19468 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 75 / Monday, April 20, 1998 / Proposed Rules

polystyrene has ‘‘superior cushioning

qualities’’ compared to a blow molded

plastic, yet acknowledges that the

material may fracture or crack in a

crash. This potential would make it

likely that a polystyrene child seat

would fail the structural integrity

requirement in a compliance test.

NHTSA is denying the petition because

the loss of structural integrity of a

restraint could negatively affect the

performance of the system by allowing

injurious forces to be imposed on the

child occupant. Further, because

damage to polystyrene may not be easily

detected, there is a concern that

consumers could mistakenly use

damaged polystyrene seats, putting the

child occupant at risk. Not enough is

known about these potential concerns to

warrant reducing the system integrity

requirement as requested.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

For nonlegal issues: Dr. George

Mouchahoir, Office of Vehicle Safety

Standards (telephone 202–366–4919).

For legal issues: Deirdre Fujita, Office

of the Chief Counsel (202–366–2992).

Both can be reached at the National

Highway Traffic Safety Administration,

400 Seventh St., S.W., Washington,

D.C., 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section

S5.1.1 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety

Standard No. 213, ‘‘Child Restraint

Systems’’ (49 CFR § 571.213), sets forth

requirements for child restraint system

integrity. Section S5.1.1(a) states that

when dynamically tested, each child

restraint shall:

Exhibit no complete separation of any load

bearing structural element and no partial

separation exposing either surfaces with a

radius of less than 1/4 inch or surfaces with

protrusions greater than 3/8 inch above the

immediate adjacent surrounding contactable

surface of any structural element of the

system. * * *

On August 5, 1996, Mr. John Lord of

The Booster Seat Company of Hamilton,

New Zealand, petitioned NHTSA to

amend S5.1.1(a) to permit fractures or

cracks in belt-positioning booster seats

that are made from polystyrene. The

petitioner believes polystyrene has

‘‘superior cushioning qualities’’

compared to blow molded plastic, yet

acknowledges that ‘‘by nature of the

material’’ may fracture or crack in a

manner prohibited by the system

integrity requirement of S5.1.1(a). The

petitioner did not believe the edges

would harm by ‘‘pinching, cutting or

stabbing the child’’ because with

polystyrene, ‘‘[b]y nature, all cracked

edges are soft.’’ The petitioner suggested

that NHTSA should amend S5.1.1.(a) for

belt-positioning seats, to allow for

separation of the structural elements so

long as a sharpness limit is met for the

edges formed by the separation.

NHTSA is denying the petition

because the structural integrity

requirement addresses more than the

sharpness of exposed edges formed by a

separation of materials. The requirement

ensures the structural soundness of a

restraint in a crash. Structural

soundness in a crash is important for

maintaining the proper positioning of

the child. A belt-positioning booster seat

lifts the child so that the vehicle

shoulder belt is positioned on the

child’s shoulder and away from the face

and neck and the lap belt is across the

child’s hips and off of the abdomen. A

loss of structural integrity of a booster

seat during impact can result in the

repositioning of the child in relation to

the belts. If the belts were to be

repositioned on the child’s neck or

abdomen, high forces could be imposed

on those vulnerable regions, resulting in

injury. Because neck and abdominal

loading are not measured by the 3-yearold and 6-year-old dummies used in

Standard 213’s compliance tests to

evaluate booster seats, a booster seat

could meet the standard’s performance

criteria (aside from the integrity

requirement) and still pose a safety risk

for children.

It is also noted that revising S5.1.1(a)

as the petitioner suggested may also

affect the structural soundness of a

restraint over the long term. A

polystyrene child seat could easily be

penetrated by sharp objects and cracked

or fractured during use in a vehicle or

during ordinary handling. Once a crack

has formed in the material, it may

quickly propagate due to the nature of

the material, so that a child seat could

be easily snapped apart along a crack

line. This damage and degradation of

the material could significantly reduce

the performance of the restraint.

Further, fractures in the polystyrene are

not easily seen. The material itself

appears pocketed and lined with tiny

fissures, and crack lines due to material

failure may not be obvious. Not enough

is known at this time about these

potential concerns to warrant reducing

the system integrity requirements of the

standard as requested.

In accordance with 49 CFR part 552,

this completes the agency’s review of

the petition. The agency has concluded

that there is no reasonable possibility

that the amendment requested by the

petitioner would be issued at the

conclusion of the rulemaking

proceeding. Accordingly, the petition is

denied.

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115,

30117 and 30166; delegation of authority at

49 CFR 1.50.

Issued on April 14, 1998.

L. Robert Shelton,

Associate Administrator for Safety

Performance Standards.

[FR Doc. 98–10299 Filed 4–17–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Parts 222 and 227

[I.D. 052493B]

Endangered and Threatened Species;

Proposed Threatened Status for

Johnson’s Seagrass

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of

reopening of comment period

SUMMARY: The National Marine

Fisheries Service (NMFS), pursuant to

the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as

amended (Act), provides notice of

reopening of the comment period on the

proposed listing of Johnson’s seagrass,

Halophila johnsonii as a threatened

species. The comment period has been

reopened to provide opportunity for

public comment since the close of the

original comment period on December

14, 1993.

DATES: The public comment period,

which originally closed on December

14, 1993, now closes June 4, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Comments and requests for

copies of the technical workshops

proceedings and references should be

sent to the Chief, Endangered Species

Division (F/PR3), Office of Protected

Resources, NMFS, 1315 East-West

Highway, Silver Spring, Maryland

20910.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Donna Brewer, F/PR3, NMFS, (301)

713–1401, or Colleen Coogan, Southeast

Region, NMFS, (813) 570–5312.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On September 15, 1993, NMFS

published a proposed rule to list

Johnson’s seagrass as a threatened

species (58 FR 48326). Designation of

critical habitat was subsequently

proposed on August 4, 1994 (59 FR

39716). A public hearing on both the

proposed listing and critical habitat
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 75 / Monday, April 20, 1998 / Proposed Rules 19469

designation was held in Vero Beach,

Florida on September 20, 1994. This

reopening of the comment period

applies only to the proposed listing of

Johnson’s seagrass as a threatened

species. The proposed designation of

critical habitat will be addressed in a

separate Federal Register notice and

additional comments will be solicited at

that time.

Since publication of the proposed

rule, additional information has been

made available to NMFS that

supplements available data on the status

and distribution of Johnson’s seagrass.

This information was reviewed in a

technical workshop held in St.

Petersburg, Florida, in November 1996,

and has been summarized in a

workshop proceedings (Kenworthy,

1997) submitted to NMFS on October

15, 1997.

In addition, genetic studies

confirming and supporting information

presented in the proposed rule

regarding the species separation of

Johnson’s seagrass have been published

(Jewitt-Smith et al., 1997); peer review

comments on the proposed rule have

been received, and a report

summarizing several years of surveys for

Johnson’s seagrass within the Indian

River Lagoon has been completed

(Virnstein, et al., 1997). A brief

summary of the workshop proceedings

follows:

The workshop convened species

experts and representatives of agencies

with jurisdiction over seagrasses and

their habitats to review existing

information on the biology and ecology

of Johnson’s seagrass. Workshop

attendees reviewed new genetic

information supporting H. johnsonii as

a separate species from H. decipens

(recently published by Jewitt-Smith et

al, 1977). New qualitative and

quantitative benthic surveys and

interviews with species experts also

reviewed at the workshop, confirmed

the extremely limited geographic

distribution of Johnson’s seagrass to

patchy and vertically disjunct areas

between Sebastian Inlet and northern

Biscayne Bay on the east coast of

Florida, finding no verifiable sightings

outside of the range other than those

already reported. Since additional

surveys have not located any male

flowers, nor has seedling recruitment

been confirmed, the workshop attendees

attributed the distribution and

abundance of Johnson’s seagrass to a

reliance on vegetative means of

reproduction and growth. High densities

of apical meristems, rapid rates of

horizontal growth, and a fast leaf

turnover were suggested to explain the

appearance and disappearance of

Johnson’s seagrass observed in

disturbed areas and on survey transects.

Public Comments Solicited

Due to the availability of additional

information, the passage of time since

the close of the previous comment

period, and the desire to review the best

scientific information available during

the decision-making process, the

comment period for the proposed listing

of Johnson’s seagrass as a threatened

species is being reopened. NMFS is

requesting comments from the public on

new or additional information on the

distribution and status of Johnson’s

seagrass. All comments received by June

4, 1998 will be considered in NMFS

final decision.

References

Kenworthy, J.W. 1997. An updated

biological status review and Summary

of the Proceedings of a Workshop to

Review the Biological Status of the

Seagrass, Halophila johnsonii Eiseman.

Final Report submitted to Office of

Protected Species, NMFS, NOAA, Silver

Spring, MD - October 15, 1997.

Jewitt-Smith, J., C. McMillan, W.J.

Kenworthy, and K. Bird. 1997.

Flowering and genetic banding patterns

of Halophila johnsonii and conspecifics.

Aquatic Botany 59: 323–331.

Virnstein, R.W., L.J. Morris, J.D.

Miller, and R. Miller-Meyers. 1997.

Distribution and abundance of

Halophila johnsonii in the Indian River

Lagoon. St. John’s River Water

Management District, Techincal

Memorandum # 24.

Authority

The Authority for this action is the

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as

amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

Dated: April 10, 1998.

Rolland A. Schmitten,

Assistant Administrator for Fisheries,

National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 98–10368 Filed 4–17–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–F