Baby Jogger, LLC, Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance |
|---|
Topics: Baby Jogger
|
Jeffrey Giuseppe
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
September 8, 2015
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 173 (Tuesday, September 8, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53914-53915]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-22573]
[[Page 53914]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2015-0074; Notice 1]
Baby Jogger, 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: Baby Jogger, LLC (Baby Jogger), has determined that certain
Baby Jogger rear-facing infant seats and bases do not fully comply with
paragraphs S5.5, S5.6, S5.8, and S8.1 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standard (FMVSS) No. 213, Child Restraint Systems. Baby Jogger has
filed an appropriate report dated June 4, 2015, pursuant to 49 CFR part
573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports.
DATES: The closing date for comments on the petition is October 8,
2015.
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
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-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. Overview
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) (see implementing rule
at 49 CFR part 556), Baby Jogger 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 Baby Jogger'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. Child Restraints Involved
Affected are approximately 15,103 of the following Baby Jogger
rear-facing infant seats and bases manufactured between November 3,
2014 and April 30, 2015:
City GO Infant Car Seat/Model No. BJ64510
City GO Infant Car Seat/Model No. BJ64529
City GO Base for Infant Car Seat/Model No. BJ80400
City GO Base for Infant Car Seat/Model No. BJ61500
City Mini Infant Cars Seat/Stroller Travel System/Model
No.BJ72510
Vue Lite Infant Car Seat/Stroller Travel System/Model No.
BJ70411
Vue Lite Infant Car Seat/Stroller Travel System/Model No.
BJ70424
Vue Lite Infant Car Seat/Stroller Travel System/Model No.
BJ70431
III. Noncompliances
Baby Jogger explains that the affected child restraints do not
fully comply with the numerous paragraphs of FMVSS No. 213 for the
following reasons:
Paragraph S5.5.2--The required information in English is no
smaller than 10 point type, but the Spanish information is smaller
at about 7 point type. This only applies to models BJ64510 and
BJ64529.
Paragraph S5.5.2(d)--The ``manufactured in address'' on the
label is in about 8 font which is smaller than the required 10 point
type.
Paragraph S5.5.2(m)--The required ``Child restraints could be
recalled for safety reasons . . .'' text is on a black background
with white text instead of black text on a white background.
Paragraph S5.5.2(g)(1)--The label has the ``Follow all
instructions. . .'' ahead of the ``Secure this child restraint
statement . . .'' instead of the reverse order as required. This
noncompliance only affects models BJ64510 and BJ64529.
Paragraph S5.5.2(n)--The label has ``This child restraint is
certified for use in motor vehicles and aircraft.'' Other than the
first word, no words other words are capitalized.
Paragraph S5.5.2.(k)(3)(ii)--The message area measures 23.4
square cm on models BJ70411, BJ70424 and BJ70431 which is less than
the minimum required message area of 30 square cm.
Paragraph S5.5.2.(k)(3)(iii)--On models BJ70411, BJ70424 and
BJ70431 the red circle on the required pictogram is 29mm in diameter
which is less than the required 30mm in diameter.
Paragraph S5.6.1.7--The instruction manuals do not include
reference to the required Web site in the section regarding child
restraint recalls.
Paragraph S5.6.3--The instruction manuals do not include the
required statement ``A snug strap should not allow any slack . . .''
Paragraph S5.8.2(a)(1)--The electronic registration form does
not have the required statement ``FOR YOUR CHILD'S CONTINUED SAFETY
. . .''
Paragraph S5.8.1(b)(2)--Figure 9a requires minimum 10% screen
tint on the lower half of the form. The form is missing the required
tinting.
Paragraph S8.1--No instructions for installing the system in an
aircraft passenger seat were provided.
IV. Summary of Baby Jogger's Analyses
Baby Jogger organized its reasoning to substantiate
inconsequentiality into the following five groupings that it believes
are similar issues between the numerous noncompliances:
a. Information Type Size/Capitalization/Presentation order
b. Background color
c. On-Product Label Message Area and Pictogram Sizes
d. Omitted Information
e. Spanish Language Type Size
Refer to Baby Jogger's petition for their complete reasoning and
associated
[[Page 53915]]
illustrations. To view the petition and all supporting documents log
onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Web site at: http://www.regulations.gov/. Then follow the online search instructions to
locate docket number ``NHTSA-2015-0074.''
Baby Jogger additionally informed NHTSA that they have corrected
all labeling noncompliances and that all future productions of the
infant car seat/stroller systems and stand-alone units will be in full
compliance with FMVSS No. 213.
In summation, Baby Jogger believes that the described noncompliance
of the subject infant car seat/stroller systems and standalone units is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety, and that its petition, to
exempt Baby Jogger 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 child restraints that Baby
Jogger no longer controlled at the time it determined that the
noncompliance existed. However, any decision on this petition does not
relieve child restraint distributors and dealers of the prohibitions on
the sale, offer for sale, or introduction or delivery for introduction
into interstate commerce of the noncompliant child restraints under
their control after Baby Jogger 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 Giuseppe,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2015-22573 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P