Ford Motor Company, Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 5301-5302 [2012-2306]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 22 / Thursday, February 2, 2012 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2012–0005; Notice 1]
Ford Motor Company, Receipt of
Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Receipt of petition.
AGENCY:
Ford Motor Company 1 (Ford)
has determined that certain model year
2011 Ford E–150, E–250, E–350 and E–
450 motor vehicles manufactured
between May 12, 2011 and May 25,
2011, do not fully comply with
paragraph S5.1 of Federal Motor Vehicle
Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 205,
Glazing Materials. Ford has filed an
appropriate report pursuant to 49 CFR
part 573, Defect and Noncompliance
Responsibility and Reports (dated
August 22, 2011).
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h) (see implementing rule at 49
CFR part 556), Ford 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 Ford’s
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 approximately 4,532
model year 2011 Ford E–150, E–250, E–
350 and E–450 trucks manufactured
between May 12, 2011 and May 25,
2011 at Ford’s Ohio assembly plant are
affected.
NHTSA notes that the statutory
provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to
file petitions for a determination of
inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to
exempt manufacturers only from the
duties found in sections 30118 and
30120, respectively, to notify owners,
purchasers, and dealers of a defect or
noncompliance and to remedy the
defect or noncompliance. Therefore,
these provisions only apply to the
4,532 2 subject vehicles that Ford no
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
1 Ford Motor Company is a motor vehicle
manufacturer incorporated under the laws of the
state of Delaware.
2 Ford’s petition, which was filed under 49 CFR
part 556, requests an agency decision to exempt
Ford as a vehicle manufacturer from the notification
and recall responsibilities of 49 CFR part 573 for the
4,532 affected vehicles. However, a decision on this
petition cannot relieve vehicle distributors and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:09 Feb 01, 2012
Jkt 226001
longer controlled at the time it
determined that the noncompliance
existed.
Ford described the noncompliance as
the formation of air bubbles in the
windshields when subjected to high
temperatures specified in paragraph
S5.1 of FMVSS No. 205.
Paragraph S5.1 of FMVSS No. 205
requires in pertinent part:
S5.1 Glazing materials for use in motor
vehicles must conform to ANSI/SAE Z26.1–
1996 unless this standard provides
otherwise.
S5.1.1 Multipurpose passenger vehicles.
Except as otherwise specifically provided by
this standard, glazing for use in multipurpose
passenger vehicles shall conform to the
requirements for glazing for use in trucks as
specified in ANSI/SAE Z26.1–1996 * * *
Ford expressed its belief that only
approximately 100 of the 4,532 subject
vehicles may actually develop air
bubbles in their windshields.
Ford argues that paragraph S5.1 of
FMVSS No. 205 specifies meeting the
requirements of ANSI Z26.1–1996
Section 5.4 Boil, Test 4. The affected
paragraph 5.4.3 ‘‘Interpretation of
Results’’ states ‘‘The glass itself may
crack in this test, but no bubbles or
other defects shall develop more than 13
mm from the outer edge of the specimen
or from any cracks that may develop.’’
Although the affected windshields may
develop air bubbles, Ford believes this
condition does not present a risk to
motor vehicle safety for the reasons
described below.
The initiation of the air bubbles will
most likely occur when the vehicle is
parked in the sun with ambient
temperatures greater than 80 °F, and
they occur very early in the life of the
vehicle. This was the case for the initial
vehicles that exhibited the condition
while still at the assembly plant, that
was experiencing high seasonal
temperatures at the time. Of the 41 field
reports of the condition that had
occurred as of August 16, 2011, only
one occurred subsequent to delivery to
a customer. All other field reports were
found during pre-delivery vehicle
preparation.
The appearance of the air bubbles is
a slow process, and there are no reports
of air bubbles affecting the entire
windshield. If bubbles do occur in the
driver vision zone, the vision zone is
initially only partially affected. This
condition would be noticed by the
customer prior to a significant spread of
the air bubbles, and the customer would
dealers of the prohibitions on the sale, offer for sale,
introduction or delivery for introduction into
interstate commerce of the noncompliant vehicles
under their control after Ford notified them that the
subject noncompliance existed.
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
5301
seek repair under Ford’s normal 3/36
warranty.
Ford is not aware of accidents or
injuries attributed to this condition.
In summation, Ford believes that the
described noncompliance of its vehicles
to meet the requirements of FMVSS No.
225 is inconsequential to motor vehicle
safety, and that its petition, to exempt
from providing recall notification of
noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C.
30118 and remedying the recall
noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C.
30120 should be granted.
Comments: Interested persons are
invited to submit written data, views,
and arguments on this petition.
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:
a. By mail addressed to: U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M–30, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington,
DC 20590.
b. By hand delivery to: U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M–30, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington,
DC 20590. The Docket Section is open
on weekdays from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m.
except Federal Holidays.
c. Electronically: by logging onto the
Federal Docket Management System
(FDMS) Web site at https://
www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Comments may also be faxed to 1 (202)
493–2251.
Comments must be written in the
English language, and be no greater than
15 pages in length, although there is no
limit to the length of necessary
attachments to the comments. If
comments are submitted in hard copy
form, please ensure that two copies are
provided. If you wish to receive
confirmation that your comments were
received, please enclose a stamped, selfaddressed postcard with the comments.
Note that all comments received will be
posted without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided.
Documents submitted to a docket may
be viewed by anyone at the address and
times given above. The documents may
also be viewed on the Internet at
https://www.regulations.gov by following
the online instructions for accessing the
dockets. DOT’s complete Privacy Act
Statement is available for review in the
E:\FR\FM\02FEN1.SGM
02FEN1
5302
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 22 / Thursday, February 2, 2012 / Notices
Federal Register published on April 11,
2000 (65 FR 19477–78).
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.
DATES: Comment closing date: March
5, 2012.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120:
delegations of authority at CFR 1.50 and
501.8.
Issued on: January 27, 2012.
Claude H. Harris,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2012–2306 Filed 2–1–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2012–0004; Notice 1]
Ford Motor Company, Receipt of
Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Receipt of Petition.
AGENCY:
Ford Motor Company 1 (Ford)
has determined that certain model year
2012 Ford Focus model passenger cars
manufactured between May 12, 2011
and May 18, 2011, do not fully comply
with paragraph S5.2.1 of Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No.
101, Controls and Displays and
paragraphs S5.5.5 of FMVSS No. 135,
Light Vehicle Brake Systems. Ford has
filed an appropriate report pursuant to
49 CFR Part 573, Defect and
Noncompliance Responsibility and
Reports (dated July 7, 2011).
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h) (see implementing rule at 49
CFR part 556), Ford 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 Ford’s
petition is published under 49 U.S.C.
30118 and 30120 and does not represent
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
1 Ford Motor Company is a motor vehicle
manufacturer incorporated under the laws of the
state of Delaware.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:04 Feb 01, 2012
Jkt 226001
any agency decision or other exercise of
judgment concerning the merits of the
petition.
Affected are approximately 485 model
year 2012 Ford Focus model passenger
cars that were manufactured between
May 12, 2011 and May 18, 2011.
NHTSA notes that the statutory
provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to
file petitions for a determination of
inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to
exempt manufacturers only from the
duties found in sections 30118 and
30120, respectively, to notify owners,
purchasers, and dealers of a defect or
noncompliance and to remedy the
defect or noncompliance. Therefore,
these provisions only apply to the 485 2
model year 2012 Ford Focus model
passenger cars that Ford no longer
controlled at the time it determined that
the noncompliance existed.
Paragraph S5.2.1 of FMVSS No. 101
requires:
S5.2.1. Except for the Low Tire Pressure
Telltale, each control, telltale and indicator
that is listed in column 1 of Table 1 or Table
2 must be identified by the symbol specified
for it in column 2 or the word or abbreviation
specified for it in column 3 of Table 1 or
Table 2. If a symbol is used, each symbol
provided pursuant to this paragraph must be
substantially similar in form to the symbol as
it appears in Table 1 or Table 2. If a symbol
is used, each symbol provided pursuant to
this paragraph must have the proportional
dimensional characteristics of the symbol as
it appears in Table 1 or Table 2. The Low
Tire Pressure Telltale (either the display
identifying which tire has low pressure or the
display which does not identify which tire
has low pressure) shall be identified by the
appropriate symbol designated in column 4,
or both the symbol in column 4 and the
words in column 3. No identification is
required for any horn (i.e., audible warning
signal) that is activated by a lanyard or by the
driver pressing on the center of the face plane
of the steering wheel hub; or for a turn signal
control that is operated in a plane essentially
parallel to the face plane of the steering
wheel in its normal driving position and
which is located on the left side of the
steering column so that it is the control on
that side of the column nearest to the steering
wheel face plane. However, if identification
is provided for a horn control in the center
of the face plane of the steering wheel hub,
the identifier must meet Table 2
requirements for the horn.
2 Ford’s petition, which was filed under 49 CFR
part 556, requests an agency decision to exempt
Ford as a vehicle manufacturer from the notification
and recall responsibilities of 49 CFR part 573 for
485 of the affected vehicles. However, a decision on
this petition cannot relieve vehicle distributors and
dealers of the prohibitions on the sale, offer for sale,
introduction or delivery for introduction into
interstate commerce of the noncompliant vehicles
under their control after Ford notified them that the
subject noncompliance existed.
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Paragraphs S5.5.5 of FMVSS No. 135
requires in pertinent part:
S5.5.5. Labeling. (a) Each visual indicator
shall display a word or words in accordance
with the requirements of Standard No. 101
(49 CFR 571.101) and this section, which
shall be legible to the driver under all
daytime and nighttime conditions when
activated. Unless otherwise specified, the
words shall have letters not less than 3.2 mm
(1⁄8 inch) high and the letters and background
shall be of contrasting colors, one of which
is red. Words or symbols in addition to those
required by Standard No. 101 and this
section may be provided for purposes of
clarity.
(b) Vehicles manufactured with a split
service brake system may use a common
brake warning indicator to indicate two or
more of the functions described in S5.5.1(a)
through S5.5.1(g). If a common indicator is
used, it shall display the word
‘‘Brake.’’ * * *
Ford explained that the
noncompliance is that the telltales used
for Brake Warning, Park Brake Warning
and Antilock Braking System (ABS)
failure warnings are displayed using
International Organization for
Standardization (ISO) symbols instead
of the telltale symbols required by
FMVSS Nos. 101 and 135.
Ford stated its belief that although the
instrument cluster telltale symbols are
displayed using ISO symbols the
noncompliance is inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety for the following
reasons:
(1) The Owners Guide for the subject
vehicles is written for multiple markets
and depicts both the ‘‘BRAKE’’ and ISO
symbol telltales for brake warning
conditions.
(2) Paragraph S5.5.1 of FMVSS No.
135 states that the warning indicator
must identify a gross loss of fluid or
fluid pressure and identify if the
parking brake is applied and is satisfied
by a separate ABS lamp which complies
with all requirements of FMVSS No. 135
and FMVSS No. 101.
(3) In the event that the brake fluid
level in the master cylinder reservoir is
less than the recommended safe level,
the ISO symbol will illuminate and a
warning message will display in the
Message Center that states ‘‘BRAKE
FLUID LEVEL LOW SERVICE NOW’’
and an initial warning chime will
sound. The message will stay
continuously displayed until
acknowledged by the operator, provided
there are no other serious message(s),
which would result in the messages
alternating. If the brake fluid is still low
on subsequent key cycles the message
will be redisplayed in the message
center. If the message is acknowledged
by the operator a red ‘‘i’’ is illuminated
on the instrument cluster noting that an
E:\FR\FM\02FEN1.SGM
02FEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 22 (Thursday, February 2, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5301-5302]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-2306]
[[Page 5301]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2012-0005; Notice 1]
Ford Motor Company, Receipt of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Receipt of petition.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Ford Motor Company \1\ (Ford) has determined that certain
model year 2011 Ford E-150, E-250, E-350 and E-450 motor vehicles
manufactured between May 12, 2011 and May 25, 2011, do not fully comply
with paragraph S5.1 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS)
No. 205, Glazing Materials. Ford has filed an appropriate report
pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility
and Reports (dated August 22, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Ford Motor Company is a motor vehicle manufacturer
incorporated under the laws of the state of Delaware.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) (see implementing rule
at 49 CFR part 556), Ford 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 Ford's 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 approximately 4,532 model year 2011 Ford E-150, E-250,
E-350 and E-450 trucks manufactured between May 12, 2011 and May 25,
2011 at Ford's Ohio assembly plant are affected.
NHTSA notes that the statutory provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to file petitions for a
determination of inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to exempt manufacturers
only from the duties found in sections 30118 and 30120, respectively,
to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or noncompliance
and to remedy the defect or noncompliance. Therefore, these provisions
only apply to the 4,532 \2\ subject vehicles that Ford no longer
controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance existed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Ford's petition, which was filed under 49 CFR part 556,
requests an agency decision to exempt Ford as a vehicle manufacturer
from the notification and recall responsibilities of 49 CFR part 573
for the 4,532 affected vehicles. However, a decision on this
petition cannot relieve vehicle distributors and dealers of the
prohibitions on the sale, offer for sale, introduction or delivery
for introduction into interstate commerce of the noncompliant
vehicles under their control after Ford notified them that the
subject noncompliance existed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ford described the noncompliance as the formation of air bubbles in
the windshields when subjected to high temperatures specified in
paragraph S5.1 of FMVSS No. 205.
Paragraph S5.1 of FMVSS No. 205 requires in pertinent part:
S5.1 Glazing materials for use in motor vehicles must conform to
ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996 unless this standard provides otherwise.
S5.1.1 Multipurpose passenger vehicles. Except as otherwise
specifically provided by this standard, glazing for use in
multipurpose passenger vehicles shall conform to the requirements
for glazing for use in trucks as specified in ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996 *
* *
Ford expressed its belief that only approximately 100 of the 4,532
subject vehicles may actually develop air bubbles in their windshields.
Ford argues that paragraph S5.1 of FMVSS No. 205 specifies meeting
the requirements of ANSI Z26.1-1996 Section 5.4 Boil, Test 4. The
affected paragraph 5.4.3 ``Interpretation of Results'' states ``The
glass itself may crack in this test, but no bubbles or other defects
shall develop more than 13 mm from the outer edge of the specimen or
from any cracks that may develop.'' Although the affected windshields
may develop air bubbles, Ford believes this condition does not present
a risk to motor vehicle safety for the reasons described below.
The initiation of the air bubbles will most likely occur when the
vehicle is parked in the sun with ambient temperatures greater than
80[emsp14][deg]F, and they occur very early in the life of the vehicle.
This was the case for the initial vehicles that exhibited the condition
while still at the assembly plant, that was experiencing high seasonal
temperatures at the time. Of the 41 field reports of the condition that
had occurred as of August 16, 2011, only one occurred subsequent to
delivery to a customer. All other field reports were found during pre-
delivery vehicle preparation.
The appearance of the air bubbles is a slow process, and there are
no reports of air bubbles affecting the entire windshield. If bubbles
do occur in the driver vision zone, the vision zone is initially only
partially affected. This condition would be noticed by the customer
prior to a significant spread of the air bubbles, and the customer
would seek repair under Ford's normal 3/36 warranty.
Ford is not aware of accidents or injuries attributed to this
condition.
In summation, Ford believes that the described noncompliance of its
vehicles to meet the requirements of FMVSS No. 225 is inconsequential
to motor vehicle safety, and that its petition, to exempt from
providing recall notification of noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C.
30118 and remedying the recall noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C.
30120 should be granted.
Comments: Interested persons are invited to submit written data,
views, and arguments on this petition. 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:
a. By mail addressed to: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
b. By hand delivery to: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. The Docket Section is open on
weekdays from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. except Federal Holidays.
c. Electronically: by logging onto the Federal Docket Management
System (FDMS) Web site at https://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the
online instructions for submitting comments. Comments may also be faxed
to 1 (202) 493-2251.
Comments must be written in the English language, and be no greater
than 15 pages in length, although there is no limit to the length of
necessary attachments to the comments. If comments are submitted in
hard copy form, please ensure that two copies are provided. If you wish
to receive confirmation that your comments were received, please
enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard with the comments. Note that
all comments received will be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.
Documents submitted to a docket may be viewed by anyone at the
address and times given above. The documents may also be viewed on the
Internet at https://www.regulations.gov by following the online
instructions for accessing the dockets. DOT's complete Privacy Act
Statement is available for review in the
[[Page 5302]]
Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).
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.
DATES: Comment closing date: March 5, 2012.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at
CFR 1.50 and 501.8.
Issued on: January 27, 2012.
Claude H. Harris,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2012-2306 Filed 2-1-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P