[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 164 (Thursday, August 25, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49973-49974]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-16862]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA 2005-21675; Notice 2]


General Motors Corporation, Grant of Petition for Decision of 
Inconsequential Noncompliance

    General Motors Corporation (General Motors) has determined that 
certain model year 2005 vehicles that it produced do not comply with S6 
of 49 CFR 571.205, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 
205, ``Glazing materials.'' Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 
30120(h), General Motors has petitioned for a determination that this 
noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety and has filed 
an appropriate report pursuant to 49 CFR Part 573, ``Defect and 
Noncompliance Reports.'' Notice of receipt of a petition was published, 
with a 30-day comment period, on June 30, 2005, in the Federal Register 
(70 FR 37893). NHTSA received no comments.
    Affected are a total of approximately 7,326 model year 2005 
Chevrolet Corvette coupes equipped with removable transparent Targa 
roofs. S6, certification and marking, of FMVSS No. 205 and the 
referenced Section 7 of ANSI/SAE Z26.1-1996 specify that the required 
identification and certification markings must be located on the 
glazing. On the subject vehicles, the required markings are present, 
but they are located on the frame of the Targa roof assembly, rather 
than on the glazing portion of the roof assembly.
    General Motors believes that the noncompliance is inconsequential 
to motor vehicle safety and that no corrective action is warranted. The 
petitioner states:

--The subject glazing meets all applicable performance requirements 
of FMVSS No. 205. There is no safety performance implication 
associated with this technical noncompliance.
--The certifications markings required by FMVSS No. 205 are provided 
on the frame of the subject Corvette Targa roof assemblies. This 
noncompliance relates only to the location of the required markings, 
not to their presence.
--Once assembled, the Targa roof frame and glazing are indivisible. 
For in-service repair, the roof assembly (glazing mounted in frame) 
is serviced as a unit. There is no service provision to replace only 
the frame or only the glazing. As a practical matter, therefore, 
marking the frame is functionally equivalent to marking the glazing.
--Given the small volume of service parts that will be needed and 
the high investment cost required to manufacture the subject 
Corvette roof assemblies, it is probable that all service parts will 
be manufactured by the same supplier as the original equipment 
parts. Accordingly, there is virtually no chance of uncertainty 
about the manufacturer of the subject parts, should a need to 
identify the manufacturer arise in the future.
--GM is not aware of any crashes, injuries, customer complaints or 
field reports associated with this condition.

    General Motors also states that NHTSA has previously granted 
inconsequential noncompliance petitions involving the omission of FMVSS 
No. 205 markings and provides the following examples: Western Star 
Trucks (63 FR 66232, 12/1/1998), Ford Motor Company (64 FR 70116, 12/
15/1999), Toyota Motor Corporation (68 FR 10307, 3/4/2003), and 
Freightliner LLC (68 FR 65991, 11/24/2003).
    NHTSA agrees with General Motors that the noncompliance is 
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. The glazing meets all 
applicable performance requirements of FMVSS No. 205. The 
certifications markings required by FMVSS No. 205 are provided on the 
frame of the subject Corvette Targa roof assemblies. The roof frame and 
glazing are indivisible, and for in-service repair, the roof assembly 
(glazing mounted in frame) is serviced

[[Page 49974]]

as a unit. Therefore, there should not be any problem obtaining the 
appropriate replacement glazing.
    General Motors is correct that the four petitions it cited, from 
Western Star Trucks, Ford Motor Company, Toyota Motor Corporation, and 
Freightliner LLC, were granted by NHTSA based on this rationale. 
General Motors has corrected the problem.
    In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that the 
petitioner has met its burden of persuasion that the noncompliance 
described is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, 
General Motors's petition is granted and the petitioner is exempted 
from the obligation of providing notification of, and a remedy for, the 
noncompliance.

    Authority: (49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120; delegations of authority at 
CFR 1.50 and 501.8)

    Issued on: August 19, 2005.
Ronald L. Medford,
Senior Associate Administrator for Vehicle Safety.
[FR Doc. 05-16862 Filed 8-24-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P