Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 20, 2009 / Notices 23775 

• Status of SAE G–10 Response to 

Symbology Standards Request—Bob 

Smith. 

• Coordination between 76/206 and 

78/214—Stephane Dubet. 

• Others to be determined. 

• SPR and INTEROP. 

June 16 

• AIS and MET Subgroup meetings. 

June 17 

• AIS and MET Subgroup meetings. 

June 18 

• AIS and MET Subgroup meetings. 

June 19 

• AIS and MET Subgroup meetings. 

• Plenary Session (Other Business, 

Meeting Plans and Dates). 

• Closing Plenary Session (Other 

Business, Meeting Plans and Dates, 

Closing Remarks, Adjourn). 

Attendance is open to the interested 

public but limited to space availability. 

With the approval of the chairmen, 

members of the public may present oral 

statements at the meeting. Persons 

wishing to present statements or obtain 

information should contact the person 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section. Members of the public 

may present a written statement to the 

committee at any time. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on May 14, 

2009. 

Meredith Gibbs, 

RTCA Advisory Committee. 

[FR Doc. E9–11752 Filed 5–19–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2009–0092; Notice 1] 

Pilkington North America, Inc., Receipt 

of Petition for Decision of 

Inconsequential Noncompliance 

Pilkington North America, Inc. 

(Pilkington) has determined that certain 

replacement rear windows that it 

manufactured for 2006–2009 Honda 

Civic two-door coupe passenger car do 

not fully comply with paragraphs S6.2 

and S6.3 of 49 CFR 571.205, Federal 

Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 

No. 205 Glazing Materials. Pilkington 

has filed an appropriate report pursuant 

to 49 CFR Part 573, Defect and 

Noncompliance Responsibility and 

Reports. 

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

30120(h) (see implementing rule at 49 

CFR part 556), Pilkington has petitioned 

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 Pilkington’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. 

Pilkington estimated that 206 

replacement rear windows (NAGS part 

number FB22692GTY) for 2006–2009 

Honda Civic two-door coupe passenger 

cars are involved. Pilkington also states 

that all of the subject windows were 

manufactured on April 16, 2008. 

Paragraphs S6.2 and S6.3 of FMVSS 

No. 205 require in pertinent part: 

S6.2 A prime glazing manufacturer certifies 

its glazing by adding to the marks required 

by section 7 of ANSI/SAE Z26.1–1996, in 

letters and numerals of the same size, the 

symbol ‘‘DOT’’ and a manufacturer’s code 

mark that NHTSA assigns to the 

manufacturer. NHTSA will assign a code 

mark to a manufacturer after the 

manufacturer submits a written request to the 

Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration, * * * 

S6.3 A manufacturer or distributor who 

cuts a section of glazing material to which 

this standard applies, for use in a motor 

vehicle or camper, must— 

(a) Mark that material in accordance with 

section 7 of ANSI/SAE Z26.1–1996; and 

(b) Certify that its product complies with 

this standard in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 

30115. 

Pilkington explained that the 

noncompliances with FMVSS No 205 

exist due to its failure to label the 

replacement rear windows with the 

marks required by section 7 of ANSI/ 

SAE Z26.1–1996, the symbol ‘‘DOT,’’ 

and its NHTSA assigned manufacturer 

code mark. 

Pilkington states that it believes that 

this noncompliance is inconsequential 

to motor vehicle safety for three reasons. 

First, the non-compliance relates solely 

to product monograms or markings; the 

subject rear windows meet all other 

safety and performance standards. 

Second, NHTSA has previously granted 

other exemptions for non-compliant 

product labeling. In the past, the agency 

has recognized that the failure to meet 

labeling requirements often is 

inconsequential as to motor vehicle 

safety. Third, the information contained 

in these product markings is not 

required in order for consumers to 

operate their vehicles safely. 

Pilkington stated its belief that the 

noncompliance will not interfere with 

any future tracing of the windows 

because Pilkington is only one of three 

manufacturers of rear windows for this 

particular Honda Civic, the other two 

being PGW (Pittsburgh Glass Works, 

formerly known as PPG) and Auto 

Temp, Inc. Given that the windows 

produced by the two other 

manufacturers will be properly marked, 

Pilkington’s unlabeled rear windows 

should easily be identified and traced, 

if necessary should any future defects or 

noncompliances be discovered. 

Pilkington also stated its belief the 

lack of a monogram is inconsequential 

with respect to motor vehicle safety 

because consumers do not need the 

information in these monograms in 

order to operate their vehicles in a safe 

manner. Pilkington has tested a number 

of the parts in its possession and 

confirmed that they meet all other 

applicable FMVSS. 

Pilkington also has informed NHTSA 

that it has corrected the problem that 

caused these errors so that they will not 

be repeated in future production. 

Pilkington also notes its intent to ensure 

that no additional non-compliant rear 

windows are in the marketplace. In this 

pursuit, Pilkington stated its intention 

to write to all wholesalers and 

distributors which purchased the 

subject replacement parts asking them 

to return to Pilkington any rear 

windows lacking compliant markings. 

However, Pilkington is seeking an 

exemption from quarterly reporting 

obligations and from any regulations 

that could potentially require efforts to 

contact end users or to label or mark 

rear windows now in use. 

In summation, Pilkington states that it 

believes that the noncompliances are 

inconsequential to motor vehicle safety 

and that no corrective action is 

warranted. 

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. 

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 be submitted by any of the 

following methods: 

a. 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. 

23776 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 20, 2009 / Notices 

b. By hand delivery 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. 

c. 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 1–202– 

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. 

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.). DOT’s 

complete Privacy Act Statement in the 

Federal Register published on April 11, 

2000 (65 FR 19477–78). 

You may view documents submitted 

to a docket at the address and times 

given above. You may also view the 

documents on the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov by following the 

online instructions for accessing the 

dockets available at that Web site. 

The petition, supporting materials, 

and all comments received before the 

close of business on the closing date 

indicated below 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. 

Comment closing date: June 19, 2009. 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: 

Delegations of authority at CFR 1.50 and 

501.8. 

Issued on: May 14, 2009. 

Claude H. Harris, 

Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance. 

[FR Doc. E9–11720 Filed 5–19–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Transit Administration 

[Docket Number: FTA–2009–0009] 

Notice of Availability of Proposed 

Guidance for New Starts/Small Starts 

Policies and Procedures and Request 

for Comments 

AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration 

(FTA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of availability and 

request for comments. 

SUMMARY: This notice announces the 

availability of, and requests comments 

on, the Federal Transit Administration’s 

(FTA) Proposed Guidance on New 

Starts/Small Starts Policies and 

Procedures. The proposed guidance 

presents weights to be assigned for the 

six project justification criteria for New 

Starts and the three project justification 

criteria for Small Starts in the project 

evaluation process. FTA also proposes a 

process to ensure that the impacts of 

tunnels are considered in project 

evaluation. 

DATES: Comments on the Proposed 

Guidance on New Starts/Small Starts 

Policies and Procedures must be 

received by June 19, 2009. Late filed 

comments will be considered to the 

extent practicable. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

[identified by the Docket Number FTA– 

2009–0009] by any of the following 

methods: 

Web site: http://regulations.gov. 

Follow the instructions for submitting 

comments on the DOT electronic docket 

site. 

Fax: 202–493–2251. 

Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. 

Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE., 

Washington, DC 20590, between 8:30 

a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal Holidays. 

Instructions: You must include the 

agency name (Federal Transit 

Administration) and the docket number 

(FTA–2009–0009). You should submit 

two copies of your comments if you 

submit them by mail. If you wish to 

receive confirmation that FTA received 

your comments, you must include a 

self-addressed stamped postcard. Note 

that all comments received will be 

posted without change to the Federal 

government Web site located at http:// 

regulations.gov. This means that if your 

comment includes any personal 

identifying information, such 

information will be made available to 

users of Web site. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Elizabeth Day, Office of Planning and 

Environment, telephone (202) 366–5159 

and Christopher Van Wyk, Office of 

Chief Counsel, telephone (202) 366– 

1733. FTA is located at 1200 New Jersey 

Ave., SE., East Building, Washington, 

DC 20590. Office hours are from 8:30 

a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

proposed changes described in the 

policy guidance made available by this 

notice have been necessitated by the 

Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient 

Transportation Equity Act—A Legacy 

for Users (SAFETEA–LU) Technical 

Corrections Act of 2008 (Pub. L. 110– 

244), which amends 49 U.S.C. 5309. The 

Act specifies that each of the project 

justification criteria for proposed New 

Starts and Small Starts projects should 

be given ‘‘comparable, but not 

necessarily equal, numerical weight 

* * * in calculating the overall project 

rating.’’ The guidance proposes to set 

the weights at 20 percent each for the 

mobility, cost-effectiveness, land use, 

and economic development criteria, and 

10 percent each for the operating 

efficiencies and environmental benefits 

criteria for New Starts projects. Each of 

the three project justification criteria for 

Small Starts (land use, economic 

development and cost-effectiveness) 

would be set at a third each. 

The Act further states that the 

Secretary of Transportation shall 

analyze, evaluate, and consider the 

congestion relief, improved mobility, 

and other benefits of tunnels in transit 

projects that include a transit tunnel, as 

well as the associated ancillary and 

mitigation costs necessary to relieve 

congestion, improve mobility, and 

decrease air and noise pollution in those 

projects that do not include a tunnel but 

where a transit tunnel was one of the 

alternatives analyzed. FTA proposes to 

require that project sponsors develop 

and consider such information during 

alternative analysis studies. FTA will 

ensure that such information has been 

addressed as part of the FTA review of 

project applications for entry into 

preliminary engineering. 

FTA will respond to comments 

received on the proposed guidance in a 

second Federal Register notice to be 

published after the close of the 

comment period. That notice will 

describe any changes made to the 

weights for project justification criteria