Les Entreprises Michel Corbeil Inc., Denial of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 5408-5409 [E6-1373]
Download as PDF
5408
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 1, 2006 / Notices
1271–1287; Emergency Wetlands
Resources Act, 16 U.S.C. 3921, 3931;
TEA–21 Wetlands Mitigation, 23 U.S.C.
103(b)(6)(m), 133(b)(11); Flood Disaster
Protection Act, 42 U.S.C. 4001–4128.
8. Executive Orders: E.O. 11990
Protection of Wetlands; E.O. 11988
Floodplain Management; E.O. 12898,
Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low Income
Populations; E.O. 11593 Protection and
Enhancement of Cultural Resources;
E.O. 13007 Indian Sacred Sites; E.O.
13287 Preserve America; E.O. 13175
Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments; E.O. 11514
Protection and Enhancement of
Environmental Quality; E.O. 13112
Invasive Species.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Program Number 20.205, Highway Planning
and Construction. The regulations
implementing Executive Order 12372
regarding intergovernmental consultation on
Federal programs and activities apply to this
program.)
Authority: 23 U.S.C. 139(l)(1).
Issued on: January 25, 2006.
Dennis A. Decker,
Division Administrator, Columbus, Ohio.
[FR Doc. E6–1312 Filed 1–31–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2005–22970; Notice 2]
cchase on PROD1PC60 with NOTICES
Les Entreprises Michel Corbeil Inc.,
Denial of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
Les Entreprises Michel Corbeil Inc.
(Corbeil) has determined that certain
school buses that it produced in 2004 do
not comply with S5.1 of 49 CFR
571.221, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standard (FMVSS) No. 221, ‘‘School bus
body joint strength.’’ Pursuant to 49
U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h), Corbeil
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 the
petition was published, with a 30 day
comment period, on November 23, 2005
in the Federal Register (70 FR 70914).
NHTSA received no comments.
Affected are a total of approximately
295 school buses produced between
May 3, 2004 and June 4, 2004. S5.1 of
FMVSS No. 221 requires that:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:49 Jan 31, 2006
Jkt 208001
* * * each body panel joint * * * when
tested in accordance with the procedure of
S6, shall hold the body panel to the member
to which it is joined when subjected to a
force of 60 percent of the tensile strength of
the weakest joined body panel determined
pursuant to S6.2.
The longitudinal roof joint on some of
the subject school buses fails when
tested according to the requirements of
S5.1.
Corbeil believes that the
noncompliance is inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety and that no
corrective action is warranted. Corbeil
states that during the period of
production of the subject school buses,
‘‘the production used expired glue.’’
Corbeil estimates that 61 of the 295
buses could be affected, based on the
number of expired glue cartridges that
were used.
Corbeil further states:
* * * repairs could affect the structural
integrity of these buses’ roofs. If we proceed
with repairs, we must remove the actual MS
polymer strips on the roof to reach the joints.
This operation requires us to preheat (300–
600 °F) the MS polymer strip (will soften the
MS polymer) but at the same time will cause
a significant urethane chemical modification
and will affect the actual joint strength. The
roof joint is composed of urethane glue and
this glue will be affected if the temperature
is higher than 194 °F * * *. If our educated
estimate is that only 61 buses on (sic) the 295
buses involved in this recall are affected,
however they cannot be individually
identified. Also, during the test, the
transverse joint succeeded at 116% of the
requirement and the longitudinal joint failed
only by 9% with 91% of the requirement.
The objective of this recall is to increase the
strength of the joint. We presently suspect
that a retrofit could affect/damage the roof
rather to (sic) reinforce the joint.
Corbeil states that no accidents or
injuries have occurred as a result of this
noncompliance.
NHTSA has reviewed the petition and
has determined that the noncompliance
is not inconsequential to motor vehicle
safety.
With respect to the margin of
noncompliance, Corbeil argues that the
failing school bus joint reached 91
percent of the load required by the
standard. In the petitioner’s opinion, not
meeting the requirement by 9 percent of
the required load is inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety. The agency
disagrees. A significant injuryproducing characteristic of school bus
crashes is exposure to sharp metal edges
that occurs when body panels become
separated from the structural
components to which they have been
fastened. In a crash, severe lacerations
may result if the occupants of the bus
are tossed against these edges.
PO 00000
Frm 00177
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Moreover, if panel separation is
extensive, the occupant may be ejected
from the vehicle, significantly
increasing the possibility of serious
injury. This standard is intended to
reduce the likelihood of this type of
injury by requiring that body joints on
school buses have a minimum tensile
strength equal to 60 percent of the
tensile strength of the weakest joined
body panel. Therefore, NHTSA believes
that failure to meet the performance
requirements of the standard is directly
consequential to the safety of our school
children.
With respect to the number of
vehicles that are noncompliant, Corbeil
states that it believes only 61 of the 295
school buses of the model tested by the
agency are noncompliant. However, 49
U.S.C. 30112 prohibits the
manufacturing, selling and importing of
any noncompliant vehicles. The
FMVSSs are designed to afford equal
protection to all who use these vehicles,
and therefore the number of
noncompliant vehicles is not relevant to
the effect on safety.
Corbeil also states that it suspects that
its proposed remedy could compromise
the integrity of the roof joints due to the
heating required to remove the sealant.
If Corbeil’s proposed repair remedy
would actually further weaken the
school bus body joints, and therefore
result in the vehicles still not meeting
the requirements of FMVSS No. 221, it
would not be an acceptable remedy
under the statute. 49 U.S.C. 30120(a)
requires that a manufacturer remedy a
noncompliance by either repairing,
replacing or repurchasing the
noncompliant vehicle.
However, we think that Corbeil’s
concerns about the one repair method it
suggests are misplaced. The agency is
aware of several cases where school bus
manufacturers have brought similar
noncompliant vehicles with inadequate
body joint strength into compliance
with FMVSS No. 221 by the addition of
mechanical fasteners. In these cases, the
additional fasteners brought the vehicles
into compliance without reliance upon
any other fastening method, such as
adhesive. Corbeil is responsible for
determining an appropriate remedy for
the noncompliance. However, as
discussed, other options may be
available that remedy the
noncompliance without compromising
the integrity of the structure. In any
event, Corbeil’s proposed remedy is not
relevant to determining whether or not
the noncompliance is consequential to
safety.
In consideration of the foregoing,
NHTSA has decided that the petitioner
has not met its burden of persuasion
E:\FR\FM\01FEN1.SGM
01FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 1, 2006 / Notices
that the noncompliance described is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
Accordingly, Corbeil’s petition is hereby
denied.
Authority: (49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120;
delegations of authority at CFR 1.50 and
501.8.)
Issued on: January 27, 2006.
Daniel C. Smith,
Associate Administrator for Enforcement.
[FR Doc. E6–1373 Filed 1–31–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2005–22971; Notice 2]
cchase on PROD1PC60 with NOTICES
Weekend Warrior Trailers, Inc., Denial
of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
Weekend Warrior Trailers, Inc.
(Weekend Warrior) has determined that
certain ramp-equipped travel trailers
that it produced in 2001 through 2005
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), Weekend Warrior 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 the
petition was published, with a 30 day
comment period, on November 23, 2005
in the Federal Register (70 FR 70915).
NHTSA received one comment.
Affected are a total of approximately
13,447 ramp-equipped travel trailers
produced between January 2001 and
September 2005. FMVSS No. 108
requires that these vehicles be equipped
with amber intermediate side marker
lamps and reflex reflectors, and red
identification lamps. However, the
subject vehicles are not equipped with
these devices.
Weekend Warrior believes that the
noncompliance is inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety and that no
corrective action is warranted. Weekend
Warrior states that the noncompliance
has caused no safety related accidents or
injuries, and that it has received no
customer complaints or notification of
injuries or deaths related to the absence
of the required items.
NHTSA has reviewed the petition and
has determined that the noncompliance
is not inconsequential to motor vehicle
safety.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:49 Jan 31, 2006
Jkt 208001
Weekend Warrior did not equip the
subject trailers with identification
lamps, intermediate side reflex
reflectors, or intermediate side marker
lamps, all of which have been required
on large trailers since January 1, 1969.
The ability of motorists to distinguish
large trucks and trailers from passenger
vehicles is an essential component of
crash avoidance because of size,
maneuvering, and speed differences
between the two types of vehicles. High
mounted identification lamps uniquely
identify large vehicles and do so with
the longest possible sight preview of the
lamps. Intermediate side marker lamps
and reflex reflectors provide additional
marking to notify oncoming drivers of
the presence of a long vehicle and one
across the roadway.
The agency received one comment
from FMVSS Consulting, which
supported denial of this petition, based
on the safety need for enhanced lighting
and conspicuity materials which, the
commenter states, are needed because
‘‘[t]railers need abundant conspicuity at
night to meet the need for safety.’’
NHTSA agrees.
A review of NHTSA’s research report
‘‘An Analysis of Fatal Large Truck
Crashes’’ (DOT HS 809 569) indicates
that 7,026 passenger vehicle drivers
died as a result of crashes with
combination trucks (i.e., trucks pulling
trailers) from 1996 through 1999. Of
those, 11 percent were rear end
collisions with the passenger vehicle
striking the combination truck, 13
percent were sideswipes where the
passenger vehicle encroached, and 5
percent were related to trucks turning
across the path of the passenger vehicle.
NHTSA believes that commercial
vehicle conspicuity may have been a
factor in many of these crashes.
Therefore, NHTSA concludes that the
manufacturer’s installation of these
components, as required by FMVSS No.
108, is critical for motor vehicle safety.
Weekend Warrior notes that it has not
received any complaints or reports of
injury as a result of the missing
equipment. The agency does not
consider the company’s having not
received such complaints or reports to
be compelling evidence of the
inconsequentiality of this
noncompliance to safety.
In consideration of the foregoing,
NHTSA has decided that the petitioner
has not met its burden of persuasion
that the noncompliance described is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
Accordingly, Weekend Warrior’s
petition is hereby denied.
Authority: (49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120;
delegations of authority at CFR 1.50 and
501.8.)
PO 00000
Frm 00178
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
5409
Issued on: Janaury 27, 2006.
Daniel C. Smith,
Associate Administrator for Enforcement.
[FR Doc. E6–1372 Filed 1–31–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Surface Transportation Board
Release of Waybill Data
The Surface Transportation Board has
received a request from Thompson Hine
and McCarthy, Sweeney & Harkaway on
behalf of the State of North Dakota
(WB456–1—1/25/2006) for access to
certain data from the Board’s 2000–2004
Carload Waybill Samples. A copy of the
request may be obtained from the Office
of Economics, Environmental Analysis,
and Administration.
The waybill sample contains
confidential railroad and shipper data;
therefore, if any parties object to these
requests, they should file their
objections with the Director of the
Board’s Office of Economics,
Environmental Analysis, and
Administration within 14 calendar days
of the date of this notice. The rules for
release of waybill data are codified at 49
CFR 1244.9.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mac
Frampton, (202) 565–1541.
Vernon A. Williams,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6–1329 Filed 1–31–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Submission for OMB Review;
Comment Request
December 26, 2005.
The Department of Treasury has
submitted the following public
information collection requirement(s) to
OMB for review and clearance under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
Public Law 104–13. Copies of the
submission(s) may be obtained by
calling the Treasury Bureau Clearance
Officer listed. Comments regarding this
information collection should be
addressed to the OMB reviewer listed
and to the Treasury Department
Clearance Officer, Department of the
Treasury, Room 11000, 1750
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20220.
DATES: Written comments should be
received on or before March 3, 2006 to
be assured of consideration.
E:\FR\FM\01FEN1.SGM
01FEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 21 (Wednesday, February 1, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5408-5409]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-1373]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2005-22970; Notice 2]
Les Entreprises Michel Corbeil Inc., Denial of Petition for
Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance
Les Entreprises Michel Corbeil Inc. (Corbeil) has determined that
certain school buses that it produced in 2004 do not comply with S5.1
of 49 CFR 571.221, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No.
221, ``School bus body joint strength.'' Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d)
and 30120(h), Corbeil 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 the petition was
published, with a 30 day comment period, on November 23, 2005 in the
Federal Register (70 FR 70914). NHTSA received no comments.
Affected are a total of approximately 295 school buses produced
between May 3, 2004 and June 4, 2004. S5.1 of FMVSS No. 221 requires
that:
* * * each body panel joint * * * when tested in accordance with
the procedure of S6, shall hold the body panel to the member to
which it is joined when subjected to a force of 60 percent of the
tensile strength of the weakest joined body panel determined
pursuant to S6.2.
The longitudinal roof joint on some of the subject school buses
fails when tested according to the requirements of S5.1.
Corbeil believes that the noncompliance is inconsequential to motor
vehicle safety and that no corrective action is warranted. Corbeil
states that during the period of production of the subject school
buses, ``the production used expired glue.'' Corbeil estimates that 61
of the 295 buses could be affected, based on the number of expired glue
cartridges that were used.
Corbeil further states:
* * * repairs could affect the structural integrity of these
buses' roofs. If we proceed with repairs, we must remove the actual
MS polymer strips on the roof to reach the joints. This operation
requires us to preheat (300-600 [deg]F) the MS polymer strip (will
soften the MS polymer) but at the same time will cause a significant
urethane chemical modification and will affect the actual joint
strength. The roof joint is composed of urethane glue and this glue
will be affected if the temperature is higher than 194 [deg]F * * *.
If our educated estimate is that only 61 buses on (sic) the 295
buses involved in this recall are affected, however they cannot be
individually identified. Also, during the test, the transverse joint
succeeded at 116% of the requirement and the longitudinal joint
failed only by 9% with 91% of the requirement. The objective of this
recall is to increase the strength of the joint. We presently
suspect that a retrofit could affect/damage the roof rather to (sic)
reinforce the joint.
Corbeil states that no accidents or injuries have occurred as a
result of this noncompliance.
NHTSA has reviewed the petition and has determined that the
noncompliance is not inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
With respect to the margin of noncompliance, Corbeil argues that
the failing school bus joint reached 91 percent of the load required by
the standard. In the petitioner's opinion, not meeting the requirement
by 9 percent of the required load is inconsequential to motor vehicle
safety. The agency disagrees. A significant injury-producing
characteristic of school bus crashes is exposure to sharp metal edges
that occurs when body panels become separated from the structural
components to which they have been fastened. In a crash, severe
lacerations may result if the occupants of the bus are tossed against
these edges. Moreover, if panel separation is extensive, the occupant
may be ejected from the vehicle, significantly increasing the
possibility of serious injury. This standard is intended to reduce the
likelihood of this type of injury by requiring that body joints on
school buses have a minimum tensile strength equal to 60 percent of the
tensile strength of the weakest joined body panel. Therefore, NHTSA
believes that failure to meet the performance requirements of the
standard is directly consequential to the safety of our school
children.
With respect to the number of vehicles that are noncompliant,
Corbeil states that it believes only 61 of the 295 school buses of the
model tested by the agency are noncompliant. However, 49 U.S.C. 30112
prohibits the manufacturing, selling and importing of any noncompliant
vehicles. The FMVSSs are designed to afford equal protection to all who
use these vehicles, and therefore the number of noncompliant vehicles
is not relevant to the effect on safety.
Corbeil also states that it suspects that its proposed remedy could
compromise the integrity of the roof joints due to the heating required
to remove the sealant. If Corbeil's proposed repair remedy would
actually further weaken the school bus body joints, and therefore
result in the vehicles still not meeting the requirements of FMVSS No.
221, it would not be an acceptable remedy under the statute. 49 U.S.C.
30120(a) requires that a manufacturer remedy a noncompliance by either
repairing, replacing or repurchasing the noncompliant vehicle.
However, we think that Corbeil's concerns about the one repair
method it suggests are misplaced. The agency is aware of several cases
where school bus manufacturers have brought similar noncompliant
vehicles with inadequate body joint strength into compliance with FMVSS
No. 221 by the addition of mechanical fasteners. In these cases, the
additional fasteners brought the vehicles into compliance without
reliance upon any other fastening method, such as adhesive. Corbeil is
responsible for determining an appropriate remedy for the
noncompliance. However, as discussed, other options may be available
that remedy the noncompliance without compromising the integrity of the
structure. In any event, Corbeil's proposed remedy is not relevant to
determining whether or not the noncompliance is consequential to
safety.
In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that the
petitioner has not met its burden of persuasion
[[Page 5409]]
that the noncompliance described is inconsequential to motor vehicle
safety. Accordingly, Corbeil's petition is hereby denied.
Authority: (49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120; delegations of authority at
CFR 1.50 and 501.8.)
Issued on: January 27, 2006.
Daniel C. Smith,
Associate Administrator for Enforcement.
[FR Doc. E6-1373 Filed 1-31-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P