Ford Motor Company; Grant of Petition for Determination of Inconsequential Noncompliance

Topics:  Ford Motor Company

Barry Felrice
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
March 17, 1994

[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 52 (Thursday, March 17, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-6163]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: March 17, 1994]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. 94-3; Notice 2]

 

Ford Motor Company; Grant of Petition for Determination of 
Inconsequential Noncompliance

    Ford Motor Company (Ford) of Dearborn, MI, determined that some of 
its replacement windshields failed to comply with the labeling 
requirements of 49 CFR 571.205, Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 205, 
``Glazing Materials,'' and filed an appropriate report pursuant to 49 
CFR part 573, ``Defect and Noncompliance Reports.'' Ford also 
petitioned to be exempted from the notification and remedy requirements 
of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1381 et 
seq.) on the basis that the noncompliance is inconsequential as it 
relates to motor vehicle safety.
    Notice of receipt of the petition was published on January 13, 
1994, and an opportunity afforded for comment (59 FR 1989).
    Standard No. 205, which incorporates, by reference, the American 
National Standards Institute's ``Safety Code for Safety Glazing 
Materials for Glazing Motor Vehicles Operating on Land Highways'' Z-
26.1-1977, January 26, 1977, as supplemented by Z26.1a, July 3, 1980 
(ANS Z26.1), specifies that, with certain exceptions, glazing materials 
for use in motor vehicles shall conform with Paragraphs S5, 
``Requirements,'' S6, ``Certification and Marking,'' and ANS Z26.1.6, 
``Marking of Safety Glazing Materials.'' Specifically, section 6 of 
ANSI Z26.1 states ``[G]lazing materials, which in a single sheet of 
material are intentionally made with an area having a luminous 
transmittance of not less than 70 percent (Test No. 2), adjoining an 
area that has less than 70 percent luminous transmittance, shall be 
permanently marked at the edge of the sheet to show the limits of the 
area that is intended to comply with Test No. 2. The markings shall be 
AS1 or AS2 etc. * * *''
    Approximately 98,000 W1099V windshields manufactured from June 1992 
through October 1993 and 14,800 W911V windshields manufactured from 
August 1992 to June 1993 are missing the AS1 marking at the 
bottom edge of the shade band. The subject windshields are manufactured 
as replacements for windshields in 1980 through 1994 model year Ford F-
Series and Bronco vehicles.
    Ford supported its petition for inconsequential noncompliance with 
the following:

    The affected windshields were produced by a Ford supplier 
without AS1 markings at the bottom edge of the shade band, 
but meet all other marking and performance requirements of Standard 
No. 205 and ANSI Z26.1 including the appropriate AS1 marking in the 
area of the trademark identifying the type of construction of the 
glazing material.
    [Ford believes that t]he omission of the marking presents no 
risk of accident or injury. Consequently in Ford's judgment, the 
omission is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety. 
The stated purposes of [Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard] FMVSS 
No. 205 are 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. As previously noted, the affected windshields fully 
comply with the performance requirements of FMVSS No. 205 and 
although missing the AS1 marking at the bottom of the shade 
band, they do have the correct AS1 marking to indicate the type of 
construction of the glazing material. Because all performance 
requirements are met, the omission of the marking at the shade band 
has no effect upon the ability of the glazing to perform in the 
manner intended by the standard. Ford is not aware of any 
complaints, accidents, or injuries related to this condition.

    No comments were received on the petition.
    The noncompliance reported does not affect the performance 
characteristics of the glazing, and, hence, the noncompliance has no 
direct effect upon motor vehicle safety. Although the markings have 
been omitted in one area of the windshield, the correct designation, 
AS1, appears in the area of the trademark identifying the type of 
construction of the glazing material. Thus, the omission at the shade 
band will not prevent correct identification of the glazing by 
personnel conducting periodic motor vehicle inspections, or when it is 
necessary to replace the windshield. There is no need in either 
instance for knowledge of where the area of 70 percent or greater light 
transmittance begins.
    In consideration of the foregoing, it is hereby found that 
petitioner has met its burden of persuasion that the noncompliance 
herein described is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle 
safety, and its petition is granted.

(15 U.S.C. 1417; delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.50 and 49 CFR 
501.8)

    Issued on: March 11, 1994.
Barry Felrice,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 94-6163 Filed 3-16-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-M