General Motors, LLC, Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 73006-73007 [2011-30563]

Download as PDF pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 73006 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 228 / Monday, November 28, 2011 / Notices manufactured from January 1, 2008, through October 15, 2009, by Tianjin Kings Glory Tire Company, LTD. of Qiaosandao, Yangliuqing, Xiqing Tianjin, China 300380, and imported by JCA are affected. JCA states that the noncompliance is that the maximum single load labeling and maximum inflation pressures on the sidewalls of the tires are in English units of ‘‘lb’’ and ‘‘psi’’ only; no Metric units are included as required by paragraph S6.5(d) of FMVSS No. 119. JCA explained that no property damage or accidents have been reported to it or its customers as a result of the subject noncompliance. JCA further explains that it has taken steps to correct the noncompliance in future production. JCA also states that it believes the noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety because the affected tires fulfill all other relevant requirements of FMVSS No. 119. In summation, JCA believes that the described 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 Decision: The agency agrees with JCA that the noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. The agency believes that the true measure of inconsequentiality to motor vehicle safety in this case is that there is no effect on the operational safety of vehicles on which these tires are mounted. While the correct tire inflation pressure is included on the subject tire sidewalls, it is not marked in both English and Metric unit systems on each sidewall as required by S6.5(d). However, because the tire inflation pressure is available and stated correctly on each tire in English units, it is unlikely that a consumer will not find or will misread pressure units due to the noncompliance. Therefore, the tires, as labeled, are likely to achieve the safety purpose of the standard. In the agency’s judgment, the subject incorrect labeling of the tire inflation pressure information will have an inconsequential effect on motor vehicle safety. 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 VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:34 Nov 25, 2011 Jkt 226001 noncompliance and to remedy the defect or noncompliance. Therefore, this decision only applies to the 899,804 2 tires that JCA no longer controlled at the time that it determined that a noncompliance existed in the subject tires. In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that JCA has met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 119 labeling noncompliances are inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, JCA’s petition is granted and the petitioner is exempted from the obligation of providing notification of, and a remedy for, the subject noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120. Authority: (49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at CFR 1.50 and 501.8) Issued on: November 18, 2011. Claude H. Harris, Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance. [FR Doc. 2011–30562 Filed 11–25–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–59–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [Docket No. NHTSA–2010–0137; Notice 2] General Motors, LLC, Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT. ACTION: Notice of Petition Grant. AGENCY: SUMMARY: General Motors, LLC (GM),1 has determined that certain 2008 through 2010 Model Year Chevrolet Malibu passenger cars equipped with automatic transmissions and manufactured 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 2 JCA’s petition, which was filed under 49 CFR part 556, requests an agency decision to exempt JCA as a manufacturer from the notification and recall responsibilities of 49 CFR Part 573 for 899,804 of the affected tires. However, the decision on this petition does not relieve distributors and dealers of the prohibitions on the sale, offer for sale, or introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate commerce of the noncompliant tires under their control after JCA notified them that the subject noncompliance existed. 1 General Motors, LLC (GM) is a Michigan corporation that manufactures motor vehicles. PO 00000 Frm 00110 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 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. Notice of receipt of GM’s petition was published, with a 30-day public comment period, on October 21, 2010, in the Federal Register (75 FR 65054). No comments were received. To view the petition and all supporting documents log onto the Federal Docket Management System Web site at: http://www.regulations.gov/. Then follow the online search instructions to locate docket number ‘‘NHTSA–2010– 00137.’’ Contact Information: For further information on this decision, contact Mr. Vincent J. Williams, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone (202) 366–2319, facsimile (202) 366–7002. Summary of GM’s Petition: A total of 462,227 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. 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 (53 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 E:\FR\FM\28NON1.SGM 28NON1 pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 228 / Monday, November 28, 2011 / Notices 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 No. 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. VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:34 Nov 25, 2011 Jkt 226001 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 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 Decision: NHTSA agrees with GM that the noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. As the agency noted in the past (53 FR 32409, August 25, 1988), the purpose of the PRNDL information display requirement is to ‘‘provide the driver with transmission position information for the vehicle conditions where such information can reduce the likelihood of shifting errors.’’ In all but the rarest circumstances, the primary function of the transmission display is to inform the driver of gear selection and relative position of the gears while the engine is running. In this case, the selected gear position and PRNDL display are always visible when the engine is running. Therefore, as GM stated, the vehicles will be in compliance with FMVSS No. 102 during normal ignition activation and vehicle operation. 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 PO 00000 Frm 00111 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 73007 defect or noncompliance. Therefore, this decision only applies to the 462,227 2 vehicles that GM no longer controlled at the time that it determined that a noncompliance existed in the subject vehicles. In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that GM has met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 102 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, GM’s petition is granted and the petitioner is exempted from the obligation of providing notification of, and a remedy for, the subject noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120. Authority: (49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at CFR 1.50 and 501.8) Issued on: November 18, 2011. Claude H. Harris, Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance. [FR Doc. 2011–30563 Filed 11–25–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–59–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [Docket No. NHTSA–2010–0080; Notice 2] Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company, Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT. AGENCY: Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance. ACTION: Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company, (Goodyear),1 has determined that approximately 14,826 passenger car replacement tires manufactured between August of 2007 and May of 2009, do not fully comply with paragraph S5.5(f) of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 139, New Pneumatic Radial Tires for Light Vehicles. Goodyear has filed an appropriate report pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance SUMMARY: 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 granting of this petition does not 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. 1 Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company (Goodyear) a replacement equipment manufacturer is incorporated in the state of Ohio. E:\FR\FM\28NON1.SGM 28NON1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 228 (Monday, November 28, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73006-73007]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-30563]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2010-0137; Notice 2]


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

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of Petition Grant.

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

SUMMARY: General Motors, LLC (GM),\1\ has determined that certain 2008 
through 2010 Model Year Chevrolet Malibu passenger cars equipped with 
automatic transmissions and manufactured 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.
    Notice of receipt of GM's petition was published, with a 30-day 
public comment period, on October 21, 2010, in the Federal Register (75 
FR 65054). No comments were received. To view the petition and all 
supporting documents log onto the Federal Docket Management System Web 
site at: http://www.regulations.gov/. Then follow the online search 
instructions to locate docket number ``NHTSA-2010-00137.''
    Contact Information: For further information on this decision, 
contact Mr. Vincent J. Williams, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, 
the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone 
(202) 366-2319, facsimile (202) 366-7002.
    Summary of GM's Petition: A total of 462,227 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.
    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 (53 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

[[Page 73007]]

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 No. 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 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 Decision: NHTSA agrees with GM that the noncompliance is 
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. As the agency noted in the 
past (53 FR 32409, August 25, 1988), the purpose of the PRNDL 
information display requirement is to ``provide the driver with 
transmission position information for the vehicle conditions where such 
information can reduce the likelihood of shifting errors.'' In all but 
the rarest circumstances, the primary function of the transmission 
display is to inform the driver of gear selection and relative position 
of the gears while the engine is running. In this case, the selected 
gear position and PRNDL display are always visible when the engine is 
running. Therefore, as GM stated, the vehicles will be in compliance 
with FMVSS No. 102 during normal ignition activation and vehicle 
operation.
    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 462,227 \2\ vehicles that GM no longer controlled 
at the time that it determined that a noncompliance existed in the 
subject 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 granting of this petition does 
not 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that GM has 
met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 102 
noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, 
GM's petition is granted and the petitioner is exempted from the 
obligation of providing notification of, and a remedy for, the subject 
noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.

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

    Issued on: November 18, 2011.
Claude H. Harris,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2011-30563 Filed 11-25-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P