[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 173 (Thursday, September 5, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46899-46900]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-22538]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
[Docket No. 96-048; Notice 2]
Decision That Certain Nonconforming Mitsubishi Pajero Multi-
Purpose Passenger Vehicles Are Eligible for Importation
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of decision by NHTSA that certain nonconforming 1984
Mitsubishi Pajero multi-purpose passenger vehicles (MPVs) are eligible
for importation.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice announces the decision by NHTSA that 1984
Mitsubishi Pajero MPVs that were not originally manufactured to comply
with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards, are
eligible for importation into the United States because they are
substantially similar to a vehicle originally manufactured for
importation into and sale in the United States and certified by its
manufacturer as complying with the safety standards (the 1984
Mitsubishi Montero), and they are capable of being readily altered to
conform to the standards.
DATE: This decision is effective September 5, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: George Entwistle, Office of Vehicle
Safety Compliance, NHTSA (202-366-5306).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Under 49 U.S.C. Sec. 30141(a)(1)(A) (formerly section
108(c)(3)(A)(i) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act
(the Act)), a motor vehicle that was not originally manufactured to
conform to all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards shall
be refused admission into the United States unless NHTSA has decided
that the motor vehicle is substantially similar to a motor vehicle
originally manufactured for importation into and sale in the United
States, certified under 49 U.S.C. Sec. 30115 (formerly section 114 of
the Act), and of the same model year as the model of the motor vehicle
to be compared, and is capable of being readily altered to conform to
all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards.
Petitions for eligibility decisions may be submitted by either
manufacturers or importers who have registered with NHTSA pursuant to
49 CFR Part 592. As specified in 49 CFR 593.7, NHTSA publishes notice
in the Federal Register of each petition that it receives, and affords
interested persons an opportunity to comment on the petition. At the
close of the comment period, NHTSA decides, on the basis of the
petition and any comments that it has received, whether the vehicle is
eligible for importation. The agency then publishes this decision in
the Federal Register.
Champagne Imports, Inc. of Lansdale, Pennsylvania (``Champagne'')
(Registered Importer No. R-90-009) petitioned NHTSA to decide whether
1984 Mitsubishi Pajero MPVs are eligible for importation into the
United States. NHTSA published notice of the petition on May 20, 1996
(61 FR 25269) to afford an opportunity for public comment. As stated in
the notice of petition, the vehicle which Champagne believes is
substantially similar is the 1984 Mitsubishi Montero that was
manufactured for importation into, and sale in, the United States and
certified by its manufacturer as conforming to all applicable Federal
motor vehicle safety standards.
The petitioner contended that it carefully compared the 1984
Mitsubishi Pajero to the 1984 Mitsubishi Montero, and found the two
models to be substantially similar with respect to compliance with most
applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards.
Champagne submitted information with its petition intended to
demonstrate that the 1984 Mitsubishi Pajero, as originally
manufactured, conforms to many Federal motor vehicle safety standards
in the same manner as the 1984 Mitsubishi Montero that was offered for
sale in the United States, or is capable of being readily altered to
conform to those standards.
Specifically, the petitioner claimed that the 1984 Mitsubishi
Pajero is identical to the certified 1984 Mitsubishi Montero with
respect to compliance with Standard Nos. 102 Transmission Shift Lever
Sequence . . . ., 103 Defrosting and Defogging Systems, 104 Windshield
Wiping and Washing Systems, 105 Hydraulic Brake Systems, 106 Brake
Hoses, 107 Reflecting Surfaces, 113 Hood Latch Systems, 116 Brake
Fluid, 119 New Pneumatic Tires for Vehicles other than Passenger Cars,
124 Accelerator Control Systems, 201 Occupant Protection in Interior
Impact, 203 Impact Protection for the Driver From the Steering Control
System, 204 Steering Control Rearward Displacement, 205 Glazing
Materials, 206 Door Locks and Door Retention Components, 207 Seating
Systems, 209 Seat Belt Assemblies, 210 Seat Belt Assembly Anchorages,
211 Wheel Nuts, Wheel Discs and Hubcaps, 212 Windshield Retention, 219
Windshield Zone Intrusion, and 302 Flammability of Interior Materials.
Petitioner also contended that the vehicle is capable of being
readily altered to meet the following standards, in the manner
indicated:
Standard No. 101 Controls and Displays: (a) substitution of a lens
marked ``Brake'' for a lens with a noncomplying symbol on the brake
failure indicator lamp; (b) installation of a seat belt warning lamp
that displays the appropriate symbol; (c) recalibration of the
speedometer/odometer from kilometers to miles per hour.
Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated
Equipment: (a) installation of U.S.-model headlamp assemblies which
incorporate headlamps with DOT markings; (b) installation of front and
rear sidemarker/reflector assemblies; (c) installation of U.S.-model
taillamp assemblies.
Standard No. 111 Rearview Mirrors: replacement of the convex
passenger side rear view mirror.
Standard No. 114 Theft Protection: installation of a buzzer
microswitch in the steering lock assembly, and a warning buzzer.
Standard No. 115 Vehicle Identification Number: installation of a
VIN plate that can be read from outside the left windshield pillar, and
a VIN reference label on the edge of the door or latch post nearest the
driver.
Standard No. 118 Power Window Systems: rewiring of the power window
system so that the window transport is inoperative when the ignition is
switched off.
Standard No. 120 Tire Selection and Rims for Motor Vehicles other
than Passenger Cars: installation of a tire information placard.
Standard No. 208 Occupant Crash Protection: (a) installation of a
U.S.-model seat belt in the driver's position, or a belt webbing-
actuated microswitch inside the driver's seat belt retractor; (b)
installation of an ignition switch-actuated seat belt warning lamp and
buzzer. The petitioner stated that the vehicle is equipped at each
front designated seating position with a
[[Page 46900]]
combination lap and shoulder restraint that adjusts by means of an
automatic retractor and releases by means of a single push button. The
petitioner further states that the vehicle is equipped with a
combination lap and shoulder restraint that releases by means of a
single push button at each rear outboard seating position, and with a
lap belt at the rear center seating position.
Standard No. 301 Fuel System Integrity: installation of a rollover
valve in the fuel tank vent line.
One comment was received in response to the notice of petition,
from Mitsubishi Motors R&D of America, Inc. (``Mitsubishi''), the
United States representative of Mitsubishi Motors Corporation, the
vehicle's manufacturer. In its comment, Mitsubishi stated that based
upon a review of the petition and a partial evaluation of the 1984
Mitsubishi Pajero, it believes that the vehicle may not be capable of
being readily altered to conform to all applicable Federal motor
vehicle safety standards. Mitsubishi noted that in addition to the
nonconformities identified in the petition, the components on the 1984
Mitsubishi Pajero that are subject to Standard No. 203, Impact
Protection for the Driver from the Steering Control System, are not
identical to those found on the 1984 Mitsubishi Montero. As a result,
Mitsubishi contended that the 1984 Mitsubishi Pajero would have to be
modified to conform to the standard, and then tested in accordance with
the standard to ensure that conformity. Mitsubishi also contended that
the 1984 Mitsubishi Pajero does not conform to Standard No. 204,
Steering Control Rearward Displacement, because it is not equipped with
the same energy-absorbing steering shaft as that found on the 1984
Mitsubishi Montero. As a result, Mitsubishi contended that the steering
shaft would have to be modified and tested in accordance with the
standard.
NHTSA accorded Champagne an opportunity to respond to Mitsubishi's
comments. In its response, Champagne observed that Mitsubishi did not
furnish specifics to support its stated belief that the 1984 Mitsubishi
Pajero may not be capable of being readily altered to conform to all
applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards. Champagne expressed
complete confidence that the vehicle is capable of being so altered. To
address the concern that Mitsubishi raised regarding the vehicle's
compliance with Standard Nos. 203 and 204, Champagne stated that it
will replace the steering wheel and steering shaft on the 1984
Mitsubishi Pajero with U.S.-model components.
NHTSA has reviewed each of the issues that Mitsubishi has raised
regarding Champagne's petition. NHTSA believes that Champagne's
responses adequately address each of those issues. NHTSA further notes
that the modifications described by Champagne have been performed with
relative ease on thousands of nonconforming vehicles imported over the
years, and would not preclude the 1984 Mitsubishi Pajero from being
found ``capable of being readily altered to comply with applicable
motor vehicle safety standards.''
NHTSA has accordingly decided to grant the petition.
Vehicle Eligibility Number for Subject Vehicles
The importer of a vehicle admissible under any final decision must
indicate on the form HS-7 accompanying entry the appropriate vehicle
eligibility number indicating that the vehicle is eligible for entry.
VSP-170 is the vehicle eligibility number assigned to vehicles
admissible under this decision.
Final Decision
Accordingly, on the basis of the foregoing, NHTSA hereby decides
that a 1984 Mitsubishi Pajero that was not originally manufactured to
comply with all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards, is
substantially similar to a 1984 Mitsubishi Montero that was originally
manufactured for importation into and sale in the United States and
certified under 49 U.S.C. Sec. 30115, and is capable of being readily
altered to conform to all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety
standards.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30141 (a)(1)(A) and (b)(1); 49 CFR 593.8;
delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.50 and 501.8.
Issued on: August 29, 1996.
Marilynne Jacobs,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 96-22538 Filed 9-4-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
