69558 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 225 / Friday, November 21, 2014 / Notices 

no impact on the vehicle capacity 

weight, and therefore, there is no risk of 

vehicle overloading. 

3. All information required for 

maintaining and/or replacing the front 

and rear tires is correct on the tire 

information placard of the subject 

vehicles. 

4. All other applicable requirements 

of FMVSS No. 110 have been met. 

5. GM is not aware of any customer 

complaints, incidents or injuries related 

to the incorrect seating capacity on the 

subject tire information placards. 

GM additionally informed NHTSA 

that it has corrected the noncompliance 

so that all future production vehicles 

will fully comply with FMVSS No. 110. 

In summation, GM believes that the 

described noncompliance of its vehicles 

is inconsequential to motor vehicle 

safety, and that its petition, to exempt 

from providing recall notification of 

noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 

30118 and remedying the recall 

noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 

30120 should be granted. 

VI. NHTSA Decision: NHTSA has 

reviewed and accepts GM’s analyses 

that the subject noncompliance is 

inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. 

Specifically, while the tire and loading 

placards incorrectly indicate the 

number of seating positions, that 

labeling error alone poses little if any 

risk to motor vehicle safety since the 

number of seating positions is readily 

apparent in the subject vehicles. The 

widths and shapes of the seats, 

especially the bucket seats, along with 

the number of seat belt sets installed 

provides a sufficient indication as to the 

maximum number of occupants the 

subject vehicles are intended to carry. 

In consideration of the foregoing, 

NHTSA has decided that GM has met its 

burden of persuasion that the FMVSS 

No. 110 noncompliance is 

inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. 

Accordingly, GM’s petition is hereby 

granted and GM is exempted from the 

obligation of providing notification of, 

and a 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 5,690 

vehicles that GM 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 tires under their 

control after GM 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, 

Acting Director, Office of Vehicle Safety 

Compliance. 

[FR Doc. 2014–27584 Filed 11–20–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2014–0055; Notice 2] 

Harley-Davidson Motor Company, Inc., 

Grant of Petition for Decision of 

Inconsequential Noncompliance 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Grant of petition. 

SUMMARY: Harley-Davidson Motor 

Company, Inc. (Harley-Davidson) has 

determined that certain model year 

(MY) 2009–2014 Harley-Davidson FL 

Touring motorcycles do not fully 

comply with paragraph S6.1.3 of 

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 

(FMVSS) No. 108, Lamps, reflective 

devices, and associated equipment. 

Harley-Davidson has filed an 

appropriate report dated April 7, 2014, 

pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and 

Noncompliance Responsibility and 

Reports. 

ADDRESSES: For further information on 

this decision contact Mike Cole, Office 

of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration (NHTSA), telephone 

(202) 366–2334, facsimile (202) 366– 

5930. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Harley-Davidson’s Petition: 

Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 

30120(h) (see implementing rule at 49 

CFR part 556), Harley-Davidson 

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. 

Notice of receipt of the petition was 

published, with a 30-day public 

comment period, on July 7, 2014 in the 

Federal Register (79 FR 38360). No 

comments were received. To view the 

petition and all supporting documents 

log onto the Federal Docket 

Management System (FDMS) Web site 

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

follow the online search instructions to 

locate docket number ‘‘NHTSA–2014– 

0055.’’ 

II. Vehicles Involved: Affected are 

approximately 343,680 MY 2009–2014 

Harley-Davidson FL Touring 

motorcycles manufactured between June 

10, 2008 and March 25, 2014. 

III. Noncompliance: Harley-Davidson 

explains that the noncompliance is that 

the location of the rear reflex reflectors 

on the subject vehicles are mounted 

between an average of 0.3′′ to 0.7′′ below 

the required 15′′ height-above-road 

surface as required by paragraph S6.1.3 

of FMVSS No. 108. 

IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S6.1.3.1 of 

FMVSS No. 108 requires in pertinent 

part: 

S6.1.3.1 Each lamp, reflective device, and 

item of associated equipment must be 

securely mounted on a rigid part of the 

vehicle, other than glazing, that is not 

designed to be removed except for repair, 

within the mounting location and height 

limits as specified in Table I, and in a 

location where it complies with all 

applicable photometric requirements, 

effective projected luminous lens area 

requirements, and visibility requirements 

with all obstructions considered. 

V. Summary of Harley-Davidson’s 

Analyses: Harley-Davidson stated its 

belief that the subject noncompliance is 

inconsequential to motor vehicle safety 

for the following reasons: 

• Harley-Davidson had a third-party 

conduct testing on the subject 

motorcycles and reflex reflectors and 

they exhibited no reduction in 

conspicuity as compared to compliant 

vehicles. The independent company 

tested five test heights, for a test range 

of 11′′–15′′ height above-road surface, 

and all five tests far exceeded the 

minimum required values at each of the 

10 test points specified in Table XVI. 

Due to the substantial safety margin 

designed into these reflex reflectors, 

photometry remained well above the 

minimums even when mounted a full 4′′ 

inches below the minimum mounting 

height. 

• Harley-Davidson believes that the 

lower mounting height of these 

reflectors may actually increase 

conspicuity and motor vehicle safety 

compared to fully compliant (higher 

mounted) reflectors. 

• Harley-Davidson notes that the 

United Nations ECE regulations specify 

a minimum mounting height of 9.84′′ 

(240mm). And further notes that in one 

study of daytime side vehicle 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 225 / Friday, November 21, 2014 / Notices 69559 

conspicuity of motorcycles, NHTSA’s 

researchers concluded that the 

mounting height of the side reflex 

reflectors (12 inches vs 15 inches) was 

an ‘‘insignificant’’ factor for vehicle 

identification distance. 

• Harley-Davidson further states that 

under FMVSS No. 108, tail lamps and 

license plate lamps on motorcycles are 

required to be illuminated whenever the 

headlamp is activated. And that since 

all Harley-Davidson models are 

equipped with automatic headlights on 

(AHO) functionality, the headlamps and 

tail lamps are automatically illuminated 

when the ignition is in the on position, 

thus providing conspicuity during 

daylight and darkness while the 

motorcycle is operating. 

Harley-Davidson also made reference 

to a withdrawal of rulemaking regarding 

a lower height for reflex reflectors. 

Harley-Davidson has additionally 

informed NHTSA that it has corrected 

the noncompliance so that all future 

production motorcycles will comply 

with FMVSS No. 108. 

In summation, Harley-Davidson 

believes that the described 

noncompliance of the subject vehicles is 

inconsequential to motor vehicle safety, 

and that its petition, to exempt HarleyDavidson from providing recall 

notification of noncompliance as 

required by 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 

remedying the recall noncompliance as 

required by 49 U.S.C. 30120 should be 

granted. 

NHTSA Decision 

NHTSA Analysis: NHTSA has 

reviewed and accepts Harley-Davidson’s 

analyses that the subject noncompliance 

is inconsequential to motor vehicle 

safety. 

The primary function of a reflex 

reflector is to reduce accidents by 

permitting early detection of an 

unlighted motor vehicle approaching an 

intersection or parked by the side of the 

road. NHTSA has concluded that the 

test data provided by Harley-Davidson 

relative to the photometric performance 

of the reflex reflectors as mounted on 

the subject motorcycles is sufficient 

justification for NHTSA to concur with 

Harley-Davidson’s assessment that the 

location of the rear reflex reflectors as 

mounted on the subject vehicles poses 

little if any risk to motor vehicle safety. 

NHTSA Decision: In consideration of 

the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that 

Harley-Davidson has met its burden of 

persuasion that the FMVSS No. 108 

noncompliance is inconsequential to 

motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, 

Harley-Davidson’s petition is hereby 

granted and Harley-Davidson is 

exempted from the obligation of 

providing notification of, and a 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 

motorcycles that Harley-Davidson 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 motorcycles under 

their control after Harley-Davidson 

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, 

Acting Director, Office of Vehicle Safety 

Compliance. 

[FR Doc. 2014–27583 Filed 11–20–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 

Safety Administration 

Office of Hazardous Materials Safety; 

Notice of Application For Special 

Permits 

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous 

Materials Safety Administration 

(PHMSA), DOT. 

ACTION: List of Applications for Special 

Permits. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

procedures governing the application 

for, and the processing of, special 

permits from the Department of 

Transportation’s Hazardous Material 

Regulations (49 CFR part 107, Subpart 

B), notice is hereby given that the Office 

of Hazardous Materials Safety has 

received the application described 

herein. Each mode of transportation for 

which a particular special permit is 

requested is indicated by a number in 

the ‘‘Nature of Application’’ portion of 

the table below as follows: 1—Motor 

vehicle, 2—Rail freight, 3—Cargo vessel, 

4—Cargo aircraft only, 5—Passengercarrying aircraft. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before December 22, 2014. 

ADDRESS COMMENTS TO: Record Center, 

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Washington, DC 20590. 

Comments should refer to the 

application number and be submitted in 

triplicate. If confirmation of receipt of 

comments is desired, include a selfaddressed stamped postcard showing 

the special permit number. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Copies of the applications are available 

for inspection in the Records Center, 

East Building, PHH–30, 1200 New 

Jersey Avenue Southeast, Washington, 

DC or at http://regulations.gov. 

This notice of receipt of applications 

for special permit is published in 

accordance with part 107 of the Federal 

hazardous materials transportation law 

(49 U.S.C. 5117(1)); 49 CFR 1.53(b)). 

Issued in Washington, DC, on November 

13, 2014. 

Donald Burger, 

Chief, General Approvals and Permits. 

Application No. Docket No. Applicant Regulation(s) affected Nature of special permits thereof 

New Special Permits 

16267–N ........... ........................ Korean Air Los Angeles, 

CA.

49 CFR 172.101 Column 

(9B), 172.204(c)(3), 

173.27, and 175.30

(a)(1).

To authorize the one-time transportation in commerce of certain explosives that are forbidden for 

transportation by cargo only aircraft. (mode 4). 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES