Hyundai Motor Company, Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 38444-38445 [2013-15281]

Download as PDF mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 38444 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 123 / Wednesday, June 26, 2013 / Notices noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Notice of receipt of the petition was published, with a 30day public comment period, on February 15, 2012 in the Federal Register (77 FR 8944). No comments were received. To view the petition and all supporting documents log onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Web site at: https:// www.regulations.gov/. Then follow the online search instructions to locate docket number ‘‘NHTSA–2011–0074’’. Contact Information: For further information on this decision contact Ms. Amina Fisher, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone (202) 366–0645, facsimile (202) 366–5307. Vehicles Involved: Affected are approximately 729 MY 2011 Chrysler Town & Country and Dodge Grand Caravan MPVs manufactured between March 16, 2011 and March 22, 2011 and equipped with Yokohama size 225/65– R16 passenger car tires. Summary of Chrysler’s Analyses: Chrysler explains that the noncompliance is that the vehicle placards on the affected vehicles incorrectly identify the tire size as required by paragraph S4.3(d) of FMVSS No. 110. Chrysler additionally explains that during the production of the subject vehicles there was a temporary shortage of Kumho size 235/60R16 passenger car tires. As a result, Yokahama size 225/ 65R16 tires and vehicle placard were substituted. On March 16, 2011, when the Kumbo tires were scheduled to be reintroduced, the vehicle placard was updated to reflect the tire change and placed on the subject vehicles. However, 729 vehicles that received the updated vehicle placard were fitted with the Yokahama tires instead of the Kumbo tires. Chrysler stated its belief that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety for the following reasons: 1. The tire inflation pressure requirement for both tires is the same and that the recommended gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of the vehicles is not affected by the tire change. Chrysler also notes that the tire circumference for both tires is essentially the same and that the functions of the vehicle speedometer and odometer, the tire pressure monitoring system (TPMS), the antilock brake system (ABS) and the electronic stability program (ESP) are not affected by the 21 mm difference in circumference. In addition, Chrysler stated that the subject Kumbo and Yokahama tires provide equivalent VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:26 Jun 25, 2013 Jkt 229001 performance when mounted on the subject vehicles. 2. While the non-compliant vehicle placards incorrectly state the tire size, they meet or exceed all other applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. 3. The noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety because the noncompliant vehicle placards do not create an unsafe condition and all other labeling requirements have been met. Chrysler also added that it believes that NHTSA has previously granted similar petitions. In summation, Chrysler believes that the described noncompliance of the subject vehicles 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. NHTSA Decision: The intent of FMVSS No. 110 is to ensure that vehicles are equipped with tires appropriate to handle maximum vehicle loads and prevent overloading. NHTSA has confirmed that: The installed and labeled tires, including the spare, when inflated to the labeled recommended cold inflation pressure are appropriate to handle the vehicle maximum loads; the tire and loading information labels on subject vehicles are correct, except for the subject noncompliance; the vehicles are equipped with tires that have the complete tire size (225/65R16) molded into their sidewalls. Consequently, the subject noncompliance should not cause any unsafe conditions associated with determination of the correct tire inflation pressures or replacement tire selection for the subject vehicles. Therefore, NHTSA agrees with Chrysler that in this specific case the incorrect tire size printed on the tire and loading information labels on the affixed vehicles does not have any adverse safety implications. NHTSA is also not aware of any customer complaints or field reports relating to this issue and Chrysler stated that it has corrected the problem that caused these errors so that they will not be repeated in future production. In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Chrysler has met its burden of persuasion that the FMVSS No. 110 noncompliance in the vehicles identified in Chrysler’s Noncompliance Information Report is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Chrysler’s petition is granted and the petitioner is exempted from the obligation of providing PO 00000 Frm 00160 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 notification of, and a remedy for, that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120. 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, this decision only applies to approximately 729 vehicles that Chrysler no longer controlled at the time that it determined that a noncompliance existed in the subject vehicles. However, the granting of this petition does not relieve vehicle distributors and dealers of the prohibitions on the sale, offer for sale, or introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate commerce of the noncompliant vehicles under their control after Chrysler notified them that the subject noncompliance existed. Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.95 and 501.8. Issued on: June 20, 2013. Claude H. Harris, Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance. [FR Doc. 2013–15278 Filed 6–25–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–59–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [Docket No. NHTSA–2012–0041; Notice 2] Hyundai Motor Company, Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT. ACTION: Grant of Petition. AGENCY: Hyundai America Technical Center, Inc., on behalf of Hyundai Motor Company (collectively referred to as ‘‘Hyundai’’) 1 has determined that certain model year (MY) 2011 and 2012 Hyundai Sonata Hybrid passenger cars, do not fully comply with paragraph § 4.1.5.5.2 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection. Hyundai has filed an appropriate report dated March 8, 2012, pursuant to 49 CFR Part SUMMARY: 1 Hyundai America Technical Center, Inc. is a corporation registered under the laws of the state of Michigan. E:\FR\FM\26JNN1.SGM 26JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 123 / Wednesday, June 26, 2013 / Notices mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and the rule implementing those provisions at 49 CFR part 556, Hyundai 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 the petition was published, with a 30day public comment period, on April 13, 2012 in the Federal Register (77 FR 22386). No comments were received. To view the petition and all supporting documents log onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Web site at: https://www.regulations.gov/. Then follow the online search instructions to locate docket number ‘‘NHTSA–2012– 0041.’’ Contact Information: For further information on this decision contact Mr. Lawrence Valvo, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone (202) 366–5359, facsimile (202) 366–3081. Vehicles Involved: Affected are approximately 14,728 MY 2011 and 2012 Hyundai Sonata Hybrid vehicles produced beginning on December 2, 2010 and shipped to dealers through March 7, 2012 that are equipped with a center rear seat belt incorporating a release mechanism that detaches both the lap and shoulder portion at the lower anchorage point. Background Requirement: Section 4.1.5.5 of FMVSS No. 208 specially states: § 4.1.5.5 Passenger cars manufactured on or after September 1, 2007. § 4.1.5.5.1 Except as provided in § 4.1.5.5.2, each passenger car shall have a Type 2 seat belt assembly that conforms to Standard No. 209 and to § 7.1 and § 7.2 of this standard at each rear designated seating position, except that side-facing designated seating positions shall have a Type 1 or Type 2 seat belt assembly that conforms to Standard No. 209 and to § 7.1 and § 7.2 of this standard. § 4.1.5.5.2 Any inboard designated seating position on a seat for which the entire seat back can be folded (including the head restraints and any other part of the vehicle attached to the seat back) such that no part of the seat back extends above a horizontal plane located 250 mm above the highest SRP located on the seat may meet the requirements of § 4.1.5.5.1 by use of a belt incorporating a release mechanism that detaches both the lap and shoulder portion at either the upper or lower anchorage point, but not both. The means of detachment shall be a key or key-like object. Summary of Hyundai’s Analyses: Hyundai explains that the VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:26 Jun 25, 2013 Jkt 229001 noncompliance is that the affected vehicles do not comply with § 4.1.5.5.2 because they are equipped with a nonfolding rear seat back and a center rear seat belt incorporating a release mechanism that detaches both the lap and shoulder portion at the lower anchorage point to allow improved assembly line procedures. Hyundai believes that the installation of a center rear seat belt incorporating a release mechanism that detaches both the lap and shoulder portion at the lower anchorage point in a vehicle with a non-folding rear seat back is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety. The seat belt assembly complies with FMVSS No. 208 requirements and with FMVSS No. 209 requirements, with the sole exception that it may be detached from the lower anchorage by use of a tool, such as a key or key-like object. If the rear seat back of the Sonata Hybrid vehicle was simply capable of being folded, which would have no effect upon seat belt performance; this detachable aspect would not result in a compliance issue. Hyundai also stated its belief that it is clear from the intended difficulty in detaching the seat belt and the instructions contained in the vehicle owner’s manual that the seat belt should not be detached. Further, in the Sonata Hybrid with a fixed rear seat back, there is no advantage or reason for the owner to detach the center rear seat belt from the lower anchorage. Based on these arguments, Hyundai Motor Company does not believe that it is appropriate to conduct a recall campaign to replace the center rear seat belts in vehicles that have been delivered to customers. Hyundai has additionally informed NHTSA that it has corrected the noncompliance so that all future production vehicles will comply with FMVSS No. 208. In summation, Hyundai believes that the described noncompliance of the subject vehicles 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. NHTSA Decision: NHTSA has reviewed and accepts Hyundai’s analyses that the noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Hyundai has provided sufficient documentation that the center rear seat belt does comply with all other safety performance requirements of FMVSS No. 208 and has met its burden of persuasion. Accordingly, Hyundai’s PO 00000 Frm 00161 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 38445 petition is hereby granted, and Hyundai is exempted from the obligation of providing notification of, and a remedy for, that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120. 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, this decision only applies to the 14,728 vehicles that Hyundai no longer controlled at the time it determined that a noncompliance existed. However, the granting of this petition does not relieve distributors and dealers of the prohibitions on the sale, offer for sale, or introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate commerce of the noncompliant vehicles under their control after Hyundai notified them that the subject noncompliance existed. Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.95 and 501.8. Issued On: June 20, 2013. Claude H. Harris, Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance. [FR Doc. 2013–15281 Filed 6–25–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–59–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [Docket No. NHTSA–2012–0045; Notice 2] Hyundai-Kia America Technical Center, Inc., Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT. ACTION: Grant of Petition. AGENCY: Hyundai America Technical Center, Inc. on behalf of Hyundai Motor Company (collectively referred to as ‘‘Hyundai’’) 1 has determined that certain model year (MY) 2012 Hyundai Veracruz multipurpose passenger vehicles (MPV) manufactured August 9, 2011, through January 8, 2012, that were equipped with 7J x 18 wheel rims, do not fully comply with paragraph § 4.3.3 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 110, Tire Selection and Rims and Motor Home/ SUMMARY: 1 Hyundai America Technical Center, Inc., is a corporation registered under the laws of the state of Michigan. E:\FR\FM\26JNN1.SGM 26JNN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 123 (Wednesday, June 26, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38444-38445]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-15281]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2012-0041; Notice 2]


Hyundai Motor Company, Grant of Petition for Decision of 
Inconsequential Noncompliance

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Grant of Petition.

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

SUMMARY: Hyundai America Technical Center, Inc., on behalf of Hyundai 
Motor Company (collectively referred to as ``Hyundai'') \1\ has 
determined that certain model year (MY) 2011 and 2012 Hyundai Sonata 
Hybrid passenger cars, do not fully comply with paragraph Sec.  
4.1.5.5.2 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 208, 
Occupant Crash Protection. Hyundai has filed an appropriate report 
dated March 8, 2012, pursuant to 49 CFR Part

[[Page 38445]]

573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Hyundai America Technical Center, Inc. is a corporation 
registered under the laws of the state of Michigan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and the rule 
implementing those provisions at 49 CFR part 556, Hyundai 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 the petition was published, with a 30-day public comment 
period, on April 13, 2012 in the Federal Register (77 FR 22386). No 
comments were received. To view the petition and all supporting 
documents log onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Web site 
at: https://www.regulations.gov/. Then follow the online search 
instructions to locate docket number ``NHTSA-2012-0041.''
    Contact Information: For further information on this decision 
contact Mr. Lawrence Valvo, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the 
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone (202) 
366-5359, facsimile (202) 366-3081.
    Vehicles Involved: Affected are approximately 14,728 MY 2011 and 
2012 Hyundai Sonata Hybrid vehicles produced beginning on December 2, 
2010 and shipped to dealers through March 7, 2012 that are equipped 
with a center rear seat belt incorporating a release mechanism that 
detaches both the lap and shoulder portion at the lower anchorage 
point.
    Background Requirement: Section 4.1.5.5 of FMVSS No. 208 specially 
states:

    Sec.  4.1.5.5 Passenger cars manufactured on or after September 
1, 2007.
    Sec.  4.1.5.5.1 Except as provided in Sec.  4.1.5.5.2, each 
passenger car shall have a Type 2 seat belt assembly that conforms 
to Standard No. 209 and to Sec.  7.1 and Sec.  7.2 of this standard 
at each rear designated seating position, except that side-facing 
designated seating positions shall have a Type 1 or Type 2 seat belt 
assembly that conforms to Standard No. 209 and to Sec.  7.1 and 
Sec.  7.2 of this standard.
    Sec.  4.1.5.5.2 Any inboard designated seating position on a 
seat for which the entire seat back can be folded (including the 
head restraints and any other part of the vehicle attached to the 
seat back) such that no part of the seat back extends above a 
horizontal plane located 250 mm above the highest SRP located on the 
seat may meet the requirements of Sec.  4.1.5.5.1 by use of a belt 
incorporating a release mechanism that detaches both the lap and 
shoulder portion at either the upper or lower anchorage point, but 
not both. The means of detachment shall be a key or key-like object.

    Summary of Hyundai's Analyses: Hyundai explains that the 
noncompliance is that the affected vehicles do not comply with Sec.  
4.1.5.5.2 because they are equipped with a non-folding rear seat back 
and a center rear seat belt incorporating a release mechanism that 
detaches both the lap and shoulder portion at the lower anchorage point 
to allow improved assembly line procedures.
    Hyundai believes that the installation of a center rear seat belt 
incorporating a release mechanism that detaches both the lap and 
shoulder portion at the lower anchorage point in a vehicle with a non-
folding rear seat back is inconsequential as it relates to motor 
vehicle safety. The seat belt assembly complies with FMVSS No. 208 
requirements and with FMVSS No. 209 requirements, with the sole 
exception that it may be detached from the lower anchorage by use of a 
tool, such as a key or key-like object. If the rear seat back of the 
Sonata Hybrid vehicle was simply capable of being folded, which would 
have no effect upon seat belt performance; this detachable aspect would 
not result in a compliance issue.
    Hyundai also stated its belief that it is clear from the intended 
difficulty in detaching the seat belt and the instructions contained in 
the vehicle owner's manual that the seat belt should not be detached. 
Further, in the Sonata Hybrid with a fixed rear seat back, there is no 
advantage or reason for the owner to detach the center rear seat belt 
from the lower anchorage.
    Based on these arguments, Hyundai Motor Company does not believe 
that it is appropriate to conduct a recall campaign to replace the 
center rear seat belts in vehicles that have been delivered to 
customers.
    Hyundai has additionally informed NHTSA that it has corrected the 
noncompliance so that all future production vehicles will comply with 
FMVSS No. 208.
    In summation, Hyundai believes that the described noncompliance of 
the subject vehicles 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.
    NHTSA Decision: NHTSA has reviewed and accepts Hyundai's analyses 
that the noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. 
Hyundai has provided sufficient documentation that the center rear seat 
belt does comply with all other safety performance requirements of 
FMVSS No. 208 and has met its burden of persuasion. Accordingly, 
Hyundai's petition is hereby granted, and Hyundai is exempted from the 
obligation of providing notification of, and a remedy for, that 
noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.
    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, this decision 
only applies to the 14,728 vehicles that Hyundai no longer controlled 
at the time it determined that a noncompliance existed. However, the 
granting of this petition does not relieve distributors and dealers of 
the prohibitions on the sale, offer for sale, or introduction or 
delivery for introduction into interstate commerce of the noncompliant 
vehicles under their control after Hyundai notified them that the 
subject noncompliance existed.

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at 
49 CFR 1.95 and 501.8.

    Issued On: June 20, 2013.
Claude H. Harris,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2013-15281 Filed 6-25-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.