Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 17, 2016 / Notices 8123 

OMB Control Number: 2126–0004. 

Type of Request: Extension of a 

currently approved ICR. 

Respondents: Motor carriers and 

drivers of commercial motor vehicles. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

6.2 million (5.7 million drivers and .5 

million motor carriers. 

Estimated Time per Response: 28 

minutes (average). 

Expiration Date: July 31, 2016. 

Frequency of Response: Responses to 

some regulatory requirements of the 

driver qualification rules occur on a 

random basis. Other responses occur 

more predictably. Some responses recur; 

others do not. For example, motor 

carriers are required to obtain and 

review the motor vehicle driving record 

of their drivers from the State of 

licensure. They must complete this task 

at the time of hiring and every year 

thereafter. The time-of-hiring 

requirement results in a random 

frequency of response, but, thereafter, 

the annual requirement results in a 

fixed frequency of response. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden: 9.8 

million hours. 

Definitions 

(1) ‘‘Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Regulations’’ (FMCSRs) are parts 350–399 of 

Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations. 

(2) ‘‘Commercial Motor Vehicle’’ (CMV) is ‘‘a 

self-propelled or towed vehicle used on the 

highways in interstate commerce to transport 

passengers or property, if the vehicle— 

(A) has a gross vehicle weight rating or 

gross combination weight rating, or gross 

vehicle weight or gross combination weight, 

of at least 10,001 pounds, whichever is 

greater; 

(B) is designed or used to transport more 

than 8 passengers (including the driver) for 

compensation; 

(C) is designed or used to transport more 

than 15 passengers, including the driver, and 

is not used to transport passengers for 

compensation; or 

(D) is used in transporting material found 

by the Secretary of Transportation to be 

hazardous under section 5103 of this title 

and transported in a quantity requiring 

placarding under regulations prescribed by 

the Secretary under section 5103.’’ 

Public Comments Invited 

FMCSA requests that you comment 

on any aspect of this information 

collection, including: (1) Whether the 

proposed collection is necessary for 

FMCSA to perform its functions, (2) the 

accuracy of the estimated burden, (3) 

ways for the FMCSA to enhance the 

quality, usefulness, and clarity of the 

collected information, and (4) ways that 

the burden could be minimized without 

reducing the quality of the collected 

information. The agency will summarize 

or include your comments in the request 

for OMB’s clearance of this information 

collection. 

Issued under the authority of 49 CFR 1.87 

on February 5, 2016. 

Kelly Regal, 

Associate Administrator for Office of 

Research and Information Technology. 

[FR Doc. 2016–03183 Filed 2–16–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Maritime Administration 

[Docket No. MARAD–2016 0009] 

Requested Administrative Waiver of 

the Coastwise Trade Laws: Vessel 

TEMOANANUIAKIVA; Invitation for 

Public Comments 

AGENCY: Maritime Administration, 

Department of Transportation. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: As authorized by 46 U.S.C. 

12121, the Secretary of Transportation, 

as represented by the Maritime 

Administration (MARAD), is authorized 

to grant waivers of the U.S.-build 

requirement of the coastwise laws under 

certain circumstances. A request for 

such a waiver has been received by 

MARAD. The vessel, and a brief 

description of the proposed service, is 

listed below. 

DATES: Submit comments on or before 

March 23, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Comments should refer to 

docket number MARAD–2016–0009. 

Written comments may be submitted by 

hand or by mail to the Docket Clerk, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 

Docket Operations, M–30, West 

Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. You may also 

send comments electronically via the 

Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. 

All comments will become part of this 

docket and will be available for 

inspection and copying at the above 

address between 10 a.m. and 5 p.m., 

E.T., Monday through Friday, except 

federal holidays. An electronic version 

of this document and all documents 

entered into this docket is available on 

the World Wide Web at http://

www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Bianca Carr, U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Maritime 

Administration, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Room W23–465, 

Washington, DC 20590. Telephone 202– 

366–9309, Email Bianca.carr@dot.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: As 

described by the applicant the intended 

service of the vessel 

TEMOANANUIAKIVA is: 

INTENDED COMMERCIAL USE OF 

VESSEL: ‘‘Snorkel and sailing day use’’ 

GEOGRAPHIC REGION: ‘‘Hawaii’’ 

The complete application is given in 

DOT docket MARAD–2016–0009 at 

http://www.regulations.gov. Interested 

parties may comment on the effect this 

action may have on U.S. vessel builders 

or businesses in the U.S. that use U.S.- 

flag vessels. If MARAD determines, in 

accordance with 46 U.S.C. 12121 and 

MARAD’s regulations at 46 CFR part 

388, that the issuance of the waiver will 

have an unduly adverse effect on a U.S.- 

vessel builder or a business that uses 

U.S.-flag vessels in that business, a 

waiver will not be granted. Comments 

should refer to the docket number of 

this notice and the vessel name in order 

for MARAD to properly consider the 

comments. Comments should also state 

the commenter’s interest in the waiver 

application, and address the waiver 

criteria given in § 388.4 of MARAD’s 

regulations at 46 CFR part 388. 

Privacy Act 

Anyone is able to search the 

electronic form of all comments 

received into any of our dockets by the 

name of the individual submitting the 

comment (or signing the comment, if 

submitted on behalf of an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). You may 

review DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

Statement in the Federal Register 

published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 

65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78). 

By Order of the Maritime Administrator. 

Dated: February 4, 2016. 

Gabriel Chavez, 

Acting Secretary, Maritime Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2016–03001 Filed 2–16–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–81–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2015–0127; Notice 1] 

Graco Children’s Products, Inc., 

Receipt of Petition for Decision of 

Inconsequential Noncompliance 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Receipt of petition. 

SUMMARY: Graco Children’s Products, 

Inc. (Graco), has determined that certain 

Graco Milestone child restraints 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
8124 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 17, 2016 / Notices 

manufactured between July 9, 2015 and 

October 6, 2015, do not fully comply 

with paragraph S5.5.2(g)(1)(ii) of 

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 

(FMVSS) No. 213, Child Restraint 

Systems. Graco filed a report pursuant 

to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and 

Noncompliance Responsibility and 

Reports. Graco then petitioned NHTSA 

under 49 CFR part 556 requesting a 

decision that the subject noncompliance 

is inconsequential to motor vehicle 

safety. 

DATES: The closing date for comments 

on the petition is March 18, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are 

invited to submit written data, views, 

and arguments on this petition. 

Comments must refer to the docket and 

notice number cited at the beginning of 

this notice and submitted by any of the 

following methods: 

• Mail: Send comments by mail 

addressed to: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Deliver: Deliver comments by 

hand to: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. The Docket 

Section is open on weekdays from 10 

a.m. to 5 p.m. except Federal Holidays. 

• Electronically: Submit comments 

electronically by: logging onto the 

Federal Docket Management System 

(FDMS) Web site at http://

www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Comments may also be faxed to (202) 

493–2251. 

Comments must be written in the 

English language, and be no greater than 

15 pages in length, although there is no 

limit to the length of necessary 

attachments to the comments. If 

comments are submitted in hard copy 

form, please ensure that two copies are 

provided. If you wish to receive 

confirmation that your comments were 

received, please enclose a stamped, selfaddressed postcard with the comments. 

Note that all comments received will be 

posted without change to http://

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided. 

Documents submitted to a docket may 

be viewed by anyone at the address and 

times given above. The documents may 

also be viewed on the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov by following the 

online instructions for accessing the 

dockets. DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

Statement is available for review in the 

Federal Register published on April 11, 

2000, (65 FR 19477–78). 

The petition, supporting materials, 

and all comments received before the 

close of business on the closing date 

indicated above will be filed and will be 

considered. All comments and 

supporting materials received after the 

closing date will also be filed and will 

be considered to the extent possible. 

When the petition is granted or denied, 

notice of the decision will be published 

in the Federal Register pursuant to the 

authority indicated below. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Overview: Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 

30118(d) and 30120(h) (see 

implementing rule at 49 CFR part 556), 

Graco submitted a petition for an 

exemption from the notification and 

remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. 

Chapter 301 on the basis that this 

noncompliance is inconsequential to 

motor vehicle safety. 

This notice of receipt of Graco’s 

petition is published under 49 U.S.C. 

30118 and 30120 and does not represent 

any agency decision or other exercise of 

judgment concerning the merits of the 

petition. 

II. Child Restraints Involved: Affected 

are approximately 8,240 Graco 

Milestone child restraints manufactured 

between July 9, 2015 and October 2, 

2015. 

III. Noncompliance: Graco explains 

that the noncompliance is due to a 

labeling issue. The labels on the subject 

child restraints do not contain the 

phrase ‘‘Secure this child restraint with 

the vehicle’s child restraint anchorage 

system,if available, or with a vehicle 

belt’’ as required by paragraph 

S5.5.2(g)(1)(ii) of FMVSS No. 213. 

IV. Rule Text: Paragraph 

S5.5.2(g)(1)(ii) of FMVSS No. 213 

requires in pertinent part: 

S5.5.2 The information specified in 

paragraphs (a) through (m) of this section 

shall be stated in the English language and 

lettered in letters and numbers that are not 

smaller than 10 point type. Unless otherwise 

specified, the information shall be labeled on 

a white background with black text. Unless 

written in all capitals, the information shall 

be stated in sentence capitalization. . . . 

(g) The statements specified in paragraphs 

(1) and (2): 

(1) A heading as specified in S5.5.2(k)(3)(i), 

with the statement ‘‘WARNING! DEATH or 

SERIOUS INJURY can occur,’’ capitalized as 

written and followed by bulleted statements 

in the following order: . . . 

(ii) Secure this child restraint with the 

vehicle’s child restraint anchorage system if 

available or with a vehicle belt. [For car beds, 

harnesses, and belt positioning boosters, the 

first part of the statement regarding 

attachment by the child restraint attachment 

by the child restraint anchorage system is 

optional]. . . . 

V. Summary of Graco’s Analyses: 

Graco stated its belief that the subject 

noncompliance is inconsequential to 

motor vehicle safety for the following 

reasons: 

(1) Graco stated that the noncompliant 

label provides visual pictograms 

showing the rear-facing child restraint 

being secured using the child restraint 

anchorage system and using a vehicle 

belt (both with a lap only seat belt and 

lap/shoulder seat belt). This pictogram 

is located on the same label just below 

where the omitted phrase is required to 

be, and provides the same substance as 

the language required by FMVSS No. 

213. 

(2) Graco also stated that in addition 

to the pictograms that describe how to 

secure the child restraint in the vehicle 

using the child restraint anchorage 

system and the vehicle belt, the printed 

instruction manual provided with the 

subject child restraints includes written 

step-by-step installation procedures. 

The manual also describes why and 

how to secure the child restraint in rearfacing and forward-facing modes using 

the child restraint anchorage system as 

well as the vehicle seat belt systems. 

The instruction manual additionally 

includes multiple prominently placed 

safety warning regarding the need to 

secure the child restraint with the child 

restraint anchorage system or the 

vehicle seat belt. 

(3) Graco stated its belief that the 

consumers generally understanding that 

child restraints must be installed/

secured a vehicle’s seat to be effective. 

Graco also stated its belief that with 

respect to labels and instructions, 

consumers are often drawn first to 

illustrations and pictograms. 

(4) Graco also stated its belief that the 

absence of the omitted phrase from the 

label does not affect the crashworthiness 

of the child restraint system. 

Graco has additionally informed 

NHTSA that it has corrected the 

noncompliance so that future 

production of the subject child 

restraints will comply with all 

applicable labeling requirements of 

FMVSS No. 213. 

In summation, Graco believes that the 

described noncompliance of the subject 

child restraints is inconsequential to 

motor vehicle safety, and that its 

petition, to exempt Graco from 

providing recall notification of the 

noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 

30118 and remedying the 

noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 

30120 should be granted. 

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 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 17, 2016 / Notices 8125 

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, any 

decision on this petition only applies to 

the subject child restraints that Graco no 

longer controlled at the time it 

determined that the noncompliance 

existed. However, any decision on this 

petition does not relieve equipment 

distributors and dealers of the 

prohibitions on the sale, offer for sale, 

or introduction or delivery for 

introduction into interstate commerce of 

the noncompliant child restraints under 

their control after Graco 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. 

Jeffrey M. Giuseppe, 

Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance. 

[FR Doc. 2016–03202 Filed 2–16–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2016–0004; Notice 1] 

Aston Martin Lagonda Limited, Receipt 

of Petition for Decision of 

Inconsequential Noncompliance 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Receipt of petition. 

SUMMARY: Aston Martin Lagonda 

Limited (AML), has determined that 

certain model year (MY) 2009–2015 

Aston Martin DB9 two-door and fourdoor passenger cars do not fully comply 

with paragraph S4.3 of Federal Motor 

Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 

206, Door locks and door retention 

components. Aston Martin Lagonda of 

North America, Inc., filed a report dated 

December 16, 2015, pursuant to 49 CFR 

part 573, Defect and Noncompliance 

Responsibility and Reports for AML. 

AML then petitioned NHTSA under 49 

CFR part 556 requesting a decision that 

the subject noncompliance is 

inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. 

DATES: The closing date for comments 

on the petition is March 18, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are 

invited to submit written data, views, 

and arguments on this petition. 

Comments must refer to the docket and 

notice number cited in the title of this 

notice and submitted by any of the 

following methods: 

• Mail: Send comments by mail 

addressed to: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Deliver: Deliver comments by 

hand to: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. The Docket 

Section is open on weekdays from 10 

a.m. to 5 p.m. except Federal Holidays. 

• Electronically: Submit comments 

electronically by: logging onto the 

Federal Docket Management System 

(FDMS) Web site at http://

www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Comments may also be faxed to (202) 

493–2251. 

Comments must be written in the 

English language, and be no greater than 

15 pages in length, although there is no 

limit to the length of necessary 

attachments to the comments. If 

comments are submitted in hard copy 

form, please ensure that two copies are 

provided. If you wish to receive 

confirmation that comments you have 

submitted by mail were received, please 

enclose a stamped, self-addressed 

postcard with the comments. Note that 

all comments received will be posted 

without change to http://

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided. 

The petition, supporting materials, 

and all comments received before the 

close of business on the closing date 

indicated above will be filed in the 

docket and will be considered. All 

comments and supporting materials 

received after the closing date will also 

be filed and will be considered to the 

extent possible. 

When the petition is granted or 

denied, notice of the decision will also 

be published in the Federal Register 

pursuant to the authority indicated at 

the end of this notice. 

All documents submitted to the 

docket may be viewed by anyone at the 

address and times given above. The 

documents may also be viewed on the 

Internet at http://www.regulations.gov 

by following the online instructions for 

accessing the dockets. The docket ID 

number for this petition is shown at the 

heading of this notice. 

DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

Statement is available for review in the 

Federal Register published on April 11, 

2000, (65 FR 19477–78). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Overview: Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 

30118(d) and 30120(h) (see 

implementing rule at 49 CFR part 556), 

AML submitted a petition for an 

exemption from the notification and 

remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. 

Chapter 301 on the basis that this 

noncompliance is inconsequential to 

motor vehicle safety. 

This notice of receipt of AML’s 

petition is published under 49 U.S.C. 

30118 and 30120 and does not represent 

any agency decision or other exercise of 

judgment concerning the merits of the 

petition. 

II. Vehicles Involved: Affected are 

approximately 5,516 MY 2009–2015 

Aston Martin DB9 two-door and fourdoor passenger cars that were 

manufactured between September 1, 

2009 and December 9, 2015. 

III. Noncompliance: AML explains 

that the noncompliance occurs when 

the door locking system in the subject 

vehicles is double-locked causing the 

interior operating means for unlocking 

the door locking mechanism to become 

disengaged and therefore does not meet 

the requirements as specified in 

paragraph S4.3 of FMVSS No. 206. 

IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S4.3 of 

FMVSS No. 206 requires in pertinent 

part: 

S4.3 Door Locks. Each door shall be 

equipped with at least one locking device 

which, when engaged, shall prevent 

operation of the exterior door handle or other 

exterior latch release control and which has 

an operating means and a lock release/

engagement device located within the 

interior of the vehicle. 

S4.3.1 Rear side doors. Each rear side 

door shall be equipped with at least one 

locking device which has a lock release/

engagement mechanism located within the 

interior of the vehicle and readily accessible 

to the driver of the vehicle or an occupant 

seated adjacent to the door, and which, when 

engaged, prevents operation of the interior 

door handle or other interior latch release 

control and requires separate actions to 

unlock the door and operate the interior door 

handle or other interior latch release control. 

S4.3.2 Back doors. Each back door 

equipped with an interior door handle or 

other interior latch release control, shall be 

equipped with at least one locking device 

that meets the requirements of S4.3.1. . . . 

V. Summary of AML’s Petition: AML 

described the subject noncompliance 

and stated its belief that the 

noncompliance is inconsequential to 

motor vehicle safety for the following 

reasons: 

(a) AML stated that the subject 

vehicles can only be double-locked by 

using the key fob (which also serves as 

the ignition key) and that if the vehicle 

is double-locked from the inside, the 

driver and or passenger will be able to 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES