3382 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 14 / Friday, January 21, 2022 / Notices 

sale, or introduction or delivery for 

introduction into interstate commerce of 

the noncompliant vehicles under their 

control after Volkswagen 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) 

Otto G. Matheke, III, 

Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance. 

[FR Doc. 2022–01128 Filed 1–20–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2019–0071; Notice 2] 

Toyota Motor 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: Toyota Motor North America, 

Inc. (Toyota) has determined that 

certain Model Year (MY) 2013–2019 

Toyota RAV4 and MY 2014–2019 

Toyota Highlander/Highlander HV 

motor vehicles do not fully comply with 

S4 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety 

Standard (FMVSS) No. 302, 

Flammability of Interior Materials. 

Toyota filed a noncompliance report 

dated June 19, 2019, and subsequently 

petitioned NHTSA on July 12, 2019, and 

later amended that petition on August 

13, 2019, for a decision that the subject 

noncompliance is inconsequential as it 

relates to motor vehicle safety. This 

notice announces the grant of Toyota’s 

petition. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kelley Adams-Campos, Safety 

Compliance Engineer, Office of Vehicle 

Safety Compliance, NHTSA, 202–366– 

7479, kelley.adamscampos@dot.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Overview 

Toyota has determined that certain 

MY 2013–2019 Toyota RAV4 and 

certain Toyota Highlander/Highlander 

HV motor vehicles do not fully comply 

with paragraph S4 of FMVSS No. 302, 

Flammability of Interior Materials. 

Toyota filed a noncompliance report 

dated June 19, 2019, pursuant to 49 CFR 

part 573, Defect and Noncompliance 

Responsibility and Reports, and 

subsequently petitioned NHTSA on July 

12, 2019, and later amended its petition 

on August 13, 2019, for an exemption 

from the notification and remedy 

requirement of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on 

the basis that this noncompliance is 

inconsequential as it relates to motor 

vehicle safety. See 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) 

and 30120(h), and 49 CFR part 556, 

Exemption for Inconsequential Defect or 

Noncompliance. 

Notice of receipt of Toyota’s petition 

was published with a 30-day public 

comment period, on December 3, 2019, 

in the Federal Register (84 FR 66276). 

No comments were received. To view 

the petition and all supporting 

documents log onto the Federal Docket 

Management System (FDMS) website at 

https://www.regulations.gov/. Then 

follow the online search instructions to 

locate docket number ‘‘NHTSA–2019– 

0071.’’ 

II. Vehicles Involved 

Approximately 2,144,217 MY 2013– 

2019 Toyota RAV4 and MY 2014–2019 

Toyota Highlander/Highlander HV 

motor vehicles manufactured between 

December 21, 2012, and March 28, 2019, 

are potentially involved. 

III. Noncompliance 

Toyota explains that the 

noncompliance relates to certain hook 

and loop fasteners that attach the floor 

carpet to the underlying padding. The 

loop side of the fastener is made from 

material that may not comply, as 

required, with paragraph S4.1 of FMVSS 

No. 302. Specifically, when tested 

separately from the floor carpet, the 

loop side of the fastener in the subject 

vehicles does not meet the burn rate 

requirements of paragraph S4.3. 

IV. Rule Requirements 

Paragraphs S4.1 through S4.3(b) of 

FMVSS No. 302 include the 

requirements relevant to this petition: 

S4.1 The portions described in S4.2 of the 

following components of vehicle occupant 

compartments shall meet the requirements of 

S4.3: Seat cushions, seat backs, seat belts, 

headlining, convertible tops, armrests, all 

trim panels including door, front, rear, and 

side panels, compartment shelves, head 

restraints, floor coverings, sun visors, 

curtains, shades, wheel housing covers, 

engine compartment covers, mattress covers, 

and any other interior materials, including 

padding and crash-deployed elements, that 

are designed to absorb energy on contact by 

occupants in the event of a crash. 

S4.2.1 Any material that does not adhere 

to other material(s) at every point of contact 

shall meet the requirements of S4.3. 

Paragraph S4.3(a) of FMVSS No. 302 

requires that material described in S4.1 

and S4.2 shall not burn, nor transmit a 

flame front across its surface, at a rate 

of more than 102 mm per minute. The 

requirement concerning the 

transmission of a flame front shall not 

apply to a surface created by cutting a 

test specimen for purposes of testing 

pursuant to S5. 

V. Summary of Toyota’s Petition 

The following views and arguments 

presented in this section (V. Summary 

of Toyota’s Petition), are the views and 

arguments provided by Toyota. 

Toyota 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, Toyota submitted 

the following: 

1. During pre-production evaluations of the 

new model Highlander (MY 2020) the 

supplier found that the loop fasteners might 

not meet the burn rate requirement of FMVSS 

No. 302. These same fasteners are used on 

the subject vehicles; they are attached to the 

underside of the carpet near the front 

footwell. Toyota conducted testing of the 

loop side of the fastener, in accordance with 

FMVSS No. 302; when tested separately from 

the carpet, the burn rate of the loop side of 

the fastener was 133 mm/min (worst of ten 

tests). The loop fastener material did not 

have flame-retardant coating, and therefore 

the burn rate requirement specified on the 

drawing was not met. 

2. The loop fastener material complies with 

FMVSS No. 302 when tested as a 

‘‘composite’’ as installed to the FMVSS No. 

302 compliant carpet assembly. 

3. The purpose of FMVSS No. 302 is to 

‘‘reduce the deaths and injuries to motor 

vehicle occupants caused by vehicle fires, 

especially those originating in the interior of 

the vehicle from sources such as matches or 

cigarettes.’’ The noncomplying loop fastener 

material would normally not be exposed to 

open flame or an ignition source (like 

matches or cigarettes) in its installed 

application, because it is installed beneath 

and completely covered by the carpet 

material which complies with FMVSS No. 

302. 

4. The loop fastener material is a very 

small portion of the overall mass of the soft 

material portions comprising the carpet 

assembly (i.e., 0.037% or less), and is 

significantly less in relation to the entire 

vehicle interior surface area that could 

potentially be exposed to flame. Therefore, it 

would have an insignificant adverse effect on 

the interior material burn rate and the 

potential for occupant injury due to interior 

fire. 

5. Toyota is not aware of any data 

suggesting that fires have occurred in the 

field from installation of the noncomplying 

loop fastener material. 

• Toyota says NHTSA has previously 

granted at least ten FMVSS No. 302 petitions 

for inconsequential noncompliance—one of 

which was for a vehicle’s seat heater 

assemblies, one of which was for a vehicle’s 

console armrest, one of which was for large 

truck sleeper bedding, one of which was for 

seating material, and six of which were for 

issues related to child restraints systems 

(CRS). These are: 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 14 / Friday, January 21, 2022 / Notices 3383 

1Cf. Gen. Motors Corporation; Ruling on Petition 

for Determination of Inconsequential 

Noncompliance, 69 FR 19897, 19899 (Apr. 14, 

2004) (citing prior cases where noncompliance was 

expected to be imperceptible, or nearly so, to 

vehicle occupants or approaching drivers). 

• Paccar (57 FR 45868, October 5, 1992)— 

Noncompliant tape edging surrounding 

otherwise compliant bedding materials in a 

large truck sleeper bed was deemed by the 

Agency to be inconsequential given its low 

relative volume to the otherwise complying 

surrounding material, as well as the fact the 

tape edging passed bedding industry fire 

standards. Unlike the Toyota loop fastener 

material in the subject vehicles, which is not 

exposed directly to the occupant 

compartment air space, the tape edging of the 

sleeper bed was exposed. Nonetheless, the 

Agency granted the petition on the basis that 

the noncompliant material was surrounded 

by compliant material and was of a low 

relative volume compared to the compliant 

material. 

• Fisher-Price (60 FR 41152, August 11, 

1995)—Noncompliant fabric used in CRS 

shoulder straps was deemed to be 

inconsequential by the Agency, due to factors 

which included that the margin of 

noncompliance was small; the shoulder 

straps that do not comply are a small part of 

the CRS itself and a minimal part of the 

fabric present in a vehicle’s interior; the 

absence of reports in which the 

noncompliance exists supported the 

Agency’s decision that the noncompliance is 

inconsequential. Toyota stated that the 

Toyota loop fastener material is also a small 

part of the vehicle carpet and a minimal part 

of the materials in the interior of the subject 

vehicles. 

• Century (60 FR 41148, August 11, 

1995)—Noncompliant seat covers were 

determined unlikely to pose a flammability 

risk when securely sewn to the seat (i.e., the 

‘‘normal condition’’), based on some 

flammability testing of the material as a 

composite. Unlike the Toyota loop fastener 

material in the subject vehicles, which is not 

exposed directly to the occupant 

compartment air space in the ‘‘normal 

condition,’’ the CRS covers were exposed. 

Similarly, the Toyota subject loop material 

also passes the FMVSS No. 302 requirements 

when tested as a ‘‘composite.’’ The Agency 

also noted that (as is the case with the subject 

Toyota loop material) ‘‘the absence of fires 

originating in these child restraints 

supported the Agency’s decision that the 

noncompliance does not have a 

consequential effect on safety.’’ 

• Cosco—(60 FR 41150, August 11, 

1995)—Noncompliant fabric used in CRS 

shoulder straps was deemed to be 

inconsequential by the Agency due to the 

similarity to the Fisher-Price request for 

inconsequentiality and the reasons set out in 

the notice granting Fisher Price’s appeal (see 

above). FMVSS No. 302 does not in itself 

apply to child restraint systems, but 

paragraph S4 of FMVSS No. 302 is invoked 

by reference in FMVSS No. 213; therefore, 

the child restraint petitions are relevant 

precedents. 

• Kolcraft (63 FR 24585, May 4, 1998)— 

One or more of the fitting, face, or backing 

materials of CRS seat covers were 

noncompliant. NHTSA determined the 

noncompliance to be inconsequential 

because when tested as a composite (i.e., in 

the ‘‘normal condition’’), the covers met 

FMVSS No. 302 requirements. Similarly, the 

Toyota subject loop fastener material passes 

the FMVSS No. 302 requirements when 

tested as a ‘‘composite.’’ 

• Cosco (63 FR 30809, June 5, 1998)— 

NHTSA found that the noncomplying 

fiberfill incorporated into a pillow located in 

a child restraint was inconsequential to 

safety due to the unlikelihood of exposure to 

an ignition source for various reasons: That 

the noncompliant material was encased in 

materials which complied with FMVSS No. 

302, and that the fiberfill was only a limited 

quantity of noncompliant material used in 

the CRS. Similarly, the subject Toyota loop 

fastener material also passes the FMVSS No. 

302 requirements when tested as a 

composite, is unlikely to be exposed to a 

direct ignition source, is surrounded by 

materials which comply with FMVSS No. 

302, and is only a limited quantity of 

noncompliant material in the carpet 

assembly. The Agency also noted that (as is 

the case with the subject Toyota loop 

material) ‘‘the absence of fires originating in 

these child restraints supported the Agency’s 

decision that the noncompliance does not 

have a consequential effect on safety.’’ 

• Ford (63 FR 40780, July 30, 1998)—A 

noncompliant center console armrest ‘‘plus 

pad’’ was determined by the Agency to be 

inconsequential to safety in that, because of 

its location under an exterior cover, it was 

unlikely to pose a flammability risk due to 

the unlikelihood of its exposure to an 

ignition source. The Agency was unaware of 

any occupant injuries in vehicle post-crash 

fires that were caused by burning of the 

console armrests in those vehicles. Toyota 

argued that Ford undertook ‘‘composite’’ 

testing like Toyota’s described above to 

support its petition. 

• Graco (77 FR 14055, March 8, 2012)— 

Certain noncompliant warning labels 

attached to the outside of detachable 

accessory pillows were deemed 

inconsequential by the Agency due to the 

relatively small size of the label, together 

with its proximity to other materials on the 

CRS that were treated with flame retardant 

materials, rendering the likelihood of ignition 

of the label extremely low. The subject 

Toyota loop fastener material is surrounded 

by compliant materials, is not exposed to the 

occupant compartment air space, and is a 

small part of the vehicle carpet assembly and 

a minimal part of the otherwise compliant 

materials in the interior of the subject 

vehicles. 

• Toyota (80 FR 4035, January 26, 2015)— 

Certain noncompliant front and rear seat 

back and seat cushion seat heaters were 

determined by the Agency to be 

inconsequential to safety in that the seat 

heaters were unlikely to pose a flammability 

risk. The Agency was unaware of any 

occupant injuries regarding these seat heaters 

in the subject vehicles. The seat heaters 

would not accommodate a flame rate beyond 

what is permitted by FMVSS No. 302 when 

exposed directly to an open flame in the 

installed condition (as a composite). It was 

also demonstrated that the seat heater was a 

very small portion of the overall mass of the 

seat assembly. According to Toyota, the facts 

here are similar. The subject loop fastener 

material is unlikely to be exposed to an 

ignition source in the installed condition, it 

does not accommodate a flame beyond what 

is permitted by FMVSS No. 302 when 

exposed directly to an open flame in the 

installed condition (as a composite), the loop 

material is only a very small portion of the 

overall mass of the carpet assembly, and 

there are no known field ignition events. 

• Toyota (83 FR 16433, April 16, 2018)— 

Certain noncompliant needle punch felt 

material used in the front and rear seat covers 

and rear center armrest assemblies was 

determined by the Agency to be 

inconsequential to safety. The Agency stated 

that: (1) The needle punch felt material is 

covered by other materials that do comply 

with FMVSS No. 302, thus, the needle punch 

felt material is protected from the occupant 

compartment where it could directly come 

into contact with an ignition source such as 

a match or cigarette; (2) when the needle 

punch felt material is tested as a composite 

with the FMVSS No. 302 compliant materials 

(i.e., seat cover, cover pad, foam pad, seat 

heater, carpet, and storage bin) that cover the 

punch felt material, the requirements for 

burn rate are met accordingly; and (3) the 

noncompliant material is approximately 0.32 

percent of the total mass of the soft material 

of the front seat assembly and between 0.48 

percent and 0.55 percent (less than 1 percent) 

of the total mass of the soft material of the 

rear seat assembly. Therefore, the 

noncompliant material represents an 

insignificant quantity of material compared 

to the total quantity of interior vehicle 

material. The loop fasteners in the subject 

vehicles share these same characteristics. 

Toyota concluded 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. 

VI. NHTSA’s Analysis 

NHTSA has reviewed Toyota’s 

evaluation that the subject 

noncompliance is inconsequential to 

motor vehicle safety. The burden of 

establishing the inconsequentiality of a 

failure to comply with a performance 

requirement in a standard—as opposed 

to a labeling requirement—is more 

substantial and difficult to meet. 

Accordingly, the Agency has not found 

many such noncompliances 

inconsequential.1 Potential performance 

failures of safety-critical equipment, like 

seat belts or air bags, are rarely deemed 

inconsequential. 

An important issue to consider in 

determining inconsequentiality based 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
3384 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 14 / Friday, January 21, 2022 / Notices 

2See Gen. Motors, LLC; Grant of Petition for 

Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 78 FR 

35355 (June 12, 2013) (finding noncompliance had 

no effect on occupant safety because it had no effect 

on the proper operation of the occupant 

classification system and the correct deployment of 

an air bag); Osram Sylvania Prods. Inc.; Grant of 

Petition for Decision of Inconsequential 

Noncompliance, 78 FR 46000 (July 30, 2013) 

(finding occupant using noncompliant light source 

would not be exposed to significantly greater risk 

than occupant using similar compliant light 

source). 

3 Morgan 3 Wheeler Limited; Denial of Petition for 

Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 81 FR 

21663, 21666 (Apr. 12, 2016). 

4United States v. Gen. Motors Corp., 565 F.2d 

754, 759 (D.C. Cir. 1977) (finding defect poses an 

unreasonable risk when it ‘‘results in hazards as 

potentially dangerous as sudden engine fire, and 

where there is no dispute that at least some such 

hazards, in this case fires, can definitely be 

expected to occur in the future’’). 

upon NHTSA’s prior decisions on 

noncompliance issues is the safety risk 

to individuals who experience the type 

of event against which the recall would 

otherwise protect.2 NHTSA also does 

not consider the absence of complaints 

or injuries to show that the issue is 

inconsequential to safety. ‘‘Most 

importantly, the absence of a complaint 

does not mean there have not been any 

safety issues, nor does it mean that there 

will not be safety issues in the future.’’ 3

‘‘[T]he fact that in past reported cases 

good luck and swift reaction have 

prevented many serious injuries does 

not mean that good luck will continue 

to work.’’ 4

NHTSA considered the following 

factors in evaluating this petition: 

First, according to the data provided by 

Toyota, the noncompliant material has a 

mass that is insignificant when compared to 

the overall mass of the carpet assembly. The 

petitioner stated that the mass of the loop 

fastener constitutes approximately 0.037 

percent or less of the soft material portions 

of the carpet assembly. However, while 

Toyota argues that the noncompliant material 

would not significantly fuel a fire, should it 

become exposed, the relative measure, i.e., 

percentage, of a material characteristic, i.e., 

mass, surface area, thickness, etc. without 

consideration of other factors, e.g. the 

surrounding of the noncompliant material 

with complying materials, does not alone 

mean such a material would not significantly 

fuel a fire upon exposure to an ignition 

source. 

Second, the loop fastener material in the 

subject vehicles is covered by the carpet 

material which complies with FMVSS No. 

302, thus, the loop fastener material is 

protected from contact with an ignition 

source originating from the occupant space. 

Third, the data submitted by Toyota shows 

that, when tested as a single unit, the loop 

fasteners along with the carpet comply with 

FMVSS No. 302. 

Toyota also stated that NHTSA has 

granted previous petitions whose facts 

align with those at issue in the instant 

case. These include a Paccar petition (57 

FR 45868, October 5, 1992), a Fischer 

Price (60 FR 41152, August 11, 1995) 

petition, a Century petition, (60 FR 

41148, August 11, 1995), Kolcraft (63 FR 

24585, May 4, 1998), Cosco petition (60 

FR 41150, August 11, 1995) and a 

Toyota petition (80 FR 4035, January 26, 

2015) where the non-compliant material 

represented a small percentage of the 

interior fabric. As NHTSA states 

previously in this section, the relative 

measure, i.e., percentage, of a material 

characteristic, i.e., mass, surface area, 

thickness, etc. without consideration of 

other factors does not alone mean such 

a material would not significantly fuel 

a fire upon exposure to an ignition 

source. Toyota also offered a past grant 

where a combination of compliant and 

non-compliant fabric met FMVSS No. 

302 when tested as a single unit. 

(Kolcraft (63 FR 24585, May 4, 1998)). 

Finally, Toyota cited several grants 

where NHTSA determined that 

noncompliant fabric located where it 

would not encounter an ignition source 

was inconsequential to safety. These 

include two Cosco petitions, (63 FR 

30809, (June 5, 1998) and 60 FR 41150 

(August 11, 1995), two Toyota petitions 

(83 FR 16433, (April 16, 2018) and (80 

FR 4035, January 26, 2015)) and a Ford 

petition (63 FR 40780, (July 30, 1998)). 

As noted above, NHTSA evaluates each 

petition on its individual facts and does 

not consider itself to be bound by these 

earlier grants. Nonetheless, NHTSA has 

evaluated the subject petition and has 

made a determination in a similar 

fashion. 

VII. NHTSA’s Decision 

NHTSA finds that Toyota has met its 

burden of persuasion of demonstrating 

that the noncompliant small loop 

fasteners sewn into the carpet at issue 

in this case do not present a risk to 

safety. The noncompliant fabric present 

here must be separated from the carpet 

to be deemed noncompliant as the 

carpet and loop patch together meet the 

standard. The loop fasteners also 

constitute a small percentage of the 

fabric area and are located where they 

are not likely to encounter an ignition 

source. Accordingly, Toyota’s petition is 

hereby granted. Toyota is consequently 

exempted from the obligation of 

providing notification of, and a free 

remedy for, the 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 

vehicles that Toyota 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 vehicles under their 

control after Toyota 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) 

Otto G. Matheke, III, 

Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance. 

[FR Doc. 2022–01132 Filed 1–20–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities; Proposed Collection; 

Comment Request; Equal Employment 

Opportunity Complaint Forms 

AGENCY: Departmental Offices, U.S. 

Department of the Treasury. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Department of the 

Treasury, as part of its continuing effort 

to reduce paperwork and respondent 

burden, invites the general public and 

other federal agencies to comment on 

the proposed information collections 

listed below, in accordance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before March 22, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments regarding 

the burden estimate, or any other aspect 

of the information collection, including 

suggestions for reducing the burden, by 

the following method: 

• Federal E-rulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Refer to Docket Number TREAS–DO– 

2022–0003 and the specific Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) control 

number 1505–0262. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

questions related to these programs, 

please contact Guizelous Molock by 

emailing pra@treasury.gov, or calling 

(202) 923–0498. Additionally, you can 

view the information collection requests 

at www.reginfo.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Title: Equal Employment Opportunity 

Compliant Forms. 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1