Hyundai Motor Company, Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 38290-38291 [E8-15130]

Download as PDF 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