[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 52 (Thursday, March 17, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-6163]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: March 17, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. 94-3; Notice 2]
Ford Motor Company; Grant of Petition for Determination of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
Ford Motor Company (Ford) of Dearborn, MI, determined that some of
its replacement windshields failed to comply with the labeling
requirements of 49 CFR 571.205, Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 205,
``Glazing Materials,'' and filed an appropriate report pursuant to 49
CFR part 573, ``Defect and Noncompliance Reports.'' Ford also
petitioned to be exempted from the notification and remedy requirements
of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1381 et
seq.) on the basis that the noncompliance is inconsequential as it
relates to motor vehicle safety.
Notice of receipt of the petition was published on January 13,
1994, and an opportunity afforded for comment (59 FR 1989).
Standard No. 205, which incorporates, by reference, the American
National Standards Institute's ``Safety Code for Safety Glazing
Materials for Glazing Motor Vehicles Operating on Land Highways'' Z-
26.1-1977, January 26, 1977, as supplemented by Z26.1a, July 3, 1980
(ANS Z26.1), specifies that, with certain exceptions, glazing materials
for use in motor vehicles shall conform with Paragraphs S5,
``Requirements,'' S6, ``Certification and Marking,'' and ANS Z26.1.6,
``Marking of Safety Glazing Materials.'' Specifically, section 6 of
ANSI Z26.1 states ``[G]lazing materials, which in a single sheet of
material are intentionally made with an area having a luminous
transmittance of not less than 70 percent (Test No. 2), adjoining an
area that has less than 70 percent luminous transmittance, shall be
permanently marked at the edge of the sheet to show the limits of the
area that is intended to comply with Test No. 2. The markings shall be
AS1 or AS2 etc. * * *''
Approximately 98,000 W1099V windshields manufactured from June 1992
through October 1993 and 14,800 W911V windshields manufactured from
August 1992 to June 1993 are missing the AS1 marking at the
bottom edge of the shade band. The subject windshields are manufactured
as replacements for windshields in 1980 through 1994 model year Ford F-
Series and Bronco vehicles.
Ford supported its petition for inconsequential noncompliance with
the following:
The affected windshields were produced by a Ford supplier
without AS1 markings at the bottom edge of the shade band,
but meet all other marking and performance requirements of Standard
No. 205 and ANSI Z26.1 including the appropriate AS1 marking in the
area of the trademark identifying the type of construction of the
glazing material.
[Ford believes that t]he omission of the marking presents no
risk of accident or injury. Consequently in Ford's judgment, the
omission is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
The stated purposes of [Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard] FMVSS
No. 205 are to reduce injuries resulting from impact to glazing
surfaces, to ensure a necessary degree of transparency in motor
vehicle windows for driver visibility, and to minimize the
possibility of occupants being thrown through the vehicle windows in
collisions. As previously noted, the affected windshields fully
comply with the performance requirements of FMVSS No. 205 and
although missing the AS1 marking at the bottom of the shade
band, they do have the correct AS1 marking to indicate the type of
construction of the glazing material. Because all performance
requirements are met, the omission of the marking at the shade band
has no effect upon the ability of the glazing to perform in the
manner intended by the standard. Ford is not aware of any
complaints, accidents, or injuries related to this condition.
No comments were received on the petition.
The noncompliance reported does not affect the performance
characteristics of the glazing, and, hence, the noncompliance has no
direct effect upon motor vehicle safety. Although the markings have
been omitted in one area of the windshield, the correct designation,
AS1, appears in the area of the trademark identifying the type of
construction of the glazing material. Thus, the omission at the shade
band will not prevent correct identification of the glazing by
personnel conducting periodic motor vehicle inspections, or when it is
necessary to replace the windshield. There is no need in either
instance for knowledge of where the area of 70 percent or greater light
transmittance begins.
In consideration of the foregoing, it is hereby found that
petitioner has met its burden of persuasion that the noncompliance
herein described is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle
safety, and its petition is granted.
(15 U.S.C. 1417; delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.50 and 49 CFR
501.8)
Issued on: March 11, 1994.
Barry Felrice,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 94-6163 Filed 3-16-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-M
