General Motors, LLC, Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 33334-33336 [2015-14255]

Download as PDF mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 33334 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 112 / Thursday, June 11, 2015 / Notices received, please enclose a stamped, selfaddressed postcard with the comments. Note that all comments received will be posted without change to http:// www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. Documents submitted to a docket may be viewed by anyone at the address and times given above. The documents may also be viewed on the Internet at http:// www.regulations.gov by following the online instructions for accessing the dockets. DOT’s complete Privacy Act Statement is available for review in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000, (65 FR 19477–78). The petition, supporting materials, and all comments received before the close of business on the closing date indicated below will be filed and will be considered. All comments and supporting materials received after the closing date will also be filed and will be considered to the extent possible. When the petition is granted or denied, notice of the decision will be published in the Federal Register pursuant to the authority indicated below. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Tireco’s Petition: Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) (see implementing rule at 49 CFR part 556), Tireco 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 Tireco’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. II. Tires Involved: Affected are approximately 1,600 Tireco brand Power King Traction size 8.25–20E/10, Power King Traction size 9.00–20 E/10, Milestar Traction size 8.25–20 E/10, and Milestar Traction size 9.00–20 E/10 replacement tires. These tires were manufactured between March 1, 2014 and March 22, 2015. III. Noncompliance: Tireco explains that the noncompliance is that the Tire Information Numbers (TINs) required to be marked on the tire sidewalls by paragraph S6.5(b) of FMVSS No. 119 are incomplete because they do not include the tire size codes required by 49 CFR part 574.5(b). IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S6.5 of FMVSS No. 119 requires in pertinent part: S6.5 Tire Markings. Except as specified in this paragraph, each tire shall be marked on each sidewall with the information in paragraph (a) through (j) of this section. The VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Jun 10, 2015 Jkt 235001 markings shall be placed between the maximum section width (exclusive of sidewall decorations or curb ribs) and the bead on at least one sidewall, unless the maximum section width of the tire is located in an area which is not more than one-fourth of the distance from the bead to the shoulder of the tire. If the maximum section width falls within that area, the markings shall appear between the bead and a point one-half the distance from the bead to the shoulder of the tire, on at least one sidewall. The markings shall be in letters and numerals not less than 2 mm (0.078 inch) high and raised above or sunk below the tire surface not less than 0.4 mm (0.015 inch), except that the marking depth shall be not less than 0.25mm (0.010 inch) in the case of motorcycle tires. The tire identification and the DOT symbol labeling shall comply with part 574 of this chapter. Markings may appear on only one sidewall and the entire sidewall area may be used in the case of motorcycle tires and recreational, boat, baggage, and special trailer tires . . . (b) The tire identification number required by part 574 of this chapter. This number may be marked on only one sidewall. V. Summary of TIRECO’s Analyses: Tireco state its belief that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety for the following reasons: (A) Tireco believes that the absence of the tire size code from the TIN has no impact on the operational performance of the subject tires or on the safety of vehicles on which the subject tires are mounted because the subject tires meet or exceed all of the applicable performance requirements specified by FMVSS No. 119. (B) Tireco states that even though the size code is absent from the TIN, the tire size information is readily available to consumers in a more understandable way by virtue of the actual tire size marking on the sidewalls. (C) Tireco also states that in the unlikely event that any of the subject tires are ever found to contain a defect or a substantive noncompliance that would warrant a recall, the recalled tires could be adequately identified through the partial [T]IN that is stamped on the sidewall. (D) Tireco referenced inconsequentiality petitions NHTSA has previously granted in the past that have addressed what it believes are similar issues. Tireco is not aware of any crashes, injuries, customer complaints, or field reports associated with the subject noncompliance. Tireco has additionally informed NHTSA that the fabricating manufacturer has corrected the molds at the manufacturing plant so that no additional tires will be manufactured with the noncompliance. PO 00000 Frm 00107 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 In summation, Tireco believes that the described noncompliance of the subject tires is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety, and that its petition, to exempt Tireco from providing recall notification of noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118 and remedying the recall noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120 should be granted. NHTSA notes that the statutory provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to file petitions for a determination of inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to exempt manufacturers only from the duties found in sections 30118 and 30120, respectively, to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or noncompliance and to remedy the defect or noncompliance. Therefore, any decision on this petition only applies to the subject tires that Tireco no longer controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance existed. However, any decision on this petition does not relieve tire distributors and dealers of the prohibitions on the sale, offer for sale, or introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate commerce of the noncompliant tires under their control after Tireco 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). Jeffrey Giuseppe, Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance. [FR Doc. 2015–14256 Filed 6–10–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–59–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [Docket No. NHTSA–2014–0125; Notice 1] General Motors, LLC, Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Receipt of petition. AGENCY: General Motors, LLC, (GM) has determined that certain model year (MY) 2015 GMC multipurpose passenger vehicles (MPV) do not fully comply with paragraph S7.8.5 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated Equipment. GM has filed an appropriate report dated November 5, 2014, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\11JNN1.SGM 11JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 112 / Thursday, June 11, 2015 / Notices The closing date for comments on the petition is July 13, 2015. ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments on this petition. Comments must refer to the docket and notice number cited at the beginning of this notice and submitted by any of the following methods: • Mail: Send comments by mail addressed to: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. • Hand Deliver: Deliver comments by hand to: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. The Docket Section is open on weekdays from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. except Federal Holidays. • Electronically: Submit comments electronically by: logging onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Web site at http:// www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Comments may also be faxed to (202) 493–2251. Comments must be written in the English language, and be no greater than 15 pages in length, although there is no limit to the length of necessary attachments to the comments. If comments are submitted in hard copy form, please ensure that two copies are provided. If you wish to receive confirmation that your comments were received, please enclose a stamped, selfaddressed postcard with the comments. Note that all comments received will be posted without change to http:// www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. Documents submitted to a docket may be viewed by anyone at the address and times given above. The documents may also be viewed on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by following the online instructions for accessing the dockets. DOT’s complete Privacy Act Statement is available for review in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000, (65 FR 19477–78). The petition, supporting materials, and all comments received before the close of business on the closing date indicated below will be filed and will be considered. All comments and supporting materials received after the closing date will also be filed and will be considered to the extent possible. When the petition is granted or denied, notice of the decision will be published in the Federal Register pursuant to the authority indicated below. mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES DATES: VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Jun 10, 2015 Jkt 235001 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 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. II. Vehicles Involved: Affected are approximately 51,616 MY 2015 GMC Yukon, Yukon Denali, Yukon XL, and Yukon XL Denali MPVs manufactured between September 19, 2013 and October 10, 2014. See GM’s petition for additional details. III. Noncompliance: GM explains that the noncompliance is that under certain conditions the parking lamps on the subject vehicles fail to meet the device activation requirements of paragraph S7.8.5 of FMVSS No. 108. IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S7.8.5 of FMVSS No. 108, as detailed in Table I– a, requires in pertinent part that the activation of parking lamps must be ‘‘Steady burning. Must be activated when the headlamps are activated in a steady burning state.’’ V. Summary of GM’s Analyses: GM stated its belief that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety for the following reasons: (A) GM explains that the condition is difficult to create even in laboratory settings, let alone real-world driving conditions. GM also stated that they were only able to duplicate the condition under the following circumstances: • The vehicle is being operated during the daytime with the master lighting switch in ‘‘AUTO’’ mode. • The transmission is not in ‘‘Park.’’ • Three or more high-inrush current spikes that exceed the body control module (BCM) inrush current threshold occur on the parking lamp/DRL circuit within a period of 0.625 seconds. While there may be other methods for triggering these spikes (e.g., a service event), GM has only been able to isolate one cause: Manually moving the master lighting control from ‘‘AUTO’’ to parking lamp (or headlamp), back to ‘‘AUTO’’ and back to parking lamp (or headlamp) within 0.625 seconds. (B) GM believes that drivers are unlikely to cause these spikes during real-world driving. The subject vehicles are equipped with automatic-headlamp PO 00000 Frm 00108 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 33335 operation, so there is very little need for drivers to ever manually operate their vehicle’s master lighting control. But even if a driver were inclined to do so, rapidly cycling a vehicle’s master lighting control from ‘‘AUTO’’ to parking lamp (or headlamp) back to ‘‘AUTO’’ and back to parking lamp (or headlamp) in less than a second is a highly unusual maneuver that few (if any) drivers would ever attempt during normal vehicle operation. (C) GM additionally explained that the condition is short-lived and that if the condition does occur any of the following routine operations will automatically correct the condition: • Cycling the vehicle’s ignition on and off with the master lighting control in auto mode. • Turning the ignition off with the master lighting control in any mode other than auto, and then turning the ignition back on after a minimum of ten minutes. • Cycling the master lighting control to off and then back to any on position. • If the vehicle is in DRL mode, activating both turn signals, or shifting the transmission in and out of ‘‘PARK.’’ (D) GM mentions that while the condition affects the parking lamps and DRL’s it does not affect the operation of the vehicle’s other lamps. (E) GM also cited a previous petition that NHTSA granted dealing with a noncompliance that GM believes is similar to the noncompliance that is the subject of its petition. GM is not aware of any field incidents or warranty claims relating to the subject noncompliance. GM has additionally informed NHTSA that it corrected the noncompliance in subsequent production of the subject vehicles. In summation, GM believes that the described noncompliance of the subject vehicles is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety, and that its petition, to exempt GM from providing recall notification of noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118 and remedying the recall noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120 should be granted. NHTSA notes that the statutory provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to file petitions for a determination of inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to exempt manufacturers only from the duties found in sections 30118 and 30120, respectively, to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or noncompliance and to remedy the defect or noncompliance. Therefore, any decision on this petition only applies to the subject vehicles that GM no longer E:\FR\FM\11JNN1.SGM 11JNN1 33336 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 112 / Thursday, June 11, 2015 / Notices controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance existed. However, any decision on 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). Jeffrey Giuseppe, Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance. [FR Doc. 2015–14255 Filed 6–10–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–59–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [Docket No. NHTSA–2015–0052; Notice 1] Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company, Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Receipt of petition. AGENCY: Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company (Goodyear), has determined that certain Goodyear G316 LHT commercial truck trailer replacement tires do not fully comply with paragraph S6.5(f) of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 119, New Pneumatic Radial Tires for motor vehicles with a GVWR of more than 4,536 Kilograms (10,000 pounds) and Motorcycles. Goodyear has filed an appropriate report dated April 27, 2015, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. DATES: The closing date for comments on the petition is July 13, 2015. ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments on this petition. Comments must refer to the docket and notice number cited at the beginning of this notice and submitted by any of the following methods: • Mail: Send comments by mail addressed to: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. • Hand Deliver: Deliver comments by hand to: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 30, West Building Ground Floor, Room mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Jun 10, 2015 Jkt 235001 W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. The Docket Section is open on weekdays from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. except Federal Holidays. • Electronically: Submit comments electronically by: Logging onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Web site at http:// www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Comments may also be faxed to (202) 493–2251. Comments must be written in the English language, and be no greater than 15 pages in length, although there is no limit to the length of necessary attachments to the comments. If comments are submitted in hard copy form, please ensure that two copies are provided. If you wish to receive confirmation that your comments were received, please enclose a stamped, selfaddressed postcard with the comments. Note that all comments received will be posted without change to http:// www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. Documents submitted to a docket may be viewed by anyone at the address and times given above. The documents may also be viewed on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by following the online instructions for accessing the dockets. DOT’s complete Privacy Act Statement is available for review in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000, (65 FR 19477–78). The petition, supporting materials, and all comments received before the close of business on the closing date indicated below will be filed and will be considered. All comments and supporting materials received after the closing date will also be filed and will be considered to the extent possible. When the petition is granted or denied, notice of the decision will be published in the Federal Register pursuant to the authority indicated below. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Goodyear’s Petition: Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) (see implementing rule at 49 CFR part 556), Goodyear 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 Goodyear’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. II. Tires Involved: Affected are approximately 79 Goodyear G316 LHT size 295/75R22.5 commercial truck PO 00000 Frm 00109 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 trailer replacement tires manufactured between March 22, 2015 and April 9, 2015. III. Noncompliance: Goodyear explains that because the sidewall markings on the reference side of the subject tires incorrectly identify the number of plies as ‘‘4 Plies Steel Cord’’ instead of the actual number ‘‘5 Plies Steel Cord,’’ the tires do not meet the requirements of paragraph S6.5(f) of FMVSS No. 119. IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S6.5 of FMVSS No. 119 requires in pertinent part: S6.5 Tire Markings. Except as specified in paragraphs, each tire shall be marked on each sidewall with the information specified in paragraphs (a) through (j) of this section . . . (f) The actual number of plies and the composition of the ply cord material in the sidewall and, if different, in the tread area; V. Summary of Goodyear’s Analyses: Goodyear stated its belief that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety for the following reasons: (A) Goodyear stated that the subject tires were manufactured as designed and meet or exceed all applicable FMVSS performance standards. (B) Goodyear also stated that all of the sidewall markings related to tire service (load capacity, corresponding inflation pressure, etc.) are correct. (C) Goodyear believes that the mislabeling of the subject tires is not a safety concern and also has no impact on the retreading, repairing, and recycling industries. (D) Goodyear also pointed out that NHTSA has previously granted petitions for noncompliances in sidewall marking that it believes are similar to its petition. Goodyear additionally informed NHTSA that the molds at the manufacturing plant have been corrected so that no additional tires will be manufactured or sold with the noncompliance. In summation, Goodyear believes that the described noncompliance of the subject tires is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety, and that its petition, to exempt Goodyear from providing recall notification of noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118 and remedying the recall noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120 should be granted. NHTSA notes that the statutory provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to file petitions for a determination of inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to exempt manufacturers only from the duties found in sections 30118 and 30120, respectively, to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or noncompliance and to remedy the E:\FR\FM\11JNN1.SGM 11JNN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 112 (Thursday, June 11, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33334-33336]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-14255]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2014-0125; Notice 1]


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

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Receipt of petition.

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

SUMMARY: General Motors, LLC, (GM) has determined that certain model 
year (MY) 2015 GMC multipurpose passenger vehicles (MPV) do not fully 
comply with paragraph S7.8.5 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 
(FMVSS) No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated Equipment. GM 
has filed an appropriate report dated November 5, 2014, pursuant to 49 
CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports.

[[Page 33335]]


DATES: The closing date for comments on the petition is July 13, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written data, 
views, and arguments on this petition. Comments must refer to the 
docket and notice number cited at the beginning of this notice and 
submitted by any of the following methods:
     Mail: Send comments by mail addressed to: U.S. Department 
of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, 
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Deliver: Deliver comments by hand to: U.S. Department 
of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, 
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. The 
Docket Section is open on weekdays from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. except 
Federal Holidays.
     Electronically: Submit comments electronically by: logging 
onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Web site at http://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online instructions for submitting 
comments. Comments may also be faxed to (202) 493-2251.
    Comments must be written in the English language, and be no greater 
than 15 pages in length, although there is no limit to the length of 
necessary attachments to the comments. If comments are submitted in 
hard copy form, please ensure that two copies are provided. If you wish 
to receive confirmation that your comments were received, please 
enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard with the comments. Note that 
all comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.
    Documents submitted to a docket may be viewed by anyone at the 
address and times given above. The documents may also be viewed on the 
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by following the online 
instructions for accessing the dockets. DOT's complete Privacy Act 
Statement is available for review in the Federal Register published on 
April 11, 2000, (65 FR 19477-78).
    The petition, supporting materials, and all comments received 
before the close of business on the closing date indicated below will 
be filed and will be considered. All comments and supporting materials 
received after the closing date will also be filed and will be 
considered to the extent possible. When the petition is granted or 
denied, notice of the decision will be published in the Federal 
Register pursuant to the authority indicated below.

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 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.
    II. Vehicles Involved: Affected are approximately 51,616 MY 2015 
GMC Yukon, Yukon Denali, Yukon XL, and Yukon XL Denali MPVs 
manufactured between September 19, 2013 and October 10, 2014. See GM's 
petition for additional details.
    III. Noncompliance: GM explains that the noncompliance is that 
under certain conditions the parking lamps on the subject vehicles fail 
to meet the device activation requirements of paragraph S7.8.5 of FMVSS 
No. 108.
    IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S7.8.5 of FMVSS No. 108, as detailed in 
Table I-a, requires in pertinent part that the activation of parking 
lamps must be ``Steady burning. Must be activated when the headlamps 
are activated in a steady burning state.''
    V. Summary of GM's Analyses: GM stated its belief that the subject 
noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety for the 
following reasons:
    (A) GM explains that the condition is difficult to create even in 
laboratory settings, let alone real-world driving conditions. GM also 
stated that they were only able to duplicate the condition under the 
following circumstances:
     The vehicle is being operated during the daytime with the 
master lighting switch in ``AUTO'' mode.
     The transmission is not in ``Park.''
     Three or more high-inrush current spikes that exceed the 
body control module (BCM) inrush current threshold occur on the parking 
lamp/DRL circuit within a period of 0.625 seconds. While there may be 
other methods for triggering these spikes (e.g., a service event), GM 
has only been able to isolate one cause: Manually moving the master 
lighting control from ``AUTO'' to parking lamp (or headlamp), back to 
``AUTO'' and back to parking lamp (or headlamp) within 0.625 seconds.
    (B) GM believes that drivers are unlikely to cause these spikes 
during real-world driving. The subject vehicles are equipped with 
automatic-headlamp operation, so there is very little need for drivers 
to ever manually operate their vehicle's master lighting control. But 
even if a driver were inclined to do so, rapidly cycling a vehicle's 
master lighting control from ``AUTO'' to parking lamp (or headlamp) 
back to ``AUTO'' and back to parking lamp (or headlamp) in less than a 
second is a highly unusual maneuver that few (if any) drivers would 
ever attempt during normal vehicle operation.
    (C) GM additionally explained that the condition is short-lived and 
that if the condition does occur any of the following routine 
operations will automatically correct the condition:
     Cycling the vehicle's ignition on and off with the master 
lighting control in auto mode.
     Turning the ignition off with the master lighting control 
in any mode other than auto, and then turning the ignition back on 
after a minimum of ten minutes.
     Cycling the master lighting control to off and then back 
to any on position.
     If the vehicle is in DRL mode, activating both turn 
signals, or shifting the transmission in and out of ``PARK.''
    (D) GM mentions that while the condition affects the parking lamps 
and DRL's it does not affect the operation of the vehicle's other 
lamps.
    (E) GM also cited a previous petition that NHTSA granted dealing 
with a noncompliance that GM believes is similar to the noncompliance 
that is the subject of its petition.
    GM is not aware of any field incidents or warranty claims relating 
to the subject noncompliance.
    GM has additionally informed NHTSA that it corrected the 
noncompliance in subsequent production of the subject vehicles.
    In summation, GM believes that the described noncompliance of the 
subject vehicles is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety, and that 
its petition, to exempt GM from providing recall notification of 
noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118 and remedying the recall 
noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120 should be granted.
    NHTSA notes that the statutory provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 
30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to file petitions for a 
determination of inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to exempt manufacturers 
only from the duties found in sections 30118 and 30120, respectively, 
to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or noncompliance 
and to remedy the defect or noncompliance. Therefore, any decision on 
this petition only applies to the subject vehicles that GM no longer

[[Page 33336]]

controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance existed. 
However, any decision on 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).

Jeffrey Giuseppe,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2015-14255 Filed 6-10-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-59-P