81 FR 47493 - Spartan Motors USA, Inc., Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 140 (July 21, 2016)

Page Range		47493-47494
FR Document		2016-17189

Spartan Motors USA, Inc. (Spartan), has determined that certain model year (MY) 2013-2015 Utilimaster Vans do not fully comply with paragraph S4.5.1(c) of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 208, Occupant crash protection. Spartan Motors USA, Inc., filed a report dated January 15, 2016, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports for Spartan. Spartan then petitioned NHTSA under 49 CFR part 556 requesting a decision that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.

Federal Register, Volume 81 Issue 140 (Thursday, July 21, 2016)

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 140 (Thursday, July 21, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47493-47494]
From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2016-17189]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2016-0024; Notice 1]

Spartan Motors USA, 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: Spartan Motors USA, Inc. (Spartan), has determined that
certain model year (MY) 2013-2015 Utilimaster Vans do not fully comply
with paragraph S4.5.1(c) of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard
(FMVSS) No. 208, Occupant crash protection. Spartan Motors USA, Inc.,
filed a report dated January 15, 2016, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573,
Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports for Spartan.
Spartan then petitioned NHTSA under 49 CFR part 556 requesting a
decision that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor
vehicle safety.

DATES: The closing date for comments on the petition is August 22,
2016.

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: 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 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 http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided.
The petition, supporting materials, and all comments 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 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 documents 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 http://www.regulations.gov by following the online
instructions for accessing the dockets. The docket ID number for this
petition is shown at the heading of this notice.
DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement is available for review in the
Federal Register published on April 11, 2000, (65 FR 19477-78).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Overview: Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) (see
implementing rule at 49 CFR part 556), Spartan 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 Spartan'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. Vehicles Involved: Affected are approximately 910 MY 2013-2015
Utilimaster Vans that were manufactured between July 11, 2014 and
December 8, 2015.
III. Noncompliance: Spartan explains that the noncompliance
occurred during alterations to the subject vehicles. During alterations
the sun visors were removed and then reinstalled. As a result of the
reinstallation, the required sun visor air bag warning labels are not
visible when the sun visors are in the stowed position. Since the sun
visor air bag warning labels are not visible when in the stowed
position, an air bag alert label is required and therefore does not
meet the requirements as specified in paragraph S4.5.1(c) of FMVSS No.
208.
IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S4.5.1(c) of FMVSS No. 208 requires in
pertinent part:
S4.5.1(c) Air bag alert label. If the label required by
S4.5.1(b) is not visible when the sun visor is in the stowed
position, an air bag alert label shall be permanently affixed to
that visor so that the label is visible when the visor is in that
position. The label shall conform in content to the sun visor label
shown in Figure 6(c) of this standard, and shall comply with the
requirements of S4.5.1(c)(1) through S4.5.1(c)(3) . . .

V. Summary of Spartan's Petition: Spartan described the subject
noncompliance and stated its belief that the noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety for the following reasons:
(a) Spartan cited the definition of motor vehicle safety as stated
in the Safety Act under 49 U.S.C. 30111(a). Spartan also cited 49
U.S.C. 30118(d) under the Safety Act where Congress acknowledges that
there are cases where a manufacturer has failed to comply with a safety
standard, yet the impact on motor vehicle safety is so slight that an
exemption from the notice and remedy requirements of the Safety Act is
justified.
(b) Spartan stated that S4.5.1(b)(2) of FMVSS No. 208 requires an
air bag warning label to be installed, at the manufacturer's option, on
either side of the sun visor at each outboard seating position equipped
with an inflatable restraint. Within that same section of FMVSS No.
208, it states that air bag warning labels are to be installed, at the
manufacturer's option, in accordance

[[Page 47494]]

with Figure 8 or 11 of the standard. Footnotes under Figures 8 and 11,
among others, state ``Sun Visor Label Visible when Visor is in Down
Position.''
Spartan submitted a photograph depicting that the air bag warning
label on the subject vehicles is visible when the sun visor is in the
down position, however, the content is inverted.
(c) Spartan specified that the content of the sun visor label
identifies the risks associated with the placement of children, or
child seats, encourages the use of seatbelts, and defers to the owner's
manual for information pertaining to the air bags.
Spartan notes that they are a vehicle alterer in this case and are
not responsible for the content of the air bag warning label and that
they make no assertions relating to compliance of the label. However,
during alterations to the vehicles they do remove and reinstall the sun
visors.
(d) Spartan also stated that they alter a completed vehicle (in
this case a van) to become a vocational vehicle intended to be used as
a delivery service vehicle (i.e., a vehicle used to carry parcel
packages or other goods.) And although, the altered vehicle would be
equipped with two outboard seating positions, delivery service vehicles
are typically occupied by the driver who has a specific purpose of
delivering goods. Given the nature of, or intended use, the vehicle, it
would be unlikely for children to be placed in the passenger seating
area.
(e) Spartan clearly expressed that they do not alter information in
the owner's manual although it may provide supplements related to the
alterations being made. Spartan says that the content in the owner's
manual states that the air bag system is supplemental to the seat belts
and further describes risks associated with the air bag system.
Furthermore, the information in the owner's manual discusses an air bag
warning indicator (tell-tale) of which the vehicle is equipped and its
function (this indicator would provide indication to the driver that
the vehicle is equipped with an air bag system.)
(f) Spartan believes that while the content on the sun visor
warning label (although not provided by Spartan) may not be in the
upright position to be easily read by the occupants, it is visible with
the sun visor in the down position. And even though the label is
inverted, the coloring scheme would continue to signify risks
associated with the air bag system.
Spartan elaborated by saying that the information within the
owner's manual for the affected vehicles expands on potential risks
related to the system but also encourages the use of seatbelts as the
primary purpose of occupant protection.
Spartan additionally informed NHTSA that on December 8, 2015
containment actions were conducted and all units in control of
Utilimaster were inspected and the noncompliance corrected. This
included vehicles currently undergoing alterations.
In summation, Spartan believes that given the vocational use of the
affected vehicles and information provided in the foregoing that the
subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety, and
that its petition, to exempt Spartan from providing notification of the
noncompliances as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118 and remedying 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 Spartan 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 under their control after Spartan
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,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2016-17189 Filed 7-20-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P

47494 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 140 / Thursday, July 21, 2016 / Notices

with Figure 8 or 11 of the standard. potential risks related to the system but The Intelligent Transportation
Footnotes under Figures 8 and 11, also encourages the use of seatbelts as Systems (ITS) Program Advisory
among others, state ‘‘Sun Visor Label the primary purpose of occupant Committee (ITSPAC) will hold a
Visible when Visor is in Down protection. meeting on August 11, 2016, from 8:00
Position.’’ Spartan additionally informed a.m. to 4:00 p.m. (EDT) in the Crystal
Spartan submitted a photograph NHTSA that on December 8, 2015 Gateway Marriott Hotel, 1700 Jefferson
depicting that the air bag warning label containment actions were conducted Davis Highway, Arlington, VA 22202.
on the subject vehicles is visible when and all units in control of Utilimaster
the sun visor is in the down position, The ITSPAC, established under
were inspected and the noncompliance
however, the content is inverted. Section 5305 of Public Law 109–59,
corrected. This included vehicles
(c) Spartan specified that the content currently undergoing alterations. Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient
of the sun visor label identifies the risks In summation, Spartan believes that Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for
associated with the placement of given the vocational use of the affected Users, August 10, 2005, and re-
children, or child seats, encourages the vehicles and information provided in established under Section 6007 of
use of seatbelts, and defers to the the foregoing that the subject Public Law 114–94, Fixing America’s
owner’s manual for information noncompliance is inconsequential to Surface Transportation (FAST) Act,
pertaining to the air bags. motor vehicle safety, and that its December 4, 2015, was created to advise
Spartan notes that they are a vehicle the Secretary of Transportation on all
petition, to exempt Spartan from
alterer in this case and are not matters relating to the study,
providing notification of the
responsible for the content of the air bag development, and implementation of
noncompliances as required by 49
warning label and that they make no intelligent transportation systems.
assertions relating to compliance of the U.S.C. 30118 and remedying the
noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. Through its sponsor, the ITS Joint
label. However, during alterations to the
30120 should be granted. Program Office (JPO), the ITSPAC makes
vehicles they do remove and reinstall
NHTSA notes that the statutory recommendations to the Secretary
the sun visors.
(d) Spartan also stated that they alter provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and regarding ITS Program needs, objectives,
a completed vehicle (in this case a van) 30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to plans, approaches, content, and
to become a vocational vehicle intended file petitions for a determination of progress.
to be used as a delivery service vehicle inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to The following is a summary of the
(i.e., a vehicle used to carry parcel exempt manufacturers only from the meeting tentative agenda: (1) Welcome,
packages or other goods.) And although, duties found in sections 30118 and (2) Discussion of Potential Advice
the altered vehicle would be equipped 30120, respectively, to notify owners, Memorandum Topics, (4) Summary and
with two outboard seating positions, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or Adjourn.
delivery service vehicles are typically noncompliance and to remedy the
defect or noncompliance. Therefore, any The meeting will be open to the
occupied by the driver who has a
decision on this petition only applies to public, but limited space will be
specific purpose of delivering goods.
Given the nature of, or intended use, the the subject vehicles that Spartan no available on a first-come, first-served
vehicle, it would be unlikely for longer controlled at the time it basis. Members of the public who wish
children to be placed in the passenger determined that the noncompliance to present oral statements at the meeting
seating area. existed. However, any decision on this must submit a request to ITSPAC@
(e) Spartan clearly expressed that they petition does not relieve vehicle dot.gov, not later than August 4, 2016.
do not alter information in the owner’s distributors and dealers of the Questions about the agenda or written
manual although it may provide prohibitions on the sale, offer for sale, comments may be submitted by U.S.
supplements related to the alterations or introduction or delivery for Mail to: U.S. Department of
being made. Spartan says that the introduction into interstate commerce of Transportation, Office of the Assistant
content in the owner’s manual states the noncompliant vehicles under their Secretary for Research and Technology,
that the air bag system is supplemental control after Spartan notified them that ITS Joint Program Office, Attention:
to the seat belts and further describes the subject noncompliance existed. Stephen Glasscock, 1200 New Jersey
risks associated with the air bag system. Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: Avenue SE., HOIT, Washington, DC
Furthermore, the information in the delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.95 and 20590 or faxed to (202) 493–2027. The
owner’s manual discusses an air bag 501.8 ITS JPO requests that written comments
warning indicator (tell-tale) of which be submitted not later than August 4,
Jeffrey M. Giuseppe,
the vehicle is equipped and its function 2016.
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
(this indicator would provide indication
to the driver that the vehicle is [FR Doc. 2016–17189 Filed 7–20–16; 8:45 am] Notice of this conference is provided
equipped with an air bag system.) BILLING CODE 4910–59–P in accordance with the Federal
(f) Spartan believes that while the Advisory Committee Act and the
content on the sun visor warning label General Services Administration
(although not provided by Spartan) may DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION regulations (41 CFR part 102–3)
not be in the upright position to be covering management of Federal
Intelligent Transportation Systems
easily read by the occupants, it is visible advisory committees.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Program Advisory Committee; Notice
with the sun visor in the down position. Issued in Washington, DC, on the 18th day
of Meeting
And even though the label is inverted, of July, 2016.
the coloring scheme would continue to AGENCY: ITS Joint Program Office, Office Stephen Glasscock,
signify risks associated with the air bag of the Assistant Secretary for Research
system. Designated Federal Officer, ITS Joint Program
and Technology, U.S. Department of
Spartan elaborated by saying that the Office.
Transportation.
information within the owner’s manual [FR Doc. 2016–17218 Filed 7–20–16; 8:45 am]
ACTION: Notice.
for the affected vehicles expands on BILLING CODE 4910–22–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:15 Jul 20, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00151 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\21JYN1.SGM 21JYN1

Document Created: 2018-02-08 07:58:45
Document Modified: 2018-02-08 07:58:45

Category		Regulatory Information
Collection		Federal Register
sudoc Class		AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106:
Publisher		Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
Section		Notices
Action		Receipt of petition.
Dates		The closing date for comments on the petition is August 22, 2016.
FR Citation		81 FR 47493

81 FR 47493 - Spartan Motors USA, Inc., Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATIONNational Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 140 (July 21, 2016)

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration