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 http:// 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 http:// 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 http://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 http:// 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 http://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 http://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 http://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