BMW of North America, LLC, Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 11447-11449 [2020-03959]
Download as PDF
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 39 / Thursday, February 27, 2020 / Notices
a. The spare tire installed on the
vehicle (P255/70R18) meets all
applicable FMVSS. It is the appropriate
temporary spare tire that was designed
for the vehicle and meets the vehicle
loading requirements. Only the spare
tire size information indicated on the
placard is incorrect and reflects the size
of the spare that was used on the
Tundra prior to a production change.
All the other information on the placard
is accurate, including the cold tire
inflation pressure.
b. In addition, if the vehicle owner
wanted to check the size of the spare
tire that is installed on the vehicle, the
information is in the owner’s manual
and is also molded into the spare tire
sidewall.
c. Given the intent of FMVSS No. 110,
S4.3(d), Toyota believes that, because
the spare tire installed on the vehicle is
the appropriate tire for the vehicle
performance and loading requirements,
there is no risk to motor vehicle safety.
2. There is also no issue if the
installed spare tire is replaced with one
of the sizes indicated on the incorrect
placard. This would also be a tire/wheel
combination that is designed for this
vehicle and would meet all other
applicable FMVSS because the
replacement spare tire would be the
same size as the spare tire originally
equipped on the Tundra prior to the
production change and would be the
same size as the four main tires on the
subject vehicles.
a. The spare tire size indicated on the
incorrect placard was also designed for
the subject vehicles and meets all
applicable FMVSS. This spare tire
wheel combination (P275/65R18) is the
same size as the four main tires installed
on the subject vehicles. It was used as
a spare tire on the prior model year
Tundra and on the 2019MY Tundra
prior to the adoption of the current
spare tire size (P255/70R18).
b. In addition, the recommended
spare tire inflation pressure and wheel
size (R18) are the same for the subject
vehicles as the prior model year Tundra.
c. Because both spare tire sizes are
appropriate for the vehicle loading
specifications, were designed for the
subject vehicles, meet all applicable
FMVSS, and the wheel size and
recommended tire pressure are the
same, Toyota believes there is no risk to
occupant safety should a P275/65R18
tire be used in place of the one
equipped on the vehicle.
3. Toyota is unaware of any owner
complaints, field reports, or allegations
of hazardous circumstances concerning
the incorrect spare tire placard in the
subject vehicles. Toyota has searched its
records for reports or other information
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Feb 26, 2020
Jkt 250001
concerning the tire placard and spare
tire in the subject vehicles. No owner
complaints, field reports, or allegations
of hazardous circumstances concerning
the placard or tire were found.
4. NHTSA has previously granted at
least five similar petitions for
inconsequential noncompliance for
inaccurate tire placards. A brief
summary of each petition is provided
below:
a. Daimler Chrysler Corporation, 73
FR 11462 (March 3, 2008) Dodge Dakota
pickup trucks had the spare tire size
indicated on the placard that did not
match the size of the spare tire installed
on the vehicle.
b. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC (MBUSA)
78 FR 43967 (July 22, 2013) Vehicle
placard on the affected vehicles
incorrectly identified the tire size
designation of the spare tire in the
vehicle.
c. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc.,
81 FR 88728 (December 8, 2016) Subject
vehicles had a tire placard label that
was misprinted with an incorrect tire
size as compared to the tires the vehicle
was equipped with.
d. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC, 82 FR
5640 (January 18, 2017) The tire
information placard affixed to the
vehicles’ B-pillar incorrectly identified
the spare tire size.
e. General Motors, LLC, 84 FR 25117
(May 30, 2019) Subject vehicles were
equipped tire placards that stated the
spare tire size is ‘‘None’’ when in fact
it should have been ‘‘T125/70R17’’ and
omitted the cold tire pressure for the
spare tire when it should have read
‘‘420 kPa, 60 psi’’.
Toyota concludes 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.
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 Toyota 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
PO 00000
Frm 00118
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
11447
prohibitions on the sale, offer for sale,
or introduction or delivery for
introduction into interstate commerce of
the noncompliant vehicles under their
control after Toyota 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).
Otto G. Matheke III,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2020–03961 Filed 2–26–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2018–0105; 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, has
determined that certain model year
(MY) 2019 BMW F750 GS and F850 GS
motorcycles do not fully comply with
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard
(FMVSS) No. 205, Glazing Materials.
BMW filed a noncompliance report
dated October 19, 2018. BMW
subsequently petitioned NHTSA on
October 29, 2018, for a decision that the
subject noncompliance is
inconsequential as it relates to motor
vehicle safety.
DATES: The closing date for comments
on the petition is March 30, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are
invited to submit written data, views,
and arguments on this petition.
Comments must refer to the docket
number and notice number cited in the
title of this notice and may be submitted
by any of the following methods:
• Mail: Send comments by mail
addressed to the 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 Delivery: Deliver comments
by hand to the 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 for Federal
Holidays.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\27FEN1.SGM
27FEN1
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with NOTICES
11448
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 39 / Thursday, February 27, 2020 / Notices
• Electronically: Submit comments
electronically by logging onto the
Federal Docket Management System
(FDMS) website 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.
All comments and supporting
materials 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 fullest 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 comments, background
documentation, and supporting
materials 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 in the heading of this
notice.
DOT’s complete Privacy Act
Statement is available for review in a
Federal Register notice published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477–78).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Overview: BMW has determined
that certain MY 2019 BMW F750 GS
and F850 GS motorcycles do not fully
comply with paragraph S6.3 of FMVSS
No. 205, Glazing Materials (49 CFR
571.205). BMW filed a noncompliance
report dated October 19, 2018, pursuant
to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and
Noncompliance Responsibility and
Reports. BMW subsequently petitioned
NHTSA on October 29, 2018, for an
exemption from the notification and
remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C.
Chapter 301 on the basis that this
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Feb 26, 2020
Jkt 250001
noncompliance is inconsequential as it
relates to motor vehicle safety, pursuant
to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and
49 CFR part 556, Exemption for
Inconsequential Defect or
Noncompliance.
This notice of receipt of BMW’s
petition is published under 49 U.S.C.
30118 and 30120 and does not represent
any agency decision or other exercises
of judgment concerning the merits of the
petition.
II. Vehicles Involved: Approximately
604 MY 2019 BMW F750 GS and F850
GS motorcycles, manufactured between
June 21, 2018, and September 19, 2018,
are potentially involved.
III. Noncompliance: BMW explains
that the noncompliance is that the
subject motorcycles are equipped with
windscreens that do not comply with
paragraph S6.3 of FMVSS No. 205.
Specifically, the subject windscreens
were marked with the AS4 marking
instead of the AS6 marking.
IV. Rule Requirements: Paragraph
S6.3 of FMVSS No. 205 includes the
requirements relevant to this petition. 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 mark that
material in accordance with section 7 of
ANSI/SAE Z26.1–1996 and certify that
its product complies with this standard
in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 30115.
AS4 certified windscreens are rigid
plastic and only for use on certain
locations, not including motorcycle
windscreens and they are not subject to
a flexibility test, whereas AS6 marked
windscreens are subject to this test. AS6
certified windscreens are flexible plastic
and, unlike AS4 certified windscreens,
can be used as a motorcycle windscreen.
Additionally, AS6 certified windscreens
are not required to be subject to an
impact test or an abrasion test, whereas,
AS4 certified windscreens are.
V. Summary of BMW’s Petition: BMW
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, BMW
submitted the following reasoning:
1. FMVSS No. 205 Section 2 (Purpose)
states, ‘‘The purpose of this standard is
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.’’
2. Potentially affected vehicles
conform to all of the FMVSS No. 205
performance requirements. Therefore,
PO 00000
Frm 00119
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
they satisfy the stated purpose of
FMVSS No. 205 regarding (a) injury
reduction, and (b) rider visibility.
3. Potentially affected vehicles
conform to all the FMVSS No. 205
performance requirements. Therefore,
there are no safety performance
implications associated with this
potential noncompliance.
4. BMW has not received any contacts
from vehicle owners regarding this
issue. Therefore, BMW is unaware of
any vehicle owners that have
encountered this issue.
5. BMW is unaware of any accidents
or injuries that may have occurred as a
result of this issue.
6. NHTSA has previously granted
petitions for inconsequential
noncompliance regarding FMVSS No.
205 involving marking of window
glazing. BMW believes that its petition
is similar to other manufacturers’
petitions in which NHTSA has granted
approval. Examples of similar petitions,
in which NHTSA has granted approval,
include the following:
• Ford Motor Company, 80 FR 11259
(March 2, 2015).
• Ford Motor Company, 78 FR 32531
(May 30, 2013).
• Ford Motor Company, 64 FR 70115
(December 15, 1999).
• General Motors, LLC, 79 FR 23402
(September 25, 2015).
• General Motors, LLC, 70 FR 49973
(August 25, 2005).
• Toyota Motor North America Inc.,
68 FR 10307 (March 4, 2003).
• Fuji Heavy Industries USA, Inc., 78
FR 59088 (September 25, 2013).
• Mitsubishi Motors North America,
Inc., 80 FR 72482 (August 22, 2015).
• Pilkington North America, Inc., 78
FR 22942 (April 17, 2003).
• Supreme Corporation, 81 FR 72850
(October 21, 2016).
• Custom Glass Solutions Upper
Sandusky Corp., 80 FR 3737 (January
23, 2015).
7. Vehicle production has been
corrected to conform to FMVSS No. 205
S6.
8. BMW also provided a copy of the
FMVSS No. 205 Certification Report
from AIB-Vincotte International N.V.
BMW’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.
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
E:\FR\FM\27FEN1.SGM
27FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 39 / Thursday, February 27, 2020 / Notices
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 BMW 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 BMW 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)
Otto G. Matheke III,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2020–03959 Filed 2–26–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2019–0122]
Notice of Request for Comments:
Drug-Impaired Driving Criminal Justice
Evaluation Tool
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Request for comment.
AGENCY:
The National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA) is
engaged in numerous activities to
reduce drug-impaired driving, including
conducting research and developing
tools, resources, and promising
practices to assist States and local
communities. To aid in evaluating
efforts to address drug-impaired driving,
NHTSA has developed the DrugImpaired Driving Criminal Justice
Evaluation Tool. The tool is designed to
assist with identifying program
strengths and opportunities for
improvements. After asking two
organizations to test the model to
explore weaknesses and identify areas
for refinement, NHTSA now wishes to
learn from other practitioners about any
improvements and refinements that
could add value to the tool. This notice
requests comment on the completeness
and usability of the tool.
DATES: Comments are due by April 27,
2020. See the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section on ‘‘Public
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Feb 26, 2020
Jkt 250001
Participation,’’ below, for more
information about written comments.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by the DOT docket above
using any of the following methods:
Electronic Submissions: Go to https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Mail: Docket Management Facility,
U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12–140,
Washington, DC 20590–0001.
Hand Delivery: West Building Ground
Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
Fax: 1–202–493–2251
Instructions: For detailed instructions
on submitting comments, see the Public
Participation heading of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document. Note that all comments
received will be posted without change
to https://www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information
provided.
Privacy Act: Except for Confidential
Information, as discussed below, all
comments received into the docket will
be made public in their entirety. The
comments will be searchable by the
name of the individual submitting the
comment (or signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You should
not include information in your
comment that you do not want to be
made public. You may review the DOT’s
complete Privacy Act Statement at
https://www.transportation.gov/privacy.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments received, go to https://
www.regulations.gov or to the street
address listed above. Follow the online
instructions for accessing the docket.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Please contact Jennifer Davidson at
jennifer.davidson@dot.gov or (202) 366–
2163.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The DrugImpaired Driving Criminal Justice
Evaluation Tool is designed to allow
State, local, territorial, and tribal
governments to assess and strengthen
their drug-impaired driving programs.
The tool consists of questions divided
into ten sections representative of
critical criminal justice and
programmatic elements. The categories
include law enforcement, prosecution,
judiciary, community supervision,
toxicology, treatment, emergency
medical services, data, legislation, and
program and communications. The
Excel file, which can be downloaded
PO 00000
Frm 00120
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
11449
from NHTSA’s website at https://
www.nhtsa.gov/DUIDtool, allows
individual sections to be sent to the
appropriate organizational
representative for completion.
The Drug-Impaired Driving Criminal
Justice Evaluation Tool allows users to
assess their existing programs to reduce
drug-impaired driving through a
systematic review of activities, policies,
and procedures being implemented. The
completed tool is intended purely for
the use of State, local, territorial or tribal
governments for self-assessment and
will not be collected by NHTSA. The
tool can help jurisdictions identify gaps
in their drug-impaired driving
programs, inform strategies to
strengthen the programs, and help track
progress over time against baseline
results. The tool includes links to best
practices and resources for
strengthening drug-impaired driving
programs.
The Drug-Impaired Driving Criminal
Justice Evaluation Tool is designed to be
completed in consultation with
representatives most familiar with the
relevant program areas, either
individually or via group discussion
(e.g., with the State DWI Task Force).
The tool can be completed in its entirety
for a comprehensive program evaluation
of the criminal justice system’s ability to
respond to drug-impaired driving, or
where appropriate to assess one
component of the criminal justice
system.
The evaluation is based on the
Capability Maturity Model, used by
other Federal agencies, to develop and
refine an organization’s software or
program development process. The
model utilizes a five-step hierarchy of
program growth and maturity. The
Capability Maturity Model can serve as
a benchmark and be repeated to show
progress over time. After answering the
questions for each subsection of the
tool, raters note their program strength
level for each component using a
defined 0–5 point scale. Scores are
tabulated on the final ‘‘Scoring’’ sheet to
provide an overall view of program
performance for each component and to
compare against baseline results for
repeat evaluations. Planning sections
are included for each issue area
following ratings to document program
strengths, opportunities, and goals for
improvement.
NHTSA conducted a limited test of
the evaluation tool to obtain feedback
on how to enhance and improve its
value. Since making refinements
recommended during testing, NHTSA is
interested in learning more about
potential end-users’ impressions of the
tool.
E:\FR\FM\27FEN1.SGM
27FEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 39 (Thursday, February 27, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11447-11449]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-03959]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2018-0105; Notice 1]
BMW of North America, LLC, Receipt of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Receipt of petition.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: BMW of North America, LLC (BMW), a subsidiary of BMW AG, has
determined that certain model year (MY) 2019 BMW F750 GS and F850 GS
motorcycles do not fully comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standard (FMVSS) No. 205, Glazing Materials. BMW filed a noncompliance
report dated October 19, 2018. BMW subsequently petitioned NHTSA on
October 29, 2018, for a decision that the subject noncompliance is
inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
DATES: The closing date for comments on the petition is March 30, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written data,
views, and arguments on this petition. Comments must refer to the
docket number and notice number cited in the title of this notice and
may be submitted by any of the following methods:
Mail: Send comments by mail addressed to the 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 Delivery: Deliver comments by hand to the 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 for Federal Holidays.
[[Page 11448]]
Electronically: Submit comments electronically by logging
onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) website 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.
All comments and supporting materials 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 fullest 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 comments, background documentation, and supporting materials
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
in the heading of this notice.
DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement is available for review in a
Federal Register notice published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Overview: BMW has determined that certain MY 2019 BMW F750 GS
and F850 GS motorcycles do not fully comply with paragraph S6.3 of
FMVSS No. 205, Glazing Materials (49 CFR 571.205). BMW filed a
noncompliance report dated October 19, 2018, pursuant to 49 CFR part
573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. BMW
subsequently petitioned NHTSA on October 29, 2018, 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, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h)
and 49 CFR part 556, Exemption for Inconsequential Defect or
Noncompliance.
This notice of receipt of BMW's petition is published under 49
U.S.C. 30118 and 30120 and does not represent any agency decision or
other exercises of judgment concerning the merits of the petition.
II. Vehicles Involved: Approximately 604 MY 2019 BMW F750 GS and
F850 GS motorcycles, manufactured between June 21, 2018, and September
19, 2018, are potentially involved.
III. Noncompliance: BMW explains that the noncompliance is that the
subject motorcycles are equipped with windscreens that do not comply
with paragraph S6.3 of FMVSS No. 205. Specifically, the subject
windscreens were marked with the AS4 marking instead of the AS6
marking.
IV. Rule Requirements: Paragraph S6.3 of FMVSS No. 205 includes the
requirements relevant to this petition. 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 mark that material in
accordance with section 7 of ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996 and certify that its
product complies with this standard in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 30115.
AS4 certified windscreens are rigid plastic and only for use on
certain locations, not including motorcycle windscreens and they are
not subject to a flexibility test, whereas AS6 marked windscreens are
subject to this test. AS6 certified windscreens are flexible plastic
and, unlike AS4 certified windscreens, can be used as a motorcycle
windscreen. Additionally, AS6 certified windscreens are not required to
be subject to an impact test or an abrasion test, whereas, AS4
certified windscreens are.
V. Summary of BMW's Petition: BMW 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, BMW submitted the following reasoning:
1. FMVSS No. 205 Section 2 (Purpose) states, ``The purpose of this
standard is 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.''
2. Potentially affected vehicles conform to all of the FMVSS No.
205 performance requirements. Therefore, they satisfy the stated
purpose of FMVSS No. 205 regarding (a) injury reduction, and (b) rider
visibility.
3. Potentially affected vehicles conform to all the FMVSS No. 205
performance requirements. Therefore, there are no safety performance
implications associated with this potential noncompliance.
4. BMW has not received any contacts from vehicle owners regarding
this issue. Therefore, BMW is unaware of any vehicle owners that have
encountered this issue.
5. BMW is unaware of any accidents or injuries that may have
occurred as a result of this issue.
6. NHTSA has previously granted petitions for inconsequential
noncompliance regarding FMVSS No. 205 involving marking of window
glazing. BMW believes that its petition is similar to other
manufacturers' petitions in which NHTSA has granted approval. Examples
of similar petitions, in which NHTSA has granted approval, include the
following:
Ford Motor Company, 80 FR 11259 (March 2, 2015).
Ford Motor Company, 78 FR 32531 (May 30, 2013).
Ford Motor Company, 64 FR 70115 (December 15, 1999).
General Motors, LLC, 79 FR 23402 (September 25, 2015).
General Motors, LLC, 70 FR 49973 (August 25, 2005).
Toyota Motor North America Inc., 68 FR 10307 (March 4,
2003).
Fuji Heavy Industries USA, Inc., 78 FR 59088 (September
25, 2013).
Mitsubishi Motors North America, Inc., 80 FR 72482 (August
22, 2015).
Pilkington North America, Inc., 78 FR 22942 (April 17,
2003).
Supreme Corporation, 81 FR 72850 (October 21, 2016).
Custom Glass Solutions Upper Sandusky Corp., 80 FR 3737
(January 23, 2015).
7. Vehicle production has been corrected to conform to FMVSS No.
205 S6.
8. BMW also provided a copy of the FMVSS No. 205 Certification
Report from AIB-Vincotte International N.V.
BMW'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.
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
[[Page 11449]]
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 BMW 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 BMW 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)
Otto G. Matheke III,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2020-03959 Filed 2-26-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P