General Motors, LLC, Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 9041-9042 [2014-03210]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 31 / Friday, February 14, 2014 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
noncompliance so that all future
production Gladiator and MetroStar
chassis cabs will comply with FMVSS
No. 121.
In summation, Spartan believes that
the described noncompliance of the
subject chassis cabs is inconsequential
to motor vehicle safety, and that its
petition, to exempt 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.
VI. NHTSA Decision
Spartan’s argument in support of the
petition is reasonable. NHTSA agrees
that the braking performance of subject
noncompliant vehicles is not adversely
affected as a result of longer pneumatic
brake actuation times of 0.006 to 0.01
seconds. The theoretical calculations
performed by Spartan indicate an
increase of approximately one foot in
stopping distance at 60 mph for
noncompliant vehicles when compared
to compliant vehicles. This minimal
increase in stopping distance does not
affect the noncompliant vehicle’s
conformance with the 60 mph stopping
distance requirement of 310 feet.
Therefore, the very small number of
affected noncompliant vehicles does not
appear to pose an undue safety risk in
braking performance in comparison to
compliant vehicles.
NHTSA is also not aware of any
customer complaints or field reports
relating to this issue, and Spartan has
stated that it has corrected the problem
that caused the noncompliance so that
it will not be repeated in future
production.
In consideration of the foregoing,
NHTSA has decided that Spartan has
met its burden of persuasion that the
FMVSS No. 121 noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
Accordingly, Spartan’s petition is
hereby granted and Spartan is exempted
from the obligation of providing
notification of, and a remedy for, that
noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118
and 30120.
NHTSA notes that the statutory
provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to
file petitions for a determination of
inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to
exempt manufacturers only from the
duties found in sections 30118 and
30120, respectively, to notify owners,
purchasers, and dealers of a defect or
noncompliance and to remedy the
defect or noncompliance. Therefore, this
decision only applies to the subject
noncompliant chassis cabs that Spartan
no longer controlled at the time it
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:47 Feb 13, 2014
Jkt 232001
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 chassis cabs under
their control after Spartan 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.
Claude H. Harris,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2014–03211 Filed 2–13–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2012–0106; Notice 2]
General Motors, LLC, Grant of Petition
for Decision of Inconsequential
Noncompliance
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Grant of Petition.
AGENCY:
General Motors, LLC (GM),
has determined that certain model year
2012 Chevrolet Captiva and Buick
Verano passenger cars manufactured
between April 6, 2011 and June 4, 2011,
do not fully comply with paragraph
S5.2.1 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standard (FMVSS) No. 101, Controls
and Displays and paragraph S5.5.5 of
FMVSS No. 135, Light Vehicle Brake
Systems. GM has filed an appropriate
report dated June 13, 2012 pursuant to
49 CFR Part 573, Defect and
Noncompliance Responsibility and
Reports.
SUMMARY:
For further information on
this decision contact Stuart Seigel,
Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA), telephone
(202) 366–5287, facsimile (202) 366–
7002.
ADDRESSES:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. GM’s Petition: 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 the petition was
published, with a 30-day public
PO 00000
Frm 00105
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
9041
comment period, on November 5, 2012
in the Federal Register (77 FR 66501).
No comments were received. To view
the petition, and all supporting
documents 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–2012–
0106.’’
II. Vehicles Involved: Affected are
approximately 47,822 model year 2012
Chevrolet Captiva and Buick Verano
model passenger cars that were
manufactured between April 6, 2011
and June 4, 2011.
III. Noncompliance: GM explains that
the noncompliance is that the telltales
used for Park Brake are displayed using
International Organization for
Standardization (ISO) symbols instead
of the telltale symbols required by
FMVSS Nos. 101 and 135.
IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S5.2.1 of
FMVSS No. 101 Specifically states in
pertinent part:
S5.2.1 Except for the Low Tire Pressure
Telltale, each control, telltale and indicator
that is listed in column 1 of Table 1 or Table
2 must be identified by the symbol specified
for it in column 2 or the word or abbreviation
specified for it in column 3 of Table 1 or
Table 2. If a symbol is used, each symbol
provided pursuant to this paragraph must be
substantially similar in form to the symbol as
it appears in Table 1 or Table 2. If a symbol
is used, each symbol provided pursuant to
this paragraph must have the proportional
dimensional characteristics of the symbol as
it appears in Table 1 or Table 2. . . .
Paragraph S5.5.5 of FMVSS No. 135
requires in pertinent part:
S5.5.5. Labeling. (a) Each visual indicator
shall display a word or words in accordance
with the requirements of Standard No. 101
(49 CFR 571.101) and this section, which
shall be legible to the driver under all
daytime and nighttime conditions when
activated. Unless otherwise specified, the
words shall have letters not less than 3.2 mm
(1⁄8 inch) high and the letters and background
shall be of contrasting colors, one of which
is red. Words or symbols in addition to those
required by Standard No. 101 and this
section may be provided for purposes of
Clarity. . . .
(d) If separate indicators are used for one
or more of the the conditions described in
S5.5.1(a) through S5.5.1(g), the indicators
shall display the following wording:
. . .
(4) If a separate indicator is provided for
application of the parking brake as specified
for S5.5.1(c), the single word ‘‘Park’’ of the
words ‘‘Parking Brake’’ may be used. . . .
V. Summary of GM’s Analyses: GM
stated its belief that although the
instrument cluster telltale symbols are
displayed using ISO symbols the
noncompliance is inconsequential to
E:\FR\FM\14FEN1.SGM
14FEN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
9042
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 31 / Friday, February 14, 2014 / Notices
motor vehicle safety for the following
reasons:
(1) The functionality of all braking
systems, including the service brakes
and parking brakes, is not affected by
the noncompliance and the vehicles
will operate as intended.
(2) In addition to the parking brake
telltale, the Captiva Driver Information
Center (DIC) provides a message when
the parking brake is set. Specifically,
when the parking brake is applied and
the ISO parking brake telltale is
illuminated, the following message is
also displayed: ‘‘Park Brake Set’’
(3) In the noncompliant vehicles, the
electronic parking brake automatically
releases when the vehicle transmission
is in drive and the vehicle is driven
away.
(4) The description of the parking
braking operation, found in the owner’s
manual, clearly indicates the ISO
parking brake symbol will be displayed
when the parking brake is applied.
(5) The control, which applies and
releases the parking brake on the subject
vehicles, is identified with the same ISO
symbol that is used on the telltale to
indicate the parking brake is applied.
(6) Other current and previous
vehicles manufactured by GM and other
manufacturers use the ISO parking
brake symbol in conjunction with the
word ‘‘PARK’’, or a common brake
telltale incorporating the subject park
brake symbol in conjunction with the
word ‘‘BRAKE’’ and the ISO symbol for
brake malfunction, to indicate the
application of the parking brake. GM
has also, confirmed that the Parking
Brake ISO telltale, in conjunction with
the brake malfunction telltale and word
‘‘BRAKE’’, has been used on other
vehicles and thus the motoring public
has come to associate the ISO park brake
symbol with the application of the
parking brake.
(7) GM is unaware of any field or
owner complaints or injuries regarding
the subject noncompliance.
In summation, GM believes that the
described noncompliance of its vehicles
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.
VI. NHTSA Decision: NHTSA has
reviewed GM’s analyses that the subject
noncompliance is inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety. Specifically, the
telltale used for Park Brake, displayed
using International Organization for
Standardization (ISO) symbol instead of
the telltale symbols required by FMVSS
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:47 Feb 13, 2014
Jkt 232001
Nos. 101 and 135, poses little if any risk
to motor vehicle safety.
NHTSA agrees with GM’s statement
that the parking brake telltale ISO
symbol has no effect on brake
performance. Vehicle stopping distance
and thus collision avoidance is not
compromised due to the mislabeling.
When the parking brake is activated the
ISO symbol is illuminated as required
with the letters and background in
contrasting colors, one of which is red
for both models, and for the Captiva,
redundant driver notification is also
provided in the information center with
the text ‘‘Park Brake Set’’. In addition,
the ISO symbol incorporates the capital
letter ‘‘P’’ which is part of the required
word ‘‘Park’’ and the ISO symbol has
been used on US-certified vehicles for
many years in conjunction with the
required text. Thus, over time, the ISO
symbol has evolved to become
increasingly recognizable and
understandable to drivers. The brake
apply switch located in the center
console is identified with the same ISO
parking brake symbol as the mislabeled
dash telltale. Each time the driver
activates the parking brake he/she will
visually be reminded of the meaning of
the ISO symbol. The parking brake
control and the representative ISO
symbol are operationally linked.
Further, the meaning of the ISO symbol
is described in the owner’s manuals of
both models.
NHTSA believes that the combination
of the red contrasting color of the ISO
symbol, the message center for the
Captiva, the letter ‘‘P’’ in the ISO
symbol, common ISO symbol usage, the
electric brake apply switch marked with
the ISO symbol, and the owner’s manual
description, will be sufficient to
adequately warn the driver when the
parking brake is set. Also, because the
parking brake automatically releases as
the vehicle transmission is shifted to
drive and the vehicle is driven away,
any possibility of vehicle control and
drivability issues due to brake drag are
eliminated. NHTSA has not received
any consumer complaints regarding the
subject vehicles.
In consideration of the foregoing,
NHTSA has decided that GM has met its
burden of persuasion that the
noncompliance with FMVSS Nos. 101
and 135 is inconsequential to motor
vehicle safety. Accordingly, GM’s
petition is hereby granted and GM is
exempted from the obligation of
providing notification of, and a remedy
for, that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C.
30118 and 30120.
NHTSA notes that the statutory
provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to
PO 00000
Frm 00106
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
file petitions for a determination of
inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to
exempt manufacturers only from the
duties found in sections 30118 and
30120, respectively, to notify owners,
purchasers, and dealers of a defect or
noncompliance and to remedy the
defect or noncompliance. Therefore, this
decision only applies to the subject
noncompliant vehicles that GM 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 GM 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).
Claude H. Harris,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2014–03210 Filed 2–13–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Surface Transportation Board
[Docket No. AB 57 (Sub-No. 61X)]
Soo Line Railroad Company—
Abandonment Exemption—in Racine
County, WI
Soo Line Railroad Company, d/b/a
Canadian Pacific (Soo Line) has filed a
verified notice of exemption under 49
CFR part 1152 subpart F—Exempt
Abandonments to abandon a 10.63-mile
line of railroad located approximately
between milepost 7.8 and milepost
18.43 in Racine County, Wis. The line
traverses United States Postal Service
Zip Codes 53139, 53182, and 53177.
Soo Line has certified that: (1) No
local traffic has moved over the line for
at least two years; (2) any overhead
traffic on the line can be and has been
rerouted over other lines; (3) no formal
complaint filed by a user of rail service
on the line (or by a state or local
government entity acting on behalf of
such user) regarding cessation of service
over the line either is pending with the
Surface Transportation Board (Board) or
with any U.S. District Court or has been
decided in favor of complainant within
the two-year period; and (4) the
requirements at 49 CFR 1105.7(c)
(environmental report), 49 CFR 1105.11
(transmittal letter), 49 CFR 1105.12
(newspaper publication), and 49 CFR
E:\FR\FM\14FEN1.SGM
14FEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 31 (Friday, February 14, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9041-9042]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-03210]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2012-0106; Notice 2]
General Motors, LLC, Grant of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Grant of Petition.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: General Motors, LLC (GM), has determined that certain model
year 2012 Chevrolet Captiva and Buick Verano passenger cars
manufactured between April 6, 2011 and June 4, 2011, do not fully
comply with paragraph S5.2.1 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard
(FMVSS) No. 101, Controls and Displays and paragraph S5.5.5 of FMVSS
No. 135, Light Vehicle Brake Systems. GM has filed an appropriate
report dated June 13, 2012 pursuant to 49 CFR Part 573, Defect and
Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports.
ADDRESSES: For further information on this decision contact Stuart
Seigel, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone (202) 366-5287,
facsimile (202) 366-7002.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. GM's Petition: 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 the petition was published, with a 30-day
public comment period, on November 5, 2012 in the Federal Register (77
FR 66501). No comments were received. To view the petition, and all
supporting documents 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-2012-0106.''
II. Vehicles Involved: Affected are approximately 47,822 model year
2012 Chevrolet Captiva and Buick Verano model passenger cars that were
manufactured between April 6, 2011 and June 4, 2011.
III. Noncompliance: GM explains that the noncompliance is that the
telltales used for Park Brake are displayed using International
Organization for Standardization (ISO) symbols instead of the telltale
symbols required by FMVSS Nos. 101 and 135.
IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S5.2.1 of FMVSS No. 101 Specifically
states in pertinent part:
S5.2.1 Except for the Low Tire Pressure Telltale, each control,
telltale and indicator that is listed in column 1 of Table 1 or
Table 2 must be identified by the symbol specified for it in column
2 or the word or abbreviation specified for it in column 3 of Table
1 or Table 2. If a symbol is used, each symbol provided pursuant to
this paragraph must be substantially similar in form to the symbol
as it appears in Table 1 or Table 2. If a symbol is used, each
symbol provided pursuant to this paragraph must have the
proportional dimensional characteristics of the symbol as it appears
in Table 1 or Table 2. . . .
Paragraph S5.5.5 of FMVSS No. 135 requires in pertinent part:
S5.5.5. Labeling. (a) Each visual indicator shall display a word
or words in accordance with the requirements of Standard No. 101 (49
CFR 571.101) and this section, which shall be legible to the driver
under all daytime and nighttime conditions when activated. Unless
otherwise specified, the words shall have letters not less than 3.2
mm (\1/8\ inch) high and the letters and background shall be of
contrasting colors, one of which is red. Words or symbols in
addition to those required by Standard No. 101 and this section may
be provided for purposes of Clarity. . . .
(d) If separate indicators are used for one or more of the the
conditions described in S5.5.1(a) through S5.5.1(g), the indicators
shall display the following wording:
. . .
(4) If a separate indicator is provided for application of the
parking brake as specified for S5.5.1(c), the single word ``Park''
of the words ``Parking Brake'' may be used. . . .
V. Summary of GM's Analyses: GM stated its belief that although the
instrument cluster telltale symbols are displayed using ISO symbols the
noncompliance is inconsequential to
[[Page 9042]]
motor vehicle safety for the following reasons:
(1) The functionality of all braking systems, including the service
brakes and parking brakes, is not affected by the noncompliance and the
vehicles will operate as intended.
(2) In addition to the parking brake telltale, the Captiva Driver
Information Center (DIC) provides a message when the parking brake is
set. Specifically, when the parking brake is applied and the ISO
parking brake telltale is illuminated, the following message is also
displayed: ``Park Brake Set''
(3) In the noncompliant vehicles, the electronic parking brake
automatically releases when the vehicle transmission is in drive and
the vehicle is driven away.
(4) The description of the parking braking operation, found in the
owner's manual, clearly indicates the ISO parking brake symbol will be
displayed when the parking brake is applied.
(5) The control, which applies and releases the parking brake on
the subject vehicles, is identified with the same ISO symbol that is
used on the telltale to indicate the parking brake is applied.
(6) Other current and previous vehicles manufactured by GM and
other manufacturers use the ISO parking brake symbol in conjunction
with the word ``PARK'', or a common brake telltale incorporating the
subject park brake symbol in conjunction with the word ``BRAKE'' and
the ISO symbol for brake malfunction, to indicate the application of
the parking brake. GM has also, confirmed that the Parking Brake ISO
telltale, in conjunction with the brake malfunction telltale and word
``BRAKE'', has been used on other vehicles and thus the motoring public
has come to associate the ISO park brake symbol with the application of
the parking brake.
(7) GM is unaware of any field or owner complaints or injuries
regarding the subject noncompliance.
In summation, GM believes that the described noncompliance of its
vehicles 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.
VI. NHTSA Decision: NHTSA has reviewed GM's analyses that the
subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
Specifically, the telltale used for Park Brake, displayed using
International Organization for Standardization (ISO) symbol instead of
the telltale symbols required by FMVSS Nos. 101 and 135, poses little
if any risk to motor vehicle safety.
NHTSA agrees with GM's statement that the parking brake telltale
ISO symbol has no effect on brake performance. Vehicle stopping
distance and thus collision avoidance is not compromised due to the
mislabeling. When the parking brake is activated the ISO symbol is
illuminated as required with the letters and background in contrasting
colors, one of which is red for both models, and for the Captiva,
redundant driver notification is also provided in the information
center with the text ``Park Brake Set''. In addition, the ISO symbol
incorporates the capital letter ``P'' which is part of the required
word ``Park'' and the ISO symbol has been used on US-certified vehicles
for many years in conjunction with the required text. Thus, over time,
the ISO symbol has evolved to become increasingly recognizable and
understandable to drivers. The brake apply switch located in the center
console is identified with the same ISO parking brake symbol as the
mislabeled dash telltale. Each time the driver activates the parking
brake he/she will visually be reminded of the meaning of the ISO
symbol. The parking brake control and the representative ISO symbol are
operationally linked. Further, the meaning of the ISO symbol is
described in the owner's manuals of both models.
NHTSA believes that the combination of the red contrasting color of
the ISO symbol, the message center for the Captiva, the letter ``P'' in
the ISO symbol, common ISO symbol usage, the electric brake apply
switch marked with the ISO symbol, and the owner's manual description,
will be sufficient to adequately warn the driver when the parking brake
is set. Also, because the parking brake automatically releases as the
vehicle transmission is shifted to drive and the vehicle is driven
away, any possibility of vehicle control and drivability issues due to
brake drag are eliminated. NHTSA has not received any consumer
complaints regarding the subject vehicles.
In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that GM has
met its burden of persuasion that the noncompliance with FMVSS Nos. 101
and 135 is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, GM's
petition is hereby granted and GM is exempted from the obligation of
providing notification of, and a remedy for, that noncompliance under
49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.
NHTSA notes that the statutory provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to file petitions for a
determination of inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to exempt manufacturers
only from the duties found in sections 30118 and 30120, respectively,
to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or noncompliance
and to remedy the defect or noncompliance. Therefore, this decision
only applies to the subject noncompliant vehicles that GM 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 GM
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).
Claude H. Harris,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2014-03210 Filed 2-13-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
