Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 43 / Thursday, March 5, 2015 / Notices 12057 

Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590; (2) 

the U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust 

Division, 10th Street & Pennsylvania 

Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20530; 

and (3) the U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Office of the General 

Counsel, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. 

Decided: March 2, 2015. 

By the Board, Acting Chairman Miller and 

Vice Chairman Begeman. 

Brendetta S. Jones, 

Clearance Clerk. 

[FR Doc. 2015–05080 Filed 3–4–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4915–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Meeting; RTCA Program Management 

Committee 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), U.S. Department 

of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice of RTCA Program 

Management Committee meeting. 

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice 

to advise the public of a meeting of 

RTCA Program Management Committee. 

DATES: The meeting will be held March 

24th 2015 from 8:30 a.m.–3:30 p.m. 

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at 

RTCA, Inc., 1150 18th Street, NW., Suite 

910, Washington, DC, 20036. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The 

RTCA Secretariat, 1150 18th Street NW., 

Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036, or by 

telephone at (202) 833–9339, fax at (202) 

833–9434, or Web site at http://

www.rtca.org. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant 

to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal 

Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92– 

463, 5 U.S.C., App.), notice is hereby 

given for a Program Management 

Committee meeting. The agenda will 

include the following: 

March 24th 

• WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS 

• REVIEW/APPROVE Meeting 

Summary 

Æ December 16, 2014, RTCA Paper 

No. 030–14/PMC–1296 

• PUBLICATION CONSIDERATION/

APPROVAL 

Æ Final Draft, New Document, 

Minimum Operational Performance 

Standards for Flight Information 

Services—Broadcast (FIS–B) with 

the Universal Access Transceiver 

(UAT), prepared by SC–206 

Æ Final Draft, Supplement to New 

Document, Minimum Operational 

Performance Standards for Flight 

Information Services—Broadcast 

(FIS–B) with the Universal Access 

Transceiver (UAT), Test 

Procedures/Electronic File only, 

prepared by SC–206 

Æ Final Draft, New Document, 

Enhanced Flight Vision Systems 

and Synthetic Vision Systems, 

prepared by SC–213 

Æ Final Draft, Change 4 to DO–210D, 

Minimum Operational Performance 

Standards for Geosynchronous 

Orbit Aeronautical Mobile Satellite 

Services (AMSS) Avionics, prepared 

by SC–222 

• INTEGRATION and COORDINATION 

COMMITTEE (ICC) 

• ACTION ITEM REVIEW 

Æ PMC Ad Hoc—Standards Overlap 

and Alignment—Discussion— 

Workshop Status. 

Æ RTCA Policy on Propriety 

Information—Discussion—Update 

• DISCUSSION 

Æ SC–147—Traffic Alert and 

Collision Avoidance System—CoChair Nomination—Review/

Approve 

Æ SC–214—Standards for Air Traffic 

Data ommunication Services— 

Discussion—Revised Terms of 

Reference (TOR) 

Æ SC–216—Aeronautical Systems 

Security—Discussion—Revised 

TOR 

Æ SC–224—Airport Security Access 

Control Systems—Discussion— 

Revised TOR—Development of 

Operational Guidelines 

Æ SC–225—Rechargeable Lithium 

Batteries and Battery Systems— 

Status—Revised TOR—Discussion 

Æ SC–227—Standards of Navigation 

Performance—Discussion—Revised 

TOR 

Æ SC–229—406 MHz Emergency 

Locator Transmitters (ELTs)—In 

Reference To TOR Discussion— 

Aircraft Tracking and In-Flight 

Triggering 

Æ SC–230—Airborne Weather 

Detection—Discussion—Revised 

TOR 

Æ SC–234—Portable Electronic 

Devices—Discussion—Status 

Update 

Æ Wake Vortex Tiger Team— 

Discussion—White Paper—Progress 

Status 

Æ Design Assurance Guidance for 

Airborne Electronic Hardware— 

Status—Possible New Special 

Committee to Update RTCA DO– 

254 

Æ NAC—Status Update 

Æ FAA Actions Taken on Previously 

Published Documents—Report 

Æ Special Committees—Chairmen’s 

Reports and Active Inter-Special 

Committee Requirements 

Agreements (ISRA)—Review 

Æ European/EUROCAE 

Coordination—Status Update 

Æ RTCA Award Nominations— 

Consideration/Approval of 

Nominations 

• OTHER BUSINESS 

• SCHEDULE for COMMITTEE 

DELIVERABLES and NEXT 

MEETING DATE 

Attendance is open to the interested 

public but limited to space availability. 

With the approval of the chairman, 

members of the public may present oral 

statements at the meeting. Persons 

wishing to present statements or obtain 

information should contact the person 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section. Members of the public 

may present a written statement to the 

committee at any time. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on February 25, 

2015. 

Mohannad Dawoud, 

Management Analyst, NextGen, Program 

Oversight and Administration, Federal 

Aviation Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2015–05108 Filed 3–4–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2013–0019] 

Greenkraft Inc.; Grant of Application 

for a Temporary Exemption From 

FMVSS No. 108 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice of grant of petition for a 

temporary exemption from paragraph 

S10 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety 

Standard (FMVSS) No. 108, Lamps, 

Reflective Devices, and Associated 

Equipment. 

SUMMARY: This notice grants the petition 

of Greenkraft, Inc. (Greenkraft) for a 

temporary exemption from the 

headlamp requirements of FMVSS No. 

108 for the company’s 1061 and 1083 

model trucks for headlamps complying 

with European regulatory requirements. 

The exemption is limited to 120 

vehicles. The agency has considered 

Greenkraft’s petition for exemption and 

has determined that the exemption 

would facilitate the development or 

field evaluation of a low-emission motor 

vehicle and would not unreasonably 

reduce the safety level of that vehicle if 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

12058 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 43 / Thursday, March 5, 2015 / Notices 

1 Greenkraft, Inc., Petition for Temporary 

Exemption on the Basis that it Would Make the 

Development or Field Evaluation of a Low Emission 

Vehicle Easier. Document No. NHTSA–2013–0019– 

0002. 

the vehicle is used in a manner 

consistent with the conditions 

discussed in this notice. 

DATES: This exemption is effective 

immediately and runs until December 

31, 2015. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John 

Piazza, Office of the Chief Counsel, 

NCC–112, National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., West Building 4th Floor, 

Room W41–214, Washington, DC 20590. 

Telephone: (202) 366–2992; Fax: (202) 

366–3820. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Statutory Basis for Temporary 

Exemptions 

The National Traffic and Motor 

Vehicle Safety Act (Safety Act), codified 

as 49 U.S.C. chapter 301, authorizes the 

Secretary of Transportation to exempt, 

on a temporary basis and under 

specified circumstances, motor vehicles 

from a motor vehicle safety standard or 

bumper standard. This authority is set 

forth at 49 U.S.C. 30113. The Secretary 

has delegated the authority in this 

section to NHTSA. 

NHTSA established 49 CFR part 555, 

Temporary Exemption from Motor 

Vehicle Safety and Bumper Standards, 

to implement the statutory provisions 

concerning temporary exemptions. A 

vehicle manufacturer wishing to obtain 

an exemption from a standard must 

demonstrate in its application (A) that 

an exemption would be in the public 

interest and consistent with the Safety 

Act and (B) that the manufacturer 

satisfies one of the following four bases 

for an exemption: (i) Compliance with 

the standard would cause substantial 

economic hardship to a manufacturer 

that has tried to comply with the 

standard in good faith; (ii) the 

exemption would facilitate the 

development or field evaluation of a 

new motor vehicle safety feature 

providing a safety level at least equal to 

the safety level of the standard; (iii) the 

exemption would facilitate the 

development or field evaluation of a 

low-emission motor vehicle and would 

not unreasonably lower the safety level 

of that vehicle; or (iv) compliance with 

the standard would prevent the 

manufacturer from selling a motor 

vehicle with an overall safety level at 

least equal to the overall safety level of 

nonexempt vehicles. 

For a petition for exemption from a 

standard to be granted on the basis that 

the exemption would facilitate the 

development or field evaluation of a 

low-emission motor vehicle and would 

not unreasonably lower the safety level 

of the vehicle, the petition must include 

specified information set forth at 49 CFR 

555.6(c). The main requirements of that 

section include: (1) Substantiation that 

the vehicle is a low-emission vehicle; 

(2) documentation establishing that a 

temporary exemption would not 

unreasonably degrade the safety of a 

vehicle; (3) substantiation that a 

temporary exemption would facilitate 

the development or field evaluation of 

the vehicle; (4) a statement of whether 

the petitioner intends to conform to the 

standard at the end of the exemption 

period; and (5) a statement that not 

more than 2,500 exempted vehicles will 

be sold in the United States (U.S.) in 

any 12-month period for which an 

exemption may be granted. Exemptions 

granted on the basis that the exemption 

would facilitate the development or 

field evaluation of a low-emission motor 

vehicle are limited to two years in 

duration. 

II. Overview of Petition 

Greenkraft petitioned the agency for a 

temporary exemption from the 

requirements in FMVSS No. 108 

applicable to headlamps for the 

company’s 1061 and 1083 model trucks 

on the basis that ‘‘the exemption would 

make the development or field 

evaluation of a low-emission motor 

vehicle easier and would not 

unreasonably lower the safety level of 

that vehicle.’’ 49 U.S.C. 

30113(b)(3)(B)(iii). The agency received 

Greenkraft’s petition October 24, 2012. 

Greenkraft has requested that, if granted, 

the exemption period begin 

immediately. 

Greenkraft is a corporation 

incorporated in California in 2008 and 

has its headquarters and manufacturing 

operations in Santa Anna, California. 

Greenkraft stated that it plans to 

produce the 1061 and 1083 model 

trucks under the requested exemption. 

These trucks are equipped with 

compressed natural gas (CNG) engines 

and have a gross vehicle weight rating 

(GVWR) of over 14,000 pounds. 

Greenkraft said it plans to import the 

vehicle’s chassis already equipped with 

the headlamps and install the engine at 

the company’s manufacturing facility in 

California. Greenkraft stated in the 

petition and in subsequent 

communications with NHTSA that it 

plans to comply with FMVSS No. 108 

at the end of the exemption period. 

Greenkraft originally planned to 

produce 2200 vehicles under the 

exemption but has revised its 

production plans so that it now plans to 

produce no more than 120 vehicles 

during the exemption period. 

Greenkraft stated in its petition that 

‘‘the [U.S.] market currently is in need 

of alternative fuel vehicles that run on 

natural gas which is abundantly 

available in the [U.S.].’’ 1 Greenkraft 

further stated that the price of natural 

gas is half the price of diesel and that 

many businesses in the U.S. wish to 

purchase natural gas powered vehicles. 

A. Low Emission Vehicle 

In order to be eligible for a temporary 

exemption on the grounds that the 

exemption would facilitate development 

or field evaluation of a low-emission 

vehicle without unreasonably lowering 

the safety performance of the vehicle, 

the applicant must substantiate that the 

vehicle is a low-emission vehicle. In 

order to qualify as a low-emission 

vehicle, the vehicle must meet the 

applicable standards for new motor 

vehicles under the Clean Air Act, 42 

U.S.C. 7521, et seq. and emit an air 

pollutant in an amount significantly 

below one of those standards. The 

Environmental Protection Agency’s 

(EPA) regulations issued pursuant to the 

Clean Air Act establish exhaust 

emissions thresholds for heavy-duty 

low-emission vehicles. These exhaust 

emission thresholds require that a heavy 

duty low-emission vehicle emit 

combined emissions of oxides of 

nitrogen and nonmethane hydrocarbons 

(or nonmethane hydrocarbon 

equivalent) of 3.8 grams or less per 

brake horsepower-hour or combined 

emissions of oxides of nitrogen and 

nonmethane hydrocarbons (or 

nonmethane hydrocarbon equivalent) of 

3.5 grams or less per brake horsepowerhour when tested (certified) on fuel 

meeting the specifications of California 

certification fuel. 40 CFR 88.105–94. 

Greenkraft submitted a certification 

from the California Environmental 

Protection Agency’s Air Resources 

Board (CARB) to substantiate that the 

vehicle that is the subject of the 

application is a low-emission vehicle. 

The CARB certification states that the 

vehicle’s combined emissions of oxides 

of nitrogen and nonmethane 

hydrocarbons are 0.13 grams per brake 

horsepower-hour. 

B. Documentation That a Temporary 

Exemption Would Not Unreasonably 

Degrade Safety 

The requirements from which 

Greenkraft seeks a temporary exemption 

are the headlamp requirements in S10 of 

FMVSS No. 108. Greenkraft stated in its 

application for a temporary exemption 

that the primary difference between 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 43 / Thursday, March 5, 2015 / Notices 12059 

2 78 FR 12138. 3See 40 CFR 88.105–94. 

Greenkraft’s low-emission vehicle, if 

exempted, and a compliant vehicle 

would be that the headlamps on 

Greenkraft’s low-emission vehicle 

would not meet the minimum candela 

requirements for two upper beam test 

points and six lower beam test points 

and would exceed the maximum 

candela requirement for one upper beam 

test point for visually/optically aimed 

headlamps. Greenkraft attached to its 

application for an exemption a test 

report from a test laboratory showing 

that the headlamps on the vehicles that 

would be the subject of the exemption 

do not meet the upper and lower beam 

requirements for optically and visually 

aimed headlamps. Greenkraft stated in 

the application that granting the 

exemption would not unreasonably 

degrade the safety of the vehicle because 

the lamps provide ‘‘excellent 

illumination’’ even though they do not 

comply with the photometric 

requirements of FMVSS No. 108. 

C. Substantiation That a Temporary 

Exemption Would Facilitate the 

Development or Field Evaluation of a 

Low Emissions Vehicle 

Greenkraft stated that a temporary 

exemption would facilitate the 

development or field evaluation of lowemission vehicles by allowing 

Greenkraft to redesign the headlamp 

without interrupting the development of 

the vehicle while the headlamp is being 

redesigned. Greenkraft further claimed 

that, by beginning development and 

field evaluation promptly, it could 

receive critical data and test results to 

further the development of natural gas 

powered vehicles. 

D. Public Interest 

Greenkraft stated that granting the 

temporary exemption would be in the 

public interest because the exemption 

would help increase the availability of 

low-emission natural gas power vehicles 

to businesses in the U.S. Greenkraft 

stated that this would reduce the U.S. 

dependence on foreign oil. 

III. Summary of Comments Received in 

Response to Notice of Receipt of 

Application 

NHTSA published a notice of receipt 

of Greenkraft’s petition for a temporary 

exemption in the Federal Register on 

February 21, 2013.2 We received three 

comments in response to the notice of 

receipt. Advocates for Highway Safety 

(Advocates) and Mr. Richard Karbowski 

opposed granting the exemption. The 

Dunlap Group submitted a comment 

supporting granting the exemption. 

Greenkraft also submitted supplemental 

materials after the comment period 

closed responding to the comments of 

Advocates and Mr. Karbowski. 

Greenkraft provided further 

supplemental information in response 

to a request from NHTSA. 

Advocates stated that NHTSA should 

not grant Greenkraft an exemption 

because Greenkraft had not 

demonstrated that a temporary 

exemption from FMVSS No. 108 would 

not unreasonably degrade the safety of 

the vehicle as required by the Safety 

Act. Advocates claimed that the test 

report for the headlamp that Greenkraft 

submitted with its petition did not 

constitute evidence that the failure of 

the lamp to meet the requirements of 

FMVSS No. 108 would not 

unreasonably degrade safety. Advocates 

argued that Greenkraft had not shown 

that a headlamp, which in some cases 

does not meet the minimum intensity 

requirements of the standard by a 

substantial margin, would not 

unreasonably degrade the safety of the 

vehicle. Advocates also argued that 

Greenkraft had not provided evidence 

that the non-compliant headlamp is 

necessary to develop its low-emission 

vehicle. 

Mr. Karbowski stated that Greenkraft 

had not provided any rationale that the 

exemption would not unreasonably 

degrade the safety of the vehicle. Mr. 

Karbowski further argued that since 

there are several FMVSS compliant 

liquefied natural gas fueled vehicles 

available for sale, granting the 

exemption would not result in the 

increased sales of those vehicles or 

environmental benefits. 

The Dunlap Group stated that 

Greenkraft’s vehicles would fill a market 

void for businesses looking for lower 

cost, clean fueled commercial vehicles. 

In its supplemental submission, 

Greenkraft stated that the headlamps 

that would be installed on the 1061 and 

1083 models have the E-code 

designation and comply with European 

regulatory requirements. Greenkraft 

argued that its analysis of the headlamp 

and engineering judgment indicate that 

the headlamps provide sufficient 

illumination. Greenkraft stated that the 

safety record of the lamps was proven 

by their long history of use in Europe 

and other countries. 

Greenkraft stated that if the 

exemption were granted, it could begin 

production immediately and design a 

headlamp that complies with the 

photometric requirements of FMVSS 

No. 108 during the exemption period. 

Greenkraft stated that developing a 

compliant headlamp is a time intensive 

and costly endeavor for a new 

manufacturer like itself. Greenkraft 

stated that a delay in its ability to 

produce vehicles under the exemption 

will lead to severe economic hardship 

and may require the company to lay off 

workers. Greenkraft argued that granting 

the petition will increase the public’s 

awareness of the environmental and 

financial benefits of low-emission 

commercial CNG vehicles that run on 

domestically produced natural gas. 

In response to a request from NHTSA, 

Greenkraft also provided data from 

European regulatory authorities 

demonstrating the lamp’s compliance 

with European regulatory requirements 

and information about Greenkraft’s 

relationship with JAC Motors of China. 

IV. Agency Analysis, Response to 

Comment, and Decision 

We have decided to grant Greenkraft 

an exemption from the headlamp 

requirements in paragraph S10 of 

FMVSS No. 108 until December 31, 

2015, at which time Greenkraft has 

stated that it will begin equipping its 

vehicles with lamps that comply with 

FMVSS No. 108. 

A. Eligibility 

As discussed above, the applicant 

must demonstrate that the vehicle emits 

an air pollutant in an amount 

significantly below one of the standards 

established under the Clean Air Act in 

order to qualify as a low-emission 

vehicle. Greenkraft submitted an engine 

certification from CARB to demonstrate 

that its vehicle met this criterion of 

eligibility for an exemption. The data 

from the CARB certification report 

shows that the vehicle’s engine emits a 

combined oxides of nitrogen and 

nonmethane hydrocarbons value of 

0.134 grams per brake horsepower-hour. 

This is significantly below the 3.5 grams 

or less per brake horsepower-hour 

emissions threshold for heavy-duty lowemission vehicles established by the 

EPA.3 Based on this information, we 

determine that the 1061 and 1083 

models equipped with CNG engines are 

low-emission vehicles. 

B. A Temporary Exemption Would Not 

Unreasonably Degrade Safety 

NHTSA has concluded that granting 

the exemption so that Greenkraft can 

use headlamps that comply with 

European regulatory requirements on 

the 1061 and 1083 models will not 

unreasonably lower the safety or impact 

protection level of the vehicle if the 

vehicle is used in a manner consistent 

with the conditions discussed below. 

NHTSA has previously granted 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

12060 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 43 / Thursday, March 5, 2015 / Notices 

4See Koenigegg Automotive AB; Response to 

Application for a Temporary Exemption From the 

Headlamp Requirements of FMVSS No. 108; 

Advanced Air Bag Requirements of No. 208, 72 FR 

17608 (Apr. 9, 2007); Group Lotus Plc; Grant of 

Application for a Temporary Exemption From 

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 and 

Part 581 Bumper Standard, 69 FR 5658 (Feb. 5, 

2004); Ford Motor Company; Disposition of Petition 

for Temporary Exemption From Federal Motor 

Vehicle Safety Standards, 58 FR 16907 (Mar. 31, 

1993) [Ford]. 

5Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; 

Minimum Sound for Requirements for Hybrid and 

Electric Vehicles, 78 FR 2798, 2816 (proposed Jan. 

14, 2013) (to be codified at 49 CFR pt. 571) 

(comparing pedestrian crash rates between vehicles 

with a GVWR less than 10000 pounds and those 

with a GVWR above 10000 pounds). 

6http://www.afdc.energy.gov/fuels/natural_gas_

locations.html. 7See Ford, 58 FR 16910 (Mar. 31, 1993). 

exemptions from the headlamp 

requirements of FMVSS No. 108 for 

vehicles equipped with European 

headlamps.4 We believe that the impact 

of the non-compliance in this case will 

be minimal considering the type of 

vehicle for which the exemption is 

being sought and its expected use. The 

headlamp that Greenkraft plans to 

install on the 1061 and 1083 models 

provide sufficient illumination for the 

purposes of lane keeping and 

illuminating other motor vehicles that 

are equipped with reflectors. The area of 

performance for which we believe that 

the non-compliance of the headlamps 

with the minimum intensity 

requirements in FMVSS No. 108 could 

have an impact is the ability of the lamp 

to illuminate pedestrians and animals in 

the roadway in areas where there is no 

overhead illumination. We believe this 

concern will be minimized because 

vehicles similar to the 1061 and 1083 

models generally have low pedestrian 

crash rates. We also believe that these 

concerns will be minimized because we 

expect, given the nature and geographic 

availability of their fuel, that the 1061 

and 1083 models will be driven 

primarily in urban areas. 

The vehicles that are the subject of 

Greenkraft’s application are mediumduty CNG fueled trucks with a GVWR 

of over 14,000 pounds that Greenkraft is 

marketing for commercial applications. 

Vehicles with a GVWR over 10,000 

pounds are roughly half as likely to be 

involved in a crash with a pedestrian as 

light-duty vehicles.5 Furthermore, 

NHTSA expects that the vehicles that 

are the subject of the exemption will be 

used in urban areas because that it 

where most of the public infrastructure 

needed to fuel CNG vehicles is located 

and where their use would be most 

feasible for commercial purposes.6 We 

have previously stated in granting an 

exemption from the photometry 

requirements of FMVSS No. 108 that the 

safety impacts resulting from the 

differences between European and U.S. 

beam patterns are minimized for 

vehicles operating in urban areas 

because of the generally high nighttime 

ambient lighting in those 

environments.7 Overhead lighting in 

urban areas provides illumination to 

help drivers detect pedestrians in 

addition to a vehicle’s low beam 

headlamps minimizing the impact of the 

headlamp’s non-compliance. This 

reduces the chance that these vehicles 

will be in a situation in which the driver 

of the vehicle is relying on the vehicle’s 

low beam headlamps to illuminate 

pedestrians in the roadway. 

We disagree with Advocates and Mr. 

Karbowski as to whether Greenkraft has 

provided sufficient information for us to 

make a determination that the 

exemption would not unreasonably 

degrade the safety or impact protection 

of the vehicle. Greenkraft has provided 

a test report demonstrating the 

performance of the lamp and a 

statement that the lamp conforms to 

European regulatory requirements. We 

believe that these materials along with 

the description of the vehicle and 

NHTSA’s expertise regarding the use of 

commercial vehicles are sufficient to 

enable us to make a determination that 

the exemption does not unreasonably 

degrade the safety of the vehicle. 

We do have some concerns about the 

decrease in performance of the 

headlamp that Greenkraft wishes to 

install on the 1061 and 1083 models 

when compared to a compliant lamp 

when the lamp is used to detect 

pedestrians and animals in areas where 

there is no overhead illumination of the 

roadway. A properly aimed low beam 

headlamp meeting, but not exceeding, 

the minimum required luminous output 

in FMVSS No. 108 at the down the road 

0.6D–1.3R test point would illuminate a 

pedestrian approximately 180 feet from 

the vehicle. The headlamp Greenkraft 

wishes to use provides only 73% of the 

required light output at this same test 

point, which could reduce the detection 

distance of a pedestrian or animal in the 

roadway by around 20–30 feet. 

Because of our concerns about the 

impact of the exemption on the driver 

of the vehicle’s ability to see pedestrians 

and other objects in the road in areas 

where there is no overhead illumination 

we are granting this petition with 

conditions on how the vehicle is to be 

marketed. We believe that it is most 

appropriate for the 1061 and 1083 

models to be used in urban areas during 

daylight hours with minimal night time 

use. We believe that it is most 

appropriate that the vehicles be 

marketed as commercial delivery 

vehicles. We do not believe that it 

would be appropriate for these vehicles 

to be marketed for any purpose that 

would entail substantial use at night. 

We also expect Greenkraft to inform its 

dealers of the conditions regarding 

marketing that accompany the grant of 

this exemption. If we determine that 

vehicles produced under the exemption 

are being marketed in a manner that is 

not consistent with these conditions, we 

will examine whether the exemption 

should be terminated under 49 CFR 

555.8(d) because the exemption is no 

longer in the public interest. For these 

reasons, we believe that the exemption 

will not unreasonably degrade the safety 

or impact protection of the vehicle if 

used in a manner consistent with the 

conditions described above. 

C. A Temporary Exemption Would 

Facilitate the Development or Field 

Evaluation of a Low Emissions Vehicle 

We have concluded that an exemption 

from the headlamp requirements of 

FMVSS No. 108 would make the 

development or field evaluation of a 

low-emission motor vehicle easier. 

Granting the exemption will allow 

Greenkraft to produce vehicles while 

the company designs a headlamp that 

complies with FMVSS No. 108. We 

believe that allowing Greenkraft to 

produce and sell vehicles during the 

exemption period will demonstrate to 

the public the environmental benefits 

and viability of CNG powered vehicles. 

For these reasons we agree with 

Greenkraft that granting this exemption 

will aid the development of lowemission vehicles. 

D. An Exemption Is in the Public 

Interest 

We also find that this exemption is 

consistent with the public interest and 

the objectives of the Safety Act. NHTSA 

has traditionally found that the public 

interest is served by affording 

consumers a wider variety of motor 

vehicles, by encouraging the 

development and field evaluation of 

fuel-efficient and alternative-energy 

vehicles, and by providing additional 

employment opportunities. We believe 

that allowing Greenkraft to produce 

vehicles during the exemption period 

will further all of these objectives. 

Allowing Greenkraft to manufacture and 

sell these vehicles during the exemption 

period will provide consumers access to 

clean fueled vehicles that run on a 

domestically produced energy source. 

Furthermore, Greenkraft is a 

manufacturer located in California that 

employs approximately 35 people. 

Granting this exemption will enable 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 43 / Thursday, March 5, 2015 / Notices 12061 

Greenkraft to more quickly begin selling 

vehicles which will allow the company 

to begin realizing revenues from vehicle 

sales. The revenues from these vehicle 

sales will allow Greenkraft to continue 

to employee individuals involved in the 

manufacture and sale of these vehicles. 

We note that prospective purchasers 

will be notified that the vehicle is 

exempted from the requirements in 

paragraph S10 of FMVSS No. 108, 

Lamps, Reflective Devices, and 

Associated Equipment. Under 49 CFR 

555.9(b), a manufacturer of an exempted 

vehicle must affix securely to the 

windshield or side window of each 

exempted vehicle a label containing a 

statement that the vehicle conforms to 

all applicable FMVSSs in effect on the 

date of manufacture ‘‘except for 

Standard Nos. [listing the standards by 

number and title for which an 

exemption has been granted] exempted 

pursuant to NHTSA Exemption No. __

__.’’ This label notifies prospective 

purchasers about the exemption and its 

subject. Under § 555.9(c), this 

information must also be included on 

the vehicle’s certification label. 

E. Agency Decision 

In consideration of the foregoing, we 

conclude that granting the requested 

exemption from the requirements in 

paragraph S10 of FMVSS No. 108, 

Lamps, Reflective Devices, and 

Associated Equipment, would facilitate 

the development or field evaluation of 

a low-emission vehicle, and would not 

unreasonably lower the safety or impact 

protection level of that vehicle if the 

vehicle is marketed as a commercial 

vehicle for use during day light hours. 

Marketing the 1061 and 1083 models for 

any purpose that would entail 

substantial use at night is not consistent 

with this temporary exemption. We 

further conclude that granting this 

exemption is in the public interest and 

consistent with the objectives of the 

Safety Act subject to the conditions 

described above. We would like to 

emphasize that this exemption from 

FMVSS No. 108, Lamps, Reflective 

Devices, and Associated Equipment is 

limited to paragraph S10 of that 

standard. Any vehicle manufactured or 

sold under this exemption must 

conform to all other applicable 

requirements of FMVSS No. 108. This 

exemption is limited to 120 CNG fueled 

vehicles. In addition, this exemption is 

conditioned on Greenkraft’s marketing 

the exempted vehicles as commercial 

vehicles for use during day light hours. 

As part of these efforts, Greenkraft 

should ensure that potential purchasers 

are informed that the exempted vehicles 

should be used primarily during 

daylight hours. 

In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 

30113(b)(3)(B)(iii), Greenkraft is granted 

NHTSA Temporary Exemption No. EX 

15–01 from paragraph S10 of FMVSS 

No. 108. The exemption shall be 

effective from the date on which notice 

of this decision is published in the 

Federal Register until December 31, 

2015, as indicated in the DATES section 

of this document. 

(49 U.S.C. 30113; delegations of 

authority at 49 CFR 1.95) 

Issued in Washington, DC, on February 25, 

2015 under authority delegated in 49 CFR 

part 1.95. 

Mark R. Rosekind, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2015–05101 Filed 3–4–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Community Development Financial 

Institutions Fund 

Proposed Data Collection; Comment 

Request 

ACTION: Notice and request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of the 

Treasury, 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, 

Public Law 104–13 (44 U.S.C. 

3506(c)(2)(A)). Currently, the 

Community Development Financial 

Institutions Fund (CDFI Fund), 

Department of the Treasury, is soliciting 

comments concerning the Annual 

Assessment Evaluation. This report 

form will be used to collect vital 

financial performance data, internal 

control, and investment impact 

measurement related information for 

institutions participating in the CDFI 

Bond Guarantee Program, consistent 

with the program’s requirements for 

Compliance Management and 

Monitoring (CMM) and Portfolio 

Management and Loan Monitoring 

(PMLM), and pursuant to 12 CFR part 

1808 (Interim Rule). The process for 

data collection and reporting is 

expected to take place via electronic 

submission to the CDFI Fund. Hard 

copies will also be accepted. The annual 

assessment evaluation reporting 

guidance for the CDFI Bond Guarantee 

Program may be obtained from the CDFI 

Bond Guarantee Program page of the 

CDFI Fund’s Web site at http://

www.cdfifund.gov. Unless otherwise 

defined in this notice, the capitalized 

terms herein are as defined in the 

Interim Rule. Please note that this 

proposed requirement would only apply 

to Eligible CDFI’s participating in the 

CDFI Bond Guarantee Program and to 

Qualified Issuers that have issued Bonds 

under the Program in Fiscal Year 2015 

or later. 

DATES: Written comments should be 

received on or before May 4, 2015 to be 

assured of consideration. These 

comments will be considered before the 

CDFI Fund submits a request for Office 

of Management and Budget (OMB) 

review of the data reporting forms 

described in this notice. 

ADDRESSES: Direct all comments to Lisa 

Jones, CDFI Bond Guarantee Program 

Manager, at the Community 

Development Financial Institutions 

Fund, U.S. Department of the Treasury, 

1500 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., 

Washington, DC 20020, by email to 

bgp@cdfi.treas.gov, or by facsimile to 

(202) 508–0083. Please note this is not 

a toll free number. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The 

Annual Assessment Evaluation may be 

obtained from the CDFI Bond Guarantee 

Program page of the CDFI Fund’s Web 

site at http://www.cdfifund.gov/bond. 

Requests for additional information 

should be directed to Lisa Jones, CDFI 

Bond Guarantee Program Manager, at 

the Community Development Financial 

Institutions Fund, U.S. Department of 

the Treasury, 1500 Pennsylvania 

Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20020 or 

by email to bgp@cdfi.treas.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Title: CDFI Bond Guarantee Program 

Reporting Forms. 

OMB Number: 1559–0044. 

Abstract: The purpose of the CDFI 

Bond Guarantee Program is to support 

CDFI lending by providing Guarantees 

for Bonds issued by Qualified Issuers as 

part of a Bond Issue for Eligible 

Community or Economic Development 

Purposes. The CDFI Bond Guarantee 

Program provides CDFIs with a new 

source of long-term capital and furthers 

the mission of the CDFI Fund to 

increase economic opportunity and 

promote community and economic 

development investments for 

underserved populations and in 

distressed communities in the United 

States. The CDFI Fund achieves its 

mission by promoting access to capital 

and local economic growth by investing 

in, supporting, and training CDFIs. 

The CDFI Fund held two-day 

application workshops on June 10–11, 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES