38082 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 145 / Thursday, July 30, 2009 / Notices 

Issued on: July 24, 2009. 

Judi Kane, 

Acting Chief, Management Programs and 

Analysis Division. 

[FR Doc. E9–18144 Filed 7–29–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2009–0114; Notice 1] 

Bentley Motors, Inc., Receipt of 

Petition for Decision of 

Inconsequential Noncompliance 

Bentley Motors, Inc. (Bentley) has 

determined that certain passenger car 

headlamps manufactured for the 2005– 

2008 Bentley Arnage and Azure 

passenger cars do not fully comply with 

paragraph 49 CFR 571.108, Federal 

Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 

No. 108 Lamps, Reflective Devices and 

Associated Equipment. Bentley has filed 

an appropriate report pursuant to 49 

CFR part 573, Defect and 

Noncompliance Responsibility and 

Reports. 

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

30120(h) (see implementing rule at 49 

CFR part 556), Bentley 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 Bentley’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. 

Bentley estimated that 1,115 model 

year 2005–2008 Bentley Arnage and 

Azure passenger cars manufactured 

between January 13, 2004 and 

November 9, 2007 are involved. Bentley 

also stated that based on its preliminary 

investigation it believes that only 50% 

of those vehicles have the subject 

noncompliance. 

Paragraphs S7.8.5.3(b) of FMVSS No. 

108 require in pertinent part: 

S7.8.5.3 Visual/optical aiming. Each 

visually/optically aimable headlamp shall be 

designed to conform to the following 

requirements: * * * 

(b) Horizontal aim, lower beam. There shall 

be no adjustment of horizontal aim unless the 

headlamp is equipped with a horizontal 

VHAD. If the headlamp has a VHAD, it shall 

be set to zero. 

Bentley explained that the 

noncompliance with FMVSS No. 108 is 

that horizontal aim adjustment of the 

subject lower beams is possible due to 

the absence of a blanking cap over the 

lower beam horizontal adjustment 

screw. 

Bentley also stated that it discovered 

this noncompliance as a result of a 

special production line quality audit 

investigation. 

Bentley further states that it believes 

that this noncompliance is 

inconsequential to motor vehicle safety 

for three reasons. First, the adjustment 

screw is always hidden by an engine 

cover when the vehicle’s hood is open. 

Second, when the engine cover is 

removed the screw is still hidden down 

a small dark guide hole, so the screw is 

not immediately visible and it is not 

immediately obvious that a disabling 

cap is not present. Last, the workshop 

manual clearly identifies that this screw 

is not functional on North American 

specification vehicles so no vehicle 

repairer would ever need to try to search 

for and adjust the screw in question. 

Bentley also has informed NHTSA 

that it has corrected the problem that 

caused this noncompliance. 

In summation, Bentley states that it 

believes that the noncompliance is 

inconsequential to motor vehicle safety 

and that no corrective action is 

warranted. 

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 am to 5 pm 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. 

Anyone is able to search the 

electronic form of all 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.). DOT’s 

complete Privacy Act Statement in the 

Federal Register published on April 11, 

2000 (65 FR 19477–78). 

You may view documents submitted 

to a docket at the address and times 

given above. You may also view the 

documents on the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov by following the 

online instructions for accessing the 

dockets available at that Web site. 

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: August 31, 

2009. 

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

delegations of authority at CFR 1.50 and 

501.8. 

Issued on: July 23, 2009. 

Claude H. Harris, 

Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance. 

[FR Doc. E9–18145 Filed 7–29–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

[Summary Notice No. PE–2009–31] 

Petition for Exemption; Summary of 

Petition Received 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES