Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 41 / Tuesday, March 3, 2015 / Notices 11521 

REPORTING BURDEN—BUY AMERICA ACT REQUIREMENTS—Continued 

Item No. Respondent universe Total annual responses 

Average 

time per 

response 

Total annual 

burden 

hours 

Totals ........................................................... n/a ................................ 12,090 .......................... n/a ................................ 11,326 

Total Estimated Annual Burden: 

40,865 hours. 

Pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 3507(a) and 5 

CFR 1320.5(b) and 1320.8(b)(3)(vi), FRA 

informs all interested parties that it may 

not conduct or sponsor, and a 

respondent is not required to respond 

to, a collection of information unless it 

displays a currently valid OMB control 

number. 

Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501–3520. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on February 25, 

2015. 

Rebecca Pennington, 

Chief Financial Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2015–04351 Filed 3–2–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2014–0078; Notice 2] 

AGC Flat Glass North America, Inc., 

Grant of Petition For Decision of 

Inconsequential Noncompliance 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Grant of petition. 

SUMMARY: AGC Flat Glass North 

America, Inc., dba AGC Automotive 

Americas Co. (AGC) has determined that 

certain glazing that it manufactured as 

replacement equipment for model year 

2003–2008 Toyota Matrix vehicles, do 

not fully comply with paragraph S5.1 of 

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 

(FMVSS) No. 205, Glazing Materials. 

AGC has filed an appropriate report 

dated May 23, 2013, pursuant to 49 CFR 

part 573, Defect and Noncompliance 

Responsibility and Reports. 

ADDRESSES: For further information on 

this decision contact Luis Figueroa, 

Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration (NHTSA), telephone 

(202) 366–5298, facsimile (202) 366– 

5930. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. AGC’s Petition: Pursuant to 49 

U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and the 

rule implementing those provisions at 

49 CFR part 556, AGC 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 AGC’s petition 

was published, with a 30-Day public 

comment period, on August 14, 2014 in 

the Federal Register (79 FR 47722). One 

comment was received from Toyota 

Motor Engineering & Manufacturing 

North America, Inc. (Toyota). To view 

the petition, comment and 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–2014– 

0078.’’ 

II. Replacement Equipment Involved: 

Affected are approximately 1,435 

replacement back windows (backlites) 

for model year 2003–2008 Toyota 

Matrix vehicles that AGC manufactured 

on February 28, 2012. The subject 

glazing is labeled ‘‘AGC Automotive, 

DOT–376 M2H5 AS2, 30B, Temperlite.’’ 

In the associated Defect and 

Noncompliance Report that AGC 

submitted to NHTSA pursuant to 49 

CFR part 573, AGC indicated that, as of 

May 23, 2014, approximately 941 of the 

affected 1,435 backlites have already 

been removed from the stream of 

commerce, leaving 494 of the backlites 

subject to notification and recall. 

III. Noncompliance: AGC explains 

that the noncompliance is that the 

affected glazing does not fully comply 

with Paragraph S5.1 of FMVSS No. 205 

because some portions of the glass 

located in the wing area of the affected 

backlites may not fragment into pieces 

that are small enough to meet the 

standard set forth in Section 5.7 of ANSI 

Z26.1–1996 (fragment must weigh less 

than 4.25 g). 

IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S5.1 of 

FMVSS No. 205 incorporates by 

reference ANSI Z26.1–1996 and other 

industry standards. Specifically, Section 

S5.7 (Fracture Test) of ANSI Z26.1–1996 

requires that no individual fragment free 

of cracks and obtained within 3 minutes 

subsequent to testing shall weigh more 

than 4.25 g (0.15 oz.). 

V. Summary of AGC’s Analyses: AGC 

stated its belief that the noncompliance 

exhibited by some glass fragments 

breaking into pieces that weighing more 

than 4.25 g does not create a risk to 

motor vehicle safety for the following 

reasons: 

1. AGC testing demonstrates that the 

noncompliant fragments have no 

adverse impact on the characteristics of 

the glass performing as tempered glass. 

2. The design of the 2003–2008 

Toyota Matrix leaves it unlikely to cause 

any safety risks to any vehicle occupant 

if the ARG backlite breaks. 

3. AGC’s destructive testing 

confirmed all noncompliant fragments 

do not impact the safety of the vehicle 

or its occupants. 

AGC stated that while it recognizes 

that its tests were static and that the 

actual results in a crash might be 

somewhat different. For example, AGC 

stated its belief that in a rear or partial 

rear collision, if the glass breaks, most 

of that glass will fall and remain in the 

general area of the breakage since the 

remainder of the vehicle will be 

propelled forward in the later phases of 

the crash. This makes it even less likely 

that any glass will enter or be propelled 

forward enough to reach the passenger 

compartment of a vehicle. ARG expects 

that the subject backlites will react no 

differently. 

Refer to AGC’s petition for more 

detailed descriptions of the data and 

analyses that it provided in support of 

its reasoning. 

AGC has additionally informed 

NHTSA that it has corrected the 

noncompliance so that all future 

production of the subject glazing will 

fully comply with FMVSS No. 205. 

In summation, AGC believes that the 

described noncompliance of the subject 

glazing is inconsequential to motor 

vehicle safety, and that its petition, to 

exempt AGC 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 Decision 

NHTSA Analysis: FMVSS No. 205 

specifies labeling and performance 

requirements for automotive glazing. As 

related to the subject noncompliance, 

FMVSS No. 205 incorporates ANSI 

Z26.1 (1996) and other industry 

standards by reference (S.5.1). 

Paragraph 4.1 of ANSI Z26.1 (1996) 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

11522 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 41 / Tuesday, March 3, 2015 / Notices 

specifies the grouping of tests applicable 

to each item of glazing. The groupings 

are also summarized in Table I. 

Fracture, Test No. 7 (par. 5.7), is part of 

a grouping of tests specified for item of 

glazing 2 (AS–2). The purpose of the 

fracture test is to ensure that resulting 

fragments are light enough to minimize 

risk of injury after a glazing fracture. Six 

production glazing items must be tested 

(paragraph 3.2.1(3) of ANSI Z26.1 

(1996)) and upon fracture no individual 

piece is to weigh more than 4.25 g 

(paragraph 5.7.4 of ANSI Z26.1 (1996)). 

In the subject petition AGC states that 

it was alerted to a possible 

noncompliance by a customer 

concerning replacement backlites that it 

manufactured for 2003–2008 Toyota 

Matrix vehicles. In response, AGC 

conducted fracture testing in accordance 

with paragraph 5.7 of ANSI Z26.1 (1996) 

and other testing. The fracture testing 

produced fragments weighting over the 

maximum allowed 4.25 g. 

AGC stated its belief that the backlites 

‘‘broke like tempered safety glass and 

exhibited all the characteristics of safety 

glazing material required in ANSI 

Z26.1.’’ The fact that there were 

fragments that weigh over the required 

4.25 g and some fragments weighing 

over 10 g contradicts AGC’s statement. 

A variation in the size of the fragmented 

material points to tempering that is not 

completely consistent with the intent of 

Test No. 7, ‘‘verify that the fragments 

produced by fracture of safety glazing 

materials are such as to minimize risk 

of injury.’’ As stated in ANSI Z26.1 this 

minimization of risk is afforded by 

fragments weighing 4.25 g or less. 

AGC also explains that the failures are 

constrained to the winged side edges of 

the backlites and that 90% of the glass 

meets the 4.25 g requirement. In 

addition, AGC claims that since 

‘‘virtually all’’ of the black ceramic 

painted portion of the winged side 

edges is covered by the door frame and 

on the exterior of the car this portion of 

the backlite curves out towards the sides 

of the vehicle, and that the chances of 

passengers being injured by broken glass 

during a crash are small. 

NHTSA also reviewed Toyota’s 

comment that it submitted to the docket 

in response to the publication of the 

notice of petition. In summary, Toyota 

states that it does not believe that the 

noncompliance poses an unreasonable 

risk to safety due to the small number 

of vehicles with the noncompliant 

glazing installed and because 90% of 

each backlite complies with the fracture 

test requirements. 

The agency does not agree with 

Toyota’s reasoning. The purpose of 

FMVSS No. 205 is to ‘‘reduce injuries’’ 

without regard to the number of 

vehicles involved. However, AGC has 

shown that the noncompliance is 

limited to the winged black ceramic area 

of the backlite. In the vehicle’s interior 

this area sits on top of the frame and is 

not exposed to passengers, and in the 

outside it faces away from the vehicle. 

Therefore, NHTSA concludes that in 

this specific case, due to the location of 

the noncompliant winged section of the 

backlite in conjunction with the shape 

of the subject vehicle, there is a low 

probability that fragments would be 

propelled to the inside of the vehicle in 

the event of a glazing fracture. 

NHTSA Decision: In consideration of 

the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that 

AGC has met its burden of persuasion 

that the subject FMVSS No. 205 

noncompliance is inconsequential to 

motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, 

AGC’s petition is hereby granted and 

AGC is exempted from the obligation of 

providing notification of, and a remedy 

for, that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 

30118 and 30120. 

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, this 

decision only applies to the subject 

noncompliant glazing that AGC no 

longer controlled at the time it 

determined that the noncompliance 

existed. However, the granting of 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 glazing under their 

control after AGC 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, 

Acting Director, Office of Vehicle Safety 

Compliance. 

[FR Doc. 2015–04311 Filed 3–2–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Office of Foreign Assets Control 

Additional Designations, Foreign 

Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act 

AGENCY: Office of Foreign Assets 

Control, Treasury. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of the 

Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets 

Control (OFAC) is publishing the names 

of five individuals and 14 entities 

whose property and interests in 

property have been blocked pursuant to 

the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin 

Designation Act (Kingpin Act) (21 

U.S.C. 1901–1908, 8 U.S.C. 1182). 

DATES: The designation by the Director 

of OFAC of the five individuals and 14 

entities identified in this notice 

pursuant to section 805(b) of the 

Kingpin Act is effective on February 24, 

2015. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Assistant Director, Sanctions 

Compliance & Evaluation, Office of 

Foreign Assets Control, U.S. Department 

of the Treasury, Washington, DC 20220, 

Tel: (202) 622–2490. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Electronic and Facsimile Availability 

This document and additional 

information concerning OFAC are 

available on OFAC’s Web site at http:// 

www.treasury.gov/ofac or via facsimile 

through a 24-hour fax-on-demand 

service at (202) 622–0077. 

Background 

The Kingpin Act became law on 

December 3, 1999. The Kingpin Act 

establishes a program targeting the 

activities of significant foreign narcotics 

traffickers and their organizations on a 

worldwide basis. It provides a statutory 

framework for the imposition of 

sanctions against significant foreign 

narcotics traffickers and their 

organizations on a worldwide basis, 

with the objective of denying their 

businesses and agents access to the U.S. 

financial system and the benefits of 

trade and transactions involving U.S. 

companies and individuals. 

The Kingpin Act blocks all property 

and interests in property, subject to U.S. 

jurisdiction, owned or controlled by 

significant foreign narcotics traffickers 

as identified by the President. In 

addition, the Secretary of the Treasury, 

in consultation with the Attorney 

General, the Director of the Central 

Intelligence Agency, the Director of the 

Federal Bureau of Investigation, the 

Administrator of the Drug Enforcement 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES