Panda Power LLC, Denial of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 38800-38801 [2013-15470]
Download as PDF
38800
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 124 / Thursday, June 27, 2013 / Notices
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 approximately
5,700 vehicles that BMW no longer
controlled at the time that it determined
that a noncompliance existed in the
subject vehicles. 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 BMW 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)
Issued On: June 19, 2013.
Claude H. Harris,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2013–15464 Filed 6–26–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2010–0166; Notice 2]
Panda Power LLC, Denial of Petition
for Decision of Inconsequential
Noncompliance
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Denial of Petition.
AGENCY:
Panda Power LLC (Panda
Power) 1, has determined that High
Intensity Discharge (HID) lighting kits 2
that it imported and sold during 2007,
2008 and 2009 failed to meet the
requirements of paragraph S7.7 of
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard
(FMVSS) No. 108, Lamps, Reflective
Devices, and Associated Equipment.
Panda Power has filed an appropriate
report pursuant to 49 CFR Part 573,
Defect and Noncompliance
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
1 Panda Power, LLC (Panda Power) is organized
under the laws of the State of Arizona and is the
importer of the subject nonconforming replacement
equipment. Panda Power sold the nonconforming
replacement equipment while doing business under
the name Mobile HID.
2 Panda Power’s high-intensity lighting (HID) kits
each contained 2 light sources, 2 ballasts and a
wiring harness with relay and fuse).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:12 Jun 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
Responsibility and Reports, dated
February 10, 2010.
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h) and the rule implementing
those provisions at 49 CFR Part 556,
Panda Power 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
the petition was published, with a 30day public comment period, on
December 21, 2010 in the Federal
Register (75 FR 80110). Comments were
received from Daniel Stern Lighting
Consultancy and Michael F. Turpen. To
view the petition, all supporting
documents, and the comments, log onto
the Federal Docket Management System
(FDMS) Web site at: https://
www.regulations.gov/. Then follow the
online search instructions to locate
docket number ‘‘NHTSA–2010–0166.’’
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
further information on this decision,
contact Mr. Michael Cole, Office of
Vehicle Safety Compliance, the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration
(NHTSA), telephone (202) 366–2334,
facsimile (202) 366–7002.
Lighting Kits Involved: Affected are
approximately 1,851 headlamp kits that
Panda Power sold during 2007, 2008
and 2009. All of the affected HID
headlamp kits were manufactured by
Guangzhou Kingwoodcar Company,
LTD, Guangzhou City, China.
Summary of Panda Power’s Analyses:
Panda Power did not describe the
noncompliances in detail, instead it
deferred to the agency’s concern that the
subject HID headlamp kits may not
comply with one or more of the
regulations enforced by the agency. This
concern was described as an apparent
noncompliance in a letter NHTSA sent
to Panda Power dated September 2,
2009. The letter was sent to Panda
Power as part of a National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)
Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance
Office Activity.3
In their petition, Panda Power argues
that the noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety
for the following reasons: (1) The HID
headlamp kits were originally intended
for sale to the agricultural community to
be placed on tractors and combines, for
off-road vehicles, and for exhibition
purposes; (2) the HID bulbs that were
sold with the kits in 2007 and 2008 are
likely burned out by now and no longer
functioning; and (3) Panda Power no
longer sells the HID headlamp kits.
3 Office
PO 00000
Activity Number: OA–108–090606G.
Frm 00119
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Supported by the above stated
reasons, Panda Power believes that
although the HID headlamp kits do not
meet the required dimensional and
electrical specifications of FMVSS No.
108, the 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.
Discussion
Requirement Background
Paragraph S7.7 of FMVSS No. 108
requires in pertinent part:
S7.7 Replaceable light sources. Each
replaceable light source shall be designed to
conform to the dimensions and electrical
specifications furnished with respect to it
pursuant to part 564 of this chapter, and shall
conform to the following requirements: (See
a,b,c,d,e, and f)
A new motor vehicle must have a
headlighting system that includes upper
beams and lower beams. Among other
things, the headlamps must provide
light within a specified range of
intensity in certain areas, and not
provide light above specified levels in
other areas. In general, vehicle
manufacturers use one of a number of
standard replaceable light sources to
achieve the regulatory requirements,
although alternatively they may devise
or arrange for development of a new
light source for a new vehicle. For each
of these types of light sources, the
dimensions and electrical specifications
are furnished to NHTSA under 49 CFR
Part 564. The vehicle manufacturer
certifies that the vehicle with a
particular light source meets FMVSSs,
including FMVSS No. 108.
Each headlamp and item of associated
equipment (such as a light source
commonly referred to as a headlamp
bulb) manufactured to replace any lamp
or item of associated equipment must be
designed to conform to FMVSS No. 108.
Each replaceable light source must be
designed to conform to the dimensions
and electrical specifications furnished
with respect to it pursuant to 49 CFR
Part 564. In addition, NHTSA’s
regulations require that the base of the
replaceable light source be marked with
the bulb marking designation, that the
replaceable light source meet lighting
performance requirements and, if a
ballast is required, additional
requirements must be met.
Headlamp replaceable light sources
have standard designations. NHTSA’s
regulations use terms for the various
types of headlamp bulbs, such as HB1
E:\FR\FM\27JNN1.SGM
27JNN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 124 / Thursday, June 27, 2013 / Notices
and HB2. (Bulb manufacturers tend to
use corresponding ANSI trade numbers
such as 9004, as well). Each type of
replaceable light source is unique in
dimensional and electrical design so as
not to be interchangeable with another
type of replaceable light source. Every
replaceable light source must be
designed to conform to the marking,
dimensional, and electrical
specifications applicable to the type of
replaceable light source that it replaces.
For instance, the replacement light
source must have the same (within a
tolerance) luminous flux (a measure of
light output) as the light source it
replaces. When the light source is
mounted in a headlamp for that type of
light source, the lamp must discharge
light in specified directions and
intensity levels, to satisfy the same
requirements of the standard. If it were
otherwise, among other things, the
wrong light sources could be placed in
headlamps and the light output would
be incorrect or improper.
NHTSA’S Analyses: Panda Power
argues that the noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety,
primarily, because the kits were
originally intended for sale to the
agricultural community and to be
placed on tractors and combines, or for
off-road vehicles, or for exhibition
purposes. NHTSA reviewed the Office
Activity file for the original
investigation with Panda Power.
Excerpts from Panda Powers Web site,
dated June 24, 2009, clearly indicate
that these items are intended for motor
vehicle headlamps. The site displays
pictures of numerous passenger cars
(e.g., Mercedes Benz, Lexus, Toyota, and
Mitsubishi), references other motor
vehicles (e.g., BMW), provides a link to
Sylvania’s replacement bulb guide for
motor vehicles, and provides pictures of
beam patterns as seen on roadways. It
also provides troubleshooting tips for
installations on motor vehicles
containing daytime running lamps and
how to stop lamp flicker when hitting
bumps in the road. Because of this
information, we find that Panda Powers
claim that they sold these items for nonroad use to be disingenuous.
Panda Power further states that its
products are likely no longer
functioning. Regardless of the quality of
Panda Power’s products, the Motor
Vehicle Safety Act requires that
manufacturers (defined to include
importers) of noncompliant equipment
must notify purchasers of the
noncompliance (pursuant to 49 U.S.C.
30119) and provide a free remedy
(pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30120). If a free
remedy cannot be provided then
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:12 Jun 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
repurchase should be initiated in a
reasonable time frame.
Panda Power also argues that because
it stopped selling the HID conversion
kits, it should not be required to
conduct a recall and remedy campaign.
Among other things, 49 U.S.C. 30112(a)
prohibits the importation and sale of
noncompliant equipment and Panda
Power is compelled to discontinue this
practice to prevent further violations of
49 U.S.C. 30112(a), and not as a waiver
from the recall and remedy
requirements. NHTSA’S Response to
Comments: NHTSA received comments
from two parties. Both of these parties
recommend denying Panda Power’s
petition.
Daniel J. Stern of the Daniel Stern
Lighting Consultancy provided a
substantive, practical, and technical
argument regarding the effects on
headlamp performance when replacing
standardized headlamp replaceable light
sources with HID conversion kits. Mr.
Stern stated that installing HID light
sources into headlamps that were
designed to accept tungsten-halogen
light sources would create an enormous
increase in glare light directed towards
other road users, and reduce the driver’s
distance visual acuity due to increased
foreground illumination. Mr. Stern also
stated that the noncompliance created
by Panda Power’s HID kits appear to be
systemic, pervasive, and substantial,
creating a significant safety risk to the
motoring public.
Michael F. Turpen, a private citizen,
examined archives of Panda Power’s
Web site using
www.waybackmachine.org (a Web site
maintained by the Internet Archive, a
501(3)(c) non-profit corporation). He
referenced archived pages of Panda
Power’s Web site that showed its HID
Conversion kits installed on motor
vehicles, photos of headlamp output on
streets in residential neighborhoods,
and banners that indicate ‘‘offering HID
kits for any vehicle.’’
NHTSA Decision: In consideration of
the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that
Panda Power has not met its burden of
persuasion that the FMVSS No. 108
noncompliances identified in Panda
Power’s Noncompliance Information
Report does not present a significant
safety risk resulting from increases in
glare when its HID headlamp
conversion kits are used in headlamps
that were not designed for this type of
light source. Therefore, NHTSA does
not agree with Panda Power that this
specific noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
Accordingly, Panda Power’s petition is
hereby denied, and the Panda Power
must notify owners, purchasers and
PO 00000
Frm 00120
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
38801
dealers pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118 and
provide a remedy in accordance with 49
U.S.C. 30120.
Authority: (49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120:
delegations of authority at CFR 1.95 and
501.8)
Issued On: June 19, 2013.
Nancy Lummen Lewis,
Associate Administrator for Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2013–15470 Filed 6–26–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2013–0006; Notice 1]
General Motors, LLC, Receipt of
Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Receipt of Petition.
AGENCY:
General Motors, LLC (GM) 1
has determined that certain model year
(MY) 2007 through 2013 GM trucks and
multipurpose passenger vehicles
(MPVs) manufactured from June 19,
2006, through December 6, 2012 do not
fully comply with paragraph S4.3 of
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard
(FMVSS) No. 110, Tire Selection and
Rims for Motor Vehicles with a GVWR
of 4,536 Kilograms or less. GM has filed
an appropriate report dated December
19, 2012, pursuant to 49 CFR Part 573,
Defect and Noncompliance
Responsibility and Reports.
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h) (see implementing rule at 49
CFR Part 556), GM 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.
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.
Vehicles Involved: Affected are
approximately 5,690: MY 2007 through
2013 Chevrolet Silverado trucks,
Suburban MPVs and Tahoe MPVs; MY
2007 through 2013 GMC Sierra trucks;
MY 2012 GMC Yukon MPVs; and MY
2007, 2009, 2011, 2012 and 2013 Yukon
XL MPV’s. The affected vehicles were
SUMMARY:
1 General Motors, LLC is a manufacturer of motor
vehicles and is registered under the laws of the state
of Michigan.
E:\FR\FM\27JNN1.SGM
27JNN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 124 (Thursday, June 27, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38800-38801]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-15470]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2010-0166; Notice 2]
Panda Power LLC, Denial of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Denial of Petition.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Panda Power LLC (Panda Power) \1\, has determined that High
Intensity Discharge (HID) lighting kits \2\ that it imported and sold
during 2007, 2008 and 2009 failed to meet the requirements of paragraph
S7.7 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108, Lamps,
Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment. Panda Power has filed an
appropriate report pursuant to 49 CFR Part 573, Defect and
Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports, dated February 10, 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Panda Power, LLC (Panda Power) is organized under the laws
of the State of Arizona and is the importer of the subject
nonconforming replacement equipment. Panda Power sold the
nonconforming replacement equipment while doing business under the
name Mobile HID.
\2\ Panda Power's high-intensity lighting (HID) kits each
contained 2 light sources, 2 ballasts and a wiring harness with
relay and fuse).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and the rule
implementing those provisions at 49 CFR Part 556, Panda Power 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 the petition was published, with a 30-day public comment
period, on December 21, 2010 in the Federal Register (75 FR 80110).
Comments were received from Daniel Stern Lighting Consultancy and
Michael F. Turpen. To view the petition, all supporting documents, and
the comments, log onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Web
site at: https://www.regulations.gov/. Then follow the online search
instructions to locate docket number ``NHTSA-2010-0166.''
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information on this
decision, contact Mr. Michael Cole, Office of Vehicle Safety
Compliance, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
telephone (202) 366-2334, facsimile (202) 366-7002.
Lighting Kits Involved: Affected are approximately 1,851 headlamp
kits that Panda Power sold during 2007, 2008 and 2009. All of the
affected HID headlamp kits were manufactured by Guangzhou Kingwoodcar
Company, LTD, Guangzhou City, China.
Summary of Panda Power's Analyses: Panda Power did not describe the
noncompliances in detail, instead it deferred to the agency's concern
that the subject HID headlamp kits may not comply with one or more of
the regulations enforced by the agency. This concern was described as
an apparent noncompliance in a letter NHTSA sent to Panda Power dated
September 2, 2009. The letter was sent to Panda Power as part of a
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) Office of
Vehicle Safety Compliance Office Activity.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Office Activity Number: OA-108-090606G.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In their petition, Panda Power argues that the noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety for the following reasons: (1)
The HID headlamp kits were originally intended for sale to the
agricultural community to be placed on tractors and combines, for off-
road vehicles, and for exhibition purposes; (2) the HID bulbs that were
sold with the kits in 2007 and 2008 are likely burned out by now and no
longer functioning; and (3) Panda Power no longer sells the HID
headlamp kits.
Supported by the above stated reasons, Panda Power believes that
although the HID headlamp kits do not meet the required dimensional and
electrical specifications of FMVSS No. 108, the 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.
Discussion
Requirement Background
Paragraph S7.7 of FMVSS No. 108 requires in pertinent part:
S7.7 Replaceable light sources. Each replaceable light source shall
be designed to conform to the dimensions and electrical
specifications furnished with respect to it pursuant to part 564 of
this chapter, and shall conform to the following requirements: (See
a,b,c,d,e, and f)
A new motor vehicle must have a headlighting system that includes
upper beams and lower beams. Among other things, the headlamps must
provide light within a specified range of intensity in certain areas,
and not provide light above specified levels in other areas. In
general, vehicle manufacturers use one of a number of standard
replaceable light sources to achieve the regulatory requirements,
although alternatively they may devise or arrange for development of a
new light source for a new vehicle. For each of these types of light
sources, the dimensions and electrical specifications are furnished to
NHTSA under 49 CFR Part 564. The vehicle manufacturer certifies that
the vehicle with a particular light source meets FMVSSs, including
FMVSS No. 108.
Each headlamp and item of associated equipment (such as a light
source commonly referred to as a headlamp bulb) manufactured to replace
any lamp or item of associated equipment must be designed to conform to
FMVSS No. 108. Each replaceable light source must be designed to
conform to the dimensions and electrical specifications furnished with
respect to it pursuant to 49 CFR Part 564. In addition, NHTSA's
regulations require that the base of the replaceable light source be
marked with the bulb marking designation, that the replaceable light
source meet lighting performance requirements and, if a ballast is
required, additional requirements must be met.
Headlamp replaceable light sources have standard designations.
NHTSA's regulations use terms for the various types of headlamp bulbs,
such as HB1
[[Page 38801]]
and HB2. (Bulb manufacturers tend to use corresponding ANSI trade
numbers such as 9004, as well). Each type of replaceable light source
is unique in dimensional and electrical design so as not to be
interchangeable with another type of replaceable light source. Every
replaceable light source must be designed to conform to the marking,
dimensional, and electrical specifications applicable to the type of
replaceable light source that it replaces. For instance, the
replacement light source must have the same (within a tolerance)
luminous flux (a measure of light output) as the light source it
replaces. When the light source is mounted in a headlamp for that type
of light source, the lamp must discharge light in specified directions
and intensity levels, to satisfy the same requirements of the standard.
If it were otherwise, among other things, the wrong light sources could
be placed in headlamps and the light output would be incorrect or
improper.
NHTSA'S Analyses: Panda Power argues that the noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety, primarily, because the kits
were originally intended for sale to the agricultural community and to
be placed on tractors and combines, or for off-road vehicles, or for
exhibition purposes. NHTSA reviewed the Office Activity file for the
original investigation with Panda Power. Excerpts from Panda Powers Web
site, dated June 24, 2009, clearly indicate that these items are
intended for motor vehicle headlamps. The site displays pictures of
numerous passenger cars (e.g., Mercedes Benz, Lexus, Toyota, and
Mitsubishi), references other motor vehicles (e.g., BMW), provides a
link to Sylvania's replacement bulb guide for motor vehicles, and
provides pictures of beam patterns as seen on roadways. It also
provides troubleshooting tips for installations on motor vehicles
containing daytime running lamps and how to stop lamp flicker when
hitting bumps in the road. Because of this information, we find that
Panda Powers claim that they sold these items for non-road use to be
disingenuous.
Panda Power further states that its products are likely no longer
functioning. Regardless of the quality of Panda Power's products, the
Motor Vehicle Safety Act requires that manufacturers (defined to
include importers) of noncompliant equipment must notify purchasers of
the noncompliance (pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30119) and provide a free
remedy (pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30120). If a free remedy cannot be
provided then repurchase should be initiated in a reasonable time
frame.
Panda Power also argues that because it stopped selling the HID
conversion kits, it should not be required to conduct a recall and
remedy campaign. Among other things, 49 U.S.C. 30112(a) prohibits the
importation and sale of noncompliant equipment and Panda Power is
compelled to discontinue this practice to prevent further violations of
49 U.S.C. 30112(a), and not as a waiver from the recall and remedy
requirements. NHTSA'S Response to Comments: NHTSA received comments
from two parties. Both of these parties recommend denying Panda Power's
petition.
Daniel J. Stern of the Daniel Stern Lighting Consultancy provided a
substantive, practical, and technical argument regarding the effects on
headlamp performance when replacing standardized headlamp replaceable
light sources with HID conversion kits. Mr. Stern stated that
installing HID light sources into headlamps that were designed to
accept tungsten-halogen light sources would create an enormous increase
in glare light directed towards other road users, and reduce the
driver's distance visual acuity due to increased foreground
illumination. Mr. Stern also stated that the noncompliance created by
Panda Power's HID kits appear to be systemic, pervasive, and
substantial, creating a significant safety risk to the motoring public.
Michael F. Turpen, a private citizen, examined archives of Panda
Power's Web site using www.waybackmachine.org (a Web site maintained by
the Internet Archive, a 501(3)(c) non-profit corporation). He
referenced archived pages of Panda Power's Web site that showed its HID
Conversion kits installed on motor vehicles, photos of headlamp output
on streets in residential neighborhoods, and banners that indicate
``offering HID kits for any vehicle.''
NHTSA Decision: In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has
decided that Panda Power has not met its burden of persuasion that the
FMVSS No. 108 noncompliances identified in Panda Power's Noncompliance
Information Report does not present a significant safety risk resulting
from increases in glare when its HID headlamp conversion kits are used
in headlamps that were not designed for this type of light source.
Therefore, NHTSA does not agree with Panda Power that this specific
noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly,
Panda Power's petition is hereby denied, and the Panda Power must
notify owners, purchasers and dealers pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118 and
provide a remedy in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 30120.
Authority: (49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at
CFR 1.95 and 501.8)
Issued On: June 19, 2013.
Nancy Lummen Lewis,
Associate Administrator for Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2013-15470 Filed 6-26-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P