Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 8 / Friday, January 12, 2007 / Notices 1575 

Railroads and Light Rail Transit 

Systems, 65 FR 42526 (July 10, 2000). 

Currently, River Line passenger 

operations and Conrail operations are 

temporally-separated, with light rail 

having exclusive use of the shared track 

from 6 a.m. until 10 p.m. during the 

Passenger Period and Conrail 

maintaining exclusive rights at all other 

times during the Freight Period. NJ 

Transit is proposing to make signal 

improvements that will maintain 

temporal separation but provide for 

superior utilization of the existing 

infrastructure by expanding the 

Passenger Period and allow Conrail an 

increased operating flexibility. 

Specifically, the intent of these 

improvements is to: enable the 

provision of passenger service to Route 

73 station in Pennsauken during the 

extended hours of 5:30 a.m. until 12 

a.m.; provide additional flexibility and 

efficiencies for the operation of freight 

trains, specifically to enable Conrail to 

operate between Pavonia Yard and 

Minson Siding/Pennsauken Industrial 

Track under vitally enforced separation 

from light rail vehicles during all hours; 

provide positive train separation 

through the utilization of active trip 

stop transponders for light rail 

encroachment; and power derails for 

freight encroachment. 

NJ Transit further submitted on 

December 15, 2006, a letter offering 

clarification and additional information 

to amend the original petition. First, NJ 

Transit is formally notifying the FRA 

that in September of 2004, NJ Transit 

and Conrail established two separate 

zones of temporal separation: Zone One 

from CP45 (Pennsauken) to CP269 

(Bordentown), with exclusive Passenger 

Period from 6 a.m. until 10 p.m., which 

remains unchanged from the original 

Shared Use Waiver; Zone Two from 

CP269 (Bordentown) to CP329 (Trenton) 

features a revised Passenger Period that 

starts at 5:45 a.m. until 10 p.m. 

Second, as part of the current 

proposed extended temporal separation 

between CP45 and CP70, there is 

potential for a new parallel operation 

between River Line light rail vehicles 

and Conrail freight equipment at track 

centerline distances that in some 

locations are less than 17-ft. NJ Transit 

is informing FRA that it will not install 

an Intrusion Detection System (IDS) in 

this area as was done previously at two 

other locations of the River Line. 

Instead, NJ Transit proposes to maintain 

an equivalent level of safety by 

restricting this section of River Line to 

one mode at a time by prohibiting River 

Line light rail vehicles from operating 

between CP45 and CP70 when a Conrail 

freight train has been authorized 

through this section. 

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 communication concerning these 

proceedings should identify the 

appropriate docket number (e.g., Waiver 

Petition Docket Number FRA–1999–

6135) and must be submitted to the 

Docket Clerk, DOT Docket Management 

Facility, Room PL–401 (Plaza Level), 

400 7th Street, SW., Washington, D.C. 

20590. Communications received within 

30 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:// 

dms.dot.gov. 

Issued in Washington, DC on January 9, 

2007. 

Grady C. Cothen, 

Deputy Associate Administrator, for Safety 

Standards and Program Development. 

[FR Doc. E7–318 Filed 1–11–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. NHTSA 2002006–25975; Notice 

2] 

American Honda Motor Co., Inc., Grant 

of Petition for Decision of 

Inconsequential Noncompliance 

American Honda Motor Co., Inc. 

(Honda) has determined that the 

certification labels for certain Pilot 

trucks that it produced in 2006 do not 

comply with S5.3 of 49 CFR 571.120, 

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 

(FMVSS) No. 120, ‘‘Tire selection and 

rims for motor vehicles other than 

passenger cars.’’ Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 

30118(d) and 30120(h), Honda has 

petitioned for a determination that this 

noncompliance is inconsequential to 

motor vehicle safety and has filed an 

appropriate report pursuant to 49 CFR 

Part 573, ‘‘Defect and Noncompliance 

Reports.’’ Notice of receipt of a petition 

was published, with a 30-day comment 

period, on October 4, 2006, in the 

Federal Register (71 FR 58660). NHTSA 

received no comments. 

Affected are a total of approximately 

23,000 model year 2006 and 2007 

Honda Pilot trucks produced between 

February 17, 2006 and August 10, 2006. 

S5.3.2 of FMVSS No. 120 requires that 

the vehicles shall show the size 

designation appropriate for the tires. 

The noncompliant vehicles have 

certification labels stating that the rim 

size is 6 inches, when in fact the rim 

size is 16 inches. Honda has corrected 

the problem that caused these errors so 

that they will not be repeated in future 

production. 

Honda believes that the 

noncompliance is inconsequential to 

motor vehicle safety and that no 

corrective action is warranted. Honda 

presents the following basis for its 

petition. Most vehicle owners, dealers, 

and tire service technicians would refer 

to the vehicles’ existing tires and/or the 

separate Tire Placard to determine the 

appropriate size for a replacement tire 

rather than to the Certification Label. If 

the vehicle owner, dealer or tire service 

technician read the incorrect rim size on 

the certification label, it would be 

obvious that a full size vehicle could not 

use 6 inch wheels. The owner’s manual 

contains the correct rim size 

information. The correct rim size is cast 

into the wheel itself. 

NHTSA agrees with Honda that the 

noncompliance is inconsequential to 

motor vehicle safety. It would be 

obvious that a full size vehicle could not 

be supported by 6 inch wheels. The 

correct size information is available in 

the owner’s manual, and on the wheel 

itself, in order to determine the correct 

size for replacement wheels and tires. 

In consideration of the foregoing, 

NHTSA has decided that the petitioner 

has met its burden of persuasion that 

the noncompliance described is 

inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. 

Accordingly, Honda’s petition is granted 

and the petitioner is exempted from the 

obligation of providing notification of, 

and a remedy for, the noncompliance. 

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

delegations of authority at CFR 1.50 and 

501.8). 

Issued on: January 8, 2007. 

Daniel C. Smith, 

Associate Administrator for Enforcement. 

[FR Doc. E7–316 Filed 1–11–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES