AGC Flat Glass North America, Inc., Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance

Topics:  Toyota Matrix

Jeffrey M. Giuseppe
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
August 14, 2014

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 157 (Thursday, August 14, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47722-47723]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-19189]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2014-0078; Notice 1]


AGC Flat Glass North America, Inc., Receipt of Petition for 
Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Receipt of Petition.

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

SUMMARY: AGC Flat Glass North America, Inc., dba AGC Automotive 
Americas Co. (AGC) has determined that certain glazing that it 
manufactured as replacement equipment for model year 2003-2008 Toyota 
Matrix vehicles, do not fully comply with paragraphs S5.1 and S5.7 of 
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 205, Glazing 
Materials. AGC has filed an appropriate report dated May 23, 2013, 
pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility 
and Reports.

DATES: The closing date for comments on the petition is September 15, 
2014.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written data, 
views, and arguments on this petition. Comments must refer to the 
docket and notice number cited at the beginning of this notice and be 
submitted by any of the following methods:
     Mail: Send comments by mail addressed to: 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 Deliver: Deliver comments by hand to: 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 
Federal Holidays.
     Electronically: Submit comments electronically by: logging 
onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Web site at 
http:[sol][sol]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 your comments were received, please 
enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard with the comments. Note that 
all comments received will be posted without change to 
http:[sol][sol]www.regulations.gov, including any personal information 
provided.
    Documents submitted to a docket may be viewed by anyone at the 
address and times given above. The documents may also be viewed on the 
Internet at http:[sol][sol]www.regulations.gov by following the online 
instructions for accessing the dockets. DOT's complete Privacy Act 
Statement is available for review in the Federal Register published on 
April 11, 2000, (65 FR 19477-78).
    The petition, supporting materials, and all comments received 
before the close of business on the closing date indicated below will 
be filed and will be considered. All comments and supporting materials 
received after the closing date will also be filed and will be 
considered to the extent possible. When the petition is granted or 
denied, notice of the decision will be published in the Federal 
Register pursuant to the authority indicated below.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    I. AGC's Petition: Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) (see 
implementing rule at 49 CFR part 556), AGC submitted a petition for an 
exemption from the notification and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. 
Chapter 301 on the basis that this noncompliance is inconsequential to 
motor vehicle safety.
    This notice of receipt of AGC's petition is published under 49 
U.S.C. 30118 and 30120 and does not represent any agency decision or 
other exercise of judgment concerning the merits of the petition.
    II. Replacement Equipment Involved: Affected are approximately 
1,435 replacement back windows (backlites) for model year 2003-2008 
Toyota Matrix vehicles that AGC manufactured on February 28, 2012. The 
subject glass is labeled ``AGC Automotive, DOT-376 M2H5 AS2, 30B, 
Temperlite.''
    In the associated Defect and Noncompliance Report that AGC 
submitted to NHTSA pursuant to 49 CFR Part 573, AGC indicated that, as 
of May 23, 2014, approximately 941 of the affected backlites have 
already been removed from the stream of commerce.
    III. Noncompliance: AGC explains that the noncompliance is that the 
affected glazing does not fully comply with Paragraph S5.1 of FMVSS No. 
205 because some portions of the glass located in the wing area of the 
backlites may not fragment into pieces that are small enough to meet 
the standard set forth in ANSI Z26.1-1996 (fragment must weigh less 
than 4.25 g).
    IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S5.1 of FMVSS No. 205 incorporates by 
reference ANSI Z26.1-1996 and other industry standards. Paragraph S5.7 
(Fracture Test) of ANSI Z26.1-1996 requires that no individual fragment 
free of cracks and obtained within 3 minutes subsequent to test shall 
weigh more than 4.25 g (0.15 oz.).
    V. Summary of AGC's Analyses: AGC stated its belief that the 
noncompliance exhibited by some glass fragments breaking into pieces 
that weigh more than 4.25 g does not create a risk to motor vehicle 
safety for the following reasons:
    1. AGC testing demonstrates that the noncompliant fragments have no 
adverse impact on the characteristics of the glass performing as 
tempered glass.
    2. The design of the 2003-2008 Toyota Matrix leaves it unlikely to 
cause any safety risks to any vehicle occupant if the ARG backlite 
breaks.
    3. AGC's destructive testing confirmed all noncompliant fragments 
do not impact the safety of the vehicle or its occupants.
    AGC stated that while it recognizes that its tests were static and 
that the actual results in a crash might be somewhat different if a 
collision broke this glass, AGC stated its belief that in a rear or 
partial rear collision, if the glass breaks, most of that glass will 
fall and remain in the general area of the breakage since the remainder 
of the vehicle will be propelled forward in the

[[Page 47723]]

later phases of the crash. This makes it even less likely that any 
glass will enter or be propelled forward enough to reach the passenger 
compartment of a vehicle. ARG expects that the subject backlites will 
react no differently.
    Refer to AGC's petition for more detailed descriptions of AGC's 
data and analyses that it believes support its reasoning.
    AGC has additionally informed NHTSA that it has corrected the 
noncompliance so that all future production of the subject glazing will 
fully comply with FMVSS No. 205.
    In summation, AGC believes that the described noncompliance of the 
subject glazing is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety, and that 
its petition, to exempt AGC from providing recall notification of 
noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118 and remedying the recall 
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 replacement equipment that 
AGC no longer controlled at the time it determined that the 
noncompliance existed. However, any decision on 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 replacement equipment under 
their control after AGC 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,
Acting Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2014-19189 Filed 8-13-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P