cars are eligible for
importation.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document announces receipt by the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) of a petition for a decision that
2005 Lamborghini Murcielago roadster passenger cars that were not
originally manufactured to comply with all applicable Federal motor
vehicle safety
[[Page 71374]]
standards are eligible for importation into the United States because
(1) they are substantially similar to vehicles that were originally
manufactured for importation into and sale in the United States and
that were certified by their manufacturer as complying with the safety
standards, and (2) they are capable of being readily altered to conform
to the standards.
DATES: The closing date for comments on the petition is December 28,
2005.
ADDRESSES: Comments should refer to the docket number and notice
number, and be submitted to: Docket Management, Room PL-401, 400
Seventh St. SW., Washington, DC 20590. [Docket hours are from 9 a.m. to
5 p.m.]. Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477-78) or you may visit
https://dms.dot.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Coleman Sachs, Office of Vehicle
Safety Compliance, NHTSA (202-366-3151).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Under 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A), a motor vehicle that was not
originally manufactured to conform to all applicable Federal motor
vehicle safety standards shall be refused admission into the United
States unless NHTSA has decided that the motor vehicle is substantially
similar to a motor vehicle originally manufactured for importation into
and sale in the United States, certified under 49 U.S.C. 30115, and of
the same model year as the model of the motor vehicle to be compared,
and is capable of being readily altered to conform to all applicable
Federal motor vehicle safety standards.
Petitions for eligibility decisions may be submitted by either
manufacturers or importers who have registered with NHTSA pursuant to
49 CFR part 592. As specified in 49 CFR 593.7, NHTSA publishes notice
in the Federal Register of each petition that it receives, and affords
interested persons an opportunity to comment on the petition. At the
close of the comment period, NHTSA decides, on the basis of the
petition and any comments that it has received, whether the vehicle is
eligible for importation. The agency then publishes this decision in
the Federal Register.
Automobile Concepts, Inc. (``AMC''), of North Miami, Florida
(Registered Importer 01-278) has petitioned NHTSA to decide whether
nonconforming 2005 Lamborghini Murcielago roadster passenger cars are
eligible for importation into the United States. The vehicles which AMC
believes are substantially similar are 2005 Lamborghini Murcielago
roadster passenger cars that were manufactured for importation into,
and sale in, the United States and certified by their manufacturer as
conforming to all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards.
The petitioner claims that it carefully compared non-U.S. certified
2005 Lamborghini Murcielago roadster passenger cars to their U.S.-
certified counterparts, and found the vehicles to be substantially
similar with respect to compliance with most Federal motor vehicle
safety standards.
AMC submitted information with its petition intended to demonstrate
that non-U.S. certified 2005 Lamborghini Murcielago roadster passenger
cars, as originally manufactured, conform to many Federal motor vehicle
safety standards in the same manner as their U.S. certified
counterparts, or are capable of being readily altered to conform to
those standards.
Specifically, the petitioner claims that non-U.S. certified 2005
Lamborghini Murcielago roadster passenger cars are identical to their
U.S. certified counterparts with respect to compliance with Standard
Nos. 102 Transmission Shift Lever Sequence, Starter Interlock, and
Transmission Braking Effect, 103 Windshield Defrosting and Defogging
Systems, 104 Windshield Wiping and Washing Systems, 106 Brake Hoses,
109 New Pneumatic Tires, 113 Hood Latch System, 116 Motor Vehicle Brake
Fluids, 118 Power-Operated Window, Partition, and Roof Panel Systems,
124 Accelerator Control Systems, 135 Passenger Car Brake Systems, 201
Occupant Protection in Interior Impact, 202 Head Restraints, 204
Steering Control Rearward Displacement, 205 Glazing Materials, 206 Door
Locks and Door Retention Components, 207 Seating Systems, 212
Windshield Mounting, 214 Side Impact Protection, 219 Windshield Zone
Intrusion, 225 Child Restraint Anchorage Systems, 301 Fuel System
Integrity, 302 Flammability of Interior Materials, and 401 Interior
Trunk Release.
In addition, the petitioner claims that the vehicles comply with
the Bumper Standard found in 49 CFR part 581.
The petitioner also contends that the vehicles are capable of being
readily altered to meet the following standards, in the manner
indicated:
Standard No. 101 Controls and Displays: Installation of a U.S.-
model instrument cluster and associated software, or installation of an
indicator lamp lens cover inscribed with the word ``brake'' in the
instrument cluster in place of the one inscribed with the international
ECE warning symbol and conversion of the speedometer to read in miles
per hour.
Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated
Equipment: (A) Installation of rear side marker lamps that incorporate
rear side-mounted reflex reflectors; and (b) inspection of all vehicles
and replacement of any non U.S.-model components necessary to meet the
requirements of this standard with U.S.-model components on vehicles
that are not already so equipped.
Standard No. 110 Tire Selection and Rims: Installation of a tire
information placard.
Standard No. 111 Rearview Mirrors: Installation of a U.S.-model
passenger side rearview mirror, or inscription of the required warning
statement on the face of that mirror.
Standard No. 114 Theft Protection: Installation of U.S. version
software, or installation a supplemental warning buzzer to meet the
requirements of this standard.
Standard No. 208 Occupant Crash Protection: (a) Installation of
U.S. version software, or installation of a supplemental buzzer system
to ensure that the seat belt warning system conforms to the
requirements of this standard; and (b) inspection of all vehicles and
replacement of any non U.S.-model components necessary to meet the
requirements of this standard with U.S.-model components on vehicles
that are not already so equipped.
Petitioner states that the restraint systems used at the front
outboard seating positions include airbags and knee bolsters as well as
combination lap and shoulder belts. These seat belt systems are self-
tensioning and release by means of a single red pushbutton.
Standard No. 209 Seat Belt Assemblies: Inspection of all vehicles
and replacement of any non-U.S.-model seat belts with U.S.-model
components on vehicles that are not already so equipped.
Standard No. 210 Seat Belt Assembly Anchorages: Inspection of all
vehicles and replacement of any non-U.S.-model seat belt anchorages
with U.S.-model components on vehicles that are not already so
equipped.
[[Page 71375]]
The petitioner additionally states that a vehicle identification
plate must be affixed to the vehicles near the left windshield post to
meet the requirements of 49 CFR part 565.
Interested persons are invited to submit comments on the petition
described above. Comments should refer to the docket number and be
submitted to: Docket Management, Room PL-401, 400 Seventh St., SW.,
Washington, DC 20590. [Docket hours are from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.]. It is
requested but not required that 10 copies be submitted.
All comments received before the close of business on the closing
date indicated above will be considered, and will be available for
examination in the docket at the above address both before and after
that date. To the extent possible, comments filed after the closing
date will also be considered. Notice of final action on the petition
will be published in the Federal Register pursuant to the authority
indicated below.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A) and (b)(1); 49 CFR 593.8;
delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.50 and 501.8.
Claude H. Harris,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. E5-6529 Filed 11-25-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
