Mack Trucks, Inc., Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 47601-47602 [2017-22111]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 196 / Thursday, October 12, 2017 / Notices
not have any adverse safety
implications.
NHTSA’S Decision: In consideration
of the foregoing, NHTSA finds that
Arconic has met its burden of
persuasion that the subject FMVSS No.
120 noncompliance on the affected
wheels is inconsequential to motor
vehicle safety. Accordingly, Arconic’s
petition is hereby granted and Arconic
is consequently exempted from the
obligation of providing notification of,
and a free 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 the subject
wheels that Arconic no longer
controlled at the time it determined that
the noncompliance existed. However,
the granting of this petition does not
relieve equipment distributors and
dealers of the prohibitions on the sale,
offer for sale, or introduction or delivery
for introduction into interstate
commerce of the noncompliant wheels
under their control after Arconic
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. 2017–22110 Filed 10–11–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2017–0016; Notice 2]
Mack Trucks, Inc., Grant of Petition for
Decision of Inconsequential
Noncompliance
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Grant of petition.
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY:
Mack Trucks, Inc. (MTI), has
determined that certain model year
(MY) 2017 Mack heavy duty trucks do
not fully comply with Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No.
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:35 Oct 11, 2017
Jkt 244001
120, Tire selection and rims and motor
home/recreation vehicle trailer load
carrying capacity information for motor
vehicles with a GVWR of more than
4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds). MTI
filed a noncompliance information
report dated February 9, 2017. MTI also
petitioned NHTSA on February 28,
2017, and revised its petition on April
29, 2017, for a decision that the subject
noncompliance is inconsequential as it
relates to motor vehicle safety.
ADDRESSES: For further information on
this decision contact Kerrin Bressant,
Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA), telephone
(202) 366–1110, facsimile (202) 366–
5930.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Overview: Mack Trucks, Inc. (MTI),
has determined that certain model year
(MY) 2017 Mack heavy duty trucks do
not fully comply with paragraph S5.2(b)
of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standard (FMVSS) No. 120, Tire
selection and rims and motor home/
recreation vehicle trailer load carrying
capacity information for motor vehicles
with a GVWR of more than 4,536
kilograms (10,000 pounds). MTI filed a
noncompliance report dated February 9,
2017, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573,
Defect and Noncompliance
Responsibility and Reports. MTI also
petitioned NHTSA on February 28,
2017, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d)
and 30120(h) and 49 CFR part 556, and
revised its petition on April 29, 2017, to
obtain an exemption from the
notification and remedy requirements of
49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the basis that
this noncompliance is inconsequential
as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
Notice of receipt of the petition was
published with a 30-day public
comment period, on July 20, 2017, in
the Federal Register (82 FR 33546). 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/. Then
follow the online search instructions to
locate docket number ‘‘NHTSA–2017–
0016.’’
II. Vehicles Involved: Approximately
226 MY 2017 Mack Pinnacle, Granite,
TerraPro and LR heavy duty trucks,
manufactured between August 15, 2016,
and December 12, 2016, are potentially
involved.
III. Noncompliance: MTI explains that
the noncompliance is that the wheels on
the subject vehicles incorrectly identify
the rim size as 24.5″ × 8.25″ instead of
22.5″ × 8.25″, and therefore do not meet
the requirements of paragraph S5.2(b) of
PO 00000
Frm 00156
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
47601
FMVSS No. 120. Specifically, the
marking error overstates the wheel
diameter by 2″.
IV. Rule Text: paragraph S5.2 of
FMVSS No. 120 states:
S5.2 Rim marking. Each rim or, at the
option of the manufacturer in the case of a
single-piece wheel, wheel disc shall be
marked with the information listed in
paragraphs (a) through (e) of this paragraph,
in lettering not less than 3 millimeters high,
impressed to a depth or, at the option of the
manufacturer, embossed to a height of not
less than 0.125 millimeters . . .
(b) The rim size designation, and in case
of multipiece rims, the rim type designation.
For example: 20 × 5.50, or 20 × 5.5.
V. Summary of MTI’s Petition: MTI
described the subject noncompliance
and stated its belief that the
noncompliance is inconsequential as it
relates to motor vehicle safety.
In support of its petition, MTI
referenced a letter to NHTSA, dated
December 5, 2016, from Arconic Wheel
and Transportation Products (Arconic),
which is the rim manufacturer, and
provided the following reasoning:
1. A 24.5″ inch tire will not seat on
the rim; therefore, if someone tries to
mount a 24.5″ tire to the rim, it will not
hold air and therefore cannot be
inflated.
2. When tires are replaced, the
technician will select the tire based on
the size and rating of the tire being
replaced. When Mack manufactured the
vehicle, the tire used was a 22.5″ (i.e.,
the correct size for the rim). Therefore,
the tires installed by Mack have the
correct size on the sidewall of the tire.
3. Mack is required to list the tires
size and inflation pressures on the
certification label as required by 49 CFR
567. The information printed on the
label is the correct size, a 22.5″ inch tire
and reflects the tires that were installed
when manufactured. The certification
label is located inside the driver’s door
and can be easily accessed by the tire
installer.
MTI concluded by expressing the
belief that the subject noncompliance is
inconsequential as it relates to motor
vehicle safety, and that its petition to be
exempted from providing notification of
the noncompliance, as required by 49
U.S.C. 30118, and a remedy for the
noncompliance, as required by 49
U.S.C. 30120, should be granted.
To view MTI’s petition analyses in its
entirety you can visit https://
www.regulations.gov by following the
online instructions for accessing the
dockets and by using the docket ID
number for this petition shown in the
heading of this notice.
E:\FR\FM\12OCN1.SGM
12OCN1
47602
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 196 / Thursday, October 12, 2017 / Notices
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
NHTSA Decision
NHTSA Analysis: MTI explains that
the noncompliance is that the wheels on
the subject vehicles incorrectly identify
the rim size as 24.5″ x 8.25″ instead of
22.5″ x 8.25″, and therefore do not meet
the requirements of paragraph S5.2(b) of
FMVSS No. 120. Specifically, the
marking error overstates the wheel
diameter by 2″.
NHTSA has reviewed MTI’s analyses
that the subject noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety
and provides the following analysis:
When it comes to mating a tire and
rim combination, it becomes very
apparent very quickly that either an
oversized tire on a rim or an undersized
tire on the same sized rim will not
properly seat to that rim. In this
particular case (the former) as MTI has
mentioned in its petition, if someone
tries to mount a 24.5″ inch tire on an
undersized rim (22.5″), it will not hold
air and therefore cannot be inflated. The
inability to mount the incorrect tire on
the rim precludes one’s ability to
actually drive with an incorrect tire-rim
combination on public roadways.
Furthermore, FMVSS No. 120 paragraph
S5.3 requires vehicles be labeled with
proper tire/rim size combinations. This
additional information is available to
provide the vehicle operator or
technician with the correct tire/rim size
information.
NHTSA’s Decision: In consideration
of the foregoing, NHTSA finds that MTI
has met its burden of persuasion that
the FMVSS No. 120 noncompliance is
inconsequential as it relates to motor
vehicle safety. Accordingly, MTI’s
petition is hereby granted and MTI is
consequently exempted from the
obligation to provide notification of, and
remedy for, the subject noncompliance
in the affected vehicles 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 the subject
vehicles that MTI no longer controlled
at the time it determined that the
noncompliance existed. 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:35 Oct 11, 2017
Jkt 244001
the noncompliant vehicles under their
control after MTI 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. 2017–22111 Filed 10–11–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency
[Docket ID OCC–2017–0019]
Rescission of Guidance on
Supervisory Concerns and
Expectations Regarding Deposit
Advance Products
Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency (OCC), Treasury.
ACTION: Rescission of guidance.
AGENCY:
The OCC is rescinding its
supervisory guidance entitled
‘‘Guidance on Supervisory Concerns
and Expectations Regarding Deposit
Advance Products’’ and OCC Bulletin
2013–40 (collectively, Guidance), which
address the OCC’s expectations
regarding the offering of deposit
advance products by national banks and
federal savings associations
(collectively, banks). The OCC is
rescinding the Guidance in light of the
adoption of a final rule on payday,
vehicle title, and certain high-cost
installment loans by the Consumer
Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB),
which overlaps with the Guidance,
resulting in potentially inconsistent
regulatory guidance for banks.
DATES: This Guidance is rescinded
effective October 5, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul
Reymann, Director, Consumer
Compliance Policy, (202) 649–5470;
Steven Jones, Director, Retail Credit
Risk, (202) 649–6220; Kenneth Lennon,
Director, Community and Consumer
Law, (202) 649–6350; Office of the
Comptroller of the Currency, 400 7th
Street SW., Washington, DC 20219 or,
for persons who are deaf or hard of
hearing, TTY, (202) 649–5597.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
In 2013, the OCC issued the Guidance
to set forth the agency’s expectations
regarding deposit advance products
offered by banks.1 A deposit advance
product is a small-dollar, short-term
SUMMARY:
1 78
PO 00000
FR 70624 (November 26, 2013).
Frm 00157
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
loan or line of credit that a bank makes
available to a customer whose deposit
account reflects recurring direct
deposits. The customer obtains a loan,
which is to be repaid from the proceeds
of the next direct deposit. The Guidance
highlighted potential credit, reputation,
operational, compliance, and other
issues associated with deposit advance
products and encouraged banks to be
aware of these issues so that banks
offering these products in response to
their customers’ short-term, small-dollar
credit needs did not engage in practices
that would increase these risks or result
in the unfair treatment of bank
customers.
Since adoption of the Guidance in
2013, the regulatory and marketplace
landscapes have changed, and the OCC
has gained supervisory experience with
application of the Guidance to deposit
advance products. Most recently, the
CFPB adopted a rule entitled ‘‘Payday,
Vehicle Title, and Certain High-Cost
Installment Loans’’ (CFPB’s Final
Rule),2 regarding short-term, smalldollar loans, which overlaps with the
Guidance and will therefore apply to
many of the loans addressed by the
Guidance. For example, the CFPB’s
Final Rule includes underwriting
requirements for covered loans that are
inconsistent with certain aspects of the
Guidance. In addition, the CFPB’s Final
Rule provides for cooling-off periods
that differ from those set forth in the
Guidance. Thus, the continuation of the
Guidance would subject banks to
potentially inconsistent regulatory
direction and undue burden as banks
prepare to implement the requirements
of the CFPB’s Final Rule.
In addition, based on the changed
regulatory and marketplace landscape
and our supervisory experience noted
above, the OCC is concerned that banks
are able to serve consumers’ needs for
short-term, small-dollar credit. As a
practical matter, consumers who would
prefer to rely on banks and thrifts for
these products may be forced to rely on
less regulated lenders and be exposed to
the risk of consumer harm and expense.
Accordingly, the OCC is rescinding
the Guidance. In rescinding the
Guidance, the OCC considered that
many other OCC guidance documents
cover key elements of consumer
lending, and these guidance documents
2 Today the CFPB announced that it adopted and
submitted the CFPB’s Final Rule for publication in
the Federal Register. https://
www.consumerfinance.gov/policy-compliance/
rulemaking/final-rules/payday-vehicle-title-andcertain-high-cost-installment-loans/. The CFPB
issued its notice of proposed rulemaking on payday
loans in 2016. 81 FR 47864 (July 22, 2016).
E:\FR\FM\12OCN1.SGM
12OCN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 196 (Thursday, October 12, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47601-47602]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-22111]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2017-0016; Notice 2]
Mack Trucks, Inc., Grant of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Grant of petition.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Mack Trucks, Inc. (MTI), has determined that certain model
year (MY) 2017 Mack heavy duty trucks do not fully comply with Federal
Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 120, Tire selection and rims
and motor home/recreation vehicle trailer load carrying capacity
information for motor vehicles with a GVWR of more than 4,536 kilograms
(10,000 pounds). MTI filed a noncompliance information report dated
February 9, 2017. MTI also petitioned NHTSA on February 28, 2017, and
revised its petition on April 29, 2017, for a decision that the subject
noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
ADDRESSES: For further information on this decision contact Kerrin
Bressant, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone (202) 366-1110,
facsimile (202) 366-5930.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Overview: Mack Trucks, Inc. (MTI), has determined that certain
model year (MY) 2017 Mack heavy duty trucks do not fully comply with
paragraph S5.2(b) of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No.
120, Tire selection and rims and motor home/recreation vehicle trailer
load carrying capacity information for motor vehicles with a GVWR of
more than 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds). MTI filed a noncompliance
report dated February 9, 2017, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and
Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. MTI also petitioned NHTSA on
February 28, 2017, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and 49
CFR part 556, and revised its petition on April 29, 2017, to obtain an
exemption from the notification and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C.
Chapter 301 on the basis that this noncompliance is inconsequential as
it relates to motor vehicle safety.
Notice of receipt of the petition was published with a 30-day
public comment period, on July 20, 2017, in the Federal Register (82 FR
33546). 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/. Then follow the
online search instructions to locate docket number ``NHTSA-2017-0016.''
II. Vehicles Involved: Approximately 226 MY 2017 Mack Pinnacle,
Granite, TerraPro and LR heavy duty trucks, manufactured between August
15, 2016, and December 12, 2016, are potentially involved.
III. Noncompliance: MTI explains that the noncompliance is that the
wheels on the subject vehicles incorrectly identify the rim size as
24.5'' x 8.25'' instead of 22.5'' x 8.25'', and therefore do not meet
the requirements of paragraph S5.2(b) of FMVSS No. 120. Specifically,
the marking error overstates the wheel diameter by 2''.
IV. Rule Text: paragraph S5.2 of FMVSS No. 120 states:
S5.2 Rim marking. Each rim or, at the option of the manufacturer
in the case of a single-piece wheel, wheel disc shall be marked with
the information listed in paragraphs (a) through (e) of this
paragraph, in lettering not less than 3 millimeters high, impressed
to a depth or, at the option of the manufacturer, embossed to a
height of not less than 0.125 millimeters . . .
(b) The rim size designation, and in case of multipiece rims,
the rim type designation. For example: 20 x 5.50, or 20 x 5.5.
V. Summary of MTI's Petition: MTI described the subject
noncompliance and stated its belief that the noncompliance is
inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
In support of its petition, MTI referenced a letter to NHTSA, dated
December 5, 2016, from Arconic Wheel and Transportation Products
(Arconic), which is the rim manufacturer, and provided the following
reasoning:
1. A 24.5'' inch tire will not seat on the rim; therefore, if
someone tries to mount a 24.5'' tire to the rim, it will not hold air
and therefore cannot be inflated.
2. When tires are replaced, the technician will select the tire
based on the size and rating of the tire being replaced. When Mack
manufactured the vehicle, the tire used was a 22.5'' (i.e., the correct
size for the rim). Therefore, the tires installed by Mack have the
correct size on the sidewall of the tire.
3. Mack is required to list the tires size and inflation pressures
on the certification label as required by 49 CFR 567. The information
printed on the label is the correct size, a 22.5'' inch tire and
reflects the tires that were installed when manufactured. The
certification label is located inside the driver's door and can be
easily accessed by the tire installer.
MTI concluded by expressing the belief that the subject
noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety,
and that its petition to be exempted from providing notification of the
noncompliance, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118, and a remedy for the
noncompliance, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120, should be granted.
To view MTI's petition analyses in its entirety you can visit
https://www.regulations.gov by following the online instructions for
accessing the dockets and by using the docket ID number for this
petition shown in the heading of this notice.
[[Page 47602]]
NHTSA Decision
NHTSA Analysis: MTI explains that the noncompliance is that the
wheels on the subject vehicles incorrectly identify the rim size as
24.5'' x 8.25'' instead of 22.5'' x 8.25'', and therefore do not meet
the requirements of paragraph S5.2(b) of FMVSS No. 120. Specifically,
the marking error overstates the wheel diameter by 2''.
NHTSA has reviewed MTI's analyses that the subject noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety and provides the following
analysis:
When it comes to mating a tire and rim combination, it becomes very
apparent very quickly that either an oversized tire on a rim or an
undersized tire on the same sized rim will not properly seat to that
rim. In this particular case (the former) as MTI has mentioned in its
petition, if someone tries to mount a 24.5'' inch tire on an undersized
rim (22.5''), it will not hold air and therefore cannot be inflated.
The inability to mount the incorrect tire on the rim precludes one's
ability to actually drive with an incorrect tire-rim combination on
public roadways. Furthermore, FMVSS No. 120 paragraph S5.3 requires
vehicles be labeled with proper tire/rim size combinations. This
additional information is available to provide the vehicle operator or
technician with the correct tire/rim size information.
NHTSA's Decision: In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA finds
that MTI has met its burden of persuasion that the FMVSS No. 120
noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
Accordingly, MTI's petition is hereby granted and MTI is consequently
exempted from the obligation to provide notification of, and remedy
for, the subject noncompliance in the affected vehicles 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 the subject vehicles that MTI no longer controlled at
the time it determined that the noncompliance existed. 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 MTI 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. 2017-22111 Filed 10-11-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
