81 FR 95731 - Ford Motor Company, Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 249 (December 28, 2016)
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 249 (December 28, 2016)
| Page Range | 95731-95733 | |
| FR Document | 2016-31405 |
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 249 (Wednesday, December 28, 2016)] [Notices] [Pages 95731-95733] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2016-31405] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [Docket No. NHTSA-2016-0116; Notice 1] Ford Motor Company, Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Receipt of petition. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: Ford Motor Company (Ford), has determined that certain model year (MY) 2015-2017 Ford F-150 and Ford F-Super Duty pickup trucks do not fully comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 202a, Head Restraints. Ford filed a noncompliance information report dated October 18, 2016. Ford also petitioned NHTSA on November 17, 2016, for a decision that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety. DATES: The closing date for comments on the petition is January 27, 2017. ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments on this petition. Comments must refer to the docket and notice number cited in the title of this notice and submitted by any of the following methods:Mail: Send comments 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. Hand Delivery: Deliver comments by hand 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. Electronically: Submit comments electronically by logging onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Web site at https://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Comments may also be faxed to (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 comments you have submitted by mail were received, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard with the comments. Note that all comments received will be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. All comments and supporting materials received before the close of business on the closing date indicated above will be filed in the docket and will be considered. All comments and supporting materials received after the closing date will also be filed and will be considered to the fullest extent possible. When the petition is granted or denied, notice of the decision will also be published in the Federal Register pursuant to the authority indicated at the end of this notice. All comments, background documentation, and supporting materials submitted to the docket may be viewed by anyone at the address and times given above. The documents may also be viewed on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov by following the online instructions for accessing the dockets. The docket ID number for this petition is shown in the heading of this notice. DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement is available for review in a Federal Register notice published on April 11, 2000, (65 FR 19477-78). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Overview Ford Motor Company (Ford), has determined that certain model year (MY) 2015-2017 Ford F-150 and Ford F-Super Duty pickup trucks do not fully comply with paragraph S4.2.2 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 202a, Head Restraints. Ford filed a noncompliance information report dated October 18, 2016, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. Ford also petitioned NHTSA on November 17, 2016, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and 49 CFR part 556, for an exemption from the notification and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the basis that this noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety. This notice of receipt of Ford'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. II. Vehicles Involved Approximately 274,321 MY 2015-2017 Ford F-150 and MY 2017 Ford [[Page 95732]] F-Super Duty pickup trucks manufactured between March 12, 2014 and September 28, 2016, are potentially involved. The affected vehicles are those equipped with a 4-way adjustable driver and front passenger seat head restraint and a front row center seating position (referred to as a ``40/20/40 front seat''). III. Noncompliance Ford explains that the noncompliance is that the driver and front passenger seat head restraints in the subject vehicles do not meet the minimum width requirements of paragraph S4.2.2 of FMVSS No. 202a. The head restraints have, on average, a width of 239 mm, which is below the 254 mm minimum width required by the standard. IV. Rule Text Paragraph S4.2.2 of FMVSS No. 202a states: S4.2.2 Width. When measured in accordance with S5.2.2 of this section, 65 3 mm below the top of the head restraint, the lateral width of a head restraint must be not less than 170 mm, except the lateral width of the head restraint for front outboard designated seating positions in a vehicle with a front center designated seating position, must be no less than 254mm . . . V. Summary of Ford's Petition Ford described the subject noncompliance and stated its belief that the noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety. In support of its petition, Ford submitted the following reasoning: 1. Identical bucket seat and head restraint design provides the intended level of protection: The outboard front bucket seats (cushion, back, head restraint) are identical for trucks built with or without a front row center designated seating position (dsp). In fact, it is possible to remove the seats from a subject truck and swap them with the seats from a truck built without a front center dsp. The center area between the two outboard front bucket seats can be configured with a fold down storage console/dsp, center storage console, or nothing. The outboard bucket seats are the same, regardless of the selected center option. a. Review of preamble discussions (FMVSS No. 202a rulemaking) finds that the main reason for retaining the 254 mm width requirement was concern that ``occupants seated on bench seats are freer than occupants of single seats to position themselves so that they are not directly in front of the head restraint, and a bench head restraint needs to be wider to assure that the head restraint will be behind the occupant in event of a crash.'' (72 FR 25514) b. Review of preamble discussions finds that the main reason for retaining the 170 mm width requirement, and not increasing to 254 mm, for ``bucket seats'' is ``. . . front outboard non-bench seats have a defined contour that, in addition to belt use, better prescribe occupant seating position relative to the head restraint. Therefore, the front non-bench head restraints can be narrower than the front bench seat head restraints.'' (69 FR 74848) c. Conclusion: The seat utilized in the subject vehicles are not ``bench seats'' in the traditional sense of providing a single seating surface that spans the width of the vehicle. All of the characteristics citied by the Agency in supporting the basis for narrower head restraints for bucket seat vehicles are present in the outboard seats of the subject trucks because the outboard bucket seats are identical regardless of how the center area between the seats is configured. The ability for an occupant to position or mis-position themselves in the outboard seat is the same for trucks with or without the center dsp because the seat contours and seat belt anchorage locations are the same. The seats are identical and interchangeable but the head restraint width requirement is different. Ford is not advocating that a narrower head restraint width requirement should apply. Rather, Ford believes that the safety risk the agency sought to address by retaining a wider width requirement for seats with a front center dsp is simply not present in the subject bucket seats because of its contoured design. Regardless how the front center area between the seats is configured, Ford believes that the subject head restraints in the outboard front bucket seats provide the intended level of protection. 2. Seating reference point measurements demonstrate head restraints provide required width protection and intended level of safety: a. Ford evaluated head restraint width protection using seating reference point measurements (SgRP). In promulgating FMVSS No. 202a, the Agency proposed to ``maintain the existing width requirements.'' In responding to comments to harmonize the requirements with ECE 17, the agency stated that, ``The 254 mm width requirement for these head restraints on bench seats has been in effect since January 1, 1969.'' (69 FR 74848). Ford believes that this clearly shows that the agency intended to retain the width requirement as-is in the upgraded standard. b. In retaining the width requirements, the measurement procedure was revised from ``when measured either 64 mm below the top of the head restraint or 635 mm above the seating reference point'' to ``when measured 65 3 mm below the top of the head restraint.'' c. Ford believes that the position of the occupant's head is determined by their seating position, not by the head restraint. In this case, Ford believes that measuring the head restraint width from the SgRP demonstrates that the subject head restraints provide the intended level of safety. Measuring from the top of the head restraint actually varies the location of the width requirement based on the head restraint design, and is not necessarily based on the position of the occupant's head. Below is a table providing data illustrating how the height of a head restraint affects the location at which the width requirement applies, further it shows how this is different under the original FMVSS No. 202 standard. Table 1--Comparison of Head Restraint With Measurement Location ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Height at width Height at width measurement--FMVSS measurement--FMVSS Top of head restraint (mm) No. 202 (635 mm No. 202a (65 mm above SgRP) below top) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 700 (FMVSS No. 202)........... 635 635 750 (FMVSS No. 202a).......... 635 685 800 (FMVSS No. 202a).......... 635 735 850........................... 635 785 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [[Page 95733]] d. The height of the adjustable head restraint in the subject trucks ranges from a minimum of 802 mm up to 851 mm, exceeding the height requirements of FMVSS No. 202a by 50 mm. e. While the agency argued that the existing requirements should not be changed because they meet the need for motor vehicle safety, in the preambles for the FMVSS No. 202a upgrade, no rationale was provided for excluding the option of measuring up from the SgRP or how this option did not meet the need for motor vehicle safety. f. Conclusion: In the subject trucks, the outboard dsp head restraint width exceeds the requirement when the width is measured 635 mm above the SgRP. This method is based on the occupant seated height and is consistent for all seats and head restraints, and demonstrates that the subject head restraints provide occupants with the intended level of safety. 3. Exemplar measurements demonstrate that the subject head restraints provide required width protection and intended level of safety for all occupants: a. Ford evaluated head restraint width protection for occupants using a SAEJ826 package manikin. The measured width of the head restraint at the initial point of contact between the head restraint and the head of the manikin is 257 mm. The height at this location is 636 mm above the seating reference point (SgRP). b. Based on a survey of 15 trucks the highest point on the head restraint that meets the 254 mm width requirement ranged from 674 mm to 721 mm above the SgRP with the head restraint in the full down position. Ford provides the required width across a wide section of the head restraint. Adjusting the head restraint up (up to 50 mm of vertical adjustment is available) further increases the range at which Ford provides the required width. This range of coverage includes occupants as tall and taller than the 95th percentile American male. c. Conclusion: The subject trucks provide the required width and intended level of safety for all occupants including, and taller than, the 95th percentile American male. 4. Vehicle performance testing demonstrates head restraints provide intended level of safety: a. Another alternative method for evaluating seat performance is testing. The Ford F-150 meets or exceeds all other FMVSS No. 202a requirements and was rated ``Good'' by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety based on dynamic whiplash testing. Based on testing, Ford believes that its head restraints are indeed providing the intended level of safety to occupants. Ford stated that it has made changes in production to increase the width of the head restraints. Ford concluded by expressing the belief that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety, and that its petition to be exempted from providing notification of the noncompliance, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118, and a remedy for the noncompliance, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120, should be granted. 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, any decision on this petition only applies to the subject vehicles that Ford no longer controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance existed. However, any decision on 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 vehicles under their control after Ford 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, Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance. [FR Doc. 2016-31405 Filed 12-27-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 28, 2016 / Notices 95731
under an obligation to provide DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION confirmation that comments you have
information to the agency. It also submitted by mail were received, please
includes entities that voluntarily submit National Highway Traffic Safety enclose a stamped, self-addressed
information to the agency. Such entities Administration postcard with the comments. Note that
would include manufacturers of motor all comments received will be posted
[Docket No. NHTSA–2016–0116; Notice 1]
vehicles and of motor vehicle without change to https://
equipment. Importers are considered to Ford Motor Company, Receipt of www.regulations.gov, including any
be manufacturers. It may also include Petition for Decision of personal information provided.
Inconsequential Noncompliance All comments and supporting
other entities that are involved with
materials received before the close of
motor vehicles or motor vehicle
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic business on the closing date indicated
equipment but are not manufacturers. above will be filed in the docket and
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Estimate of the Total Annual Department of Transportation (DOT). will be considered. All comments and
Reporting and Recordkeeping Burdens ACTION: Receipt of petition. supporting materials received after the
Resulting from the Collection of closing date will also be filed and will
Information—4000 hours. SUMMARY: Ford Motor Company (Ford), be considered to the fullest extent
The agency receives requests for has determined that certain model year possible.
(MY) 2015–2017 Ford F–150 and Ford When the petition is granted or
confidential treatment that vary in size
F-Super Duty pickup trucks do not fully denied, notice of the decision will also
from requests that ask the agency to
comply with Federal Motor Vehicle be published in the Federal Register
withhold as little as a portion of one pursuant to the authority indicated at
Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 202a,
page to multiple boxes of documents. the end of this notice.
Head Restraints. Ford filed a
NHTSA estimates that it will take on noncompliance information report All comments, background
average approximately eight (8) hours dated October 18, 2016. Ford also documentation, and supporting
for an entity to prepare a submission petitioned NHTSA on November 17, materials submitted to the docket may
requesting confidential treatment. This 2016, for a decision that the subject be viewed by anyone at the address and
estimate will vary based on the size of noncompliance is inconsequential as it times given above. The documents may
the submission, with smaller and relates to motor vehicle safety. also be viewed on the Internet at https://
voluntary submissions taking DATES: The closing date for comments www.regulations.gov by following the
considerably less time to prepare. The on the petition is January 27, 2017. online instructions for accessing the
agency based this estimate on the dockets. The docket ID number for this
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are
volume of requests received over the petition is shown in the heading of this
invited to submit written data, views, notice.
past three years. and arguments on this petition. DOT’s complete Privacy Act
NHTSA estimates that it will receive Comments must refer to the docket and Statement is available for review in a
approximately 500 requests for notice number cited in the title of this Federal Register notice published on
confidential treatment annually. This notice and submitted by any of the April 11, 2000, (65 FR 19477–78).
figure is based on the average number of following methods:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
requests received over the past three • Mail: Send comments by mail
years. We selected this period because addressed to U.S. Department of I. Overview
it provides an estimate based on Transportation, Docket Operations, Ford Motor Company (Ford), has
incoming requests for the most recent M–30, West Building Ground Floor, determined that certain model year
three years. The agency estimates that Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey (MY) 2015–2017 Ford F–150 and Ford
the total burden for this information Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. F-Super Duty pickup trucks do not fully
collection will be approximately 4000 • Hand Delivery: Deliver comments comply with paragraph S4.2.2 of
hours, which is based on the number of by hand to U.S. Department of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard
requests (500) multiplied by the Transportation, Docket Operations, (FMVSS) No. 202a, Head Restraints.
estimated number of hours to prepare M–30, West Building Ground Floor, Ford filed a noncompliance information
Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey report dated October 18, 2016, pursuant
each submission (8 hours).
Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and
Since nothing in the rule requires The Docket Section is open on Noncompliance Responsibility and
those persons who request confidential weekdays from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. except Reports. Ford also petitioned NHTSA on
treatment pursuant to part 512 to keep Federal Holidays. November 17, 2016, pursuant to 49
copies of any records or requests • Electronically: Submit comments U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and 49
submitted to us, recordkeeping costs electronically by logging onto the CFR part 556, for an exemption from the
imposed would be zero hours and zero Federal Docket Management System notification and remedy requirements of
costs. (FDMS) Web site at https:// 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the basis that
Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3506; delegation of www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online this noncompliance is inconsequential
authority at 49 CFR 1.95. instructions for submitting comments. as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
• Comments may also be faxed to This notice of receipt of Ford’s
Issued on December 21, 2016 in (202) 493–2251. petition is published under 49 U.S.C.
Washington, DC, under authority delegated Comments must be written in the
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
30118 and 30120 and does not represent
in 49 CFR part 1.95. English language, and be no greater than any agency decision or other exercise of
Paul A. Hemmersbaugh, 15 pages in length, although there is no judgment concerning the merits of the
Chief Counsel. limit to the length of necessary petition.
[FR Doc. 2016–31333 Filed 12–27–16; 8:45 am] attachments to the comments. If
comments are submitted in hard copy II. Vehicles Involved
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
form, please ensure that two copies are Approximately 274,321 MY 2015–
provided. If you wish to receive 2017 Ford F–150 and MY 2017 Ford
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:54 Dec 27, 2016 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00177 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\28DEN1.SGM 28DEN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_95980/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 28, 2016 / Notices 95733
d. The height of the adjustable head restraints are indeed providing the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
restraint in the subject trucks ranges intended level of safety to occupants. FinCEN Resource Center at 800–767–
from a minimum of 802 mm up to 851 Ford stated that it has made changes 2825.
mm, exceeding the height requirements in production to increase the width of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
of FMVSS No. 202a by 50 mm. the head restraints. Annunzio-Wylie Anti-Money
e. While the agency argued that the Ford concluded by expressing the
Laundering Act of 1992 required the
existing requirements should not be belief that the subject noncompliance is
Secretary of the Treasury to establish a
changed because they meet the need for inconsequential as it relates to motor
Bank Secrecy Act Advisory Group
motor vehicle safety, in the preambles vehicle safety, and that its petition to be
(BSAAG) consisting of representatives
for the FMVSS No. 202a upgrade, no exempted from providing notification of
from federal regulatory and law
rationale was provided for excluding the the noncompliance, as required by 49
enforcement agencies, financial
option of measuring up from the SgRP U.S.C. 30118, and a remedy for the
institutions, and trade groups with
or how this option did not meet the noncompliance, as required by 49
members subject to the requirements of
need for motor vehicle safety. U.S.C. 30120, should be granted.
f. Conclusion: In the subject trucks, NHTSA notes that the statutory the Bank Secrecy Act, 31 CFR 1000—
the outboard dsp head restraint width provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 1099 et seq. or Section 6050I of the
exceeds the requirement when the 30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to Internal Revenue Code of 1986. The
width is measured 635 mm above the file petitions for a determination of BSAAG is the means by which the
SgRP. This method is based on the inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to Treasury receives advice on the
occupant seated height and is consistent exempt manufacturers only from the operations of the Bank Secrecy Act. As
for all seats and head restraints, and duties found in sections 30118 and chair of the BSAAG, the Director of
demonstrates that the subject head 30120, respectively, to notify owners, FinCEN is responsible for ensuring that
restraints provide occupants with the purchasers, and dealers of a defect or relevant issues are placed before the
intended level of safety. noncompliance and to remedy the BSAAG for review, analysis, and
3. Exemplar measurements defect or noncompliance. Therefore, any discussion.
demonstrate that the subject head FinCEN invites BSAAG membership
decision on this petition only applies to
restraints provide required width nominations for financial institutions,
the subject vehicles that Ford no longer
protection and intended level of safety trade groups, and non-federal regulatory
controlled at the time it determined that
for all occupants: and law enforcement agencies. New
the noncompliance existed. However,
a. Ford evaluated head restraint width members will be selected to serve a
any decision on this petition does not
protection for occupants using a three-year term and must designate one
relieve vehicle distributors and dealers
SAEJ826 package manikin. The individual to represent that member at
of the prohibitions on the sale, offer for
measured width of the head restraint at plenary meetings. The designated
sale, or introduction or delivery for
the initial point of contact between the representative should be knowledgeable
introduction into interstate commerce of
head restraint and the head of the about Bank Secrecy Act requirements
the noncompliant vehicles under their
manikin is 257 mm. The height at this and must be able and willing to make
control after Ford notified them that the
location is 636 mm above the seating the necessary time commitment to
subject noncompliance existed.
reference point (SgRP). participate on committees throughout
b. Based on a survey of 15 trucks the Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: the year by phone and attend biannual
delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.95 and plenary meetings held in Washington,
highest point on the head restraint that 501.8.
meets the 254 mm width requirement DC, in May and October.
ranged from 674 mm to 721 mm above Jeffrey M. Giuseppe, It is important to provide complete
the SgRP with the head restraint in the Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance. answers to the following items, as
full down position. Ford provides the [FR Doc. 2016–31405 Filed 12–27–16; 8:45 am]
nominations will be evaluated on the
required width across a wide section of BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
information provided through this
the head restraint. Adjusting the head process. There is no formal application;
restraint up (up to 50 mm of vertical interested organizations may submit
adjustment is available) further their nominations via email or email
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
increases the range at which Ford attachment. Nominations should consist
provides the required width. This range Financial Crimes Enforcement of:
of coverage includes occupants as tall Network; Bank Secrecy Act Advisory • Name of the organization requesting
and taller than the 95th percentile Group; Solicitation of Application for membership
American male. Membership • Point of contact, title, address,
c. Conclusion: The subject trucks email address and phone number
provide the required width and AGENCY: Financial Crimes Enforcement • Description of the financial
intended level of safety for all occupants Network (‘‘FinCEN’’), Treasury. institution or trade group and its
including, and taller than, the 95th ACTION: Notice and request for involvement with the Bank Secrecy Act,
percentile American male. nominations. 31 CFR 1000–1099 et seq.
4. Vehicle performance testing • Reasons why the organization’s
SUMMARY: FinCEN is inviting participation on the BSAAG will bring
demonstrates head restraints provide
nominations from the public for value to the group
intended level of safety:
a. Another alternative method for membership on the Bank Secrecy Act Organizations may nominate
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
evaluating seat performance is testing. Advisory Group. New members will be themselves, but nominations for
The Ford F–150 meets or exceeds all selected for three-year membership individuals who are not representing an
other FMVSS No. 202a requirements terms. organization will not be considered.
and was rated ‘‘Good’’ by the Insurance DATES: Nominations must be received Members will not be remunerated for
Institute for Highway Safety based on by January 27, 2017. their time, services, or travel. In making
dynamic whiplash testing. Based on ADDRESSES: Nominations must be the selections, FinCEN will seek to
testing, Ford believes that its head emailed to BSAAG@fincen.gov. complement current BSAAG members
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:54 Dec 27, 2016 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00179 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\28DEN1.SGM 28DEN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_95980/page/3.svg)
Document Created: 2016-12-28 02:16:42
Document Modified: 2016-12-28 02:16:42
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Notices | |
| Action | Receipt of petition. | |
| Dates | The closing date for comments on the petition is January 27, 2017. | |
| FR Citation | 81 FR 95731 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR