Decision That Nonconforming 2000-2001 Audi (8D) A4, S4, and RS4 Passenger Cars, Manufactured From September 1, 1999, Through August 31, 2001, for the European Market, Are Eligible for Importation, 11703-11705 [E6-3233]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
erjones on PROD1PC68 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 45 / Wednesday, March 8, 2006 / Notices
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.
Wallace Environmental Testing
Laboratories, Inc. (WETL) of Houston,
TX (Registered Importer 90–005) has
petitioned NHTSA to decide whether
nonconforming 1995 Pontiac Firebird
Trans Am passenger cars are eligible for
importation into the United States. The
vehicles which WETL believes are
substantially similar are 1995 Pontiac
Firebird Trans Am passenger cars that
were manufactured for 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 1995
Pontiac Firebird Trans Am passenger
cars to their U.S.-certified counterparts,
and found the vehicles to be
substantially similar with respect to
compliance with all applicable Federal
motor vehicle safety standards.
WETL submitted information with its
petition intended to demonstrate that
non-U.S. certified 1995 Pontiac Firebird
Trans Am 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 1995 Pontiac Firebird
Trans Am passenger cars are identical to
their U.S. certified counterparts with
respect to compliance with Standard
Nos. 101 Controls and Displays, 102
Transmission Shift Lever Sequence,
Starter Interlock, and Transmission
Braking Effect, 103 Windshield
Defrosting and Defogging Systems, 104
Windshield Wiping and Washing
Systems, 105 Hydraulic and Electric
Brake Systems, 106 Brake Hoses, 109
New Pneumatic Tires, 110 Tire
Selection and Rims, 113 Hood Latch
System, 114 Theft Protection, 116 Motor
Vehicle Brake Fluids, 118 PowerOperated Window, Partition, and Roof
Panel Systems, 124 Accelerator Control
Systems, 201 Occupant Protection in
Interior Impact, 202 Head Restraints,
204 Steering Control Rearward
Displacement, 205 Glazing Materials,
206 Door Locks and Door Retention
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:53 Mar 07, 2006
Jkt 208001
Components, 207 Seating Systems, 209
Seat Belt Assemblies, 210 Seat Belt
Assembly Anchorages, 212 Windshield
Mounting, 214 Side Impact Protection,
216 Roof Crush Resistance, 219
Windshield Zone Intrusion, 301 Fuel
System Integrity, and 302 Flammability
of Interior Materials.
In addition, the petitioner claims that
the vehicles comply with the Bumper
Standard found in 49 CFR Part 581.
Petitioner also contends that the
vehicles are capable of being readily
altered to meet the following standards,
in the manner indicated:
Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective
Devices and Associated Equipment: (A)
installation of U.S.-model front and rear
side marker lamps; and (B) connection
of wiring to the existing center high
mounted stop lamp assembly and
installation of a U.S.-model bulb.
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. 208 Occupant Crash
Protection: installation of U.S. version
software to ensure that the seat belt
warning system meets the requirements
of this standard.
The petitioner also states that all
vehicles will be inspected prior to
importation to assure compliance with
the Theft Prevention Standard at 49 CFR
Part 541, and that antitheft devices will
be installed, if necessary, to comply
with that standard.
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 am to
5 pm]. 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. E6–3231 Filed 3–7–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
PO 00000
Frm 00131
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
11703
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2002–11847; Notice 3]
Decision That Nonconforming 2000–
2001 Audi (8D) A4, S4, and RS4
Passenger Cars, Manufactured From
September 1, 1999, Through August
31, 2001, for the European Market, Are
Eligible for Importation
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Notice of decision by National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration
that nonconforming 2000–2001 Audi
(8D) A4, S4, and RS4 passenger cars,
manufactured from September 1, 1999,
through August 31, 2001, for the
European market, are eligible for
importation.
SUMMARY: This document announces a
decision by the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)
that certain 2000–2001 Audi (8D) A4,
S4, and RS4 passenger cars,
manufactured from September 1, 1999,
through August 31, 2001, for the
European market, that were not
originally manufactured to comply with
all applicable Federal motor vehicle
safety standards (FMVSS) are eligible
for importation into the United States
because they are substantially similar to
vehicles originally manufactured for
importation into and sale in the United
States and that were certified by their
manufacturer as complying with the
safety standards (the U.S. certified
version of the 2000–2001 Audi (8D) A4,
and S4 passenger cars), and they are
capable of being readily altered to
conform to the standards.
DATES: This decision was effective
March 28, 2003. The agency notified the
petitioner at that time that the subject
vehicles are eligible for importation.
This document provides public notice
of the eligibility decision.
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 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 as required
E:\FR\FM\08MRN1.SGM
08MRN1
erjones on PROD1PC68 with NOTICES
11704
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 45 / Wednesday, March 8, 2006 / Notices
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.
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.
J.K. Technologies, LLC (JK) of
Baltimore, Maryland (Registered
Importer 90–006), petitioned NHTSA to
decide whether 2000–2001 Audi (8D)
A4, S4, and RS4 passenger cars,
manufactured from September 1, 1999,
through August 31, 2001 for the
European market, are eligible for
importation into the United States.
NHTSA published a notice of the
petition on April 4, 2002 (67 FR 16146)
and a second notice on September 30,
2002 (67 FR 61378) to afford an
opportunity for public comment. The
reader is referred to those notices for a
thorough description of the petition.
One comment was received in
response to the first notice of petition,
from Volkswagen of America, Inc. (VW),
the U.S. representative of the vehicle’s
original manufacturer. VW’s comment
addressed issues it believed J.K. had
overlooked in describing alterations
necessary to conform 2001 Audi A4 and
S4 models to numerous FMVSS as well
as to the Bumper Standard. The agency
accorded J.K. an opportunity to respond
to the issues raised by VW. J.K.
responded by revising its petition. In the
revised petition, J.K. added 2000 A4 and
S4, and 2000–2001 RS4 models to those
for which it sought import eligibility.
Because this revision expanded the
scope of the petition, NHTSA published
the second notice. Only one comment
was received in response to the second
notice of petition, again from VW. VW’s
comment reiterated comments made in
its response to the first notice and
addressed issues it believed J.K. had
overlooked in regard to the RS4 model.
VW also stated that the petition needed
to clarify the specific carline platform
intended to be covered under the
petition. VW’s comments, J.K.’s
responses, and NHTSA’s analysis are set
forth below for each of the issues that
VW raised.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:53 Mar 07, 2006
Jkt 208001
(1) Vehicle Platform: VW stated that
two unique versions of the A4 platform
were offered for sale in Europe. The
European model year 2000 vehicles
were built on the ‘‘8D’’ platform, while
the European model year 2001 vehicles
were built on the ‘‘8E’’ platform. All
2000 and 2001 model year U.S.-model
vehicles were built on the ‘‘8D’’
platform. VW asserted that the 2001
U.S-model and the 2001 European
market vehicles are not directly
comparable for the purposes of
determining modifications needed to
achieve conformity with all applicable
FMVSS. In its response, J.K. stated that
it only intended the petition to cover the
‘‘8D’’ platform.
NHTSA’s Analysis: In view of VW’s
comments and J.K.’s response, the
agency concluded that any eligibility
decision resulting from the petition
should apply to nonconforming
European market Audi A4, S4, and RS4
passenger cars manufactured between
September 1, 1999 and August 31, 2001
that were built on the ‘‘8D’’ platform.
The petition dates chosen are derived
from the definition of ‘‘model year’’ in
49 CFR 593.4.
(2) FMVSS No. 102 Transmission
Shift Lever Sequence: VW confirmed
that the U.S. and the non-U.S.-certified
model are identical with regard to
conformity with this standard. In
addition, VW pointed out that the nonU.S.-certified model is not equipped
with a clutch/starter interlock that
prevents the engine from being started
unless the clutch pedal is depressed.
J.K. stated that although it did not
believe that the clutch/starter interlock
was required by the standard, the
company acknowledged that this is an
important component that would give
an extra margin of safety. J.K. therefore
stated that it will add the components
to the vehicles that it converts.
NHTSA’s Analysis: The standard does
not require a clutch/starter interlock on
a vehicle equipped with a manual
transmission. So long as the vehicle
remains in compliance with all
applicable FMVSS, NHTSA has no
objection to the installation of these
components.
(3) FMVSS No. 114 Theft
Prevention: The petition stated that the
key warning system must be activated
by the installation of U.S.-version
software to meet the requirements of
this standard and that the proper
operation of the system must be verified
for each vehicle so converted. VW stated
that vehicle modification is necessary
and that paragraph S4.5 of the standard
requires a warning device that is not
installed on vehicles manufactured for
markets other than the United States.
PO 00000
Frm 00132
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
NHTSA’s Analysis: The modifications
VW identified as necessary would not
prelude the vehicle from being deemed
eligible for importation. Conformity
packages submitted for vehicles
imported under the decision must
demonstrate that the vehicle is
equipped with a key warning system
that conforms to the standard.
(4) FMVSS No. 118 Power-Operated
Window Partition, and Roof Panel
Systems: The petition stated that the
systems in the non-U.S. model are the
same as those in the U.S. model. VW
stated that the non-U.S. models do not
comply with paragraph S4(e) of the
standard and are not certified to the
requirements of paragraph S5, which
provides an exemption from the need to
comply under paragraph S4(e). J.K.
responded that it had tested the system
after the installation of U.S.-model
dash/body and OBDII software, which
may explain why the systems in the
non-U.S. model vehicles conformed to
the standards.
NHTSA’s Analysis: The modifications
VW identified as necessary would not
prelude the vehicle from being deemed
eligible for importation. Conformity
packages submitted for vehicles
imported under the decision must
demonstrate that the vehicle is
equipped with a power-operated
window partition and roof panel system
that conforms to the standard.
(5) FMVSS No. 135 Passenger Car
Brake Systems: The petition stated that
the hydraulic brake system and the
parking brake system are identical to
those in the U.S.-model. VW stated that
the brake lining material on non-U.S.
model vehicles is different from the
lining material installed on vehicles
certified as conforming to FMVSS No.
135. J.K. responded that the vehicle it
examined had brake pads that bore U.S.model part numbers, but admitted that
some vehicles may not be so equipped.
J.K. concluded that all vehicles must be
inspected for the presence of U.S.-model
brake pads and that U.S.-model pads
must be installed on vehicles that are
not so equipped.
NHTSA’s Analysis: The modifications
VW identified as necessary would not
prelude the vehicle from being deemed
eligible for importation. Conformity
packages submitted for vehicles
imported under the decision must
demonstrate that the vehicle is
equipped with a brake system that
conforms to the standard.
(6) FMVSS No. 202 Head Restraints:
VW confirmed that the U.S. model and
the non-U.S. model are identical with
regard to conformity with this standard.
However, VW pointed out that the nonU.S. model is not equipped with head
E:\FR\FM\08MRN1.SGM
08MRN1
erjones on PROD1PC68 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 45 / Wednesday, March 8, 2006 / Notices
restraint locking devices that are present
in the U.S.-model. J.K. responded that
the non-U.S. model vehicles that it
examined had head restraint locking
devices.
NHTSA’s Analysis: The standard does
not require head restraint locking
devices. The presence or absence of
these devices therefore has no bearing
on the vehicle’s compliance with this
standard.
(7) FMVSS No. 206 Door Locks and
Door Retention Components: The
petition stated that the door locks and
retention system components installed
on the non-U.S. model are identical to
those installed on the U.S.-model. VW
stated that non-U.S. model vehicles
have a door locking system in which the
interior door handle has a single pull
release to open the door when the
locking system is activated, and that the
U.S.-model vehicles have a door locking
system that requires a double pull
motion. According to VW, the first pull
unlocks the door and the second pull
opens the door latch. VW further stated
that the double pull feature is required
to comply with paragraph S4.1.3.2 of
the standard. J.K. responded that the
vehicle it examined had a door locking
system that required two pulls, but
acknowledged that some vehicles may
not be so equipped. J.K. stated that all
vehicles must be inspected for the
presence of U.S.-model components and
that U.S.-model components must be
installed on vehicles no so equipped.
NHTSA’s Analysis: The modifications
VW identified as necessary would not
prelude the vehicle from being deemed
eligible for importation. Conformity
packages submitted for vehicles
imported under decisions must
demonstrate that the vehicle is
equipped with a door lock system that
conforms to the standard.
(8) 49 CFR Part 581 Bumper
Standard: The petition stated that the
bumpers and bumper mounting
structures were identical to those
installed on U.S.-model vehicles. VW
stated that non-U.S.-model A4 and S4
vehicles have bumper systems that are
different from those installed on U.S.model vehicles. The revised petition
stated that the support structure for the
bumpers on the non-U.S. vehicles are
identical to that of the U.S.-model and
that U.S.-model bumper components
must be installed in order to meet the
requirements of the standard. In
response to the revised petition, VW
stated that the bumper system on the
RS4 model differs from that on the A4
and S4 models. VW also stated that no
conforming parts are available for the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:53 Mar 07, 2006
Jkt 208001
SR4 model. J.K. responded that it has
installed U.S.-model A4 bumper
systems on the non-U.S. model RS4
‘‘8D’’ chassis vehicle, that these systems
bolt on directly, and that it will confirm
these modifications.
NHTSA’s Analysis: The agency notes
that Bumper Standard compliance
issues are not directly relevant to an
import eligibility decision, as such a
decision is to be based on the capability
of a non-U.S. certified vehicle to be
altered to conform to the FMVSS, and
the Bumper Standard is not an FMVSS.
However, because a vehicle that is not
originally manufactured to comply with
the Bumper Standard must be modified
to comply with the standard before it
can be allowed permanently into the
United States, conformance with the
Bumper Standard must be shown in the
conformity package submitted to
NHTSA to allow release of the DOT
Conformance bond furnished at the time
of importation.
Conclusion
Based on the contents of the petition
and the resolution of the issues set forth
above, NHTSA decided to grant the
petition.
Vehicle Eligibility Number for Subject
Vehicles
The importer of a vehicle admissible
under any final decision must indicate
on the form HS–7 accompanying entry
the appropriate vehicle eligibility
number indicating that the vehicle is
eligible for entry. VSP–400 is the
vehicle eligibility number assigned to
vehicles admissible under this notice of
final decision.
Final Decision
Accordingly, on the basis of the
foregoing, NHTSA decided that 2000–
2001 Audi (8D) A4, S4, and RS4
passenger cars, manufactured from
September 1, 1999, through August 31,
2001, for the European Market, that
were not originally manufactured to
comply with all applicable FMVSS, are
substantially similar to 2000–2001 Audi
(8D) A4, and S4 passenger cars
originally manufactured for importation
into and sale in the United States and
certified under 49 U.S.C. 30115, and are
capable of being readily altered to
conform to all applicable FMVSS.
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. E6–3233 Filed 3–7–06; 8:45 am]
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration
Office of Hazardous Materials Safety;
Notice of Delays in Processing of
Special Permit Applications
AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration, DOT.
ACTION: List of application delayed more
than 180 days.
SUMMARY: In accordance with the
requirements of 49 U.S.C. 5117(c),
PHMSA is publishing the following list
of special permit applications that have
been in process for 180 days or more.
The reason(s) for delay and the expected
completion date for action on each
application is provided in association
with each identified application.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ann
Mazullo, Office of Hazardous Materials
Special Permits and Approvals, Pipeline
and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 400 Seventh Street,
SW., Washington, DC 20590–0001, (202)
366–4535.
Key to ‘‘Reason for Delay’’
1. Awaiting additional information
from applicant.
2. Extensive public comment under
review.
3. Application is technically complex
and is of significant impact or
precedent-setting and requires extensive
analysis.
4. Staff review delayed by other
priority issues or volume of special
permit applications.
Meaning of Application Number
Suffixes
N—New application.
M—Modification request.
X—Renewal.
PM—Party to application with
modification request.
Issued in Washington, DC, on March 01,
2006.
R. Ryan Posten,
Chief, Special Permits Program, Office of
Hazardous Materials Safety, Special Permits
& Approvals.
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
PO 00000
Frm 00133
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
11705
E:\FR\FM\08MRN1.SGM
08MRN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 45 (Wednesday, March 8, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11703-11705]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-3233]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2002-11847; Notice 3]
Decision That Nonconforming 2000-2001 Audi (8D) A4, S4, and RS4
Passenger Cars, Manufactured From September 1, 1999, Through August 31,
2001, for the European Market, Are Eligible for Importation
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Notice of decision by National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration that nonconforming 2000-2001 Audi (8D) A4, S4, and RS4
passenger cars, manufactured from September 1, 1999, through August 31,
2001, for the European market, are eligible for importation.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document announces a decision by the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) that certain 2000-2001 Audi (8D)
A4, S4, and RS4 passenger cars, manufactured from September 1, 1999,
through August 31, 2001, for the European market, that were not
originally manufactured to comply with all applicable Federal motor
vehicle safety standards (FMVSS) are eligible for importation into the
United States because they are substantially similar to vehicles
originally manufactured for importation into and sale in the United
States and that were certified by their manufacturer as complying with
the safety standards (the U.S. certified version of the 2000-2001 Audi
(8D) A4, and S4 passenger cars), and they are capable of being readily
altered to conform to the standards.
DATES: This decision was effective March 28, 2003. The agency notified
the petitioner at that time that the subject vehicles are eligible for
importation. This document provides public notice of the eligibility
decision.
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 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 as required
[[Page 11704]]
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.
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.
J.K. Technologies, LLC (JK) of Baltimore, Maryland (Registered
Importer 90-006), petitioned NHTSA to decide whether 2000-2001 Audi
(8D) A4, S4, and RS4 passenger cars, manufactured from September 1,
1999, through August 31, 2001 for the European market, are eligible for
importation into the United States. NHTSA published a notice of the
petition on April 4, 2002 (67 FR 16146) and a second notice on
September 30, 2002 (67 FR 61378) to afford an opportunity for public
comment. The reader is referred to those notices for a thorough
description of the petition.
One comment was received in response to the first notice of
petition, from Volkswagen of America, Inc. (VW), the U.S.
representative of the vehicle's original manufacturer. VW's comment
addressed issues it believed J.K. had overlooked in describing
alterations necessary to conform 2001 Audi A4 and S4 models to numerous
FMVSS as well as to the Bumper Standard. The agency accorded J.K. an
opportunity to respond to the issues raised by VW. J.K. responded by
revising its petition. In the revised petition, J.K. added 2000 A4 and
S4, and 2000-2001 RS4 models to those for which it sought import
eligibility. Because this revision expanded the scope of the petition,
NHTSA published the second notice. Only one comment was received in
response to the second notice of petition, again from VW. VW's comment
reiterated comments made in its response to the first notice and
addressed issues it believed J.K. had overlooked in regard to the RS4
model. VW also stated that the petition needed to clarify the specific
carline platform intended to be covered under the petition. VW's
comments, J.K.'s responses, and NHTSA's analysis are set forth below
for each of the issues that VW raised.
(1) Vehicle Platform: VW stated that two unique versions of the A4
platform were offered for sale in Europe. The European model year 2000
vehicles were built on the ``8D'' platform, while the European model
year 2001 vehicles were built on the ``8E'' platform. All 2000 and 2001
model year U.S.-model vehicles were built on the ``8D'' platform. VW
asserted that the 2001 U.S-model and the 2001 European market vehicles
are not directly comparable for the purposes of determining
modifications needed to achieve conformity with all applicable FMVSS.
In its response, J.K. stated that it only intended the petition to
cover the ``8D'' platform.
NHTSA's Analysis: In view of VW's comments and J.K.'s response, the
agency concluded that any eligibility decision resulting from the
petition should apply to nonconforming European market Audi A4, S4, and
RS4 passenger cars manufactured between September 1, 1999 and August
31, 2001 that were built on the ``8D'' platform. The petition dates
chosen are derived from the definition of ``model year'' in 49 CFR
593.4.
(2) FMVSS No. 102 Transmission Shift Lever Sequence: VW confirmed
that the U.S. and the non-U.S.-certified model are identical with
regard to conformity with this standard. In addition, VW pointed out
that the non-U.S.-certified model is not equipped with a clutch/starter
interlock that prevents the engine from being started unless the clutch
pedal is depressed. J.K. stated that although it did not believe that
the clutch/starter interlock was required by the standard, the company
acknowledged that this is an important component that would give an
extra margin of safety. J.K. therefore stated that it will add the
components to the vehicles that it converts.
NHTSA's Analysis: The standard does not require a clutch/starter
interlock on a vehicle equipped with a manual transmission. So long as
the vehicle remains in compliance with all applicable FMVSS, NHTSA has
no objection to the installation of these components.
(3) FMVSS No. 114 Theft Prevention: The petition stated that the
key warning system must be activated by the installation of U.S.-
version software to meet the requirements of this standard and that the
proper operation of the system must be verified for each vehicle so
converted. VW stated that vehicle modification is necessary and that
paragraph S4.5 of the standard requires a warning device that is not
installed on vehicles manufactured for markets other than the United
States.
NHTSA's Analysis: The modifications VW identified as necessary
would not prelude the vehicle from being deemed eligible for
importation. Conformity packages submitted for vehicles imported under
the decision must demonstrate that the vehicle is equipped with a key
warning system that conforms to the standard.
(4) FMVSS No. 118 Power-Operated Window Partition, and Roof Panel
Systems: The petition stated that the systems in the non-U.S. model are
the same as those in the U.S. model. VW stated that the non-U.S. models
do not comply with paragraph S4(e) of the standard and are not
certified to the requirements of paragraph S5, which provides an
exemption from the need to comply under paragraph S4(e). J.K. responded
that it had tested the system after the installation of U.S.-model
dash/body and OBDII software, which may explain why the systems in the
non-U.S. model vehicles conformed to the standards.
NHTSA's Analysis: The modifications VW identified as necessary
would not prelude the vehicle from being deemed eligible for
importation. Conformity packages submitted for vehicles imported under
the decision must demonstrate that the vehicle is equipped with a
power-operated window partition and roof panel system that conforms to
the standard.
(5) FMVSS No. 135 Passenger Car Brake Systems: The petition stated
that the hydraulic brake system and the parking brake system are
identical to those in the U.S.-model. VW stated that the brake lining
material on non-U.S. model vehicles is different from the lining
material installed on vehicles certified as conforming to FMVSS No.
135. J.K. responded that the vehicle it examined had brake pads that
bore U.S.-model part numbers, but admitted that some vehicles may not
be so equipped. J.K. concluded that all vehicles must be inspected for
the presence of U.S.-model brake pads and that U.S.-model pads must be
installed on vehicles that are not so equipped.
NHTSA's Analysis: The modifications VW identified as necessary
would not prelude the vehicle from being deemed eligible for
importation. Conformity packages submitted for vehicles imported under
the decision must demonstrate that the vehicle is equipped with a brake
system that conforms to the standard.
(6) FMVSS No. 202 Head Restraints: VW confirmed that the U.S. model
and the non-U.S. model are identical with regard to conformity with
this standard. However, VW pointed out that the non-U.S. model is not
equipped with head
[[Page 11705]]
restraint locking devices that are present in the U.S.-model. J.K.
responded that the non-U.S. model vehicles that it examined had head
restraint locking devices.
NHTSA's Analysis: The standard does not require head restraint
locking devices. The presence or absence of these devices therefore has
no bearing on the vehicle's compliance with this standard.
(7) FMVSS No. 206 Door Locks and Door Retention Components: The
petition stated that the door locks and retention system components
installed on the non-U.S. model are identical to those installed on the
U.S.-model. VW stated that non-U.S. model vehicles have a door locking
system in which the interior door handle has a single pull release to
open the door when the locking system is activated, and that the U.S.-
model vehicles have a door locking system that requires a double pull
motion. According to VW, the first pull unlocks the door and the second
pull opens the door latch. VW further stated that the double pull
feature is required to comply with paragraph S4.1.3.2 of the standard.
J.K. responded that the vehicle it examined had a door locking system
that required two pulls, but acknowledged that some vehicles may not be
so equipped. J.K. stated that all vehicles must be inspected for the
presence of U.S.-model components and that U.S.-model components must
be installed on vehicles no so equipped.
NHTSA's Analysis: The modifications VW identified as necessary
would not prelude the vehicle from being deemed eligible for
importation. Conformity packages submitted for vehicles imported under
decisions must demonstrate that the vehicle is equipped with a door
lock system that conforms to the standard.
(8) 49 CFR Part 581 Bumper Standard: The petition stated that the
bumpers and bumper mounting structures were identical to those
installed on U.S.-model vehicles. VW stated that non-U.S.-model A4 and
S4 vehicles have bumper systems that are different from those installed
on U.S.-model vehicles. The revised petition stated that the support
structure for the bumpers on the non-U.S. vehicles are identical to
that of the U.S.-model and that U.S.-model bumper components must be
installed in order to meet the requirements of the standard. In
response to the revised petition, VW stated that the bumper system on
the RS4 model differs from that on the A4 and S4 models. VW also stated
that no conforming parts are available for the SR4 model. J.K.
responded that it has installed U.S.-model A4 bumper systems on the
non-U.S. model RS4 ``8D'' chassis vehicle, that these systems bolt on
directly, and that it will confirm these modifications.
NHTSA's Analysis: The agency notes that Bumper Standard compliance
issues are not directly relevant to an import eligibility decision, as
such a decision is to be based on the capability of a non-U.S.
certified vehicle to be altered to conform to the FMVSS, and the Bumper
Standard is not an FMVSS. However, because a vehicle that is not
originally manufactured to comply with the Bumper Standard must be
modified to comply with the standard before it can be allowed
permanently into the United States, conformance with the Bumper
Standard must be shown in the conformity package submitted to NHTSA to
allow release of the DOT Conformance bond furnished at the time of
importation.
Conclusion
Based on the contents of the petition and the resolution of the
issues set forth above, NHTSA decided to grant the petition.
Vehicle Eligibility Number for Subject Vehicles
The importer of a vehicle admissible under any final decision must
indicate on the form HS-7 accompanying entry the appropriate vehicle
eligibility number indicating that the vehicle is eligible for entry.
VSP-400 is the vehicle eligibility number assigned to vehicles
admissible under this notice of final decision.
Final Decision
Accordingly, on the basis of the foregoing, NHTSA decided that
2000-2001 Audi (8D) A4, S4, and RS4 passenger cars, manufactured from
September 1, 1999, through August 31, 2001, for the European Market,
that were not originally manufactured to comply with all applicable
FMVSS, are substantially similar to 2000-2001 Audi (8D) A4, and S4
passenger cars originally manufactured for importation into and sale in
the United States and certified under 49 U.S.C. 30115, and are capable
of being readily altered to conform to all applicable FMVSS.
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. E6-3233 Filed 3-7-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
