Spartan Motors USA, Inc., Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 47493-47494 [2016-17189]

Agencies

• National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
• DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 140 (Thursday, July 21, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47493-47494]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-17189]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2016-0024; Notice 1]


Spartan Motors USA, 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: Spartan Motors USA, Inc. (Spartan), has determined that 
certain model year (MY) 2013-2015 Utilimaster Vans do not fully comply 
with paragraph S4.5.1(c) of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 
(FMVSS) No. 208, Occupant crash protection. Spartan Motors USA, Inc., 
filed a report dated January 15, 2016, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, 
Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports for Spartan. 
Spartan then petitioned NHTSA under 49 CFR part 556 requesting a 
decision that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor 
vehicle safety.

DATES: The closing date for comments on the petition is August 22, 
2016.

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 in the title of this notice and 
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 comments you have submitted by mail 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.
    The petition, supporting materials, and all comments received 
before the close of business on the closing date indicated above will 
be filed in the docket 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 
also be published in the Federal Register pursuant to the authority 
indicated at the end of this notice.
    All documents submitted to the 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. The docket ID number for this 
petition is shown at the heading of this notice.
    DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement is available for review in the 
Federal Register published on April 11, 2000, (65 FR 19477-78).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    I. Overview: 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. 
Chapter 301 on the basis that this noncompliance is inconsequential to 
motor vehicle safety.
    This notice of receipt of Spartan'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 910 MY 2013-2015 
Utilimaster Vans that were manufactured between July 11, 2014 and 
December 8, 2015.
    III. Noncompliance: Spartan explains that the noncompliance 
occurred during alterations to the subject vehicles. During alterations 
the sun visors were removed and then reinstalled. As a result of the 
reinstallation, the required sun visor air bag warning labels are not 
visible when the sun visors are in the stowed position. Since the sun 
visor air bag warning labels are not visible when in the stowed 
position, an air bag alert label is required and therefore does not 
meet the requirements as specified in paragraph S4.5.1(c) of FMVSS No. 
208.
    IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S4.5.1(c) of FMVSS No. 208 requires in 
pertinent part:
    S4.5.1(c) Air bag alert label. If the label required by 
S4.5.1(b) is not visible when the sun visor is in the stowed 
position, an air bag alert label shall be permanently affixed to 
that visor so that the label is visible when the visor is in that 
position. The label shall conform in content to the sun visor label 
shown in Figure 6(c) of this standard, and shall comply with the 
requirements of S4.5.1(c)(1) through S4.5.1(c)(3) . . .

    V. Summary of Spartan's Petition: Spartan described the subject 
noncompliance and stated its belief that the noncompliance is 
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety for the following reasons:
    (a) Spartan cited the definition of motor vehicle safety as stated 
in the Safety Act under 49 U.S.C. 30111(a). Spartan also cited 49 
U.S.C. 30118(d) under the Safety Act where Congress acknowledges that 
there are cases where a manufacturer has failed to comply with a safety 
standard, yet the impact on motor vehicle safety is so slight that an 
exemption from the notice and remedy requirements of the Safety Act is 
justified.
    (b) Spartan stated that S4.5.1(b)(2) of FMVSS No. 208 requires an 
air bag warning label to be installed, at the manufacturer's option, on 
either side of the sun visor at each outboard seating position equipped 
with an inflatable restraint. Within that same section of FMVSS No. 
208, it states that air bag warning labels are to be installed, at the 
manufacturer's option, in accordance

[[Page 47494]]

with Figure 8 or 11 of the standard. Footnotes under Figures 8 and 11, 
among others, state ``Sun Visor Label Visible when Visor is in Down 
Position.''
    Spartan submitted a photograph depicting that the air bag warning 
label on the subject vehicles is visible when the sun visor is in the 
down position, however, the content is inverted.
    (c) Spartan specified that the content of the sun visor label 
identifies the risks associated with the placement of children, or 
child seats, encourages the use of seatbelts, and defers to the owner's 
manual for information pertaining to the air bags.
    Spartan notes that they are a vehicle alterer in this case and are 
not responsible for the content of the air bag warning label and that 
they make no assertions relating to compliance of the label. However, 
during alterations to the vehicles they do remove and reinstall the sun 
visors.
    (d) Spartan also stated that they alter a completed vehicle (in 
this case a van) to become a vocational vehicle intended to be used as 
a delivery service vehicle (i.e., a vehicle used to carry parcel 
packages or other goods.) And although, the altered vehicle would be 
equipped with two outboard seating positions, delivery service vehicles 
are typically occupied by the driver who has a specific purpose of 
delivering goods. Given the nature of, or intended use, the vehicle, it 
would be unlikely for children to be placed in the passenger seating 
area.
    (e) Spartan clearly expressed that they do not alter information in 
the owner's manual although it may provide supplements related to the 
alterations being made. Spartan says that the content in the owner's 
manual states that the air bag system is supplemental to the seat belts 
and further describes risks associated with the air bag system. 
Furthermore, the information in the owner's manual discusses an air bag 
warning indicator (tell-tale) of which the vehicle is equipped and its 
function (this indicator would provide indication to the driver that 
the vehicle is equipped with an air bag system.)
    (f) Spartan believes that while the content on the sun visor 
warning label (although not provided by Spartan) may not be in the 
upright position to be easily read by the occupants, it is visible with 
the sun visor in the down position. And even though the label is 
inverted, the coloring scheme would continue to signify risks 
associated with the air bag system.
    Spartan elaborated by saying that the information within the 
owner's manual for the affected vehicles expands on potential risks 
related to the system but also encourages the use of seatbelts as the 
primary purpose of occupant protection.
    Spartan additionally informed NHTSA that on December 8, 2015 
containment actions were conducted and all units in control of 
Utilimaster were inspected and the noncompliance corrected. This 
included vehicles currently undergoing alterations.
    In summation, Spartan believes that given the vocational use of the 
affected vehicles and information provided in the foregoing that the 
subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety, and 
that its petition, to exempt Spartan from providing notification of the 
noncompliances as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118 and remedying the 
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 Spartan 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 Spartan 
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,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2016-17189 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-59-P