Hyundai Motor Company, Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 15835-15837 [E8-6005]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 58 / Tuesday, March 25, 2008 / Notices
4. Docket No. NHTSA–2007–28264
under this decision are specified in
Annex A.
Final Decision
Accordingly, on the basis of the
foregoing, NHTSA hereby decides that
each motor vehicle listed in Annex A to
this notice, which was not originally
manufactured to comply with all
applicable FMVSS, is either (1)
substantially similar to a motor vehicle
manufactured for importation into and/
or sale in the United States, and
certified under 49 U.S.C. 30115, as
specified in Annex A, and is capable of
being readily altered to conform to all
applicable FMVSS or (2) has safety
features that comply with, or are
capable of being altered to comply with,
all applicable Federal motor vehicle
safety standards.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A),
(a)(1)(B) and (b)(1); 49 CFR 593.8; delegations
of authority at 49 CFR 1.50 and 501.8.
Nonconforming Vehicles: 2003
Kawasaki VN1500–P1/P2 Motorcycle.
Substantially Similar U.S. Certified
Vehicles: 2003 Kawasaki VN1500–P1/P2
Motorcycle.
Notice of Petition Published at: 72 FR
30429 (May 31, 2007).
Vehicle Eligibility Number: VSP–492
(effective date July 11, 2007).
5. Docket No. NHTSA–2007–28531
Nonconforming Vehicles: 2004
Hyundai XG350 Passenger Car.
Substantially Similar U.S. Certified
Vehicles: 2004 Hyundai XG350
Passenger Car.
Notice of Petition Published at: 72 FR
35541 (June 28, 2007).
Vehicle Eligibility Number: VSP–494
(effective date August 14, 2007).
6. Docket No. NHTSA–2007–0006
Nonconforming Motor Vehicles Decided
to be Eligible for Importation
Nonconforming Vehicles: 2000–2001
Moto Guzzi California Motorcycles.
Substantially Similar U.S. Certified
Vehicles: 2000–2001 Moto Guzzi
California Motorcycles.
Notice of Petition Published at: 72 FR
59591 (October 22, 2007).
Vehicle Eligibility Number: VSP–495
(effective date November 28, 2007).
1. Docket No. NHTSA–2007–28262
7. Docket No. NHTSA–2007–0005
Nonconforming Vehicles: 2005 Honda
CR–V Multipurpose Passenger Vehicle.
Substantially Similar U.S. Certified
Vehicles: 2005 Honda CR–V
Multipurpose Passenger Vehicle.
Notice of Petition Published at: 72 FR
30428 (May 31, 2007).
Vehicle Eligibility Number: VSP–489
(effective date July 11, 2007).
Nonconforming Vehicles: 2004–2005
Vespa LX and PX Model Motorcycles.
Substantially Similar U.S. Certified
Vehicles: 2004–2005 Vespa LX and PX
Model Motorcycles.
Notice of Petition Published at: 72 FR
59588 (October 22, 2007).
Vehicle Eligibility Number: VSP–496
(effective date November 28, 2007).
2. Docket No. NHTSA–2007–28261
8. Docket No. NHTSA–2007–0004
Issued on: March 19, 2008.
Claude H. Harris,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
Annex A
Nonconforming Vehicles: 1986–1987
Volkswagen Transporter Multipurpose
Passenger Vehicle.
Substantially Similar U.S. Certified
Vehicles: 1986–1987 Volkswagen
Vanagon Multipurpose Passenger
Vehicle.
Notice of Petition Published at: 72 FR
30424 (May 31, 2007).
Vehicle Eligibility Number: VSP–490
(effective date July 11, 2007).
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
3. Docket No. NHTSA–2007–28263
Nonconforming Vehicles: 2006 Harley
Davidson FX, FL, & XL Motorcycle
Substantially Similar U.S. Certified
Vehicles: 2006 Harley Davidson FX, FL,
& XL Motorcycle.
Notice of Petition Published at: 72 FR
30425 (May 31, 2007).
Vehicle Eligibility Number: VSP–491
(effective date July 11, 2007).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:33 Mar 24, 2008
Jkt 214001
Nonconforming Vehicles: 1999–2007
Yamaha Drag Star 1100 Motorcycles.
Substantially Similar U.S. Certified
Vehicles: 1999–2007 Yamaha V Star
1100 Motorcycles.
Notice of Petition Published at: 72 FR
59586 (October 22, 2007).
Vehicle Eligibility Number: VSP–497
(effective date November 28, 2007).
9. Docket No. NHTSA–2007–0007
Nonconforming Vehicles: 1988 Ducati
851 Motorcycles.
Substantially Similar U.S. Certified
Vehicles: 1988 Ducati 851 Motorcycles.
Notice of Petition Published at: 72 FR
59584 (October 22, 2007).
Vehicle Eligibility Number: VSP–498
(effective date November 28, 2007).
10. Docket No. NHTSA–2007–0009
Nonconforming Vehicles: 2007 Harley
Davidson FXSTC Soft Tail Custom
Motorcycles.
PO 00000
Frm 00118
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
15835
Substantially Similar U.S. Certified
Vehicles: 2007 Harley Davidson FXSTC
Soft Tail Custom Motorcycles.
Notice of Petition Published at: 72 FR
59590 (October 22, 2007).
Vehicle Eligibility Number: VSP–499
(effective date November 28, 2007).
11. Docket No. NHTSA–2007–0008
Nonconforming Vehicles: 1993 Ducati
888 Motorcycles.
Substantially Similar U.S. Certified
Vehicles: 1993 Ducati 888 Motorcycles.
Notice of Petition Published at: 72 FR
59589 (October 22, 2007).
Vehicle Eligibility Number: VSP–500
(effective date November 28, 2007).
12. Docket No. NHTSA–2007–0036
Nonconforming Vehicles: 1992 Alfa
Romeo Spyder Passenger Cars.
Substantially Similar U.S. Certified
Vehicles: 1992 Alfa Romeo Spyder
Passenger Cars.
Notice of Petition Published at: 72 FR
65833 (November 23, 2007).
Vehicle Eligibility Number: VSP–503
(effective date January 16, 2008).
13. Docket No. NHTSA–2007–0021
Nonconforming Vehicles: 2000–2003
BMW C1 Motorcycles. Because there are
no substantially similar U.S.-certified
version 2000–2003 BMW C1
Motorcycles, the petitioner sought
import eligibility under 49 U.S.C.
30141(a)(1)(B).
Notice of Petition Published at: 72 FR
63652 (November 9, 2007).
Vehicle Eligibility Number: VCP–40
(effective date January 16, 2008).
[FR Doc. E8–6074 Filed 3–24–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2008–0048; Notice 1]
Hyundai Motor Company, Receipt of
Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
Hyundai Motor Company (Hyundai),
has determined that certain vehicles
that it manufactured during the period
beginning July 14, 2006 through
November 23, 2007, did not fully
comply with paragraph S9.5 of 49 CFR
571.225 (Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standards (FMVSS) No. 225 Child
Restraint Anchorage Systems. Hyundai
has filed an appropriate report pursuant
to 49 CFR Part 573, Defect and
Noncompliance Responsibility and
Reports.
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h) (see implementing rule at 49
E:\FR\FM\25MRN1.SGM
25MRN1
15836
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 58 / Tuesday, March 25, 2008 / Notices
CFR part 556), Hyundai has petitioned
for an exemption from the notification
and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C.
Chapter 301 on the basis that this
noncompliance is inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety.
This notice of receipt of Hyundai’s
petition is published under 49 U.S.C.
30118 and 30120 and does not represent
any agency decision or other exercise of
judgment concerning the merits of the
petition.
Affected are approximately 115,000
model years 2007 and 2008 Hyundai
Elantra passenger cars produced
beginning July 14, 2006 through
November 23, 2007. Paragraph S9.5 of
49 CFR 571.225 requires in pertinent
part that:
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
S9.5 Marking and conspicuity of the lower
anchorages. Each vehicle shall comply with
S9.5(a) or (b).
(a) Above each bar installed pursuant to
S4, the vehicle shall be permanently marked
with a circle:
(1) That is not less than 13 mm in
diameter;
(2) That is either solid or open, with or
without words, symbols or pictograms,
provided that if words, symbols or
pictograms are used, their meaning is
explained to the consumer in writing, such
as in the vehicle’s owners manual; and
(3) That is located such that its center is
on each seat back between 50 and 100 mm
above or on the seat cushion 100(±)25 mm
forward of the intersection of the vertical
transverse and horizontal longitudinal planes
intersecting at the horizontal centerline of
each lower anchorage, as illustrated in Figure
22. The center of the circle must be in the
vertical longitudinal plane that passes
through the center of the bar (±25 mm).
(4) The circle may be on a tag.
(b) The vehicle shall be configured such
that the following is visible: Each of the bars
installed pursuant to S4, or a permanently
attached guide device for each bar. The bar
or guide device must be visible without the
compression of the seat cushion or seat back,
when the bar or device is viewed, in a
vertical longitudinal plane passing through
the center of the bar or guide device, along
a line making an upward 30 degree angle
with a horizontal plane. Seat backs are in the
nominal design riding position. The bars may
be covered by a removable cap or cover,
provided that the cap or cover is permanently
marked with words, symbols or pictograms
whose meaning is explained to the consumer
in written form as part of the owner’s
manual.
Hyundai explained its belief that
paragraph S9.5 of FMVSS No. 225
requires that above each child restraint
lower anchorage the vehicle shall be
permanently marked with; a circle that
is not less than 13 mm in diameter, that
is either solid or open, with or without
words, symbols or pictograms, provided
that if words, symbols or pictograms are
used, their meaning is explained to the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:33 Mar 24, 2008
Jkt 214001
consumer in writing, such as in the
vehicle’s owner’s manual.
Hyundai also explained that the
owner’s manuals of the affected vehicles
contain a section titled ‘‘Child seat
lower anchorages’’ that provides
illustrations indicating the locations of
the child restraint lower anchorages and
written descriptions of the locations of
the child restraint lower anchorages.
Hyundai expressed its belief that the
vehicles are properly marked, as
required by paragraph S9.5 of FMVSS
No. 225, with solid circles to identify
the locations of the lower anchorages.
Hyundai also stated that those solid
circles contain pictograms, which
represent a child seated in a child
restraint. However, the owner’s manuals
provided with the affected vehicles do
not contain a specific written
explanation of the meaning of the
pictogram that appears on the
identification circles.
Hyundai states that it believes the
noncompliance is inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety for the following
reasons:
(1) When the requirements of
paragraph S9.5 were first implemented
over seven years ago, there may have
been the potential to misunderstand the
newly adopted child restraint lower
anchorage identification mark.
Therefore, NHTSA decided that a circle
must be used, to standardize the symbol
used to identify the anchorages, because
standardization would likely increase
user recognition of the symbol. The
standardized circle has now appeared in
almost every U.S. vehicle for more than
seven years, allowing the public to gain
familiarity with its purpose. In reference
to the identification circles, FMVSS 225
No. S9.5 (a)(2) states that they may be
‘‘with or without words, symbols or
pictograms’’. If the identification circle
does not contain any pictogram, it does
not require a written explanation.
(2) The simple pictogram representing
a child seated in a child restraint
enhances the identification provided by
the circle. The missing written
explanation of the meaning of the
pictogram does not affect the ability of
a person to locate the lower anchorages,
aided by the visual indication of the
identification circles and the
illustrations and written explanations
provided in the owner’s manual, and
does not affect the ability of the lower
anchorages to properly secure a child
restraint.
In addition, Hyundai stated that even
though it will include a written
explanation in future printings of the
subject owner’s manual, it strongly
believes that the missing written
explanation is an inconsequential
PO 00000
Frm 00119
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
noncompliance that poses no threat to
the safety of its customers.
Hyundai also states that no customer
complaints have been received related
to the lack of a written explanation of
the meaning of the pictogram or any
problems that may have resulted from
the lack of a written explanation of the
meaning of the pictogram.
Hyundai requested that NHTSA
consider its petition and grant an
exemption from the recall requirements
of the National Traffic and Motor
Vehicle Safety Act on the basis that the
noncompliance described above is
inconsequential as it relates to motor
vehicle safety.
NHTSA notes that the statutory
provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to
file petitions for a determination of
inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to
exempt manufacturers only from the
duties found in sections 30118 and
30120, respectively, to notify owners,
purchasers, and dealers of a defect or
noncompliance and to remedy the
defect or noncompliance.
Interested persons are invited to
submit written data, views, and
arguments on this petition. Comments
must refer to the docket and notice
number cited at the beginning of this
notice and be submitted by any of the
following methods:
a. By mail addressed to: U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M–30, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington,
DC 20590.
b. By hand delivery to U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M–30, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue, SE, Washington,
DC 20590. The Docket Section is open
on weekdays from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m.
except Federal Holidays.
c. Electronically: by logging onto the
Federal Docket Management System
(FDMS) Web site at: https://
www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Comments may also be faxed to 1–202–
493–2251.
Comments must be written in the
English language, and be no greater than
15 pages in length, although there is no
limit to the length of necessary
attachments to the comments. If
comments are submitted in hard copy
form, please ensure that two copies are
provided. If you wish to receive
confirmation that your comments were
received, please enclose a stamped, selfaddressed postcard with the comments.
Note that all comments received will be
posted without change to https://
E:\FR\FM\25MRN1.SGM
25MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 58 / Tuesday, March 25, 2008 / Notices
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided.
Documents submitted to a docket may
be viewed by anyone at the address and
times given above. The documents may
also be viewed on the Internet at
https://www.regulations.gov by following
the online instructions for accessing the
dockets. DOT’s complete Privacy Act
Statement is available for review in the
Federal Register published on April 11,
2000 (65 FR 19477–78).
The petition, supporting materials,
and all comments received before the
close of business on the closing date
indicated below will be filed and will be
considered. All comments and
supporting materials received after the
closing date will also be filed and will
be considered to the extent possible.
When the petition is granted or denied,
notice of the decision will be published
in the Federal Register pursuant to the
authority indicated below.
Comment closing date: April 24, 2008.
Authority: (49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120:
delegations of authority at CFR 1.50 and
501.8)
Issued on: March 19, 2008.
Claude H. Harris,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. E8–6005 Filed 3–24–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Executive Office for Asset Forfeiture;
Proposed Collection; Comment
Request
Notice and request for
comments.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
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 Executive
Office for Asset Forfeiture within the
Department of the Treasury is soliciting
comments concerning the Request for
Transfer of Property Seized/Forfeited by
a Treasury Agency, TD F 92–22.46.
DATES: Written comments should be
received on or before May 28, 2008 to
be assured of consideration.
ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments
to the Executive Office for Asset
Forfeiture, Attn: Jackie A. Jackson, 1341
G Street 9th Floor NW., Washington, DC
20220. Telephone: (202) 622–2755. E-
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:33 Mar 24, 2008
Jkt 214001
Mail Address:
Jackie.Jackson@DO.Treas.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Requests for additional information or
copies of the form(s) and instructions
should be directed to the Executive
Office for Asset Forfeiture, Attn: Jackie
A. Jackson, 1341 G Street 9th Floor NW.,
Washington, DC 20220. Telephone:
(202) 622–2755. E-Mail Address:
Jackie.Jackson@DO.Treas.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Title: Request for Transfer of Property
Seized/Forfeited by a Treasury Agency,
TD F 92–22.46
OMB Number: 1505–0152.
Form Number: TD F 92–22.46.
Abstract: The form was developed to
capture the minimum amount of data
necessary to process the application for
equitable sharing benefits. Only one
form is required per seizure. If a law
enforcement agency does not make this
one time application for benefits under
the equitable sharing process, the
agency will not benefit from the
forfeiture process.
Current Actions: This is a notice for
the continued use of the established
form. There are several changes to the
form or instructions.
Type of Review: Extension (with
changes).
Proposed Changes: At the top of the
form add a line for Recipient/Requesting
Agency Case Number.
In section II—Add a Line to collect
the E-mail Address of the Agency
Contact Person.
Affected Public: Federal, State and
local law enforcement agencies
participating in the Treasury asset
sharing program.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
5,000.
Estimated Time Per Respondent: 30
Minutes.
Estimated Total Annual Burden
Hours: 2,500.
Request for Comments
Comments submitted in response to
this notice will be summarized and/or
included in the request for OMB
approval. All comments will become a
matter of public record. Comments are
invited on: (a) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information shall have practical utility;
(b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate
of the burden of the collection of
information; (c) ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; (d) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of
information on respondents, including
PO 00000
Frm 00120
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
15837
through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information
technology; and (e) estimates of capital
or start-up costs and costs of operation,
maintenance, and purchase of services
to provide information.
Eric E. Hampl,
Director, Executive Office for Asset Forfeiture.
[FR Doc. E8–5974 Filed 3–24–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810–25–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Internal Revenue Service
[CO–49–88]
Proposed Collection; Comment
Request for Regulation Project
Internal Revenue Service (IRS),
Treasury.
ACTION: Notice and request for
comments.
AGENCY:
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 IRS is
soliciting comments concerning an
existing final regulation, CO–49–88 (TD
8546), Limitations on Corporate Net
Operating Loss (§ 1.382–6).
DATES: Written comments should be
received on or before May 27, 2008 to
be assured of consideration.
ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments
to Glenn P. Kirkland, Internal Revenue
Service, room 6129, 1111 Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20224.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Requests for additional information or
copies of the regulations should be
directed to Carolyn N. Brown at Internal
Revenue Service, room 6129, 1111
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington,
DC 20224, or at (202) 622–6688, or
through the Internet at
Carolyn.N.Brown@irs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Title: Limitations on Corporate Net
Operating Loss.
OMB Number: 1545–1381.
Regulation Project Number: CO–49–
88.
Abstract: This regulation provides
rules for the allocation of a loss
corporation’s taxable income or net
operating loss between the periods
before and after ownership change
E:\FR\FM\25MRN1.SGM
25MRN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 58 (Tuesday, March 25, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15835-15837]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-6005]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2008-0048; Notice 1]
Hyundai Motor Company, Receipt of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
Hyundai Motor Company (Hyundai), has determined that certain
vehicles that it manufactured during the period beginning July 14, 2006
through November 23, 2007, did not fully comply with paragraph S9.5 of
49 CFR 571.225 (Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) No. 225
Child Restraint Anchorage Systems. Hyundai has filed an appropriate
report pursuant to 49 CFR Part 573, Defect and Noncompliance
Responsibility and Reports.
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) (see implementing rule
at 49
[[Page 15836]]
CFR part 556), Hyundai has petitioned for an exemption from the
notification and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the
basis that this noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle
safety.
This notice of receipt of Hyundai's petition is published under 49
U.S.C. 30118 and 30120 and does not represent any agency decision or
other exercise of judgment concerning the merits of the petition.
Affected are approximately 115,000 model years 2007 and 2008
Hyundai Elantra passenger cars produced beginning July 14, 2006 through
November 23, 2007. Paragraph S9.5 of 49 CFR 571.225 requires in
pertinent part that:
S9.5 Marking and conspicuity of the lower anchorages. Each
vehicle shall comply with S9.5(a) or (b).
(a) Above each bar installed pursuant to S4, the vehicle shall
be permanently marked with a circle:
(1) That is not less than 13 mm in diameter;
(2) That is either solid or open, with or without words, symbols
or pictograms, provided that if words, symbols or pictograms are
used, their meaning is explained to the consumer in writing, such as
in the vehicle's owners manual; and
(3) That is located such that its center is on each seat back
between 50 and 100 mm above or on the seat cushion 100()25 mm forward of the intersection of the vertical transverse
and horizontal longitudinal planes intersecting at the horizontal
centerline of each lower anchorage, as illustrated in Figure 22. The
center of the circle must be in the vertical longitudinal plane that
passes through the center of the bar (25 mm).
(4) The circle may be on a tag.
(b) The vehicle shall be configured such that the following is
visible: Each of the bars installed pursuant to S4, or a permanently
attached guide device for each bar. The bar or guide device must be
visible without the compression of the seat cushion or seat back,
when the bar or device is viewed, in a vertical longitudinal plane
passing through the center of the bar or guide device, along a line
making an upward 30 degree angle with a horizontal plane. Seat backs
are in the nominal design riding position. The bars may be covered
by a removable cap or cover, provided that the cap or cover is
permanently marked with words, symbols or pictograms whose meaning
is explained to the consumer in written form as part of the owner's
manual.
Hyundai explained its belief that paragraph S9.5 of FMVSS No. 225
requires that above each child restraint lower anchorage the vehicle
shall be permanently marked with; a circle that is not less than 13 mm
in diameter, that is either solid or open, with or without words,
symbols or pictograms, provided that if words, symbols or pictograms
are used, their meaning is explained to the consumer in writing, such
as in the vehicle's owner's manual.
Hyundai also explained that the owner's manuals of the affected
vehicles contain a section titled ``Child seat lower anchorages'' that
provides illustrations indicating the locations of the child restraint
lower anchorages and written descriptions of the locations of the child
restraint lower anchorages. Hyundai expressed its belief that the
vehicles are properly marked, as required by paragraph S9.5 of FMVSS
No. 225, with solid circles to identify the locations of the lower
anchorages. Hyundai also stated that those solid circles contain
pictograms, which represent a child seated in a child restraint.
However, the owner's manuals provided with the affected vehicles do not
contain a specific written explanation of the meaning of the pictogram
that appears on the identification circles.
Hyundai states that it believes the noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety for the following reasons:
(1) When the requirements of paragraph S9.5 were first implemented
over seven years ago, there may have been the potential to
misunderstand the newly adopted child restraint lower anchorage
identification mark. Therefore, NHTSA decided that a circle must be
used, to standardize the symbol used to identify the anchorages,
because standardization would likely increase user recognition of the
symbol. The standardized circle has now appeared in almost every U.S.
vehicle for more than seven years, allowing the public to gain
familiarity with its purpose. In reference to the identification
circles, FMVSS 225 No. S9.5 (a)(2) states that they may be ``with or
without words, symbols or pictograms''. If the identification circle
does not contain any pictogram, it does not require a written
explanation.
(2) The simple pictogram representing a child seated in a child
restraint enhances the identification provided by the circle. The
missing written explanation of the meaning of the pictogram does not
affect the ability of a person to locate the lower anchorages, aided by
the visual indication of the identification circles and the
illustrations and written explanations provided in the owner's manual,
and does not affect the ability of the lower anchorages to properly
secure a child restraint.
In addition, Hyundai stated that even though it will include a
written explanation in future printings of the subject owner's manual,
it strongly believes that the missing written explanation is an
inconsequential noncompliance that poses no threat to the safety of its
customers.
Hyundai also states that no customer complaints have been received
related to the lack of a written explanation of the meaning of the
pictogram or any problems that may have resulted from the lack of a
written explanation of the meaning of the pictogram.
Hyundai requested that NHTSA consider its petition and grant an
exemption from the recall requirements of the National Traffic and
Motor Vehicle Safety Act on the basis that the noncompliance described
above is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
NHTSA notes that the statutory provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to file petitions for a
determination of inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to exempt manufacturers
only from the duties found in sections 30118 and 30120, respectively,
to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or noncompliance
and to remedy the defect or noncompliance.
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments on this petition. Comments must refer to the docket and
notice number cited at the beginning of this notice and be submitted by
any of the following methods:
a. By mail addressed to: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
b. By hand delivery to U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE, Washington, DC 20590. The Docket Section is open on
weekdays from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. except Federal Holidays.
c. Electronically: by logging onto the Federal Docket Management
System (FDMS) Web site at: https://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the
online instructions for submitting comments. Comments may also be faxed
to 1-202-493-2251.
Comments must be written in the English language, and be no greater
than 15 pages in length, although there is no limit to the length of
necessary attachments to the comments. If comments are submitted in
hard copy form, please ensure that two copies are provided. If you wish
to receive confirmation that your comments were received, please
enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard with the comments. Note that
all comments received will be posted without change to https://
[[Page 15837]]
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.
Documents submitted to a docket may be viewed by anyone at the
address and times given above. The documents may also be viewed on the
Internet at https://www.regulations.gov by following the online
instructions for accessing the dockets. DOT's complete Privacy Act
Statement is available for review in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).
The petition, supporting materials, and all comments received
before the close of business on the closing date indicated below will
be filed and will be considered. All comments and supporting materials
received after the closing date will also be filed and will be
considered to the extent possible. When the petition is granted or
denied, notice of the decision will be published in the Federal
Register pursuant to the authority indicated below.
Comment closing date: April 24, 2008.
Authority: (49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at
CFR 1.50 and 501.8)
Issued on: March 19, 2008.
Claude H. Harris,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. E8-6005 Filed 3-24-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P