Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC, and Daimler AG (DAG), Denial of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 47718-47720 [2014-19191]
Download as PDF
47718
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 157 / Thursday, August 14, 2014 / Notices
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., e.t., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Privacy Act
All comments received will be posted
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov and will include
any personal information you have
provided. Anyone may search the
electronic form of all comments
received into any of our 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, etc.).
You may review DOT’s complete
Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
Register published on January 17, 2008
(73 FR 3316), or you may visit https://
edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/pdf/E8–
785.pdf.
Issued on: August 7, 2014.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2014–19250 Filed 8–13–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2012–0007; Notice 2]
Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC, and Daimler
AG (DAG), Denial of Petition for
Decision of Inconsequential
Noncompliance
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Denial of Petition.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC 1
(MBUSA) and its parent company
Daimler AG (DAG)(collectively referred
to as ‘‘MBUSA’’) have determined that
certain model year 2011 and 2012
Mercedes-Benz S-Class (221 platform)
passenger cars do not fully comply with
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard
(FMVSS) No. 138, Tire Pressure
Monitoring Systems (TPMS),
specifically the requirements in
paragraph S4.4. MBUSA filed a report
for the nonconformance pursuant to 49
CFR Part 573, Defect and
Noncompliance Responsibility and
Reports, on September 30, 2011.
ADDRESSES: For further information on
this decision please contact Mr. Maurice
Hicks, Office of Vehicle Safety
1 Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC, and Daimler AG are
motor vehicle manufacturers and importers.
Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC is a limited liability
company organized under the laws of Delaware.
Daimler AG is organized under the laws of the
Federal Republic of Germany.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:42 Aug 13, 2014
Jkt 232001
Compliance, the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
telephone (202) 366–1708, facsimile
(202) 366–5930.
SUPPLEMENTRY INFORMATION: I. MBUSA’s
Petition: Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d)
and 30120(h) and the rule implementing
those provisions at 49 CFR Part 556, on
October 28, 2011, MBUSA filed 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.
Notice of receipt of the petition was
published, with a 30-day public
comment period, on June 27, 2012, in
the Federal Register (77 FR 38391). 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–
0007.’’
MUBUSA subsequently submitted
clarifying information relevant to its
Part 556 petition on May 8, 2014, which
has been placed in the docket. NHTSA
has considered this information in
response to the petition.
II. Vehicles Involved: The affected
vehicles included approximately 4,769
model years 2011 and 2012 MercedesBenz S-Class (221 platform) passenger
cars that were produced from March
2011 through August 2011. MBUSA
subsequently corrected the noncompliance in 4,510 vehicles through a
service campaign; MBUSA recently
reported 252 vehicles have yet to be
corrected.
III. Noncompliance: In the subject
Mercedes S-Class vehicles, the tire
pressure monitoring system malfunction
indicators required by S4.4 may not
illuminate in the manner required by
FMVSS 138 due to a software
misprogramming that was applied to
these vehicles.
IV. Rule Text: Section S4.4 of FMVSS
No. 138 states specifically:
S4.4 TPMS malfunction.
(a) The vehicle shall be equipped with a
tire pressure monitoring system that includes
a telltale that provides a warning to the
driver not more than 20 minutes after the
occurrence of a malfunction that affects the
generation or transmission of control or
response signals in the vehicle’s tire pressure
monitoring system. The vehicle’s TPMS
malfunction indicator shall meet the
requirements of either S4.4(b) or S4.4(c).
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Dedicated TPMS malfunction telltale.
The vehicle meets the requirements of S4.4(a)
when equipped with a dedicated TPMS
malfunction telltale that:
PO 00000
Frm 00107
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
(1) Is mounted inside the occupant
compartment in front of and in clear view of
the driver;
(2) Is identified by the word ‘‘TPMS’’ as
described under the ‘‘Tire Pressure
Monitoring System Malfunction’’ Telltale in
Table 1 of Standard No. 101 (49 CFR
571.101);
(3) Continues to illuminate the TPMS
malfunction telltale under the conditions
specified in S4.4(a) for as long as the
malfunction exists, whenever the ignition
locking system is in the ‘‘On’’ (‘‘Run’’)
position; and
(c) Combination low tire pressure/TPMS
malfunction telltale. The vehicle meets the
requirements of S4.4(a) when equipped with
a combined Low Tire Pressure/TPMS
malfunction telltale that:
(1) Meets the requirements of S4.2 and
S4.3; and
(2) Flashes for a period of at least 60
seconds but no longer than 90 seconds upon
detection of any condition specified in
S4.4(a) after the ignition locking system is
activated to the ‘‘On’’ (‘‘Run’’) position. After
each period of prescribed flashing, the
telltale must remain continuously
illuminated as long as a malfunction exists
and the ignition locking system is in the
‘‘On’’ (‘‘Run’’) position. This flashing and
illumination sequence must be repeated each
time the ignition locking system is placed in
the ‘‘On’’ (‘‘Run’’) position until the situation
causing the malfunction has been corrected.
Multiple malfunctions occurring during any
ignition cycle may, but are not required to,
reinitiate the prescribed flashing sequence.
V. Summary of MBUSA’s Analyses:
MBUSA stated its belief that the subject
noncompliances to paragraphs S4.4(b)
and (c) are inconsequential for the
following reasons:
Absence of Flashing ‘‘Malfunction’’
Telltale: In the subject vehicles, the
TPMS malfunction indicator required
by S4.4 may not illuminate in the
manner required by FMVSS No. 138 due
to a software programming error that
occurred in a limited number of
vehicles. The subject vehicles use one of
the telltale symbols specified for
‘‘combination’’ telltales (the vehicle
icon) which activate when 1, 2 or 3
wheel sensors are missing or
malfunctioning. Because this particular
symbol is used, the vehicle is required
to comply with the ‘‘combination low
pressure/TPMS malfunction’’ telltale
requirements of FMVSS No. 138
paragraph S4.4(c)(2). Accordingly, a
‘‘combination’’ telltale indicator is
required to flash for 60–90 seconds to
notify the driver of a system
malfunction, and then to remain
continuously illuminated. When
indicating a low inflation pressure
condition, the combination telltale
indicator is required to illuminate and
remain continuously illuminated upon
successive restarts of the vehicle until
the low pressure condition is corrected.
E:\FR\FM\14AUN1.SGM
14AUN1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 157 / Thursday, August 14, 2014 / Notices
The subject vehicles display a steady
vehicle symbol, plus the following four
additional pieces of information, which
directly communicate the specific
nature of the system malfunction: (1)
The actual tire pressure on each wheel
with a sensor; (2) two blank dashes next
to a wheel with faulty sensors/signals;
(3) the word ‘‘Service’’ on the bottom of
the display; and (4) a clear text message
expressly stating ‘‘Wheel Sensor(s)
Missing.’’ MBUSA believes the failure of
the malfunction telltale to flash in the
subject vehicles has no negative impact
on safety because the additional
supplemental data in the subject
vehicles addresses the underlying
purpose of the flashing requirement,
and more than compensates for the
absence of an initial flashing.
In developing the TPMS regulations,
MBUSA believes that NHTSA
recognized that flashing of the TPMS
malfunction warning should not be
required for all vehicles and TPMS
systems, depending on the
distinctiveness and level of information
contained in the malfunction indicator
warning. For this same reason, the
requirements for ‘‘dedicated’’
malfunction telltales at FMVSS No. 138
paragraph S4.4(b) do not require any
flashing of the telltale upon initial
detection of a fault or malfunction.
MBUSA opines the agency recognized
that malfunction indicator telltales with
sufficiently clear or distinct information
alerting the driver to a problem with the
function of their TPMS, as opposed to
a low tire inflation pressure, did not
need to flash in order to adequately alert
the driver to a problem with the system.
MBUSA believes that the additional
text messaging is much more effective at
conveying important safety information
than relying on owners to review the
owner’s manual, and understand the
distinction between a steady or flashing
symbol with no words.
Malfunction Involving All Four
Wheel Sensors: When all four wheel
sensors are missing or inoperative, the
subject vehicles utilize a dedicated
warning: ‘‘Tire pressure monitor
inoperative.’’ MBUSA states the
warning exceeds the minimum
requirement (‘‘TPMS’’) and displays a
clear and concise malfunction message
that informs the driver clearly and
precisely about what is wrong with the
vehicle. However, this dedicated
malfunction telltale indicator will not
re-illuminate upon subsequent drive
cycles or after being manually cleared
from the instrument cluster. While the
message is always available when the
driver manually scrolls through the
TPMS menu, the message does not
continue to illuminate whenever the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:42 Aug 13, 2014
Jkt 232001
vehicle is ‘‘on’’ as required by FMVSS
No. 138 S4.4(b)(3).
MBUSA believes, although
theoretically possible for all four wheel
sensors to fail simultaneously, there is
no evidence to support the occurrence
in real world use. The subject vehicles
have been in use for 3.5 calendar years,
and MBUSA has received no complaints
or concerns related to this TPMS
monitoring issue from dealers or
customers. Likewise, there have been no
reports of accidents, injuries or
incidents related to the failure of this
TPMS warning to repeat. The
probability of such a situation occurring
is virtually impossible especially
considering that all four sensors would
need to fail at the same time, not just
separately. A much more likely
malfunction scenario would be where
one (or in a very unlikely situation two)
sensor signal fails in sequence, which
would provide the operator with
repeated warnings of the need to repair
the wheel sensors upon each vehicle
restart.
In fact, the only situation MBUSA
believes would create the
noncompliance would involve cases
where owners would go to considerable
effort to remove all four wheels (for
example to replace the standard wheels
with snow tires). In such a situation, the
owner would be well aware that the
wheels with sensors had been removed,
and there would be no need to
continually repeat the warning at each
vehicle restart.
MBUSA further states that because
the subject vehicles display an initial
notification of the loss of four wheel
sensors that provides significantly more
information than the minimum
regulatory functionality of the telltale,
this noncompliance has an
inconsequential impact on motor
vehicle safety. In comparison, a
dedicated malfunction telltale simply
displays the abbreviation ‘‘TPMS’’ in
yellow with no flashing. In the subject
vehicles, rather than display a simple
abbreviation, which would require the
use of the owner’s manual to determine
that the message indicated a
malfunction (as opposed to a low tire
pressure situation, for example), the
display specifically states that the ‘‘Tire
Pressure Monitor’’ is ‘‘inoperative,’’ and
more specifically that ‘‘No Wheel
Sensors’’ are detected. With this
enhanced level of information and
clarity, it is not necessary for this
particular message to repeat upon each
vehicle re-start, especially given how
rare this unique situation would be in
actual use.
MBUSA Repair Service Campaign:
Since submitting the October 2011
PO 00000
Frm 00108
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
47719
petition, MSUSA has reprogrammed
4,510 of the subject vehicles during
normal scheduled maintenance as a part
of a service campaign initiated on
February 2012 (Campaign No.
2012010006). There are now 240 (or
fewer) vehicles in the field with the
incorrect TPMS programming.
On May 8, 2014, MBUSA submitted
an update to its original petition for
exemption. MBUSA argues that, while it
may be theoretically possible, many
factors exist that would reduce the
likelihood for owners to have
replacement wheels installed without
TPMS wheel sensors. All replacement
wheels sold by authorized Mercedes
dealerships will always have TPMS
sensors included (either the original
ones transferred or new ones) and
recognizing the cost (above $100,000 on
average) and age of these vehicles, SClass owners will always likely choose
to have their wheels and tires replaced
at authorized Mercedes dealerships.
MBUSA also argues that information
is provided in the Operator’s Manual
clearly stating that ‘‘for safety reasons,
Mercedes-Benz recommends that you
only use tires, wheels and accessories
which have been approved by
Mercedes-Benz specifically for your
vehicle,’’ and ‘‘Always have the tires
changed at a qualified specialist
workshop, e.g. an authorized MercedesBenz Center.’’ It also states that the
TPMS telltale should always be checked
which would premise that there is no
reason to expect that sensors would not
be used. Even in the case of needing
snow tires, MBUSA contends it
provides sufficient information to its
owners to encourage them to purchase
upgraded optional performance
packages (i.e., 4-matic all-wheel drive
configuration with aggressive all season
radial tires) which would preclude the
need for snow tires.
In summation, MBUSA stated that, for
all the reasons cited, this technical
noncompliance does not represent a
‘‘significant safety risk.’’ Because the
TPMS noncompliance identified above
is inconsequential to motor vehicle
safety MBUSA requests an exemption
from the notification and remedy
provisions of the Motor Vehicle Safety
Act, which would serve no reasonable
purpose under these circumstances.
VI. NHTSA’S Analysis of MBUSA’s
Arguments: MBUSA’s petition identifies
two noncompliances with S4.4 of the
Standard:
1. Absence of telltale flashing for
malfunction involving 1–3 wheel
sensors
2. Malfunction involving all four
wheel sensors
E:\FR\FM\14AUN1.SGM
14AUN1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
47720
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 157 / Thursday, August 14, 2014 / Notices
Regarding the malfunction telltale
that does not initially flash for 60–90
seconds, MBUSA has provided the
required visual telltale, a combined
telltale which is the plan view of the
vehicle, although one that does not flash
before it remains continuously
illuminated, but instead adds several
additional text messages that clearly
communicate a system malfunction and
continue to be displayed until the
malfunction has been corrected. NHTSA
believes that because the subject
vehicles contain this additional
information, the failure of the vehicle’s
malfunction telltale to initially flash has
an inconsequential impact on safety.
MBUSA’s second noncompliance
involves the scenario where all four
wheel sensors are simultaneously
malfunctioning or missing. Under this
scenario the subject vehicle’s TPMS will
initially display a separate dedicated
malfunction warning, but will not
automatically display the warning on
subsequent ignition cycles as required
by FMVSS No. 138 S4.4(b)(3). MBUSA
judges the noncompliance
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety
on the basis that, although the situation
presents a technical noncompliance
with FMVSS 138 No. S4.4, there is no
negative impact on safety, because the
circumstances causing the noncompliance can only exist if owners
deliberately decide to install
replacement wheels without TPMS
sensors. MBUSA asserts there is no
reason to assume that replacement
wheels will not have TPMS sensors
given the normal experiences of S-Class
owners and existing precautions.
MBUSA also points out that the absence
of a ‘‘significant safety risk’’
substantiates exemption from
notification and remedy requirements as
NHTSA explained in the Volkswagen’s
petition for inconsequential treatment of
a noncompliance with the TPMS
malfunction warning requirements of
FMVSS No. 138 S4.4(c)(2) (76 FR 30240,
May 24, 2010).
The intent of FMVSS No. 138 is stated
in paragraph S1 Purpose and scope:
This standard specifies performance
requirements for TPMSs to warn drivers
of significant under-inflation of tires
and the resulting safety problems. A
malfunction will reduce the
effectiveness of the TPMS or, in some
scenarios, can render it inoperative. As
such, the lack of a malfunction indicator
to warn the driver of a malfunction until
the malfunction has been resolved is
one of the critical requirements of the
standard to address the safety concerns
of an inoperative TPMS. MBUSA
contends that there is no safety risk but
fails to acknowledge that a vehicle
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:42 Aug 13, 2014
Jkt 232001
owner in some cases may not be aware
that the wheel sensors have been
removed. For example, if the ignition
were cycled by a second party after the
sensors were removed and prior to the
vehicle being returned to the owner, the
owner may never see the first and only
malfunction indication. The potential
risk is that the vehicle can then be
operated with a TPMS that appears to be
functioning properly. It also is possible
after long periods of time for owners to
forget that the wheel sensors are missing
or even for a subsequent owner to
purchase one of the 252 vehicles
without knowing the sensors are
missing. When a low inflation pressure
condition occurs, these owners would
not be warned, and this condition could
lead to a vehicle crash.
MBUSA also explained that
replacement wheels will always have
TPMS sensors included (either the
original ones transferred or new ones)
and that statements in the MB S-Class
Operator’s Manual or optional OEM tire
and wheel packages can address a
variety of use conditions which will
discourage the use of unapproved tires
and rims and encourage the use of
wheel sensors. Despite these factors,
NHTSA believes the possibility still
remains for owners to install wheel
packages not having TPMS sensors. For
example, an authorized dealership may
not be in close proximity to an owner
or an owner may want custom wheels
or upsized wheel options that are not
available through MBUSA. In these
instances, there would be a safety risk
for these owners.
Finally, MBUSA believes that owner’s
manual warnings or its marketing of
optional equipment are sufficient
enough to prevent owners from entering
into misuse situations. However,
owner’s manuals may be ignored or not
read by vehicle owners and there is no
guarantee that a manual will remain
with the vehicle throughout its entire
useful life. Furthermore, owners may
also choose not to buy MBUSA optional
tire and wheel packages for economic
reasons (i.e., these packages may cost
considerably more). Therefore, given
these factors, NHTSA concludes
MBUSA’s claim that the noncompliance
has no significant safety risk is
unsubstantiated.
VII. NHTSA’s Decision: In
consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA
has decided that MBUSA has not met its
burden of persuasion that the FMVSS
No. 138 noncompliance identified in its
Part 573 Report and Petition is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
Accordingly, MBUSA’s petition is
hereby denied. For the remaining
vehicles not remedied, MBUSA must
PO 00000
Frm 00109
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
notify owners, purchasers and dealers
pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118 and
provide 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).
Nancy Lummen Lewis,
Associate Administrator for Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2014–19191 Filed 8–13–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2013–0145; Notice 2]
KBC America, Inc., Grant of Petition for
Decision of Inconsequential
Noncompliance
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Grant of Petition.
AGENCY:
KBC America, Inc. ‘‘KBCA’’
has determined that certain motorcycle
helmets manufactured by KBC
Corporation for Harley-Davidson as
Harley-Davidson brand helmets do not
fully comply with paragraph S5.6 of
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard
(FMVSS) No. 218, Motorcycle Helmets.
KBCA has filed an appropriate report
dated December 12, 2013, pursuant to
49 CFR part 573, Defect and
Noncompliance Responsibility and
Reports.
SUMMARY:
For further information on
this decision contact Claudia Covell,
Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA), telephone
(202) 366–5293, facsimile (202) 366–
5930.
ADDRESSES:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. KBCA’s Petition: Pursuant to 49
U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) (see
implementing rule at 49 CFR part 556),
KBCA 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.
Notice of receipt of KBCA’s petition
was published, with a 30-day public
comment period, on June 6, 2014 in the
Federal Register (79 FR 32817). One
comment was received. In that
comment, Harley-Davidson Motor
Company reiterated KBCA’s points
supporting their belief that the
noncompliance is inconsequential to
E:\FR\FM\14AUN1.SGM
14AUN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 157 (Thursday, August 14, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47718-47720]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-19191]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2012-0007; Notice 2]
Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC, and Daimler AG (DAG), Denial of Petition
for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Denial of Petition.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC \1\ (MBUSA) and its parent company
Daimler AG (DAG)(collectively referred to as ``MBUSA'') have determined
that certain model year 2011 and 2012 Mercedes-Benz S-Class (221
platform) passenger cars do not fully comply with Federal Motor Vehicle
Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 138, Tire Pressure Monitoring Systems
(TPMS), specifically the requirements in paragraph S4.4. MBUSA filed a
report for the nonconformance pursuant to 49 CFR Part 573, Defect and
Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports, on September 30, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC, and Daimler AG are motor vehicle
manufacturers and importers. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC is a limited
liability company organized under the laws of Delaware. Daimler AG
is organized under the laws of the Federal Republic of Germany.
ADDRESSES: For further information on this decision please contact Mr.
Maurice Hicks, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone (202) 366-
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1708, facsimile (202) 366-5930.
SUPPLEMENTRY INFORMATION: I. MBUSA's Petition: Pursuant to 49 U.S.C.
30118(d) and 30120(h) and the rule implementing those provisions at 49
CFR Part 556, on October 28, 2011, MBUSA filed 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.
Notice of receipt of the petition was published, with a 30-day
public comment period, on June 27, 2012, in the Federal Register (77 FR
38391). 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-2012-0007.''
MUBUSA subsequently submitted clarifying information relevant to
its Part 556 petition on May 8, 2014, which has been placed in the
docket. NHTSA has considered this information in response to the
petition.
II. Vehicles Involved: The affected vehicles included approximately
4,769 model years 2011 and 2012 Mercedes-Benz S-Class (221 platform)
passenger cars that were produced from March 2011 through August 2011.
MBUSA subsequently corrected the non-compliance in 4,510 vehicles
through a service campaign; MBUSA recently reported 252 vehicles have
yet to be corrected.
III. Noncompliance: In the subject Mercedes S-Class vehicles, the
tire pressure monitoring system malfunction indicators required by S4.4
may not illuminate in the manner required by FMVSS 138 due to a
software misprogramming that was applied to these vehicles.
IV. Rule Text: Section S4.4 of FMVSS No. 138 states specifically:
S4.4 TPMS malfunction.
(a) The vehicle shall be equipped with a tire pressure
monitoring system that includes a telltale that provides a warning
to the driver not more than 20 minutes after the occurrence of a
malfunction that affects the generation or transmission of control
or response signals in the vehicle's tire pressure monitoring
system. The vehicle's TPMS malfunction indicator shall meet the
requirements of either S4.4(b) or S4.4(c).
* * * * *
(b) Dedicated TPMS malfunction telltale. The vehicle meets the
requirements of S4.4(a) when equipped with a dedicated TPMS
malfunction telltale that:
(1) Is mounted inside the occupant compartment in front of and
in clear view of the driver;
(2) Is identified by the word ``TPMS'' as described under the
``Tire Pressure Monitoring System Malfunction'' Telltale in Table 1
of Standard No. 101 (49 CFR 571.101);
(3) Continues to illuminate the TPMS malfunction telltale under
the conditions specified in S4.4(a) for as long as the malfunction
exists, whenever the ignition locking system is in the ``On''
(``Run'') position; and
(c) Combination low tire pressure/TPMS malfunction telltale. The
vehicle meets the requirements of S4.4(a) when equipped with a
combined Low Tire Pressure/TPMS malfunction telltale that:
(1) Meets the requirements of S4.2 and S4.3; and
(2) Flashes for a period of at least 60 seconds but no longer
than 90 seconds upon detection of any condition specified in S4.4(a)
after the ignition locking system is activated to the ``On''
(``Run'') position. After each period of prescribed flashing, the
telltale must remain continuously illuminated as long as a
malfunction exists and the ignition locking system is in the ``On''
(``Run'') position. This flashing and illumination sequence must be
repeated each time the ignition locking system is placed in the
``On'' (``Run'') position until the situation causing the
malfunction has been corrected. Multiple malfunctions occurring
during any ignition cycle may, but are not required to, reinitiate
the prescribed flashing sequence.
V. Summary of MBUSA's Analyses: MBUSA stated its belief that the
subject noncompliances to paragraphs S4.4(b) and (c) are
inconsequential for the following reasons:
Absence of Flashing ``Malfunction'' Telltale: In the subject
vehicles, the TPMS malfunction indicator required by S4.4 may not
illuminate in the manner required by FMVSS No. 138 due to a software
programming error that occurred in a limited number of vehicles. The
subject vehicles use one of the telltale symbols specified for
``combination'' telltales (the vehicle icon) which activate when 1, 2
or 3 wheel sensors are missing or malfunctioning. Because this
particular symbol is used, the vehicle is required to comply with the
``combination low pressure/TPMS malfunction'' telltale requirements of
FMVSS No. 138 paragraph S4.4(c)(2). Accordingly, a ``combination''
telltale indicator is required to flash for 60-90 seconds to notify the
driver of a system malfunction, and then to remain continuously
illuminated. When indicating a low inflation pressure condition, the
combination telltale indicator is required to illuminate and remain
continuously illuminated upon successive restarts of the vehicle until
the low pressure condition is corrected.
[[Page 47719]]
The subject vehicles display a steady vehicle symbol, plus the
following four additional pieces of information, which directly
communicate the specific nature of the system malfunction: (1) The
actual tire pressure on each wheel with a sensor; (2) two blank dashes
next to a wheel with faulty sensors/signals; (3) the word ``Service''
on the bottom of the display; and (4) a clear text message expressly
stating ``Wheel Sensor(s) Missing.'' MBUSA believes the failure of the
malfunction telltale to flash in the subject vehicles has no negative
impact on safety because the additional supplemental data in the
subject vehicles addresses the underlying purpose of the flashing
requirement, and more than compensates for the absence of an initial
flashing.
In developing the TPMS regulations, MBUSA believes that NHTSA
recognized that flashing of the TPMS malfunction warning should not be
required for all vehicles and TPMS systems, depending on the
distinctiveness and level of information contained in the malfunction
indicator warning. For this same reason, the requirements for
``dedicated'' malfunction telltales at FMVSS No. 138 paragraph S4.4(b)
do not require any flashing of the telltale upon initial detection of a
fault or malfunction. MBUSA opines the agency recognized that
malfunction indicator telltales with sufficiently clear or distinct
information alerting the driver to a problem with the function of their
TPMS, as opposed to a low tire inflation pressure, did not need to
flash in order to adequately alert the driver to a problem with the
system.
MBUSA believes that the additional text messaging is much more
effective at conveying important safety information than relying on
owners to review the owner's manual, and understand the distinction
between a steady or flashing symbol with no words.
Malfunction Involving All Four Wheel Sensors: When all four wheel
sensors are missing or inoperative, the subject vehicles utilize a
dedicated warning: ``Tire pressure monitor inoperative.'' MBUSA states
the warning exceeds the minimum requirement (``TPMS'') and displays a
clear and concise malfunction message that informs the driver clearly
and precisely about what is wrong with the vehicle. However, this
dedicated malfunction telltale indicator will not re-illuminate upon
subsequent drive cycles or after being manually cleared from the
instrument cluster. While the message is always available when the
driver manually scrolls through the TPMS menu, the message does not
continue to illuminate whenever the vehicle is ``on'' as required by
FMVSS No. 138 S4.4(b)(3).
MBUSA believes, although theoretically possible for all four wheel
sensors to fail simultaneously, there is no evidence to support the
occurrence in real world use. The subject vehicles have been in use for
3.5 calendar years, and MBUSA has received no complaints or concerns
related to this TPMS monitoring issue from dealers or customers.
Likewise, there have been no reports of accidents, injuries or
incidents related to the failure of this TPMS warning to repeat. The
probability of such a situation occurring is virtually impossible
especially considering that all four sensors would need to fail at the
same time, not just separately. A much more likely malfunction scenario
would be where one (or in a very unlikely situation two) sensor signal
fails in sequence, which would provide the operator with repeated
warnings of the need to repair the wheel sensors upon each vehicle
restart.
In fact, the only situation MBUSA believes would create the
noncompliance would involve cases where owners would go to considerable
effort to remove all four wheels (for example to replace the standard
wheels with snow tires). In such a situation, the owner would be well
aware that the wheels with sensors had been removed, and there would be
no need to continually repeat the warning at each vehicle restart.
MBUSA further states that because the subject vehicles display an
initial notification of the loss of four wheel sensors that provides
significantly more information than the minimum regulatory
functionality of the telltale, this noncompliance has an
inconsequential impact on motor vehicle safety. In comparison, a
dedicated malfunction telltale simply displays the abbreviation
``TPMS'' in yellow with no flashing. In the subject vehicles, rather
than display a simple abbreviation, which would require the use of the
owner's manual to determine that the message indicated a malfunction
(as opposed to a low tire pressure situation, for example), the display
specifically states that the ``Tire Pressure Monitor'' is
``inoperative,'' and more specifically that ``No Wheel Sensors'' are
detected. With this enhanced level of information and clarity, it is
not necessary for this particular message to repeat upon each vehicle
re-start, especially given how rare this unique situation would be in
actual use.
MBUSA Repair Service Campaign: Since submitting the October 2011
petition, MSUSA has reprogrammed 4,510 of the subject vehicles during
normal scheduled maintenance as a part of a service campaign initiated
on February 2012 (Campaign No. 2012010006). There are now 240 (or
fewer) vehicles in the field with the incorrect TPMS programming.
On May 8, 2014, MBUSA submitted an update to its original petition
for exemption. MBUSA argues that, while it may be theoretically
possible, many factors exist that would reduce the likelihood for
owners to have replacement wheels installed without TPMS wheel sensors.
All replacement wheels sold by authorized Mercedes dealerships will
always have TPMS sensors included (either the original ones transferred
or new ones) and recognizing the cost (above $100,000 on average) and
age of these vehicles, S-Class owners will always likely choose to have
their wheels and tires replaced at authorized Mercedes dealerships.
MBUSA also argues that information is provided in the Operator's
Manual clearly stating that ``for safety reasons, Mercedes-Benz
recommends that you only use tires, wheels and accessories which have
been approved by Mercedes-Benz specifically for your vehicle,'' and
``Always have the tires changed at a qualified specialist workshop,
e.g. an authorized Mercedes-Benz Center.'' It also states that the TPMS
telltale should always be checked which would premise that there is no
reason to expect that sensors would not be used. Even in the case of
needing snow tires, MBUSA contends it provides sufficient information
to its owners to encourage them to purchase upgraded optional
performance packages (i.e., 4-matic all-wheel drive configuration with
aggressive all season radial tires) which would preclude the need for
snow tires.
In summation, MBUSA stated that, for all the reasons cited, this
technical noncompliance does not represent a ``significant safety
risk.'' Because the TPMS noncompliance identified above is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety MBUSA requests an exemption
from the notification and remedy provisions of the Motor Vehicle Safety
Act, which would serve no reasonable purpose under these circumstances.
VI. NHTSA'S Analysis of MBUSA's Arguments: MBUSA's petition
identifies two noncompliances with S4.4 of the Standard:
1. Absence of telltale flashing for malfunction involving 1-3 wheel
sensors
2. Malfunction involving all four wheel sensors
[[Page 47720]]
Regarding the malfunction telltale that does not initially flash
for 60-90 seconds, MBUSA has provided the required visual telltale, a
combined telltale which is the plan view of the vehicle, although one
that does not flash before it remains continuously illuminated, but
instead adds several additional text messages that clearly communicate
a system malfunction and continue to be displayed until the malfunction
has been corrected. NHTSA believes that because the subject vehicles
contain this additional information, the failure of the vehicle's
malfunction telltale to initially flash has an inconsequential impact
on safety.
MBUSA's second noncompliance involves the scenario where all four
wheel sensors are simultaneously malfunctioning or missing. Under this
scenario the subject vehicle's TPMS will initially display a separate
dedicated malfunction warning, but will not automatically display the
warning on subsequent ignition cycles as required by FMVSS No. 138
S4.4(b)(3). MBUSA judges the noncompliance inconsequential to motor
vehicle safety on the basis that, although the situation presents a
technical noncompliance with FMVSS 138 No. S4.4, there is no negative
impact on safety, because the circumstances causing the non-compliance
can only exist if owners deliberately decide to install replacement
wheels without TPMS sensors. MBUSA asserts there is no reason to assume
that replacement wheels will not have TPMS sensors given the normal
experiences of S-Class owners and existing precautions. MBUSA also
points out that the absence of a ``significant safety risk''
substantiates exemption from notification and remedy requirements as
NHTSA explained in the Volkswagen's petition for inconsequential
treatment of a noncompliance with the TPMS malfunction warning
requirements of FMVSS No. 138 S4.4(c)(2) (76 FR 30240, May 24, 2010).
The intent of FMVSS No. 138 is stated in paragraph S1 Purpose and
scope: This standard specifies performance requirements for TPMSs to
warn drivers of significant under-inflation of tires and the resulting
safety problems. A malfunction will reduce the effectiveness of the
TPMS or, in some scenarios, can render it inoperative. As such, the
lack of a malfunction indicator to warn the driver of a malfunction
until the malfunction has been resolved is one of the critical
requirements of the standard to address the safety concerns of an
inoperative TPMS. MBUSA contends that there is no safety risk but fails
to acknowledge that a vehicle owner in some cases may not be aware that
the wheel sensors have been removed. For example, if the ignition were
cycled by a second party after the sensors were removed and prior to
the vehicle being returned to the owner, the owner may never see the
first and only malfunction indication. The potential risk is that the
vehicle can then be operated with a TPMS that appears to be functioning
properly. It also is possible after long periods of time for owners to
forget that the wheel sensors are missing or even for a subsequent
owner to purchase one of the 252 vehicles without knowing the sensors
are missing. When a low inflation pressure condition occurs, these
owners would not be warned, and this condition could lead to a vehicle
crash.
MBUSA also explained that replacement wheels will always have TPMS
sensors included (either the original ones transferred or new ones) and
that statements in the MB S-Class Operator's Manual or optional OEM
tire and wheel packages can address a variety of use conditions which
will discourage the use of unapproved tires and rims and encourage the
use of wheel sensors. Despite these factors, NHTSA believes the
possibility still remains for owners to install wheel packages not
having TPMS sensors. For example, an authorized dealership may not be
in close proximity to an owner or an owner may want custom wheels or
upsized wheel options that are not available through MBUSA. In these
instances, there would be a safety risk for these owners.
Finally, MBUSA believes that owner's manual warnings or its
marketing of optional equipment are sufficient enough to prevent owners
from entering into misuse situations. However, owner's manuals may be
ignored or not read by vehicle owners and there is no guarantee that a
manual will remain with the vehicle throughout its entire useful life.
Furthermore, owners may also choose not to buy MBUSA optional tire and
wheel packages for economic reasons (i.e., these packages may cost
considerably more). Therefore, given these factors, NHTSA concludes
MBUSA's claim that the noncompliance has no significant safety risk is
unsubstantiated.
VII. NHTSA's Decision: In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has
decided that MBUSA has not met its burden of persuasion that the FMVSS
No. 138 noncompliance identified in its Part 573 Report and Petition is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, MBUSA's petition
is hereby denied. For the remaining vehicles not remedied, MBUSA must
notify owners, purchasers and dealers pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118 and
provide 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).
Nancy Lummen Lewis,
Associate Administrator for Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2014-19191 Filed 8-13-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P