|
|---|
|
Daimler Trucks North America, LLC, Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance Publication: Federal Register Agency: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Byline: Otto G. Matheke III Date: 15 April 2022 Subjects: American Government  , Safety
Topics: Freightliner Cascadia, Western Star |
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 73 (Friday, April 15, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22622-22623]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-08108]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2021-0074; Notice 1]
Daimler Trucks 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: Daimler Trucks North America, LLC, (DTNA) has determined that
certain model year (MY) 2020-2022 Freightliner Cascadia and Western
Star motor vehicles do not fully comply with Federal Motor Vehicle
Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 205, Glazing Materials. DTNA filed an
original noncompliance report dated June 30, 2021, and later amended it
on July 16, 2021. DTNA petitioned NHTSA on July 29, 2021, for a
decision that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it
relates to motor vehicle safety. This notice announces receipt of
DTNA's petition.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jack Chern, Office of Vehicle Safety
Compliance, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
(202) 366-0661, jack.chern@dot.gov.
DATES: Send comments on or before May 16, 2022.
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 in the title of this notice and
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.
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 docket. 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
DTNA has determined that certain MY 2020-2022 Freightliner Cascadia
and Western Star motor vehicles do not fully comply with the
requirements of paragraph S5.1 of FMVSS No. 205, Glazing Materials (49
CFR 571.205). DTNA filed an original noncompliance report dated June
30, 2021, and later amended it on July 16, 2021, pursuant to 49 CFR
part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. DTNA
subsequently petitioned NHTSA on July 29, 2021, 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
[[Page 22623]]
Inconsequential Defect or Noncompliance.
This notice of receipt of DTNA'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. Windshields Involved
Approximately 68,658 MY 2020-2022 Freightliner Cascadia, MY 2021
Western Star 57X, MY 2021-2022 Western Star 49X, and MY 2021-2022
Western Star 47X motor vehicles, manufactured between June 25, 2020,
and June 22, 2021, are potentially involved.
III. Noncompliance
DTNA explains that the noncompliance is that windshield installed
in the subject vehicles may contain a Tintex Plus light material,
which, in combination with the windshield configuration and thickness,
do not fully meet the requirements of paragraph S5.1 of FMVSS No. 205.
Specifically, the windshields in the subject vehicles have a luminous
transmittance measured between 67.35 and 68.01 percent, instead of the
required 70 percent.
IV. Rule Requirements
Paragraph S5.1 of FMVSS No. 205 includes the requirements relevant
to this petition. Glazing materials for use in motor vehicles must
conform to ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996.
V. Summary of DTNA's Petition
The following views and arguments presented in this section, ``V.
Summary of DTNA's Petition,'' are the views and arguments provided by
DTNA. They have not been evaluated by the Agency and do not reflect the
views of the Agency. DTNA describes the subject noncompliance and
contends that the noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to
motor vehicle safety.
DTNA states that although the luminous transmittance of the
windshields in the subject vehicles is 1.99-2.65 percent less than the
required 70 percent, the subject vehicles have such features as
windshield's installation angles that make effective visibility much
higher than other vehicles with similar transmittance.''
DTNA claims that NHTSA has previously determined that luminous
transmittance, lower than what is required, to not be a safety risk.
According to DTNA, NHTSA's ``Report to Congress on Tinting of Motor
Vehicle Windows,'' in March 1991 found that ``the light transmittance
of windows of the then new passenger cars and vans that complied with
Standard No. 205 did not present an unreasonable risk of accident
occurrence.'' DTNA says that a study reported by TUY Rheinland also
supports its position that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential
to motor vehicle safety because the report states that ``low contrast
targets were not seen 100% of the time by either group of subjects, but
the normally sighted group performed equally well in seeing them
through windshields of 89, 76, and 58% transmittance'' and visibility
was not found to be ``much reduced'' until it reached 40%. Thus, DTNA
believes that the subject windshields ``are far closer to the
standard'' in luminous transmittance than what the TUY Rheinland study
found would reduce visibility.
DTNA explains the light transmittance ``as experienced by a vehicle
driver, is a function of the windshield construction and installation
angle.'' DTNA states that because of the measurements found in the
subject windshields, the luminous transmittance of the subject
windshields is ``only nominally outside the specification but perform
in a manner exceeding the typical modern passenger vehicle with a
window at a standard angle.'' Therefore, the luminous transmittance in
the subject windshields are ``as good or better than the visibility
through windshields of other vehicles that comply'' with the
requirement.
Furthermore, DTNA explains that due to the ``6-9 month lifetime''
for heavy truck windshields, ``the length of time for any particular
windshield to be on the road is limited'' and would be replaced with
windshields that do not contain the subject noncompliance.
DTNA claims that NHTSA has previously granted inconsequentiality
petitions for similar noncompliances with luminous transmittance.\1\
DTNA says that in those cases, NHTSA agreed that although the
percentage of luminous transmittance was lower, the reduction ``would
have no practical or perceivable effect on driver visibility.''
Therefore, DTNA believes that granting its petition would be consistent
with inconsequentiality petitions that NHTSA has previously granted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Ford Motor Company; Grant of Application for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance, 60 FR 31345 (June 14, 1995); see also
Fleetwood Enterprises, Inc.; Action on Application for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance, 63 FR 10964 (March 5, 1998)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DTNA concludes by stating its belief 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 DTNA 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 and replacement windshield glass
panes under their control after DTNA 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. 2022-08108 Filed 4-14-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P