Mitsubishi Motors North America, Inc., Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 32814-32815 [2014-13183]
Download as PDF
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
32814
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 109 / Friday, June 6, 2014 / Notices
2. GM believes that all other rim
marking information required by S4.4.2
of FMVSS No. 110 on the subject rims
is correct. The rims are marked with
S4.4.2(b) rim size designation; S4.4.2(c)
the symbol DOT; S4.4.2(d) manufacturer
identification; and S4.4.2(e) month and
year of manufacture.
3. GM believes that the rim is marked
with the correct rim size information;
namely 18x4.5B. The vehicle tire
pressure placard contains the correct
tire size information, and the tire size is
marked on the tire sidewall. The
certification label on the vehicle
contains the correct spare tire and rim
sizes; namely T135/70R18 and 18x4.5B.
Thus, the rim markings and vehicle
labeling, which are used to identify the
correct replacement rim, provide the
correct and complete size of spare rim.
Therefore, there is very little likelihood
of a tire and rim mismatch as a result
of the incorrect marking of the source of
the published rim dimensions.
4. GM believes that very few of these
spare wheels will ever need to be
replaced over the life of the vehicle.
Nevertheless, the owner’s manual
provided with these vehicles contains a
section ‘‘Wheel Replacement’’. This
section states ‘‘Your dealer will know
the kind of wheel that is needed. Each
new wheel should have the same loadcarrying capacity, diameter, width,
offset, and be mounted the same way as
the one it replaces.’’
5. GM believes that if a customer
needs to replace a spare wheel, he/she
is likely to go to a GM dealer or a tire/
wheel retailer. The skilled personnel at
these facilities know how to determine
the correct spare wheel size that they
are replacing. For spare wheel
replacement, they may look at the spare
wheel itself, the tire, the tire placard or
the certification label to determine the
replacement size. The spare wheel does
contain the correct size designation
18x4.5B.
6. GM believes that all other
applicable requirements of FMVSS Nos.
109 and 110 have been met.
GM also stated its belief that NHTSA
has previously granted inconsequential
treatment for FMVSS No. 110 rim
marking noncompliance.
GM informed NHTSA that it is not
aware of any crashes, injuries or
customer complaints associated with
this condition.
GM also informed NHTSA that it has
corrected the noncompliance for all
future production.
In summation, GM believes that the
described noncompliance of the subject
vehicles is inconsequential to motor
vehicle safety, and that its petition, to
exempt from providing recall
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:59 Jun 05, 2014
Jkt 232001
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 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, any
decision on this petition only applies to
the subject noncompliant vehicles that
GM no longer controlled at the time it
determined that the noncompliance
existed. However, any decision on this
petition does not relieve motor 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 motor vehicles under
their control after GM 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)
Jeffrey M. Giuseppe,
Acting Director, Office of Vehicle Safety
Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2014–13182 Filed 6–5–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2014–0047; Notice 1]
Mitsubishi Motors North America, Inc.,
Receipt of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Receipt of Petition.
AGENCY:
Mitsubishi Motors North
America, Inc. (MMNA) has determined
that certain model year (MY) 2014
Mitsubishi Outlander Sport
multipurpose passenger vehicles (MPV)
do not fully comply with paragraph S6
of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standard (FMVSS) No. FMVSS 205,
Glazing Materials. MMNA has filed an
appropriate report dated April 3, 2014,
pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and
Noncompliance Responsibility and
Reports.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00124
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
The closing date for comments
on the petition is July 7, 2014.
ADDRESSES: 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:
• 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 Deliver: 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
DATES:
E:\FR\FM\06JNN1.SGM
06JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 109 / Friday, June 6, 2014 / Notices
in the Federal Register pursuant to the
authority indicated below.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. MMNA’s Petition
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h) (see implementing rule at 49
CFR part 556), MMNA submitted a
petition 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 MMNA’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.
II. Vehicles Involved
Affected are approximately 311 MY
2014 Mitsubishi Outlander Sport MPVs
manufactured from February 12, 2014
through February 21, 2014 that
contained mislabeled laminated rear
door glazing manufactured by
Pilkington North America, Inc. (PNA).
III. Noncompliance
MMNA explains that the
noncompliance is that the laminated
rear door glazing in the subject vehicles
was labeled with the incorrect
manufacturer’s model number.
Specifically, the glazing was labeled
with PNA model number ‘‘M131’’
instead of the correct model number
‘‘M129.’’
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
IV. Rule Text
FMVSS No. 205 incorporates ANSI
Z26.1–1996 and other industry
standards in paragraph S.5.1 by
reference. Paragraph S6 of FMVSS No.
205 specifically requires manufacturers
to mark the glazing material in
accordance with Section 7 of ANSI
Z26.1 and to add other markings
required by NHTSA. With respect to the
subject noncompliance, Section 7 of
ANSI Z26.1–1996 specifies that in
addition to the item of glazing number
and other required markings, the
manufacturer shall include a model
number which will identify the type of
construction of the glazing material.
V. Summary of MMNA’s Analyses
MMNA stated its belief that the
subject noncompliance relates solely to
the product monograms or markings,
specifically the use of model number
‘‘M 131’’ instead of ‘‘M 129’’. These rear
door windows otherwise meet all other
marking and performance requirements
of FMVSS No. 205 and ANSI Z26.1.
MMNA also stated its belief that
NHTSA previously noted that ‘‘The
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:59 Jun 05, 2014
Jkt 232001
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, December 15,
1999). MMNA believes that because the
affected glazing fully meets all of the
applicable performance requirements of
FMVSS No. 205 that the absence of the
correct model number on the glazing
has no effect upon the ability of the
glazing to satisfy those purposes and
thus perform in the manner intended by
FMVSS No. 205.
MMNA also stated its belief that
NHTSA has previously granted other
petitions that MMNA believes were
similar to the subject petition.
MMNA is not aware of any crashes,
injuries, customer complaints, or field
reports associated with this condition.
MMNA has additionally informed
NHTSA that it has corrected the
noncompliance so that all future
production vehicles delivered with
laminated glass will comply with
FMVSS No. 205.
In summation, MMNA 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 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, any
decision on this petition only applies to
the subject vehicles that MMNA no
longer controlled at the time it
determined that the noncompliance
existed. However, any decision on 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 MMNA notified them that
the subject noncompliance existed.
PO 00000
Frm 00125
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
32815
Authority: (49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120:
Delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.95 and
501.8).
Jeffrey M. Giuseppe,
Acting Director, Office of Vehicle Safety
Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2014–13183 Filed 6–5–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2013–0146; Notice 1]
BMW of North America, LLC, Receipt
of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Receipt of petition.
AGENCY:
BMW of North America, LLC,
(BMW) a subsidiary of BMW AG in
Munich, Germany, has determined that
certain model year (MY) 2014 BMW 7
series and 6 series vehicles do not fully
comply with paragraph S5.2.1 of
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard
(FMVSS) No. 101, Controls and
Displays. BMW has filed an appropriate
report dated December 5, 2013 pursuant
to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and
Noncompliance Responsibility and
Reports.
DATES: The closing date for comments
on the petition is July 7, 2014.
ADDRESSES: 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:
• 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 Deliver: 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.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\06JNN1.SGM
06JNN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 109 (Friday, June 6, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32814-32815]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-13183]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2014-0047; Notice 1]
Mitsubishi Motors North America, Inc., Receipt of Petition for
Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Receipt of Petition.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Mitsubishi Motors North America, Inc. (MMNA) has determined
that certain model year (MY) 2014 Mitsubishi Outlander Sport
multipurpose passenger vehicles (MPV) do not fully comply with
paragraph S6 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. FMVSS
205, Glazing Materials. MMNA has filed an appropriate report dated
April 3, 2014, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance
Responsibility and Reports.
DATES: The closing date for comments on the petition is July 7, 2014.
ADDRESSES: 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:
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 Deliver: 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, 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 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
[[Page 32815]]
in the Federal Register pursuant to the authority indicated below.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. MMNA's Petition
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) (see implementing rule
at 49 CFR part 556), MMNA submitted a petition 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 MMNA'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.
II. Vehicles Involved
Affected are approximately 311 MY 2014 Mitsubishi Outlander Sport
MPVs manufactured from February 12, 2014 through February 21, 2014 that
contained mislabeled laminated rear door glazing manufactured by
Pilkington North America, Inc. (PNA).
III. Noncompliance
MMNA explains that the noncompliance is that the laminated rear
door glazing in the subject vehicles was labeled with the incorrect
manufacturer's model number. Specifically, the glazing was labeled with
PNA model number ``M131'' instead of the correct model number ``M129.''
IV. Rule Text
FMVSS No. 205 incorporates ANSI Z26.1-1996 and other industry
standards in paragraph S.5.1 by reference. Paragraph S6 of FMVSS No.
205 specifically requires manufacturers to mark the glazing material in
accordance with Section 7 of ANSI Z26.1 and to add other markings
required by NHTSA. With respect to the subject noncompliance, Section 7
of ANSI Z26.1-1996 specifies that in addition to the item of glazing
number and other required markings, the manufacturer shall include a
model number which will identify the type of construction of the
glazing material.
V. Summary of MMNA's Analyses
MMNA stated its belief that the subject noncompliance relates
solely to the product monograms or markings, specifically the use of
model number ``M 131'' instead of ``M 129''. These rear door windows
otherwise meet all other marking and performance requirements of FMVSS
No. 205 and ANSI Z26.1. MMNA also stated its belief that NHTSA
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, December 15,
1999). MMNA believes that because the affected glazing fully meets all
of the applicable performance requirements of FMVSS No. 205 that the
absence of the correct model number on the glazing has no effect upon
the ability of the glazing to satisfy those purposes and thus perform
in the manner intended by FMVSS No. 205.
MMNA also stated its belief that NHTSA has previously granted other
petitions that MMNA believes were similar to the subject petition.
MMNA is not aware of any crashes, injuries, customer complaints, or
field reports associated with this condition.
MMNA has additionally informed NHTSA that it has corrected the
noncompliance so that all future production vehicles delivered with
laminated glass will comply with FMVSS No. 205.
In summation, MMNA 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 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, any decision on
this petition only applies to the subject vehicles that MMNA no longer
controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance existed.
However, any decision on 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 MMNA
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).
Jeffrey M. Giuseppe,
Acting Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2014-13183 Filed 6-5-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P