« AnteriorContinuar »
(c) The owner of a container is liable for any costs incident to a petition for review including any independent surveys, and for any other costs incident to or resulting from detention or other control of a container.
(d) Unless otherwise determined by the Chief, Merchant Vessel Inspection Division, Office of Merchant Marine Safety, U.S. Coast Guard, a detention
order or other order remains in effect pending the outcome of any petition or appeal of that order.
(e) The Chief, Merchant Vessel Inspection Division, Office of Merchant Marine Safety, U.S. Coast Guard acts on all appeals within ten days of receipt.
(45 FR 37217, June 2, 1980, as amended at 47 FR 50496, Nov. 8, 1982)
Page 569 Regrooved tires.
150 570 Vehicle in use inspection standards
151 571 Federal motor vehicle safety standards
162 572 Anthropomorphic test dummies..........
427 573 Defect and noncompliance reports
449 574 Tire identification and recordkeeping
453 575 Consumer information regulations
464 576 Record retention.........
486 577 Defect and noncompliance notification
486 579 Defect and noncompliance responsibility
492 580 Odometer disclosure requirements
493 581 Bumper standard.................
495 582 Insurance cost information regulation .....
498 590 Motor vehicle emission inspections.............
499 CROSS REFERENCE: See 23 CFR, Chapter I, Subchapter G, Federal Highway Administration, Department of Transportation, for regulations on the certification of vehicle size and weight enforcement and the certification of speed limit enforcement.
EDITORIAL NOTE: At 48 FR 39908, September 1, 1983, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration suspended the automatic occupant restraint requirements of Safety Standard No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection, until September 1, 1984. For the convenience of the user, the full text of that document appears below:
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
49 CFR Part 571
(Docket No. 74-14; Notice 31)
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Stand
ards Occupant Crash Protection; Automatic Occupant Restraint Requirement
AGENCY: Department of Transportation. ACTION: Suspension of rule and request for comments.
SUMMARY: This notice suspends the automatic occupant restraint requirements of Safety Standard No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection. This action permits the agency time for the further review contemplated by the recent Supreme Court decision that found NHTSA's rescission of the requirement to be arbitrary and capricious. This suspension is issued without a prior opportunity for notice and comment; the rule might otherwise be deemed effective on September 1, 1983. However, public comment on the suspension is requested and the suspension will be revised or revoked, if appropriate, in response to the comments received. DATES: Suspension–The mandatory automatic restraint requirement of Standard No. 208 is suspended until September 1, 1984. This suspension is effective on September 1, 1983.
Public Comments—Comments on this notice must be received on or before October 3, 1983. ADDRESSES: Comments should refer to the docket and notice numbers set forth above and be submitted to: Docket Section, Room 5109, 400 Sev
enth Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20590. Docket hours are 8:00 am to 4:00 p.m. (e.d.t.), Monday through Friday. FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Kennerly Digges, Acting Associate Administator for Rulemaking, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20590 (202-426-1810). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On October 29, 1981 (46 FR 53419), the Department of Transportation's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) published a notice rescinding the automatic restraint requirements of Safety Standard No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection. (The language of Standard 208 as it was codified prior to the rescission is contained in Appendix A to this notice.) On June 1, 1982, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit found the agency's action to be arbitrary and capricious and overturned the agency's action. (State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Department of Transportation, 680 F. 2d 206.) On August 4, 1982, the Court of Appeals issued an order staying the effective date of the requirement until September 1, 1983.
In June 1983, the United States Supreme Court rejected the scope of review used by the lower court, but also found the rescission to be arbitrary and capricious. The Supreme Court vacated the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remanded the case to that Court with directions to remand it to NHTSA for further consideration consistent with the Supreme Court's opinion. (Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association V. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. (No. 82-354; June 24, 1983).
Because the Supreme Court vacated the judgment of the Court of Appeals, it could be argued that the rescission of the automatic restraint require