Coupled Products, Inc., Grant of Appeal of Decision on Inconsequential Noncompliance, 32397-32398 [05-10784]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 105 / Thursday, June 2, 2005 / Notices
Issued in Washington, DC, on May 25,
2005.
Mary Cheston,
Manager, International Policy Office, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 05–10903 Filed 6–1–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–M
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2004–18755; Notice 4]
Coupled Products, Inc., Grant of
Appeal of Decision on Inconsequential
Noncompliance
Coupled Products, Inc. (Coupled
Products) has appealed a decision by
the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA) 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. Coupled
Products had applied to be exempted
from the notification and remedy
requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301,
‘‘Motor Vehicle Safety.’’
Notice of receipt of the original
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.
Coupled Products appealed, and notice
of the appeal was published in the
Federal Register on March 2, 2005 (70
FR 10162). NHTSA received one public
comment.
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
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:54 Jun 01, 2005
Jkt 205001
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. Coupled
Products had stated in its original
petition that because of the specific
vehicle application involved (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.
In the notice denying Coupled
Products’ original petition, NHTSA
determined that this was not a
persuasive argument. NHTSA 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 original 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 stated 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.
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.
Based on the additional data submitted
by Coupled Products, NHTSA agrees
that the noncompliance is
inconsequential to safety. The Agency
had a major concern with the possibility
of the loss of braking capability when it
denied the original petition. However,
the petitioner has addressed this issue
satisfactorily by comparing the
performance of correctly crimped and
incorrectly crimped brake hose
PO 00000
Frm 00109
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
32397
assemblies. Coupled Products used two
types of pressure cycle tests for this
purpose.
One type of pressure cycle test
purported to simulate the situation of a
‘‘panic stop.’’ For this, the petitioner
used the maximum pressure level in the
trailer (1000 psi) as the upper limit for
the pressure cycle (10 seconds at 1000
psi/2 seconds at zero psi), while keeping
the brake hoses exposed to 212° F. The
brake hoses were exposed to over 10,000
cycles with no failures.
The other type of pressure cycle test
conducted by the petitioner (SAE J1401,
paragraph 4.2.12 ‘‘Hot Impulse Test’’)
while exposing the brake hose
assemblies to more extreme conditions
of temperature (295° F) and pressure
(maximum pressure cycle limit of 1600
psi), using a lesser number of cycles
(150 cycles), calls for holding 4000 psi
for two minutes. All brake hoses tested
passed, demonstrating a burst pressure
of over 10,000 psi, well over the 4000
psi pressure hold. The performance of
the incorrectly crimped brake hose
assemblies at the pressure/temperature
envelopes covered by Coupled Products’
testing satisfactorily addresses NHTSA’s
concerns that the brake hoses will
perform their intended function under
operating conditions. Under both types
of pressure cycle tests the incorrectly
crimped brake hose assemblies
performed as well as the correctly
crimped assemblies.
NHTSA had additional concerns
regarding the effect on the brake hoses
of the trailer suspensions reaching their
limit of travel, and also with the
possibility of interference with the brake
hoses during loading/unloading
operations. The petitioner submitted a
series of photos to address these issues.
The photos indicated that there is no
effect on the brake hose performance
when the trailer’s suspensions are in
their full jounce (compressed) or
rebound conditions, and that there is no
possibility of interference with the brake
hoses during loading/unloading
operations.
The public comment in response to
the notice of appeal was from EZLoader, Inc., a manufacturer of boat
trailers. EZ-Loader stated that it has sold
brake hose assemblies manufactured by
Coupled Products, and has not had any
warranty claims or reports of field
incidents related to the brake hose
assemblies in question. Therefore, EZLoader supports a determination that
the noncompliance is inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety.
In consideration of the foregoing,
NHTSA has decided that the petitioner
has met its burden of persuasion that
the noncompliance described is
E:\FR\FM\02JNN1.SGM
02JNN1
32398
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 105 / Thursday, June 2, 2005 / Notices
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
Accordingly, Coupled Products’ appeal
of NHTSA’s decision on
inconsequential noncompliance is
granted and the petitioner is exempted
from the obligation of providing
notification of, and a remedy for, the
noncompliance.
(Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120;
delegations of authority at CFR 1.50 and
501.8)
Issued on: May 25, 2005.
Ronald L. Medford,
Senior Associate Administrator for Vehicle
Safety.
[FR Doc. 05–10784 Filed 6–1–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2005–21270; Notice 1]
Mercedes-Benz USA LLC, Receipt of
Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
Mercedes-Benz USA LLC (Mercedes)
has determined that the designated
seating capacity placards for certain
vehicles that it produced in 2004 do not
comply with S4.3(b) of 49 CFR 571.110,
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard
(FMVSS) No. 110, ‘‘Tire selection and
rims.’’ Mercedes has filed an
appropriate report pursuant to 49 CFR
Part 573, ‘‘Defect and Noncompliance
Reports.’’
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h), Mercedes 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.
This notice of receipt of Mercedes’
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.
Affected are a total of approximately
1,576 SLK class vehicles produced
between March 24, 2004 and December
15, 2004. S4.3(b) of FMVSS No. 110
requires that a ‘‘placard, permanently
affixed to the glove compartment door
or an equally accessible location, shall
display the * * * [d]esignated seating
capacity * * * .’’ The noncompliant
vehicles have placards stating that the
seating capacity is four, when in fact the
seating capacity is two.
Mercedes believes that the
noncompliance is inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety and that no
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:54 Jun 01, 2005
Jkt 205001
corrective action is warranted. Mercedes
states:
* * * most, if not all, consumers will look
at the number of seats in the vehicle and the
number of safety belts to determine its
capacity, rather than looking at the tire
information placard. Because the SLK
Roadster is a two-seater vehicle with no rear
seat, it is immediately obvious that the
seating capacity is two and not four, and that
it is not possible to seat four occupants in the
vehicle.
Because it is impossible for the SLK to
hold four occupants, the seating capacity
labeling error has no impact on the vehicle
capacity weight, recommended cold tire
inflation pressure and recommended size
designation information. All of this
information is correct on the tire information
placard. Moreover, the purpose of providing
seating capacity information is to prevent
vehicle overloading. Because the SLK holds
only two occupants, it is not possible to
overload the vehicle due to reliance on the
tire information placard.
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: July 5, 2005.
Frm 00110
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Issued on: May 25, 2005.
Ronald L. Medford,
Senior Associate Administrator for Vehicle
Safety.
[FR Doc. 05–10785 Filed 6–1–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Mercedes further states:
PO 00000
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120:
delegations of authority at CFR 1.50 and
501.8)
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA 2005–20782; Notice 2]
Porsche Cars North America, Inc.,
Grant of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
Dr. Ing. h.c.F Porsche AG has
determined that certain vehicles that it
manufactured for model years 2003,
2004 and 2005 do not comply with
S4.2.2(a) of 49 CFR 571.114, Federal
Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS)
No. 114, ‘‘Theft protection.’’ Pursuant to
49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h), on
behalf of Dr. Ing. h.c.F Porsche AG,
Porsche Cars North America, Inc.
(Porsche) has petitioned for a
determination that this noncompliance
is inconsequential to motor vehicle
safety and has filed an appropriate
report pursuant to 49 CFR Part 573,
‘‘Defect and Noncompliance Reports.’’
Notice of receipt of a petition was
published, with a 30-day comment
period, on April 11, 2005, in the Federal
Register (70 FR 18459). NHTSA
received no comments.
Approximately 28,949 model year
2003, 2004, and 2005 Porsche Cayenne,
Cayenne S and Cayenne Turbo vehicles
are affected. S4.2.2(a) of FMVSS No. 114
requires that
* * * provided that steering is prevented
upon the key’s removal, each vehicle * * *
[which has an automatic transmission with a
‘‘park’’ position] may permit key removal
when electrical failure of this [key-locking]
system * * * occurs or may have a device
which, when activated, permits key removal.
In the affected vehicles, the steering
does not lock when the ignition key is
removed from the ignition switch using
the optionally provided device that
permits key removal in the event of
electrical system failure or when the
transmission is not in the ‘‘park’’
position.
Porsche believes that the
noncompliance is inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety and that no
corrective action is warranted. Porsche
states the following in its petition:
E:\FR\FM\02JNN1.SGM
02JNN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 105 (Thursday, June 2, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32397-32398]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-10784]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2004-18755; Notice 4]
Coupled Products, Inc., Grant of Appeal of Decision on
Inconsequential Noncompliance
Coupled Products, Inc. (Coupled Products) has appealed a decision
by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) 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. Coupled Products had
applied to be exempted from the notification and remedy requirements of
49 U.S.C. Chapter 301, ``Motor Vehicle Safety.''
Notice of receipt of the original 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. Coupled Products appealed, and notice of the
appeal was published in the Federal Register on March 2, 2005 (70 FR
10162). NHTSA received one public comment.
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.
Coupled Products had stated in its original petition that because of
the specific vehicle application involved (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.
In the notice denying Coupled Products' original petition, NHTSA
determined that this was not a persuasive argument. NHTSA 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 original 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
stated 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.
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. Based on the additional data submitted by Coupled Products, NHTSA
agrees that the noncompliance is inconsequential to safety. The Agency
had a major concern with the possibility of the loss of braking
capability when it denied the original petition. However, the
petitioner has addressed this issue satisfactorily by comparing the
performance of correctly crimped and incorrectly crimped brake hose
assemblies. Coupled Products used two types of pressure cycle tests for
this purpose.
One type of pressure cycle test purported to simulate the situation
of a ``panic stop.'' For this, the petitioner used the maximum pressure
level in the trailer (1000 psi) as the upper limit for the pressure
cycle (10 seconds at 1000 psi/2 seconds at zero psi), while keeping the
brake hoses exposed to 212[deg] F. The brake hoses were exposed to over
10,000 cycles with no failures.
The other type of pressure cycle test conducted by the petitioner
(SAE J1401, paragraph 4.2.12 ``Hot Impulse Test'') while exposing the
brake hose assemblies to more extreme conditions of temperature
(295[deg] F) and pressure (maximum pressure cycle limit of 1600 psi),
using a lesser number of cycles (150 cycles), calls for holding 4000
psi for two minutes. All brake hoses tested passed, demonstrating a
burst pressure of over 10,000 psi, well over the 4000 psi pressure
hold. The performance of the incorrectly crimped brake hose assemblies
at the pressure/temperature envelopes covered by Coupled Products'
testing satisfactorily addresses NHTSA's concerns that the brake hoses
will perform their intended function under operating conditions. Under
both types of pressure cycle tests the incorrectly crimped brake hose
assemblies performed as well as the correctly crimped assemblies.
NHTSA had additional concerns regarding the effect on the brake
hoses of the trailer suspensions reaching their limit of travel, and
also with the possibility of interference with the brake hoses during
loading/unloading operations. The petitioner submitted a series of
photos to address these issues. The photos indicated that there is no
effect on the brake hose performance when the trailer's suspensions are
in their full jounce (compressed) or rebound conditions, and that there
is no possibility of interference with the brake hoses during loading/
unloading operations.
The public comment in response to the notice of appeal was from EZ-
Loader, Inc., a manufacturer of boat trailers. EZ-Loader stated that it
has sold brake hose assemblies manufactured by Coupled Products, and
has not had any warranty claims or reports of field incidents related
to the brake hose assemblies in question. Therefore, EZ-Loader supports
a determination that the noncompliance is inconsequential to motor
vehicle safety.
In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that the
petitioner has met its burden of persuasion that the noncompliance
described is
[[Page 32398]]
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Coupled Products'
appeal of NHTSA's decision on inconsequential noncompliance is granted
and the petitioner is exempted from the obligation of providing
notification of, and a remedy for, the noncompliance.
(Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120; delegations of authority at CFR
1.50 and 501.8)
Issued on: May 25, 2005.
Ronald L. Medford,
Senior Associate Administrator for Vehicle Safety.
[FR Doc. 05-10784 Filed 6-1-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
