6260 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 22 / Friday, February 1, 2008 / Notices 

FRA to modify the terms and conditions 

of FRA’s November 9, 2006, decision 

letter seeking a permanent waiver of 

compliance from requirements of the 

FRA Horn Rule for continued safe 

operation of its Southern New Jersey 

Light Rail Transit (SNJLRT) River Line 

at seven specific highway-rail grade 

crossings in the Palmyra and Riverton, 

NJ, communities. NJ Transit submits 

that this request is consistent with the 

waiver process for shared use. (See 

Statement of Agency Policy Concerning 

Jurisdiction Over the Safety of Railroad 

Passenger Operations and Waivers 

Related to Shared Use of the Tracks of 

the General Railroad System by Light 

Rail and Conventional Equipment, 65 

FR 42529 (July 10, 2000); also see Joint 

Statement of Agency Policy Concerning 

Shared Use of the Tracks of the General 

Railroad System by Conventional 

Railroads and Light Rail Transit 

Systems, 65 FR 42526 (July 10, 2000).) 

On April 27, 2005, FRA issued the 

Final Rule on Use of Locomotive Horns 

at Highway-Rail Grade Crossings, 70 FR 

21844 (2005), with an effective date of 

June 24, 2005. NJ Transit claimed that 

although its audible warning operating 

practices on the River Line are generally 

in compliance with the rules contained 

in 49 CFR Parts 222 and 229, Use of 

Locomotive Horns at Highway Rail 

Grade Crossings; Final Rule, it needed 

relief from the requirements of the rule 

because of the unique operating 

characteristics of the SNJLRT River 

Line-particularly the close proximity of 

highway-rail grade crossings in the 

communities of Riverton and Palmyra, 

NJ. As noted and explained in the FRA 

decision letter dated November 9, 2006, 

FRA denied NJ Transit relief from the 

Horn Rule requirements, except at 

certain locations outlined in the 

decision letter, including four near-side 

station stops in the Riverton-Palmyra 

single track corridor at Cinnaminson 

Avenue, Morgan Avenue, Thomas 

Avenue, and Main Street. 

With this petition submitted in lieu of 

instituting quiet zones, NJ Transit again 

is seeking relief from the requirements 

of the FRA Horn Rule (use of 83 dB bell 

in lieu of 86dB horn) at seven of nine 

actively warned highway-rail grade 

crossings along this 1.4-mile RivertonPalmyra single track corridor. The 

driving force behind this request is that 

the SNJLRT River Line operates 91 

weekday trips through this corridor, 

generating over 800 audible warnings 

between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m., causing 

quality of life issues and noise 

complaints from nearby residents. 

Also with this petition, NJ Transit is 

seeking permission from FRA to modify 

the temporal separation operating plan 

to reflect new Burlington and Camden 

Subdivisions. The creation of these 

subdivisions will allow SNJLRT light 

rail vehicles in a particular subdivision 

to operate concurrently when Conrail 

freight trains are either late in clearing 

tracks in the other subdivision or they 

report clear for the remainder of the 

freight window. The subdivisions will 

be delineated where switches can be 

reversed and blocked to prevent 

movements outside each respective 

subdivision. 

All communications concerning these 

proceedings should identify the 

appropriate docket number (e.g., Waiver 

Petition Docket Number FRA–2007–

0030) and may be submitted by any of 

the following methods: 

• Web site: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: Docket Operations Facility, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue, SE., W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Room W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal Holidays. 

Communications received within 45 

days of the date of this notice will be 

considered by FRA before final action is 

taken. Comments received after that 

date will be considered as far as 

practicable. All written communications 

concerning these proceedings are 

available for examination during regular 

business hours (9 a.m.–5 p.m.) at the 

above facility. All documents in the 

public docket are also available for 

inspection and copying on the Internet 

at the docket facility’s Web site at 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

Anyone is able to search the 

electronic form of any written 

communications and 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 19477–19478). 

Issued in Washington, DC on January 28, 

2008. 

Grady C. Cothen, Jr., 

Deputy Associate Administrator for Safety 

Standards and Program Development. 

[FR Doc. E8–1863 Filed 1–31–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Railroad Administration 

Petition for Waiver of Compliance 

In accordance with Part 211 of Title 

49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), 

notice is hereby given that the Federal 

Railroad Administration (FRA) received 

a request for a waiver of compliance 

with certain requirements of its safety 

standards. The individual petition is 

described below, including the party 

seeking relief, the regulatory provisions 

involved, the nature of the relief being 

requested, and the petitioner’s 

arguments in favor of relief. 

Village of Elmwood Park, Illinois 

[Waiver Petition Docket Number FRA–2007–

0022] 

The Village of Elmwood Park, Illinois 

(Village) and the Northeastern Illinois 

Commuter Rail Corporation (Metra) seek 

a permanent waiver of compliance from 

a certain provision of the Use of 

Locomotive Horns at Highway-Rail 

Grade Crossings, 49 CFR Part 222. The 

Village intends to establish a new 

partial quiet zone consisting of four 

public highway-rail at-grade crossings 

and two pedestrian at-grade crossings. 

The Village and Metra are seeking a 

waiver to modify the hours of a new 

partial quiet zone as provided in 49 CFR 

Part 222.9, definition of a new partial 

quiet zone that states that locomotive 

horns are not routinely sounded 

between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. 

The waiver petition requests that the 

time period for the new partial quiet 

zone is between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. as 

recommended by the Illinois Commerce 

Commission (ICC) to better reflect the 

existing traffic conditions. The ICC 

made these comments during a 

diagnostic team meeting on September 

5, 2007, and in a letter to the Village 

dated September 11, 2007. 

Interested parties are invited to 

participate in these proceedings by 

submitting written views, data, or 

comments. FRA does not anticipate 

scheduling a public hearing in 

connection with these proceedings since 

the facts do not appear to warrant a 

hearing. If any interested party desires 

an opportunity for oral comment, they 

should notify FRA, in writing, before 

the end of the comment period and 

specify the basis for their request. 

All communications concerning these 

proceedings should identify the 

appropriate docket number (e.g., Waiver 

Petition Docket Number FRA–2007–

0022) and may be submitted by any of 

the following methods: 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 22 / Friday, February 1, 2008 / Notices 6261 

1Section 14 (g) of the TREAD Act, November 1, 

2000, Pub. L. 106–414, 114 Stat. 1800. 

2 67 FR 67448, Docket NHTSA–2001–10053. 

3The EOU rating does not compare the crash 

performance of different child restraints. However, 

a child restraint is most effective if corectly 

installed in the vehicle as well as properly adjusted 

to the child. A child restraint that is easier to use 

should theoretically havea lower misuse rate. 

4 72 FR 3103, January 24, 20007. Full transcript 

can be found in Docket Number NHTSA–2007–

26833–23. 

Web site: http://www.regulations.gov. 

Follow the online instructions for 

submitting comments. 

Fax: 202–493–2251. 

Mail: Docket Operations Facility, U.S. 

Department of Transportation, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue, SE., W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590. 

Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Room W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. 

Communications received within 45 

days of the date of this notice will be 

considered by FRA before final action is 

taken. Comments received after that 

date will be considered as far as 

practicable. All written communications 

concerning these proceedings are 

available for examination during regular 

business hours (9 a.m.–5 p.m.) at the 

above facility. All documents in the 

public docket are also available for 

inspection and copying on the Internet 

at the docket facility’s Web site at 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

Anyone is able to search the 

electronic form of any written 

communications and 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 19477–19478). 

Issued in Washington, DC on January 28, 

2008. 

Grady C. Cothen, Jr., 

Deputy Associate Administrator for Safety 

Standards and Program Development. 

[FR Doc. E8–1866 Filed 1–31–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[Docket NHTSA–2006–25344] 

Consumer Information; Rating 

Program for Child Restraint Systems 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice, final decision. 

SUMMARY: In response to Section 14(g) of 

the Transportation Recall Enhancement, 

Accountability, and Documentation Act, 

the National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration established a yearly ease 

of use assessment program for add-on 

child restraints. Since the program was 

established, the most notable 

improvements have been made to child 

restraint harness designs, labels, and 

manuals. On November 23, 2007, the 

agency published a notice seeking 

comment on revisions to the program. 

This notice summarizes the comments 

received and provides the agency’s 

decision on how we will proceed. The 

agency has decided to enhance the 

program by including new rating 

features (the design aspects that are 

being evaluated) and criteria (the 

questions that evaluate the feature), 

adjusting the scoring system, and using 

stars to display the ease of use rating. 

We anticipate that these program 

changes will result in a more robust 

rating program for consumers while 

continuing to encourage manufacturers 

to refine current features and in some 

cases, install more features that help 

make child restraints easier to use. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

technical issues related to the Ease of 

Use rating program, you may call 

Nathaniel Beuse of the Office of Crash 

Avoidance Standards, at (202) 366–

4931. For legal issues, call Deirdre 

Fujita of the Office of Chief Counsel, at 

(202) 366–2992. You may send mail to 

these officials at the National Highway 

Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New 

Jersey Ave., SE., Washington, DC, 

20590. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Introduction 

II. Summary of Request for Comments 

A. Rating Categories and Their Associated 

Features 

1. Assembly 

2. Evaluation of Labels 

3. Evaluation of Instructions 

4. Securing the Child 

5. Vehicle Installation Features 

B. Rating System 

III. Summary of Comments 

IV. Discussion and Agency Decisions 

A. General Concerns 

1. Multi-Mode and ‘‘Basic’’ Child 

Restraints 

2. Timing of Upgraded Program 

3. Clarification of Terms 

B. Rating Categories and their Associated 

Features 

1. Assembly 

2. Evaluation of Labels 

3. Evaluation of Instructions 

4. Securing the Child 

5. Vehicle Installation Features 

C. Rating System 

D. Vehicle Rating System 

E. Cost and Retail Concerns 

F. Other 

V. Conclusion 

Appendices 

Appendix A: Ease of Use Rating Forms 

Appendix B: Ease of Use Score Forms 

Appendix C: Ease of Use Star Rating 

System 

I. Introduction 

In response to the Transportation 

Recall Enhancement, Accountability, 

and Documentation (TREAD) 1 Act, the 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration (NHTSA) issued a final 

rule 2 on November 5, 2002 that 

established a program that rates child 

restraint systems (CRS) on how easy 

they are to use.3 To date, the agency’s 

Ease of Use (EOU) program has been 

very successful in encouraging child 

restraint manufacturers to improve child 

restraint designs, labels, and manuals 

such that now nearly all child restraints 

achieve the top rating. While child 

restraint manufacturers are to be 

commended for their overwhelming 

response to the program, today the 

ratings are such that it is difficult for 

consumers to discern ease of use 

differences between products. 

On November 23, 2007, NHTSA 

published a request for comment on the 

agency’s considered updates to the 

features and criteria used in the child 

restraint EOU ratings program, along 

with the method in which the ratings 

are displayed to consumers (72 FR 

65804, Docket 2006–25344). In 

proposing these revisions, the agency 

considered recent consumer use surveys 

conducted by the agency and others on 

Lower Anchors and Tethers for Children 

(LATCH), public comments submitted 

as a result of NHTSA’s February 8, 2007 

public meeting on LATCH,4 a 

comprehensive study of the agency’s 

EOU program, and feedback from 

current EOU raters. 

Our request for comment highlighted 

several changes that we believed would 

encourage consumers to purchase and 

manufacturers to provide easier to use 

features, in particular for LATCH 

hardware and child restraint harnesses. 

These changes would also allow the 

agency to begin recognizing newer 

design features that have entered the 

market since the program’s inception. 

We also sought to provide continued 

incentive for manufacturers to design 

child restraint features that are intuitive 

and easier to use. We sought comment 

on proposed changes to the numerical 

break points (e.g. ranges) used to assign 

different ratings to the restraints in 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES