Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 19, 2022 / Notices 2983 

and labeling requirements. Nonetheless, 

BMW’s petition establishes that the 

incorrectly marked windscreens on the 

affected motorcycles conform to all 

FMVSS No. 205 performance 

requirements as evidenced in a test 

report showing the windscreens meet all 

the AS6 glazing performance 

requirements required by FMVSS No. 

205. 

As the performance requirements are 

met, NHTSA’s principal concern is 

whether the noncompliant marking of 

the windscreen creates a safety risk in 

the event that consumers mistakenly 

believe the glazing meets the impact, 

abrasion, and dimensional stability 

requirements of AS4 glazing or attempt 

to replace the windscreen with AS4 

glazing. 

First, NHTSA considered whether the 

mismarking would lead a consumer to 

believe that the windscreen offers the 

same level of performance provided by 

AS4 glazing that is not provided by AS6 

glazing material. Specifically, NHTSA 

considered whether a rider would 

believe that, as a result of the 

mismarking, the windscreen provides 

impact protection and meets 

dimensional stability and abrasion 

requirements. While this could be a 

potential safety risk, the size and 

placement of the subject windscreen 

was factored into NHTSA’s analysis. 

The windscreens come in two sizes, one 

measuring 316 mm wide by 309 mm 

high, and the other measuring 314 mm 

wide by 216 mm high. The size, design, 

and placement of the subject 

windscreens appear such that a rider 

would expect that they would offer little 

to no impact protection. Further, the 

size and placement of the windscreens 

are such NHTSA does not believe that 

the mismarking will create a safety risk 

from riders believing that the 

windscreen meets the abrasion and 

dimensional stability requirements of 

AS4 glazing. According to BMW, the 

subject windscreens are intended to 

protect the dashboard electronics, 

deflect wind away from the rider, and 

serve as an aesthetic design for the 

motorcycle. Further, NHTSA believes 

that few riders know the differences in 

performance of AS4 and AS6 glazing. 

NHTSA believes that due to the size, 

design, placement of the subject 

windscreens, and the likelihood that 

riders would know the differences 

between the performance of AS4 and 

AS6 glazing, riders are unlikely to 

believe that the windscreen offers a 

higher level of performance than 

actually offered by the noncompliant 

windscreens. 

Second, in the case that the 

windscreens require replacement, 

NHTSA believes that there is minimal 

risk in a motorcyclist being misled by 

the improper marking and concluding 

that a replacement windscreen must be 

of AS4 glazing rather than AS6 flexible 

glazing. The Agency believes that this 

risk is minimal because an AS4 

replacement part would not be available 

and obtaining such a part would require 

that the new windscreen be custom 

fabricated from rigid AS4 glazing. If 

such fabrication were possible, it would 

likely entail considerable inconvenience 

and expense. Further, BMW or another 

replacement part supplier would be able 

to easily identify the correct AS6 

replacement glazing through their 

replacement parts identification 

systems. 

BMW’s petition also cited multiple 

instances where NHTSA previously 

determined that incorrect AS markings 

on glazing were inconsequential for 

safety. The Agency first notes that use 

of previous determinations for 

inconsequential noncompliance should 

be viewed with caution as each 

inconsequential noncompliance petition 

is evaluated on the individual facts 

presented and determinations are made 

on a case-by-case basis. Further, of the 

eleven cited petitions, only 2 pertained 

to glazing that contained an incorrect 

AS glazing type marking and are 

potentially relevant to this petition. In 

both the petition from General Motors, 

LLC, (79 FR 23402, September 25, 2015) 

and the petition from Mitsubishi Motors 

North America, Inc. (80 FR 72482, 

August 22, 2015), AS3 glazing was 

marked as AS2 glazing. While the 

petitions are similar to BMW’s, AS3 

glazing and AS2 glazing have the same 

impact protection requirements. The 

analysis for this petition is different 

because, as discussed above, AS4 

glazing is required to meet two impact 

tests that are not required for AS6 

glazing. 

Given that the windscreens in the 

subject motorcycles meet all the 

performance requirements as required 

by FMVSS No. 205 and the improper 

marking of the glazing presents no 

recognizable safety risk, the Agency 

finds that the subject glazing is 

inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. 

VII. NHTSA’s Decision 

In consideration of the foregoing, 

NHTSA finds that BMW has met its 

burden of persuasion that the subject 

FMVSS No. 205 noncompliance in the 

affected vehicles is inconsequential to 

motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, 

BMW’s petition is hereby granted. BMW 

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 that BMW no longer controlled 

at the time it determined that the 

noncompliance existed. However, the 

granting of this petition does not relieve 

vehicle 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 under their 

control after BMW 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. 2022–00869 Filed 1–18–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities; Proposed Collection; 

Comment Request; Small Business 

Lending Fund Quarterly Supplemental 

Report 

AGENCY: Departmental Offices, 

Department of the Treasury. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The 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 comment on 

the proposed information collections 

listed below, in accordance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before March 21, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments regarding 

the burden estimate, or any other aspect 

of the information collection, including 

suggestions for reducing the burden, by 

the following method: 

• Federal E-rulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Refer to Docket Number TREAS–DO– 

2022–0001 and the specific Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) control 

number 1505–0228. 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
2984 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 19, 2022 / Notices 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

questions related to these programs, 

please contact Steve Davidson by 

emailing pra@treasury.gov, or calling 

(202) 285–0346. Additionally, you can 

view the information collection requests 

at www.reginfo.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Title: Small Business Lending Fund 

Quarterly Supplemental Report. 

OMB Control Number: 1505–0228. 

Type of Review: Extension of a 

currently approved collection. 

Description: Banks participating in 

the Small Business Lending Fund 

program are required to submit a 

Supplemental Report each quarter. The 

Supplemental Report is used to 

determine the bank’s small business 

lending baseline and allows Treasury to 

assess the change in the small business 

lending for the previous quarter. 

Forms: TD F 102.3A, TD F 102.4. 

Affected Public: Businesses and other 

for-profits. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

56. 

Frequency of Response: Quarterly. 

Estimated Total Number of Annual 

Responses: 224. 

Estimated Time per Response: 3.5 

hours. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden 

Hours: 784. 

Request for Comments: Comments 

submitted in response to this notice will 

be summarized and included in the 

request for Office of Management and 

Budget approval. All comments will 

become a matter of public record. 

Comments are invited on: (a) Whether 

the collection of information is 

necessary for the proper performance of 

the functions of the agency, including 

whether the information shall have 

practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the 

agency’s estimate of the burden of the 

collection of information; (c) ways to 

enhance the quality, utility, and clarity 

of the information to be collected; (d) 

ways to minimize the burden of the 

collection of information on 

respondents, including through the use 

of technology; and (e) estimates of 

capital or start-up costs and costs of 

operation, maintenance, and purchase 

of services required to provide 

information. 

Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. 

Dated: January 12, 2022. 

Molly Stasko, 

Treasury PRA Clearance Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2022–00890 Filed 1–18–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810–AK–P 

UNITED STATES INSTITUTE OF 

PEACE 

Notice of Board of Directors Meeting 

AGENCY: United States Institute of Peace 

(USIP) and Endowment of the United 

States Institute of Peace. 

ACTION: Announcement of meeting. 

SUMMARY: Meeting of the Board of 

Directors: Chair’s Report; Vice Chair’s 

Report; President’s Report; Approval of 

Minutes; USIP Key Current Initiatives: 

Ethiopia; Afghanistan and Pakistan; 

Strategic Stability; and Youth; Reports 

from USIP Board Committees: 

Governance and Compliance; Strategy 

and Program; Audit and Finance; 

Security and Facilities; and Talent and 

Culture. 

DATES: Friday, January 21, 2022 (10:00 

a.m.–12:00 p.m.). 

ADDRESSES: Virtual Board Meeting 

Information: Join by video: Join 

ZoomGov Meeting https://usiporg.zoomgov.com/j/1617695522?pwd=

dzMwNWFCbzJGZHlPOGZzUk15Tj

NBZz09; Meeting ID: 161 769 5522; 

Passcode: 249160. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Megan O’Hare, 202–429–4144, mohare@

usip.org. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Open 

Session—Portions may be closed 

pursuant to Subsection (c) of Section 

552(b) of Title 5, United States Code, as 

provided in subsection 1706(h)(3) of the 

United States Institute of Peace Act, 

Public Law 98–525. 

Authority: 22 U.S.C. 4605(h)(3). 

Dated: January 10, 2022. 

Megan O’Hare, 

Chief of Staff. 

[FR Doc. 2022–00921 Filed 1–18–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6820–AR–P 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1