81 FR 52734 - Baby Jogger, LLC, Ruling on Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 153 (August 9, 2016)
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 153 (August 9, 2016)
| Page Range | 52734-52737 | |
| FR Document | 2016-18770 |
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 153 (Tuesday, August 9, 2016)] [Notices] [Pages 52734-52737] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2016-18770] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [Docket No. NHTSA-2015-0074; Notice 2] Baby Jogger, LLC, Ruling on Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Ruling on petition for inconsequential noncompliance. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 filed an associated report dated June 4, 2015, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. Baby Jogger then petitioned NHTSA under 49 CFR part 556 requesting a decision that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. ADDRESSES: For further information on this decision contact Zachary Fraser, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone (202) 366-5754, facsimile (202) 366-3081. 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. Notice of receipt of the petition was published, with a 30-day public comment period, on September 8, 2015 in the Federal Register (80 FR 53914). No comments were received. 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.'' 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 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 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 29 mm in diameter which is less than the required 30 mm 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 percent 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 issue groupings that it believes are similar 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 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 production of the subject 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 [[Page 52735]] 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'S Decision NHTSA's Analysis: NHTSA examined the noncompliances that Baby Jogger described in its petition by category as follows: a. Information Type Size/Capitalization/Presentation Order Baby Jogger printed labels required in paragraph S5.5.2 containing the place of manufacture in 8 point type rather than the required 10 point type. Baby Jogger believes the smaller type of the place of manufacture will not have any impact on child passenger safety. Baby Jogger failed to capitalize certain first letters of words contained in a label to instruct the user that the restraint is certified for use in motor vehicles and aircraft (paragraph S5.5.2(n)). Baby Jogger believes the lower case letters will not have any impact on child passenger safety. Finally, Baby Jogger printed on-product labels with two of the required statements of paragraph S5.5.2(g)(1)in incorrect order. Baby Jogger believes the out of order information will not have any impact on child passenger safety. NHTSA does not concur with Baby Jogger's reasons for inconsequentiality stated above. With regard to the noncompliant 8 point font size, in the Final Rule establishing FMVSS No. 139, ``New pneumatic radial tires for light vehicles,'' the agency stated ``With respect to the size of the text on the placard and label, NHTSA learned from focus groups that the public generally prefers larger fonts in label text because it is easier to read. This helps ensure the placard and label will effectively convey the message to the reader.'' \1\ Also, in a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to upgrade dynamic testing in FMVSS No. 213, the agency originally proposed that labeling be in block lettering ``3/32 inch high.'' \2\ In the final rule to upgrade FMVSS No. 213, the agency changed this to ``10 point type'' and made other changes in response to a comment from General Motors.\3\ General Motors stated ``The proposal restricts the lettering to block lettering which results in instructions which are hard to read. We recommend that the body type for the label be specified to require at least a 10 point type, based on the character case with the option of using capitals or upper and lower case. We believe this specification will result in an easier to read label which, in turn, should promote more complete reading of the label by the consumer.'' \4\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ 67 FR 69600; November 18, 2002. \2\ 43 FR 21470; May 18, 1978. \3\ 44 FR 72131; December 13, 1979. \4\ Docket no. 74-09-N04, comment #78, sent 12/1/78. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- For these reasons, NHTSA believes that font size less than the required 10 point type results in undesirable reading conditions which may cause eye strain and lead to the consumer failing to complete reading all the important safety instructions. Baby Jogger failed to capitalize certain first letters of words contained in a label to instruct the user that the restraint is certified for use in motor vehicles and aircraft (paragraph S5.5.2(n)). Baby Jogger believes the lower case letters will not have any impact on child passenger safety. The agency believes that failure to capitalize the required statements for proper use of child restraints may result in the consumer not adequately seeing and understanding the important safety information pertaining to proper use of the restraints. Baby Jogger printed on-product labels with two of the required statements of paragraph S5.5.2(g)(1)in incorrect order. Baby Jogger believes the out of order information will not have any impact on child passenger safety because the statements are stand-alone and do not depend on another statement; therefore, the order of bulleted statements do affect the proper use of the car seat. NHTSA disagrees with this reasoning. S5.5.2(g)(1) requires the heading ```WARNING! DEATH or SERIOUS INJURY can occur', capitalized as written and followed by bulleted statements in the following order:'' (emphasis added). The order of statements follows a sequence beginning with instructions for rear-facing usage (S5.5.2(k)(1)), the maximum mass of children that can safely occupy the system (S.5.5.2(f)), the proper adjustment of the belts provided with the child restraint (S5.5.2(h)), instructions for securing a child restraint to the vehicle with a top tether strap (S5.5.2(j), and instructions for securing a booster seat to the vehicle using the vehicle's seat belt system (S5.5.2(i)). Baby Jogger incorrectly placed the statements required by S5.5.2(i) before the statements required by S5.5.2(j). The agency intentionally created a sequence of information that begins with instructions that call for interaction between the occupant and the restraint system, and ends with instructions that call for interaction between the occupant and the written instruction. If this sequence is disrupted by placing items out of order the user could become distracted and disregard important instructions. The agency believes the above label noncompliances, in totality, have a compounding effect that may result in the user mistrusting information on the labels and thereby ignoring the labels. b. Background Color Baby Jogger notified the agency of the following two noncompliances related to background color: (1) Paragraph S5.5.2 requires a label with information that child restraints could be recalled for safety reasons to be printed on a white background with black text. The noncompliant label contains the required information but is printed on black background with white text. Baby Jogger believes there is no indication that the reversed color combination will affect consumers' ability to understand the information on the label, and, therefore, the contrasting colors will not have any impact on child passenger safety. NHTSA disagrees with Baby Jogger's assessment that the reversal of required text/label color will not affect the consumers' ability to understand the label. A visual inspection of the label in a photograph provided by Baby Jogger shows that the white text on the black background is not as easy to read as the compliant text located above. (This picture is located in the docket). The consumer may not read the label in its entirety if the ability to read the information on the label creates a challenge to the reader, which would result in the reader not being aware of important recall information. (2) S5.8.1(b)(2) requires the registration form to conform to Figures 9a and 9b which require portions of the card to have a minimum 10% screen tint. The registration card provided by Baby Jogger does not have any screen tint. Baby Jogger believes that the missing screen tint will not have an impact on motor vehicle safety because there is no indication that the missing tint will affect consumers' ability to understand the information on the registration card. The image of the registration card provided in Baby Jogger's petition would seem to support Baby Jogger's argument that the missing tint does not affect the ability to understand the required information provided on the registration card. c. On-Product Label Message Area and Pictogram Sizes Three of the Baby Jogger models have the air bag warning label required by [[Page 52736]] paragraph S5.5.2(k)(3)(ii) with a message area measuring 23.4 square cm which is less than the minimum required message area of 30 square cm. Baby Jogger does not believe the noncompliance creates a risk to motor vehicle safety because the label is prominently displayed and clearly communicates the required warning, and there is no indication that the sizing issue affects customers' ability to understand the warnings. In addition, the pictogram required in paragraph S5.5.2(k)(3)(iii) for the Baby Jogger label measures 29 millimeters in diameter which is less than the minimum required diameter of 30 millimeters. Baby Jogger believes that the pictogram that is 1 millimeter too small will not have any impact on child passenger safety. In addition, Baby Jogger maintains for both noncompliances above that the required information is provided in the printed instructions and is prominently featured on the affected products, and there is no indication that the sizing issue affects consumers' ability to understand or appreciate the warnings. We disagree with Baby Jogger that the smaller than required air bag warning label message area creates no risk to motor vehicle safety. The air bag warning labels are the agency's primary method for obtaining the consumer's attention and conveying important safety information with respect to the proper location to install a rear-facing child restraint. The agency believes that these air bag warning labels are necessary to make consumers aware of the potentially serious consequences of placing a rear-facing child seat or any child twelve and under on the front seat with an air bag, and that the rear seat is the safest place for these children. In NHTSA's occupant crash protection rule published on May 12, 2000,\5\ the agency stated ``. . . as with the current labels, manufacturers may provide translations of the required English language message as long as all the requirements for the English language are met, including size'' \6\ (emphasis added). Thus, the agency reconfirmed the importance of the message area requirement in the advanced air bag final rule. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \5\ 65 FR 30680. \6\ 65 FR 30722. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The air bag warning label requirements in FMVSS No. 213, Child Restraint Systems, were established as part of a FMVSS No. 208, Occupant Crash Protection, final rule requiring new air bag warning labels in motor vehicles.\7\ The intent of the final rule is that the warning or alert message fills the message area.\8\ Not filling the message area would make purposeless the specification. The Baby Jogger label has a message area that is 22 percent below the required 30 square cm. This is a significant reduction in message area equivalent to not filling the message area. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \7\ 61 FR 60206; November 27, 1996. \8\ 61 FR 60206 at 60210. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The pictogram of the air bag warning label has a diameter that is 3 percent below the required 30 mm. Even though the pictogram minimum format is not met, NHTSA believes in this case that the consumer will have a message size that is acceptable. d. Omitted Information Baby Jogger notified the agency of the following four noncompliances related to missing information required in the printed instructions or electronic registration form in FMVSS No. 213: (1) Paragraph S5.6.1.7 requires the printed instructions to include the statement in paragraph (ii) that ``Child restraints could be recalled . . . or register on-line at (insert Web site for electronic registration form).'' The printed instruction manual does not include the Web site address in the section regarding child restraint registration. Baby Jogger does not believe the noncompliance with paragraph S5.6.1.7 creates a risk to motor vehicle safety since on-line registration is optional. The agency disagrees with Baby Jogger that the missing information for on-line registration does not create a risk to motor vehicle safety. While the manufacturer has the choice to provide on-line registration or not, if the manufacturer does provide the option for on-line registration then they are required to provide the Web site address in the section regarding child seat registration. The agency recognizes the importance of child restraint registrations. To support increasing the number of registrations, the agency is currently studying efforts to increase the rate of child restraint registrations so that in the event of a recall, all owners of affected units will be notified of a potentially unsafe product. (2) Paragraph S5.6.3 requires the printed instructions to include the statement: ``A snug strap should not allow any slack. It lies in a relatively straight line without sagging. It does not press on the child's flesh or push the child's body into an unnatural position.'' The printed instruction manual does not include this information. Baby Jogger does not believe that this noncompliance creates a risk to motor vehicle safety because the printed instructions provide adequate text to adjust the harness around the child including statements addressing snugness and sagging (see Baby Jogger's Petition in Docket NHTSA-2015- 0074 for detail). NHTSA disagrees with Baby Jogger that the provided text to address strap snugness in lieu of the required text is sufficient to replace the required text. The text provided by Baby Jogger contains additional information not related to strap snugness. In addition, the provided text fails to provide guidance to achieve a snug fit which may result in an improper securing of the child in the restraint and a compromise of the child seat's safety effectiveness in the event of a crash. (3) Paragraph S8.1 requires the printed instructions to include a step-by-step procedure (including diagrams) for installing the system in aircraft passenger seats, securing a child in the system when it is installed in aircraft, and adjusting the system to fit the child. The printed instruction manual does not include instructions for installing the system in aircraft passenger seats. Baby Jogger does not believe that the missing aircraft installation information creates a risk to motor vehicle safety because the printed instructions address the installation of the child seat in a vehicle equipped with a lap belt only, which is similar to the installation of the child seat in an aircraft passenger seat with lap belt only. Baby Jogger believes that the installation instructions provided for a vehicle lap belt will be logically understood as the method to secure the child seat to the aircraft passenger seat. NHTSA disagrees with Baby Jogger's line of reasoning. We have concerns that absent the required instructions specific to aircraft passenger installation, the user will be unprepared to properly secure the child restraint to the aircraft passenger seat, properly secure the child when it is installed in an aircraft, and properly adjust the system to fit the child. These potential improper procedures could result in a compromise of the child seat's safety effectiveness during flight. (4) Paragraph S5.8.2(a)(1)(i) requires the electronic registration form to contain the statement ``FOR YOUR CHILD'S CONTINUED SAFETY'' at the top of the form. The electronic registration form on the Baby Jogger Web site did not include this statement at the top. Baby Jogger believes that users of child restraints have a basic understanding that recalls are conducted for safety reasons, and that one who navigated to the electronic registration form would not be [[Page 52737]] dissuaded from registering due to the missing phrase. The Agency agrees that a consumer who has navigated to the on-line registration will not be dissuaded from registering due to the missing phrase. Also, the Agency notes that Baby Jogger has corrected this omission on its on-line registration form and the required statement is present. e. Spanish Language Type Size Paragraph S5.5.2 of FMVSS No. 213 requires the information in the English language to be not smaller than 10 point type. An on-product warning label provided by Baby Jogger has the Spanish information at approximately 7 point type. The English language label is in full compliance with this requirement. Baby Jogger believes that the noncompliant text does not create a risk to motor vehicle safety because the information is clearly displayed on the affected child restraints and clearly communicates the required information. NHTSA believes that the 7 point type text provided in the Spanish language label is not clearly displayed and is difficult to read. The smaller font size likely poses a challenge to the consumer's ability to read the text and could result in the consumer ignoring the text due to the difficulty in being able to read it. NHTSA disagrees with Baby Jogger's reasons for inconsequentiality as supported by the reasons stated above under the category ``Information Type Size.'' NHTSA's Decision: In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has determined that Baby Jogger has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 213 noncompliances are inconsequential to motor vehicle safety for: (a) Information Type Size/Capitalization/ Presentation order, (b) Background color (excluding the 10 percent tint noncompliance), (c) On-Product Label Message Area and Pictogram Sizes (excluding the pictogram noncompliance), (d) Omitted Information (excluding the missing statement at the top of the on-line registration form), and (e) Spanish Language Type Size. Accordingly, Baby Jogger's petition is hereby denied for these noncompliances and Baby Jogger is obligated to provide notification of, and free remedies for, the noncompliances as required under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120. In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that the petitioner has met its burden of persuasion that the noncompliances identified above as ``excluded'' in its petition are inconsequential to motor vehicle safety: (b) minimum 10 percent tint on registration card, (c) minimum 30 mm diameter pictogram on air bag warning label, and (d) missing statement at the top of the on-line registration form. Accordingly, we grant its petition on these issues. Authority: (49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.95 and 501.8). Issued on: August 2, 2016. Stephen A. Ridella, Acting Associate Administrator for Enforcement. [FR Doc. 2016-18770 Filed 8-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
![52734 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 153 / Tuesday, August 9, 2016 / Notices
Environmental, historic preservation, I. Overview: Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. in motor vehicles and aircraft.’’ Other
public use, or trail use/rail banking 30118(d) and 30120(h) (see than the first word, no other words are
conditions will be imposed, where implementing rule at 49 CFR part 556), capitalized.
appropriate, in a subsequent decision. Baby Jogger submitted a petition for an Paragraph S5.5.2.(k)(3)(ii)—The
Pursuant to the provisions of 49 CFR exemption from the notification and message area measures 23.4 square cm
1152.29(e)(2), NSR shall file a notice of remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. on models BJ70411, BJ70424 and
consummation with the Board to signify Chapter 301 on the basis that this BJ70431 which is less than the
that it has exercised the authority noncompliance is inconsequential to minimum required message area of 30
granted and fully abandoned the Line. If motor vehicle safety. square cm.
consummation has not been effected by Notice of receipt of the petition was Paragraph S5.5.2.(k)(3)(iii)—On
NSR’s filing of a notice of published, with a 30-day public models BJ70411, BJ70424 and BJ70431
consummation by August 9, 2017, and comment period, on September 8, 2015 the red circle on the required pictogram
there are no legal or regulatory barriers in the Federal Register (80 FR 53914). is 29 mm in diameter which is less than
to consummation, the authority to No comments were received. To view the required 30 mm in diameter.
abandon will automatically expire. the petition, and all supporting Paragraph S5.6.1.7—The instruction
Board decisions and notices are documents log onto the Federal Docket manuals do not include reference to the
available on our Web site at Management System (FDMS) Web site required Web site in the section
‘‘WWW.STB.DOT.GOV.’’ at: http://www.regulations.gov/. Then regarding child restraint recalls.
follow the online search instructions to Paragraph S5.6.3—The instruction
Decided: August 4, 2016.
locate docket number ‘‘NHTSA–2015– manuals do not include the required
By the Board, Joseph H. Dettmar, Acting 0074.’’ statement ‘‘A snug strap should not
Director, Office of Proceedings. II. Child Restraints Involved: Affected allow any slack. . .’’
Jeffrey Herzig, are approximately 15,103 of the Paragraph S5.8.2(a)(1)—The
Clearance Clerk. following Baby Jogger rear-facing infant electronic registration form does not
[FR Doc. 2016–18867 Filed 8–8–16; 8:45 am] seats and bases manufactured between have the required statement ‘‘FOR
BILLING CODE 4915–01–P November 3, 2014 and April 30, 2015: YOUR CHILD’S CONTINUED
• City GO Infant Car Seat/Model No. SAFETY. . .’’
BJ64510 Paragraph S5.8.1(b)(2)—Figure 9a
• City GO Infant Car Seat/Model No. requires minimum 10 percent screen
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
BJ64529 tint on the lower half of the form. The
National Highway Traffic Safety • City GO Base for Infant Car Seat/ form is missing the required tinting.
Administration Model No. BJ80400 Paragraph S8.1—No instructions for
• City GO Base for Infant Car Seat/ installing the system in an aircraft
[Docket No. NHTSA–2015–0074; Notice 2] Model No. BJ61500 passenger seat were provided.
• City Mini Infant Cars Seat/Stroller IV. Summary of Baby Jogger’s
Baby Jogger, LLC, Ruling on Petition Travel System/Model No.BJ72510 Analyses: Baby Jogger organized its
for Decision of Inconsequential • Vue Lite Infant Car Seat/Stroller
reasoning to substantiate
Noncompliance Travel System/Model No. BJ70411
• Vue Lite Infant Car Seat/Stroller inconsequentiality into the following
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Travel System/Model No. BJ70424 five issue groupings that it believes are
Safety Administration (NHTSA), • Vue Lite Infant Car Seat/Stroller similar between the numerous
Department of Transportation (DOT). Travel System/Model No. BJ70431 noncompliances:
ACTION: Ruling on petition for III. Noncompliances: Baby Jogger a. Information Type Size/Capitalization/
inconsequential noncompliance. explains that the affected child Presentation Order
restraints do not fully comply with b. Background Color
SUMMARY: Baby Jogger, LLC (Baby numerous paragraphs of FMVSS No. c. On-Product Label Message Area and
Jogger), has determined that certain 213 for the following reasons: Pictogram Sizes
Baby Jogger rear-facing infant seats and Paragraph S5.5.2—The required d. Omitted Information
bases do not fully comply with information in English is no smaller e. Spanish Language Type Size
paragraphs S5.5, S5.6, S5.8, and S8.1 of than 10 point type, but the Spanish Refer to Baby Jogger’s petition for
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard information is smaller at about 7 point their complete reasoning and associated
(FMVSS) No. 213, Child Restraint type. This only applies to models illustrations. To view the petition and
Systems. Baby Jogger filed an associated BJ64510 and BJ64529. all supporting documents log onto the
report dated June 4, 2015, pursuant to Paragraph S5.5.2(d)—The Federal Docket Management System
49 CFR part 573, Defect and ‘‘manufactured in address’’ on the label (FDMS) Web site at: http://
Noncompliance Responsibility and is in about 8 font which is smaller than www.regulations.gov/. Then follow the
Reports. Baby Jogger then petitioned the required 10 point type. online search instructions to locate
NHTSA under 49 CFR part 556 Paragraph S5.5.2(m)—The required docket number ‘‘NHTSA–2015–0074.’’
requesting a decision that the subject ’’Child restraints could be recalled for Baby Jogger additionally informed
noncompliance is inconsequential to safety reasons. . .’’ text is on a black NHTSA that they have corrected all
motor vehicle safety. background with white text instead of labeling noncompliances and that all
future production of the subject infant
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
ADDRESSES: For further information on
black text on a white background.
Paragraph S5.5.2(g)(1)—The label has car seat/stroller systems and stand-alone
this decision contact Zachary Fraser, units will be in full compliance with
the ‘‘Follow all instructions. . .’’ ahead
Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the FMVSS No. 213.
of the ‘‘Secure this child restraint’’
National Highway Traffic Safety In summation, Baby Jogger believes
statement, instead of the reverse order
Administration (NHTSA), telephone that the described noncompliance of the
as required. This noncompliance only
(202) 366–5754, facsimile (202) 366– subject infant car seat/stroller systems
affects models BJ64510 and BJ64529.
3081. Paragraph S5.5.2(n)—The label has and standalone units is inconsequential
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: ‘‘This child restraint is certified for use to motor vehicle safety, and that its
VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:00 Aug 08, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00125 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09AUN1.SGM 09AUN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_52887/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 153 / Tuesday, August 9, 2016 / Notices 52737
dissuaded from registering due to the registration card, (c) minimum 30 mm through a 24-hour fax-on demand
missing phrase. diameter pictogram on air bag warning service at (202) 622–0077.
The Agency agrees that a consumer label, and (d) missing statement at the
who has navigated to the on-line Background
top of the on-line registration form.
registration will not be dissuaded from Accordingly, we grant its petition on On December 3, 1999, the Kingpin
registering due to the missing phrase. these issues. Act (21 U.S.C. Sections 1901–1908, 8
Also, the Agency notes that Baby Jogger U.S.C. Section 1182) was signed into
Authority: (49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120:
has corrected this omission on its on- delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.95 and
law by the President of the United
line registration form and the required 501.8). States. The Kingpin Act provides a
statement is present. statutory framework for the President to
Issued on: August 2, 2016. impose sanctions against significant
e. Spanish Language Type Size Stephen A. Ridella, foreign narcotics traffickers and their
Paragraph S5.5.2 of FMVSS No. 213 Acting Associate Administrator for organizations on a worldwide basis,
requires the information in the English Enforcement. with the objective of denying their
language to be not smaller than 10 point [FR Doc. 2016–18770 Filed 8–8–16; 8:45 am] businesses and agents access to the U.S.
type. An on-product warning label BILLING CODE 4910–59–P financial system and to the benefits of
provided by Baby Jogger has the trade and transactions involving U.S.
Spanish information at approximately 7 persons and entities.
point type. The English language label DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY The Kingpin Act blocks all property
is in full compliance with this and interests in property, subject to U.S.
requirement. Baby Jogger believes that Office of Foreign Assets Control jurisdiction, owned or controlled by
the noncompliant text does not create a significant foreign narcotics traffickers
risk to motor vehicle safety because the Unblocking of Specially Designated as identified by the President or the
information is clearly displayed on the Nationals and Blocked Persons, Secretary of the Treasury. In addition,
affected child restraints and clearly Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation the Secretary of the Treasury consults
communicates the required information. Act with the Attorney General, the Director
NHTSA believes that the 7 point type of the Central Intelligence Agency, the
AGENCY: Office of Foreign Assets
text provided in the Spanish language Director of the Federal Bureau of
Control, Treasury.
label is not clearly displayed and is Investigation, the Administrator of the
difficult to read. The smaller font size ACTION: Notice. Drug Enforcement Administration, the
likely poses a challenge to the SUMMARY: The Department of the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of
consumer’s ability to read the text and Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets State, and the Secretary of Homeland
could result in the consumer ignoring Security when designating and blocking
Control (OFAC) is publishing the names
the text due to the difficulty in being the property or interests in property,
of five individuals and six entities
able to read it. NHTSA disagrees with subject to U.S. jurisdiction, of persons
whose property and interests in
Baby Jogger’s reasons for or entities found to be: (1) Materially
property have been unblocked pursuant
inconsequentiality as supported by the assisting in, or providing financial or
to the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin
reasons stated above under the category technological support for or to, or
Designation Act (Kingpin Act).
‘‘Information Type Size.’’ providing goods or services in support
Additionally, OFAC is publishing an
NHTSA’s Decision: In consideration of, the international narcotics trafficking
update to the identifying information of
of the foregoing, NHTSA has activities of a person designated
one individual currently included in the
determined that Baby Jogger has not met pursuant to the Kingpin Act; (2) owned,
list of Specially Designated Nationals
its burden of persuasion that the subject controlled, or directed by, or acting for
and Blocked Persons (SDN List).
FMVSS No. 213 noncompliances are or on behalf of, a person designated
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety DATES: The unblocking and removal
pursuant to the Kingpin Act; and/or (3)
for: (a) Information Type Size/ from the list of Specially Designated
playing a significant role in
Capitalization/Presentation order, (b) Nationals and Blocked Persons (SDN
international narcotics trafficking.
Background color (excluding the 10 List) of the individuals and entities On August 4, 2016, the Associate
percent tint noncompliance), (c) On- identified in this notice whose property Director of OFAC’s Office of Global
Product Label Message Area and and interests in property were blocked Targeting removed from the SDN List
Pictogram Sizes (excluding the pursuant to the Kingpin Act, is effective the individuals and entities listed
pictogram noncompliance), (d) Omitted on August 4, 2016. Additionally, the below, whose property and interests in
Information (excluding the missing update to the SDN List of the identifying property was blocked pursuant to the
statement at the top of the on-line information of the individual identified Kingpin Act.
registration form), and (e) Spanish in this notice is also effective on August
Language Type Size. Accordingly, Baby 4, 2016. Individuals
Jogger’s petition is hereby denied for FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 1. GARCIA AYALA, Filemon, C
these noncompliances and Baby Jogger Assistant Director, Sanctions Constitucion # 32, Col Rio Grande,
is obligated to provide notification of, Compliance & Evaluation, Department Rio Grande, Zacatecas 98400, Mexico;
and free remedies for, the of the Treasury, Office of Foreign Assets Matamoros, Tamaulipas, Mexico; Rio
noncompliances as required under 49 Control, Washington, DC 20220, Tel: Grande, Zacatecas, Mexico; DOB 28
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
U.S.C. 30118 and 30120. (202) 622–2490. Oct 1948; alt. DOB 26 Oct 1948; alt.
In consideration of the foregoing, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOB 27 Oct 1948; POB Loreto,
NHTSA has decided that the petitioner Zacatecas, Mexico; Passport
has met its burden of persuasion that Electronic and Facsimile Availability 160010455 (Mexico) issued 03 May
the noncompliances identified above as This document and additional 2002 expires 03 May 2012; C.U.R.P.
‘‘excluded’’ in its petition are information concerning OFAC are GAAF481027HZSRYL07 (Mexico);
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety: available from OFAC’s Web site at alt. C.U.R.P. GAAF481026HTSRYL08
(b) minimum 10 percent tint on (www.treasury.gov/ofac) or via facsimile (Mexico) (individual) [SDNTK].
VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:00 Aug 08, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00128 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09AUN1.SGM 09AUN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_52887/page/4.svg)
Document Created: 2016-08-09 01:09:57
Document Modified: 2016-08-09 01:09:57
| 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 | Ruling on petition for inconsequential noncompliance. | |
| FR Citation | 81 FR 52734 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR