Grote Industries, LLC, Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance |
|---|
Topics: Grote
|
Jeffrey M. Giuseppe
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
September 15, 2014
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 178 (Monday, September 15, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55066-55067]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-21882]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2014-0093; Notice 1]
Grote Industries, 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: Grote Industries, LLC (Grote), has determined that certain
Grote bulk nylon air brake tubing manufactured during the period
December 2013 to March 2014 does not fully comply with paragraph S11.2
of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 106; Brake Hoses.
Grote has filed an appropriate report dated June 13, 2014, pursuant to
49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports.
DATES: The closing date for comments on the petition is October 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://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-
[[Page 55067]]
addressed postcard with the comments. Note that all comments received
will be posted without change to http://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://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. Grote's Petition: Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h)
(see implementing rule at 49 CFR part 556), Grote 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 Grote'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. Equipment Involved: Affected are approximately 869 spools of
Grote nylon air brake tubing that was manufactured during the period
December 2013 to March 2014.
III. Noncompliance: Grote explains that the noncompliance is that,
due to a production error, the affected air brake tubing is not
properly marked in accordance with paragraph S11.2.1(a) of FMVSS No.
106, which requires plastic air brake tubing to be marked with a
designation that identifies the manufacturer of the tubing. In
addition, some of the tubing also does not comply with paragraph
S11.2.1(e) of FMVSS No. 106 which requires plastic air brake tubing to
be marked with the letter ``A'' to indicate intended use in air brake
systems. Specifically, all of the subject brake tubing was mismarked
with the number ``1913'' in addition to ``GROTE'' and some of the
tubing was also mismarked with the letter ``B,'' instead of the letter
``A.''
IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S11.2 of FMVSS No. 106 requires in
pertinent part:
S11.2 Labeling
S11.2.1 Plastic air brake tubing. Plastic air brake tubing shall
be labeled, or cut from bulk tubing that is labeled, at intervals of
not more than 6 inches, measured from the end of one legend to the
beginning of the next, in block capital letters and numerals at
least one-eighth of an inch high, with the information listed in
paragraphs (a) through (e) of this section. The information need not
be present on tubing that is sold as part of a motor vehicle.
(a) The symbol DOT, constituting a certification by the hose
manufacturer that the hose conforms to all applicable motor vehicle
safety standards. . . .
(e) The letter ``A'' shall indicate intended use in air brake
systems.
V. Summary of Grote's Analyses: Grote stated its belief that the
subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety for
the following reasons:
Grote believes that these labeling noncompliances are
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety because both the manufacturer
designation and the intended use are otherwise clearly marked on the
tubing.
Grote stated its belief that the purpose of the manufacturer
identification requirement is to permit identification of products in
the event of a product recall. If a recall of the subject air brake
tubing was to become necessary the affected tubing could easily be
identified by the GROTE name, which is conspicuously marked on all of
the affected tubing.
Grote also stated its belief that the manufacturer associated with
the identification number ``1913'' has not existed since 1977 and are
are not aware of any manufacturer currently marketing air brake tubing
under the ``Samuel Moore'' brand.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ After receiving Grote's petition, based on a submission from
Eaton Corporation, NHTSA revised its records to indicate that the
brake hose manufacturer identification ``1913'' ceded to Eaton
Corporation due to its acquisition of Moore, Samuel, and Company,
Synflex Division.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The purpose of the ``A'' letter designation requirement is to
indicate that the product is intended for use in air brake
applications. As noted above, some of the products are marked as ``SAE
J844 Type B'' instead of the letter ``A.'' Type B tubing is an SAE J844
designation that identifies reinforced air brake tubing. This
designation is widely recognized among truck maintenance and service
personnel. Regardless, the subject hose is also clearly and prominently
marked with the phrase, ``GROTE AIR BRAKE,'' eliminating any possible
confusion or misunderstanding as to the intended application of the
product.
In addition, Grote stated its belief that NHTSA has made analogous
inconsequentiality determinations in similar situations related to
other products where a required label was missing, but the product
contained other markings that conveyed the same or similar information.
See Bridgestone Americas Tire Operations, LLC, Grant of Petition for
Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 78 FR 35357 (June 12, 2013);
Bridgestone Americas Tire Operations, LLC, Grant of Petition for
Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 71 FR 4396 (Jan. 26, 2006);
and Delphi Corporation, Grant of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance, 69 FR 41331 (July 8, 2004).
Grote also informed NHTSA that it has corrected the noncompliance
so that all future production nylon air brake tubing will comply with
FMVSS No. 106.
In summation, Grote believes that the described noncompliance of
the subject nylon air brake tubing is inconsequential to motor vehicle
safety, and that its petition, to exempt Grote 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 equipment that Grote 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 equipment under their control
after Grote 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. 2014-21882 Filed 9-12-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P