75640 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 179 / Monday, September 16, 2024 / Notices 

1 Johnson Policy Associates, Inc. 

2Automotive Oil Change Association, Auto Care 

Association, Service Station Dealers Association & 

Allied Trades, and Automotive Service Association. 

not exempt the individual from meeting 

the applicable CDL testing 

requirements. 

VI. Preemption 

During the period the exemption is in 

effect, no State shall enforce any law or 

regulation that conflicts with this 

exemption with respect to a person 

operating under the exemption. 

VII. Conclusion 

Based upon its evaluation of the 10 

exemption applications, FMCSA 

exempts the following drivers from the 

hearing standard; in § 391.41(b)(11), 

subject to the requirements cited above: 

Carl Afroilan (MD) 

Kevin Camper (IN) 

Anthony Cline (OH) 

Dwain Coppernoll (OR) 

Adrian Crutchfield (MO) 

Jonathan Hornberger (MI) 

Scott Prewara (MN) 

Gregory Rosa (NY) 

Barney Toussaint (GA) 

Terrell Williams (OH) 

In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 

31315(b), each exemption will be valid 

for 2 years from the effective date unless 

revoked earlier by FMCSA. The 

exemption will be revoked if the 

following occurs: (1) the person fails to 

comply with the terms and conditions 

of the exemption; (2) the exemption has 

resulted in a lower level of safety than 

was maintained prior to being granted; 

or (3) continuation of the exemption 

would not be consistent with the goals 

and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136, 49 

U.S.C. chapter 313, or the FMCSRs. 

Larry W. Minor, 

Associate Administrator for Policy. 

[FR Doc. 2024–20930 Filed 9–13–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2024–0059] 

Denial of Motor Vehicle Defect Petition, 

DP22–003 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation. 

ACTION: Denial of a petition for a defect 

investigation. 

SUMMARY: This notice sets forth the 

reasons for the denial of a defect 

petition (DP22–003) jointly submitted 

by a consulting firm and four 

automotive associations requesting that 

the Agency initiate a safety defect 

investigation into the loss of motive 

power incidents attributed to oil drain 

pan assembly failures on certain 

Hyundai Motor America, Inc. and Kia 

America, Inc. vehicles spanning Model 

Years (MY) 2005–2021. After 

conducting a technical review of the 

petition and other information, 

NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation 

has concluded that the issues raised by 

the petition do not warrant a defect 

investigation at this time. Accordingly, 

the Agency has denied the petition. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Joseph Teitelman, Vehicle Defect 

Division C, Office of Defects 

Investigation, NHTSA, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590. 

Telephone: (202) 366–3243. Email: 

joseph.teitelman@dot.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Introduction 

Interested persons may petition 

NHTSA requesting that the Agency 

initiate an investigation to determine 

whether a motor vehicle or an item of 

replacement equipment does not 

comply with an applicable motor 

vehicle safety standard or contains a 

defect that relates to motor vehicle 

safety. 49 U.S.C. 30162(a)(2); 49 CFR 

552.1. Upon receipt of a properly filed 

petition, the Agency conducts a 

technical review of the petition, 

material submitted with the petition, 

and any additional information. 49 

U.S.C. 30162(a)(2); 49 CFR 552.6. The 

technical review may consist solely of a 

review of information already in the 

possession of the Agency or it may 

include the collection of information 

from a motor vehicle manufacturer and/ 

or other sources. After conducting the 

technical review and considering 

appropriate factors, which may include, 

but are not limited to, the nature of the 

complaint, allocation of Agency 

resources, Agency priorities, the 

likelihood of uncovering sufficient 

evidence to establish the existence of a 

defect, and the likelihood of success in 

any necessary enforcement litigation, 

the Agency will grant or deny the 

petition. See 49 U.S.C. 30162(a)(2); 49 

CFR 552.8. 

Background Information 

On September 12, 2022, the Office of 

Defects Investigation (ODI) opened a 

Defect Petition (DP22–003) to evaluate 

the petition, which was jointly 

submitted by a consulting firm 1 and 

four automotive associations 2

(collectively, the ‘‘Petitioners’’) to 

NHTSA (the ‘‘Agency’’) on July 13, 

2022. The Petitioners requested that 

NHTSA initiate a safety defect 

investigation into the oil drain pan 

assemblies of multiple Hyundai and Kia 

vehicles. The following Hyundai and 

Kia vehicles were referenced in the 

petition, representing an estimated 

combined population of more than 7.5 

million vehicles and 83 total model/ 

model year vehicles: 2006–2019 

Hyundai Sonata, 2013–2018 Hyundai 

Santa Fe Sport, 2010–2012 and 2019– 

2020 Hyundai Santa Fe, 2010–2015 and 

2018–2019 Hyundai Tucson, 2011–2021 

Kia Sportage, 2005–2020 Kia Optima, 

2011–2020 Kia Sorento, 2010–2013 Kia 

Forte, 2010–2013 Kia Forte Coup, and 

2007–2010 Kia Rondo. The Petitioners 

submitted four supplemental letters to 

the Agency on January 31, 2023, March 

21, 2023, May 23, 2023, and August 4, 

2023. NHTSA’s technical review of the 

petition included a review of the 

material cited by the Petitioners, 

consumer complaint information in 

NHTSA’s databases, and related dealer 

communications. 

Summary of Petition 

The Petitioners assert that the subject 

vehicles manufactured by Hyundai 

Motor America, Inc. (‘‘Hyundai’’) and 

Kia America, Inc. (collectively, ‘‘H/K’’) 

are equipped with oil drain pan 

assemblies that ‘‘have experienced 

unprecedented allegations of midinterval plug-outs thousands of miles 

after service without malfunction 

indicator lights or the leakage associated 

with under-tightening an oil drain plug, 

or a plug or pan with damaged threads.’’ 

Additionally, the Petitioners allege that 

the defective oil pan assemblies are 

causing engines to seize and experience 

a loss of motive power while being 

operated, often at highway speeds. The 

specific failure mode detailed in the 

petition is the engine oil drain plug 

‘‘backing out’’ while the vehicle is being 

operated following an oil change. The 

‘‘backing out’’ of the drain plug results 

in the sudden and rapid draining of 

engine oil, thereby leading to loss of 

motive power. The Petitioners assert 

that the oil drain plug gaskets are 

‘‘paint-camouflaged’’ and ‘‘fused to 

either the plug or pan.’’ It is alleged that 

when the oil of the subject vehicles is 

being changed, there is an increased 

likelihood of failing to remove the 

existing drain plug gasket before 

applying a new one, an act commonly 

referred to as either double-gasketing or 

stacking gaskets. The Petitioners 

indicate that the absence of necessary 

technical information for changing oil in 

H/K vehicles’ owner’s manuals 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 179 / Monday, September 16, 2024 / Notices 75641 

3PE04–018 (2004) Office of Defects 

Investigations, NHTSA; EA04–027 (2004) Office of 

Defects Investigations, NHTSA. 4NHTSA Safety Recall Number 13E–005. 

5Hyundai TSB 23–EM–005H. (2023) Engine Oil 

and Filter Change Service Guidelines. 

contributes to the improper application 

of multiple drain plug gaskets. 

Additionally, the Petitioners allege 

that the subject vehicles’ oil pans have 

insufficient structural integrity. The 

Petitioners state that the ‘‘overall flimsy 

pan material’’ contributes to the 

loosening of the drain plugs and leads 

to cracks developing in the oil pans. The 

petition cites five examples of vehicles 

with oil pans that were identified as 

containing cracks and provides 

supporting photographs. 

Furthermore, the Petitioners assert 

that H/K should have identified a safetyrelated defect in relation to the alleged 

issue and communicated such to 

NHTSA by submitting a Defect and 

Noncompliance Information Report, 

pursuant to applicable federal 

regulations. The Petitioners also suggest 

that the manufacturers should circulate 

information addressing the risks 

associated with their painted oil pan 

assemblies in a Technical Service 

Bulletin (TSB). 

The July 13, 2022, petition references 

eight complaints, which were reported 

by consumers directly to NHTSA and 

‘‘over 100’’ complaints sourced from 

professional aftermarket automotive 

maintenance experts and consumer 

forums. In the four supplemental letters 

to the Agency, additional complaints 

were referenced by the Petitioners, 

bringing the total number of complaints 

from all sources to 166. The 

supplemental letters also reference an 

expanded list of subject vehicles and 

brought the total to at least 144 model/ 

model year vehicles, representing an 

estimated combined population of more 

than 11.5 million vehicles. 

Office of Defects Investigation Analysis 

ODI completed a detailed review of 

the eight Vehicle Owner Questionnaires 

(VOQs) which were referenced in the 

petition. ODI determined that five of the 

eight complaints were related to claims 

of drain plug back outs leading to loss 

of motive power and/or permanent 

engine damage. The remaining three 

complaints were not related to the 

issues raised by the Petitioners and 

instead included allegations about 

excessive oil consumption and 

unrelated engine failure. With respect to 

the complaints that were related to the 

issues raised by the Petitioners, a loss of 

motive power event was commonly 

related to a prior oil change service, 

conducted either at a dealership or a 

third-party service center. 

ODI conducted a broad search of 

NHTSA’s database for any additional 

VOQs involving all H/K models from 

MY 2005 through the present. The 

database search, which was aimed at 

locating complaints referencing the oil 

drain plug or a crack in the oil pan, 

produced 46 additional VOQs that were 

related to the issues raised by the 

Petitioners and contained unique VINs. 

Of the 51 total related VOQs, there were 

no reported collisions or vehicle fires. 

The vehicle models that represented the 

largest percentage of the related VOQs 

were the Hyundai Sonata with 15 

reported complaints, the Hyundai Santa 

Fe with eight reported complaints, the 

Kia Sorento with six reported 

complaints, and the Hyundai Tucson 

with five reported complaints. The 

failure rates for individual H/K models 

represented by the VOQs submitted to 

NHTSA are all less than 2 reported 

occurrences per 100,000 vehicles, which 

is relatively low for a population that 

includes vehicles that have been in 

service for more than 10 years. 

Based on a review of the available 

data, the subject failure mode has not 

occurred between the initial sale of a 

vehicle and the completion of its first 

oil change. There is insufficient 

information to support that a vehiclebased defect exists relating to the oil 

pan assembly, and instead the 

documented incidents appear related to 

a failure to follow the proper procedure 

during an oil change service. It is 

noteworthy that the reported failure 

mileage varies greatly within both the 

population of VOQs submitted to 

NHTSA and the additional reports 

referenced by the Petitioners, making it 

apparent that simply changing the oil 

for the first time does not result in the 

backing out of the oil drain plug. It is 

not unusual or unprecedented for a 

vehicle to require the removal of an oil 

drain plug gasket during an oil change 

service, and properly trained 

technicians should be aware of the need 

to do so before adding a new gasket and 

re-installing the oil drain plug. 

A review of the photographs of 

alleged oil pan cracks revealed that all 

examples of the alleged issue were 

localized to the immediate vicinity of 

the oil drain plug. Additionally, 

multiple photographs depicted witness 

marks on the surface of the oil pan, 

indicating that direct contact likely 

occurred between the component and a 

tool during servicing. The available 

information demonstrates that the 

documented oil pan damages were 

likely the result of improper 

maintenance procedures rather than 

defective components. 

In further consideration of the issue 

raised by the Petitioners, ODI conducted 

a review of previous Agency 

investigations and actions that shared 

technical similarities. In 2004, ODI 

opened a Preliminary Evaluation (later 

upgraded to an Engineering Analysis) 

focusing on MY 2003–2005 Honda CR– 

V vehicles that were experiencing 

engine compartment fires. The failures, 

which were reported to ODI at a rate of 

more than 30 per 100,000 vehicles, 

related to an oil leak resulting from the 

stacking of oil filter gaskets during an 

oil change service.3 Through its 

investigations, ODI determined that 

technician error was one of the main 

contributing factors to the high rate of 

vehicle fires and concluded that if the 

initial oil change was done properly on 

the subject vehicles with the original oil 

filter gasket being removed and a new 

one being correctly installed, the 

elevated risk of fire was eliminated. The 

Engineering Analysis was closed in 

January 2005 without a field action 

based on ODI’s findings. Conversely, in 

2013, an equipment recall was issued on 

oil filters manufactured by FRAM Group 

Operations, LLC. It was determined that 

the oil filters, which were sold for 

installation on several Subaru models, 

were manufactured with improper 

threading of the base plate, leading to an 

inadequate seal and the potential for 

rapid oil leakage.4 These examples 

demonstrate that the Agency has not 

proceeded with recall action on issues 

that appear to stem from improper 

repair procedures, but has acted to 

remedy defective components that lead 

to the loss of engine oil. 

In October 2023, Hyundai published a 

TSB with the subject: ‘‘Engine Oil and 

Filter Change Service Guidelines.’’ 5 The 

TSB, which is applicable to all Hyundai 

models equipped with gasoline engines, 

provides numbered instructions with 

accompanying photographs and 

specifically highlights the need to 

remove and replace existing drain plug 

gaskets prior to reinstalling the drain 

plug. This TSB reinforces proper 

maintenance procedures for oil change 

service on Hyundai vehicles. 

After a thorough review of the 

material submitted by the Petitioners 

and other pertinent information 

available to the Agency, NHTSA has not 

identified sufficient evidence of a 

vehicle-based defect pertaining to the 

oil pan assemblies of the subject 

vehicles. Based on the available 

information, it is unlikely that any 

investigation opened from the granting 

of this petition would result in an order 

concerning the notification and remedy 

of a safety-related defect. Consequently, 

this petition is denied. The denial of 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
75642 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 179 / Monday, September 16, 2024 / Notices 

6The authority to determine whether to approve 

or deny defect petitions under 49 U.S.C. 30162(d) 

and 49 CFR part 552 has been further delegated to 

the Associate Administrator for Enforcement. 

this petition does not foreclose the 

Agency from taking further action if 

warranted or making a future finding 

that a safety-related defect exists based 

upon additional information that the 

Agency may receive. 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30162(d) and 49 

CFR part 552; delegation of authority at 

49 CFR 1.95(a).6

Eileen Sullivan, 

Associate Administrator, Enforcement. 

[FR Doc. 2024–20971 Filed 9–13–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Office of Foreign Assets Control 

Notice of OFAC Sanctions Actions 

AGENCY: Office of Foreign Assets 

Control, Treasury. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of the 

Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets 

Control (OFAC) is publishing the names 

of one or more persons and vessels that 

have been placed on OFAC’s Specially 

Designated Nationals and Blocked 

Persons List based on OFAC’s 

determination that one or more 

applicable legal criteria were satisfied. 

OFAC is also revising the entries of a 

person and a vessel that have been 

placed on OFAC’s Specially Designated 

Nationals and Blocked Persons List. All 

property and interests in property 

subject to U.S. jurisdiction of these 

persons and these vessels are blocked, 

and U.S. persons are generally 

prohibited from engaging in transactions 

with them. 

DATES: See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

section for applicable date(s). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

OFAC: Lisa M. Palluconi, Acting 

Director, tel.: 202–622–2490; Associate 

Director for Global Targeting, tel.: 202– 

622–2420; Assistant Director for 

Licensing, tel.: 202–622–2480; Assistant 

Director for Regulatory Affairs, tel.: 202– 

622–4855; or Assistant Director for 

Sanctions Compliance & Evaluation, 

tel.: 202–622–2490. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Electronic Availability 

The Specially Designated Nationals 

and Blocked Persons List and additional 

information concerning OFAC sanctions 

programs are available on OFAC’s 

website (https://www.treasury.gov/ofac). 

Notice of OFAC Action(s) 

On September 10, 2010, OFAC 

determined that the property and 

interests in property subject to U.S. 

jurisdiction of the following persons 

and vessels are blocked under the 

relevant sanctions authorities listed 

below. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1