Bentley Motors, Inc., Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 4744 [2011-1582]
Download as PDF
4744
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 17 / Wednesday, January 26, 2011 / Notices
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Susan Lender (AST–100), Office of
Commercial Space Transportation
(AST), 800 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Room 331, Washington, DC 20591,
telephone (202) 267–8029; E-mail
susan.lender@faa.gov. Complete
information regarding COMSTAC is
available on the FAA Web site at:
https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/
headquarters_offices/ast/
advisory_committee/.
Issued in Washington, DC, January 20,
2011.
George C. Nield,
Associate Administrator for Commercial
Space Transportation.
[FR Doc. 2011–1549 Filed 1–25–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2009–0114; Notice 2]
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
Bentley Motors, Inc., Grant of Petition
for Decision of Inconsequential
Noncompliance
Bentley Motors, Inc. (Bentley) has
determined that certain headlamps in
2005–2008 Bentley Arnage and Azure
passenger cars do not fully comply with
paragraph S7.8.2.1(b) of 49 CFR
571.108, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standard (FMVSS) No. 108 Lamps,
Reflective Devices and Associated
Equipment. Bentley 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) (see implementing rule at 49
CFR part 556), Bentley 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
Bentley’s petition was published, with a
30-day public comment period, on 7/30/
2009, in the Federal Register (74 FR
38082). No comments were received. To
view the petition and all supporting
documents, log onto the Federal Docket
Management System Web site at:
https://www.regulations.gov/. Then
follow the online search instructions to
locate docket number ‘‘NHTSA–2009–
0114.’’
For further information on this
decision, contact Mr. Mike Cole, Office
of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA), telephone
(202) 366–2334, facsimile (202) 366–
7002.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:27 Jan 25, 2011
Jkt 223001
Bentley estimated that 1,115 model
year 2005–2008 Bentley Arnage and
Azure passenger cars manufactured
between January 13, 2004 and
November 9, 2007 are involved. Bentley
also stated that based on its preliminary
investigation it believes that only 50%
of those vehicles have the subject
noncompliance.
Paragraph S7.8.5.3(b) of FMVSS No.
108 requires in pertinent part:
S7.8.5.3 Visual/optical aiming. Each
visually/optically aimable headlamp shall be
designed to conform to the following
requirements: * * *
(b) Horizontal aim, lower beam. There shall
be no adjustment of horizontal aim unless the
headlamp is equipped with a horizontal
VHAD. If the headlamp has a VHAD, it shall
be set to zero.
Bentley explained that the
noncompliance with FMVSS No. 108 is
that horizontal aim adjustment of the
subject lower beams is possible due to
the absence of a blanking cap over the
lower beam horizontal adjustment
screw.
Bentley also stated that they
discovered this noncompliance as a
result of a special production line
quality audit investigation.
Bentley further stated that it believes
that this noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety
for three reasons. First, the adjustment
screw is always hidden by an engine
cover when the vehicle’s hood is open.
Second, when the engine cover is
removed the screw is still hidden down
a small dark guide hole, so the screw is
not immediately visible and it is not
immediately obvious that a disabling
cap is not present. Last, the workshop
manual clearly identifies that this screw
is not functional on North American
specification vehicles so no vehicle
repairer would ever need to try to search
for and adjust the screw in question.
Bentley also has informed NHTSA
that it has corrected the problem that
caused this noncompliance.
In summation, Bentley states that it
believes that the noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety
and that no corrective action is
warranted.
NHTSA Decision
NHTSA agrees with Bentley that the
noncompliance is inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety. The only possible
safety risk is that someone could locate
and improperly adjust the lower beam
horizontal adjustment mechanism. That
risk is extremely small. The location of
the horizontal adjuster makes it difficult
to access and there is no information in
the owner’s manual or given to the
dealer which indicates the location.
PO 00000
Frm 00136
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Further, the lamps as originally
installed in the subject vehicles are
properly aimed and the need for reaiming is unlikely. In addition, it is
unlikely that owners will try to adjust
the headlamp aim since the owner’s
manual instructs drivers to take the
vehicle to the dealer if the lamps need
to be re-aimed. Because dealers are
generally not aware that the horizontal
aim can be adjusted, they are likely to
replace the lamps that may need
adjustment. Moreover, to the extent this
notice increases awareness on the part
of owners or dealers that the horizontal
adjustment mechanism is present on
these vehicles, the notice will also
inform them that any horizontal
adjustment issue should be addressed
by replacing the lamps and/or
contacting Bentley.
In consideration of the foregoing,
NHTSA has decided that Bentley has
met its burden of persuasion that the
subject FMVSS No. 108 headlamps
noncompliance is inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety. Accordingly,
Bentley’s petition is granted and the
petitioner is exempted from the
obligation of providing notification of,
and a remedy for, the subject
noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118
and 30120.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120;
delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.50 and
501.8.
Issued on: January 19, 2011.
Claude H. Harris,
Acting Associate Administrator for
Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2011–1582 Filed 1–25–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Internal Revenue Service
Proposed Collection; Comment
Request for Form 1099–K
Internal Revenue Service (IRS),
Treasury.
ACTION: Notice and request for
comments.
AGENCY:
The Department of the
Treasury, as part of its continuing effort
to reduce paperwork and respondent
burden, invites the general public and
other Federal agencies to take this
opportunity to comment on proposed
and/or continuing information
collections, as required by the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
Public Law 104–13 (44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(2)(A)). Currently, the IRS is
soliciting comments concerning Form
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\26JAN1.SGM
26JAN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 17 (Wednesday, January 26, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 4744]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-1582]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2009-0114; Notice 2]
Bentley Motors, Inc., Grant of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
Bentley Motors, Inc. (Bentley) has determined that certain
headlamps in 2005-2008 Bentley Arnage and Azure passenger cars do not
fully comply with paragraph S7.8.2.1(b) of 49 CFR 571.108, Federal
Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108 Lamps, Reflective Devices
and Associated Equipment. Bentley 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) (see implementing rule
at 49 CFR part 556), Bentley 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 Bentley's petition was published, with a
30-day public comment period, on 7/30/2009, in the Federal Register (74
FR 38082). No comments were received. To view the petition and all
supporting documents, log onto the Federal Docket Management System Web
site at: https://www.regulations.gov/. Then follow the online search
instructions to locate docket number ``NHTSA-2009-0114.''
For further information on this decision, contact Mr. Mike Cole,
Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone (202) 366-2334, facsimile
(202) 366-7002.
Bentley estimated that 1,115 model year 2005-2008 Bentley Arnage
and Azure passenger cars manufactured between January 13, 2004 and
November 9, 2007 are involved. Bentley also stated that based on its
preliminary investigation it believes that only 50% of those vehicles
have the subject noncompliance.
Paragraph S7.8.5.3(b) of FMVSS No. 108 requires in pertinent part:
S7.8.5.3 Visual/optical aiming. Each visually/optically aimable
headlamp shall be designed to conform to the following requirements:
* * *
(b) Horizontal aim, lower beam. There shall be no adjustment of
horizontal aim unless the headlamp is equipped with a horizontal
VHAD. If the headlamp has a VHAD, it shall be set to zero.
Bentley explained that the noncompliance with FMVSS No. 108 is that
horizontal aim adjustment of the subject lower beams is possible due to
the absence of a blanking cap over the lower beam horizontal adjustment
screw.
Bentley also stated that they discovered this noncompliance as a
result of a special production line quality audit investigation.
Bentley further stated that it believes that this noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety for three reasons. First, the
adjustment screw is always hidden by an engine cover when the vehicle's
hood is open. Second, when the engine cover is removed the screw is
still hidden down a small dark guide hole, so the screw is not
immediately visible and it is not immediately obvious that a disabling
cap is not present. Last, the workshop manual clearly identifies that
this screw is not functional on North American specification vehicles
so no vehicle repairer would ever need to try to search for and adjust
the screw in question.
Bentley also has informed NHTSA that it has corrected the problem
that caused this noncompliance.
In summation, Bentley states that it believes that the
noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety and that no
corrective action is warranted.
NHTSA Decision
NHTSA agrees with Bentley that the noncompliance is inconsequential
to motor vehicle safety. The only possible safety risk is that someone
could locate and improperly adjust the lower beam horizontal adjustment
mechanism. That risk is extremely small. The location of the horizontal
adjuster makes it difficult to access and there is no information in
the owner's manual or given to the dealer which indicates the location.
Further, the lamps as originally installed in the subject vehicles are
properly aimed and the need for re-aiming is unlikely. In addition, it
is unlikely that owners will try to adjust the headlamp aim since the
owner's manual instructs drivers to take the vehicle to the dealer if
the lamps need to be re-aimed. Because dealers are generally not aware
that the horizontal aim can be adjusted, they are likely to replace the
lamps that may need adjustment. Moreover, to the extent this notice
increases awareness on the part of owners or dealers that the
horizontal adjustment mechanism is present on these vehicles, the
notice will also inform them that any horizontal adjustment issue
should be addressed by replacing the lamps and/or contacting Bentley.
In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Bentley
has met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108
headlamps noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
Accordingly, Bentley's petition is granted and the petitioner is
exempted from the obligation of providing notification of, and a remedy
for, the subject noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120; delegations of authority at
49 CFR 1.50 and 501.8.
Issued on: January 19, 2011.
Claude H. Harris,
Acting Associate Administrator for Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2011-1582 Filed 1-25-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P