Fuji Heavy Industries U.S.A., Inc., Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 59088-59089 [2013-23361]

Download as PDF 59088 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 186 / Wednesday, September 25, 2013 / Notices Emergency order item No. Respondent universe Total annual responses Average time per response (c)—Dispatcher’s Record of Information Exchanged or Communicated. (d)—Train Dispatcher or Other Qualified Employee Verification and Confirmation of Train Securement Meeting RR’s Requirements. (3) RR Review and Revision of Existing Procedures and Processed Related to the number of Hand Brakes Set on All Unattended Trains: (4) RR Revision of Operating Rules and Practices to Require Job Briefing of Train Securement: —Daily Job Briefings ............................................ (5) Development of RR Procedure to Ensure a Qualified Employee Inspects All Equipment Visited by Emergency Responder for Proper Securement Before Train or Vehicle is Left Unattended: —Inspections of Equipment .................................. (6) RR Employees Copy of FRA EO 28: 655 railroads ..................... 26,000 records ................. 2 minutes .... 867 655 railroads ..................... 26,000 verifications and confirmations. 2 minutes .... 867 655 railroads ..................... 491 revised procedures and processes. 6 hours ........ 2,946 655 railroads ..................... 2 hours ........ 982 100,000 RR Employees ... 655 railroads ..................... 491 revised operating rules and practices. 23,400,000 briefings ......... 491 Procedures ................ 30 seconds .. 60 minutes .. 195,000 491 655 railroads ..................... 100,000 RR Employees ... 1,000 inspections ............. 100,000 copies ................. 4 hours ........ 1 minute ...... 4,000 1,667 Total Estimated Responses: 23,581,555. Total Estimated Annual Burden: 229,643 hours. Status: Regular Review. Pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 3507(a) and 5 CFR 1320.5(b), 1320.8(b)(3)(vi), FRA informs all interested parties that it may not conduct or sponsor, and a respondent is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501–3520. Rebecca Pennington, Chief Financial Officer. [FR Doc. 2013–23255 Filed 9–24–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–06–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [Docket No. NHTSA–2013–0017; Notice 2] Fuji Heavy Industries U.S.A., Inc., Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT. ACTION: Grant of petition. AGENCY: Fuji Heavy Industries U.S.A., Inc., on behalf of Subaru of America (Fuji), has determined that certain 2013 Subaru XV Crosstrek passenger cars manufactured between May 17, 2012, and February 7, 2013, do not fully comply with paragraphs S6.1 and S6.2 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 205, Glazing Materials. Fuji has filed an appropriate report dated January 29, 2013, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:20 Sep 24, 2013 Jkt 229001 For further information on this decision contact Mr. Luis Figueroa, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone (202) 366–5298, facsimile (202) 366– 7002. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Fuji’s Petition: Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and the rule implementing those provisions at 49 CFR Part 556, Fuji has petitioned for an exemption from the notification and remedy requirements of 39 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 February 25, 2013 in the Federal Register (78 FR 12827). 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/. The follow the online search instructions to locate docket number ‘‘NHTSA–2013–0017.’’ II. Vehicles Involved: Affected are approximately 23,600 model year 2013 Subaru XV Crosstrek passenger cars manufactured between May 17, 2012, and February 7, 2013. III. Rule Text: Paragraphs S6.1 and S6.2 of FMVSS No. 205 specifically states: ADDRESSES: S6.1 A prime glazing material manufacturer must certify, in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 30115, each piece of glazing material to which this standard applies that is designed— (a) As a component of any specific motor vehicle or camper; or (b) To be cut into components for use in motor vehicles or items of motor vehicle equipment. S6.2 A prime glazing manufacturer certifies its glazing by adding to the marks required by section 7 of ANSI Z26.1–1996, in PO 00000 Frm 00098 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Total annual burden hours letters and numerals of the same size, the symbol ‘‘DOT’’ and a manufacturer’s code mark that NHTSA assigns to the manufacturer. IV. Summary of FUJI’S Analyses: Fuji explains that the noncompliance is that, due to a labeling error, the glazing markings on the rear window of the subject vehicles lack the symbol ‘‘DOT’’, the manufacturer’s code mark (i.e. 44), and the AS3 code mark and thus do not conform to the requirements of 49 CFR 571.205 paragraphs S6.1 and S6.2. Fuji contends that the rear glazing of the affected vehicles otherwise meets all marking and performance requirements of FMVSS No. 205 and ANSI Z26.1 and NHTSA has previously noted that ‘‘The stated purposes of FMVSS No. 205 are to reduce injuries resulting from impact to glazing surfaces, to ensure a necessary degree of transparency in motor vehicle windows for driver visibility, and to minimize the possibility of occupants being thrown through the vehicle windows in collisions’’ (64 FR 70116). Because the affected glazing fully meet all of the applicable performance requirements, Fuji believes the absence of the ‘‘DOT’’ symbol, the manufacturer’s number (i.e. ‘‘44’’), and the AS3 code mark have no effect upon the ability of the glazing to satisfy these stated purposes and thus perform in the manner intended by FMVSS No. 205. Fuji stated that it is not aware of any crashes, injuries, customer complaints or field reports associated with this noncompliance. Fuji also expressed its belief that NHTSA has previously granted similar petitions involving the omission of FMVSS No. 205 markings. Fuji has additionally informed NHTSA that it has corrected the noncompliances so that all future E:\FR\FM\25SEN1.SGM 25SEN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 186 / Wednesday, September 25, 2013 / Notices production of the vehicles will comply with FMVSS no 205. In summation, Fuji believes that the described noncompliance of its vehicles is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety, and that its petition, to exempt it 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. V. NHTSA’S Decision: FMVSS No. 205 specifies labeling and performance requirements for automotive glazing. Paragraph S6 of FMVSS No. 205 requires glazing material manufacturers to certify, in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 30115, each piece of glazing material to which the standard applies. A prime glazing material manufacturer is required to mark its glazing by adding the marks required in Section 7 of ANSI Z26.1 (1996) including the FMVSS certification symbol ‘‘DOT,’’ the item of glazing code mark (in this case ‘‘AS3’’) and a manufacturer’s code mark as assigned by the NHTSA’s Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance (in this case ‘‘44’’). NHTSA has reviewed and accepts Fuji analyses that this noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Fuji has provided documentation that the windows do comply with all safety performance requirements of the standard. This documentation is a surrogate for the FMVSS certification ‘‘DOT’’ labeling. NHTSA also believes that the lack of the manufacturer’s code and the item of glazing code labeling would not result in inadvertent replacement of the windows with the wrong glazing. Broken tempered glass can readily be identified as tempered glass, rather than plastic or laminated glass. Anyone who intended to replace the window with an identical tempered glass window would have to obtain the glazing from Fuji or a major automotive parts manufacturer since tempered glass automotive windows cannot be easily manufactured by small field facilities. Fuji, or an automotive parts supplier would be able to identify the correct replacement window by use of their replacement parts identification systems. In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Fuji has met its burden of persuasion that the FMVSS No. 205 noncompliance in the glazing material identified in Fuji’s Noncompliance Information Report is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Fuji’s petition is granted and the petitioner is exempted from the obligation of providing notification of, and a remedy for, that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120. VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:20 Sep 24, 2013 Jkt 229001 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 23,600 vehicles that Fuji 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 Fuji notified them that the subject noncompliance existed. Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at CFR 1.95 and 501.8. Claude H. Harris, Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance. [FR Doc. 2013–23361 Filed 9–24–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–59–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [Docket No. NHTSA–2013–0083; Notice 1] Spartan Motors, Inc. on Behalf of Spartan Motors Chassis, Inc., Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT. ACTION: Receipt of petition. AGENCY: Spartan Motors, Inc. on behalf of Spartan Motors Chassis, Inc. (Spartan) has determined that certain model year 2008 through 2013 Spartan Gladiator and MetroStar chassis cabs do not fully comply with paragraph S5.3.3.1(a) of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 121, Air Brake Systems. Spartan has filed an appropriate report dated April 19, 2013, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. SUMMARY: October 25, 2013. 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 DATES: ADDRESSES: PO 00000 Frm 00099 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 59089 this notice and be submitted by any of the following methods: • Mail: Send comments 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. • Hand Delivery: Deliver comments by hand 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. • Electronically: Submit comments 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 (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 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. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Spartan’s Petition: Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) (see implementing rule at 49 CFR part 556), Spartan submitted a petition for an exemption from the notification and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. E:\FR\FM\25SEN1.SGM 25SEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 186 (Wednesday, September 25, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59088-59089]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-23361]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2013-0017; Notice 2]


Fuji Heavy Industries U.S.A., Inc., Grant of Petition for 
Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.

ACTION: Grant of petition.

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

SUMMARY: Fuji Heavy Industries U.S.A., Inc., on behalf of Subaru of 
America (Fuji), has determined that certain 2013 Subaru XV Crosstrek 
passenger cars manufactured between May 17, 2012, and February 7, 2013, 
do not fully comply with paragraphs S6.1 and S6.2 of Federal Motor 
Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 205, Glazing Materials. Fuji has 
filed an appropriate report dated January 29, 2013, pursuant to 49 CFR 
part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports.

ADDRESSES: For further information on this decision contact Mr. Luis 
Figueroa, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the National Highway 
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone (202) 366-5298, 
facsimile (202) 366-7002.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    I. Fuji's Petition: Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and 
the rule implementing those provisions at 49 CFR Part 556, Fuji has 
petitioned for an exemption from the notification and remedy 
requirements of 39 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 February 25, 2013 in the Federal Register (78 FR 12827). 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/. The follow the online search 
instructions to locate docket number ``NHTSA-2013-0017.''
    II. Vehicles Involved: Affected are approximately 23,600 model year 
2013 Subaru XV Crosstrek passenger cars manufactured between May 17, 
2012, and February 7, 2013.
    III. Rule Text: Paragraphs S6.1 and S6.2 of FMVSS No. 205 
specifically states:

    S6.1 A prime glazing material manufacturer must certify, in 
accordance with 49 U.S.C. 30115, each piece of glazing material to 
which this standard applies that is designed--
    (a) As a component of any specific motor vehicle or camper; or
    (b) To be cut into components for use in motor vehicles or items 
of motor vehicle equipment.
    S6.2 A prime glazing manufacturer certifies its glazing by 
adding to the marks required by section 7 of ANSI Z26.1-1996, in 
letters and numerals of the same size, the symbol ``DOT'' and a 
manufacturer's code mark that NHTSA assigns to the manufacturer.

    IV. Summary of FUJI'S Analyses: Fuji explains that the 
noncompliance is that, due to a labeling error, the glazing markings on 
the rear window of the subject vehicles lack the symbol ``DOT'', the 
manufacturer's code mark (i.e. 44), and the AS3 code mark and thus do 
not conform to the requirements of 49 CFR 571.205 paragraphs S6.1 and 
S6.2.
    Fuji contends that the rear glazing of the affected vehicles 
otherwise meets all marking and performance requirements of FMVSS No. 
205 and ANSI Z26.1 and NHTSA has previously noted that ``The stated 
purposes of FMVSS No. 205 are to reduce injuries resulting from impact 
to glazing surfaces, to ensure a necessary degree of transparency in 
motor vehicle windows for driver visibility, and to minimize the 
possibility of occupants being thrown through the vehicle windows in 
collisions'' (64 FR 70116). Because the affected glazing fully meet all 
of the applicable performance requirements, Fuji believes the absence 
of the ``DOT'' symbol, the manufacturer's number (i.e. ``44''), and the 
AS3 code mark have no effect upon the ability of the glazing to satisfy 
these stated purposes and thus perform in the manner intended by FMVSS 
No. 205.
    Fuji stated that it is not aware of any crashes, injuries, customer 
complaints or field reports associated with this noncompliance.
    Fuji also expressed its belief that NHTSA has previously granted 
similar petitions involving the omission of FMVSS No. 205 markings.
    Fuji has additionally informed NHTSA that it has corrected the 
noncompliances so that all future

[[Page 59089]]

production of the vehicles will comply with FMVSS no 205.
    In summation, Fuji believes that the described noncompliance of its 
vehicles is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety, and that its 
petition, to exempt it 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.
    V. NHTSA'S Decision: FMVSS No. 205 specifies labeling and 
performance requirements for automotive glazing. Paragraph S6 of FMVSS 
No. 205 requires glazing material manufacturers to certify, in 
accordance with 49 U.S.C. 30115, each piece of glazing material to 
which the standard applies. A prime glazing material manufacturer is 
required to mark its glazing by adding the marks required in Section 7 
of ANSI Z26.1 (1996) including the FMVSS certification symbol ``DOT,'' 
the item of glazing code mark (in this case ``AS3'') and a 
manufacturer's code mark as assigned by the NHTSA's Office of Vehicle 
Safety Compliance (in this case ``44'').
    NHTSA has reviewed and accepts Fuji analyses that this 
noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Fuji has 
provided documentation that the windows do comply with all safety 
performance requirements of the standard. This documentation is a 
surrogate for the FMVSS certification ``DOT'' labeling. NHTSA also 
believes that the lack of the manufacturer's code and the item of 
glazing code labeling would not result in inadvertent replacement of 
the windows with the wrong glazing. Broken tempered glass can readily 
be identified as tempered glass, rather than plastic or laminated 
glass. Anyone who intended to replace the window with an identical 
tempered glass window would have to obtain the glazing from Fuji or a 
major automotive parts manufacturer since tempered glass automotive 
windows cannot be easily manufactured by small field facilities. Fuji, 
or an automotive parts supplier would be able to identify the correct 
replacement window by use of their replacement parts identification 
systems.
    In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Fuji has 
met its burden of persuasion that the FMVSS No. 205 noncompliance in 
the glazing material identified in Fuji's Noncompliance Information 
Report is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Fuji's 
petition is granted and the petitioner 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 approximately 23,600 vehicles that Fuji 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 Fuji notified them that the subject noncompliance existed.

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

Claude H. Harris,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2013-23361 Filed 9-24-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.