General Motors, LLC, Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 65054-65056 [2010-26426]

Download as PDF 65054 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices noncompliance. Mazda then concluded that the vehicles equipped with the affected headlamps failed to comply with paragraph S7.2(b) of FMVSS No. 108. Mazda stated the following reasons why they believe the noncompliance is inconsequential to vehicle safety and does not present a risk to motor vehicle safety: jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES The affected headlamps fulfill all the relevant performance requirements of FMVSS No. 108, except that trade name and/ or trademark of the manufacturer or importer is missing on the lens. However, the affected headlamps have the trademark of the headlamp manufacturer on the rim of the headlamp housing. Thus, Mazda contends that this marking on the rim is visible with the vehicle’s front hood open and states that it believes that the rim marking could assist the easy identification of the headlamp manufacturer by the users of the vehicles. Mazda has not received any complaints or claims related to the noncompliance nor is it aware of any known reports of accidents or injuries attributed to the noncompliance. In summary, Mazda states that it believes the noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety because the affected headlamps fulfill all other relevant requirements of FMVSS No. 108. The company also states that it has taken steps to correct the noncompliance in future production. Supported by the above stated reasons, Mazda believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety, and that its petition, to exempt it 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 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. Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments on this petition. Comments must refer to the docket and notice number cited at the beginning of this notice and be submitted by any of the following methods: a. 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. VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 b. By hand delivery 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 am to 5 pm except Federal Holidays. c. 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 1–202– 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 your comments were received, please enclose a stamped, selfaddressed postcard with the comments. Note that all comments received will be posted without change to https:// www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. Documents submitted to a docket may be viewed by anyone at the address and times given above. The documents may also be viewed on the Internet at http: //www.regulations.gov by following the online instructions for accessing the dockets. DOT’s complete Privacy Act Statement is available for review in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477–78). The petition, supporting materials, and all comments received before the close of business on the closing date indicated below will be filed and will be considered. All comments and supporting materials received after the closing date will also be filed and will be considered to the extent possible. When the petition is granted or denied, notice of the decision will be published in the Federal Register pursuant to the authority indicated below. Comment Closing Date: November 22, 2010. Authority: (49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: Delegations of authority at CFR 1.50 and 501.8) Issued on: October 15, 2010. Claude H. Harris, Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance. [FR Doc. 2010–26425 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–59–P PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [Docket No. NHTSA–2010–0137; Notice 1] General Motors, LLC, Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance General Motors, LLC (GM),1 has determined that certain 2008 through 2010 Model Year Chevrolet Malibu passenger cars equipped with automatic transmissions and manufactured between May 2007 through March 2010 do not fully meet the requirements of paragraph S3.1.4.1 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 102, Transmission Shift Position Sequence, Starter Interlock, and Transmission Braking Effect. GM filed an appropriate report pursuant to 49 CFR part 573 Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports, dated March 30, 2010. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) (see implementing rule at 49 CFR part 556), GM has petitioned 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. This notice of receipt of GM’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. A total of 462,227 2 model year 2008, 2009 and 2010 Chevrolet Malibu passenger cars manufactured during the period May 2007 through March 2010 are potentially affected by the subject noncompliance. Paragraph S3.1.4.1 of FMVSS No. 102 requires: Except as specified in S3.1.4.3, if the transmission shift position sequence includes a park position, identification of shift positions, including the positions in relation to each other and the position selected, shall be displayed in view of the driver whenever any of the following conditions exist: (a) The ignition is in a position where the transmission can be shifted; or 1 General Motors, LLC (GM) is a Michigan corporation that manufactures motor vehicles. 2 GM’s petition, which was filed under 49 CFR part 556, requests an agency decision to exempt GM from the notification and recall responsibilities of 49 CFR part 573 for as many as 462,227 of the affected vehicles. However, the agency cannot relieve GM’s 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 GM recognized that the subject noncompliance existed. Those vehicles must be brought into conformance, exported, or destroyed. E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices (b) The transmission is not in park. jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES GM described the noncompliance as the absence of the required transmission shift position display for a certain ignition key cylinder position. GM explained that while the key is in the ignition there is a narrow ignition key cylinder position between the ‘‘ACC’’ and ‘‘OFF’’ positions within which the transmission shift lever can be moved and the indicator light that illuminates the transmission shift position display is inoperative. The Company added that this noncompliance only occurs when the engine is not running. GM additionally stated that in all other ignition activation and operation positions, all of the subject vehicles comply with paragraph S3.1.4.1 of FMVSS No. 102. GM argued its belief that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety because: As NHTSA recognized in proposing the standard (49 FR 32409–32411 (August 25, 1988)), the purpose of the display requirement for PRNDM information is to ‘‘provide the driver with transmission position information for the vehicle conditions where such information can reduce the likelihood of shifting errors.’’ Thus, in all but the rarest circumstances, the primary function of the PRNDM display is to inform the driver of gear selection and relative position of the gears while the engine is running. All of the subject vehicles display PRNDM information whenever the ignition switch is in the ‘‘On’’ or ‘‘Run’’ position. With the exception of the absence of the required transmission shift position display for one narrow ignition key cylinder position, the system meets all other applicable requirements of FMVSS No. 102. GM has no record of any incidents, injuries, owner complaints or field reports related to this noncompliance. GM added that if a customer reports this problem to them and requests a remedy, the Company will replace the ignition switch with a conforming component. Since this noncompliance only occurs during an atypical operation, the noncompliance is not likely to occur under normal driving conditions. The only circumstance where the noncompliance would appear is if the ignition switch is in the intermediary position between the ‘‘OFF’’ and ‘‘ACC’’ detent positions prior to the interlock. In order for this condition to be present, a driver would have to first move the transmission control to ‘‘PARK.’’ In such a case, there are two possible scenarios for the driver: 1) leaving the vehicle with the key in the ignition or 2) remaining in the vehicle. GM provides the following analysis for both scenarios: 1. The driver exits the vehicle while leaving the key in the ignition: If the driver attempted to remove the key before exiting the vehicle, the key would not be capable of removal. The doors may also still be locked if they are in the factory default setting to unlock in the ‘‘PARK’’ position. VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 As required by S5.1.3 of FMVSS 114, GM provides an audible warning to the driver that activates whenever the key has been left in the ignition locking system and the driver’s door is opened. The Owner’s Manual supplied with the vehicle provides specific warnings and instructions on ensuring the vehicle is in ‘‘PARK’’ and the key is removed before exiting the vehicle. 2. The driver remains in the vehicle: If the driver remains in the vehicle, he or she would likely either restart the vehicle’s engine or attempt to remove the key to exit the vehicle. If the driver attempts to restart the engine, paragraph S3.1.3 of FMVSS No. 102 requires that the starter be inoperative whenever the vehicle’s transmission shift position is in a forward or reverse drive position. The driver rotating the ignition switch forward attempting to start the engine will definitely activate the PRNDM display. Therefore, the PRNDM information will be available to the driver who can see that the vehicle did not start because the transmission was not in ‘‘Park’’ or ‘‘Neutral’’. GM says that because both of these situations are addressed by FMVSS requirements, a lack of a transmission shift position display in either of these cases may constitute a minor inconvenience, but will have no consequence to safety. In addition, GM stated that NHTSA has previously granted similar petitions on 3 occasions. Furthermore, GM also stated the following: GM recognizes that there may be isolated non-driving situations in which a person may desire to know gear selection or the relative position of the gears with the engine off, such as when placing the vehicle in tow. However, these cases occur infrequently and do not occur during normal ignition activation and vehicle operation. If the subject condition [noncompliance] is present during these infrequent non-driving situations when PRNDM information may be desired, gear selection and relative positioning can easily be determined by rotating the ignition switch slightly clockwise past the accessory ‘‘ACC’’ detent to activate the shift indicator display without starting the vehicle’s engine. Given the nature of these non-driving situations and since the information can be readily obtained with a slight key rotation, GM believes that the subject condition [noncompliance] will have no real or implied degradation of motor vehicle safety. GM stated that previous rulemakings and NHTSA decisions on several previous inconsequential noncompliance petitions further support its position that the subject noncompliances are inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. GM also indicated that it has corrected the problem that caused the subject noncompliance so that it cannot reoccur in future production. In view of the above, GM believes that the described noncompliance is inconsequential and does not present a PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 65055 risk to motor vehicle safety. Thus, GM requests that its petition, to exempt it 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 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. Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments on this petition. Comments must refer to the docket and notice number cited at the beginning of this notice and be submitted by any of the following methods: a. 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. b. By hand delivery 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. c. 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 1–202– 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 your comments were received, please enclose a stamped, selfaddressed postcard with the comments. Note that all comments received will be posted without change to https:// www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. Documents submitted to a 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. DOT’s complete Privacy Act Statement is available for review in the E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1 65056 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477–78). The petition, supporting materials, and all comments received before the close of business on the closing date indicated below will be filed and will be considered. All comments and supporting materials received after the closing date will also be filed and will be considered to the extent possible. When the petition is granted or denied, notice of the decision will be published in the Federal Register pursuant to the authority indicated below. Comment closing date: November 22, 2010. Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at CFR 1.50 and 501.8. Issued on: October 14, 2010. Claude H. Harris, Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance. [FR Doc. 2010–26426 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–59–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration [FMCSA Docket No. FMCSA–2010–0202] Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Diabetes Mellitus Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of final disposition. AGENCY: FMCSA announces its decision to exempt thirty-nine individuals from its rule prohibiting persons with insulin-treated diabetes mellitus (ITDM) from operating commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) in interstate commerce. The exemptions will enable these individuals to operate CMVs in interstate commerce. DATES: The exemptions are effective October 21, 2010. The exemptions expire on October 22, 2012. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Mary D. Gunnels, Director, Medical Programs, (202) 366–4001, fmcsamedical@dot.gov, FMCSA, Room W64–224, Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590– 0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES SUMMARY: Electronic Access You may see all the comments online through the Federal Document Management System (FDMS) at: https:// www.regulations.gov. VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Oct 20, 2010 Jkt 223001 Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or comments, go to https:// www.regulations.gov and/or Room W12–140 on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments received into any of DOT’s dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, or other entity). You may review DOT’s Privacy Act Statement for the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) published in the Federal Register on January 17, 2008 (73 FR 3316), or you may visit https://edocket.access.gpo.gov/ 2008/pdf/E8–785.pdf. Background On August 27, 2010, FMCSA published a notice of receipt of Federal diabetes exemption applications from thirty-nine individuals and requested comments from the public (75 FR 52809). The public comment period closed on September 27, 2010 and no comments were received. FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of the thirty-nine applicants and determined that granting the exemptions to these individuals would achieve a level of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be achieved by complying with the current regulation 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3). Diabetes Mellitus and Driving Experience of the Applicants The Agency established the current standard for diabetes in 1970 because several risk studies indicated that drivers with diabetes had a higher rate of crash involvement than the general population. The diabetes rule provides that ‘‘A person is physically qualified to drive a commercial motor vehicle if that person has no established medical history or clinical diagnosis of diabetes mellitus currently requiring insulin for control’’ (49 CFR 391.41(b)(3)). FMCSA established its diabetes exemption program, based on the Agency’s July 2000 study entitled ‘‘A Report to Congress on the Feasibility of a Program To Qualify Individuals with Insulin-Treated Diabetes Mellitus To Operate in Interstate Commerce as Directed by the Transportation Act for the 21st Century.’’ The report concluded that a safe and practicable protocol to allow some drivers with ITDM to operate CMVs is feasible. The September 3, 2003 (68 FR 52441) PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Federal Register notice in conjunction with the November 8, 2005 (70 FR 67777) Federal Register notice provides the current protocol for allowing such drivers to operate CMVs in interstate commerce. These thirty-nine applicants have had ITDM over a range of 1 to 33 years. These applicants report no severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness or seizure, requiring the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning symptoms, in the past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the past 5 years. In each case, an endocrinologist verified that the driver has demonstrated a willingness to properly monitor and manage his/her diabetes mellitus, received education related to diabetes management, and is on a stable insulin regimen. These drivers report no other disqualifying conditions, including diabetes-related complications. Each meets the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). The qualifications and medical condition of each applicant were stated and discussed in detail in the August 27, 2010, Federal Register notice and they will not be repeated in this notice. Discussion of Comment FMCSA did not receive any comments in this proceeding. Basis for Exemption Determination Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption from the diabetes standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3) if the exemption is likely to achieve an equivalent or greater level of safety than would be achieved without the exemption. The exemption allows the applicants to operate CMVs in interstate commerce. To evaluate the effect of these exemptions on safety, FMCSA considered medical reports about the applicants’ ITDM and vision, and reviewed the treating endocrinologists’ medical opinion related to the ability of the driver to safely operate a CMV while using insulin. Consequently, FMCSA finds that in each case exempting these applicants from the diabetes standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3) is likely to achieve a level of safety equal to that existing without the exemption. Conditions and Requirements The terms and conditions of the exemption will be provided to the applicants in the exemption document and they include the following: (1) That each individual submit a quarterly E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM 21OCN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 203 (Thursday, October 21, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65054-65056]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-26426]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2010-0137; Notice 1]


General Motors, LLC, Receipt of Petition for Decision of 
Inconsequential Noncompliance

    General Motors, LLC (GM),\1\ has determined that certain 2008 
through 2010 Model Year Chevrolet Malibu passenger cars equipped with 
automatic transmissions and manufactured between May 2007 through March 
2010 do not fully meet the requirements of paragraph S3.1.4.1 of 
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 102, Transmission 
Shift Position Sequence, Starter Interlock, and Transmission Braking 
Effect. GM filed an appropriate report pursuant to 49 CFR part 573 
Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports, dated March 30, 
2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ General Motors, LLC (GM) is a Michigan corporation that 
manufactures motor vehicles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) (see implementing rule 
at 49 CFR part 556), GM has petitioned 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.
    This notice of receipt of GM'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.
    A total of 462,227 \2\ model year 2008, 2009 and 2010 Chevrolet 
Malibu passenger cars manufactured during the period May 2007 through 
March 2010 are potentially affected by the subject noncompliance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ GM's petition, which was filed under 49 CFR part 556, 
requests an agency decision to exempt GM from the notification and 
recall responsibilities of 49 CFR part 573 for as many as 462,227 of 
the affected vehicles. However, the agency cannot relieve GM's 
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 GM 
recognized that the subject noncompliance existed. Those vehicles 
must be brought into conformance, exported, or destroyed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Paragraph S3.1.4.1 of FMVSS No. 102 requires:

    Except as specified in S3.1.4.3, if the transmission shift 
position sequence includes a park position, identification of shift 
positions, including the positions in relation to each other and the 
position selected, shall be displayed in view of the driver whenever 
any of the following conditions exist:
    (a) The ignition is in a position where the transmission can be 
shifted; or

[[Page 65055]]

    (b) The transmission is not in park.

    GM described the noncompliance as the absence of the required 
transmission shift position display for a certain ignition key cylinder 
position. GM explained that while the key is in the ignition there is a 
narrow ignition key cylinder position between the ``ACC'' and ``OFF'' 
positions within which the transmission shift lever can be moved and 
the indicator light that illuminates the transmission shift position 
display is inoperative. The Company added that this noncompliance only 
occurs when the engine is not running.
    GM additionally stated that in all other ignition activation and 
operation positions, all of the subject vehicles comply with paragraph 
S3.1.4.1 of FMVSS No. 102.
    GM argued its belief that the subject noncompliance is 
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety because:

    As NHTSA recognized in proposing the standard (49 FR 32409-32411 
(August 25, 1988)), the purpose of the display requirement for PRNDM 
information is to ``provide the driver with transmission position 
information for the vehicle conditions where such information can 
reduce the likelihood of shifting errors.'' Thus, in all but the 
rarest circumstances, the primary function of the PRNDM display is 
to inform the driver of gear selection and relative position of the 
gears while the engine is running. All of the subject vehicles 
display PRNDM information whenever the ignition switch is in the 
``On'' or ``Run'' position.
    With the exception of the absence of the required transmission 
shift position display for one narrow ignition key cylinder 
position, the system meets all other applicable requirements of 
FMVSS No. 102.
    GM has no record of any incidents, injuries, owner complaints or 
field reports related to this noncompliance. GM added that if a 
customer reports this problem to them and requests a remedy, the 
Company will replace the ignition switch with a conforming 
component.
    Since this noncompliance only occurs during an atypical 
operation, the noncompliance is not likely to occur under normal 
driving conditions. The only circumstance where the noncompliance 
would appear is if the ignition switch is in the intermediary 
position between the ``OFF'' and ``ACC'' detent positions prior to 
the interlock. In order for this condition to be present, a driver 
would have to first move the transmission control to ``PARK.'' In 
such a case, there are two possible scenarios for the driver: 1) 
leaving the vehicle with the key in the ignition or 2) remaining in 
the vehicle. GM provides the following analysis for both scenarios:
    1. The driver exits the vehicle while leaving the key in the 
ignition:
    If the driver attempted to remove the key before exiting the 
vehicle, the key would not be capable of removal. The doors may also 
still be locked if they are in the factory default setting to unlock 
in the ``PARK'' position.
    As required by S5.1.3 of FMVSS 114, GM provides an audible 
warning to the driver that activates whenever the key has been left 
in the ignition locking system and the driver's door is opened.
    The Owner's Manual supplied with the vehicle provides specific 
warnings and instructions on ensuring the vehicle is in ``PARK'' and 
the key is removed before exiting the vehicle.
    2. The driver remains in the vehicle:
    If the driver remains in the vehicle, he or she would likely 
either restart the vehicle's engine or attempt to remove the key to 
exit the vehicle.
    If the driver attempts to restart the engine, paragraph S3.1.3 
of FMVSS No. 102 requires that the starter be inoperative whenever 
the vehicle's transmission shift position is in a forward or reverse 
drive position. The driver rotating the ignition switch forward 
attempting to start the engine will definitely activate the PRNDM 
display. Therefore, the PRNDM information will be available to the 
driver who can see that the vehicle did not start because the 
transmission was not in ``Park'' or ``Neutral''.
    GM says that because both of these situations are addressed by 
FMVSS requirements, a lack of a transmission shift position display 
in either of these cases may constitute a minor inconvenience, but 
will have no consequence to safety. In addition, GM stated that 
NHTSA has previously granted similar petitions on 3 occasions.

    Furthermore, GM also stated the following:

    GM recognizes that there may be isolated non-driving situations 
in which a person may desire to know gear selection or the relative 
position of the gears with the engine off, such as when placing the 
vehicle in tow. However, these cases occur infrequently and do not 
occur during normal ignition activation and vehicle operation. If 
the subject condition [noncompliance] is present during these 
infrequent non-driving situations when PRNDM information may be 
desired, gear selection and relative positioning can easily be 
determined by rotating the ignition switch slightly clockwise past 
the accessory ``ACC'' detent to activate the shift indicator display 
without starting the vehicle's engine. Given the nature of these 
non-driving situations and since the information can be readily 
obtained with a slight key rotation, GM believes that the subject 
condition [noncompliance] will have no real or implied degradation 
of motor vehicle safety.

    GM stated that previous rulemakings and NHTSA decisions on several 
previous inconsequential noncompliance petitions further support its 
position that the subject noncompliances are inconsequential to motor 
vehicle safety.
    GM also indicated that it has corrected the problem that caused the 
subject noncompliance so that it cannot reoccur in future production.
    In view of the above, GM believes that the described noncompliance 
is inconsequential and does not present a risk to motor vehicle safety. 
Thus, GM requests that its petition, to exempt it 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 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.
    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and 
arguments on this petition. Comments must refer to the docket and 
notice number cited at the beginning of this notice and be submitted by 
any of the following methods:
    a. 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.
    b. By hand delivery 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.
    c. Electronically: by logging onto the Federal Docket Management 
System (FDMS) Web site at http:[sol][sol]www.regulations.gov/. Follow 
the online instructions for submitting comments. Comments may also be 
faxed to 1-202-493-2251.
    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 your comments were received, please 
enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard with the comments. Note that 
all comments received will be posted without change to 
http:[sol][sol]www.regulations.gov, including any personal information 
provided.
    Documents submitted to a docket may be viewed by anyone at the 
address and times given above. The documents may also be viewed on the 
Internet at http:[sol][sol]www.regulations.gov by following the online 
instructions for accessing the dockets. DOT's complete Privacy Act 
Statement is available for review in the

[[Page 65056]]

Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).
    The petition, supporting materials, and all comments received 
before the close of business on the closing date indicated below will 
be filed and will be considered. All comments and supporting materials 
received after the closing date will also be filed and will be 
considered to the extent possible. When the petition is granted or 
denied, notice of the decision will be published in the Federal 
Register pursuant to the authority indicated below.
    Comment closing date: November 22, 2010.

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

    Issued on: October 14, 2010.
Claude H. Harris,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2010-26426 Filed 10-20-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.