Denial of Motor Vehicle Defect Petition, 69727 [E7-23853]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 236 / Monday, December 10, 2007 / Notices original EIS, and reconsider them, if appropriate. Because public scoping meetings for the Saddle Road Improvements project were held in Hilo, Kona and Waimea during the development of the original EIS, no additional scoping is required for an ongoing project, where an SEIS is prepared that does not involve a reassessment of the entire action. However, letters describing the proposed action and soliciting comments will be sent to appropriate Federal, State and local agencies, and to private organizations and citizens who have previously expressed or are known to have interest in this proposal. Public hearings will be held in both West and East Hawai‘i. Public notice will be given of the time and place of the hearings. The draft SEIS will be available for public and agency review and comment prior to the public hearing. To ensure that the full range of issues related to this proposed action are addressed and that all significant issues are identified, comments and suggestions are invited from all interested parties. Comments or questions concerning this proposed action and the SEIS should be directed to the FHWA–CFLHD or the HDOT at the addresses provided above. (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) Issued on: November 27, 2007. Ricardo Suarez, P.E., Division Engineer, CFLHD. [FR Doc. 07–5988 Filed 12–7–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–22–M DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Denial of Motor Vehicle Defect Petition National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation. ACTION: Denial of petition for a defect investigation. rmajette on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES AGENCY: SUMMARY: This notice sets forth the reasons for the denial of a petition submitted pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30162 by Mr. Richard H. McSwain of McSwain Engineering Inc. to NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation (ODI), received June 29, 2007, requesting that the agency commence a proceeding to determine the existence of a defect related to motor vehicle safety with VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:35 Dec 07, 2007 Jkt 214001 respect to the manual seatback recliner mechanism in model year 1989–1992 Ford Probe vehicles (subject vehicles). After a review of the petition and other information, NHTSA has concluded that further expenditure of the agency’s investigative resources on the issues raised by the petition does not appear to be warranted. The agency accordingly has denied the petition. The petition is hereinafter identified as DP07–001. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Steve Chan, Safety Defects Engineer, Defects Assessment Division, Office of Defects Investigation, NHTSA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. Telephone: (202) 366–8537. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 29, 2007, NHTSA received a petition from Mr. Richard H. McSwain of McSwain Engineering Inc., requesting that the agency investigate the failure of the seatback recliner mechanisms in the subject vehicles. The petition is based on an examination of a passenger side front seat recliner mechanism from a subject vehicle involved in a multivehicle collision, of an exemplar seat, as well as mechanical testing of a seat from a subject vehicle. The petitioner identified a failure mode involving bypass of the seatback stop pin (inside the recliner mechanism) during forward movement of the seatback, such as when entering and exiting the rear seat. The petition stated that stop pin bypass allows the recliner mechanism sector gear to over-travel with respect to the pawl. Return of the seatback to the upright position may then bend the first tooth of the pawl, resulting in a false or partial engagement of the sector and pawl teeth. This false engagement condition is transmitted to the opposing recliner mechanism via a mechanical communication cable. According to the petition, the ultimate result is the inability of the recliner mechanism to support the seatback during a collision event. The petitioner concluded that the stop pin bypass that initiated the failure mode is a result of inadequate height of the pin and the resulting inadequate contact between the pin and seatback stop. The Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 207 ‘‘Seating Systems,’’ specifies that seats in passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, and buses must meet certain static force test requirements. However, for seats that hinge on folding seatbacks, the restraining device, once engaged, shall not release when a force equal to twenty times the weight of the seatback is applied through the center of gravity for the seat in the direction the seat is facing. It is not uncommon to see PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 69727 the seatbacks of new vehicles moved from their initial positions after a FMVSS simulated vehicular collision. The identified failure mode may be the result of progressive wear and tear of the seatback stop pin, the seatback stop, and other seat components in vehicles that are, on average, 17 years old. Available data do not suggest that this has occurred with a notable frequency. ODI reviewed its consumer complaint data received over the last nineteen years and found no complaints of seatback collapse (with or without a vehicle collision) in the subject vehicles. In view of the foregoing, and considering the advanced age of the subject vehicles, it is unlikely that NHTSA would issue an order for the notification and remedy of the alleged defect as defined by the petitioner at the conclusion of the investigation requested in the petition. The statutory requirement that the manufacturer provide a free remedy does not apply if the vehicle was bought by the first purchaser more than 10 calendar years before an order is issued. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA’s limited resources to best accomplish the agency’s safety mission, the petition is denied. Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30162(d); delegations of authority at CFR 1.50 and 501.8. Issued on: December 4, 2007. Daniel C. Smith, Associate Administrator for Enforcement. [FR Doc. E7–23853 Filed 12–7–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–59–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [Docket No. NHTSA–2007–0042; Notice 1] General Motors Corporation, Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance General Motors Corporation (GM) has determined that certain model year 2005, 2006 & 2007 Cadillac STS passenger cars equipped with sunroofs do not fully comply with paragraph S4(e) of 49 CFR 571.118, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 118 Power-Operated Window, Partition, and Roof Panel Systems. GM has filed an appropriate report pursuant to 49 CFR Part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h), GM has petitioned for an exemption from the notification and E:\FR\FM\10DEN1.SGM 10DEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 236 (Monday, December 10, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 69727]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-23853]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration


Denial of Motor Vehicle Defect Petition

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 
Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Denial of petition for a defect investigation.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice sets forth the reasons for the denial of a 
petition submitted pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30162 by Mr. Richard H. 
McSwain of McSwain Engineering Inc. to NHTSA's Office of Defects 
Investigation (ODI), received June 29, 2007, requesting that the agency 
commence a proceeding to determine the existence of a defect related to 
motor vehicle safety with respect to the manual seatback recliner 
mechanism in model year 1989-1992 Ford Probe vehicles (subject 
vehicles). After a review of the petition and other information, NHTSA 
has concluded that further expenditure of the agency's investigative 
resources on the issues raised by the petition does not appear to be 
warranted. The agency accordingly has denied the petition. The petition 
is hereinafter identified as DP07-001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Steve Chan, Safety Defects 
Engineer, Defects Assessment Division, Office of Defects Investigation, 
NHTSA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. Telephone: 
(202) 366-8537.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 29, 2007, NHTSA received a petition 
from Mr. Richard H. McSwain of McSwain Engineering Inc., requesting 
that the agency investigate the failure of the seatback recliner 
mechanisms in the subject vehicles. The petition is based on an 
examination of a passenger side front seat recliner mechanism from a 
subject vehicle involved in a multi-vehicle collision, of an exemplar 
seat, as well as mechanical testing of a seat from a subject vehicle. 
The petitioner identified a failure mode involving bypass of the 
seatback stop pin (inside the recliner mechanism) during forward 
movement of the seatback, such as when entering and exiting the rear 
seat. The petition stated that stop pin bypass allows the recliner 
mechanism sector gear to over-travel with respect to the pawl. Return 
of the seatback to the upright position may then bend the first tooth 
of the pawl, resulting in a false or partial engagement of the sector 
and pawl teeth. This false engagement condition is transmitted to the 
opposing recliner mechanism via a mechanical communication cable. 
According to the petition, the ultimate result is the inability of the 
recliner mechanism to support the seatback during a collision event. 
The petitioner concluded that the stop pin bypass that initiated the 
failure mode is a result of inadequate height of the pin and the 
resulting inadequate contact between the pin and seatback stop.
    The Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 207 ``Seating 
Systems,'' specifies that seats in passenger cars, multipurpose 
passenger vehicles, trucks, and buses must meet certain static force 
test requirements. However, for seats that hinge on folding seatbacks, 
the restraining device, once engaged, shall not release when a force 
equal to twenty times the weight of the seatback is applied through the 
center of gravity for the seat in the direction the seat is facing. It 
is not uncommon to see the seatbacks of new vehicles moved from their 
initial positions after a FMVSS simulated vehicular collision.
    The identified failure mode may be the result of progressive wear 
and tear of the seatback stop pin, the seatback stop, and other seat 
components in vehicles that are, on average, 17 years old. Available 
data do not suggest that this has occurred with a notable frequency. 
ODI reviewed its consumer complaint data received over the last 
nineteen years and found no complaints of seatback collapse (with or 
without a vehicle collision) in the subject vehicles.
    In view of the foregoing, and considering the advanced age of the 
subject vehicles, it is unlikely that NHTSA would issue an order for 
the notification and remedy of the alleged defect as defined by the 
petitioner at the conclusion of the investigation requested in the 
petition. The statutory requirement that the manufacturer provide a 
free remedy does not apply if the vehicle was bought by the first 
purchaser more than 10 calendar years before an order is issued. 
Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA's 
limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety mission, the 
petition is denied.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30162(d); delegations of authority at CFR 
1.50 and 501.8.

    Issued on: December 4, 2007.
Daniel C. Smith,
Associate Administrator for Enforcement.
[FR Doc. E7-23853 Filed 12-7-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P