Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 228 / Monday, November 29, 2010 / Notices 73159 

1Continental Tire North America, Inc. 

(Continental) is a replacement equipment 

manufacturer and importer that is incorporated in 

the State of Ohio. 

denies its exemption petition, CI seeks 

a waiver from the requirements of 49 

U.S.C. 21103(a)(1) as it applies to 

employees performing covered service 

at its Channelview facility, for the 

purpose of conducting a pilot project. 

Both petitions may be viewed at 

http://www.regulations.gov under the 

docket number listed above. 

CI’s Petition for Statutory Exemption 

In its petition for statutory exemption, 

CI seeks an exemption from the 

statutory requirement contained in 49 

U.S.C. 21103(a)(1), limiting train 

employees to a total of 276 on-duty 

hours per calendar month, awaiting or 

in deadhead transportation from a duty 

assignment to a place of final release, 

and in any other mandatory service for 

a railroad carrier, and from 49 U.S.C. 

21103(a)(4), which requires railroads to 

provide train employees 48 hours of rest 

after an employee has initiated an onduty period on 6 consecutive days and 

72 hours of rest after an employee has 

initiated an on-duty period on 7 

consecutive days. In support of its 

exemption request, CI states that its 

Channelview facility has 15 or fewer 

employees covered by the HSL and that 

the facility is operated independently of 

other CI facilities. CI further explains 

that its employees subject to the HSL 

spend the majority of their on-duty time 

performing non-covered service (e.g., 

unloading grain from stationery railcars, 

general housekeeping duties in 

accordance with the Occupational 

Safety and Health Administration’s 

combustible dust standards) and that 

covered service accounts for less than 

12 percent of covered employees’ 

monthly hours worked. CI also explains 

that with certain seasonal exceptions, 

employees at its Channelview facility 

generally work in two shifts that rotate 

every 2 weeks; from 7 a.m.–3 p.m. and 

from 3 p.m.–11 p.m. (extended to 3 a.m. 

if needed). CI asserts that the 

employees’ current work schedules 

ensure safe operations by providing the 

employees greater control over rest 

periods and the scheduling of personal 

affairs and that the statutory restrictions 

of 49 U.S.C. 21103(a)(1) and 21103(a)(4) 

unnecessarily lower the earning 

potential of employees subject to the 

HSL as compared to other workers at the 

facility. 

CI’s Petition for Waiver 

In its petition for waiver, in lieu of 

using a calendar month for measuring 

the on-duty hours of an employee 

pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 21103(a)(1), CI 

proposes to implement a pilot program 

for establishing an alternative 

calculation period for the 276-hour 

monthly limitation. CI and its 

employees propose a pilot program that 

would divide a ‘‘calendar month’’ into 

two measuring periods or groups. The 

first group would calculate its time 

toward the 276-hour monthly limitation 

from the first day of each month to the 

last day of each month. The second 

group would calculate its time toward 

the 276-hour monthly limitation from 

the 15th day of a month to the 14th day 

of the following month. By staggering 

the calculation of the 276-hour monthly 

limitation, CI notes that the pilot 

program would ensure that not all 

employees reach the monthly limitation 

at the same time. 

CI included with its petitions, 

documentation indicating that its 

employees supported the request for 

relief. (49 U.S.C. 21103(a)(1) and 21103 

(a)(4)). As previously stated, the 

requests for relief are specially limited 

to CI’s Channelview, TX, facility and, as 

such, the other facilities of CI are not 

covered by the requests. 

Interested parties are invited to 

participate in these proceedings by 

submitting written views, data, or 

comments. FRA does not anticipate 

scheduling a public hearing in 

connection with these proceedings since 

the facts do not appear to warrant a 

hearing. If any interested party desires 

an opportunity for oral comment, they 

should notify FRA, in writing, before 

the end of the comment period and 

specify the basis for their request. 

All communications concerning these 

proceedings should identify the 

appropriate docket number (e.g., Waiver 

Petition Docket Number FRA–2010– 

0027) and may be submitted by any of 

the following methods: 

• Web site: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: Docket Operations Facility, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue, SE., W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Room W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. 

Communications received within 45 

days of the date of this notice will be 

considered by FRA before final action is 

taken. Comments received after that 

date will be considered as far as 

practicable. All written communications 

concerning these proceedings are 

available for examination during regular 

business hours (9 a.m.–5 p.m.) at the 

above facility. All documents in the 

public docket are also available for 

inspection and copying on the Internet 

at the docket facility’s Web site at 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

Anyone is able to search the 

electronic form of any written 

communications and comments 

received into any of our dockets by the 

name of the individual submitting the 

comment (or signing the comment, if 

submitted on behalf of an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). You may 

review DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

Statement in the Federal Register 

published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 

65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78). 

Issued in Washington, DC, on November 

22, 2010. 

Robert C. Lauby, 

Deputy Associate Administrator for 

Regulatory and Legislative Operations. 

[FR Doc. 2010–29826 Filed 11–26–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2010–0153; Notice 1] 

Continental Tire North America, Inc., 

Receipt of Petition for Decision of 

Inconsequential Noncompliance 

Continental Tire North America, Inc., 

(Continental),1 has determined that 

certain passenger car replacement tires 

manufactured in 2009 do not fully 

comply with paragraph S5.5(b) of 

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 

(FMVSS) No. 139, New Pneumatic 

Radial Tires for Light Vehicles. 

Continental has filed an appropriate 

report pursuant to 49 CFR Part 573, 

Defect and Noncompliance 

Responsibility and Reports, dated 

August 10, 2010. 

Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 

30120(h) (see implementing rule at 49 

CFR part 556), Continental 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 Continental’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 17,121 

size 235/45ZR17 94W Continental brand 

Extremecontact DWS model passenger 

car tires manufactured from March 2009 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

73160 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 228 / Monday, November 29, 2010 / Notices 

2Continental’s petition, which was filed under 49 

CFR Part 556, requests an agency decision to 

exempt Continental as a replacement equipment 

manufacturer from the notification and recall 

responsibilities of 49 CFR Part 573 for the 16,325 

tires that were delivered to its customers in the 

United States. However, the agency cannot relieve 

Continental distributors of the prohibitions on the 

sale, offer for sale, or introduction or delivery for 

introduction into interstate commerce of the 

noncompliant tires under their control after 

Continental recognized that the subject 

noncompliance existed. Those tires must be brought 

into conformance, exported, or destroyed. In 

addition, any of the affected tires that Continental 

has not delivered to its customers must be brought 

into compliance, exported or destroyed. 

to October 2009 at Continental’s plant 

located in Camac ̧ari- BA, Brasil. A total 

of approximately 16,325 of these tires 

have been delivered to Continental’s 

customers in the United States and 

Canada. 

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, 

these provisions only apply to the 

16,325 2 tires that have already passed 

from the manufacturer to an owner, 

purchaser, or dealer. 

Paragraph S5.5(b) of FMVSS No. 139 

requires in pertinent part: 

S5.5 Tire markings. Except as specified in 

paragraphs (a) through (i) of S5.5, each tire 

must be marked on each sidewall with the 

information specified in S5.5(a) through (d) 

and on one sidewall with the information 

specified in S5.5(e) through (i) according to 

the phase-in schedule specified in S7 of this 

standard. The markings must be placed 

between the maximum section width and the 

bead on at least one sidewall, unless the 

maximum section width of the tire is located 

in an area that is not more than one-fourth 

of the distance from the bead to the shoulder 

of the tire. If the maximum section width 

falls within that area, those markings must 

appear between the bead and a point one-half 

the distance from the bead to the shoulder of 

the tire, on at least one sidewall. The 

markings must be in letters and numerals not 

less than 0.078 inches high and raised above 

or sunk below the tire surface not less than 

0.015 inches* * * 

(b) The tire size designation as listed in the 

documents and publications specified in 

S4.1.1 of this standard; 

Continental explains that the 

noncompliance is that, due to a mold 

labeling error, the sidewall marking on 

the reference side of the tires incorrectly 

identifies the tire size code as ‘‘658R 

3VR’’ when in fact it should be 

identified as ‘‘658P 3VR’’ in the tread 

area of the tires as required by 

paragraph S5.5(b). 

Continental also explains that while 

the non-compliant tires are mislabeled, 

all of the tires included in this petition 

meet or exceed the performance 

requirements of FMVSS No. 139. 

Continental argues that this 

noncompliance is inconsequential to 

motor vehicle safety because the 

noncompliant sidewall marking does 

not create an unsafe condition and all 

other labeling requirements have been 

met. 

Continental points out that NHTSA 

has previously granted similar petitions 

for non-compliances in sidewall 

marking. 

Continental additionally states that it 

has corrected the affected tire molds and 

all future production will have the 

correct material shown on the sidewall. 

In summation, Continental believes 

that the described noncompliance of its 

tires to meet the requirements of FMVSS 

No. 139 is inconsequential to motor 

vehicle safety, and that its petition, to 

exempt from providing recall 

notification of noncompliance as 

required by 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 

remedying the recall noncompliance as 

required by 49 U.S.C. 30120, should be 

granted. 

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 http:// 

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 http:// 

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 

http://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: December 29, 

2010. 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: 

delegations of authority at CFR 1.50 and 

501.8. 

Issued on: November 19, 2010. 

Claude H. Harris, 

Acting Associate Administrator for 

Enforcement. 

[FR Doc. 2010–29879 Filed 11–26–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 

Safety Administration 

[Docket No. PHMSA–2010–0354] 

Pipeline Safety: Information Collection 

Activities 

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous 

Materials Safety Administration, DOT. 

ACTION: Notice and request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES