Forest River, Inc., Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 7178-7180 [2019-03573]
Download as PDF
7178
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 41 / Friday, March 1, 2019 / Notices
Washington, DC 20590. Telephone 202–
366–9309, Email Bianca.carr@dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: As
described by the applicant the intended
service of the vessel FELIX is:
—Intended Commercial Use of Vessel:
‘‘Take on paying passengers/clients
for sailing trips and recreational
SCUBA diving of up to 1–2-week
duration liveaboard.’’
—Geographic Region Including Base of
Operations: ‘‘Florida, Georgia, South
Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia,
Maryland, Delaware, New Jersey, New
York (excluding New York Harbor),
Connecticut, Rhode Island, Maine,
Puerto Rico’’ (Base of Operations:
Delaware)
—Vessel Length and Type: 52′
Catamaran
The complete application is available
for review identified in the DOT docket
as MARAD–2019–0024 at https://
www.regulations.gov. Interested parties
may comment on the effect this action
may have on U.S. vessel builders or
businesses in the U.S. that use U.S.-flag
vessels. If MARAD determines, in
accordance with 46 U.S.C. 12121 and
MARAD’s regulations at 46 CFR part
388, that the issuance of the waiver will
have an unduly adverse effect on a U.S.vessel builder or a business that uses
U.S.-flag vessels in that business, a
waiver will not be granted. Comments
should refer to the vessel name, state the
commenter’s interest in the waiver
application, and address the waiver
criteria given in section 388.4 of
MARAD’s regulations at 46 CFR part
388.
Public Participation
jbell on DSK30RV082PROD with NOTICES
How do I submit comments?
Please submit your comments,
including the attachments, following the
instructions provided under the above
heading entitled ADDRESSES. Be advised
that it may take a few hours or even
days for your comment to be reflected
on the docket. In addition, your
comments must be written in English.
We encourage you to provide concise
comments and you may attach
additional documents as necessary.
There is no limit on the length of the
attachments.
Where do I go to read public comments,
and find supporting information?
Go to the docket online at https://
www.regulations.gov., keyword search
MARAD–2019–0024 or visit the Docket
Management Facility (see ADDRESSES for
hours of operation). We recommend that
you periodically check the Docket for
new submissions and supporting
material.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:13 Feb 28, 2019
Jkt 247001
Will my comments be made available to
the public?
Yes. Be aware that your entire
comment, including your personal
identifying information, will be made
publicly available.
May I submit comments confidentially?
If you wish to submit comments
under a claim of confidentiality, you
should submit three copies of your
complete submission, including the
information you claim to be confidential
business information, to the Department
of Transportation, Maritime
Administration, Office of Legislation
and Regulations, MAR–225, W24–220,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590. Include a cover
letter setting forth with specificity the
basis for any such claim and, if possible,
a summary of your submission that can
be made available to the public.
Privacy Act
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c),
DOT solicits comments from the public
to better inform its rulemaking process.
DOT posts these comments, without
edit, to www.regulations.gov, as
described in the system of records
notice, DOT/ALL–14 FDMS, accessible
through www.dot.gov/privacy. To
facilitate comment tracking and
response, we encourage commenters to
provide their name, or the name of their
organization; however, submission of
names is completely optional. Whether
or not commenters identify themselves,
all timely comments will be fully
considered. If you wish to provide
comments containing proprietary or
confidential information, please contact
the agency for alternate submission
instructions.
Authority: 49 CFR 1.93(a), 46 U.S.C. 55103,
46 U.S.C. 12121.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: February 25, 2019.
By Order of the Maritime Administrator.
T. Mitchell Hudson, Jr.,
Secretary, Maritime Administration.
[FR Doc. 2019–03604 Filed 2–28–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–81–P
PO 00000
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2018–0003; Notice 2]
Forest River, Inc., Grant of Petition for
Decision of Inconsequential
Noncompliance
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Grant of petition.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: Forest River, Inc. (Forest
River), has determined that certain
model year (MY) 2017–2018 Forest
River buses and school buses do not
fully comply with Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No.
205, Glazing Materials. Forest River
filed two separate noncompliance
reports, both dated November 30, 2017.
Forest River then petitioned NHTSA on
December 12, 2017, for a decision that
the subject noncompliance is
inconsequential as it relates to motor
vehicle safety. This notice announces
the grant of this petition.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Leroy Angeles, Office of Vehicle Safety
Compliance, NHTSA, telephone (202)
366–5304, facsimile (202) 366–3081.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Overview
Forest River has determined that
certain MY 2017–2018 Forest River
buses and school buses do not fully
comply with FMVSS No. 205, Glazing
Materials (49 CFR 571.205). Forest River
filed two separate noncompliance
reports, both dated November 30, 2017,
pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and
Noncompliance Responsibility and
Reports. Forest River then petitioned
NHTSA on December 12, 2017,
pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h) and 49 CFR part 556, for 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.
II. Buses Involved
Approximately 544 MY 2017–2018
Forest River school buses and
approximately 2,121 MY 2017–2018
Forest River buses, manufactured
between June 26, 2017, and November
10, 2017, are potentially involved. The
following Forest River buses are
involved:
School Buses
• Starcraft Allstar XL, Quest XL and
Prodigy
Frm 00163
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\01MRN1.SGM
01MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 41 / Friday, March 1, 2019 / Notices
Buses
• Starcraft Allstar XL, Allstar, Starlite,
XLT, Starquest, and Allstar MVP
• StarTrans President, PS2, Senator,
Senator II, Candidate, and Candidate
II
• Glaval Apollo, Commute, Concorde II,
Entourage, Legacy, Primetime, Sport,
Titan II, Titan II LF and Universal
• Elkhart Coach ECII
jbell on DSK30RV082PROD with NOTICES
III. Noncompliance
Forest River explains that the
noncompliance is that the subject buses
were equipped with curbside entry door
glass that does not fully comply with
paragraph S6 of FMVSS No. 205.
Specifically, the curbside entry door
glass has the AS3 glazing marking when
it should have been marked with the
AS2 glazing marking.
IV. Rule Requirements
Section S6 of FMVSS No. 205, titled
‘‘Certification and Marking’’ includes
the requirements relevant to this
petition:
• A prime glazing material
manufacturer must certify, in
accordance with 49 U.S.C. 30115, each
piece of glazing material to which this
standard applies is designed as:
a. A component of any specific motor
vehicle or camper; or
b. To be cut into components for use
in motor vehicles or items of motor
vehicle equipment.
• A prime glazing manufacturer
certifies its glazing by adding to the
marks required by section 7 of ANSI/
SAE Z26.1–1996, in letters and
numerals of the same size, the symbol
‘‘DOT’’ and a manufacturer’s code mark
that NHTSA assigns to the
manufacturer.
• NHTSA will assign a code mark to
a manufacturer after the manufacturer
submits a written request to the Office
of Vehicle Safety Compliance, National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
The request must include the company
name, address, and a statement from the
manufacturer certifying its status as a
prime glazing manufacturer as defined
in paragraph S4.
• A manufacturer or distributor who
cuts a section of glazing material to
which this standard applies, for use in
a motor vehicle or camper, must:
a. Mark that material in accordance
with section 7 of ANSI/SAE Z26.1–
1996; and
b. Certify that its product complies
with this standard in accordance with
49 U.S.C. 30115.
V. Summary of Forest River’s Petition
Forest River described the subject
noncompliance and stated its belief that
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:13 Feb 28, 2019
Jkt 247001
the noncompliance is inconsequential
as it relates to motor vehicle safety. In
support of its petition, Forest River
submitted the following arguments:
1. As an initial matter, the
noncompliance does not present a safety
risk because it has no effect on the
structure, performance, or safety of the
glass. That is, the noncompliance relates
solely to the glass’ markings,
specifically the use of the marking
‘‘AS3,’’ instead of ‘‘AS2.’’
2. The glass required for the subject
buses and school buses must meet the
requirements of ANSI 26.1–1996 AS2.
Forest River requested that a sample of
the glass be tested to ensure its
compliance with all applicable
standards. The test results have affirmed
that the glass indeed meets ANSI 26.1–
1996 AS2’s requirements and is
compliant for the designed position in
which it is applied.
3. Forest River is enclosing copies of
statements from the glass manufacturer
Cleer Vision, and test data confirming
the glass’ compliance with ANSI and
FMVSS No. 205’s performance
standards.
4. Forest River stated that the agency
has previously granted numerous
petitions for determinations of
inconsequential noncompliance in
regard to FMVSS No. 205, including
petitions involving mismarkings similar
to the instant matter. See the following
recent examples:
a. Mitsubishi Motors North America, Inc.
Petition, 80 FR 72482 (November 19, 2015)
(involving rear door windows marked with
the model number ‘‘M66’’ instead of the
correct ‘‘M131’’);
b. Custom Glass Solutions Upper Sandusky
Corporation Petition, 79 FR 49833 (January
23, 2015) (involving laminated glass panes
mistakenly marked as ‘‘tempered’’ and with
the incorrect manufacturer’s DOT number,
model number, and manufacturer’s
trademark).
c. Mitsubishi Motors North America, Inc.
Petition, 79 FR 49833 (August 22, 2014)
(involving rear door windows marked with
the model number ‘‘M13l’’ instead of the
correct ‘‘M129’’);
d. General Motors LLC Petition, 79 FR
23402 (April 28, 2014) (involving quarter
windows marked as ‘‘AS2’’ instead of the
correct ‘‘AS3’’).
Forest River 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.
Forest River’s complete petition and
all supporting documents are available
PO 00000
Frm 00164
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
7179
by logging onto the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) website at:
https://www.regulations.gov and
following the online search instructions
to locate the docket number listed in the
title of this notice.
VI. NHTSA’s Analysis
NHTSA has reviewed Forest River’s
petition and agrees with Forest River
that the subject noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
The agency believes that the true
measure of inconsequentiality to motor
vehicle safety in this case is that the
mismarking of the glazing material has
no effect on the operational safety of the
subject buses. This noncompliance to
the labeling requirements in FMVSS No.
205 will have an inconsequential effect
on motor vehicle safety because:
Forest River’s petition included letters
from Cleer Vision, stating that the glass
inadvertently marked AS3 does in fact
meet all requirements of AS2
certification including, but not limited
to, the visual light transmittance being
70 percent or greater. Cleer Vision
provided a Certificate of Conformity
from Guardian Industries certifying that
the float glass products they
manufacture comply with applicable
FMVSS specifications with respect to
thickness, optics, inclusions, and
transmittance. Guardian Industries’
provided data showing the average
visible light transmittance as 80.03
percent, thus greater than the minimum
70 percent for AS2.
ANSI Z26.1–1996 requires that all
AS3 tempered glass pass the ball impact
test, fracture test, and the shot bag
impact test. In addition to AS3
tempered glass requirements, Forest
River’s AS2 tempered glass must also
meet the light stability, luminous
transmittance, and abrasion resistance
requirements set forth in ANSI Z26.1–
1996 for AS2 tempered glass. Since
Forest River’s petition focused largely
on luminous transmittance, NHTSA
contacted Forest River requesting test
data confirming that the subject glass
meets all the requirements set forth in
ANSI Z26.1–1996 for AS2 tempered
glass.
In response, Forest River provided a
test report documenting the results of
testing to all of the requirements for AS2
tempered glass. NHTSA reviewed Forest
River’s report and verified that the
subject glass meets the performance
requirements set forth in ANSI Z26.1–
1996 for AS2 tempered glass
incorporated by reference in FMVSS No.
205.
The agency contacted Forest River on
April 2, 2018, asking Forest River what
they will do to ensure the
E:\FR\FM\01MRN1.SGM
01MRN1
7180
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 41 / Friday, March 1, 2019 / Notices
noncompliance does not happen again
in the future. In response, Forest River
stated that they have implemented a
triple verification process between the
supplier and Forest River to further
prevent future occurrences.
VII. NHTSA’s Decision
In consideration of the foregoing
analysis, NHTSA has decided that
Forest River has met its burden of
persuasion that the FMVSS No. 205
noncompliance is inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety. Accordingly,
Forest River’s petition is hereby granted
and Forest River is exempted from the
obligation of providing notification of,
and a remedy for, the subject
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
buses that Forest River 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 buses under their
control after Forest River 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).
Michael A. Cole,
Acting Director, Office of Vehicle Safety
Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2019–03573 Filed 2–28–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
jbell on DSK30RV082PROD with NOTICES
[Docket No. DOT–OST–2007–27057]
Notice of Submission of Proposed
Information Collections to OMB;
Agency Request for OMB Approval of
Information Collections: Increasing
Charter Air Transportation Options
Office of the Secretary (OST),
Department of Transportation.
ACTION: Notice and request for
comments.
AGENCY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:13 Feb 28, 2019
Jkt 247001
SUMMARY: In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this
notice announces the Department of
Transportation’s (DOT or Department)
intention to request an Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) control
number for requirements in the
Department’s final rule, Increasing
Charter Air Transportation Options, that
certain disclosures be made to
consumers by air charter brokers, air
taxi operators, and commuter air
carriers.
DATES: Written comments should be
submitted by April 30, 2019.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by DOT Docket Number OST–
2007–27057 through one of the
following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
• Fax: 1–202–493–2251.
• Mail or Hand Delivery: Docket
Management Facility, U.S. Department
of Transportation, West Building
Ground Floor, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE, Room W12–140, Washington, DC
20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except on
Federal holidays. The telephone number
is 202–366–9329.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sohum Karia, Office of the General
Counsel, Office of the Secretary, U.S.
Department of Transportation, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
20590, 202–366–9342 (Voice), 202–366–
7152 (Fax), or sohum.karia@dot.gov
(Email). Arrangements to receive this
document in an alternative format may
be made by contacting the above-named
individual.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Title: Increasing Charter Air
Transportation Options.
Type of Review: New Information
Collections.
Background: This notice concerns two
new information collection
requirements in the Department’s final
rule, Increasing Charter Air
Transportation Options, 83 FR 46867
(September 17, 2018), which is effective
on February 14, 2019. Under the final
rule, air charter brokers 1 are authorized
to act as indirect air carriers 2 by
1 The final rule defines an air charter broker as
‘‘any person or entity that, as an indirect air carrier,
foreign indirect air carrier, or a bona fide agent,
holds out, sells, or arranges single entity charter air
transportation using a direct air carrier.’’
2 ‘‘Indirect air carrier’’ means any person who
undertakes to engage indirectly in air transportation
operations and who uses for such transportation the
services of a direct air carrier. 14 CFR 380.2. ‘‘Direct
air carrier’’ means a certificated commuter or
foreign air carrier, or an air taxi operator registered
under 14 CFR part 298, or a Canadian charter air
PO 00000
Frm 00165
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
contracting in their own right with
customers to provide charter air
transportation and separately arranging
with direct air carriers to provide such
transportation services. The first
information collection pertains to the
requirement that air charter brokers
disclose in all solicitation materials and
advertisements that they are air charter
brokers and not direct air carriers. The
second information collection involves
the requirement that air charter brokers,
air taxi operators, and commuter air
carriers provide notification to
consumers containing pertinent
information regarding the terms of the
charter air transportation at the time a
consumer is considering the purchase of
air transportation. If the information is
not known at that time or changes
thereafter, then the entities must
provide notification within a reasonable
time after the information becomes
known. This information is intended to
aid the prospective charterer in making
a more informed choice regarding the
purchase of charter air transportation,
and to facilitate travel by reducing the
possibility that the consumer will be
misled or ill-informed about key
information regarding a given flight
before and during his or her trip.
The title, a description of the
information collection and respondents,
and the periodic reporting burden are
set forth below for each of the
information collections:
1. Requirement to disclose that air
charter brokers are not direct air carriers
in advertising and solicitation materials
(14 CFR 295.23)
All air charter broker solicitation
materials and advertising, including
internet web pages, must clearly and
conspicuously state that the air charter
broker is not a direct air carrier in
operational control of aircraft, and that
the air service advertised would be
provided by a properly licensed direct
air carrier.
Respondents: Air charter brokers.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
700. To reach this estimate, the
Department began by determining the
approximate number of flights arranged
by air charter brokers annually, using
flight records information from the air
traffic control radar system and data
reports from private sector aviation
research organizations.3 These data
taxi operator registered under 14 CFR part 294, that
directly engages in the operation of aircraft under
a certificate, authorization, permit or exemption
issued by the Department. Id.
3 These data are developed from the Enhanced
Traffic Management System (ETMS) flight records,
and rely on aircraft and user classifications made
by air traffic controllers as well as tail number and
operator data. The development of these data for the
E:\FR\FM\01MRN1.SGM
01MRN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 41 (Friday, March 1, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7178-7180]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-03573]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2018-0003; Notice 2]
Forest River, 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: Forest River, Inc. (Forest River), has determined that certain
model year (MY) 2017-2018 Forest River buses and school buses do not
fully comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No.
205, Glazing Materials. Forest River filed two separate noncompliance
reports, both dated November 30, 2017. Forest River then petitioned
NHTSA on December 12, 2017, for a decision that the subject
noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
This notice announces the grant of this petition.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Leroy Angeles, Office of Vehicle
Safety Compliance, NHTSA, telephone (202) 366-5304, facsimile (202)
366-3081.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Overview
Forest River has determined that certain MY 2017-2018 Forest River
buses and school buses do not fully comply with FMVSS No. 205, Glazing
Materials (49 CFR 571.205). Forest River filed two separate
noncompliance reports, both dated November 30, 2017, pursuant to 49 CFR
part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. Forest
River then petitioned NHTSA on December 12, 2017, pursuant to 49 U.S.C.
30118(d) and 30120(h) and 49 CFR part 556, for 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.
II. Buses Involved
Approximately 544 MY 2017-2018 Forest River school buses and
approximately 2,121 MY 2017-2018 Forest River buses, manufactured
between June 26, 2017, and November 10, 2017, are potentially involved.
The following Forest River buses are involved:
School Buses
Starcraft Allstar XL, Quest XL and Prodigy
[[Page 7179]]
Buses
Starcraft Allstar XL, Allstar, Starlite, XLT, Starquest, and
Allstar MVP
StarTrans President, PS2, Senator, Senator II, Candidate, and
Candidate II
Glaval Apollo, Commute, Concorde II, Entourage, Legacy,
Primetime, Sport, Titan II, Titan II LF and Universal
Elkhart Coach ECII
III. Noncompliance
Forest River explains that the noncompliance is that the subject
buses were equipped with curbside entry door glass that does not fully
comply with paragraph S6 of FMVSS No. 205. Specifically, the curbside
entry door glass has the AS3 glazing marking when it should have been
marked with the AS2 glazing marking.
IV. Rule Requirements
Section S6 of FMVSS No. 205, titled ``Certification and Marking''
includes the requirements relevant to this petition:
A prime glazing material manufacturer must certify, in
accordance with 49 U.S.C. 30115, each piece of glazing material to
which this standard applies is designed as:
a. A component of any specific motor vehicle or camper; or
b. To be cut into components for use in motor vehicles or items of
motor vehicle equipment.
A prime glazing manufacturer certifies its glazing by
adding to the marks required by section 7 of ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996, in
letters and numerals of the same size, the symbol ``DOT'' and a
manufacturer's code mark that NHTSA assigns to the manufacturer.
NHTSA will assign a code mark to a manufacturer after the
manufacturer submits a written request to the Office of Vehicle Safety
Compliance, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The request
must include the company name, address, and a statement from the
manufacturer certifying its status as a prime glazing manufacturer as
defined in paragraph S4.
A manufacturer or distributor who cuts a section of
glazing material to which this standard applies, for use in a motor
vehicle or camper, must:
a. Mark that material in accordance with section 7 of ANSI/SAE
Z26.1-1996; and
b. Certify that its product complies with this standard in
accordance with 49 U.S.C. 30115.
V. Summary of Forest River's Petition
Forest River 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, Forest River submitted the
following arguments:
1. As an initial matter, the noncompliance does not present a
safety risk because it has no effect on the structure, performance, or
safety of the glass. That is, the noncompliance relates solely to the
glass' markings, specifically the use of the marking ``AS3,'' instead
of ``AS2.''
2. The glass required for the subject buses and school buses must
meet the requirements of ANSI 26.1-1996 AS2. Forest River requested
that a sample of the glass be tested to ensure its compliance with all
applicable standards. The test results have affirmed that the glass
indeed meets ANSI 26.1-1996 AS2's requirements and is compliant for the
designed position in which it is applied.
3. Forest River is enclosing copies of statements from the glass
manufacturer Cleer Vision, and test data confirming the glass'
compliance with ANSI and FMVSS No. 205's performance standards.
4. Forest River stated that the agency has previously granted
numerous petitions for determinations of inconsequential noncompliance
in regard to FMVSS No. 205, including petitions involving mismarkings
similar to the instant matter. See the following recent examples:
a. Mitsubishi Motors North America, Inc. Petition, 80 FR 72482
(November 19, 2015) (involving rear door windows marked with the
model number ``M66'' instead of the correct ``M131'');
b. Custom Glass Solutions Upper Sandusky Corporation Petition,
79 FR 49833 (January 23, 2015) (involving laminated glass panes
mistakenly marked as ``tempered'' and with the incorrect
manufacturer's DOT number, model number, and manufacturer's
trademark).
c. Mitsubishi Motors North America, Inc. Petition, 79 FR 49833
(August 22, 2014) (involving rear door windows marked with the model
number ``M13l'' instead of the correct ``M129'');
d. General Motors LLC Petition, 79 FR 23402 (April 28, 2014)
(involving quarter windows marked as ``AS2'' instead of the correct
``AS3'').
Forest River 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.
Forest River's complete petition and all supporting documents are
available by logging onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS)
website at: https://www.regulations.gov and following the online search
instructions to locate the docket number listed in the title of this
notice.
VI. NHTSA's Analysis
NHTSA has reviewed Forest River's petition and agrees with Forest
River that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor
vehicle safety. The agency believes that the true measure of
inconsequentiality to motor vehicle safety in this case is that the
mismarking of the glazing material has no effect on the operational
safety of the subject buses. This noncompliance to the labeling
requirements in FMVSS No. 205 will have an inconsequential effect on
motor vehicle safety because:
Forest River's petition included letters from Cleer Vision, stating
that the glass inadvertently marked AS3 does in fact meet all
requirements of AS2 certification including, but not limited to, the
visual light transmittance being 70 percent or greater. Cleer Vision
provided a Certificate of Conformity from Guardian Industries
certifying that the float glass products they manufacture comply with
applicable FMVSS specifications with respect to thickness, optics,
inclusions, and transmittance. Guardian Industries' provided data
showing the average visible light transmittance as 80.03 percent, thus
greater than the minimum 70 percent for AS2.
ANSI Z26.1-1996 requires that all AS3 tempered glass pass the ball
impact test, fracture test, and the shot bag impact test. In addition
to AS3 tempered glass requirements, Forest River's AS2 tempered glass
must also meet the light stability, luminous transmittance, and
abrasion resistance requirements set forth in ANSI Z26.1-1996 for AS2
tempered glass. Since Forest River's petition focused largely on
luminous transmittance, NHTSA contacted Forest River requesting test
data confirming that the subject glass meets all the requirements set
forth in ANSI Z26.1-1996 for AS2 tempered glass.
In response, Forest River provided a test report documenting the
results of testing to all of the requirements for AS2 tempered glass.
NHTSA reviewed Forest River's report and verified that the subject
glass meets the performance requirements set forth in ANSI Z26.1-1996
for AS2 tempered glass incorporated by reference in FMVSS No. 205.
The agency contacted Forest River on April 2, 2018, asking Forest
River what they will do to ensure the
[[Page 7180]]
noncompliance does not happen again in the future. In response, Forest
River stated that they have implemented a triple verification process
between the supplier and Forest River to further prevent future
occurrences.
VII. NHTSA's Decision
In consideration of the foregoing analysis, NHTSA has decided that
Forest River has met its burden of persuasion that the FMVSS No. 205
noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly,
Forest River's petition is hereby granted and Forest River is exempted
from the obligation of providing notification of, and a remedy for, the
subject 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 buses that Forest River 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 buses under their control after Forest
River 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).
Michael A. Cole,
Acting Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2019-03573 Filed 2-28-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P