Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 3 / Monday, January 6, 2025 / Notices 735 

15For additional guidance in setting performance 

measures related to traffic records system, see 

Traffic Records Data Quality Management Guide: 

Update to the Model Performance Measures for 

State Traffic Records Systems, DOT HS 813 544 

(Mar 2024). Available online at https://crashstats.

nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/813544. 

procedures to set performance targets. 

Performance measures set the stage for 

an informed discussion of State 

performance, barriers to improvement, 

potential countermeasure strategies, and 

the expected benefits of safety activities. 

SHSOs should expand and engage more 

diverse stakeholders when establishing 

performance targets. Considering the 

viewpoints of underserved and 

overrepresented communities is critical 

for setting performance targets. 

SHSOs should ensure that 

performance targets and measures are 

developed in cooperative partnerships 

based on data and objective information. 

The SHSO should use the most current 

available data to perform a trend 

analysis to help predict what is likely to 

happen. Using a data-driven decision 

process that accounts for the SHSO’s 

programming and interventions helps 

maintain a focus on improvement. This 

approach helps make investment and 

policy decisions to achieve performance 

targets. 

NHTSA acknowledges that States face 

many other considerations when setting 

performance targets. Each performance 

target must be treated individually 

instead of applying the same formula or 

giving a blanket statement about what 

factors were considered for the entire 

process. For example, suppose a 

primary seat belt law was recently 

enacted in your State. In that case, the 

State could expect to have a higher 

decrease in unbelted fatalities compared 

to other types of fatalities. 

When setting targets, SHSOs should 

consider the following as part of their 

justification: 

• Problem identification and trend 

analysis 

• What data sources were considered? 

• Which sociodemographic sources are 

considered? 

• How will the program, 

countermeasure strategy, and project 

selections adjustments help meet the 

target? 

• How were underserved and 

overrepresented communities 

considered? 

• How has the SHSO engaged with 

stakeholders? 

• Anticipated levels of effort 

• Economic conditions 

• Legislative changes 

• Political support 

• Has the State adopted the Safe System 

approach? 

• Other local considerations such as 

other transportation efforts, 

employment patterns, weather, 

demographic changes, and travel 

patterns 

Illustrative Examples 

As a reminder, States are required to 

provide performance measures for every 

countermeasure strategy for 

programming funds in the 3HSP. 

Projects do not require specific 

performance measures but are instead 

associated with performance measures 

through their corresponding 

countermeasure strategy. This section 

provides context for when a State may 

need to submit a State-developed 

performance measure. For example, 

drugged or poly-substance impaired 

driving is listed as a State-developed 

performance measure because data is 

not consistently collected across States 

and territories, and State programs vary. 

NHTSA encourages States to look at 

ways to improve data collection related 

to drug impairment and testing. 

Suppose an SHSO includes a drugimpaired driving countermeasure 

strategy within the Impaired Driving 

program area. In that case, the State may 

not rely on the number of fatalities 

involving a driver or motorcycle 

operator with a BAC of .08 and above 

universal core performance measure as 

that measure is specific to alcoholimpaired driving. Instead, the SHSO 

must include a State-developed 

performance measure related to drugged 

driving. Other examples include if the 

SHSO has a Police Traffic Services 

program area that includes multiple 

topics such as speeding and distracted 

driving. In this example, the SHSO may 

not rely solely on the number of 

speeding-related fatalities performance 

measure. Rather, the SHSO may need to 

use a State-developed performance 

measure such as observed cell phone/ 

handheld electronic, distracted driving 

fatalities, or another measure specific to 

the State’s countermeasure strategies. 

Countermeasure strategies for topics 

such as traffic records may not rely on 

the universal core measures because 

none are relevant to traffic records. 

Instead, SHSOs will need to create a 

State-developed performance measure 

such as improvement in accuracy.15

Further, even for program areas and 

countermeasure strategies for which 

there is a universal or strategic core 

performance measure, SHSOs are 

strongly encouraged to also develop 

additional State-developed performance 

measures to more specifically address 

their problem ID when appropriate. For 

example: 

• In addition to UC–7 (number of 

pedestrian fatalities), a State could 

develop a separate measure for 

pedestrian fatalities for ages 18–34. 

• In addition to number of motorcyclist 

fatalities, a State could develop a 

separate measure for number of 

unhelmeted fatalities. 

• In addition to UC–4 (number of 

unrestrained passenger vehicle 

occupant fatalities, all seat positions), 

a State could develop a separate 

measure for observed seat belt use for 

passenger vehicles, front seat 

outboard passengers. 

• In addition to UC–5 (number of 

fatalities involving a driver or 

motorcycle operator with a BAC over 

your State’s legal limit), a State could 

develop a separate measure for 

Number of fatalities in crashes 

involving a driver or motorcycle 

operator with a blood alcohol 

concentration (BAC) of .05 and above. 

VI. Applicability Date 

SHSOs will submit performance 

measures aligning with this framework 

beginning with the 3HSP due to NHTSA 

on July 1, 2026, covering fiscal years 

2027, 2028 and 2029. 

Authority: 49 CFR 1.95 and 501.8(i). 

Issued in Washington, DC. 

Barbara Sauers, 

Associate Administrator, Regional Operations 

and Program Delivery. 

[FR Doc. 2024–31487 Filed 1–3–25; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2019–0042; Notice 2] 

Gillig, LLC, Grant of Petition for 

Decision of Inconsequential 

Noncompliance 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Grant of petition. 

SUMMARY: Gillig LLC, determined that 

certain model year (MY) 2013–2019 

Gillig Low Floor buses do not fully 

comply with Federal Motor Vehicle 

Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 102, 

Transmission Shift Position Sequence, 

Starter Interlock, and Transmission 

Braking Effect. Gillig filed a 

noncompliance report dated April 1, 

2019, and later amended the report on 

April 23, 2019. Gillig subsequently 

petitioned NHTSA on May 8, 2019, for 

a decision that the subject 

noncompliance is inconsequential as it 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with NOTICES
736 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 3 / Monday, January 6, 2025 / Notices 

1Cf. Gen. Motors Corporation: Ruling on Petition 

for Determination of Inconsequential 

Noncompliance, 69 FR 19897, 19899 (Apr. 14, 

2004) (citing prior cases where noncompliance was 

expected to be imperceptible, or nearly so, to 

vehicle occupants or approaching drivers). 

2See Gen. Motors, LLC; Grant of Petition for 

Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 78 FR 

35355 (June 12, 2013) (finding noncompliance had 

no effect on occupant safety because it had no effect 

on the proper operation of the occupant 

classification system and the correct deployment of 

an air bag); Osram Sylvania Prods. Inc.; Grant of 

Petition for Decision of Inconsequential 

Noncompliance, 78 FR 46000 (July 30, 2013) 

(finding occupant using noncompliant light source 

would not be exposed to significantly greater risk 

than occupant using similar compliant light 

source). 

3See Morgan 3 Wheeler Limited; Denial of 

Petition for Decision of Inconsequential 

Noncompliance, 81 FR 21663, 21666 (Apr. 12, 

2016); see also United States v. Gen. Motors Corp., 

565 F.2d 754, 759 (D.C. Cir. 1977) (finding defect 

poses an unreasonable risk when it ‘‘results in 

hazards as potentially dangerous as sudden engine 

fire, and where there is no dispute that at least some 

such hazards, in this case fires, can definitely be 

expected to occur in the future’’). 

relates to motor vehicle safety. This 

notice announces the grant of Gillig’s 

petition. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ahmad Barnes, Office of Vehicle Safety 

Compliance, the National Highway 

Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

(202) 366–7236. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Overview: Gillig has determined 

that certain MY 2013–2019 Low Floor 

buses do not fully comply with 

paragraph S3.1.3 of FMVSS No. 102, 

Transmission Shift Position Sequence, 

Starter Interlock, and Transmission 

Braking Effect (49 CFR 571.102). Gillig 

filed a noncompliance report dated 

April 1, 2019, and later amended their 

report on April 23, 2019, pursuant to 49 

CFR part 573, Defect and 

Noncompliance Responsibility and 

Reports. and subsequently petitioned 

NHTSA on May 8, 2019, for an 

exemption from the notification and 

remedy requirement of 49 U.S.C Chapter 

301 on the basis that this 

noncompliance is inconsequential as it 

relates to motor vehicle safety, pursuant 

to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and 

49 CFR part 556, Exemption for 

Inconsequential Defect or 

Noncompliance. 

Notice of receipt of Gillig’s petition 

was published with a 30-day public 

comment period, on September 20, 

2019, in the Federal Register (84 FR 

49624). No comments were received. To 

view the petition and all supporting 

documents log onto the Federal Docket 

Management System (FDMS) website at 

https://www.regulations.gov/. Then 

follow the online search instructions to 

locate docket number ‘‘NHTSA–2019– 

0042.’’ 

II. Buses Involved: Approximately 925 

MY 2013–2019 Gillig Low Floor buses, 

manufactured between December 23, 

2013, and February 25, 2019, are 

potentially involved. 

III. Noncompliance: Gillig explains 

that the noncompliance is that the 

subject buses are equipped with a starter 

interlock that allow starter operation 

while the transmission shift position is 

in a forward or reverse drive position 

and therefore, does not meet the 

requirements in paragraph S3.1.3 of 

FMVSS No. 102. 

IV. Rule Requirements: Paragraph 

S3.1.3 of FMVSS No. 102 provides the 

requirements relevant to this petition. 

Except as provided in paragraphs 

S3.1.3.1 through S3.1.3.3, the engine 

starter shall be inoperative when the 

transmission shift position is in a 

forward or reverse drive position. 

V. Summary of Gillig’s Petition: The 

following views and arguments 

presented in this section, ‘‘V. Summary 

of Gillig’s Petition,’’ are the views and 

arguments provided by Gillig and do not 

reflect the views of the Agency. Gillig 

described the subject noncompliance 

and contended that the noncompliance 

is inconsequential as it relates to motor 

vehicle safety. 

Gillig says that Allison Transmission 

Inc., (ATI) conducted an audit at Gillig’s 

headquarters and discovered the 

noncompliance. In support of its 

petition, Gillig explains that ‘‘the 

potentially noncompliant condition 

occurs as follows: when the ignition 

switch is in the ON position, the engine 

is stopped, the shift selector is in the 

‘Forward’ or ‘Reverse’ position, and the 

start button is depressed, the starter 

cranks the engine, but the transmission 

does not engage because, according to 

ATI, the shifter is in an inhibited state.’’ 

Gillig describes the inhibited state, ‘‘in 

a condition with ignition on/engine off, 

even if the transmission gear selector is 

moved to Drive or Reverse, the 

transmission shifter does not broadcast 

anything but Neutral to the transmission 

control unit’’. Gillig says that ‘‘with the 

engine running, the vehicle operator 

must perform four separate actions in a 

specific sequence to engage the 

transmission and move the vehicle 

under power, specifically: (a) place foot 

on brake (b) select neutral (c) select a 

gear, and (d) remove foot from foot 

brake.’’ Gillig says that ‘‘because the 

transmission controller defaults the 

transmission to neutral after an engine 

start, there is no risk of unintentional 

vehicle movement’’ and therefore the 

subject noncompliance is 

inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. 

Gillig concluded that the subject 

noncompliance is inconsequential as it 

relates to motor vehicle safety and that 

its petition to be exempted from 

providing notification of the 

noncompliance, as required by 49 

U.S.C. 30118, and a remedy for the 

noncompliance, as required by 49 

U.S.C. 30120, should be granted. 

VI. NHTSA’s Analysis: The burden of 

establishing the inconsequentiality of a 

failure to comply with a performance 

requirement in an FMVSS—as opposed 

to a labeling requirement with no 

performance implications—is more 

substantial and difficult to meet. 

Accordingly, the Agency has not found 

many such noncompliances 

inconsequential.1

In determining inconsequentiality of a 

noncompliance, NHTSA focuses on the 

safety risk to individuals who 

experience the type of event against 

which a recall would otherwise 

protect.2 In general, NHTSA does not 

consider the absence of complaints or 

injuries when determining if a 

noncompliance is inconsequential to 

safety. The absence of complaints does 

not mean vehicle occupants have not 

experienced a safety issue, nor does it 

mean that there will not be safety issues 

in the future.3

In evaluating the merits of the petition 

for inconsequentiality by Gillig, NHTSA 

has determined that this noncompliance 

is inconsequential to motor vehicle 

safety. Paragraph S3.1.3 of FMVSS No. 

102 requires that the engine starter shall 

be inoperative while the transmission is 

in a forward or reverse position. In the 

subject vehicles, the starter is 

operational when a forward or reverse 

position is selected, which is 

noncompliant. Gillig contends that the 

subject vehicles are equipped with a 

shift controller interlock which is active 

when the propulsion system is on and 

prevents the vehicle from moving 

without the driver first performing a 

series of actions. The interlock prevents 

the forward or reverse gears from 

engaging until the transmission is first 

returned to its neutral position. Gillig 

also noted that the subject vehicles do 

not have a park position on the 

transmission selector which means the 

vehicles are likely to be started in either 

a forward or reverse gear. NHTSA agrees 

that subject Gillig vehicles shift 

interlock provides sufficient assurance 

of preventing unintended forward or 

rearward movement. More specifically, 

NHTSA agrees that because the 

transmission controller defaults the 

transmission to neutral after an engine 

start, there is no risk of unintentional 

vehicle movement. Consequently, the 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 3 / Monday, January 6, 2025 / Notices 737 

interlock present here satisfies the 

intent of S3.1.3 of FMVSS No. 102, 

NHTSA finds that the noncompliance in 

the subject vehicles is inconsequential 

to safety. 

VII. NHTSA’s Decision: In 

consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA 

finds that Gillig has met its burden of 

persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 

102 noncompliance in the affected 

buses is inconsequential to motor 

vehicle safety. Accordingly, Gillig’s 

petition is hereby granted and Gillig 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 

buses that Gillig 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 buses under their 

control after Gillig 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. 2024–31752 Filed 1–3–25; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

[DOT–OST–2024–0127] 

Solicitation for Annual Combating 

Human Trafficking in Transportation 

Impact Award 

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary of 

Transportation, U.S. Department of 

Transportation. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The annual Combating 

Human Trafficking in Transportation 

Impact Award (the award) is a 

component of the Department of 

Transportation’s (DOT) Transportation 

Leaders Against Human Trafficking 

initiative that seeks to raise awareness 

among transportation stakeholders 

about human trafficking and increase 

training and prevention to combat the 

crime. The award serves as a platform 

for transportation stakeholders to 

creatively develop impactful and 

innovative counter-trafficking tools, 

initiatives, campaigns, and technologies 

that can be shared with the broader 

community to help stop human 

trafficking. The award is open to 

individuals and entities, including nongovernmental organizations, 

transportation industry associations, 

research institutions, and State and 

local government organizations. 

Entrants compete for a cash award of up 

to $50,000 to be awarded to the 

individual(s) or entity selected for 

creating the most impactful countertrafficking initiative or technology. 

DATES: Submissions will be accepted 

from January 6, 2025 through 11:59 p.m. 

PST/2:59 a.m. EST on March 7, 2025. 

ADDRESSES: Additional information 

regarding the Department’s countertrafficking activities can be found at 

www.transportation.gov/ 

stophumantrafficking. 

Additional information regarding the 

Department’s counter-trafficking 

activities can be found at 

www.transportation.gov/ 

stophumantrafficking. To register your 

intent to compete individually or as part 

of a team, visit www.transportation.gov/ 

stophumantrafficking, email 

trafficking@dot.gov, or contact the 

Office of International Transportation 

and Trade at (202) 366–4398. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Award Approving Official: The 

Secretary of Transportation (Secretary). 

Subject of Award Competition: The 

Combating Human Trafficking in 

Transportation Impact Award 

recognizes impactful, innovative, and 

shareable approaches to combating 

human trafficking in the transportation 

industry. 

Problem 

As many as 27.6 million men, women, 

and children are held against their will 

and trafficked into forced labor and 

commercial sex. Transportation figures 

prominently in human trafficking 

enterprises when traffickers move 

victims, which uniquely positions the 

industry to combat the crime. 

Challenge 

The Combating Human Trafficking in 

Transportation Impact Award is looking 

for the best innovators to develop 

original, impactful, unique, and 

shareable human trafficking tools, 

initiatives, campaigns, and technologies 

that can help stop these heinous crimes 

in the transportation industry. 

Eligibility 

To be eligible to participate in the 

Combating Human Trafficking in 

Transportation Impact Award 

competition, private entities must be 

incorporated in and maintain a primary 

place of business in the United States, 

and individuals must be citizens or 

permanent residents of the United 

States. There is no charge to enter the 

competition. 

Rules, Terms, and Conditions 

The following additional rules apply: 

1. Entrants shall submit a project to 

the competition under the rules 

promulgated by the Department in this 

Notice; 

2. Entrants must indemnify, defend, 

and hold harmless the Federal 

Government from and against all thirdparty claims, actions, or proceedings of 

any kind and from any and all damages, 

liabilities, costs, and expenses relating 

to or arising from participant’s 

submission or any breach or alleged 

breach of any of the representations, 

warranties, and covenants of participant 

hereunder. Entrants are financially 

responsible for claims made by a third 

party; 

3. Entrants may not be a Federal 

entity, Federal employee acting within 

the scope of their employment, or a 

family member of a Federal Employee; 

4. Entrants may not be an employee 

or family member of an employee of the 

U.S. Department of Transportation; 

5. Entrants shall not be deemed 

ineligible because an individual used 

Federal facilities or consulted with 

Federal employees during a competition 

if the facilities and employees are made 

available to all individuals participating 

in the competition on an equitable basis; 

6. The entries cannot have been 

submitted in the same or substantially 

similar form in any other previous 

Federally sponsored promotion or 

Federally sponsored competition; 

7. Entrants previously awarded first 

place are not eligible to reenter for the 

same or substantially similar project; 

8. Entries which, in the Department’s 

sole discretion, are determined to be 

substantially similar to another entity’s 

entry submitted to this competition may 

be disqualified; 

9. The competition is subject to all 

applicable Federal laws and regulations. 

Participation constitutes the entrants’ 

full and unconditional agreement to 

these rules and to the Secretary’s 

decisions, which are final and binding 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with NOTICES