Coupled Products, Inc., Notice of Appeal of Denial of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 10162-10163 [05-3989]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
10162
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 40 / Wednesday, March 2, 2005 / Notices
noncompliant tires were incorrectly
marked: ‘‘340 kPa (49 psi).’’ The actual
conversion of 340 kPa to psi units yields
49.35 psi before rounding to whole
numbers (340 kPa divided by a
conversion factor of 6.895 equals 49.35
psi).
The labeling requirements of FMVSS
No. 109 New Pneumatic Tire S4.3.4 (a)
mandate that each tire have
permanently molded into or onto both
sidewalls the maximum permissible
inflation pressure in pounds per inch
(psi) rounded to the next higher whole
number.
MNA argues that this noncompliance
will have no impact on either the
performance of the tire on a motor
vehicle, or on motor vehicle safety itself.
MNA argues that NHTSA has recently
studied the impact of tire labeling
information on safety in the context of
its rulemaking efforts under the
Transportation Recall Enhancement,
Accountability and Documentation
(TREAD) Act. This analysis found that
sidewall maximum inflation pressure
labeling is poorly understood by the
general public, and indicated that those
consumers that are aware of sidewall
maximum inflation pressure labeling
commonly misuse this information. A
number of commenters on both the
Advanced Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking and the Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking for tire labeling
recommended that the maximum
inflation pressure labeling be removed
from the sidewall because of its limited
safety value and its propensity to
confuse consumers. NHTSA ultimately
decided to retain maximum inflation
pressure labeling requirements as an aid
in preventing over-inflation. The
mislabeling issue in this case will in no
way contribute to the risk of overinflation because the value actually
marked is lower than the value required
by the regulations.
Also, MNA states that, this
mislabeling is clearly inconsequential
with respect to safety for all of the
following stated reasons: (1) The
noncompliance is one solely of
rounding to the nearest whole number
and labeling; (2) The actual labeling is
one psi less than that required by the
regulation; (3) Rounding 49.35 psi to 49
psi, the nearest whole number, is more
accurate in this case than rounding to
the next higher whole number (50) as
required by the regulations; (4) All
performance requirements of FMVSS
No. 109 are met or exceeded; (5) These
tires are marked with the correct metric
maximum inflation pressure (as allowed
by FMVSS No. 109 and as shown on
pages 1–32 of the 2003 Tire and Rim
Association yearbook); (6) Use of the
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:00 Mar 01, 2005
Jkt 205001
sidewall label as a source of information
for the maximum inflation pressure will
not increase the risk of over-inflation of
the tire because the actual value is lower
than both the actual maximum inflation
pressure (by 0.35 psi) and lower than
the 50 psi value required for these tires
by the regulations; (7) Incorrect use of
the sidewall label maximum inflation
pressure as a source of information for
the recommended inflation pressure
will not result in an overloading of the
tires or reduce the load capacity of the
tires because the 49 psi conversion still
remains 8 psi greater than that required
to carry the maximum load for these
tires. In fact, 340 kPa (50psi) is the
higher of two alternative choices for the
maximum inflation pressure provided
for this tire’s load rating per The Tire
and Rim Association yearbook.
Consequently, MNA believes that the
foregoing noncompliance will have an
inconsequential impact on motor
vehicle safety.
NHTSA believes that the true measure
of inconsequentiality to motor vehicle
safety in this case is the effect of the
noncompliance on the operational
safety of vehicles on which these tires
are mounted. In this case, MNA selected
the lower inflation pressure provided
for this tire’s load rating per The Tire
and Rim Association yearbook. Except
for the one psi understated maximum
permissible inflation pressure on the
sidewall, the subject tires are properly
labeled and constructed in accordance
with FMVSS No. 109. This labeling
noncompliance has no effect on the
performance of the subject tires.
In consideration of the foregoing,
NHTSA has decided that the applicant
has met its burden of persuasion that
the noncompliance is inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, its
application is granted and the applicant
is exempted from providing the
notification of the noncompliance as
required by 49 U.S.C. 30118, and from
remedying the noncompliance, as
required by 49 U.S.C. 30120.
(Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120;
delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.50 and
501.8)
Issued on: February 18, 2005.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 05–3988 Filed 3–1–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
PO 00000
Frm 00092
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2004–18755; Notice 3]
Coupled Products, Inc., Notice of
Appeal of Denial of Petition for
Decision of Inconsequential
Noncompliance
Coupled Products, Inc. (Coupled
Products) has appealed a decision by
the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration that denied its petition
for a determination that its
noncompliance with Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No.
106, ‘‘Brake hoses,’’ is inconsequential
to motor vehicle safety.
Notice of receipt of the petition was
published on August 5, 2004, in the
Federal Register (69 FR 47484). On
December 24, 2004, NHTSA published a
notice in the Federal Register denying
Coupled Products’ petition (69 FR
76520), stating that the petitioner had
not met its burden of persuasion that the
noncompliance is inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety.
This notice of receipt of Coupled
Products’ appeal is published in
accordance with NHTSA’s regulations
(49 CFR 556.7 and 556.8) and does not
represent any agency decision or other
exercise of judgment concerning the
merits of the appeal.
Coupled Products determined that
certain hydraulic brake hose assemblies
that it produced do not comply with
S5.3.4 of 49 CFR 571.106, FMVSS No.
106. S5.3.4 of FMVSS No. 106, tensile
strength, requires that ‘‘a hydraulic
brake hose assembly shall withstand a
pull of 325 pounds without separation
of the hose from its end fittings.’’ A total
of approximately 24,622 brake hose
assemblies, consisting of 3,092
assemblies bearing Part Number 5478
and 21,530 assemblies bearing Part
Number 5480 may not comply with
S5.3.4. The potentially affected hoses
were manufactured using a ‘‘straight
cup’’ procedure rather than the
appropriate ‘‘step cup’’ procedure.
Compliance testing by the petitioner of
eight sample hose assemblies from two
separate manufacturing lots of these
hoses revealed that seven of the eight
samples experienced hose separation
from the end fittings at loads from 224
to 317 pounds. Coupled Products
asserted that the noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety
and that no corrective action is
warranted.
NHTSA reviewed the petition and
determined that the noncompliance is
not inconsequential to motor vehicle
E:\FR\FM\02MRN1.SGM
02MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 40 / Wednesday, March 2, 2005 / Notices
safety. Coupled Products had stated in
its petition that because of the specific
vehicle application involved, since the
hoses are used in specific boat trailer
applications of a single trailer
manufacturer, the hoses are installed in
such a manner as to make it unlikely
that the hose assembly would be subject
to the type of forces to which the tensile
strength test is directed.
However, NHTSA determined that
this was not a persuasive argument,
since it is also true of many automobile
brake hose applications. NHTSA also
pointed out that the tensile strength test
is a worst case test, subjecting the
crimped joint to a separation pull. The
purpose of the tensile strength test is to
test only the crimped area in a brake
hose. A test conducted at an angle to the
end fitting centerline, such as
conducted by the Coupled Products,
would not measure the strength of the
crimped area by itself but also the
interaction of the end fitting with the
interior wall of the brake hose. This
would result in a more lenient test for
the crimped area.
In its petition, Coupled Products had
also asserted that because the braking
system on the trailer is independent of
the towing vehicle’s braking system, a
failure of the hose assembly on the
trailer would not result in a loss of
braking capability of the towing vehicle,
and the driver would be able to stop
both vehicles. In response, NHTSA
determined that in the event that the
failure of the hose assembly occurred,
the driver of the towing vehicle would
be faced with a potentially serious
safety situation due to the reduced
stopping capability of the vehicle
combination.
The compliance testing by Coupled
Products resulted in seven of eight
sample hose assemblies experiencing
hose separation from the end fittings at
loads from 224 to 317 pounds. This
represents a noncompliance margin of
from 45 percent to 2 percent,
respectively, compared to the
requirement of 325 pounds, over a total
population of 24,622 hose assemblies.
NHTSA stated that a noncompliance
margin of up to 45 percent presents a
serious safety concern.
In consideration of the foregoing,
NHTSA decided that the petitioner did
not meet its burden of persuasion that
the noncompliance it described is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
Accordingly, its petition was denied.
In its appeal from NHTSA’s denial,
Coupled Products provided new data. It
performed new testing on the
noncompliant hoses using a hot impulse
test modeled in accordance with SAE
J1401, which is to be incorporated into
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:00 Mar 01, 2005
Jkt 205001
FMVSS No. 106 in 2006 (69 FR 76298,
76324). This test was conducted using
both properly crimped and incorrectly
crimped brake hoses. The hoses passed
the test without failures. In addition,
Coupled Products conducted life cycle
impulse testing based on SAE J1401,
using the maximum brake pressure level
(1000 psi) of the trailer for 10,000
cycles, equivalent to two panic stops a
day—every day—for ten years, to assess
the potential of catastrophic failure or
leakage. This test was conducted using
correctly and incorrectly crimped brake
hoses. Couple Products states that there
was no deterioration of hose assembly
integrity. Coupled Products’ appeal
submission containing the specific data
can be found in the NHTSA Docket for
this petition.
Interested persons are invited to
submit written data, views, and
arguments on the petition described
above. Comments must refer to the
docket and notice number cited at the
beginning of this notice and be
submitted by any of the following
methods. Mail: Docket Management
Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Nassif Building, Room
PL–401, 400 Seventh Street, SW.,
Washington, DC, 20590–0001. Hand
Delivery: Room PL–401 on the plaza
level of the Nassif Building, 400
Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC. It
is requested, but not required, that two
copies of the comments be provided.
The Docket Section is open on
weekdays from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. except
Federal Holidays. Comments may be
submitted electronically by logging onto
the Docket Management System Web
site at https://dms.dot.gov. Click on
‘‘Help’’ to obtain instructions for filing
the document electronically. Comments
may be faxed to 1–202–493–2251, or
may be submitted to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: go to https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
The petition, supporting materials,
and all comments received before the
close of business on the closing date
indicated below will be filed and will be
considered. All comments and
supporting materials received after the
closing date will also be filed and will
be considered to the extent possible.
When the petition is granted or denied,
notice of the decision will be published
in the Federal Register pursuant to the
authority indicated below.
Comment closing date: April 1, 2005.
(Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120:
delegations of authority at CFR 1.50 and
501.8)
PO 00000
Frm 00093
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
10163
Issued on: February 22, 2005.
Ronald L. Medford,
Senior Associate Administrator for Vehicle
Safety.
[FR Doc. 05–3989 Filed 3–1–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2004–19792; Notice 2]
Unified Marine, Inc., Denial of Petition
for Decision of Inconsequential
Noncompliance
Unified Marine, Inc. (Unified Marine)
has determined that certain combination
lamps it distributed for sale, which were
produced in 2002 through 2004, do not
comply with 49 CFR 571.108, Federal
Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS)
No. 108, ‘‘Lamps, reflective devices, and
associated equipment.’’ Pursuant to 49
U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h), Unified
Marine has petitioned for an exemption
from the notification and remedy
requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301
on the basis that this noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
Notice of receipt of Unified Marine’s
petition was published, with a 30 day
comment period, on December 15, 2004,
in the Federal Register (69 FR 75106).
NHTSA received two comments.
Approximately 52,665 combination
lamps and combination lamp kits
produced between December 2002 and
July 2004 and marketed as ‘‘Road
Warrior by SeaSense’’ are affected.
These include the following
combination lamps: 1,624 model
50080272 (right hand), 1,001 model
50080274 (left hand), 1,612 model
80272, and 1,947 model 80274, as well
as 46,481 model 50080270 combination
lamp kits that consist of two lamps per
kit.
The subject rear combination lamps
contain taillamps, stop lamps, turn
signal lamps, rear reflex reflectors, and
side marker lamps. In addition, the
combination lamps designated for the
left (driver’s) side of the vehicle contain
license plate lamps. FMVSS No. 108,
S5.8.1, requires that each lamp,
reflective device, or item of associated
equipment manufactured to replace any
lamp, reflective device, or item of
associated equipment on any vehicle to
which this standard applies, be
designed to conform to the standard. As
such, in order to comply with S5.8.1,
the combination lamps must be
designed to conform to the photometry,
color, and other requirements specific to
E:\FR\FM\02MRN1.SGM
02MRN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 40 (Wednesday, March 2, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10162-10163]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-3989]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2004-18755; Notice 3]
Coupled Products, Inc., Notice of Appeal of Denial of Petition
for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance
Coupled Products, Inc. (Coupled Products) has appealed a decision
by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration that denied its
petition for a determination that its noncompliance with Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 106, ``Brake hoses,'' is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
Notice of receipt of the petition was published on August 5, 2004,
in the Federal Register (69 FR 47484). On December 24, 2004, NHTSA
published a notice in the Federal Register denying Coupled Products'
petition (69 FR 76520), stating that the petitioner had not met its
burden of persuasion that the noncompliance is inconsequential to motor
vehicle safety.
This notice of receipt of Coupled Products' appeal is published in
accordance with NHTSA's regulations (49 CFR 556.7 and 556.8) and does
not represent any agency decision or other exercise of judgment
concerning the merits of the appeal.
Coupled Products determined that certain hydraulic brake hose
assemblies that it produced do not comply with S5.3.4 of 49 CFR
571.106, FMVSS No. 106. S5.3.4 of FMVSS No. 106, tensile strength,
requires that ``a hydraulic brake hose assembly shall withstand a pull
of 325 pounds without separation of the hose from its end fittings.'' A
total of approximately 24,622 brake hose assemblies, consisting of
3,092 assemblies bearing Part Number 5478 and 21,530 assemblies bearing
Part Number 5480 may not comply with S5.3.4. The potentially affected
hoses were manufactured using a ``straight cup'' procedure rather than
the appropriate ``step cup'' procedure. Compliance testing by the
petitioner of eight sample hose assemblies from two separate
manufacturing lots of these hoses revealed that seven of the eight
samples experienced hose separation from the end fittings at loads from
224 to 317 pounds. Coupled Products asserted that the noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety and that no corrective action
is warranted.
NHTSA reviewed the petition and determined that the noncompliance
is not inconsequential to motor vehicle
[[Page 10163]]
safety. Coupled Products had stated in its petition that because of the
specific vehicle application involved, since the hoses are used in
specific boat trailer applications of a single trailer manufacturer,
the hoses are installed in such a manner as to make it unlikely that
the hose assembly would be subject to the type of forces to which the
tensile strength test is directed.
However, NHTSA determined that this was not a persuasive argument,
since it is also true of many automobile brake hose applications. NHTSA
also pointed out that the tensile strength test is a worst case test,
subjecting the crimped joint to a separation pull. The purpose of the
tensile strength test is to test only the crimped area in a brake hose.
A test conducted at an angle to the end fitting centerline, such as
conducted by the Coupled Products, would not measure the strength of
the crimped area by itself but also the interaction of the end fitting
with the interior wall of the brake hose. This would result in a more
lenient test for the crimped area.
In its petition, Coupled Products had also asserted that because
the braking system on the trailer is independent of the towing
vehicle's braking system, a failure of the hose assembly on the trailer
would not result in a loss of braking capability of the towing vehicle,
and the driver would be able to stop both vehicles. In response, NHTSA
determined that in the event that the failure of the hose assembly
occurred, the driver of the towing vehicle would be faced with a
potentially serious safety situation due to the reduced stopping
capability of the vehicle combination.
The compliance testing by Coupled Products resulted in seven of
eight sample hose assemblies experiencing hose separation from the end
fittings at loads from 224 to 317 pounds. This represents a
noncompliance margin of from 45 percent to 2 percent, respectively,
compared to the requirement of 325 pounds, over a total population of
24,622 hose assemblies. NHTSA stated that a noncompliance margin of up
to 45 percent presents a serious safety concern.
In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA decided that the
petitioner did not meet its burden of persuasion that the noncompliance
it described is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly,
its petition was denied.
In its appeal from NHTSA's denial, Coupled Products provided new
data. It performed new testing on the noncompliant hoses using a hot
impulse test modeled in accordance with SAE J1401, which is to be
incorporated into FMVSS No. 106 in 2006 (69 FR 76298, 76324). This test
was conducted using both properly crimped and incorrectly crimped brake
hoses. The hoses passed the test without failures. In addition, Coupled
Products conducted life cycle impulse testing based on SAE J1401, using
the maximum brake pressure level (1000 psi) of the trailer for 10,000
cycles, equivalent to two panic stops a day--every day--for ten years,
to assess the potential of catastrophic failure or leakage. This test
was conducted using correctly and incorrectly crimped brake hoses.
Couple Products states that there was no deterioration of hose assembly
integrity. Coupled Products' appeal submission containing the specific
data can be found in the NHTSA Docket for this petition.
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments on the petition described above. Comments must refer to the
docket and notice number cited at the beginning of this notice and be
submitted by any of the following methods. Mail: Docket Management
Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Nassif Building, Room PL-
401, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, 20590-0001. Hand
Delivery: Room PL-401 on the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400
Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC. It is requested, but not required,
that two copies of the comments be provided. The Docket Section is open
on weekdays from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. except Federal Holidays. Comments
may be submitted electronically by logging onto the Docket Management
System Web site at https://dms.dot.gov. Click on ``Help'' to obtain
instructions for filing the document electronically. Comments may be
faxed to 1-202-493-2251, or may be submitted to the Federal eRulemaking
Portal: go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
The petition, supporting materials, and all comments received
before the close of business on the closing date indicated below will
be filed and will be considered. All comments and supporting materials
received after the closing date will also be filed and will be
considered to the extent possible. When the petition is granted or
denied, notice of the decision will be published in the Federal
Register pursuant to the authority indicated below.
Comment closing date: April 1, 2005.
(Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at CFR
1.50 and 501.8)
Issued on: February 22, 2005.
Ronald L. Medford,
Senior Associate Administrator for Vehicle Safety.
[FR Doc. 05-3989 Filed 3-1-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
