6614 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 29 / Wednesday, February 12, 1997 / Notices

Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective

Devices and Associated Equipment: (a)

Installation of U.S.-model headlamp

assemblies; (b) installation of U.S.-

model front and rear sidemarker/

reflector assemblies; (c) installation of

U.S.-model taillamp assemblies; (d)

installation of a high mounted stop

lamp.

Standard No. 110 Tire Selection and

Rims: Installation of a tire information

placard.

Standard No. 111 Rearview Mirror:

Replacement of the passenger side

rearview mirror, which is convex.

Standard No. 114 Theft Protection:

Installation of a warning buzzer

microswitch in the steering lock

assembly and a warning buzzer.

Standard No. 118 Power Window

Systems: Rewiring of the power window

system so that the window transport is

inoperative when the ignition is

switched off.

Standard No. 206 Door Locks and

Door Retention Components:

Replacement of the rear door locks and

rear door lock buttons with U.S.-model

components.

Standard No. 208 Occupant Crash

Protection: (a) Installation of a U.S.-

model seat belt in the driver’s position,

or a belt webbing actuated microswitch

inside the driver’s seat belt retractor; (b)

installation of an ignition switch

actuated seat belt warning lamp and

buzzer; (c) replacement of the driver’s

and passenger’s side air bags and knee

bolsters with U.S.-model components if

such components are not already

installed on the vehicle. The petitioner

states that the vehicle is equipped with

combination lap and shoulder belts that

adjust by means of an automatic

retractor and release by means of a

single push button in each front

designated seating position, with

combination lap and shoulder belts that

release by means of a single push button

in each rear outboard designated seating

position, and with a lap belt in the rear

center designated seating position.

Standard No. 214 Side Impact

Protection: Installation of reinforcing

beams.

Standard No. 301 Fuel System

Integrity: Installation of a rollover valve

in the fuel tank vent line between the

fuel tank and the evaporative emissions

collection canister.

Petitioner also states that a vehicle

identification number plate will be

affixed to the vehicle to meet the

requirements of 49 CFR part 565.

Interested persons are invited to

submit comments on the petition

described above. Comments should refer

to the docket number and be submitted

to: Docket Section, National Highway

Traffic Safety Administration, Room

5109, 400 Seventh Street, S.W.,

Washington, DC 20590. It is requested

but not required that 10 copies be

submitted.

All comments received before the

close of business on the closing date

indicated above will be considered, and

will be available for examination in the

docket at the above address both before

and after that date. To the extent

possible, comments filed after the

closing date will also be considered.

Notice of final action on the petition

will be published in the Federal

Register pursuant to the authority

indicated below.

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A) and

(b)(1); 49 CFR 593.8; delegations of authority

at 49 CFR 1.50 and 501.8.

Issued on: February 6, 1997.

Marilynne Jacobs,

Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.

[FR Doc. 97–3449 Filed 2–11–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P

[Docket No. 97–010; Notice 1]

Notice of Receipt of Petition for

Decision That Nonconforming 1983

Suzuki GSX750 Motorcycles Are

Eligible for Importation

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of receipt of petition for

decision that nonconforming 1983

Suzuki GSX750 motorcycles are eligible

for importation.

SUMMARY: This notice announces receipt

by the National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration (NHTSA) of a petition

for a decision that a 1983 Suzuki

GSX750 that was not originally

manufactured to comply with all

applicable Federal motor vehicle safety

standards is eligible for importation into

the United States because (1) it is

substantially similar to a vehicle that

was originally manufactured for

importation into and sale in the United

States and that was certified by its

manufacturer as complying with the

safety standards, and (2) it is capable of

being readily altered to conform to the

standards.

DATES: The closing date for comments

on the petition is March 14, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Comments should refer to

the docket number and notice number,

and be submitted to: Docket Section,

Room 5109, National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration, 400 Seventh St.,

SW, Washington, DC 20590. [Docket

hours are from 9:30 am to 4 pm]

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

George Entwistle, Office of Vehicle

Safety Compliance, NHTSA (202–366–

5306).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Under 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A), a

motor vehicle that was not originally

manufactured to conform to all

applicable Federal motor vehicle safety

standards shall be refused admission

into the United States unless NHTSA

has decided that the motor vehicle is

substantially similar to a motor vehicle

originally manufactured for importation

into and sale in the United States,

certified under 49 U.S.C. 30115, and of

the same model year as the model of the

motor vehicle to be compared, and is

capable of being readily altered to

conform to all applicable Federal motor

vehicle safety standards.

Petitions for eligibility decisions may

be submitted by either manufacturers or

importers who have registered with

NHTSA pursuant to 49 CFR part 592. As

specified in 49 CFR 593.7, NHTSA

publishes notice in the Federal Register

of each petition that it receives, and

affords interested persons an

opportunity to comment on the petition.

At the close of the comment period,

NHTSA decides, on the basis of the

petition and any comments that it has

received, whether the vehicle is eligible

for importation. The agency then

publishes this decision in the Federal

Register.

Champagne Imports, Inc. of Lansdale,

Pennsylvania (‘‘Champagne’’)

(Registered Importer 90–009) has

petitioned NHTSA to decide whether

1983 Suzuki GSX750 motorcycles are

eligible for importation into the United

States. The vehicle which Champagne

believes is substantially similar is the

1983 Suzuki GS750, which was

manufactured for importation into, and

sale in, the United States and certified

by its manufacturer as conforming to all

applicable Federal motor vehicle safety

standards.

The petitioner claims that it carefully

compared the 1983 Suzuki GSX750 to

the 1983 Suzuki GS750, and found the

two vehicles to be substantially similar

with respect to compliance with most

Federal motor vehicle safety standards.

Champagne submitted information

with its petition intended to

demonstrate that the 1983 Suzuki

GSX750, as originally manufactured,

conforms to many Federal motor vehicle

safety standards in the same manner as

the 1983 Suzuki GS750, or is capable of

being readily altered to conform to those

standards.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 29 / Wednesday, February 12, 1997 / Notices 6615

Specifically, the petitioner claims that

the 1983 Suzuki GSX750 is identical to

the 1983 Suzuki GS750 with respect to

compliance with Standard Nos. 106

Brake Hoses, 111 Rearview Mirrors,

116 Brake Fluid, 119 New Pneumatic

Tires for Vehicles other than Passenger

Cars, and 122 Motorcycle Brake

Systems.

Petitioner also contends that the

vehicle is capable of being readily

altered to meet the following standards,

in the manner indicated:

Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective

Devices and Associated Equipment:

installation of U.S.-model headlamp

assemblies.

Standard No. 120 Tire Selection and

Rims for Vehicles other than Passenger

Cars: installation of a tire information

placard.

Standard No. 123 Motorcycle

Controls and Displays: installation of a

U.S. model speedometer calibrated in

miles per hour.

Petitioner also states that a vehicle

identification number plate will be

affixed to the vehicle to meet the

requirements of 49 CFR Part 565.

Comments should refer to the docket

number and be submitted to: Docket

Section, National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration, Room 5109, 400

Seventh Street, S.W., Washington, DC

20590. It is requested but not required

that 10 copies be submitted.

All comments received before the

close of business on the closing date

indicated above will be considered, and

will be available for examination in the

docket at the above address both before

and after that date. To the extent

possible, comments filed after the

closing date will also be considered.

Notice of final action on the petition

will be published in the Federal

Register pursuant to the authority

indicated below.

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A) and

(b)(1); 49 CFR 593.8; delegations of authority

at 49 CFR 1.50 and 501.8.

Issued on: February 6, 1997.

Marilynne Jacobs,

Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.

[FR Doc. 97–3450 Filed 2–11–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P

[Docket No. 97–012; Notice 1]

Notice of Receipt of Petition for

Decision That Nonconforming 1974

MGB Roadster Passenger Cars Are

Eligible for Importation

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of receipt of petition for

decision that nonconforming 1974 MGB

Roadster passenger cars are eligible for

importation.

SUMMARY: This notice announces receipt

by the National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration (NHTSA) of a petition

for a decision that a 1974 MGB Roadster

that was not originally manufactured to

comply with all applicable Federal

motor vehicle safety standards is

eligible for importation into the United

States because (1) it is substantially

similar to a vehicle that was originally

manufactured for importation into and

sale in the United States and that was

certified by its manufacturer as

complying with the safety standards,

and (2) it is capable of being readily

altered to conform to the standards.

DATES: The closing date for comments

on the petition is March 14, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Comments should refer to

the docket number and notice number,

and be submitted to: Docket Section,

Room 5109, National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration, 400 Seventh St.,

SW, Washington, DC 20590. [Docket

hours are from 9:30 am to 4 pm]

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

George Entwistle, Office of Vehicle

Safety Compliance, NHTSA (202–366–

5306).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Under 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A), a

motor vehicle that was not originally

manufactured to conform to all

applicable Federal motor vehicle safety

standards shall be refused admission

into the United States unless NHTSA

has decided that the motor vehicle is

substantially similar to a motor vehicle

originally manufactured for importation

into and sale in the United States,

certified under 49 U.S.C. 30115, and of

the same model year as the model of the

motor vehicle to be compared, and is

capable of being readily altered to

conform to all applicable Federal motor

vehicle safety standards.

Petitions for eligibility decisions may

be submitted by either manufacturers or

importers who have registered with

NHTSA pursuant to 49 CFR part 592. As

specified in 49 CFR 593.7, NHTSA

publishes notice in the Federal Register

of each petition that it receives, and

affords interested persons an

opportunity to comment on the petition.

At the close of the comment period,

NHTSA decides, on the basis of the

petition and any comments that it has

received, whether the vehicle is eligible

for importation. The agency then

publishes this decision in the Federal

Register.

Champagne Imports, Inc. of Lansdale,

Pennsylvania (‘‘Champagne’’)

(Registered Importer 90–009) has

petitioned NHTSA to decide whether

1974 MGB Roadster passenger cars are

eligible for importation into the United

States. The vehicle which Champagne

believes is substantially similar is the

1974 MGB Roadster that was

manufactured for importation into, and

sale in, the United States and certified

by its manufacturer as conforming to all

applicable Federal motor vehicle safety

standards.

The petitioner claims that it carefully

compared the non-U.S. certified 1974

MGB Roadster to its U.S. certified

counterpart, and found the two vehicles

to be substantially similar with respect

to compliance with most Federal motor

vehicle safety standards.

Champagne submitted information

with its petition intended to

demonstrate that the non-U.S. certified

1974 MGB Roadster, as originally

manufactured, conforms to many

Federal motor vehicle safety standards

in the same manner as its U.S. certified

counterpart, or is capable of being

readily altered to conform to those

standards.

Specifically, the petitioner claims that

the non-U.S. certified 1974 MGB

Roadster is identical to its U.S. certified

counterpart with respect to compliance

with Standards Nos. 102 Transmission

Shift Lever Sequence * * * ., 103

Defrosting and Defogging Systems, 104

Windshield Wiping and Washing

Systems, 105 Hydraulic Brake

Systems, 106 Brake Hoses, 109 New

Pneumatic Tires, 113 Hood Latch

Systems, 116 Brake Fluid, 124

Accelerator Control Systems, 201

Occupant Protection in Interior Impact,

202 Head Restraints, 203 Impact

Protection for the Driver From the

Steering Control System, 204 Steering

Control Rearward Displacement, 205

Glazing Materials, 206 Door Locks and

Door Retention Components, 207

Seating Systems, 209 Seat Belt

Assemblies, 210 Seat Belt Assembly

Anchorages, 212 Windshield

Retention, 216 Roof Crush Resistance,

219 Windshield Zone Intrusion, and

302 Flammability of Interior Materials.

Petitioner also contends that the

vehicle is capable of being readily

altered to meet the following standards,

in the manner indicated:

Standard No. 101 Controls and

Displays: (a) Substitution of a lens

marked ‘‘Brake’’ for a lens with a

noncomplying symbol on the brake

failure indicator lamp; (b) installation of

a seat belt warning lamp that displays

the appropriate symbol; (c) recalibration