Mack Trucks, Inc., Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 47601-47602 [2017-22111]

Download as PDF 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