73140 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 236 / Tuesday, December 9, 2014 / Notices 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2012–0141, Notice 2] 

Denial of Petition for Import Eligibility 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Denial of Petition. 

SUMMARY: This document sets forth the 

reasons for the denial of a petition 

submitted to the National Highway 

Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) 

under 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(B). The 

petition, which was submitted by US 

SPECS of Havre de Grace, Maryland, a 

registered importer (RI) of motor 

vehicles, requested NHTSA to decide 

that what US SPECS described as a 

‘‘2012 Lita GLE–6 low-speed vehicle 

(LSV)’’ that was not originally 

manufactured to comply with all 

applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety 

Standards (FMVSS) is eligible for 

importation into the United States 

because it has safety features that 

comply with, or are capable of being 

altered to comply with, all such 

standards. NHTSA is denying the 

petition because the 2012 Lita GLE–6 as 

originally manufactured would be 

classified as something other than an 

LSV, and could not be converted to an 

LSV through the RI process. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NHTSA 

published a notice of receipt of the 

petition, with a 30-day public comment 

period, on May 21, 2013, in the Federal 

Register (78 FR 29808). The notice 

contained the following cautionary 

statement: ‘‘It should be noted that the 

publication of this notice is not an 

acknowledgment that the vehicle that is 

the subject of the petition, the 2012 Lita 

GLE–6, is a low speed vehicle. In 

addition, in NHTSA’s view, a vehicle 

that is not a low speed vehicle may not 

be converted to one by installing a 

governor (electronic or mechanical) or 

by removing weight such as by 

removing a seat, which may be 

reinstalled.’’ See 78 FR 29809. The 

agency solicited comments on these 

specific issues. Ibid. No comments were 

submitted in response to the notice. 

Despite the absence of comments, 

NHTSA has reviewed the petition, and 

concluded that it must be denied. The 

reasons for this conclusion are set forth 

below. 

In evaluating the petition, NHTSA has 

concluded that the activities US SPECS 

is proposing to undertake with respect 

to the vehicle in question are not ones 

that fall within the limited scope of 

activities an RI is authorized to perform. 

As detailed in the agency’s regulations 

at 49 CFR part 592 Registered Importers 

of Vehicles not Originally Manufactured 

to Conform to the Federal Motor Vehicle 

Safety Standards, an RI is responsible 

for taking possession of a 

nonconforming motor vehicle that has 

been offered for importation, performing 

all modifications necessary to conform 

the vehicle to all Federal motor vehicle 

safety and bumper standards that apply 

to the vehicle, and then certifying the 

vehicle as conforming to those 

standards. See 49 CFR 592.6(c). 

Under the Safety Act, RIs are not in 

the same position as original 

manufacturers. In general, 

manufacturers that produce motor 

vehicles and motor vehicle equipment 

for the United States market and that 

import vehicles and equipment for the 

United States market must produce and 

import vehicles and equipment that 

comply with, and are certified to, 

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards 

(FMVSSs). See 49 U.S.C. 30112(a), 

30115. RIs are on a different footing. An 

exception to the general rule, which 

applies to motor vehicles (but not to 

motor vehicle equipment), is that 

vehicles that were not originally 

manufactured to comply with FMVSSs 

may be imported under the registered 

importer program if a number of 

conditions are met. 

Under the statute, RIs are recognized 

as occupying a unique position as 

modifiers of previously manufactured 

vehicles. Section 30141 permits 

importation of vehicles that do not 

comply with FMVSSs only if NHTSA 

determines that the vehicle can be 

modified to meet all applicable 

FMVSSs. 49 U.S.C. 30141. More 

specifically, Section 30141(a)(1)(A), 

which governs the import eligibility of 

vehicles with a substantially similar 

U.S. certified counterpart, authorizes 

NHTSA to allow importation of such a 

vehicle if the vehicle is ‘‘capable of 

being readily altered to comply with 

applicable motor vehicle safety 

standards prescribed under this 

chapter.’’ (Emphasis added), 49 U.S.C. 

30141(a)(1)(A)(iv). When a noncompliant vehicle does not have a 

substantially similar U.S. counterpart, 

NHTSA may only determine that the 

vehicle is eligible for importation if ‘‘the 

safety features comply with or are 

capable of being altered to comply with 

. . .’’ applicable FMVSS. (Emphasis 

added), 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(B). The 

agency is empowered to make such 

determinations on its own initiative or 

‘‘on petition of a manufacturer or 

importer registered under subsection (c) 

of this section.’’ 49 U.S.C. 30141(a). An 

importer registered under subsection (c) 

of § 30141 is an RI. Therefore, on its 

face, § 30141 establishes that Congress 

distinguished RIs from original 

‘‘manufacturer[s]’’. 

RI’s have a special status and 

responsibilities and duties beyond those 

generally imposed on ‘‘manufacturer[s]’’ 

under the Safety Act. In contrast to 

companies that produce and import 

vehicles certified to comply with 

FMVSSs, RI’s must post a bond when 

importing vehicles. 49 U.S.C. 30141(d). 

Congress also established ownership 

restrictions for RI’s and directed NHTSA 

to establish regulations unique to these 

entities. 49 U.S.C. 30141(c). Unlike 

original manufacturers that self-certify 

vehicles, RIs must also demonstrate, to 

NHTSA’s satisfaction, that particular 

vehicles have been brought into 

compliance with all applicable FMVSS. 

Under 49 U.S.C. 30146(a) an RI may 

‘‘release custody of a motor vehicle 

imported by the registered importer . . . 

only after . . . the registered importer 

certifies to the Secretary of 

Transportation, in the way the Secretary 

prescribes, that the motor vehicle 

complies with each standard prescribed 

in the year the vehicle was 

manufactured and that applies in that 

year to that vehicle.’’ Where an RI has 

certified a vehicle that is substantially 

similar to a vehicle certified for the U.S. 

market by its original manufacturer, the 

RI must recall the vehicles it has 

certified if the original manufacturer 

recalls its U.S.-certified counterpart. 49 

U.S.C. 30147(a)(1)(A). 

NHTSA’s regulations properly 

recognize the congressional 

determination that an RI’s role is to 

modify non-compliant vehicles. 

Petitions for import eligibility must 

identify the original manufacturer of the 

vehicle and the vehicle’s model name 

and model year. 49 CFR 593.6(a)(1) and 

(b)(1). In the case of petitions seeking 

eligibility on a ‘‘substantially similar’’ 

basis, the petition must identify the 

necessary modifications that must be 

completed to bring the non-compliant 

vehicle into compliance with the 

FMVSS applicable to the vehicle’s U.S.- 

certified counterpart. § 593.6(a)(5). For 

other vehicles, the petition must show 

that the vehicle is capable of being 

modified to meet the standards that 

would have applied had it been 

originally manufactured for importation 

into and sale in the U.S. § 593.6(b)(2). 

Any examination of the petition filed 

by US SPECS is premised on the notion 

that the 2012 Lita GLE–6 is a ‘‘motor 

vehicle.’’ For the purposes of the Safety 

Act, a ‘‘motor vehicle’’ is ‘‘a vehicle 

driven or drawn by mechanical power 

and manufactured primarily for use on 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 236 / Tuesday, December 9, 2014 / Notices 73141 

public streets, roads, and highways.’’ 

See 49 U.S.C. 30102(a)(6). In filing the 

petition, US SPECS acknowledges 2012 

Lita GLE–6 is manufactured primarily 

for use on public streets, roads and 

highways. If this were not the case, and 

the 2012 Lita GLE–6 was not 

manufactured primarily for highway 

use, then it is not a ‘‘motor vehicle’’ 

subject to the FMVSS, and there would 

be no reason to consider performing 

conformance modifications to ensure 

that the 2012 Lita GLE-complies with 

those standards. 

Because there is no need to examine 

whether the 2012 Lita GLE–6 is a motor 

vehicle, the next question that arises is 

what class of vehicle is at issue in this 

petition. US SPECS contends that the 

2012 Lita GLE–6 should be classified as 

a Low Speed Vehicle (LSV). NHTSA’s 

regulations at 49 CFR 571.3 define, 

among other things, the types of 

vehicles that are subject to the FMVSS. 

Those regulations state: ‘‘Low-speed 

vehicle (LSV) means a motor vehicle, (1) 

That is 4-wheeled, (2) Whose speed 

attainable in 1.6 km (1 mile) is more 

than 32 kilometers per hour (20 miles 

per hour) and not more than 40 

kilometers per hour (25 miles per hour) 

on a paved level surface, and (3) Whose 

GVWR [gross vehicle weight rating] is 

less than 1,361 kilograms (3,000 

pounds).’’ Requirements for LSVs are 

specified in FMVSS No. 500 Low-Speed 

Vehicles, at 49 CFR 571.500. The 

purpose of the standard is to ensure that 

low-speed vehicles operated on the 

public streets, roads, and highways are 

equipped with the minimum motor 

vehicle equipment appropriate for 

motor vehicle safety. The standard 

requires an LSV to be equipped with 

headlamps, front and rear turn signal 

lamps, taillamps, stop lamps, reflex 

reflectors, mirrors, a parking brake, a 

windshield that conforms to the FMVSS 

on glazing materials (49 CFR 571.205), 

a vehicle identification number or VIN 

that conforms to the requirements of 49 

CFR part 565 Vehicle Identification 

Number Requirements, and a Type 1 or 

Type 2 seat belt assembly at each 

designated seating position that 

conforms to FMVSS No. 209 Seat Belt 

Assemblies (49 CFR 571.209). 

Consistent with these requirements, 

US SPEC’s petition stated that the 

company would need to install 

headlights, turn signals, tail lights, a 

stop light, reflex reflectors, mirrors, a 

parking brake, and a compliant 

windshield, seat belts and VIN plate on 

the vehicle if it was not already so 

equipped. In addition, the petition 

stated that every vehicle must be 

weighed and ‘‘[a]ny vehicle not meeting 

the required GVWR for low speed 

vehicle (sic) must have some of the 

seating removed to achieve the correct 

calculated GVWR.’’ This statement was 

made in reference to the requirements 

for calculating a vehicle’s GVWR that 

are found in NHTSA Certification 

regulations at 49 CFR part 567. Section 

567.4(g)(3) of those regulations specifies 

that a vehicle’s stated GVWR ‘‘shall not 

be less than the sum of the unloaded 

vehicle weight, rated cargo load, and 

150 pounds times the number of the 

vehicle’s designated seating positions.’’ 

Finally, the petition states: ‘‘Every 

vehicle must be checked to insure that 

it does not exceed the maximum (25 

mph) and minimum (20 mph) speed 

requirement. We must reprogram any 

vehicle that is not within the required 

speed limits.’’ 

Given the modifications that US 

SPECS described as potentially needing 

to be performed on the 2012 Lita GLE– 

6, a question can be raised as to whether 

the vehicle was originally manufactured 

as an LSV. If the 2012 Lita GLE–6, as 

originally manufactured, had the 

characteristics of LSV but also has a 

GVWR of 3,000 pounds or more, then it 

would need to be classified as a motor 

vehicle of some type other than a low 

speed vehicle, such as a passenger car, 

multipurpose passenger vehicle, or 

truck. If the vehicle met one of those 

classifications, it could not be modified 

and certified as a low speed vehicle by 

a registered importer, as a registered 

importer is not authorized to change a 

vehicle’s type classification to 

circumvent the need for bringing the 

vehicle into compliance with standards 

that would have applied to the vehicle 

had it been originally manufactured for 

sale in the United States. 

By changing the vehicle’s minimum 

or maximum speed capability, by 

removing designated seating positions 

to justify a reduction in its GVWR, and 

by adding equipment items required by 

FMVSS No. 500 that were not installed 

on the vehicle as originally 

manufactured, US SPECS would not be 

conforming something originally 

manufactured as an LSV to applicable 

FMVSS, as RI’s are authorized to do, but 

would instead be converting a passenger 

car, multi-purpose vehicle, truck or bus 

into an LSV. 

In view of these considerations, 

NHTSA has decided to deny the 

petition under 49 CFR 593.7(e). That 

section provides that a notice of denial 

must state that the Administrator will 

not consider a new petition covering the 

model that is the subject of the denial 

until at least 3 months from the date of 

the notice of denial. Because the 2012 

Lita GLE–6 would not be classified as an 

LSV as originally manufactured, 

NHTSA will not consider any further 

import eligibility petitions covering that 

vehicle as an LSV. 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(B) and 

(b)(1); 49 CFR 593.7; delegations of authority 

at 49 CFR 1.95 and 501.8. 

Nancy Lummen Lewis, 

Associate Administrator for Enforcement. 

[FR Doc. 2014–28725 Filed 12–8–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Office of The Secretary 

List of Countries Requiring 

Cooperation With an International 

Boycott 

In accordance with section 999(a)(3) 

of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, 

the Department of the Treasury is 

publishing a current list of countries 

which require or may require 

participation in, or cooperation with, an 

international boycott (within the 

meaning of section 999(b)(3) of the 

Internal Revenue Code of 1986). 

On the basis of the best information 

currently available to the Department of 

the Treasury, the following countries 

require or may require participation in, 

or cooperation with, an international 

boycott (within the meaning of section 

999(b)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code 

of 1986). 

Iraq 

Kuwait 

Lebanon 

Libya 

Qatar 

Saudi Arabia 

Syria 

United Arab Emirates 

Yemen 

Dated: December 2, 2014. 

Danielle Rolfes, 

International Tax Counsel (Tax Policy). 

[FR Doc. 2014–28804 Filed 12–8–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810–25–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Office of Foreign Assets Control 

Publication of Guidance Relating to the 

Provision of Certain Temporary 

Sanctions Relief, as Extended Through 

June 30, 2015 

AGENCY: Office of Foreign Assets 

Control, Treasury. 

ACTION: Notice, publication of guidance. 

SUMMARY: The Department of the 

Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets 

Control (OFAC) is publishing Guidance 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES