Final Decision To Partially Rescind Decision That Nonconforming 1990-1999 Nissan GTS and GTR Passenger Cars Are Eligible for Importation, 10591-10596 [06-1896]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 40 / Wednesday, March 1, 2006 / Notices
You may submit comments
by mail to: Maritime Administration,
Office of Congressional and Public
Affairs, 400 Seventh Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20590; or by e-mail to:
pao.marad@dot.gov.
ADDRESSES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Erhard Koehler, Manager, NS Savannah
Programs, Maritime Administration, 400
Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC
20590; phone: (202) 366–2631; fax: (202)
366–3954; or e-mail
Erhard.Koehler@dot.gov. Information
regarding the NS Savannah is also
available on MARAD’s Web site at
https://www.marad.dot.gov.
The NS
Savannah, the world’s first nuclearpowered commercial vessel, was
originally launched on July 21, 1959,
and served as a demonstration of the
peaceful and productive use of atomic
power. It was part of the Patriots Point
Naval and Maritime Museum in Mount
Pleasant, SC from 1981 to 1994, and has
spent the last 11 years moored at
MARAD’s James River Reserve Fleet in
Virginia.
MARAD is considering transferring
the Savannah from its present location
to either Charleston, South Carolina;
Wilmington, North Carolina; Hampton
Roads, Virginia; or Baltimore, Maryland,
to complete the decommissioning of its
nuclear reactor. No nuclear fuel remains
on the Savannah (as all of the fuel was
removed more than 30 years ago).
MARAD has a five-year plan to remove
the rest of the irradiated components
from the ship—the reactor pressure
vessel, steam generators, pumps and
piping systems. These components have
been tested and found to be Class A or
lower, which means they have the
lowest radiation levels they can have
and still be considered nuclear waste.
The waste would be disposed of in a
licensed facility. This collective process
is defined as ‘‘decommissioning.’’
The Savannah is licensed and
regulated by the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC)—just like
any other commercial utility that
operates a nuclear power station. Under
NRC regulations, MARAD must move
the Savannah from its present location
in the James River Reserve Fleet to an
East Coast port / industrial complex
where the decommissioning work can
be accomplished. NRC will then
consider an amendment to MARAD’s
Savannah license to authorize the
decommissioning work. This review is
expected to take two years (2006–2008),
and it will include a series of formal
hearings chaired by the NRC in the
decommissioning port.
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:25 Feb 28, 2006
Jkt 208001
MARAD is requesting public
comments on its proposal to relocate the
Savannah for decommissioning. After
reviewing comments, MARAD may hold
several informational public meetings
(and/or teleconferences) addressing this
proposal in Charleston, South Carolina;
Wilmington, North Carolina; Hampton
Roads, Virginia (to include Norfolk,
Portsmouth, Newport News); and
Baltimore, Maryland. If such meetings
are determined to be necessary, specific
dates and times for the meetings will be
announced in the Federal Register.
(Authority 49 CFR 1.66)
Dated: February 24, 2006.
By order of the Maritime Administrator.
Joel C. Richard,
Secretary, Maritime Administration
[FR Doc. E6–2923 Filed 2–28–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–81–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA 2005–22654; Notice 2]
Final 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: Final decision to partially
rescind decision that nonconforming
1990–1999 Nissan GTS and GTR
passenger cars are eligible for
importation.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This document announces a
final decision by NHTSA to partially
rescind a prior decision by the agency
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. As a
result of this decision, only Nissan R33
model GTS and GTR passenger cars
manufactured between January 1996
and June 1998 are eligible for
importation. All other model and model
year vehicles admissible under the prior
decision are no longer eligible for
importation. As a consequence, the
agency is rescinding vehicle eligibility
number VCP–17, which covered
vehicles admissible under the prior
decision, and issuing vehicle eligibility
number VCP–32 to cover only those
model and model year Nissan GTS and
GTR passenger cars that remain eligible
for importation. The rescission will only
bar the future importation of the model
PO 00000
Frm 00130
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
10591
and model year Nissan GTS and GTR
passenger cars that are no longer eligible
for importation, and will not affect the
status of vehicles that have already been
lawfully imported under vehicle
eligibility number VCP–17.
DATES: The decision is effective on
March 1, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Coleman Sachs, Office of Vehicle Safety
Compliance, National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, 400 Seventh
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590
(202–366–5291).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Statutory and Regulatory
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 crash
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
received, whether the vehicle is eligible
for importation. Because NHTSA has
little or no direct knowledge of many
vehicles for which import eligibility is
sought, the agency must rely on the
petition and any comments that are
submitted in making this decision. The
agency then publishes its decision in
the Federal Register. If NHTSA decides
that the vehicle is eligible for
importation, it will assign a vehicle
eligibility number. The eligibility
E:\FR\FM\01MRN1.SGM
01MRN1
10592
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 40 / Wednesday, March 1, 2006 / Notices
number is entered on the importation
declaration to inform Customs that the
vehicle can be lawfully imported (by a
registered importer or by a person who
has a contract with a registered importer
to modify the vehicle) even though the
vehicle was not originally manufactured
to comply with all applicable FMVSS or
was not so certified by its original
manufacturer for importation into, and
sale in, the United States.
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
B. Import Eligibility Petition and
Decision
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’s and passenger’s air bags on
1994–1999 models, would need to be
replaced with components
manufactured to the petitioner’s
specifications based on the results of
dynamic crash 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 that decision. The agency
published notice of the decision on
January 19, 2000 (65 FR 3002).
C. Information Undermining Eligibility
Decision
After the notice of decision granting
the petition was published, the agency
obtained additional information
regarding 1990–1999 Nissan GTS and
GTR passenger cars from Nissan North
America, Inc., the U.S. representative of
Nissan Motor Company, LTD (Nissan) of
Tokyo, Japan, the vehicles’
manufacturer. Nissan informed the
agency that it manufactured three
distinct GTS and GTR models from 1990
to 1999, designated as the R32, the R33,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:25 Feb 28, 2006
Jkt 208001
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 stated that it was
‘‘highly likely that each model type
would perform differently in the crash
tests required by the FMVSS.’’
Nissan also provided a chart showing
production ‘‘start’’ and ‘‘end’’ dates for
the R32, the R33, and the R34 models.
The R32 models were manufactured
from May 1989 through November 1994;
the R33 models were manufactured
from August 1993 through June 1998;
and the R34 models were manufactured
from November 1997 through August
2002. Included in the chart is
information identifying the production
‘‘start’’ dates when air bags were offered
as an option and as standard equipment
at both the driver’s and the front
passenger’s seating positions on the
R32, the R33, and the R34 model
vehicles.
The agency did not have this
information at the time of its original
decision to grant import eligibility to
1990–1999 Nissan GTS and GTR
passenger cars. Instead, the agency
heavily relied on the results of static
and dynamic tests on two modified
1996 R33 model vehicles, which the
original petition suggested were
representative of the entire model year
range covered by the petition. As
indicated in the original petition, the
petitioner had made structural
modifications to these two vehicles and
replaced the air bags at the driver’s and
front passenger’s seating positions with
components manufactured to its own
specifications. With the benefit of the
information provided by Nissan, it is
now apparent that the petitioner did not
demonstrate full compliance with the
performance requirements of FMVSS
208 and other crashworthiness
standards (e.g., FMVSS Nos. 210 Seat
Belt Assembly Anchorages, 212
Windshield Mounting, and 301 Fuel
System Integrity) for R32 and R34
models because petitioner did not
identify these separate models or
provide crash performance test data on
them.
The agency’s decision to grant import
eligibility to 1990–1999 Nissan GTS and
GTR passenger cars also relied on the
petitioner’s assertion that the original
equipment driver’s air bag on 1990–
1993 models, and the driver’s and
PO 00000
Frm 00131
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
passenger’s air bags on 1994–1999
models would be replaced with
components manufactured to the
petitioner’s specifications.
However, the air bag production chart
provided by Nissan shows that no
driver’s air bags were available in the
R32 GTS model until August 1991. For
the R32 GTR model, no driver’s air bag
was offered until February 1994, and it
was then offered only as optional
equipment. Nissan did not offer
passenger’s air bags in the R32 model.
Nissan began production of the R33
model in August 1993, offering both
driver’s and passenger’s air bags as
optional equipment on the GTS model.
It was not until January 1995 that a
driver’s air bag was offered on the GTR
model. As of January 1995, the driver’s
air bag became standard on both GTS
and GTR models. One year later, in
January 1996, the passenger’s air bag
became standard on both GTS and GTR
models.
Nissan has informed the agency that
it does not possess records that would
allow it to determine whether any
individual vehicle had air bags installed
as optional equipment. Based on the
information furnished by Nissan, the
agency can only be assured that R33
model vehicles, produced by Nissan
beginning in January 1996, had both
driver’s and passenger’s air bags
installed as original equipment.
D. Tentative Decision To Partially
Rescind Import Eligibility
On the basis of the foregoing, NHTSA
tentatively concluded that the original
grant of eligibility to the 1990–1999
Nissan GTS and GTR passenger cars,
comprising R32, R33, and R34 model
vehicles, was overly broad. As a
consequence, the agency tentatively
decided to rescind that decision in part,
so that only Nissan R33 model GTS and
GTR passenger cars manufactured
between January 1996 and June 1998
would be eligible for importation if the
tentative decision was made final. The
agency published a notice of the
tentative decision on November 28,
2005, 70 FR 71375. The notice solicited
public comments on the tentative
decision.
E. Comments on Tentative Decision
The agency received 35 comments in
response to the notice of tentative
decision. Nine of these were duplicates.
Eliminating the duplicates, a total of 26
comments were received. Those
comments are summarized below.
a. General Issues
Ten commenters opposed any change
in the existing decision that 1990–1999
E:\FR\FM\01MRN1.SGM
01MRN1
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 40 / Wednesday, March 1, 2006 / Notices
Nissan GTS and GTR ‘‘Skyline’’
passenger cars are eligible for
importation. Two commenters
expressed the opinion that Skylines are
not unsafe vehicles. Three commenters
observed that there are so few Skyline
vehicles in the United States that their
impact on motor vehicle safety is
negligible. Three commenters observed
that NHTSA should not rescind import
eligibility for Nissan Skylines, thereby
denying enthusiasts the opportunity to
own these vehicles, on account of a
single registered importer’s fraudulent
practices in certifying the compliance of
these vehicles to all applicable
standards. In contrast to these
comments, three commenters were of
the opinion that NHTSA should rescind
import eligibility for all Nissan Skyline
vehicles. Of these, one commenter
believed the market for the Nissan
Skyline was too limited for businesses
to spend the capital necessary to reengineer components required to fully
comply with the FMVSS.
Agency Response: Because they were
not originally manufactured to comply
with all applicable FMVSS, Nissan
Skyline vehicles could not be lawfully
imported into the United States unless
they were determined eligible for
importation, based on their capability of
being modified to conform to those
standards. That is the case regardless of
how safe the commenters may believe
the vehicles to be, and regardless of how
many Skyline vehicles may actually be
operated on U.S. roads.
Although the agency’s original import
eligibility decision was overly broad
because it was based on the premise that
all vehicles within the 1990–1999
model years were built on the same
platform and were all equipped with air
bags, the agency does not believe it is
necessary to entirely rescind import
eligibility for all Skyline vehicles. There
is sufficient information of record for
the agency to conclude that certain of
those models and model years are
capable of being modified to conform to
all applicable standards within the
meaning of 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(B).
Although the agency has been
informed that some Skyline owners
have been defrauded by unscrupulous
enterprises operating outside the laws
and regulations that the agency
administers, that is not the reason for
the partial rescission action. The partial
rescission is instead based on the
receipt of new information from the
vehicles’ original manufacturer that
caused the agency to question the
breadth of its original eligibility
decision.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:25 Feb 28, 2006
Jkt 208001
b. Request To Delay Agency Decision
One commenter, who described
himself as a member of the armed
forces, stated that he specifically
requested a tour of duty in Japan so that
he could return to the United States
with a Nissan Skyline. This commenter
requested the agency to delay the partial
rescission for 12 to 24 months so he and
other military personnel may import
vehicles before the rescission takes
effect.
Agency Response: An agency decision
to partially rescind import eligibility for
the Nissan Skyline would limit the
model and model year range of those
vehicles that can be lawfully imported,
but would not render all Nissan Skyline
vehicles ineligible for importation. This
should assure that returning service
members and others would continue to
have a sufficient opportunity to import
one of these vehicles. The agency notes
that it lacks the authority to create
special exemptions from the
importation restrictions for any reason,
including military service.
10593
Nissan Skyline vehicles, in 1999 the
agency was persuaded that the
petitioner had demonstrated that the
R33 model Nissan Skyline was capable
of being altered to comply with all
applicable FMVSS. Aside from
generally observing that the three
Skyline models would yield similar
crash test results, none of the
commenters provided any sound
evidence, such as crash test data, to
show that the R32 and R34 models are
also capable of being brought into
compliance with all applicable FMVSS.
There is nothing to refute the original
manufacturer’s claim that the three
models would be highly likely to
perform differently in dynamic crash
tests. In light of the manufacturer’s
statement that the three Skyline models
would perform differently in dynamic
crash tests and the absence of crash test
data to support the commenters’ claim
that the three models would perform the
same, we decline to accept that claim.
c. Challenges To Information
Supporting Partial Rescission
2. Owner’s and Parts Manuals Show
Availability of Air Bags as Optional
Equipment in Early Models
1. The Three Models Would Perform the
Same in Crash Tests
Four commenters disagreed with the
manufacturer’s statement that R32, R33,
and R34 model vehicles differ in terms
of their structural design and restraint
performance. The commenters
acknowledge that there are structural
differences among the platforms, which
they view as minor, but predict that
crash tests performed on each of those
platforms would yield identical results.
Several commenters recommended that
the agency obtain the manufacturer’s
vehicle design documents to confirm
the differences claimed by the
manufacturer.
Agency Response: The original
manufacturer, Nissan, represented 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 observed that it
was ‘‘highly likely that each model type
would perform differently in the crash
tests required by the FMVSS.’’ The
commenters have not provided any
technical basis for disputing Nissan’s
statements. Based on its review of the
petition and the petition’s supporting
information, including reports of crash
tests conducted on two R33 model
One commenter stated that he
obtained in Japan a 1992 Nissan Skyline
GTR owner’s manual showing that an
air bag was offered for the vehicle.
Additionally, this commenter stated that
he purchased a parts manual for a 1992
R32 model vehicle showing the part
numbers for an air bag. The commenter
stated he was enclosing pages from both
manuals with his comment to the
Docket, but did not do so. Based on the
information he reportedly found in the
two manuals, the commenter requested
clarification of Nissan’s statement that
no driver’s air bag was offered for the
R32 GTR model until February 1994,
and that it was then offered only as
optional equipment.
Agency’s Response: Based on the
information provided by Nissan, that
manufacturer offered an air bag as
optional equipment at the driver’s
designated seating position on the R32
sedan and coupe beginning in August
1991. We are aware that vehicle owner’s
manuals often contain information
covering optional equipment offered in
a vehicle model. The same holds true
for parts manuals. While an air bag was
offered as early as August 1991 in the
R32 sedan and coupe, Nissan states that
it did not offer the air bag in the R32
GTR until February 1994. We do not
regard the commenter’s information as
refuting the information provided by
Nissan.
PO 00000
Frm 00132
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\01MRN1.SGM
01MRN1
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
10594
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 40 / Wednesday, March 1, 2006 / Notices
3. Optional R32 Air Bags Are Nearly
Identical to R33 Air Bags
One commenter, an attorney
representing a vehicle owner, claimed
that an air bag was available as a factory
option on 1990–1993 R32 model Nissan
Skyline vehicles. This commenter
asserted that this optional restraint
system is nearly identical to that found
in 1993–1995 R33 model Nissan Skyline
vehicles and employs the same sensors
and electronic control module.
Although he conceded that there are
differences between the chassis of the
R32 and later R33 models, the
commenter contended that the air bag
systems installed in those models are
substantially similar, in terms of both
their components and their manner of
operation, and observed that the R33
model was crash tested by the RI that
petitioned NHTSA to determine the
vehicle eligible for importation. The
commenter also noted that 1990 to 1994
model vehicles are not required to have
an air bag to comply with the automatic
crash protection requirements of
FMVSS No. 208, and may do so by
means of an automatic restraint such as
a motorized seatbelt. As a consequence,
the commenter encouraged the agency
to allow the original eligibility
determination to stand, but to permit an
alternate means of achieving
compliance with FMVSS No. 208 (e.g.,
by adding automatic seatbelts).
Agency Response: Contrary to the
commenter’s contention, information
supplied to the agency by Nissan shows
that no 1990 R32 model Skyline
vehicles were manufactured with air
bags at the driver’s designated seating
position. It was not until August 1991
that Nissan began offering, as optional
equipment, air bags at the driver’s
designated seating position in R32
model sedans and coupes. According to
Nissan, no R32 model Skyline was
equipped with an air bag at the
passenger’s designated seating position.
With regard to the commenter’s
observation that nearly identical
restraint systems were available for R32
and R33 model vehicles, the agency
again notes Nissan’s claim that the R32,
R33, and R34 models differ in terms of
their ‘‘structural design and restraint
performance,’’ that each of the models
was ‘‘newly designed and different from
the type preceding it,’’ and that it was
‘‘highly likely that each model type
would perform differently in the crash
tests required by the FMVSS.’’
Addressing the commenter’s
suggestion that motorized seatbelts be
allowed as an alternate means of
achieving compliance with FMVSS No.
208, the agency notes that the registered
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:25 Feb 28, 2006
Jkt 208001
importer that petitioned NHTSA to
determine the Nissan Skyline eligible
for importation conducted crash tests on
the vehicle after replacing its air bags
with ones manufactured to the
petitioner’s specifications. The
petitioner did not install motorized
seatbelts in the vehicle to achieve
compliance with the standard.
Moreover, Nissan informed the agency
that automatic seatbelts were not
installed as original equipment in the
1990–1999 Skyline models, and no
dynamic crash test data is available to
demonstrate that such a vehicle
equipped with automatic seatbelts
would comply with FMVSS No. 208.
The mere statement that equipment
such as automatic seatbelts could be
added to a vehicle is not sufficient to
prove that the vehicle is capable of
being altered to comply with FMVSS
No. 208, as would be required to
establish that the vehicle is eligible for
importation under 49 U.S.C.
30141(a)(1)(B). Such proof could only be
obtained by conducting a crash test that
replicates how the vehicle structures
and restraint systems perform in a crash.
4. Agency’s Reliance on Manufacturer’s
Comments Is Inconsistent With Past
Import Eligibility Decision Practices
Another commenter, a registered
importer, observed that because Nissan
had every opportunity to comment on
the original import eligibility petition
covering 1990–1999 Nissan GTS and
GTR passenger cars, but elected not to
do so, the manufacturer in effect
conceded that no adverse safety impact
would result from the granting of this
petition. Noting that NHTSA received
information from the manufacturer after
the petition was granted, the commenter
recommended that the agency officially
announce, in the Federal Register
notices that it publishes to solicit
comments on future petitions, that it
will ask manufacturers to assess the
sufficiency of the proposed
modifications identified by the
petitioner. In particular, the commenter
faulted the agency for accepting
Nissan’s statements that the R32, R33,
and R34 model vehicles are sufficiently
distinct that they are likely to yield
different crash test results. The
commenter noted that NHTSA has
disregarded manufacturer’s comments
in ruling on past petitions. The
commenter further noted that NHTSA
personnel have previously stated that
minor differences in overall wheelbase
would not have an overall impact on a
vehicle’s crashworthiness unless weight
differences of more than 500 pounds
were involved.
PO 00000
Frm 00133
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Agency response: The agency does not
believe that any conclusion or inference
can be drawn from the fact that Nissan
did not comment on the original
eligibility petition for Nissan Skyline
vehicles. Regarding the manner in
which NHTSA obtained information
from Nissan in this instance, the agency
notes that it asked the manufacturer to
provide vehicle production data on
Skyline vehicles as part of an
investigation unrelated to the original
petition. Based on the information
furnished by the manufacturer (such as
the fact that air bags were not installed
as original equipment on 1990 R32
models), the agency re-evaluated the
eligibility decision. Contrary to the
commenter’s observation, the agency
was not constrained from re-evaluating
this decision on account of past
instances in which it has granted import
eligibility to a particular vehicle despite
objections from the vehicle’s original
manufacturer.
The information furnished by Nissan,
which NHTSA did not have when it
granted the original petition, compelled
the agency to conclude that the
petitioner did not adequately
demonstrate that R32 and R34 model
Skyline vehicles are capable of being
modified to comply with all applicable
FMVSS. In these circumstances, it was
not appropriate for the agency to let its
earlier import eligibility decision stand.
Accordingly, NHTSA undertook to
modify that decision prospectively by
limiting import eligibility to R33 model
vehicles in which both required air bags
are installed as standard equipment.
However, RIs are free to petition the
agency to decide whether any other
model or model year Skyline vehicle is
eligible for importation.
Unlike past instances in which a
single eligibility decision has covered
vehicles with minor differences in
overall wheelbase, in this instance, the
Nissan Skyline was produced in three
distinct models over the 1990 through
1999 model years. In view of Nissan’s
statement that the three models differ in
terms of their ‘‘structural design and
restraint performance,’’ and would be
‘‘highly likely to perform differently in
the crash tests required by the FMVSS,’’
NHTSA cannot justify maintaining
import eligibility for the three models
based on data submitted for one model
alone.
5. Import Eligibility Should Be Retained
for 1995 R33 Model Skyline Vehicles
Six commenters asked the agency to
retain import eligibility for 1995 R33
model Nissan Skyline vehicles. The
commenters noted that the body style of
the 1995 R33 model is exactly the same
E:\FR\FM\01MRN1.SGM
01MRN1
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 40 / Wednesday, March 1, 2006 / Notices
as the R33 models produced from 1996
to 1998. The commenters further
observed that some of the 1995 R33
model vehicles were equipped with an
optional air bag at the passenger’s
designated seating position. The
commenters noted that even though
Nissan is unable to advise the agency
whether any particular vehicle was
manufactured with an optional air bag,
agency personnel might verify the air
bag’s presence by performing a vehicle
inspection.
The commenters further contended
that 1995 models that were not
originally equipped with an air bag at
the passenger’s designated seating
position are capable of being retrofitted
with readily available components. One
commenter stated that a dual
supplemental restraint system (SRS)
could be installed in those vehicles. As
described by the commenter, this
system would include a complete dash,
a passenger’s air bag module, a dual SRS
wire harness, and a dual SRS electronic
control unit.
Another commenter contended that it
is possible to retrofit 1995 Skyline
vehicles with dual air bags, because
these vehicles were originally designed
to accept the optional passenger air bag
on the assembly line. The commenter
claimed that the steering column, the
wiring harness, and air bag system
mounting brackets are identical on 1995
R33 model vehicles, regardless of
whether they were originally equipped
with or without the optional passenger
air bag. The commenter further
contended that the components needed
to add the air bag at the passenger’s
designated seating position (e.g., rear
SRS control unit mount and dashboard
pad with blow out panel) could be
readily purchased from the
manufacturer and retrofitted to the
vehicle.
Agency response: The original
petition stated that to achieve
compliance with FMVSS No. 208, the
driver’s air bags on 1990–1993 models,
and the driver’s and passenger’s air bags
on 1994–1999 models, would need to be
replaced with components
manufactured to the petitioner’s
specifications. The petition did not
address the fact that many Skyline
vehicles within the covered range of
model years never had air bags installed
as original equipment and that those
components could therefore not be
‘‘replaced’’ in the manner described.
Because it has no way to reliably
determine whether any particular 1995
model Skyline vehicle was originally
equipped with a passenger air bag, the
agency is unwilling to retain import
eligibility for that model year.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:25 Feb 28, 2006
Jkt 208001
With regard to the suggestion that
1995 vehicles be inspected to determine
whether air bags are installed, our
regulations at 49 CFR 594.7(e) require
the payment of $827 when agency
personnel inspect a vehicle. The agency
does not have the resources that would
be needed to inspect each 1995 vehicle
that may be imported.
Only vehicles originally
manufactured with all required air bags
are within the scope of the original
eligibility decision. Without the benefit
of data, views, and arguments
equivalent to what is needed to support
an eligibility petition, the agency is
unable to determine whether a 1995 R33
model Skyline vehicle that was not
originally equipped with one or more
required air bags may be properly
retrofitted with an air bag system. Based
on the information furnished by Nissan,
our only assurance is that R33 model
Skyline vehicles manufactured
beginning in January 1996, which had
dual air bags installed as standard
equipment, can be modified in the
manner described in the original
eligibility petition.
6. Requested Relief for Vehicles Already
Imported
Ten commenters stated that they had
purchased Nissan Skyline vehicles in
good faith and lawfully imported those
vehicles for personal use in reliance on
the agency’s existing import eligibility
determination. These commenters
requested the agency to grant a one-time
waiver from the requirements of
standards the vehicles have not been
proven to meet. Given the limited
number of vehicles that fall into this
category, the commenters contended
that the granting of such a waiver would
have a negligible impact on motor
vehicle safety. In exchange for any such
waiver, several commenters offered to
accept certain conditions, such as those
limiting on-road use, restricting the
resale of the vehicle, and releasing the
agency from liability for injuries that
could result from operating a vehicle
that does not comply with all applicable
standards.
One commenter asked the agency to
consider exempting from the air bag
requirements vehicles already imported
and in the custody of a registered
importer. This commenter observed that
the agency has previously granted
financial hardship exemptions from the
requirements of FMVSS No. 208 to five
manufacturers, including Saleen,
Bugatti, Shelby America, Laforza, and
Spyker. The commenter also observed
that the agency also granted permission
to a vehicle owner to deactivate an air
bag based on a medical condition, even
PO 00000
Frm 00134
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
10595
though the vehicle’s registered importer
did not properly install a required air
bag.
Agency response: An agency decision
to partially rescind import eligibility for
Nissan Skyline vehicles would only be
effective prospectively, and would not
affect the legality of the importation of
those vehicles under the prior eligibility
decision. As previously noted, NHTSA
granted import eligibility to 1990–1999
Nissan GTS and GTR ‘‘Skyline’’
passenger cars on the basis of a
representation in the original petition
that the vehicle’s airbags would be
‘‘replaced’’ with components
manufactured to the petitioner’s
specifications. Because no comments
were submitted in response to the notice
of petition, this representation was not
refuted. It was only later that the agency
learned, through an investigation, that
air bags were only installed as standard
equipment on a limited range of
vehicles produced within the models
years covered by the petition. NHTSA
has not released the DOT Conformance
bonds on a number of Skyline vehicles
that were not originally manufactured
with required air bags, for want of
evidence that those vehicles have been
altered to comply with FMVSS No. 208
in the manner described in the petition.
Comments relating to disposition of
these and other vehicles already
imported under the prior decision are
outside the scope of this decision.
Nevertheless, the agency is willing to
consider, on a case-by-case basis, the
concerns of those owning Skyline
vehicles that were lawfully imported
under the original eligibility decision
but have yet to be bond released by
NHTSA.
We have considered the commenters’
suggestions in light of the agency’s
authority under the laws and
regulations that it administers. One
commenter suggested that the agency
grant owners of the affected vehicles
exemptions from one or more applicable
FMVSS, such as those granted to
manufacturers under 49 U.S.C. 30113
and 49 CFR Part 555. As specified in
those provisions, these exemptions can
only be granted to a manufacturer, and
only in circumstances where
compliance with a standard would
cause substantial economic hardship to
a manufacturer that has tried in good
faith to comply with the standard. The
agency lacks the authority to grant such
an exemption to any other party.
Although a registered importer may file
with the agency a petition for a
temporary exemption under Part 555, as
explained in the agency’s
interpretations, the agency would regard
such a petition as being filed on behalf
E:\FR\FM\01MRN1.SGM
01MRN1
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
10596
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 40 / Wednesday, March 1, 2006 / Notices
of the foreign manufacturer, and would
consider the circumstances of the
manufacturer, and not the importer, in
deciding whether to grant the petition.
Moreover, since an exemption under
Part 555 would only apply to vehicles
originally manufactured after the date
the exemption is granted, used vehicles
could not benefit from such an
exemption.
One commenter also suggested that
the agency grant owners of vehicles that
cannot be modified to conform to the air
bag requirements of FMVSS No. 208 an
exemption similar to the one described
in 49 CFR 595.5. This provision enables
motor vehicle dealers or repair
businesses to install retrofit air bag onoff switches without violating the
prohibition in 49 U.S.C. 30122 against
making inoperative safety equipment
installed in a vehicle in compliance
with an applicable standard. This
regulation applies to a limited and
narrowly tailored set of circumstances.
The regulation seeks to preserve the
benefits of air bags, while providing a
means for reducing the risk of serious or
fatal injury that air bags pose to
identifiable groups of people, such as
people who cannot avoid sitting
extremely close to air bags by reason of
their short stature, people with certain
medical conditions, and young children.
To obtain permission for the installation
of an on-off switch, the vehicle owner
must certify that the owner or another
user of the vehicle is a member of one
of the at-risk groups. This regulation,
which pertains to the prohibition on
making safety equipment inoperative in
49 U.S.C. 30122, has no bearing on
import eligibility decisions under 49
U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(B).
Several commenters offered to limit
their vehicles’ on-road use, to restrict
the resale of their vehicles, or to release
the agency from liability resulting from
the vehicles’ noncompliance in
exchange for a waiver from compliance
with one or more applicable standards.
Addressing the offer to release the
agency from liability, the agency notes
that it is not subject to suit for
exercising governmental functions of
this kind. The remaining conditions are
similar to ones imposed on the owners
of vehicles imported for purposes of
show or display under 49 CFR
591.5(j)(1). A vehicle cannot be
imported for purposes of show or
display unless it is found by the agency
to have such historical or technological
significance that it is worthy of being
imported for those purposes. As a
general rule, a vehicle is ineligible for
importation for purposes of show or
display if more than 500 of the vehicles
were produced, or if the vehicle has
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:25 Feb 28, 2006
Jkt 208001
been found eligible for importation
under 49 CFR Part 593, based on its
capability of being modified to conform
to all applicable standards. For these
reasons, the agency has previously
denied an application for the
importation of a 1995 Nissan Skyline
GTS–T under the show or display
provisions. To be consistent with its
past administration of these provisions,
the agency remains unwilling to extend
show or display status to Nissan Skyline
vehicles. Moreover, the agency lacks the
authority to impose mileage or resale
restrictions on vehicles imported for any
other purpose.
Final Decision
Accordingly, on the basis of the
foregoing, NHTSA hereby rescinds its
decision, granted on November 15,
1999, that 1990–1999 Nissan GTS and
GTR Passenger cars are eligible for
importation into the United States.
NHTSA hereby decides that Nissan R33
model GTS and GTR passenger cars
manufactured between January 1996
and June 1998 are eligible for
importation into the United States
because they have safety features that
comply with, or are capable of being
altered to comply with, all applicable
Federal motor vehicle safety standards.
Vehicle Eligibility Number
The importer of a vehicle admissible
under any import eligibility decision
must enter on the HS–7 Declaration
form covering the entry the appropriate
vehicle eligibility number indicating
that the vehicle is eligible for
importation. Vehicle eligibility number
VCP–17 was assigned to 1990–1999
Nissan GTS and GTR passenger cars.
NHTSA is rescinding that eligibility
number and assigning eligibility number
VCP–32 to Nissan R33 model GTS and
GTR passenger cars manufactured
between January 1996 and June 1998
that remain eligible for importation.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(B) 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. 06–1896 Filed 2–28–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
PO 00000
Frm 00135
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Community Development Financial
Institutions Fund
Proposed Collection; Comment
Request
Notice and request for
comments.
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Department of the
Treasury, as part of its continuing effort
to reduce paperwork and respondent
burden, invites the general public and
other Federal agencies to take this
opportunity to comment on proposed
and/or continuing information
collections, as required by the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
Public Law 104–13 (44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(2)(A)). Currently, the
Community Development Financial
Institutions Fund (the Fund), a
government corporation within the
Department of the Treasury, is soliciting
comments concerning the ‘‘New
Markets Tax Credit (NMTC) Program—
Community Development Entity (CDE)
Certification Application’’ (hereafter,
the Application).
DATES: Written comments should be
received on or before May 1, 2006 to be
assured of consideration.
ADDRESSES: Direct all comments to
Pamela Williams, Program Operations
Advisor, Community Development
Financial Institutions Fund, U.S.
Department of the Treasury, 601 13th
Street, NW, Suite 200 South,
Washington, DC 20005, Facsimile
Number (202) 622–7754.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The
Application may be obtained from the
Fund’s Web site at https://
www.cdfifund.gov. Requests for
additional information should be
directed to Pamela Williams, Program
Operations Advisor, Community
Development Financial Institutions
Fund, U.S. Department of the Treasury,
601 13th Street, NW, Suite 200 South,
Washington, DC 20005, or by phone to
(202) 622–6355.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Title: New Markets Tax Credit
(NMTC) Program—Community
Development Entity (CDE) Certification
Application.
OMB Number: 1559–0014.
Abstract: Title I, subtitle C, section
121 of the Community Renewal Tax
Relief Act of 2000 (the Act), as enacted
by section 1(a)(7) of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2001 (Pub. L. 106–
554, December 21, 2000), amended the
Internal Revenue Code (IRC) by adding
IRC § 45D and created the NMTC
Program. The Department of the
E:\FR\FM\01MRN1.SGM
01MRN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 40 (Wednesday, March 1, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10591-10596]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-1896]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA 2005-22654; Notice 2]
Final Decision To Partially Rescind Decision That Nonconforming
1990-1999 Nissan GTS and GTR Passenger Cars Are Eligible for
Importation
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.
ACTION: Final decision to partially rescind decision that nonconforming
1990-1999 Nissan GTS and GTR passenger cars are eligible for
importation.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document announces a final decision by NHTSA to partially
rescind a prior decision by the agency 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. As a result of this decision,
only Nissan R33 model GTS and GTR passenger cars manufactured between
January 1996 and June 1998 are eligible for importation. All other
model and model year vehicles admissible under the prior decision are
no longer eligible for importation. As a consequence, the agency is
rescinding vehicle eligibility number VCP-17, which covered vehicles
admissible under the prior decision, and issuing vehicle eligibility
number VCP-32 to cover only those model and model year Nissan GTS and
GTR passenger cars that remain eligible for importation. The rescission
will only bar the future importation of the model and model year Nissan
GTS and GTR passenger cars that are no longer eligible for importation,
and will not affect the status of vehicles that have already been
lawfully imported under vehicle eligibility number VCP-17.
DATES: The decision is effective on March 1, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Coleman Sachs, Office of Vehicle
Safety Compliance, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400
Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590 (202-366-5291).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Statutory and Regulatory 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 crash 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 received, whether the vehicle is
eligible for importation. Because NHTSA has little or no direct
knowledge of many vehicles for which import eligibility is sought, the
agency must rely on the petition and any comments that are submitted in
making this decision. The agency then publishes its decision in the
Federal Register. If NHTSA decides that the vehicle is eligible for
importation, it will assign a vehicle eligibility number. The
eligibility
[[Page 10592]]
number is entered on the importation declaration to inform Customs that
the vehicle can be lawfully imported (by a registered importer or by a
person who has a contract with a registered importer to modify the
vehicle) even though the vehicle was not originally manufactured to
comply with all applicable FMVSS or was not so certified by its
original manufacturer for importation into, and sale in, the United
States.
B. Import Eligibility Petition and Decision
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's and passenger's
air bags on 1994-1999 models, would need to be replaced with components
manufactured to the petitioner's specifications based on the results of
dynamic crash 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 that decision.
The agency published notice of the decision on January 19, 2000 (65 FR
3002).
C. Information Undermining Eligibility Decision
After the notice of decision granting the petition was published,
the agency obtained additional information regarding 1990-1999 Nissan
GTS and GTR passenger cars from Nissan North America, Inc., the U.S.
representative of Nissan Motor Company, LTD (Nissan) of Tokyo, Japan,
the vehicles' manufacturer. 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 stated that it was ``highly
likely that each model type would perform differently in the crash
tests required by the FMVSS.''
Nissan also provided a chart showing production ``start'' and
``end'' dates for the R32, the R33, and the R34 models. The R32 models
were manufactured from May 1989 through November 1994; the R33 models
were manufactured from August 1993 through June 1998; and the R34
models were manufactured from November 1997 through August 2002.
Included in the chart is information identifying the production
``start'' dates when air bags were offered as an option and as standard
equipment at both the driver's and the front passenger's seating
positions on the R32, the R33, and the R34 model vehicles.
The agency did not have this information at the time of its
original decision to grant import eligibility to 1990-1999 Nissan GTS
and GTR passenger cars. Instead, the agency heavily relied on the
results of static and dynamic tests on two modified 1996 R33 model
vehicles, which the original petition suggested were representative of
the entire model year range covered by the petition. As indicated in
the original petition, the petitioner had made structural modifications
to these two vehicles and replaced the air bags at the driver's and
front passenger's seating positions with components manufactured to its
own specifications. With the benefit of the information provided by
Nissan, it is now apparent that the petitioner did not demonstrate full
compliance with the performance requirements of FMVSS 208 and other
crashworthiness standards (e.g., FMVSS Nos. 210 Seat Belt Assembly
Anchorages, 212 Windshield Mounting, and 301 Fuel System Integrity) for
R32 and R34 models because petitioner did not identify these separate
models or provide crash performance test data on them.
The agency's decision to grant import eligibility to 1990-1999
Nissan GTS and GTR passenger cars also relied on the petitioner's
assertion that the original equipment driver's air bag on 1990-1993
models, and the driver's and passenger's air bags on 1994-1999 models
would be replaced with components manufactured to the petitioner's
specifications.
However, the air bag production chart provided by Nissan shows that
no driver's air bags were available in the R32 GTS model until August
1991. For the R32 GTR model, no driver's air bag was offered until
February 1994, and it was then offered only as optional equipment.
Nissan did not offer passenger's air bags in the R32 model. Nissan
began production of the R33 model in August 1993, offering both
driver's and passenger's air bags as optional equipment on the GTS
model. It was not until January 1995 that a driver's air bag was
offered on the GTR model. As of January 1995, the driver's air bag
became standard on both GTS and GTR models. One year later, in January
1996, the passenger's air bag became standard on both GTS and GTR
models.
Nissan has informed the agency that it does not possess records
that would allow it to determine whether any individual vehicle had air
bags installed as optional equipment. Based on the information
furnished by Nissan, the agency can only be assured that R33 model
vehicles, produced by Nissan beginning in January 1996, had both
driver's and passenger's air bags installed as original equipment.
D. Tentative Decision To Partially Rescind Import Eligibility
On the basis of the foregoing, NHTSA tentatively concluded that the
original grant of eligibility to the 1990-1999 Nissan GTS and GTR
passenger cars, comprising R32, R33, and R34 model vehicles, was overly
broad. As a consequence, the agency tentatively decided to rescind that
decision in part, so that only Nissan R33 model GTS and GTR passenger
cars manufactured between January 1996 and June 1998 would be eligible
for importation if the tentative decision was made final. The agency
published a notice of the tentative decision on November 28, 2005, 70
FR 71375. The notice solicited public comments on the tentative
decision.
E. Comments on Tentative Decision
The agency received 35 comments in response to the notice of
tentative decision. Nine of these were duplicates. Eliminating the
duplicates, a total of 26 comments were received. Those comments are
summarized below.
a. General Issues
Ten commenters opposed any change in the existing decision that
1990-1999
[[Page 10593]]
Nissan GTS and GTR ``Skyline'' passenger cars are eligible for
importation. Two commenters expressed the opinion that Skylines are not
unsafe vehicles. Three commenters observed that there are so few
Skyline vehicles in the United States that their impact on motor
vehicle safety is negligible. Three commenters observed that NHTSA
should not rescind import eligibility for Nissan Skylines, thereby
denying enthusiasts the opportunity to own these vehicles, on account
of a single registered importer's fraudulent practices in certifying
the compliance of these vehicles to all applicable standards. In
contrast to these comments, three commenters were of the opinion that
NHTSA should rescind import eligibility for all Nissan Skyline
vehicles. Of these, one commenter believed the market for the Nissan
Skyline was too limited for businesses to spend the capital necessary
to re-engineer components required to fully comply with the FMVSS.
Agency Response: Because they were not originally manufactured to
comply with all applicable FMVSS, Nissan Skyline vehicles could not be
lawfully imported into the United States unless they were determined
eligible for importation, based on their capability of being modified
to conform to those standards. That is the case regardless of how safe
the commenters may believe the vehicles to be, and regardless of how
many Skyline vehicles may actually be operated on U.S. roads.
Although the agency's original import eligibility decision was
overly broad because it was based on the premise that all vehicles
within the 1990-1999 model years were built on the same platform and
were all equipped with air bags, the agency does not believe it is
necessary to entirely rescind import eligibility for all Skyline
vehicles. There is sufficient information of record for the agency to
conclude that certain of those models and model years are capable of
being modified to conform to all applicable standards within the
meaning of 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(B).
Although the agency has been informed that some Skyline owners have
been defrauded by unscrupulous enterprises operating outside the laws
and regulations that the agency administers, that is not the reason for
the partial rescission action. The partial rescission is instead based
on the receipt of new information from the vehicles' original
manufacturer that caused the agency to question the breadth of its
original eligibility decision.
b. Request To Delay Agency Decision
One commenter, who described himself as a member of the armed
forces, stated that he specifically requested a tour of duty in Japan
so that he could return to the United States with a Nissan Skyline.
This commenter requested the agency to delay the partial rescission for
12 to 24 months so he and other military personnel may import vehicles
before the rescission takes effect.
Agency Response: An agency decision to partially rescind import
eligibility for the Nissan Skyline would limit the model and model year
range of those vehicles that can be lawfully imported, but would not
render all Nissan Skyline vehicles ineligible for importation. This
should assure that returning service members and others would continue
to have a sufficient opportunity to import one of these vehicles. The
agency notes that it lacks the authority to create special exemptions
from the importation restrictions for any reason, including military
service.
c. Challenges To Information Supporting Partial Rescission
1. The Three Models Would Perform the Same in Crash Tests
Four commenters disagreed with the manufacturer's statement that
R32, R33, and R34 model vehicles differ in terms of their structural
design and restraint performance. The commenters acknowledge that there
are structural differences among the platforms, which they view as
minor, but predict that crash tests performed on each of those
platforms would yield identical results. Several commenters recommended
that the agency obtain the manufacturer's vehicle design documents to
confirm the differences claimed by the manufacturer.
Agency Response: The original manufacturer, Nissan, represented
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 observed that it was ``highly likely
that each model type would perform differently in the crash tests
required by the FMVSS.'' The commenters have not provided any technical
basis for disputing Nissan's statements. Based on its review of the
petition and the petition's supporting information, including reports
of crash tests conducted on two R33 model Nissan Skyline vehicles, in
1999 the agency was persuaded that the petitioner had demonstrated that
the R33 model Nissan Skyline was capable of being altered to comply
with all applicable FMVSS. Aside from generally observing that the
three Skyline models would yield similar crash test results, none of
the commenters provided any sound evidence, such as crash test data, to
show that the R32 and R34 models are also capable of being brought into
compliance with all applicable FMVSS. There is nothing to refute the
original manufacturer's claim that the three models would be highly
likely to perform differently in dynamic crash tests. In light of the
manufacturer's statement that the three Skyline models would perform
differently in dynamic crash tests and the absence of crash test data
to support the commenters' claim that the three models would perform
the same, we decline to accept that claim.
2. Owner's and Parts Manuals Show Availability of Air Bags as Optional
Equipment in Early Models
One commenter stated that he obtained in Japan a 1992 Nissan
Skyline GTR owner's manual showing that an air bag was offered for the
vehicle. Additionally, this commenter stated that he purchased a parts
manual for a 1992 R32 model vehicle showing the part numbers for an air
bag. The commenter stated he was enclosing pages from both manuals with
his comment to the Docket, but did not do so. Based on the information
he reportedly found in the two manuals, the commenter requested
clarification of Nissan's statement that no driver's air bag was
offered for the R32 GTR model until February 1994, and that it was then
offered only as optional equipment.
Agency's Response: Based on the information provided by Nissan,
that manufacturer offered an air bag as optional equipment at the
driver's designated seating position on the R32 sedan and coupe
beginning in August 1991. We are aware that vehicle owner's manuals
often contain information covering optional equipment offered in a
vehicle model. The same holds true for parts manuals. While an air bag
was offered as early as August 1991 in the R32 sedan and coupe, Nissan
states that it did not offer the air bag in the R32 GTR until February
1994. We do not regard the commenter's information as refuting the
information provided by Nissan.
[[Page 10594]]
3. Optional R32 Air Bags Are Nearly Identical to R33 Air Bags
One commenter, an attorney representing a vehicle owner, claimed
that an air bag was available as a factory option on 1990-1993 R32
model Nissan Skyline vehicles. This commenter asserted that this
optional restraint system is nearly identical to that found in 1993-
1995 R33 model Nissan Skyline vehicles and employs the same sensors and
electronic control module. Although he conceded that there are
differences between the chassis of the R32 and later R33 models, the
commenter contended that the air bag systems installed in those models
are substantially similar, in terms of both their components and their
manner of operation, and observed that the R33 model was crash tested
by the RI that petitioned NHTSA to determine the vehicle eligible for
importation. The commenter also noted that 1990 to 1994 model vehicles
are not required to have an air bag to comply with the automatic crash
protection requirements of FMVSS No. 208, and may do so by means of an
automatic restraint such as a motorized seatbelt. As a consequence, the
commenter encouraged the agency to allow the original eligibility
determination to stand, but to permit an alternate means of achieving
compliance with FMVSS No. 208 (e.g., by adding automatic seatbelts).
Agency Response: Contrary to the commenter's contention,
information supplied to the agency by Nissan shows that no 1990 R32
model Skyline vehicles were manufactured with air bags at the driver's
designated seating position. It was not until August 1991 that Nissan
began offering, as optional equipment, air bags at the driver's
designated seating position in R32 model sedans and coupes. According
to Nissan, no R32 model Skyline was equipped with an air bag at the
passenger's designated seating position. With regard to the commenter's
observation that nearly identical restraint systems were available for
R32 and R33 model vehicles, the agency again notes Nissan's claim that
the R32, R33, and R34 models differ in terms of their ``structural
design and restraint performance,'' that each of the models was ``newly
designed and different from the type preceding it,'' and that it was
``highly likely that each model type would perform differently in the
crash tests required by the FMVSS.''
Addressing the commenter's suggestion that motorized seatbelts be
allowed as an alternate means of achieving compliance with FMVSS No.
208, the agency notes that the registered importer that petitioned
NHTSA to determine the Nissan Skyline eligible for importation
conducted crash tests on the vehicle after replacing its air bags with
ones manufactured to the petitioner's specifications. The petitioner
did not install motorized seatbelts in the vehicle to achieve
compliance with the standard. Moreover, Nissan informed the agency that
automatic seatbelts were not installed as original equipment in the
1990-1999 Skyline models, and no dynamic crash test data is available
to demonstrate that such a vehicle equipped with automatic seatbelts
would comply with FMVSS No. 208. The mere statement that equipment such
as automatic seatbelts could be added to a vehicle is not sufficient to
prove that the vehicle is capable of being altered to comply with FMVSS
No. 208, as would be required to establish that the vehicle is eligible
for importation under 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(B). Such proof could only
be obtained by conducting a crash test that replicates how the vehicle
structures and restraint systems perform in a crash.
4. Agency's Reliance on Manufacturer's Comments Is Inconsistent With
Past Import Eligibility Decision Practices
Another commenter, a registered importer, observed that because
Nissan had every opportunity to comment on the original import
eligibility petition covering 1990-1999 Nissan GTS and GTR passenger
cars, but elected not to do so, the manufacturer in effect conceded
that no adverse safety impact would result from the granting of this
petition. Noting that NHTSA received information from the manufacturer
after the petition was granted, the commenter recommended that the
agency officially announce, in the Federal Register notices that it
publishes to solicit comments on future petitions, that it will ask
manufacturers to assess the sufficiency of the proposed modifications
identified by the petitioner. In particular, the commenter faulted the
agency for accepting Nissan's statements that the R32, R33, and R34
model vehicles are sufficiently distinct that they are likely to yield
different crash test results. The commenter noted that NHTSA has
disregarded manufacturer's comments in ruling on past petitions. The
commenter further noted that NHTSA personnel have previously stated
that minor differences in overall wheelbase would not have an overall
impact on a vehicle's crashworthiness unless weight differences of more
than 500 pounds were involved.
Agency response: The agency does not believe that any conclusion or
inference can be drawn from the fact that Nissan did not comment on the
original eligibility petition for Nissan Skyline vehicles. Regarding
the manner in which NHTSA obtained information from Nissan in this
instance, the agency notes that it asked the manufacturer to provide
vehicle production data on Skyline vehicles as part of an investigation
unrelated to the original petition. Based on the information furnished
by the manufacturer (such as the fact that air bags were not installed
as original equipment on 1990 R32 models), the agency re-evaluated the
eligibility decision. Contrary to the commenter's observation, the
agency was not constrained from re-evaluating this decision on account
of past instances in which it has granted import eligibility to a
particular vehicle despite objections from the vehicle's original
manufacturer.
The information furnished by Nissan, which NHTSA did not have when
it granted the original petition, compelled the agency to conclude that
the petitioner did not adequately demonstrate that R32 and R34 model
Skyline vehicles are capable of being modified to comply with all
applicable FMVSS. In these circumstances, it was not appropriate for
the agency to let its earlier import eligibility decision stand.
Accordingly, NHTSA undertook to modify that decision prospectively by
limiting import eligibility to R33 model vehicles in which both
required air bags are installed as standard equipment. However, RIs are
free to petition the agency to decide whether any other model or model
year Skyline vehicle is eligible for importation.
Unlike past instances in which a single eligibility decision has
covered vehicles with minor differences in overall wheelbase, in this
instance, the Nissan Skyline was produced in three distinct models over
the 1990 through 1999 model years. In view of Nissan's statement that
the three models differ in terms of their ``structural design and
restraint performance,'' and would be ``highly likely to perform
differently in the crash tests required by the FMVSS,'' NHTSA cannot
justify maintaining import eligibility for the three models based on
data submitted for one model alone.
5. Import Eligibility Should Be Retained for 1995 R33 Model Skyline
Vehicles
Six commenters asked the agency to retain import eligibility for
1995 R33 model Nissan Skyline vehicles. The commenters noted that the
body style of the 1995 R33 model is exactly the same
[[Page 10595]]
as the R33 models produced from 1996 to 1998. The commenters further
observed that some of the 1995 R33 model vehicles were equipped with an
optional air bag at the passenger's designated seating position. The
commenters noted that even though Nissan is unable to advise the agency
whether any particular vehicle was manufactured with an optional air
bag, agency personnel might verify the air bag's presence by performing
a vehicle inspection.
The commenters further contended that 1995 models that were not
originally equipped with an air bag at the passenger's designated
seating position are capable of being retrofitted with readily
available components. One commenter stated that a dual supplemental
restraint system (SRS) could be installed in those vehicles. As
described by the commenter, this system would include a complete dash,
a passenger's air bag module, a dual SRS wire harness, and a dual SRS
electronic control unit.
Another commenter contended that it is possible to retrofit 1995
Skyline vehicles with dual air bags, because these vehicles were
originally designed to accept the optional passenger air bag on the
assembly line. The commenter claimed that the steering column, the
wiring harness, and air bag system mounting brackets are identical on
1995 R33 model vehicles, regardless of whether they were originally
equipped with or without the optional passenger air bag. The commenter
further contended that the components needed to add the air bag at the
passenger's designated seating position (e.g., rear SRS control unit
mount and dashboard pad with blow out panel) could be readily purchased
from the manufacturer and retrofitted to the vehicle.
Agency response: The original petition stated that to achieve
compliance with FMVSS No. 208, the driver's air bags on 1990-1993
models, and the driver's and passenger's air bags on 1994-1999 models,
would need to be replaced with components manufactured to the
petitioner's specifications. The petition did not address the fact that
many Skyline vehicles within the covered range of model years never had
air bags installed as original equipment and that those components
could therefore not be ``replaced'' in the manner described. Because it
has no way to reliably determine whether any particular 1995 model
Skyline vehicle was originally equipped with a passenger air bag, the
agency is unwilling to retain import eligibility for that model year.
With regard to the suggestion that 1995 vehicles be inspected to
determine whether air bags are installed, our regulations at 49 CFR
594.7(e) require the payment of $827 when agency personnel inspect a
vehicle. The agency does not have the resources that would be needed to
inspect each 1995 vehicle that may be imported.
Only vehicles originally manufactured with all required air bags
are within the scope of the original eligibility decision. Without the
benefit of data, views, and arguments equivalent to what is needed to
support an eligibility petition, the agency is unable to determine
whether a 1995 R33 model Skyline vehicle that was not originally
equipped with one or more required air bags may be properly retrofitted
with an air bag system. Based on the information furnished by Nissan,
our only assurance is that R33 model Skyline vehicles manufactured
beginning in January 1996, which had dual air bags installed as
standard equipment, can be modified in the manner described in the
original eligibility petition.
6. Requested Relief for Vehicles Already Imported
Ten commenters stated that they had purchased Nissan Skyline
vehicles in good faith and lawfully imported those vehicles for
personal use in reliance on the agency's existing import eligibility
determination. These commenters requested the agency to grant a one-
time waiver from the requirements of standards the vehicles have not
been proven to meet. Given the limited number of vehicles that fall
into this category, the commenters contended that the granting of such
a waiver would have a negligible impact on motor vehicle safety. In
exchange for any such waiver, several commenters offered to accept
certain conditions, such as those limiting on-road use, restricting the
resale of the vehicle, and releasing the agency from liability for
injuries that could result from operating a vehicle that does not
comply with all applicable standards.
One commenter asked the agency to consider exempting from the air
bag requirements vehicles already imported and in the custody of a
registered importer. This commenter observed that the agency has
previously granted financial hardship exemptions from the requirements
of FMVSS No. 208 to five manufacturers, including Saleen, Bugatti,
Shelby America, Laforza, and Spyker. The commenter also observed that
the agency also granted permission to a vehicle owner to deactivate an
air bag based on a medical condition, even though the vehicle's
registered importer did not properly install a required air bag.
Agency response: An agency decision to partially rescind import
eligibility for Nissan Skyline vehicles would only be effective
prospectively, and would not affect the legality of the importation of
those vehicles under the prior eligibility decision. As previously
noted, NHTSA granted import eligibility to 1990-1999 Nissan GTS and GTR
``Skyline'' passenger cars on the basis of a representation in the
original petition that the vehicle's airbags would be ``replaced'' with
components manufactured to the petitioner's specifications. Because no
comments were submitted in response to the notice of petition, this
representation was not refuted. It was only later that the agency
learned, through an investigation, that air bags were only installed as
standard equipment on a limited range of vehicles produced within the
models years covered by the petition. NHTSA has not released the DOT
Conformance bonds on a number of Skyline vehicles that were not
originally manufactured with required air bags, for want of evidence
that those vehicles have been altered to comply with FMVSS No. 208 in
the manner described in the petition. Comments relating to disposition
of these and other vehicles already imported under the prior decision
are outside the scope of this decision. Nevertheless, the agency is
willing to consider, on a case-by-case basis, the concerns of those
owning Skyline vehicles that were lawfully imported under the original
eligibility decision but have yet to be bond released by NHTSA.
We have considered the commenters' suggestions in light of the
agency's authority under the laws and regulations that it administers.
One commenter suggested that the agency grant owners of the affected
vehicles exemptions from one or more applicable FMVSS, such as those
granted to manufacturers under 49 U.S.C. 30113 and 49 CFR Part 555. As
specified in those provisions, these exemptions can only be granted to
a manufacturer, and only in circumstances where compliance with a
standard would cause substantial economic hardship to a manufacturer
that has tried in good faith to comply with the standard. The agency
lacks the authority to grant such an exemption to any other party.
Although a registered importer may file with the agency a petition for
a temporary exemption under Part 555, as explained in the agency's
interpretations, the agency would regard such a petition as being filed
on behalf
[[Page 10596]]
of the foreign manufacturer, and would consider the circumstances of
the manufacturer, and not the importer, in deciding whether to grant
the petition. Moreover, since an exemption under Part 555 would only
apply to vehicles originally manufactured after the date the exemption
is granted, used vehicles could not benefit from such an exemption.
One commenter also suggested that the agency grant owners of
vehicles that cannot be modified to conform to the air bag requirements
of FMVSS No. 208 an exemption similar to the one described in 49 CFR
595.5. This provision enables motor vehicle dealers or repair
businesses to install retrofit air bag on-off switches without
violating the prohibition in 49 U.S.C. 30122 against making inoperative
safety equipment installed in a vehicle in compliance with an
applicable standard. This regulation applies to a limited and narrowly
tailored set of circumstances. The regulation seeks to preserve the
benefits of air bags, while providing a means for reducing the risk of
serious or fatal injury that air bags pose to identifiable groups of
people, such as people who cannot avoid sitting extremely close to air
bags by reason of their short stature, people with certain medical
conditions, and young children. To obtain permission for the
installation of an on-off switch, the vehicle owner must certify that
the owner or another user of the vehicle is a member of one of the at-
risk groups. This regulation, which pertains to the prohibition on
making safety equipment inoperative in 49 U.S.C. 30122, has no bearing
on import eligibility decisions under 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(B).
Several commenters offered to limit their vehicles' on-road use, to
restrict the resale of their vehicles, or to release the agency from
liability resulting from the vehicles' noncompliance in exchange for a
waiver from compliance with one or more applicable standards.
Addressing the offer to release the agency from liability, the agency
notes that it is not subject to suit for exercising governmental
functions of this kind. The remaining conditions are similar to ones
imposed on the owners of vehicles imported for purposes of show or
display under 49 CFR 591.5(j)(1). A vehicle cannot be imported for
purposes of show or display unless it is found by the agency to have
such historical or technological significance that it is worthy of
being imported for those purposes. As a general rule, a vehicle is
ineligible for importation for purposes of show or display if more than
500 of the vehicles were produced, or if the vehicle has been found
eligible for importation under 49 CFR Part 593, based on its capability
of being modified to conform to all applicable standards. For these
reasons, the agency has previously denied an application for the
importation of a 1995 Nissan Skyline GTS-T under the show or display
provisions. To be consistent with its past administration of these
provisions, the agency remains unwilling to extend show or display
status to Nissan Skyline vehicles. Moreover, the agency lacks the
authority to impose mileage or resale restrictions on vehicles imported
for any other purpose.
Final Decision
Accordingly, on the basis of the foregoing, NHTSA hereby rescinds
its decision, granted on November 15, 1999, that 1990-1999 Nissan GTS
and GTR Passenger cars are eligible for importation into the United
States. NHTSA hereby decides that Nissan R33 model GTS and GTR
passenger cars manufactured between January 1996 and June 1998 are
eligible for importation into the United States because they have
safety features that comply with, or are capable of being altered to
comply with, all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards.
Vehicle Eligibility Number
The importer of a vehicle admissible under any import eligibility
decision must enter on the HS-7 Declaration form covering the entry the
appropriate vehicle eligibility number indicating that the vehicle is
eligible for importation. Vehicle eligibility number VCP-17 was
assigned to 1990-1999 Nissan GTS and GTR passenger cars. NHTSA is
rescinding that eligibility number and assigning eligibility number
VCP-32 to Nissan R33 model GTS and GTR passenger cars manufactured
between January 1996 and June 1998 that remain eligible for
importation.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(B) 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. 06-1896 Filed 2-28-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P