Hyundai Motor Company, Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 38290-38291 [E8-15130]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
38290
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 129 / Thursday, July 3, 2008 / Notices
Caltrans’ contact at the address
provided above.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Program Number 20.205, Highway Planning
and Construction. The regulations
implementing Executive Order 12372
regarding intergovernmental consultation on
Federal programs and activities apply to this
program.)
Issued on: June 26, 2008.
Nancy Bobb,
Director, State Programs, Federal Highway
Administration, Sacramento, California.
[FR Doc. E8–15111 Filed 7–2–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
Reports, Forms and Record Keeping
Requirements; Agency Information
Collection Activity Under OMB Review
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Notice.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: In compliance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this notice
announces that the Information
Collection Request (ICR) abstracted
below has been forwarded to the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) for
review and comment. The ICR describes
the nature of the information collections
and their expected burden. The Federal
Register Notice with a 60-day comment
period was published on December 28,
2007 [72 FR 73972].
DATES: Comments must be submitted on
or before August 4, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David Sparks, National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, Office of
Odometer Fraud Investigation (NVS–
230), 202–366–4761. 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Room W55–318,
Washington, DC 20590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Title: 49 CFR part 580 Odometer
Disclosure Statement.
OMB Number: 2127–0047.
Type of Request: Extension of a
currently approved collection.
Abstract: The Federal Odometer Law,
49 U.S.C. Chapter 327, and
implementing regulations, 49 CFR part
580 require each transferor of a motor
vehicle to provide the transferee with a
written disclosure of the vehicle’s
mileage. This disclosure is to be made
on the vehicle’s title, or in the case of
a vehicle that has never been titled, on
a separate form. If the title is lost or is
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:46 Jul 02, 2008
Jkt 214001
held by a lien holder, and where
permitted by state law, the disclosure
can be made on a state-issued, secure
power of attorney.
NHTSA received comments from:
South Dakota Department of Revenue &
Regulation, Texas Department of
Transportation Vehicle Titles and
Registration, Virginia Department of
Motor Vehicles, and Wisconsin
Department of Transportation. Each
commenter cites a need for the ability to
disclose odometer information
electronically in a paperless
environment. Texas and Virginia
specifically reference a petition filed
with NHTSA by the Virginia
Department of Motor Vehicles seeking
approval of alternate odometer
disclosure requirements, to wit,
electronic odometer statements. NHTSA
has preliminarily granted Virginia’s
proposed alternate disclosure
requirements and is seeking public
comments concerning Virginia’s
proposal via the Federal Register
through July 24, 2008. NHTSA’s initial
determination concerning Virginia’s
petition was published in the Federal
Register on June 24, 2008 (73 FR 35617–
23).
Additionally, Wisconsin suggests
eliminating the ten-year exemption for
odometer disclosure statements and
conversely Virginia supports the tenyear exemption. NHTSA is reviewing
the ten-year exemption and may seek
comments in a future Federal Register
notice.
This ICR notice concerns only the
information collection requirements
under current law, and does not relate
to the issues raised by those
commenting.
Affected Public: Households,
Business, other for-profit, and not-forprofit institutions, Federal Government,
and State, Local, or Tribal Government.
Estimated Total Annual Burden:
2,034,910.
ADDRESSES: Send comments, within 30
days, to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget, 725–17th
Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503,
Attention NHTSA Desk Officer.
Comments are invited on: Whether
the proposed collection of information
is necessary for the proper performance
of the functions of the Department,
including whether the information will
have practical utility; the accuracy of
the Department’s estimate of the burden
of the proposed information collection;
ways to enhance the quality, utility and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information
PO 00000
Frm 00119
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
on respondents, including the use of
automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
A Comment to OMB is most effective if
OMB receives it within 30 days of
publication.
Issued in Washington, DC, on June 27,
2008.
David W. Sparks,
Director, Office of Odometer Fraud
Investigation.
[FR Doc. E8–15057 Filed 7–2–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2008–0048; Notice 2]
Hyundai Motor Company, Grant 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
Standard (FMVSS) No. 225 Child
Restraint Anchorage Systems). On
November 28, 2007 Hyundai 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) and the rule implementing
those provisions at 49 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. Notice of receipt of
the petition was published, with a 30day public comment period, on March
25, 2008 in the Federal Register (73 FR
15835). No comments were received. To
view the petition and all supporting
documents log onto the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Web site
at: https://www.regulations.gov/. Then
follow the online search instructions to
locate docket number ‘‘NHTSA–2008–
0048.’’
For further information on this
decision, contact Mr. Ed Chan, Office of
Vehicle Safety Compliance, the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration
(NHTSA), telephone (202) 493–0335,
facsimile (202) 366–3081.
Affected are approximately 115,000
model years 2007 and 2008 Hyundai
Elantra passenger cars produced
beginning July 14, 2006 through
November 23, 2007.
E:\FR\FM\03JYN1.SGM
03JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 129 / Thursday, July 3, 2008 / Notices
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 described the
noncompliance as the failure to provide
specific written explanation of the
meaning of the pictogram that appears
on the lower anchorage identification
circles in the owner’s manuals provided
with the affected vehicles.
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.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:46 Jul 02, 2008
Jkt 214001
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 7 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
7 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00120
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
38291
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 Decision
NHTSA agrees with Hyundai that the
noncompliance is inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety.
The pictogram that Hyundai
imprinted on the lower anchorage
identification circles is designated by
the ISO (the International Organization
for Standardization), a worldwide
federation of national standards bodies,
as a ‘‘child seat’’ 1 symbol for use in road
vehicle controls, indicators and telltales.
Although a description of the
pictogram in the owner’s manual can
improve a user’s recognition of the
purpose for the lower anchorages, we
think the risk created by this particular
noncompliance is negligible with no
impact on child occupant safety.
In consideration of the foregoing,
NHTSA has decided that Hyundai has
met its burden of persuasion that the
labeling noncompliances described are
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
Accordingly, Hyundai’s petition is
granted and the petitioner is exempted
from the obligation of providing
notification of, and a remedy for, the
noncompliances under 49 U.S.C. 30118
and 30120.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120;
delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.50 and
501.8.
Issued on: June 27, 2008.
Daniel C. Smith,
Associate Administrator for Enforcement.
[FR Doc. E8–15130 Filed 7–2–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[NHTSA Docket No. NHTSA–2008–0126]
National EMS Advisory Council; Notice
of Federal Advisory Committee
Meeting
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.
ACTION: National EMS Advisory
Council; Notice of Federal Advisory
Committee Meeting.
AGENCY:
1 ISO 2575: Road vehicles—Symbols for controls,
indicators and tell-tales.
E:\FR\FM\03JYN1.SGM
03JYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 129 (Thursday, July 3, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38290-38291]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-15130]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2008-0048; Notice 2]
Hyundai Motor Company, Grant 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 Standard (FMVSS) No. 225
Child Restraint Anchorage Systems). On November 28, 2007 Hyundai 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) and the rule
implementing those provisions at 49 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. Notice of
receipt of the petition was published, with a 30-day public comment
period, on March 25, 2008 in the Federal Register (73 FR 15835). No
comments were received. To view the petition and all supporting
documents log onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Web site
at: https://www.regulations.gov/. Then follow the online search
instructions to locate docket number ``NHTSA-2008-0048.''
For further information on this decision, contact Mr. Ed Chan,
Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone (202) 493-0335, facsimile
(202) 366-3081.
Affected are approximately 115,000 model years 2007 and 2008
Hyundai Elantra passenger cars produced beginning July 14, 2006 through
November 23, 2007.
[[Page 38291]]
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 described the noncompliance as the failure to provide
specific written explanation of the meaning of the pictogram that
appears on the lower anchorage identification circles in the owner's
manuals provided with the affected vehicles.
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 7 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 7 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 Decision
NHTSA agrees with Hyundai that the noncompliance is inconsequential
to motor vehicle safety.
The pictogram that Hyundai imprinted on the lower anchorage
identification circles is designated by the ISO (the International
Organization for Standardization), a worldwide federation of national
standards bodies, as a ``child seat'' \1\ symbol for use in road
vehicle controls, indicators and tell-tales.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ISO 2575: Road vehicles--Symbols for controls, indicators
and tell-tales.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although a description of the pictogram in the owner's manual can
improve a user's recognition of the purpose for the lower anchorages,
we think the risk created by this particular noncompliance is
negligible with no impact on child occupant safety.
In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Hyundai
has met its burden of persuasion that the labeling noncompliances
described are inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly,
Hyundai's petition is granted and the petitioner is exempted from the
obligation of providing notification of, and a remedy for, the
noncompliances under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120; delegations of authority at
49 CFR 1.50 and 501.8.
Issued on: June 27, 2008.
Daniel C. Smith,
Associate Administrator for Enforcement.
[FR Doc. E8-15130 Filed 7-2-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
