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