[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 176 (Tuesday, September 12, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47422-47423]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-22605]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. 95-53; Notice 2]
Cantab Motors, Ltd., Grant of Application for Temporary Exemption
From Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards No. 208 and 214
Cantab Motors, Ltd., of Round Hill, Va., applied for a temporary
exemption of two years from paragraph S4.1.4 of Federal Motor Vehicle
Safety Standard No. 208 Occupant Crash Protection, and for three years
from Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 214 Side Impact
Protection. The basis of the application was that compliance will cause
substantial economic hardship to a manufacturer that has tried to
comply with the standard in good faith.
Notice of receipt of the application was published on July 14,
1995, and an opportunity afforded for comment (60 FR 36328).
The make and type of passenger car for which exemption was
requested is the Morgan open car or convertible. Morgan Motor Company
(``Morgan''), the British manufacturer of the Morgan, has not offered
its vehicle for sale in the United States since the early days of the
Federal motor vehicle safety standards. In the nine years it has been
in business, the applicant has bought 35 incomplete Morgan cars from
the British manufacturer, and imported them as motor vehicle equipment,
completing manufacture by the addition of engine and fuel system
components. They differ from their British counterparts, not only in
equipment items and modifications necessary for compliance with the
Federal motor vehicle safety standards, but also in their fuel system
components and engines, which are propane fueled. As the party
completing manufacture of the vehicle, Cantab certifies its conformance
to all applicable Federal safety and bumper standards. The vehicle
completed by Cantab in the U.S. is deemed sufficiently different from
the one produced in Britain that NHTSA considers Cantab the
manufacturer, not a converter, even though the brand names are the
same.
Morgan itself produced 478 cars in 1994, while in the year
preceding the filing of its petition in June 1995, the applicant
produced 9 cars for sale in the United States. Since the granting of
its original exemption in 1990, Cantab has invested $38,244 in research
and development related to compliance with Federal safety and emissions
standards. The applicant has experienced a net loss in each of its last
three fiscal (calendar) years, with a cumulative net loss for this
period of $92,594.
Application for Exemption From Standard No. 208
Cantab received NHTSA Exemption No. 90-3 from S4.1.2.1 and S4.1.2.2
of Standard No. 208, which expired May 1, 1993 (55 FR 21141). When this
exemption was granted in 1990, the applicant had concluded that the
most feasible way for it to conform to the automatic restraint
requirements of Standard No. 208 was by means of an automatically
deploying belt. In the period following the granting of the exemption,
Morgan and the applicant created a mock-up of the Morgan passenger
compartment with seat belt hardware and motor drive assemblies. In
time, it was determined that the belt track was likely to deform,
making it inoperable. The program was abandoned, and Morgan and Cantab
embarked upon research leading to a dual airbag system.
According to the applicant, Morgan tried without success to obtain
a suitable airbag system from Mazda, Jaguar, Rolls-Royce and Lotus. As
a result, Morgan is now developing its own system for its cars, and
``[a]s many as twelve different sensors, of both the impact and
deceleration (sic) type, have been tested and the system currently
utilizes a steering wheel from a Jaguar and the Land Rover Discovery
steering column.'' Redesign of the passenger compartment is underway,
involving knee bolstering, a supplementary seat belt system, anti-
submarining devices, and the seats themselves. Morgan informed the
applicant on May 2, 1995, that it had thus far completed 10 tests on
the mechanical components involved ``and are now carrying out a
detailed assessment of air bag operating systems and columns before we
will be in a position to undertake the full set of
[[Page 47423]]
appropriate tests to approve the installation in our vehicles.''
Application for Exemption From Standard No. 214
Concurrently, Morgan and the applicant have been working towards
meeting the dynamic test and performance requirements for side impact
protection, for which Standard No. 214 has established a phase-in
schedule. Although Morgan fits its car with a dual roll bar system
specified by Cantab, and Cantab installs door bars and strengthens the
door latch receptacle and striker plate, the system does not yet
conform to the new requirements of Standard No. 214, and the applicant
has asked for an exemption of three years. It does, however, meet the
previous side door strength requirements of the standard. Were the
phase-in requirement of S8 applied to it, calculated on the basis of
its limited production, only very few cars would be required to meet
the standard.
Safety and Public Interest Arguments
Because of the small number of vehicles that the applicant produces
and its belief that they are used for pleasure rather than daily for
business commuting or on long trips, and because of the three-point
restraints and side impact protection currently offered, the applicant
argued that an exemption would be in the public interest and consistent
with safety. It brought to the agency's attention two recent oblique
front impact accidents at estimated speeds of 30 mph and 65 mph
respectively in which the restrained occupants ``emerged unscathed.''
Further, the availability ``of this unique vehicle . . . will help
maintain the existing diversity of motor vehicles available to the U.S.
consumer.'' Finally, ``the distribution of [this] propane-fueled
vehicle has contributed to the national interest by promoting the
development of motor systems by using alternate fuels.''
No comments were received on the application.
In adding only engine and fuel system components to incomplete
vehicles, the applicant is not a manufacturer of motor vehicles in the
conventional sense. It does not produce the front end structural
components, instrument panel, or steering wheel, areas of the motor
vehicle whose design is critical for compliance with the airbag
requirements of Standard No. 208. These are manufactured by Morgan, and
the applicant is necessarily dependent upon Morgan to devise designs
that will enable conformance with Standard No. 208. The applicant has
been monitoring Morgan's progress, and that company is engaging in
testing and design activities necessary for eventual conformance. The
fact that the applicant is requesting only a two-year exemption, rather
than three, indicates its belief that complying operator and passenger
airbags will at last be fitted to its cars by the end of this period.
Similarly, the applicant is dependent upon the structural design of
its vehicle for compliance with Standard No. 214. As with Standard No.
208, Morgan and the applicant are working towards conformance, though
apparently it will not be achieved within two years. In both instances,
however, the applicant is conscious of the need to conform and has been
taking steps to accomplish it. Although the company's total expenditure
of $38,244 in the last five years to meet emission and safety
requirements is low, the small number of cars produced for sale in the
United States in the last year, nine, would not make available
substantial funds to the company, and its cumulative net losses of
$92,594 indicate an operation whose financial existence is precarious.
Applicant's cars are equipped with manual three-point restraint
systems and comply with previous side impact intrusion requirements.
Because applicant produces only one line of vehicles, it cannot take
advantage of the phase-in requirement. Given the existing level of
safety of the vehicles and the comparatively small exposure of the
small number of them that would be produced under an exemption, there
would appear to be an insignificant risk to traffic safety by providing
an exemption. The public interest is served by maintaining the
existence of small businesses and by creating awareness of alternative
power sources.
In consideration of the foregoing, it is hereby found that to
require immediate compliance with Standards Nos. 208 and 214 would
cause substantial economic hardship to a manufacturer that has in good
faith attempted to meet the standards, and that an exemption would be
in the public interest and consistent with the objectives of traffic
safety.
Accordingly, the applicant is hereby granted NHTSA Exemption No.
95-2, from paragraph S4.1.4 of 49 CFR 571.208 Motor Vehicle Safety
Standard No. 208 Occupant Crash Protection, expiring September 1, 1997,
and from 49 CFR 571.214 Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 214 Side
Impact Protection, expiring September 1, 1998.
(49 U.S.C. 30113; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50)
Issued on September 7, 1995.
Ricardo Martinez,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 95-22605 Filed 9-11-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 49l0-59-P
