National Highway Traffic Safety Administration April 2013 – Federal Register Recent Federal Regulation Documents

Reports, Forms, and Recordkeeping Requirements
Document Number: 2013-10126
Type: Notice
Date: 2013-04-30
Agency: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of Transportation
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 collection and the expected burden. The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment period was published on January 11, 2013.
National Emergency Medical Services Advisory Council (NEMSAC); Notice of Federal Advisory Committee Meeting
Document Number: 2013-09921
Type: Notice
Date: 2013-04-26
Agency: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of Transportation
The NHTSA announces a meeting of NEMSAC to be held in the Metropolitan Washington, DC, area. This notice announces the date, time, and location of the meeting, which will be open to the public, as well as opportunities for public input to the NEMSAC. The purpose of NEMSAC, a nationally recognized council of emergency medical services representatives and consumers, is to advise and consult with DOT and the Federal Interagency Committee on EMS (FICEMS) on matters relating to emergency medical services (EMS).
Visual-Manual NHTSA Driver Distraction Guidelines for In-Vehicle Electronic Devices
Document Number: 2013-09883
Type: Notice
Date: 2013-04-26
Agency: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of Transportation
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is concerned about the effects of distraction on motor vehicle safety due to drivers' use of electronic devices. Consequently, NHTSA is issuing nonbinding, voluntary Driver Distraction Guidelines (NHTSA Guidelines) to promote safety by discouraging the introduction of excessively distracting devices in vehicles. This notice announces the issuance of the final version of the first phase of the NHTSA Guidelines. This first phase applies to original equipment (OE) in-vehicle electronic devices used by the driver to perform secondary tasks (communications, entertainment, information gathering, navigation tasks, etc. are considered secondary tasks) through visual-manual means (i.e., the driver looks at a device, manipulates a device-related control with his or her hand, and/or watches for visual feedback). The NHTSA Guidelines list certain secondary tasks believed by the agency to interfere inherently with a driver's ability to safely control the vehicle. The NHTSA Guidelines recommend that in-vehicle devices be designed so that they cannot be used by the driver to perform these inherently distracting secondary tasks while driving. For all other visual-manual secondary tasks, the NHTSA Guidelines specify a test method for measuring eye glance behavior during those tasks. Eye glance metrics are compared to acceptance criteria to evaluate whether a task interferes too much with driver attention, rendering it unsuitable for a driver to perform while driving. If a task does not meet the acceptance criteria, the NHTSA Guidelines recommend that the task be made inaccessible for performance by the driver while driving. In addition, the NHTSA Guidelines contain several recommendations to limit and reduce the potential for distraction associated with the use of OE in-vehicle electronic devices.
Notice of Receipt of Petition for Decision that Nonconforming 2005-2007 BMW 5 Series Passenger Cars Manufactured Before September 1, 2006 are Eligible for Importation
Document Number: 2013-09728
Type: Notice
Date: 2013-04-25
Agency: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of Transportation
This document announces receipt by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) of a petition for a decision that nonconforming 2005-2007 BMW 5 Series passenger cars manufactured before September 1, 2006 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 that were originally manufactured for sale in the United States and that were certified by their manufacturer as complying with the safety standards (the U.S.-certified version of 2005-2007 BMW 5 Series passenger cars) and they are capable of being readily altered to conform to the standards.
Notice of Receipt of Petition for Decision That Nonconforming 2011 Thule 3008BL Boat Trailers Are Eligible for Importation
Document Number: 2013-09724
Type: Notice
Date: 2013-04-25
Agency: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of Transportation
This document announces receipt by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) of a petition for a decision that 2011 Thule 3008BL boat trailers 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 have safety features that comply with, or are capable of being altered to comply with, all such standards.
Petition for Exemption From the Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard; Maserati North America Inc.
Document Number: 2013-09685
Type: Notice
Date: 2013-04-24
Agency: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of Transportation
This document grants in full Maserati North America Inc.'s, (Maserati) petition for an exemption of the Quattroporte vehicle line in accordance with 49 CFR Part 543, Exemption from the Theft Prevention Standard. This petition is granted because the agency has determined that the antitheft device to be placed on the line as standard equipment is likely to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance with the parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR Part 541).
Reports, Forms, and Record Keeping Requirements
Document Number: 2013-09575
Type: Notice
Date: 2013-04-23
Agency: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of Transportation
Before a Federal agency can collect certain information from the public, it must receive approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Under procedures established by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, before seeking OMB approval, Federal agencies must solicit public comment on proposed collections of information, including extensions and reinstatement of previously approved collections. This document describes one collection of information for which NHTSA intends to seek OMB approval.
Information Collection Activities: Submission for the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Review; Request for Comment
Document Number: 2013-09366
Type: Notice
Date: 2013-04-22
Agency: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of Transportation
In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. chapter 35), this notice announces that the Information Collection Request (ICR) abstracted below will be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review. The ICR describes the nature of the information collection and its expected burden. A Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment period soliciting public comments on the following information collection was published on August 14, 2012 (Federal Register/Vol. 77, No. 157/pp. 48608-48609).
Reports, Forms, and Record Keeping Requirements
Document Number: 2013-09365
Type: Notice
Date: 2013-04-22
Agency: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of Transportation
Before a Federal agency can collect certain information from the public, it must receive approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Under procedures established by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, before seeking OMB approval, Federal agencies must solicit public comment on proposed collections of information, including extensions and reinstatements of previously approved collections. This document describes the collection of information for which NHTSA intends to seek OMB approval.
Reports, Forms and Record Keeping Requirements, Agency Information Collection Activity Under OMB Review
Document Number: 2013-09140
Type: Notice
Date: 2013-04-18
Agency: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of Transportation
Before a Federal agency can collect certain information from the public, the agency must receive approval from the Office of Management and Budget (``OMB''). Under procedures established by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), before seeking OMB approval, Federal agencies must solicit public comment on proposed collections of information, including extensions and reinstatements of previously approved collections. In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice describes one collection of information for which NHTSA intends to seek OMB approval.
Organization and Delegation of Duties
Document Number: 2013-09122
Type: Rule
Date: 2013-04-18
Agency: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of Transportation
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation (DOT) is updating its regulations. These regulations govern the organization of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and delegations of authority from the Administrator to Agency officers including the Deputy Administrator, Chief Counsel, and Senior Associate Administrators. This rule is a publication of delegations made by the Administrator to other Agency officials.
Sidump'r Trailer Company, Inc., Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance
Document Number: 2013-08958
Type: Notice
Date: 2013-04-17
Agency: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of Transportation
Sidump'r Trailer Company, Inc. (Sidump'r) has determined that the rear impact guards on certain trailers that it manufactured between January 10, 2006 and April 13, 2007 do not comply with paragraph S5.1 of 49 CFR 571.224, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 224, Rear Impact Protection. Sidump'r has filed an appropriate report pursuant to 49 CFR Part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports, dated April 20, 2007. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118 (d) and 30120 (h) and the rule implementing those provisions at 49 CFR Part 556, Sidump'r 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 a petition was published, with a 30-day public comment period, on August 16, 2007, in the Federal Register (72 FR 46127). The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) received no comments. To view the petition and all supporting documents log onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Web site at: http:// www.regulations.gov/. Then follow the online search instructions to locate docket number ``NHTSA-2007-28927.'' For further information on this decision, contact Mr. Luis Figueroa, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, NHTSA, telephone (202) 366-5298, facsimile (202) 366-1002. Trailers Involved: Affected are approximately 416 model 223, 325 and 425 side dump bulk material hauling trailers manufactured by Sidump'r between January 10, 2006 and April 13, 2007. Summary of Sidump'r's Analysis and Arguments: Sidump'r first became aware of the noncompliance of these trailers when Sidump'r received a customer inquiry on or about February 27, 2007 regarding the rear impact guards installed on the subject trailers. As a result of this inquiry, Sidump'r stated that it commenced a thorough engineering evaluation of the rear end of the subject trailers to determine whether they meet the requirements of FMVSS No. 224. Following this engineering evaluation and after consultation with its counsel, Sidump'r determined that the trailers do not comply with FMVSS No. 224. Specifically, Sidump'r has determined that the location of those guards does not meet the requirements of paragraph S5.1.3 of FMVSS No. 224 because there is a ``push block'' located at the rear of the trailer chassis extending 23.62 inches (600 mm) to the rear of the rear impact guard. Sidump'r stated that it considered the ``push blocks'' to be the ``rear extremities'' of the subject trailers. Therefore, it concluded that the rearmost surface of the horizontal members of the rear impact guards are located 11.62 inches (295 mm) too far forward of the ``rear extremity'' of the trailers to conform with the requirements of paragraph S5.1.3. Sidump'r also examined the possibility of the ``push block'' itself serving as the rear impact guard. It determined that the ``push block'' itself does not constitute a compliant rear impact guard as originally installed because it exceeds the maximum ground clearance of 22 inches (560 mm) allowed by paragraph S5.1.2 of FMVSS No. 224 by 1.5 inches (38 mm). Sidump'r stated that it has corrected the problem that caused the noncompliance in the trailers they produced after April 20, 2007 by modifying the design of the trailers to incorporate an additional horizontal member mounted to the underside of the ``push block'' assembly. Sidump'r also stated that it believes this noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety and that no further corrective action is warranted due to the geometric characteristics of the trailers and the nature of their field usage. Specifically, Sidump'r makes the arguments that the overall level of safety of the subject trailers is equivalent to a compliant trailer because their ``push block'' is equipped with a guard-like structure that is comparable to a compliant rear impact guard based on dimensional considerations, and on a simulation of the guard performance \1\ when subjected to the loads required under FMVSS No. 223. Sidump'r additionally supported its position that the overall level of safety of the noncompliant trailers is equivalent to comparable trailers by comparing them to road construction controlled horizontal discharge trailers and by citing several previous decisions where NHTSA granted temporary exemptions from compliance with FMVSS No. 224 as the result of petitions filed under 49 CFR Part 555 Temporary Exemption From Motor Vehicle Safety and Bumper Standards for noncompliances that it considers similar in consequence to those covered in this petition.
Notice of Receipt of Petition for Decision That Nonconforming 1991 Volkswagen Transporter Multi-Purpose Vehicles Are Eligible for Importation
Document Number: 2013-08957
Type: Notice
Date: 2013-04-17
Agency: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of Transportation
This document announces receipt by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) of a petition for a decision that nonconforming 1991 Volkswagen Transporter Multi-Purpose Passenger Vehicles 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 that were originally manufactured for sale in the United States and that were certified by their manufacturer as complying with the safety standards (1991 Volkswagen Vanagon Multi- Purpose Passenger Vehicles) and they are capable of being readily altered to conform to the standards.
OSRAM SYLVANIA Products, Inc.; Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance
Document Number: 2013-08956
Type: Notice
Date: 2013-04-17
Agency: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of Transportation
OSRAM SYLVANIA Products, Inc., (OSRAM SYLVANIA), has determined that certain Type ``H11 C'' light sources that it manufactured fail to meet the requirements of paragraph S7.7 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment. OSRAM SYLVANIA has filed an appropriate report pursuant to 49 CFR Part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports, dated August 24, 2010. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) (see implementing rule at 49 CFR part 556), OSRAM SYLVANIA 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 January 25, 2011 in the Federal Register (76 FR 4420). No comments were received. To view the petition, and all supporting documents log onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Web site at: http://www.regulations.gov/. Then follow the online search instructions to locate docket number ``NHTSA-2010-0177.'' For further information on this decision contact Mr. Michael Cole, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone (202) 366-2334, facsimile (202) 366-7002. Lamps Involved: OSRAM SYLVANIA estimates that approximately 28,412 ``H11 C'' light sources (bulbs) that it manufactured on June 23 and 24, 2010 are affected. All of the affected light sources were manufactured by OSRAM GmbH, Industriestrasse, Herbrechtingen, Germany. Summary of Osram Sylvania's Analysis and Arguments: OSRAM SYLVANIA described the noncompliance as the mismarking of type ``H11 C'' lighting sources as type ``H11.'' In its petition OSRAM SYLVANIA argues that the noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety for the following reasons: (1) The noncompliance in this case pertains solely to the failure of the subject light sources to meet the applicable marking requirements. (2) ``H11 C'' light sources are designed to be completely interchangeable with the original ``H11'' light sources. When Philips Lighting B.V., submitted its modification to the ``H11'' light source specification that became the ``H11 C'' specification it certified that use of the ``H11 C'' light source will not create a noncompliance with any requirement of FMVSS No. 108 when used to replace an ``H11'' light source in a headlamp certified by its manufacturer as conforming to all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. Subject ``H11 C'' light sources are designed to conform to Part 564 Docket NHTSA 98-3397- 81 including the additional requirements under paragraph IX. In other words, inadvertent installation of a subject ``H11 C'' light source in place of an ``H11'' light sourceor vice versawill not create a noncompliance with any of the performance or interchangeability requirements of FMVSS No. 108 (including beam pattern photometrics) or otherwise present an increased risk to motor vehicle safety. (3) ``H11 C'' light sources have the same filament position, dimension and tolerances, capsule and capsule support dimensions, bulb base interchangeability dimensions, seal specifications, and electrical specifications as the ``H11.'' The only difference between the ``H11'' light source and the ``H11 C'' light source is that the ``H11 C'' provides for the light transmitting portion of the glass wall to incorporate a color controlling optical filter in order to improve visibility.\1\
Pilkington North America, Inc., Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance
Document Number: 2013-08955
Type: Notice
Date: 2013-04-17
Agency: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of Transportation
Pilkington North America, Inc. (Pilkington) has determined that certain replacement rear windows manufactured for model year 2006 through 2009 Honda Civic two-door coupe passenger cars manufactured on April 16, 2008, do not fully comply with paragraphs S6.2 and S6.3 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 205 Glazing Materials. Pilkington has filed an appropriate report pursuant to 49 CFR Part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports, dated February 4, 2009. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and the rule implementing those provisions at 49 CFR part 556, Pilkington 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 Pilkington's petition was published, with a 30-day public comment period, on May 20, 2009, in the Federal Register (74 FR 23775). No comments were received. To view the petition, and all supporting documents log onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Web site at: http://www.regulations.gov/. Then follow the online search instructions to locate docket number ``NHTSA-2009-0092.'' For further information on this decision, contact Mr. Luis Figueroa, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, NHTSA, telephone (202) 366-5298, facsimile (202) 366-7002. Equipment Involved: Affected are approximately 206 replacement rear windows (National Auto Glass Specifications (NAGS) part number FB22692GTY) for model year 2006 through 2009 Honda Civic two-door coupe passenger cars that were manufactured at Pilkington's Versailles, Kentucky plant on April 16, 2008. Summary of Pilkington's Analysis and Arguments: Pilkington explains that the noncompliance for the 205 replacement rear windows exists due to Pilkington's failure to label the replacement rear windows with the marks required by section 7 of ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996, the symbol ``DOT,'' and its NHTSA assigned manufacturer code mark. As of the time of the petition, Paragraphs S6.2 and S6.3 of FMVSS No. 205 require in pertinent part: S6.2 A prime glazing manufacturer certifies its glazing by adding to the marks required by section 7 of ANSI/SAE Z26.1 1996, in letters and numerals of the same size, the symbol ``DOT'' and a manufacturer's code mark that NHTSA assigns to the manufacturer. NHTSA will assign a code mark to a manufacturer after the manufacturer submits a written request to the Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, * * * S6.3 A manufacturer or distributor who cuts a section of glazing material to which this standard applies, for use in a motor vehicle or camper, must (a) Mark that material in accordance with section 7 of ANSI/SAE Z26.1 1996; and (b) Certify that its product complies with this standard in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 30115. Pilkington states that it believes that this noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety for the following reasons: (1) The noncompliances relate solely to product monograms or markings and the noncompliant rear windows. Pilkington has tested a number of the parts in its possession and confirmed that they meet or exceed all other applicable performance requirements in FMVSS No. 205. (2) NHTSA has previously granted other exemptions for noncompliant product labeling. In the past, the agency has recognized that the failure to meet labeling requirements often is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. (3) The information contained in the noncompliant product markings is not required in order for consumers to operate their vehicles safely. Pilkington also stated its belief that the noncompliance will not interfere with any future tracing of the windows because Pilkington is only one of three manufacturers of rear windows for this particular Honda Civic, the other two being PGW (Pittsburgh Glass Works, formerly known as PPG) and Auto Temp, Inc. Given that the windows produced by the two other manufacturers will be properly marked, Pilkington's unlabeled rear windows should easily be identified and traced, if necessary, should any future defects or noncompliances be discovered. Discussion: NHTSA has reviewed and accepts Pilkington's analyses that this noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Pilkington has provided documentation that the windows do comply with all other safety performance requirements of the standard, except the labeling. This documentation is a surrogate for the certification labeling. NHTSA believes that the lack of labeling would not result in inadvertent replacement of the windows with the wrong glazing. Broken tempered glass can readily be identified as tempered glass, rather than plastic or laminated glass. Anyone who intended to replace the window with an identical tempered glass window would have to contact Pilkington for the proper part, since tempered glass windows cannot be easily manufactured by small field facilities. At that point, Pilkington, or their representative, would be able to provide the correct replacement window by use of their parts system. NHTSA Decision: In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Pilkington has met its burden of persuasion that the FMVSS No. 205 noncompliance in the noncompliant windows described in Pilkington's Noncompliance Information Report is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Pilkington's petition is hereby granted and the petitioner is exempted from the obligation of providing notification of, and a remedy for, that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120. 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. Therefore, this decision only applies to the 206 noncompliant windows that Pilkington no longer controlled at the time that it determined that a noncompliance existed in the subject vehicles.
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Matters Incorporated by Reference
Document Number: 2013-08356
Type: Rule
Date: 2013-04-12
Agency: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of Transportation
On January 6, 2012, NHTSA published a final rule updating and consolidating all of the references to the many standards and practices that are incorporated by reference into the Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSSs). Additionally, the final rule removed an obsolete FMVSS, No. 208a, as well as various obsolete provisions in other FMVSSs. The agency received a petition for reconsideration of that final rule from the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers. The petitioner asserts that the amendments to one FMVSS are not based on the latest version of that FMVSS and further asserts that several references to standards are out of date or contain minor omissions. The petitioner requests that technical amendments be made to address these issues. In response to the petition, this document amends certain paragraphs in FMVSS No. 202a to reflect the substantive language of the FMVSS in effect before the effective date of the January 6, 2012 final rule, with the addition of the cross-references to the consolidated list of materials incorporated by reference. The agency is denying the other requests made in the petition. This document also makes technical amendments to correct minor errors in the consolidated list of incorporated material and some of the FMVSS sections that reference this list.
Petition for Exemption From the Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard; BMW of North America, LLC
Document Number: 2013-08225
Type: Notice
Date: 2013-04-09
Agency: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of Transportation
This document grants in full the BMW of North America, LLC (BMW) petition for exemption of the X4 vehicle line in accordance with 49 CFR part 543, Exemption from the Theft Prevention Standard. This petition is granted because the agency has determined that the antitheft device to be placed on the line as standard equipment is likely to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance with the parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR part 541). BMW requested confidential treatment for specific information in its petition that the agency will address by separate letter.
NHTSA Activities Under the United Nations World Forum for the Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations 1998 Global Agreement
Document Number: 2013-08221
Type: Notice
Date: 2013-04-09
Agency: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of Transportation
NHTSA is publishing this notice to inform the public of the upcoming scheduled meetings of the World Forum for the Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations (WP.29) and its Working Parties of Experts for calendar year 2013. It also provides the most recent status of activities under the Program of Work of the 1998 Global Agreement (to which the United States is a signatory Contracting Party) and requests comments on those activities. Publication of this information is in accordance with NHTSA's Statement of Policy regarding Agency Policy Goals and Public Participation in the Implementation of the 1998 Global Agreement on Global Technical Regulations (GTR).
New Car Assessment Program (NCAP)
Document Number: 2013-07766
Type: Proposed Rule
Date: 2013-04-05
Agency: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of Transportation
The U.S. New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) provides comparative information on the safety of new vehicles to assist consumers with vehicle purchasing decisions and encourage motor vehicle manufacturers to make safety improvements. To maintain the relevance and effectiveness of NCAP, NHTSA has periodically updated the program, most recently in model year 2011. In response to the rapid development of vehicle safety technologies, especially in the area of crash avoidance, the agency is once again requesting public comments in order to help identify the potential areas for improvement to the program that have the greatest potential for producing safety benefits. This notice lists and describes potential areas of study for improving NCAP. The agency will use the comments it receives to aid it in developing a notice proposing near term upgrades to NCAP. The agency will also use the comments received in response to this notice to help it in developing a draft 5- year plan for the NCAP program outlining research that the agency plans to conduct as well as longer term upgrades it intends to pursue making to NCAP.
Notice of Receipt of Petition for Decision That Nonconforming 2010 BMW Z4 Passenger Cars Are Eligible for Importation
Document Number: 2013-07847
Type: Notice
Date: 2013-04-04
Agency: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of Transportation
This document announces receipt by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) of a petition for a decision that 2010 BMW Z4 passenger cars 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 that were originally manufactured for 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 2010 BMW Z4) and they are capable of being readily altered to conform to the standards.
Notice of Receipt of Petition for Decision That Nonconforming 2012 Porsche GT3RS Passenger Cars Are Eligible for Importation
Document Number: 2013-07846
Type: Notice
Date: 2013-04-04
Agency: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of Transportation
This document announces receipt by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) of a petition for a decision that nonconforming 2012 Porsche GT3RS passenger cars 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 that were originally manufactured for 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 2012 Porsche GT3RS) and they are capable of being readily altered to conform to the standards.
Notice of Receipt of Petition for Decision that Nonconforming 2007 Ford Escape Multi-Purpose Passenger Vehicles are Eligible for Importation
Document Number: 2013-07844
Type: Notice
Date: 2013-04-04
Agency: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of Transportation
This document announces receipt by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) of a petition for a decision that nonconforming 2007 Ford Escape Multi-Purpose Passenger Vehicles 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 that were originally manufactured for 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 same 2007 Ford Escape Multi-Purpose Passenger Vehicles) and they are capable of being readily altered to conform to the standards.
Reports, Forms, and Recordkeeping Requirements
Document Number: 2013-07762
Type: Notice
Date: 2013-04-03
Agency: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of Transportation
Before a Federal agency can collect certain information from the public, it must receive approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Under procedures established by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, before seeking OMB approval, Federal agencies must solicit public comment on proposed collections of information, including extensions and reinstatement of previously approved collections. This document describes an existing collection of information for an existing regulation for the aftermarket modification of vehicles to accommodate people with disabilities, for which NHTSA intends to seek renewed OMB approval.