Cantab Motors, Ltd.; Receipt of Application for Temporary Exemption From Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards No. 208 and 214

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. 95-53; Notice 1]

Cantab Motors, Ltd.; Receipt of Application for Temporary

Exemption From Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards No. 208 and 214

Cantab Motors, Ltd., of Round Hill, VA, has 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 from Federal

Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 214 Side Impact Protection. The basis

of the application is that compliance will cause substantial economic

hardship to a manufacturer that has tried to comply with the standard

in good faith.

[[Page 36329]]

This notice of receipt of an application is published in accordance

with the requirements of 49 U.S.C. 30113(b)(2) and does not represent

any judgment of the agency on the merits of the application.

The make and type of passenger car for which exemption is 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 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 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. 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

argues that an exemption would be in the public interest and consistent

with safety. It brings 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.''

Interested persons are invited to submit comments on the

application described above. Comments should refer to the docket number

and the notice number, and be submitted to: Docket Section, National

Highway Traffic Safety Administration, room 5109, 400 Seventh Street,

SW., Washington, DC 20590. It is requested but not required that 10

copies be submitted.

All comments received before the close of business on the comment

closing date indicated below will be considered, and will be available

for examination in the docket at the above address both before and

after that date. To the extent possible, comments filed after the

closing date will also be considered.

Notice of final action on the application will be published in the

Federal Register pursuant to the authority indicated below.

Comment closing date: August 14, 1995.

(49 U.S.C. 30113; delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.50. and

501.8)

Issued on July 10, 1995.

Barry Felrice,

Associate Administrator for Safety Performance Standards.

[FR Doc. 95-17297 Filed 7-13-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P