82 FR 38992 - Ride the Ducks International, LLC, Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 157 (August 16, 2017)

Page Range		38992-38993
FR Document		2017-17325

Ride the Ducks International, LLC (RTDI), has determined that certain model year (MY) 1996-2014 Ride the Ducks International Stretch Amphibious passenger vehicles (APVs) do not fully comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 103, Windshield Defrosting and Defogging Systems. RTDI filed a noncompliance information report dated March 15, 2017. RTDI also petitioned NHTSA on April 12, 2017, for a decision that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.

Federal Register, Volume 82 Issue 157 (Wednesday, August 16, 2017)

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 157 (Wednesday, August 16, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38992-38993]
From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2017-17325]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2017-0035; Notice 1]

Ride the Ducks International, 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: Ride the Ducks International, LLC (RTDI), has determined that
certain model year (MY) 1996-2014 Ride the Ducks International Stretch
Amphibious passenger vehicles (APVs) do not fully comply with Federal
Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 103, Windshield Defrosting
and Defogging Systems. RTDI filed a noncompliance information report
dated March 15, 2017. RTDI also petitioned NHTSA on April 12, 2017, for
a decision that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it
relates to motor vehicle safety.

DATES: The closing date for comments on the petition is September 15,
2017.

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 Delivery: 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 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 dockets. 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: Ride the Ducks International, LLC (RTDI), has
determined that certain model year (MY) 1996-2014 Ride the Ducks
International Stretch Amphibious passenger vehicles (APVs) do not fully
comply with paragraph S4.1 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard
(FMVSS) No. 103, Windshield Defrosting and Defogging Systems. RTDI
filed a noncompliance information report dated March 15, 2017, pursuant
to 49 CFR 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports.
RTDI also petitioned NHTSA on April 12, 2017, pursuant to 49 U.S.C.
30118(d) and 30120(h) and 49 CFR part 556, 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.
This notice of receipt of RTDI'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: Approximately 105 MY 1996-2014 Ride the
Ducks International Stretch APVs, manufactured between January 1, 1996,
and December 31, 2014, are potentially involved.
III. Noncompliance: RTDI explained that the noncompliance is that
the subject vehicles were manufactured without a windshield defrosting
and defogging system, as required by paragraph S4.1 of FMVSS No. 103.
IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S4.1 of FMVSS No. 103 states in pertinent
part:

S4.1 Each vehicle shall have a windshield defrosting and
defogging system

[[Page 38993]]

V. Summary of RTDI's Petition: As background, in 1996, RTDI began
to produce APVs. The original Amphibious Passenger vehicles (APVs) are
based on military vehicles that were capable of operation over both
land and water. The ``Stretch'' APVs were refurbished by RTDI in
accordance with state and U.S. Coast Guard rules and regulations. These
vehicles have renewed hulls that are ``stretched'' over the original
chassis frame and original vehicle components that were replaced with
modern equipment. RTDI manufactured the stretch APVs until 2005, when
RTDI introduced its ``Truck'' APVs. The truck APVs are based on
military cargo vehicles. RTDI has not manufactured any vehicles since
2014.
RTDI described the subject noncompliance and stated its belief that
the noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle
safety.
In support of its petition, RTDI submitted the following reasoning:
1. FMVSS No. 103 specifies that ``[e]ach vehicle shall have a
windshield defrosting and defogging system.'' 49 CFR 571.103, S4(a),
S4.1. The purpose of FMVSS No. 103 is to establish minimum performance
requirements for vehicle windshield defrosting and defogging systems in
order to ensure that the vehicle operator is able to sufficiently see
through the windshield.
The APVs have features that are designed to achieve the same
purpose as the standard. The APVs' ``open-air'' design precludes fog
from building up on the windshield. Fog buildup on the interior or
exterior of a motor vehicle windshield occurs when water condenses on
the windshield. For water to condense on a windshield, the air next to
the windshield must be humid and the air's dew point--the temperature
to which air must be cooled to become saturated with water vapor--must
be higher than the windshield's temperature. In other words, humid and
warm air must surround a cool windshield. Because of its open-air
design, the APVs will not encounter any of the physical conditions that
create fog buildup on the windshield. The APVs do not have solid glass
windows in the passenger compartment and the rear of the vehicle is
also open to the air. The side panels of the driver's compartment are
open on both sides of the windshield and the center windshield can be
pushed outward and opened when needed. Because of the APVs' design, the
ambient air is able to continually circulate within the interior of the
vehicle, creating no difference between the temperature or humidity of
the air outside and inside the vehicle. In the unlikely event that fog
did accumulate on the windshield, the APVs have windshield wipers to
clear the surface and the vehicle operator can also push down the
windshield for visibility.
2. Frost builds up on the windshield of a vehicle when the
temperature of liquid or condensation on the windshield decreases to
the freezing point of water, turning the condensation into frost. The
APVs' lack of a defrosting system similarly does not present a safety
concern. The APVs are only operated on a seasonal basis and not during
the winter months in any location where the vehicles provide tours. The
APVs, therefore, are not operated during or exposed to weather
conditions that would expose the vehicles to frost or create the need
to defrost the windshields. As above, the operator also has the ability
to push down the center windshield or use the windshield wipers to
increase visibility in the unlikely event of frost.
3. From its inception, the Safety Act has included a provision
recognizing that some noncompliances may pose little or no actual
safety risk. The Safety Act exempts manufacturers from their statutory
obligation to provide notice and remedy upon a determination by NHTSA
that a noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. See 49
U.S.C. 30118(d). In applying this recognition to particular fact
situations, the agency considers whether the noncompliance gives rise
to ``a significantly greater risk than . . . in a compliant vehicle.''
69 FR 19897, 19900 (April 14, 2000). As described above, the
specialized design of the APVs and the vehicles' pattern of use does
not expose the vehicles to conditions that could create an increased
safety risk when compared to a vehicle that has a windshield defrosting
and defogging system installed.
RTDI concluded by expressing the 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 RTDI 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 RTDI
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. 2017-17325 Filed 8-15-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P

Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 16, 2017 / Notices 38993

V. Summary of RTDI’s Petition: As the unlikely event that fog did decision on this petition only applies to
background, in 1996, RTDI began to accumulate on the windshield, the the subject vehicles that RTDI no longer
produce APVs. The original APVs have windshield wipers to clear controlled at the time it determined that
Amphibious Passenger vehicles (APVs) the surface and the vehicle operator can the noncompliance existed. However,
are based on military vehicles that were also push down the windshield for any decision on this petition does not
capable of operation over both land and visibility. relieve vehicle distributors and dealers
water. The ‘‘Stretch’’ APVs were 2. Frost builds up on the windshield of the prohibitions on the sale, offer for
refurbished by RTDI in accordance with of a vehicle when the temperature of sale, or introduction or delivery for
state and U.S. Coast Guard rules and liquid or condensation on the introduction into interstate commerce of
regulations. These vehicles have windshield decreases to the freezing the noncompliant vehicles under their
renewed hulls that are ‘‘stretched’’ over point of water, turning the condensation control after RTDI notified them that the
the original chassis frame and original into frost. The APVs’ lack of a defrosting subject noncompliance existed.
vehicle components that were replaced system similarly does not present a
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120:
with modern equipment. RTDI safety concern. The APVs are only delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.95 and
manufactured the stretch APVs until operated on a seasonal basis and not 501.8.
2005, when RTDI introduced its during the winter months in any
‘‘Truck’’ APVs. The truck APVs are location where the vehicles provide Jeffrey M. Giuseppe,
based on military cargo vehicles. RTDI tours. The APVs, therefore, are not Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
has not manufactured any vehicles since operated during or exposed to weather [FR Doc. 2017–17325 Filed 8–15–17; 8:45 am]
2014. conditions that would expose the BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
RTDI described the subject vehicles to frost or create the need to
noncompliance and stated its belief that defrost the windshields. As above, the
the noncompliance is inconsequential operator also has the ability to push DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
as it relates to motor vehicle safety. down the center windshield or use the
In support of its petition, RTDI windshield wipers to increase visibility National Highway Traffic Safety
submitted the following reasoning: in the unlikely event of frost. Administration
1. FMVSS No. 103 specifies that 3. From its inception, the Safety Act [Docket No. NHTSA–2017–0038; Notice 1]
‘‘[e]ach vehicle shall have a windshield has included a provision recognizing
defrosting and defogging system.’’ 49 that some noncompliances may pose Ride the Ducks International, LLC,
CFR 571.103, S4(a), S4.1. The purpose little or no actual safety risk. The Safety Receipt of Petition for Decision of
of FMVSS No. 103 is to establish Act exempts manufacturers from their Inconsequential Noncompliance
minimum performance requirements for statutory obligation to provide notice
vehicle windshield defrosting and and remedy upon a determination by AGENCY: National Highway Traffic
defogging systems in order to ensure NHTSA that a noncompliance is Safety Administration (NHTSA),
that the vehicle operator is able to inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Department of Transportation (DOT).
sufficiently see through the windshield. See 49 U.S.C. 30118(d). In applying this ACTION: Receipt of petition.
The APVs have features that are recognition to particular fact situations,
designed to achieve the same purpose as the agency considers whether the SUMMARY: Ride the Ducks International,
the standard. The APVs’ ‘‘open-air’’ noncompliance gives rise to ‘‘a LLC (RTDI), has determined that certain
design precludes fog from building up significantly greater risk than . . . in a model year (MY) 1996–2014 Ride the
on the windshield. Fog buildup on the compliant vehicle.’’ 69 FR 19897, 19900 Ducks International Stretch Amphibious
interior or exterior of a motor vehicle (April 14, 2000). As described above, passenger vehicles (APVs) do not fully
windshield occurs when water the specialized design of the APVs and comply with Federal Motor Vehicle
condenses on the windshield. For water the vehicles’ pattern of use does not Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 104,
to condense on a windshield, the air expose the vehicles to conditions that Windshield Wiping and Washing
next to the windshield must be humid could create an increased safety risk Systems. RTDI filed a noncompliance
and the air’s dew point—the when compared to a vehicle that has a information report dated March 15,
temperature to which air must be cooled windshield defrosting and defogging 2017. RTDI also petitioned NHTSA on
to become saturated with water vapor— system installed. April 12, 2017, for a decision that the
must be higher than the windshield’s RTDI concluded by expressing the subject noncompliance is
temperature. In other words, humid and belief that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor
warm air must surround a cool inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
windshield. Because of its open-air vehicle safety, and that its petition to be DATES: The closing date for comments
design, the APVs will not encounter any exempted from providing notification of on the petition is September 15, 2017.
of the physical conditions that create fog the noncompliance, as required by 49 ADDRESSES: Interested persons are
buildup on the windshield. The APVs U.S.C. 30118, and a remedy for the invited to submit written data, views,
do not have solid glass windows in the noncompliance, as required by 49 and arguments on this petition.
passenger compartment and the rear of U.S.C. 30120, should be granted. Comments must refer to the docket and
the vehicle is also open to the air. The NHTSA notes that the statutory notice number cited in the title of this
side panels of the driver’s compartment provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and notice and submitted by any of the
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES

are open on both sides of the 30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to following methods:
windshield and the center windshield file petitions for a determination of • Mail: Send comments by mail
can be pushed outward and opened inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to addressed to U.S. Department of
when needed. Because of the APVs’ exempt manufacturers only from the Transportation, Docket Operations, M–
design, the ambient air is able to duties found in sections 30118 and 30, West Building Ground Floor, Room
continually circulate within the interior 30120, respectively, to notify owners, W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
of the vehicle, creating no difference purchasers, and dealers of a defect or Washington, DC 20590.
between the temperature or humidity of noncompliance and to remedy the • Hand Delivery: Deliver comments
the air outside and inside the vehicle. In defect or noncompliance. Therefore, any by hand to U.S. Department of

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:33 Aug 15, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00119 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\16AUN1.SGM 16AUN1

Document Created: 2017-08-16 10:27:04
Document Modified: 2017-08-16 10:27:04

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 September 15, 2017.
FR Citation		82 FR 38992

82 FR 38992 - Ride the Ducks International, LLC, Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATIONNational Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 157 (August 16, 2017)

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration