75370 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 211 / Thursday, November 2, 2023 / Notices 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Maritime Administration 

Decommissioning and Disposition of 

the National Historic Landmark 

Nuclear Ship Savannah; Notice of 

Information Session 

AGENCY: Maritime Administration, 

Department of Transportation. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Maritime Administration 

(MARAD) announces an information 

session for the National Historic 

Landmark (NHL) Nuclear Ship 

Savannah (NSS). MARAD is 

decommissioning the nuclear power 

plant of the NSS, which will result in 

the termination of the ship’s Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission (NRC) license, 

making the ship available for 

disposition, including potential 

conveyance or preservation. The 

information session will provide 

interested parties an opportunity to ask 

questions about the NSS to assist in 

determining if they may wish to 

consider acquiring the ship for 

preservation purposes, as prescribed in 

the recently executed Programmatic 

Agreement (PA) covering the 

decommissioning and disposition of the 

ship. 

DATES: The information session will be 

held on November 18, 2023, from 10 

a.m. to 4 p.m. eastern standard time 

(EST). Requests to attend the 

information session must be received 

one (1) week in advance, by November 

11, 2023, to facilitate entry or to receive 

instructions to participate online. 

Requests for accommodations for a 

disability must also be received one (1) 

week in advance. 

ADDRESSES: The information session 

will be held onboard the NSS, online, or 

by phone. The NSS is located at Pier 13 

Canton Marine Terminal, 4601 Newgate 

Avenue, Baltimore, MD 21124. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Erhard W. Koehler, (202) 680–2066 or 

via email at marad.history@dot.gov. You 

may send mail to N.S. Savannah/ 

Savannah Technical Staff, Pier 13 

Canton Marine Terminal, 4601 Newgate 

Avenue, Baltimore, MD 21224, ATTN: 

Erhard Koehler. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

The decommissioning and disposition 

of the NSS is an Undertaking under 

Section 106 of the NHPA. Section 106 

requires that federal agencies consider 

views of the public regarding their 

Undertakings; therefore, in 2020, 

MARAD established a Federal docket at 

https://www.regulations.gov/docket/ 

MARAD-2020-0133 to provide public 

notice about the NSS Undertaking. The 

federal docket was also used in 2021 to 

solicit public comments on the future 

uses of the NSS. MARAD is continuing 

to use this same docket to take in public 

comment, share information, and post 

agency actions. 

The NHPA Programmatic Agreement 

(PA) for the Decommissioning and 

Disposition of the NSS is available on 

the MARAD docket located at 

www.regulations.gov under docket id 

‘‘MARAD–2020–0133.’’ The PA 

stipulates a deliberative process by 

which MARAD will consider the 

disposition of the NSS. This process 

requires MARAD to make an 

affirmative, good-faith effort to preserve 

the NSS. To that end, a Notice of 

Availability/Request for Information 

(NOA/RFI) was developed in 

accordance with Stipulation IV of the 

PA and was published in the Federal 

Register. The purpose of the NOA/RFI 

process is to determine preservation 

interest from entities that may wish to 

acquire the NSS. 

II. Agenda 

The agenda will include (1) welcome 

and introductions; (2) information about 

the ship; and (3) questions and answers. 

The agenda will also be posted on 

MARAD’s website at https://

www.maritime.dot.gov/outreach/ 

history/maritime-administrationhistory-program and on the MARAD 

docket located at www.regulations.gov 

under docket id ‘‘MARAD–2020–0133.’’ 

III. Public Participation 

The information session will be open 

to the public. Members of the public 

who wish to attend in person or online 

must RSVP to the person listed in the 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section with your name and affiliation. 

Members of the public may also call-in 

using the following number: +1–312– 

600–3163, Phone Conference ID: 

531709929#. 

Special services. The NSS is not 

compliant with the Americans with 

Disabilities Act (ADA). The ship has 

some capability to accommodate 

persons with impaired mobility. If you 

require accommodations to attend PRG 

meetings in-person, please contact the 

person listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section. The U.S. 

Department of Transportation is 

committed to providing all participants 

equal access to this meeting. If you need 

alternative formats or services such as 

sign language, interpretation, or other 

ancillary aids, please contact the person 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section. 

(Authority: 49 CFR 1.81 and 1.93; 36 CFR 

part 800; 5 U.S.C. 552b.) 

By Order of the Maritime Administrator. 

T. Mitchell Hudson, Jr., 

Secretary, Maritime Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2023–24203 Filed 11–1–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–81–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2020–0090; Notice 2] 

Nissan North America, Inc., Grant of 

Petition for Decision of 

Inconsequential Noncompliance 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Grant of petition. 

SUMMARY: Nissan North America, Inc. 

(Nissan) has determined that certain 

replacement windshield glass panes 

manufactured by Central Glass Co., Ltd., 

outsourced to Japan Tempered & 

Laminated Glass Co., Ltd., and sold to 

Nissan as replacement parts for use in 

certain Nissan motor vehicles do not 

fully comply with Federal Motor 

Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 

205, Glazing Materials. Nissan filed a 

noncompliance report dated June 29, 

2020. Nissan subsequently petitioned 

NHTSA on July 29, 2020, for a decision 

that the subject noncompliance is 

inconsequential as it relates to motor 

vehicle safety. This notice announces 

grant of Nissan’s petition. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jack 

Chern, Office of Vehicle Safety 

Compliance, the National Highway 

Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

(202) 366–0661, jack.chern@dot.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Overview 

Nissan has determined that certain 

replacement windshield glass panes 

manufactured by Central Glass Co., Ltd., 

outsourced to Japan Tempered & 

Laminated Glass Co., Ltd., and sold to 

Nissan as replacement parts for use in 

certain Nissan motor vehicles do not 

fully comply with the requirements of 

paragraph S6.2 of FMVSS No. 205, 

Glazing Materials (49 CFR 571.205). 

Nissan filed a noncompliance report 

dated June 29, 2020, pursuant to 49 CFR 

part 573, Defect and Noncompliance 

Responsibility and Reports. Nissan 

subsequently petitioned NHTSA on July 

29, 2020, for an exemption from the 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 211 / Thursday, November 2, 2023 / Notices 75371 

1See Mercedes-Benz, U.S.A., L.L.C.; Denial of 

Application for Decision of Inconsequential 

Noncompliance, 66 FR 38342 (July 23, 2001) 

(rejecting argument that noncompliance was 

inconsequential because of the small number of 

vehicles affected); Aston Martin Lagonda Ltd.; 

Denial of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential 

Noncompliance, 81 FR 41370 (June 24, 2016) 

(noting that situations involving individuals 

trapped in motor vehicles—while infrequent—are 

consequential to safety); Morgan 3 Wheeler Ltd.; 

Denial of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential 

Noncompliance, 81 FR 21663, 21664 (Apr. 12, 

2016) (rejecting argument that petition should be 

granted because the vehicle was produced in very 

low numbers and likely to be operated on a limited 

basis). 

2See Gen. Motors Corp.; Ruling on Petition for 

Determination of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 

69 FR 19897, 19900 (Apr. 14, 2004); Cosco Inc.; 

Denial of Application for Decision of 

Inconsequential Noncompliance, 64 FR 29408, 

29409 (June 1, 1999). 

notification and remedy requirements of 

49 U.S.C. chapter 301 on the basis that 

this noncompliance is inconsequential 

as it relates to motor vehicle safety, 

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

30120(h) and 49 CFR part 556, 

Exemption for Inconsequential Defect or 

Noncompliance. 

Notice of receipt of Nissan’s petition 

was published with a 30-day public 

comment period, on April 13, 2021, in 

the Federal Register (86 FR 19319). No 

comments were received. To view the 

petition and all supporting documents 

log onto the Federal Docket 

Management System (FDMS) website at 

https://www.regulations.gov/. Then 

follow the online search instructions to 

locate docket number ‘‘NHTSA–2020– 

0090.’’ 

II. Windshields Involved 

Approximately 1,934 replacement 

windshield glass panes sold as 

replacement service parts, manufactured 

between April 1, 2000, and April 30, 

2012, are potentially involved. These 

replacement windshield glass panes 

were manufactured by Central Glass Co., 

Ltd., who subsequently outsourced to a 

subsidiary company, Japan Tempered & 

Laminated Glass Co., Ltd., and sold to 

Nissan as replacement parts for Nissan 

motor vehicles. 

III. Noncompliance 

Nissan stated that the glass 

manufacturer, Central Glass Co., Ltd., 

outsourced glass production to a 

subsidiary company, Japan Tempered & 

Laminated Glass Co., Ltd. (JTLG), in 

April 2000. Instead of using its own 

certification mark ‘‘166,’’ JTLG used the 

certification mark ‘‘44,’’ which is 

assigned to its parent company, Central 

Glass Co. 

IV. Rule Requirements 

Paragraph S6.2 of FMVSS No. 205 

includes the requirements that a prime 

glazing manufacturer add a 

manufacturer’s code mark, that NHTSA 

assigns to the manufacturer, to its 

glazing. 

V. Summary of Nissan’s Petition 

The following views and arguments 

presented in this section, ‘‘V. Summary 

of Nissan’s Petition,’’ are the views and 

arguments provided by Nissan and do 

not reflect the views of the Agency. 

Nissan describes the subject 

noncompliance and contends that the 

noncompliance is inconsequential as it 

relates to motor vehicle safety. 

In support of its petition, Nissan 

offers the following reasoning: 

1. Nissan states that although the 

manufacturer’s code mark is incorrect, 

the certification mark affixed to the 

subject parts features the correct AS 

Item number and model number. In 

addition, the windshield glass panes 

were fabricated in full compliance with 

the technical requirements of 49 CFR 

571.205 applicable to laminated glass 

for use in motor vehicles. 

2. Nissan says that many of the 1,934 

windshield glass components that may 

contain an incorrect manufacturer’s 

code mark are located in non-U.S. 

markets. For this reason, Nissan believes 

the actual number of subject parts is 

substantially lower than the 1,934 

possible windshield glass panes because 

only a small number of potentially 

affected windshield glass panes were 

shipped to the U.S. market for use as 

service parts between April 1, 2000, and 

April 30, 2012. 

3. Nissan also states that the part 

number remains accurate, despite the 

manufacturer’s code mark discrepancy. 

The subject noncompliance, 

accordingly, is unlikely to result in the 

use of an incorrect replacement part in 

an OEM application because the part 

would be ordered using Nissan’s unique 

part number and not the ‘‘DOT’’ 

number. In Nissan’s ordering system, 

parts with the incorrect manufacturer’s 

code mark are indistinguishable from 

parts with the correct code. In fact, the 

parts are traceable to Central Glass Co., 

Ltd., since the incorrect code used by 

their subsidiary, JLTG, is the code for 

the parent company, Central Glass Co., 

Ltd. 

4. Nissan believes that there is a low 

likelihood of a vehicle requiring this 

replacement part because the average 

age of potentially affected vehicles (MY 

1991–1999) is 25+ years old. Currently, 

only one replacement windshield glass 

service part (727120M010) is in stock 

and available. However, Nissan 

instructed the Sagamihara Part Center in 

Japan to suspend shipment for this part. 

Even so, if a vehicle previously received 

or were to receive a subject replacement 

part, the part fully complies with the 

technical requirements of 49 CFR 

571.205. In no way is the actual safety 

aspect of the windshield glass 

compromised by the misprinted 

manufacturer’s code mark. 

5. Nissan contends that in similar 

situations, NHTSA has granted the 

applications of other petitioners. For 

example, 80 FR 3737 (January 23, 2015) 

Petition by Custom Glass Solutions 

Upper Sandusky Corporation. Nissan 

cited NHTSA, saying ‘‘NHTSA believes 

that the subject labeling errors are 

inconsequential to motor vehicle safety 

because the marking of glazing as 

‘Tempered’ or ‘Laminated’ is not 

required by FMVSS No. 205, the 

probability of anyone in the United 

States obtaining the subject incorrectly 

marked glazing as replacement glazing 

is very unlikely since the affected 

glazing is specifically designed for use 

in mining vehicles manufactured by 

Atlas Copco in Australia. In addition, 

there is no concern that the wrong 

model number on the subject glazing 

would result in an incorrect 

replacement part being used because 

replacement parts are ordered by 

referring to the glazing part number or 

by identifying the vehicle for which the 

replacement glazing is intended.’’ 

Nissan concludes by again contending 

that the subject noncompliance is 

inconsequential as it relates to motor 

vehicle safety, and that its petition to be 

exempted from providing notification of 

the noncompliance, as required by 49 

U.S.C. 30118, and a remedy for the 

noncompliance, as required by 49 

U.S.C. 30120, should be granted. 

VI. NHTSA’s Analysis 

1. General Principles 

Arguments that only a small number 

of vehicles or items of motor vehicle 

equipment are affected have not 

justified granting an inconsequentiality 

petition.1 Similarly, NHTSA has 

rejected petitions based on the assertion 

that only a small percentage of vehicles 

or items of equipment are likely to 

actually exhibit a noncompliance. The 

percentage of potential occupants that 

could be adversely affected by a 

noncompliance does not determine the 

question of inconsequentiality. Rather, 

the issue to consider is the consequence 

to an occupant or a consumer who is 

exposed to the consequence of that 

noncompliance.2 These considerations 

are also relevant when considering 

whether a defect is inconsequential to 

motor vehicle safety. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
75372 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 211 / Thursday, November 2, 2023 / Notices 

2. Response to the Arguments From 

Nissan 

Paragraph S6.2 of FMVSS No. 205 

requires a prime glazing manufacturer to 

mark its glazing with a manufacturer’s 

code mark that NHTSA assigns to the 

manufacturer. 

Nissan pointed out that many of the 

subject 1,934 windshield glass 

components that may contain an 

incorrect manufacturer’s code mark are 

located in non-U.S. markets. As 

previously stated, NHTSA does not 

consider arguments that the 

noncompliance involves only a small 

number of items of motor vehicle 

equipment when determining whether 

the noncompliance is inconsequential to 

motor vehicle safety. Instead, NHTSA 

considers the consequences of the 

noncompliance and how that may 

impact a consumer exposed to it. For 

purposes of this petition, NHTSA 

considered whether the noncompliance 

impacted the functional safety of the 

impacted windshield and also whether 

the noncompliance would impact any 

potential future recalls. 

First, as part of NHTSA’s 

consideration of Nissan’s petition, 

NHTSA reviewed information 

submitted by Nissan in support of its 

statements that the subject windshields 

met all of the applicable performance 

requirements specified in FMVSS No. 

205. Based on its review of the test data 

submitted by Nissan, NHTSA believes 

that Nissan’s certifications of the safety 

performance of the subject windshields 

were made based on reasonable bases. 

Accordingly, NHTSA has no reason to 

believe that the windshields are 

otherwise noncompliant with the 

performance requirements in FMVSS 

No. 205. 

Second, NHTSA considered whether 

the noncompliance could impact the 

efficiency of a recall if the affected 

windshields were subject to one. Based 

on the information presented, NHTSA 

believes that if the affected windshields 

were subject to a future recall, Nissan or 

consumers would be able to identify the 

affected windshields in order to have 

the recall completed. This is because, 

while the marking does not identify the 

fabricating manufacturer, it does 

identify the parent company and the 

correct model number and would, 

therefore, be traceable to an entity who 

would accept responsibility for 

conducting a recall. Based on the 

foregoing reasons, NHTSA does not 

believe the noncompliance poses a 

consequential risk to motor vehicle 

safety. 

NHTSA also requested that Nissan 

provide information about what Nissan, 

Central Glass Co., Ltd., and Japan 

Tempered & Laminated Glass Co., Ltd. 

(JTLG) are doing to ensure this type of 

noncompliance does not happen again. 

Nissan responded that Central Glass Co. 

has informed Nissan that in the time 

since this issue took place, change 

management policies have been 

implemented, with all new changes to 

products now being reviewed by the 

Central Glass HQ quality assurance 

department for approval. Additionally, 

JTLG also reviewed U.S. certification 

and marking requirements and made 

updates to their own processes, where 

appropriate, to ensure future 

compliance. Nissan states that any 

future manufacturing process changes 

would be detected and corrected prior 

to production. 

VII. NHTSA’s Decision 

In consideration of the foregoing, 

NHTSA finds that Nissan has met its 

burden of persuasion that the subject 

FMVSS No. 205 noncompliance in the 

affected windshield glass panes is 

inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. 

Accordingly, Nissan’s petition is hereby 

granted and Nissan is consequently 

exempted from the obligation of 

providing notification of, and a free 

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 subject 

vehicles and equipment that Nissan no 

longer controlled at the time it 

determined that the noncompliance 

existed. However, the granting of this 

petition does not relieve vehicle and 

equipment distributors and dealers of 

the prohibitions on the sale, offer for 

sale, or introduction or delivery for 

introduction into interstate commerce of 

the noncompliant vehicles and 

replacement windshield glass panes 

under their control after Nissan notified 

them that the subject noncompliance 

existed. 

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

delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.95 and 

501.8) 

Otto G. Matheke, III, 

Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance. 

[FR Doc. 2023–24140 Filed 11–1–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Internal Revenue Service 

Proposed Collection; Requesting 

Comments Form 5307 

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), 

Treasury. 

ACTION: Notice and request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: The Internal Revenue Service, 

as part of its continuing effort to reduce 

paperwork and respondent burden, 

invites the general public and other 

federal agencies to take this opportunity 

to comment on proposed and/or 

continuing information collections, as 

required by the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995. The IRS is soliciting 

comments concerning Form 5307, 

Application for Determination for 

Adopters of Modified Nonstandardized 

Pre-Approved Plans. 

DATES: Written comments should be 

received on or before January 2, 2024 to 

be assured of consideration. 

ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments 

to Andres Garcia, Internal Revenue 

Service, Room 6526, 1111 Constitution 

Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20224, or 

by email to pra.comments@irs.gov. 

Include OMB Control No. 1545–0200 in 

the subject line of the message. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Requests for additional information or 

copies of this collection should be 

directed to Jon Callahan, (737) 800– 

7639, at Internal Revenue Service, Room 

6526, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW, 

Washington, DC 20224, or through the 

internet at jon.r.callahan@irs.gov. 

The IRS is currently seeking 

comments concerning the following 

information collection tools, reporting, 

and record-keeping requirements: 

Title: Application for Determination 

for Adopters of Modified 

Nonstandardized Pre-Approved Plans. 

OMB Number: 1545–0200. 

Form Number: Form 5307. 

Abstract: An adopting employer of a 

nonstandardized pre-approved plan that 

has made modifications to the terms of 

the pre-approved plan that are not 

extensive, or an adopting employer of 

any pre-approved plan (either 

standardized or nonstandardized) that 

amends its pre-approved plan solely to 

add language to satisfy the requirements 

of Internal Revenue Code (IRC) sections 

415 and 416 due to the required 

aggregation of plans, use Form 5307 to 

request a determination letter from the 

IRS. The IRS uses the information to 

determine if the adopted plan is 

qualified under IRC sections 401(a) and 

501(a). The form may not be used to 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES