12192 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 43 / Monday, March 6, 1995 / Proposed Rules

application for deletion from

documentation must already be on file

with the National Vessel Documentation

Command or must be submitted by

facsimile with the instrument being

submitted by facsimile for filing.

(b) Within 10 days of submitting an

instrument by facsimile for filing, the

person submitting the instrument by

facsimile must submit the instrument in

duplicate to the National Vessel

Documentation Command, [address to

be inserted in final rule]; at least one

copy must bear original signatures. If

not already on file, the original of any

application required by paragraph (a) of

this section must also be submitted with

the original instrument to the National

Vessel Documentation Command.

(c) Upon receipt of the instrument in

duplicate in accordance with paragraph

(b) of this section, the date and time of

recording of the instrument is the date

and time the instrument submitted by

facsimile was filed.

(d) All instruments submitted by

facsimile for filing must be clearly

legible, submitted from 81⁄2-inch by 11-

inch paper in not less than 10-point

type size, and accompanied by a cover

sheet.

(e) The facsimile cover sheet required

by paragraph (d) of this section should

indicate the name, address, telephone

number and facsimile telephone number

of the person submitting the instrument

by facsimile, and the number of pages

submitted by facsimile.

(f) The filing of any instrument

submitted by facsimile is terminated

and the instrument will be returned to

the submitter if:

(1) The instrument is subject to

termination for any cause under

§ 67.217(a);

(2) The instrument required to be

submitted in duplicate in accordance

with paragraph (b) of this section is not

received within the 10-day period; or

(3) There is any variance between the

instrument submitted by facsimile for

filing and the instrument submitted in

duplicate in accordance with paragraph

(b) of this section.

(g) When the filing of an instrument

submitted by facsimile is terminated for

a variance in accordance with paragraph

(f)(3) of this section, the instrument

submitted in duplicate in accordance

with paragraph (b) of this section will be

deemed to be an original filing under

this subpart subject to termination

under § 67.217(a)(1). The instrument

submitted in duplicate will be deemed

not in substantial compliance with the

applicable regulations in this part

because of the variance between it and

the instrument submitted by facsimile.

The procedures for termination of filing

and disposition of instruments

described in paragraphs (b) and (c) of

§ 67.217 will apply.

3. In § 67.500, paragraph (a) is revised

to read as follows:

§ 67.500 Applicability.

(a) This subpart specifies

documentation services provided for

vessels for which fees are applicable. No

documentation service for which a fee is

applicable will be performed until the

appropriate fee has been paid. Fees are

contained in Table 67.550.

* * * * *

4. Section 67.540 is added to read as

follows:

§ 67.540 Facsimile handling fee.

A handling fee is charged for

processing an instrument submitted by

facsimile for filing in accordance with

subpart O of this part.

5. In § 67.550, Table 67.550 is

amended by adding ‘‘Facsimile

submission handling’’ as an entry

following the entry ‘‘Notice of claim of

lien and related instruments’’ under the

category ‘‘Filing and recording:’’ to read

as follows:

§ 67.550 Fee table.

* * * * *

TABLE 67.550.—FEES

Activity Reference Fee

* * * * * * *

Facsimile submission handling ............................................................................................................................ Subpart O .................... 1 2.00

* * * * * * *

1Per page.

* * * * *

Dated: February 28, 1995.

N.W. Lemley,

Acting Chief, Office of Marine Safety, Security

and Environmental Protection.

[FR Doc. 95–5387 Filed 3–3–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–14–M

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. 95–009, Notice 01]

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety

Standards; Child Restraint Systems

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of public meeting;

request for comments.

SUMMARY: This notice announces that

NHTSA will be holding a public

meeting regarding the misuse of child

restraint systems (safety seats). NHTSA

seeks comments on actions that the

agency, industry and public can do to

improve the proper installation and use

of child safety seats.

DATES: Public meeting: A public meeting

to hear views and comments will be

held in Indianapolis, Indiana on April 2,

1995, from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m.

Those wishing to make oral

presentations at the meeting should

contact Dr. George Mouchahoir, at the

address or telephone number listed

below by March 24, 1995.

Written comments: Written comments

may be submitted to the agency and

must be received by April 2, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Public meeting: The public

meeting will be held at the following

location: The Hyatt Regency

Indianapolis, One South Capitol

Avenue, Indianapolis, Indiana 46204,

Telephone: (317) 632–1234/(800) 233–

1234 Toll Free Reservations.

Written comments: All written

comments must refer to the docket and

notice number of this notice and be

submitted (preferable 10 copies) to the

Docket Section, National Highway

Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),

Room 5109, 400 Seventh St., S.W.,

Washington, DC 20590. Docket hours

are from 9:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Monday

through Friday.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 43 / Monday, March 6, 1995 / Proposed Rules 12193

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.

George Mouchahoir, Office of Vehicle

Safety Standards, National Highway

Traffic Safety Administration, 400

Seventh St., SW, Washington, DC,

20590 (telephone 202–366–4919).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A child

safety seat that is installed properly and

used correctly provides very effective

crash protection for a child. However,

the safety benefits of a child seat can be

reduced or negated by misuse of the

seat. The agency believes in most cases,

the misuse is unknown to the person

installing or using the restraint.

In September 1994, three-year-old

Dana Hutchinson was killed in a

misused child seat. The DANA

Foundation, established by the child’s

family after the crash to encourage

correct safety seat use, describes the

crash:

Dana’s father had installed her child safety

seat in their car for a short trip to Grandma’s

house. As always, he checked it to make sure

it was tightly held. When her mother picked

her up from school, Dana was securely

fastened in the seat, and the installation was

double-checked. As always, she and her two

brothers were safely buckled in before the

trip began.

It was raining very hard, and the roads

were slippery. Their car was in a serious

collision with a pick-up truck, and Dana, her

mother, and her two brothers were injured.

A few days later, Dana died from severe head

and neck injuries. The police report from the

accident stated an opinion that her child

safety restraint was improperly secured.

The vehicle in which Dana

Hutchinson was restrained required a

supplemental buckle that was specially

designed for use with child seats. The

need for this buckle was discussed in

the vehicle owner’s manual. While

Dana’s parents did not read the manual,

they thought they had done everything

they were supposed to do to secure their

child in the car seat.

Improving the proper installation and

use of child seats is a NHTSA priority.

In recent months, NHTSA

Administrator Ricardo Martinez

appeared on national television to make

the public more aware of misuse

problems. The agency has also worked

with newspapers, magazines and other

journals across the country to alert the

public that misuse is ‘‘foiling child

safety seat’s effectiveness’’ (quoting

headline in December 12, 1994 article of

the Washington Post). Further, last

month Administrator Martinez

announced the formation of a ‘‘blue

ribbon panel’’ of experts to recommend

ways that safety seats can be made

easier to install and use. Panel members

include senior representatives of the

motor vehicle, child safety seat and seat

belt industries, a pediatric physician

and several child safety seat

practitioners. Mr. Joseph Colella, the

executive director of the DANA

Foundation, is also a member. The

panel moderator is Philip Haseltine,

president of the American Coalition for

Traffic Safety. By June 1, the panel will

make recommendations to the

industries affected and the general

public.

NHTSA is having the public meeting

to afford interested persons the

opportunity to comment on child seat

misuse problems. The transcript of the

meeting will be made available to the

blue ribbon panel for its consideration.

While blue ribbon panel members may

be attending the public meeting as

observers, they will not be participating

formally in the proceeding.

The agency would like information

about misuse problems from parents or

other caretakers who personally had

difficulty using a safety seat with a

child. What feature of the child seat

promoted the misuse problem? NHTSA

is also interested in the observations of

educators or safety specialists who have

encountered misuse problems when

training members of the public to use

child seats correctly. How are safety

seats being misused? What has been or

could be done to reduce that misuse?

How can parents and other caretakers be

encouraged to read owner’s manuals to

learn how to use a child safety seat

correctly? The agency seeks information

from child seat and vehicle

manufacturers on what aspects of

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard

213, ‘‘Child Restraint Systems,’’

encourage or discourage proper child

seat use. For example, child seat

labeling requirements have often been

criticized as overwhelming the

consumer with long and complex

warnings and instructions. How can

these labeling requirements be

improved? Which aspects of the labeling

requirements should be retained, and

which should be abolished, and why?

How do manufacturers assess whether a

child seat will be misused (i.e., the

potential for misuse)? What actions have

been taken by vehicle and child seat

manufacturers to reduce consumers’

misuse of child seats?

NHTSA requests comments from all

interested persons on the compatibility

between vehicle seat and belt

assemblies and child safety seats that

promote system misuse. NHTSA is

concerned that child safety seats and the

vehicles they are used in are not always

readily compatible, making it difficult

for parents to install and use the safety

seat to ensure that their child receives

the best level of protection. The

incompatibility arises from differences

in vehicle seat cushion width, depth

and angles; forward-mounted anchorage

points, and vehicle belt systems with

emergency locking retractors, at times

create an improper fit or difficult

installation of the safety seat. As noted

above, the blue ribbon panel will

recommend ways to make child safety

seats and vehicles more compatible to

promote convenient and correct usage.

The agency has chosen the date and

place of the public meeting to coincide

with NHTSA’s Lifesavers 1995 National

Conference on Highway Safety

Priorities, which will be held on April

2–5, 1995 in Indianapolis, Indiana. It

hopes that scheduling the public

meeting for April 2 will encourage

persons participating in the Lifesavers

conference to attend the public meeting

to share their views. Typically,

Lifesavers participants work in state

highway safety agencies, community

traffic safety programs, state or local

EMS or injury prevention offices, and

state or local law enforcement agencies.

(For information about the Lifesavers

conference, contact Ms. Shirley Barton,

NHTSA Office of Traffic Safety

Programs, at (202) 366–2687.)

Procedural Matters

As noted at the beginning of this

notice, persons wishing to speak at the

public meeting should contact Dr.

Mouchahoir by the indicated date. If the

number of requests for oral

presentations exceeds the available

time, NHTSA will ask prospective

speakers with similar views to combine

presentations. To facilitate

communication, NHTSA will provide

auxiliary aids (e.g., sign-language

interpreter, braille materials, large print

materials and/or a magnifying device) to

participants as necessary, during the

meeting. Thus, any person desiring

assistance of auxiliary aids should

contact Ms. Barbara Carnes, NHTSA

Office of Rulemaking, telephone (202)

366–1810, no later than 10 days before

the meeting.

Those speaking at the public meeting

should limit their presentation to 10

minutes. If the presentation will include

slides, motion pictures, or other visual

aids, the presenters should bring at least

one copy to the meeting so that NHTSA

can readily include the material in the

public record.

The presiding officials at the meeting

may ask questions of any speaker, and

any participant may submit written

questions for the official, at its

discretion, to address to other meeting

participants. There will be no

opportunity for participants directly to

question each other. If time permits,
12194 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 43 / Monday, March 6, 1995 / Proposed Rules

persons who have not requested time,

but would like to make a statement, will

be afforded an opportunity to do so.

A schedule of participants making

oral presentations will be available at

the designated meeting room. NHTSA

will place a copy of any written

statement in the docket for this notice.

A verbatim transcript of the meeting

will be prepared and also placed in the

NHTSA docket as soon as possible after

the meeting.

Participation in the meeting is not a

prerequisite for the submission of

written comments. NHTSA invites

written comments from all interested

parties. It is requested but not required

that 10 copies be submitted.

If a commenter wishes to submit

certain information under a claim of

confidentiality, three copies of the

complete submission, including

purportedly confidential business

information, should be submitted to the

Chief Counsel, NHTSA, at the street

address given above, and copies from

which the purportedly confidential

information has been deleted should be

submitted to the Docket Section. A

request for confidentiality should be

accompanied by a cover letter setting

forth the information specified in the

agency’s confidential business

information regulation. 49 CFR Part 512.

All comments received before the

close of business on the comment

closing date indicated above will be

considered. To the extent possible,

comments filed after the closing date

will also be considered. Comments will

be available for inspection in the docket.

NHTSA will continue to file relevant

information as it becomes available in

the docket after the closing date. It is

therefore recommended that interested

persons continue to examine the docket

for new material.

Those desiring to be notified upon

receipt of their comments in the docket

should enclose a self-addressed,

stamped postcard in the envelope with

their comments. Upon receiving the

comments, the docket supervisor will

return the postcard by mail.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 57l

Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Motor

vehicles.

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

30117 and 30166; delegation of authority at

49 CFR 1.50.

Issued on: March 1, 1995.

Barry Felrice,

Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.

[FR Doc. 95–5416 Filed 3–3–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P