Supplemental Notice of Public Hearing To Determine Whether Fiat Chrysler Has Reasonably Met Its Obligations To Remedy Recalled Vehicles and To Notify NHTSA, Owners, and Purchasers of Recalls, 35716-35721 [2015-15246]

Download as PDF tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 35716 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 119 / Monday, June 22, 2015 / Notices 3:16 p.m., WMATA’s OCC activated the under-platform fans at the L’Enfant Plaza Green and Yellow Line platforms, but because the fans were in exhaust mode—not supply mode—the activation of the fans pulled smoke toward rather than away from both trains. Moreover, the operator of train 302 had not shut off the train ventilation system that draws outside air into the train cars. WMATA procedure required the train operator to receive permission from the OCC to shut off the train ventilation system. Since both the station and vent shaft fans were all activated in exhaust mode—not supply mode—there was not a supply of fresh air to help move the smoke through the tunnel. A post- accident inspection found that two of the four fans had tripped an overload circuit breaker and were nonoperational. Police and emergency responders assisted in the evacuation of both trains and the L’Enfant Plaza station. A limited number of passengers aboard train 302 were able to self-evacuate. One passenger died and 86 others were transported to local medical facilities for treatment for smoke inhalation. The WMATA incurred an estimated $120,000 in damage to assets. During its investigation, the NTSB determined the cause of the smoke to have been an electrical arcing incident, and the source of the smoke to have been about 1,100 feet ahead (south) of train 302. Further, as part of its investigation, the NTSB determined that WMATA did not have a written ventilation procedure for smoke and fire events in a tunnel, and that the ventilation strategy WMATA deployed during this accident was not consistent with best practice. On February 11, 2015, the NTSB issued three urgent safety recommendations to WMATA, two urgent safety recommendations to the American Public Transportation Association, and urgent safety recommendation R–15–007 to FTA, calling for audits for all rail transit agencies that have subway tunnel environments to assess the state of good repair of their tunnel ventilation systems, their written emergency procedures for fire and smoke events, and their training programs to ensure compliance with those procedures, and to verify that the rail transit agencies are applying industry best standards, such as the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Code 130, Standards for Fixed Guideway Transit and Passenger Rail Systems, in their maintenance and emergency procedures. The FTA responded to the NTSB safety recommendation by letter of March 13, 2015, stating, in part, that VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:45 Jun 19, 2015 Jkt 235001 we have identified the rail transit agencies with operational subway tunnel environments and will engage the State Safety Oversight Agencies (SSOAs) that have safety oversight jurisdiction over these rail transit agencies, in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 5329 and 5330 and 49 CFR part 659, for the purpose of addressing R–15–007. To that end, on June 17, 2015, the FTA Office of Transit Safety and Oversight issued Safety Advisory 15–1, addressed to the RFGPTS that have operational subway tunnel environments, and a letter addressed to the SSOAs that have safety oversight jurisdiction over these the rail transit agencies, with instructions to conduct audits to (1) determine the extent of subway tunnel mileage at each such rail transit agency, and the characteristics of its operational subway tunnel environments; (2) assess each rail transit agency’s written emergency procedures for fire and smoke events; (3) assess each rail transit agency’s training programs for ensuring compliance with those emergency procedures; and (4) determine each rail transit agency’s compliance with industry best standards, such as NFPA Code 130, in their maintenance and emergency procedures. Additionally, the SSOAs were instructed to complete a Tunnel Ventilation System Inspection of each such rail transit agency, using the audit tools provided by FTA, and to submit the results of their audits with supporting documentation no later than August 31, 2015. For additional guidance, FTA referred the SSOAs to the joint FTA/Federal Highway Administration Highway and Rail Transit Tunnel Inspection Manual, 2005 Edition, which sets forth established industry inspection standards. The FTA will use the data and information from these audits by the SSOAs in conducting a broader analysis for responding to NTSB recommendation R–15–007, and potentially, for future rulemaking and guidance to the rail transit industry. Both the FTA Safety Advisory 15–1 and the June 17, 2015 letter addressed to the SSOAs are available on the FTA public Web site, https://www.fta.dot.gov/tso.html. The FTA’s issuance of Safety Advisory 15–1 is in accordance with FTA’s authority to ‘‘investigate public transportation accidents and incidents and provide guidance to recipients regarding prevention of accidents and incidents.’’ 49 U.S.C. 5329(f) (5). The requests for information and data from the SSOAs and the rail transit agencies within their jurisdiction are based on FTA’s authority to request program information pertinent to rail transit PO 00000 Frm 00093 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 safety under the State Safety Oversight rule, 49 CFR 659.39(d). Readers who have an interest in the January 12, 2015, WMATA accident that led to the urgent recommendations by the NTSB and FTA’s issuance of Safety Advisory 15–1 can obtain further information about that accident in two reports issued on June 17, 2015: A Safety Management Inspection that FTA conducted of WMATA from March 16 to April 3, 2015, and a Safety Management System gap analysis FTA performed for WMATA from March 3 to March 5, 2015. Both documents are available on the FTA public Web site, https:// www.fta.dot.gov/tso.html. Therese W. McMillan, Acting Administrator. [FR Doc. 2015–15256 Filed 6–19–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [Docket No. NHTSA–2015–0047] Supplemental Notice of Public Hearing To Determine Whether Fiat Chrysler Has Reasonably Met Its Obligations To Remedy Recalled Vehicles and To Notify NHTSA, Owners, and Purchasers of Recalls National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT. ACTION: Supplemental notice of public hearing. AGENCY: NHTSA will hold a public hearing on whether Fiat Chrysler Automobiles US LLC (Fiat Chrysler) has reasonably met its obligations to remedy recalled vehicles and to notify NHTSA, owners, and purchasers of recalls. This notice provides supplemental information on the subject matter of the hearing. DATES: The public hearing will be held beginning at 10 a.m. ET on July 2, 2015, at the U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. If you wish to attend or speak at the hearing, you must register in advance no later than June 30, 2015 (and June 26, 2015, for non-U.S. citizens), by following the instructions in the Procedural Matters section of this notice. NHTSA will consider late registrants to the extent time and space allows, but cannot ensure that late registrants will be able to attend or speak at the hearing. To ensure that NHTSA has an opportunity to consider SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\22JNN1.SGM 22JNN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 119 / Monday, June 22, 2015 / Notices comments, NHTSA must receive written comments by June 23, 2015. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments to the docket number identified in the heading of this document by any of the following methods: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. • Mail: Docket Management Facility, M–30, U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building, Ground Floor, Rm. W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. • Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. • Fax: (202) 493–2251. Regardless of how you submit your comments, you should mention the docket number of this document. You may call the Docket office at 202– 366–9324. Note that all comments received will be posted without change to https:// www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For registration to attend or speak at the public hearing: Carla Bridges, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590 (Telephone: 202–366–2992) (Fax: 202–366–3820). For hearing procedures: Justine Casselle, Office of the Chief Counsel, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590 (Telephone: 202–366–2992) (Fax: 202–366–3820). Information regarding recalls is available on NHTSA’s Web site: https:// www.safercar.gov. To find recalls by NHTSA Recall Number: (1) In the dropdown menu in the lower right-hand corner for ‘‘Shortcut search for a recall,’’ select ‘‘by Campaign ID Number; (2) click ‘‘Go’’; (3) select the box for ‘‘Recalls’’; (3) enter the recall number; and (4) click ‘‘GO.’’ SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: As the agency explained in its Federal Register notice of May 22, 2015 (80 FR 29790), NHTSA has substantial concerns about the significant safety hazards posed to consumers in connection with Fiat Chrysler’s administration and execution of its recalls. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(e) and 30120(e), and 49 CFR 557.6(d) and 557.7, NHTSA has decided to hold a public hearing on whether Fiat Chrysler has reasonably met its obligations under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, as amended (Safety Act), to remedy VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:45 Jun 19, 2015 Jkt 235001 recalled vehicles and to provide notifications regarding its recalls. I. Initiation of a Recall A manufacturer of a motor vehicle that decides in good faith that the vehicle contains a defect related to motor vehicle safety or does not comply with an applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) must notify NHTSA by submitting a Defect and Noncompliance Information Report, commonly referred to as a Part 573 Report. 49 U.S.C. 30118(c); 49 CFR 573.6. The manufacturer must subsequently file quarterly reports with NHTSA on the recall, including the status of the manufacturer’s recall notification campaign and the number of vehicles that have been remedied. 49 CFR 573.7. II. Fiat Chrysler Recalls NHTSA’s public hearing may address Fiat Chrysler’s performance in recalls including, but not limited to, NHTSA Recall Nos. 13V–038, 13V–252, 13V– 527, 13V–528, 13V–529, 14V–154, 14V– 373, 14V–391, 14V–438, 14V–567, 14V– 634, 14V–635, 14V–749, 14V–795, 14V– 796, 14V–817, 15V–041, 15V–046, 15V– 090, 15V–114, 15V–115, and 15V–178. This includes two recalls, Recall Nos. 14V–154 and 14V–635, for which the agency identified concerns following publication of its May 22, 2015 Federal Register notice (80 FR 29790). These twenty-two recall campaigns are to address the following: 1. Loosening of the rear axle pinion nut causing loss of vehicle control (Recall No. 13V–038); 2. Rear fuel tank structure’s risk of failure (Recall No. 13V–252); 3. Failure of the left tie rod assembly resulting in loss of steering control (Recall No. 13V–527); 4. Failure of the left tie rod assembly resulting in loss of steering control (Recall No. 13V–528); 5. Failure of the left tie rod assembly resulting in loss of steering control (Recall No. 13V–529); 6. Water freezing in the brake booster (Recall No. 14V–154); 7. Inadvertent ignition switch movement turning off the engine (Recall No. 14V–373); 8. Vanity lamp wiring shortages resulting in fire (Recall No. 14V–391); 9. Inadvertent ignition switch movement turning off the engine (Recall No. 14V–438); 10. Inadvertent ignition switch movement turning off the engine (Recall No. 14V–567); 11. Sudden failure of the alternator (Recall No. 14V–634); PO 00000 Frm 00094 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 35717 12. Electrical connectors of the diesel fuel heater may overheat (Recall No. 14V–635); 13. Inoperative instrument cluster causing vehicle failure (Recall No. 14V– 749); 14. Broken springs in the clutch ignition interlock switch (Recall No. 14V–795); 15. Loosening of the rear axle pinion nut causing loss of vehicle control (Recall No. 14V–796); 16. Potential air bag inflator rupture with metal fragments causing serious injury (14V–817); 17. Unintended air bag deployment during vehicle operation (Recall No. 15V–041); 18. Unintended air bag deployment during vehicle operation (Recall No. 15V–046); 19. Contaminated, dislodged or broken parking pawl or park rod (Recall No. 15V–090); 20. Fuel leak near an ignition source (Recall No. 15V–114); 21. Fuel pump relay causing a vehicle to stall without warning (Recall No. 15V–115); and 22. Driver and passenger side door latch failure (Recall No. 15V–178). III. Recall Remedy Requirements A manufacturer of a recalled motor vehicle is required to remedy the vehicle’s defect or noncompliance without charge. 49 U.S.C. 30120(a). The manufacturer may repair the vehicle, replace the vehicle with an identical or reasonably equivalent vehicle, or refund the purchase price, less a reasonable allowance for depreciation. Id. If a manufacturer decides to repair a defect or noncompliance and the repair is not done adequately within a reasonable time, the manufacturer shall replace the vehicle without charge with an identical or reasonably equivalent vehicle, or refund the purchase price, less a reasonable allowance for depreciation. Id. § 30120(c). On its own motion or on application by any interested person, NHTSA may conduct a hearing to decide whether a manufacturer has reasonably met the remedy requirements. Id. § 30120(e); 49 CFR 557.6. If NHTSA decides that the manufacturer has not reasonably met the remedy requirements, it shall order the manufacturer to take specified action to meet those requirements, including by ordering the manufacturer to refund the purchase price of the defective or noncomplying vehicles, less a reasonable allowance for depreciation. 49 U.S.C. 30120(a), (c), (e); see 49 CFR 557.8. NHTSA may also take any other action authorized by the Safety Act. 49 U.S.C. 30120(e); 49 CFR 557.8. A person E:\FR\FM\22JNN1.SGM 22JNN1 35718 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 119 / Monday, June 22, 2015 / Notices that violates the Safety Act, including the remedy requirements, or regulations prescribed thereunder, is liable to the United States Government for a civil penalty of not more than $7,000 for each violation. 49 U.S.C. 30165(a)(1); 49 CFR 578.6. A separate violation occurs for each motor vehicle and for each failure to perform a required act. Id. The maximum penalty for a related series of violations is $35,000,000. Id. tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES IV. Whether Fiat Chrysler Has Reasonably Met the Remedy Requirements The public hearing will address NHTSA’s concerns that Fiat Chrysler is not meeting its recall remedy requirements. NHTSA has tentatively concluded that Fiat Chrysler has not remedied vehicles in a reasonable time and has not adequately remedied vehicles. NHTSA will consider information on issues including, but not limited to, those detailed below in deciding whether Fiat Chrysler has reasonably met the remedy requirements of the Safety Act. A. Failure To Remedy Vehicles in a Reasonable Time On February 6, 2013, Fiat Chrysler recalled approximately 278,000 model year 2009 Dodge Durango, 2009 Plymouth Aspen, 2009–2011 Dodge Dakota and 2009–2012 Ram 1500 vehicles. This recall, 13V–038, involves a pinion nut on the vehicle’s differential that may come loose. If this occurs, both rear wheels can lock up and the vehicle can become uncontrollable. Although this recall was initiated over 16 months ago, NHTSA has received, and continues to receive, numerous complaints from owners of these vehicles that they have been unable to have the recall repair performed because parts to perform the repair are not available. These complaints include incidents where the pinion nut has failed after the owners were notified that parts were not available, including two incidents resulting in crashes. Another series of recalls involves a tie rod end that can fracture, disabling the steering gear and causing a loss of directional control. Fiat Chrysler filed recall notifications for recalls 13V–527 and 13V–529 on November 6, 2013. The company filed another recall notification for recall 13V–528 on November 11, 2013. These three recalls involve approximately one million Dodge Ram pickup trucks and cab chassis vehicles. Problems with producing sufficient replacement parts to allow repair of these vehicles were compounded by failures of the remedy part that caused Fiat Chrysler to stop VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:45 Jun 19, 2015 Jkt 235001 shipment of the replacement parts. At this time, a year and a half after the recall notices were filed, many of the vehicles remain unrepaired. Owners have reported to NHTSA that they have been unable to have their vehicles repaired after making multiple attempts to do so because parts are unavailable. On June 18, 2013 Fiat Chrysler notified NHTSA that it would conduct a recall of approximately 1.5 million model year 2003–2008 Jeep Liberty and model year 1993–1998 Jeep Grand Cherokee vehicles to reduce the risk of fire in rear end collisions. Among other things, Fiat Chrysler indicated that it would install trailer hitches on these vehicles to improve the performance of the rear structure of the vehicles in such impacts. As of April 30, 2015, Fiat Chrysler has completed remedy repairs on 320,000 of the 1.5 million vehicles involved in these recalls. B. Failure To Adequately Repair Defects Fiat Chrysler filed a recall notification on July 1, 2014 stating that a safety related defect existed in approximately 650,000 model year 2011–2014 Dodge Durango and Jeep Grand Cherokee vehicles. The defect results in the risk of fire inside the vehicle caused by a short circuit that occurs when fasteners used to secure a sun visor to the head liner pierce a wiring harness located above the sun visor mount. The remedy procedure called for re-locating the wiring to remove the risk that it would be pierced when the sun visor was reinstalled. Following several incidents where vehicles experienced fires after the remedy repair had been conducted, Chrysler issued revised instructions and service procedures in April 2015 to ensure that the recall remedy repair procedure did not result in damage to the wiring harness when the sun visor was reattached. NHTSA is aware of 13 incidents where short circuits, including fires or thermal events, occurred after the recall remedy was attempted. V. Recall Notification Requirements A manufacturer must submit a Part 573 Report to NHTSA, initiating a recall, not more than five working days after it knew or should have known of a safety-related defect or noncompliance in its vehicles. See 49 CFR 573.6(b). The manufacturer’s initial Part 573 Report to must contain, at a minimum the manufacturer’s name, the identity of the vehicles potentially containing the defect or noncompliance, and a description of the defect or noncompliance. Id. Other required information not available at the time the initial Part 573 Report must be PO 00000 Frm 00095 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 submitted within five working days after the manufacturer has confirmed the accuracy of the information. Id. This includes a chronology of all principal events that were the basis for the determination that the defect related to motor vehicle safety. 49 CFR 573.6(c)(6). A manufacturer must amend its Part 573 Report within five working days after it has new information that updates or corrects information previously reported on the identity of the vehicles potentially containing the defect or noncompliance, the total number of vehicles potentially containing the defect or noncompliance, the manufacturer’s program for remedying the defect or noncompliance, and the estimated date(s) on which it will begin sending notifications about the recall to owners and dealers. 49 CFR 573.6(b). If a manufacturer becomes aware that the beginning or completion dates reported to the agency for its notifications to owners or dealers will be delayed by more than two weeks, it must promptly advise the agency of the delay and the reasons for the delay, and provide a revised estimate. 49 CFR 573.6(b), (c)(8)(ii). A manufacturer who decides in good faith that the vehicle contains a safetyrelated defect or does not comply with an applicable FMVSS must notify owners of the defect or noncompliance no later than 60 days from the date it files its Part 573 Report with NHTSA. 49 U.S.C. 30118(c); 49 CFR 577.7(a)(1). Owner notifications must be sent, by first class mail, to each person registered under State law as the owner of the vehicle and whose name and address are reasonably ascertainable by the manufacturer through State records or other available sources. 49 U.S.C. 30119(d); 49 CFR 577.7(a)(2)(i). If the owner cannot be reasonably ascertained, the manufacturer shall notify the most recent purchaser known to the manufacturer. Id. Among other things, the notification to owners must contain a clear description of the safety-related defect or noncompliance, an evaluation of the risk to motor vehicle safety reasonably related to the defect or noncompliance, the measures to be taken to obtain a remedy, and the earliest date on which the vehicle will be remedied without charge. 49 U.S.C. 30119(a); 49 CFR part 577. If a remedy is not available at the time of the initial notice, then the manufacturer must send a second notice to owners once a remedy is available. 49 CFR 577.7(a)(1). A manufacturer must submit a copy of its proposed owner notification letter to NHTSA’s Recall Management Division no fewer than five Federal Government E:\FR\FM\22JNN1.SGM 22JNN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 119 / Monday, June 22, 2015 / Notices business days before it intends to begin mailing it to owners. 49 CFR 577.5(a). A manufacturer must also send notifications to dealers within a reasonable time after the manufacturer first decides that a safety-related defect or noncompliance exists. 49 U.S.C. 30119(c); 49 CFR 577.7(a). Among other requirements, the dealer notice must identify the vehicles covered by the recall, describe the defect or noncompliance, provide a brief evaluation of the risk to motor vehicle safety associated with the defect or noncompliance, and include a complete description of the recall remedy and the estimated date on which the remedy will be available. 49 CFR 577.13. The dealer notice must also include an advisory that it is a violation of Federal law for a dealer to deliver a new motor vehicle covered by the notification under a sale or lease until the defect or noncompliance is remedied. Id. Any required information that is not available at the time of the initial dealer notice shall be provided as it becomes available. Id. A manufacturer is required to submit to NHTSA a representative copy of all notices, bulletins, and other communications that related directly to a defect or noncompliance and are sent to more than one manufacturer, distributor, dealer or purchaser no later than five days after they are initially sent. 49 CFR 573.6(c)(10). All submissions pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, except as otherwise required, must be submitted to NHTSA through its online recalls portal. 49 CFR 573.9. A manufacturer must use the provided templates for all required submissions. Id. On its own motion or on petition of any interested person, NHTSA may conduct a hearing to decide whether a manufacturer has reasonably met its notification requirements. 49 U.S.C. 30118(e); 49 CFR 557.6. If NHTSA decides that the manufacturer has not reasonably met the notification requirements, it shall order the manufacturer to take specified action to meet those requirements and may take any other action authorized by the Safety Act. 49 U.S.C. 30118(e); 49 CFR 557.8. A person that violates the Safety Act, including the notification requirements, or regulations prescribed thereunder, is liable to the United States Government for a civil penalty of not more than $7,000 for each violation. 49 U.S.C. 30165(a)(1); 49 CFR 578.6. A separate violation occurs for each motor vehicle and for each failure to perform a required act. Id. The maximum penalty for a related series of violations is $35,000,000. Id. VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:45 Jun 19, 2015 Jkt 235001 VI. Whether Fiat Chrysler Has Reasonably Met the Notification Requirements The public hearing will address NHTSA’s concerns that Fiat Chrysler is not meeting its recall notification requirements. NHTSA has tentatively concluded that Fiat Chrysler has not notified vehicle owners about recalls in a timely manner and has not submitted information to NHTSA about its recalls that is timely, correct, complete, and in the required form. Compliance with the notification requirements is important to allow owners to make informed decisions about their safety and to enable NHTSA to determine whether Fiat Chrysler’s recalls are effective in mitigating the safety risk of defects. NHTSA will consider information on issues including, but not limited to, those detailed below in deciding whether Fiat Chrysler has reasonably met the notification requirements of the Safety Act. A. Untimely Recall Notices to Owners Fiat Chrysler acknowledged, in its response to NHTSA’s May 18, 2015 Special Order, that it did not timely notify owners about certain recalls. Fiat Chrysler stated that it first notified owners of defects in their vehicles after the 60-day deadline in Recall Nos. 14V– 373, 14V–567, 14V–634, 14V–795, and 15V–115.1 It appears Fiat Chrysler also did not notify owners that their vehicles were recalled within the required 60day period in at least two additional recalls, Recall Nos. 13V–527 and 14V– 635. In Recall No. 13V–527, Fiat Chrysler reported to NHTSA that it mailed interim owner notices on January 16, 2014, or 11 days late. In Recall No. 14V–635, Fiat Chrysler reported to NHTSA that it mailed interim owner notices on December 8, 2014, or two days late. Additionally, Fiat Chrysler did not notify vehicle owners for over five months of the risk of potential air bag inflator ruptures in Recall No. 14V–354 (now a part of Recall No. 14V–817). Fiat Chrysler still has not notified vehicle owners of Recall No. 14V–817, nearly six months after filing its Part 573 Report in December 2014. Although Fiat Chrysler submitted draft interim notices 1 For Recall No. 14V–373, Fiat Chrysler previously reported to NHTSA that it mailed interim owner notices on September 11, 2014, or 19 days late. Fiat Chrysler now says in its Special Order response that its interim owner notices were mailed 12 days late. For Recall No. 14V–795, Fiat Chrysler previously reported to NHTSA that it mailed interim owner notices on February 10, 2015, or within the required 60-day period. Fiat Chrysler now says in its Special Order response that its interim owner notices were mailed one day late. PO 00000 Frm 00096 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 35719 to NHTSA for approval in both Recall Nos. 14V–354 and 14V–817, Fiat Chrysler apparently never sent those notices to owners. Timely notification to vehicle owners about recalls is critical so that they can make informed decisions concerning their safety. Even where a manufacturer does not have parts available to immediately repair the vehicle, an owner is entitled to understand the risk of continuing to drive the vehicle before it is repaired. B. Untimely Recall Notice to NHTSA Fiat Chrysler’s chronology for Recall No. 15V–090 states that its supplier notified it in October 2014 of a production process issue linked to the transmission shift failures that are the subject of the recall. Fiat Chrysler did not initiate the recall, by submitting a Part 573 Report, until over two months later. Fiat Chrysler’s chronology ends on December 7, 2014, when Fiat Chrysler received additional information from its supplier. Fiat Chrysler has not provided a complete chronology explaining this apparent delay in conducting a recall despite NHTSA’s request to do so. The requirement to initiate a recall within five working days of knowing of a safety-related defect helps to mitigate the risk of safety-related defects. That requirement exists so that the public is notified of safety risks and so that vehicle owners can expeditiously have their vehicles remedied. Additionally, the requirement for a complete chronology is important so that NHTSA may ensure that recalls are timely. C. Failure To Notify NHTSA About Changes to Notification Schedule It appears that Fiat Chrysler did not keep NHTSA informed about its schedule for notifying vehicle owners about recalls, as required. Fiat Chrysler did not notify NHTSA, by amending its Part 573 Report within five working days, of changes to the estimated dates on which it will begin notifying owners or dealers in several recalls, including Recall Nos. 13V–527, 14V–373, 14V– 567, 14V–643, 14V–749, and 14V–795. In some of those recalls, involving a delay of more than two weeks in the notification schedule, Fiat Chrysler did not promptly provide the reasons for the delay and a revised estimate. Timely and complete information about a manufacturer’s notification schedule is important to ensure that vehicle owners are kept informed about safety defects and know when and how they can have those defects fixed. Similarly, dealer notices provide essential information on the defects so that dealers can keep their customers E:\FR\FM\22JNN1.SGM 22JNN1 35720 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 119 / Monday, June 22, 2015 / Notices informed and repair their vehicles expediously and effectively. D. Failure To Submit Copies of Recall Communications to NHTSA NHTSA has tentatively concluded that Fiat Chrysler also has not submitted representative copies of recall communications to NHTSA as required. This includes not submitting a draft owner notification for NHSTA’s review and approval, and not timely submitting copies of owner and dealer communications to NHTSA. tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 1. Failure To Submit a Draft Owner Notification Letter In at least one recall, Recall No. 14V– 749, Fiat Chrysler did not submit a draft owner notification letter to NHTSA prior to mailing it. NHTSA reviews draft owner notification letters to ensure that they contain accurate and complete information. Failing to submit a draft owner notice to NHTSA as required prevents NHTSA from ensuring that owners receive critical information about their recalled vehicles, including the safety risk associated with the defect and how to have it fixed. 2. Failure To Submit Copies of Recall Communications to Owners and Dealers Despite a legal requirement that Fiat Chrysler submit copies of recall communications to the agency within five days, NHTSA staff repeatedly has had to request that Fiat Chrysler submit copies of those documents to the agency. Fiat Chrysler did not submit copies of owner letters within five days as required in recalls including Recall Nos. 13V–527, 14V–373, 14V–438, 14V– 634, 14V–643, 14V–795, 15V–114, and 15V–115. Fiat Chrysler also did not submit copies of dealer communications within five days as required in Recall Nos. 13V–252, 13V–527, 13V–528, 13V– 529, 13V–373, 13V–391, 14V–567, 14V– 635, 14V–749, 14V–795, 14V–796, 15V– 090, 15V–115, and 15V–178. In twelve of those recalls, Fiat Chrysler did not provide NHTSA with copies of certain recall-related dealer communications until after NHTSA noticed this public hearing. When Fiat Chrysler does submit copies of recall communications, it routinely enters incorrect information into NHTSA’s recalls portal, such as providing the date that Fiat Chrysler submitted a document to NHTSA or leaving the date blank, rather than providing the date that Fiat Chrysler mailed its notification to owners. Compliance with the requirement to submit representative copies of owner notification letters to the agency and to provide correct and complete VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:45 Jun 19, 2015 Jkt 235001 information about the notifications to NHTSA is important so that NHTSA may ensure vehicle owners are aware of defects in their vehicles and have information on how to have those defects fixed. Likewise, the requirement to submit dealer communications enables the agency to evaluate whether dealers have accurate and complete information necessary to remedy vehicles. Among other things, dealer communications provide the personnel responsible for actually repairing vehicles with the instructions on how to do so. It is essential that NHTSA have access to those communications so that it can fulfill its statutory oversight role to ensure that remedies are effective. E. Failure To Provide NHTSA With Other Critical Information About Recalls NHSTA has tentatively concluded that Fiat Chrysler also has not provided NHTSA with other critical information about its recalls by submitting timely, accurate, and complete amendments to its Part 573 Reports, and by properly submitting information through NHTSA’s online recalls portal. The requirement to file an amended Part 573 Report is important because the act of amending the Part 573 Report lets NHTSA and the public know that the manufacturer has become aware of significant new or changed information about the recall. 1. Failure To Submit Information on the Vehicles Impacted by a Recall Across multiple recalls, Fiat Chrysler has not correctly and completely identified the vehicles affected by the recalls. In several recalls, Fiat Chrysler sent letters or other submissions to NHTSA that showed an apparent change to the number of vehicles involved in a recall, rather than filing an amended Part 573 Report as required. On multiple occasions, Fiat Chrysler provided inconsistent information to NHTSA—apparently changing the recall population in a cover letter and then providing contradictory information in a later-filed amendment to its Part 573 Report for the recall. These recalls include Recalls No. 13V–527, 14V–373, 14V–154, 14V–438, 14V–634, 14V–635, 14V–643, 14V–749, 14V–795, 15V–090, and 15V–115. In another recall, Recall No. 15V–041, Fiat Chrysler did not correctly identify the vehicle identification numbers (VINs) associated with the recall. NHTSA oversight caught over 65,000 vehicles impacted by the recall that Fiat Chrysler had not included. Additionally, Fiat Chrysler did not provide NHTSA with information on the vehicles affected by PO 00000 Frm 00097 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Takata air bag inflator Recall No. 14V– 354 (now a part of Recall No. 14V–817) for over seven weeks, lagging far behind other manufacturers recalling vehicles for the same issue. A failure to follow the requirements for providing information on the vehicles affected by a recall is concerning because, if a manufacturer cannot provide NHTSA with consistent, correct, and timely information on the vehicles included in a recall to the agency, it suggests that the manufacturer may also be failing to provide all vehicle owners with notice of the defect and access to a free remedy as the law requires. Moreover, placing information on changes to the vehicle population affected by a recall in routine correspondence rather than filing an amended Part 573 Report, as required, impedes NHTSA and the public’s ability to understand the full universe of vehicles impacted by the defect. 2. Failure To Submit Information on the Recall Remedy NHTSA has tentatively concluded that Fiat Chrysler also has not submitted amended Part 573 Reports as required when it has confirmed or changed its remedy plan. This has occurred for recalls including Recall Nos. 13V–527 and 14V–634. Having timely and complete access to information on a manufacturer’s remedy plan is essential for the agency to assess the remedy plan and ensure that a manufacturer is meeting its obligation to adequately repair vehicle defects within a reasonable time. VII. Decision To Conduct a Public Hearing NHTSA has decided that it is necessary to conduct a public hearing to decide whether Fiat Chrysler has reasonably met the remedy and notification requirements under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120. See 49 U.S.C. §§ 30118(e), §§ 30120(e); 49 CFR 557.6(d), 557.7. Based on information presented at the public hearing and other available information, NHTSA may issue an order that could include a finding that Fiat Chrysler failed to carry out its recall requirements under the Safety Act and requiring Fiat Chrysler to take specific actions to comply with the law. Any interested person may make written and/or oral presentations of information, views, and arguments on whether Fiat Chrysler has reasonably met the remedy and/or notification requirements. There will be no crossexamination of witnesses. 49 CFR 557.7. NHTSA will consider the views of participants in deciding whether Fiat E:\FR\FM\22JNN1.SGM 22JNN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 119 / Monday, June 22, 2015 / Notices Chrysler has reasonably met the notification and/or remedy requirements under 49 U.S.C. §§ 30118 and 30120, and in developing the terms of an order (if any) requiring Fiat Chrysler to take specified action as the remedy for the recalls and/or take other action. 49 U.S.C. §§ 30118(e), 30120(e); 49 CFR 557.8. Procedural Matters: Interested persons may participate in these proceedings through written and/or oral presentations. Persons wishing to attend must notify Carla Bridges, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590 (Telephone: 202–366–2992) (Fax: 202–366–3820), before the close of business on June 30, 2015 (and June 26, 2015, for non-U.S. citizens). Each person wishing to attend must provide his or her name and country of citizenship. Non-U.S. citizens must also provide date of birth, title or position, and passport or diplomatic ID number, along with expiration date. Each person wishing to make an oral presentation must also specify the amount of time that the presentation is expected to last, his or her organizational affiliation, phone number, and email address. NHTSA will prepare a schedule of presentations. Depending upon the number of persons who wish to make oral presentations and the anticipated length of those presentations, NHTSA may limit the length of oral presentations. For security purposes, photo identification is required to enter the U.S. Department of Transportation building. To allow sufficient time to clear security and enter the building, NHTSA recommends that hearing participants arrive 30 to 60 minutes prior to the start of the public hearing. The hearing will be held at a site accessible to individuals with disabilities. Individuals who require accommodations, such as sign language interpreters, should contact Ms. Justine Casselle using the contact information in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above no later than June 24, 2015. A transcript of the proceedings will be placed in the docket for this notice at a later date. Persons who wish to file written comments should submit them so that they are received by NHTSA no later than June 23, 2015. Instructions on how to submit written comments to the docket is located under the ADDRESSES section of this notice. Authority: 49 U.S.C. §§ 30118(e), 30120(e); 49 CFR 557.6(d), 557.7; delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.95(a) and 501.2(a)(1). VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:45 Jun 19, 2015 Jkt 235001 Issued: June 16, 2015. Mark R. Rosekind, Administrator. [FR Doc. 2015–15246 Filed 6–19–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–59–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Office of the Secretary of Transportation [Docket No. DOT–OST–2015–0126] Notice of Order Soliciting Community Proposals Office of the Secretary, Department of Transportation. ACTION: Notice of order soliciting community proposals (Order 2015–6– 18). AGENCY: The Department of Transportation is soliciting proposals from communities or consortia of communities interested in receiving grants under the Small Community Air Service Development Program. The full text of the Department’s order, including Appendices, is included in this Notice. As noted in the order, an application for a grant under this program must include a Grant Proposal of no more than 20 pages (one-sided only), a completed Application for Federal Domestic Assistance (SF424), a Summary Information Schedule, and any letters from the applicant community showing support. DATES: Applications must be submitted no later than July 22, 2015. ADDRESSES: Communities must submit applications electronically through https://www.grants.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brooke Chapman, Associate Director, Small Community Air Service Development Program, Office of Aviation Analysis, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., W86–307, Washington, DC 20590, (202) 366 0577. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: By this order, the Department of Transportation (the Department or DOT) invites proposals from communities and/or consortia of communities interested in obtaining a federal grant under the Small Community Air Service Development Program (‘‘Small Community Program’’ or ‘‘SCASDP’’) to address air service and airfare issues in their communities. Applications of no more than 20 one-sided pages each (excluding the completed Application for Federal Domestic Assistance (SF424), Summary Information schedule, and any letters from the community or an air carrier showing SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00098 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 35721 support for the application), including all required information, must be submitted to www.grants.gov no later than 5:00 p.m. EDT on July 22, 2015. You are strongly encouraged to submit applications in advance of the deadline. Please be aware that you must complete the registration process before submitting an application, and that this process usually takes two to four weeks to complete. If interested parties experience difficulties at any point during the registration or application process, please call the grants.gov Customer Support Hotline at 1–800– 518–4726, Monday-Friday, from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. EDT. The Department will not accept late-filed applications. Additional information on applying through grants.gov is in Appendix A, including a notice regarding late submissions related to technical difficulties. This order is organized into the following sections: I. Background II. Selection Criteria and Guidance on Application of Selection Criteria III. Evaluation and Selection Process IV. How to Apply V. Air Service Development Zone VI. Grant Administration VII. Questions and Clarifications Appendix A—Additional Information on Applying Through www.grants.gov Appendix B—Summary Information Appendix C—Application Checklist Appendix D—Confidential Commercial Information I. Background The Small Community Program was established by the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century (Pub. L. 106–181) and reauthorized by the Vision 100-Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act (Pub. L. 108–176) and subsequently the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (Pub. L. 112–95) (FAA 2012). The program is designed to provide financial assistance to small communities in order to help them enhance their air service. The Department provides this assistance in the form of monetary grants that are disbursed on a reimbursable basis. Authorization for this program is codified at 49 U.S.C. 41743. The Small Community Program is authorized to receive appropriations under 49 U.S.C. 41743(e)(2), as amended. Appropriations are provided for this program for award selection in FY 2015 pursuant to FAA 2012 and the FY 2015 Appropriations Act (Pub. L. 113–235). The Department has up to $5.5 million available for FY 2015 grant awards to carry out this program. There is no limit on the amount of individual awards, and the amounts awarded will E:\FR\FM\22JNN1.SGM 22JNN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 119 (Monday, June 22, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35716-35721]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-15246]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2015-0047]

Supplemental Notice of Public Hearing To Determine Whether Fiat
Chrysler Has Reasonably Met Its Obligations To Remedy Recalled Vehicles
and To Notify NHTSA, Owners, and Purchasers of Recalls

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

ACTION: Supplemental notice of public hearing.

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

SUMMARY: NHTSA will hold a public hearing on whether Fiat Chrysler
Automobiles US LLC (Fiat Chrysler) has reasonably met its obligations
to remedy recalled vehicles and to notify NHTSA, owners, and purchasers
of recalls. This notice provides supplemental information on the
subject matter of the hearing.

DATES: The public hearing will be held beginning at 10 a.m. ET on July
2, 2015, at the U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. If you wish to attend or speak at the
hearing, you must register in advance no later than June 30, 2015 (and
June 26, 2015, for non-U.S. citizens), by following the instructions in
the Procedural Matters section of this notice. NHTSA will consider late
registrants to the extent time and space allows, but cannot ensure that
late registrants will be able to attend or speak at the hearing. To
ensure that NHTSA has an opportunity to consider

[[Page 35717]]

comments, NHTSA must receive written comments by June 23, 2015.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments to the docket number identified in
the heading of this document by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
Mail: Docket Management Facility, M-30, U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building, Ground Floor, Rm. W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Fax: (202) 493-2251.
Regardless of how you submit your comments, you should mention the
docket number of this document.
You may call the Docket office at 202-366-9324.
Note that all comments received will be posted without change to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For registration to attend or speak at
the public hearing: Carla Bridges, National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590
(Telephone: 202-366-2992) (Fax: 202-366-3820). For hearing procedures:
Justine Casselle, Office of the Chief Counsel, National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590
(Telephone: 202-366-2992) (Fax: 202-366-3820). Information regarding
recalls is available on NHTSA's Web site: https://www.safercar.gov. To
find recalls by NHTSA Recall Number: (1) In the drop-down menu in the
lower right-hand corner for ``Shortcut search for a recall,'' select
``by Campaign ID Number; (2) click ``Go''; (3) select the box for
``Recalls''; (3) enter the recall number; and (4) click ``GO.''

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: As the agency explained in its Federal
Register notice of May 22, 2015 (80 FR 29790), NHTSA has substantial
concerns about the significant safety hazards posed to consumers in
connection with Fiat Chrysler's administration and execution of its
recalls. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(e) and 30120(e), and 49 CFR
557.6(d) and 557.7, NHTSA has decided to hold a public hearing on
whether Fiat Chrysler has reasonably met its obligations under the
National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, as amended (Safety Act),
to remedy recalled vehicles and to provide notifications regarding its
recalls.

I. Initiation of a Recall

A manufacturer of a motor vehicle that decides in good faith that
the vehicle contains a defect related to motor vehicle safety or does
not comply with an applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard
(FMVSS) must notify NHTSA by submitting a Defect and Noncompliance
Information Report, commonly referred to as a Part 573 Report. 49
U.S.C. 30118(c); 49 CFR 573.6. The manufacturer must subsequently file
quarterly reports with NHTSA on the recall, including the status of the
manufacturer's recall notification campaign and the number of vehicles
that have been remedied. 49 CFR 573.7.

II. Fiat Chrysler Recalls

NHTSA's public hearing may address Fiat Chrysler's performance in
recalls including, but not limited to, NHTSA Recall Nos. 13V-038, 13V-
252, 13V-527, 13V-528, 13V-529, 14V-154, 14V-373, 14V-391, 14V-438,
14V-567, 14V-634, 14V-635, 14V-749, 14V-795, 14V-796, 14V-817, 15V-041,
15V-046, 15V-090, 15V-114, 15V-115, and 15V-178. This includes two
recalls, Recall Nos. 14V-154 and 14V-635, for which the agency
identified concerns following publication of its May 22, 2015 Federal
Register notice (80 FR 29790). These twenty-two recall campaigns are to
address the following:
1. Loosening of the rear axle pinion nut causing loss of vehicle
control (Recall No. 13V-038);
2. Rear fuel tank structure's risk of failure (Recall No. 13V-252);
3. Failure of the left tie rod assembly resulting in loss of
steering control (Recall No. 13V-527);
4. Failure of the left tie rod assembly resulting in loss of
steering control (Recall No. 13V-528);
5. Failure of the left tie rod assembly resulting in loss of
steering control (Recall No. 13V-529);
6. Water freezing in the brake booster (Recall No. 14V-154);
7. Inadvertent ignition switch movement turning off the engine
(Recall No. 14V-373);
8. Vanity lamp wiring shortages resulting in fire (Recall No. 14V-
391);
9. Inadvertent ignition switch movement turning off the engine
(Recall No. 14V-438);
10. Inadvertent ignition switch movement turning off the engine
(Recall No. 14V-567);
11. Sudden failure of the alternator (Recall No. 14V-634);
12. Electrical connectors of the diesel fuel heater may overheat
(Recall No. 14V-635);
13. Inoperative instrument cluster causing vehicle failure (Recall
No. 14V-749);
14. Broken springs in the clutch ignition interlock switch (Recall
No. 14V-795);
15. Loosening of the rear axle pinion nut causing loss of vehicle
control (Recall No. 14V-796);
16. Potential air bag inflator rupture with metal fragments causing
serious injury (14V-817);
17. Unintended air bag deployment during vehicle operation (Recall
No. 15V-041);
18. Unintended air bag deployment during vehicle operation (Recall
No. 15V-046);
19. Contaminated, dislodged or broken parking pawl or park rod
(Recall No. 15V-090);
20. Fuel leak near an ignition source (Recall No. 15V-114);
21. Fuel pump relay causing a vehicle to stall without warning
(Recall No. 15V-115); and
22. Driver and passenger side door latch failure (Recall No. 15V-
178).

III. Recall Remedy Requirements

A manufacturer of a recalled motor vehicle is required to remedy
the vehicle's defect or noncompliance without charge. 49 U.S.C.
30120(a). The manufacturer may repair the vehicle, replace the vehicle
with an identical or reasonably equivalent vehicle, or refund the
purchase price, less a reasonable allowance for depreciation. Id. If a
manufacturer decides to repair a defect or noncompliance and the repair
is not done adequately within a reasonable time, the manufacturer shall
replace the vehicle without charge with an identical or reasonably
equivalent vehicle, or refund the purchase price, less a reasonable
allowance for depreciation. Id. Sec. 30120(c).
On its own motion or on application by any interested person, NHTSA
may conduct a hearing to decide whether a manufacturer has reasonably
met the remedy requirements. Id. Sec. 30120(e); 49 CFR 557.6. If NHTSA
decides that the manufacturer has not reasonably met the remedy
requirements, it shall order the manufacturer to take specified action
to meet those requirements, including by ordering the manufacturer to
refund the purchase price of the defective or noncomplying vehicles,
less a reasonable allowance for depreciation. 49 U.S.C. 30120(a), (c),
(e); see 49 CFR 557.8. NHTSA may also take any other action authorized
by the Safety Act. 49 U.S.C. 30120(e); 49 CFR 557.8. A person

[[Page 35718]]

that violates the Safety Act, including the remedy requirements, or
regulations prescribed thereunder, is liable to the United States
Government for a civil penalty of not more than $7,000 for each
violation. 49 U.S.C. 30165(a)(1); 49 CFR 578.6. A separate violation
occurs for each motor vehicle and for each failure to perform a
required act. Id. The maximum penalty for a related series of
violations is $35,000,000. Id.

IV. Whether Fiat Chrysler Has Reasonably Met the Remedy Requirements

The public hearing will address NHTSA's concerns that Fiat Chrysler
is not meeting its recall remedy requirements. NHTSA has tentatively
concluded that Fiat Chrysler has not remedied vehicles in a reasonable
time and has not adequately remedied vehicles. NHTSA will consider
information on issues including, but not limited to, those detailed
below in deciding whether Fiat Chrysler has reasonably met the remedy
requirements of the Safety Act.

A. Failure To Remedy Vehicles in a Reasonable Time

On February 6, 2013, Fiat Chrysler recalled approximately 278,000
model year 2009 Dodge Durango, 2009 Plymouth Aspen, 2009-2011 Dodge
Dakota and 2009-2012 Ram 1500 vehicles. This recall, 13V-038, involves
a pinion nut on the vehicle's differential that may come loose. If this
occurs, both rear wheels can lock up and the vehicle can become
uncontrollable. Although this recall was initiated over 16 months ago,
NHTSA has received, and continues to receive, numerous complaints from
owners of these vehicles that they have been unable to have the recall
repair performed because parts to perform the repair are not available.
These complaints include incidents where the pinion nut has failed
after the owners were notified that parts were not available, including
two incidents resulting in crashes.
Another series of recalls involves a tie rod end that can fracture,
disabling the steering gear and causing a loss of directional control.
Fiat Chrysler filed recall notifications for recalls 13V-527 and 13V-
529 on November 6, 2013. The company filed another recall notification
for recall 13V-528 on November 11, 2013. These three recalls involve
approximately one million Dodge Ram pickup trucks and cab chassis
vehicles. Problems with producing sufficient replacement parts to allow
repair of these vehicles were compounded by failures of the remedy part
that caused Fiat Chrysler to stop shipment of the replacement parts. At
this time, a year and a half after the recall notices were filed, many
of the vehicles remain unrepaired. Owners have reported to NHTSA that
they have been unable to have their vehicles repaired after making
multiple attempts to do so because parts are unavailable.
On June 18, 2013 Fiat Chrysler notified NHTSA that it would conduct
a recall of approximately 1.5 million model year 2003-2008 Jeep Liberty
and model year 1993-1998 Jeep Grand Cherokee vehicles to reduce the
risk of fire in rear end collisions. Among other things, Fiat Chrysler
indicated that it would install trailer hitches on these vehicles to
improve the performance of the rear structure of the vehicles in such
impacts. As of April 30, 2015, Fiat Chrysler has completed remedy
repairs on 320,000 of the 1.5 million vehicles involved in these
recalls.

B. Failure To Adequately Repair Defects

Fiat Chrysler filed a recall notification on July 1, 2014 stating
that a safety related defect existed in approximately 650,000 model
year 2011-2014 Dodge Durango and Jeep Grand Cherokee vehicles. The
defect results in the risk of fire inside the vehicle caused by a short
circuit that occurs when fasteners used to secure a sun visor to the
head liner pierce a wiring harness located above the sun visor mount.
The remedy procedure called for re-locating the wiring to remove the
risk that it would be pierced when the sun visor was re-installed.
Following several incidents where vehicles experienced fires after the
remedy repair had been conducted, Chrysler issued revised instructions
and service procedures in April 2015 to ensure that the recall remedy
repair procedure did not result in damage to the wiring harness when
the sun visor was reattached. NHTSA is aware of 13 incidents where
short circuits, including fires or thermal events, occurred after the
recall remedy was attempted.

V. Recall Notification Requirements

A manufacturer must submit a Part 573 Report to NHTSA, initiating a
recall, not more than five working days after it knew or should have
known of a safety-related defect or noncompliance in its vehicles. See
49 CFR 573.6(b). The manufacturer's initial Part 573 Report to must
contain, at a minimum the manufacturer's name, the identity of the
vehicles potentially containing the defect or noncompliance, and a
description of the defect or noncompliance. Id. Other required
information not available at the time the initial Part 573 Report must
be submitted within five working days after the manufacturer has
confirmed the accuracy of the information. Id. This includes a
chronology of all principal events that were the basis for the
determination that the defect related to motor vehicle safety. 49 CFR
573.6(c)(6).
A manufacturer must amend its Part 573 Report within five working
days after it has new information that updates or corrects information
previously reported on the identity of the vehicles potentially
containing the defect or noncompliance, the total number of vehicles
potentially containing the defect or noncompliance, the manufacturer's
program for remedying the defect or noncompliance, and the estimated
date(s) on which it will begin sending notifications about the recall
to owners and dealers. 49 CFR 573.6(b). If a manufacturer becomes aware
that the beginning or completion dates reported to the agency for its
notifications to owners or dealers will be delayed by more than two
weeks, it must promptly advise the agency of the delay and the reasons
for the delay, and provide a revised estimate. 49 CFR 573.6(b),
(c)(8)(ii).
A manufacturer who decides in good faith that the vehicle contains
a safety-related defect or does not comply with an applicable FMVSS
must notify owners of the defect or noncompliance no later than 60 days
from the date it files its Part 573 Report with NHTSA. 49 U.S.C.
30118(c); 49 CFR 577.7(a)(1).
Owner notifications must be sent, by first class mail, to each
person registered under State law as the owner of the vehicle and whose
name and address are reasonably ascertainable by the manufacturer
through State records or other available sources. 49 U.S.C. 30119(d);
49 CFR 577.7(a)(2)(i). If the owner cannot be reasonably ascertained,
the manufacturer shall notify the most recent purchaser known to the
manufacturer. Id. Among other things, the notification to owners must
contain a clear description of the safety-related defect or
noncompliance, an evaluation of the risk to motor vehicle safety
reasonably related to the defect or noncompliance, the measures to be
taken to obtain a remedy, and the earliest date on which the vehicle
will be remedied without charge. 49 U.S.C. 30119(a); 49 CFR part 577.
If a remedy is not available at the time of the initial notice, then
the manufacturer must send a second notice to owners once a remedy is
available. 49 CFR 577.7(a)(1).
A manufacturer must submit a copy of its proposed owner
notification letter to NHTSA's Recall Management Division no fewer than
five Federal Government

[[Page 35719]]

business days before it intends to begin mailing it to owners. 49 CFR
577.5(a).
A manufacturer must also send notifications to dealers within a
reasonable time after the manufacturer first decides that a safety-
related defect or noncompliance exists. 49 U.S.C. 30119(c); 49 CFR
577.7(a). Among other requirements, the dealer notice must identify the
vehicles covered by the recall, describe the defect or noncompliance,
provide a brief evaluation of the risk to motor vehicle safety
associated with the defect or noncompliance, and include a complete
description of the recall remedy and the estimated date on which the
remedy will be available. 49 CFR 577.13. The dealer notice must also
include an advisory that it is a violation of Federal law for a dealer
to deliver a new motor vehicle covered by the notification under a sale
or lease until the defect or noncompliance is remedied. Id. Any
required information that is not available at the time of the initial
dealer notice shall be provided as it becomes available. Id.
A manufacturer is required to submit to NHTSA a representative copy
of all notices, bulletins, and other communications that related
directly to a defect or noncompliance and are sent to more than one
manufacturer, distributor, dealer or purchaser no later than five days
after they are initially sent. 49 CFR 573.6(c)(10).
All submissions pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, except as otherwise
required, must be submitted to NHTSA through its online recalls portal.
49 CFR 573.9. A manufacturer must use the provided templates for all
required submissions. Id.
On its own motion or on petition of any interested person, NHTSA
may conduct a hearing to decide whether a manufacturer has reasonably
met its notification requirements. 49 U.S.C. 30118(e); 49 CFR 557.6. If
NHTSA decides that the manufacturer has not reasonably met the
notification requirements, it shall order the manufacturer to take
specified action to meet those requirements and may take any other
action authorized by the Safety Act. 49 U.S.C. 30118(e); 49 CFR 557.8.
A person that violates the Safety Act, including the notification
requirements, or regulations prescribed thereunder, is liable to the
United States Government for a civil penalty of not more than $7,000
for each violation. 49 U.S.C. 30165(a)(1); 49 CFR 578.6. A separate
violation occurs for each motor vehicle and for each failure to perform
a required act. Id. The maximum penalty for a related series of
violations is $35,000,000. Id.

VI. Whether Fiat Chrysler Has Reasonably Met the Notification
Requirements

The public hearing will address NHTSA's concerns that Fiat Chrysler
is not meeting its recall notification requirements. NHTSA has
tentatively concluded that Fiat Chrysler has not notified vehicle
owners about recalls in a timely manner and has not submitted
information to NHTSA about its recalls that is timely, correct,
complete, and in the required form. Compliance with the notification
requirements is important to allow owners to make informed decisions
about their safety and to enable NHTSA to determine whether Fiat
Chrysler's recalls are effective in mitigating the safety risk of
defects.
NHTSA will consider information on issues including, but not
limited to, those detailed below in deciding whether Fiat Chrysler has
reasonably met the notification requirements of the Safety Act.

A. Untimely Recall Notices to Owners

Fiat Chrysler acknowledged, in its response to NHTSA's May 18, 2015
Special Order, that it did not timely notify owners about certain
recalls. Fiat Chrysler stated that it first notified owners of defects
in their vehicles after the 60-day deadline in Recall Nos. 14V-373,
14V-567, 14V-634, 14V-795, and 15V-115.\1\ It appears Fiat Chrysler
also did not notify owners that their vehicles were recalled within the
required 60-day period in at least two additional recalls, Recall Nos.
13V-527 and 14V-635. In Recall No. 13V-527, Fiat Chrysler reported to
NHTSA that it mailed interim owner notices on January 16, 2014, or 11
days late. In Recall No. 14V-635, Fiat Chrysler reported to NHTSA that
it mailed interim owner notices on December 8, 2014, or two days late.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ For Recall No. 14V-373, Fiat Chrysler previously reported to
NHTSA that it mailed interim owner notices on September 11, 2014, or
19 days late. Fiat Chrysler now says in its Special Order response
that its interim owner notices were mailed 12 days late. For Recall
No. 14V-795, Fiat Chrysler previously reported to NHTSA that it
mailed interim owner notices on February 10, 2015, or within the
required 60-day period. Fiat Chrysler now says in its Special Order
response that its interim owner notices were mailed one day late.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Additionally, Fiat Chrysler did not notify vehicle owners for over
five months of the risk of potential air bag inflator ruptures in
Recall No. 14V-354 (now a part of Recall No. 14V-817). Fiat Chrysler
still has not notified vehicle owners of Recall No. 14V-817, nearly six
months after filing its Part 573 Report in December 2014. Although Fiat
Chrysler submitted draft interim notices to NHTSA for approval in both
Recall Nos. 14V-354 and 14V-817, Fiat Chrysler apparently never sent
those notices to owners.
Timely notification to vehicle owners about recalls is critical so
that they can make informed decisions concerning their safety. Even
where a manufacturer does not have parts available to immediately
repair the vehicle, an owner is entitled to understand the risk of
continuing to drive the vehicle before it is repaired.

B. Untimely Recall Notice to NHTSA

Fiat Chrysler's chronology for Recall No. 15V-090 states that its
supplier notified it in October 2014 of a production process issue
linked to the transmission shift failures that are the subject of the
recall. Fiat Chrysler did not initiate the recall, by submitting a Part
573 Report, until over two months later. Fiat Chrysler's chronology
ends on December 7, 2014, when Fiat Chrysler received additional
information from its supplier. Fiat Chrysler has not provided a
complete chronology explaining this apparent delay in conducting a
recall despite NHTSA's request to do so.
The requirement to initiate a recall within five working days of
knowing of a safety-related defect helps to mitigate the risk of
safety-related defects. That requirement exists so that the public is
notified of safety risks and so that vehicle owners can expeditiously
have their vehicles remedied. Additionally, the requirement for a
complete chronology is important so that NHTSA may ensure that recalls
are timely.

C. Failure To Notify NHTSA About Changes to Notification Schedule

It appears that Fiat Chrysler did not keep NHTSA informed about its
schedule for notifying vehicle owners about recalls, as required. Fiat
Chrysler did not notify NHTSA, by amending its Part 573 Report within
five working days, of changes to the estimated dates on which it will
begin notifying owners or dealers in several recalls, including Recall
Nos. 13V-527, 14V-373, 14V-567, 14V-643, 14V-749, and 14V-795. In some
of those recalls, involving a delay of more than two weeks in the
notification schedule, Fiat Chrysler did not promptly provide the
reasons for the delay and a revised estimate.
Timely and complete information about a manufacturer's notification
schedule is important to ensure that vehicle owners are kept informed
about safety defects and know when and how they can have those defects
fixed. Similarly, dealer notices provide essential information on the
defects so that dealers can keep their customers

[[Page 35720]]

informed and repair their vehicles expediously and effectively.

D. Failure To Submit Copies of Recall Communications to NHTSA

NHTSA has tentatively concluded that Fiat Chrysler also has not
submitted representative copies of recall communications to NHTSA as
required. This includes not submitting a draft owner notification for
NHSTA's review and approval, and not timely submitting copies of owner
and dealer communications to NHTSA.
1. Failure To Submit a Draft Owner Notification Letter
In at least one recall, Recall No. 14V-749, Fiat Chrysler did not
submit a draft owner notification letter to NHTSA prior to mailing it.
NHTSA reviews draft owner notification letters to ensure that they
contain accurate and complete information. Failing to submit a draft
owner notice to NHTSA as required prevents NHTSA from ensuring that
owners receive critical information about their recalled vehicles,
including the safety risk associated with the defect and how to have it
fixed.
2. Failure To Submit Copies of Recall Communications to Owners and
Dealers
Despite a legal requirement that Fiat Chrysler submit copies of
recall communications to the agency within five days, NHTSA staff
repeatedly has had to request that Fiat Chrysler submit copies of those
documents to the agency. Fiat Chrysler did not submit copies of owner
letters within five days as required in recalls including Recall Nos.
13V-527, 14V-373, 14V-438, 14V-634, 14V-643, 14V-795, 15V-114, and 15V-
115. Fiat Chrysler also did not submit copies of dealer communications
within five days as required in Recall Nos. 13V-252, 13V-527, 13V-528,
13V-529, 13V-373, 13V-391, 14V-567, 14V-635, 14V-749, 14V-795, 14V-796,
15V-090, 15V-115, and 15V-178. In twelve of those recalls, Fiat
Chrysler did not provide NHTSA with copies of certain recall-related
dealer communications until after NHTSA noticed this public hearing.
When Fiat Chrysler does submit copies of recall communications, it
routinely enters incorrect information into NHTSA's recalls portal,
such as providing the date that Fiat Chrysler submitted a document to
NHTSA or leaving the date blank, rather than providing the date that
Fiat Chrysler mailed its notification to owners.
Compliance with the requirement to submit representative copies of
owner notification letters to the agency and to provide correct and
complete information about the notifications to NHTSA is important so
that NHTSA may ensure vehicle owners are aware of defects in their
vehicles and have information on how to have those defects fixed.
Likewise, the requirement to submit dealer communications enables the
agency to evaluate whether dealers have accurate and complete
information necessary to remedy vehicles. Among other things, dealer
communications provide the personnel responsible for actually repairing
vehicles with the instructions on how to do so. It is essential that
NHTSA have access to those communications so that it can fulfill its
statutory oversight role to ensure that remedies are effective.

E. Failure To Provide NHTSA With Other Critical Information About
Recalls

NHSTA has tentatively concluded that Fiat Chrysler also has not
provided NHTSA with other critical information about its recalls by
submitting timely, accurate, and complete amendments to its Part 573
Reports, and by properly submitting information through NHTSA's online
recalls portal. The requirement to file an amended Part 573 Report is
important because the act of amending the Part 573 Report lets NHTSA
and the public know that the manufacturer has become aware of
significant new or changed information about the recall.
1. Failure To Submit Information on the Vehicles Impacted by a Recall
Across multiple recalls, Fiat Chrysler has not correctly and
completely identified the vehicles affected by the recalls. In several
recalls, Fiat Chrysler sent letters or other submissions to NHTSA that
showed an apparent change to the number of vehicles involved in a
recall, rather than filing an amended Part 573 Report as required. On
multiple occasions, Fiat Chrysler provided inconsistent information to
NHTSA--apparently changing the recall population in a cover letter and
then providing contradictory information in a later-filed amendment to
its Part 573 Report for the recall. These recalls include Recalls No.
13V-527, 14V-373, 14V-154, 14V-438, 14V-634, 14V-635, 14V-643, 14V-749,
14V-795, 15V-090, and 15V-115. In another recall, Recall No. 15V-041,
Fiat Chrysler did not correctly identify the vehicle identification
numbers (VINs) associated with the recall. NHTSA oversight caught over
65,000 vehicles impacted by the recall that Fiat Chrysler had not
included. Additionally, Fiat Chrysler did not provide NHTSA with
information on the vehicles affected by Takata air bag inflator Recall
No. 14V-354 (now a part of Recall No. 14V-817) for over seven weeks,
lagging far behind other manufacturers recalling vehicles for the same
issue.
A failure to follow the requirements for providing information on
the vehicles affected by a recall is concerning because, if a
manufacturer cannot provide NHTSA with consistent, correct, and timely
information on the vehicles included in a recall to the agency, it
suggests that the manufacturer may also be failing to provide all
vehicle owners with notice of the defect and access to a free remedy as
the law requires. Moreover, placing information on changes to the
vehicle population affected by a recall in routine correspondence
rather than filing an amended Part 573 Report, as required, impedes
NHTSA and the public's ability to understand the full universe of
vehicles impacted by the defect.
2. Failure To Submit Information on the Recall Remedy
NHTSA has tentatively concluded that Fiat Chrysler also has not
submitted amended Part 573 Reports as required when it has confirmed or
changed its remedy plan. This has occurred for recalls including Recall
Nos. 13V-527 and 14V-634.
Having timely and complete access to information on a
manufacturer's remedy plan is essential for the agency to assess the
remedy plan and ensure that a manufacturer is meeting its obligation to
adequately repair vehicle defects within a reasonable time.

VII. Decision To Conduct a Public Hearing

NHTSA has decided that it is necessary to conduct a public hearing
to decide whether Fiat Chrysler has reasonably met the remedy and
notification requirements under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120. See 49
U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 30118(e), Sec. Sec. 30120(e); 49 CFR 557.6(d),
557.7.
Based on information presented at the public hearing and other
available information, NHTSA may issue an order that could include a
finding that Fiat Chrysler failed to carry out its recall requirements
under the Safety Act and requiring Fiat Chrysler to take specific
actions to comply with the law.
Any interested person may make written and/or oral presentations of
information, views, and arguments on whether Fiat Chrysler has
reasonably met the remedy and/or notification requirements. There will
be no cross-examination of witnesses. 49 CFR 557.7.
NHTSA will consider the views of participants in deciding whether
Fiat

[[Page 35721]]

Chrysler has reasonably met the notification and/or remedy requirements
under 49 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 30118 and 30120, and in developing the terms
of an order (if any) requiring Fiat Chrysler to take specified action
as the remedy for the recalls and/or take other action. 49 U.S.C.
Sec. Sec. 30118(e), 30120(e); 49 CFR 557.8.
Procedural Matters: Interested persons may participate in these
proceedings through written and/or oral presentations. Persons wishing
to attend must notify Carla Bridges, National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590
(Telephone: 202-366-2992) (Fax: 202-366-3820), before the close of
business on June 30, 2015 (and June 26, 2015, for non-U.S. citizens).
Each person wishing to attend must provide his or her name and country
of citizenship. Non-U.S. citizens must also provide date of birth,
title or position, and passport or diplomatic ID number, along with
expiration date. Each person wishing to make an oral presentation must
also specify the amount of time that the presentation is expected to
last, his or her organizational affiliation, phone number, and email
address. NHTSA will prepare a schedule of presentations. Depending upon
the number of persons who wish to make oral presentations and the
anticipated length of those presentations, NHTSA may limit the length
of oral presentations.
For security purposes, photo identification is required to enter
the U.S. Department of Transportation building. To allow sufficient
time to clear security and enter the building, NHTSA recommends that
hearing participants arrive 30 to 60 minutes prior to the start of the
public hearing.
The hearing will be held at a site accessible to individuals with
disabilities. Individuals who require accommodations, such as sign
language interpreters, should contact Ms. Justine Casselle using the
contact information in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section
above no later than June 24, 2015. A transcript of the proceedings will
be placed in the docket for this notice at a later date.
Persons who wish to file written comments should submit them so
that they are received by NHTSA no later than June 23, 2015.
Instructions on how to submit written comments to the docket is located
under the ADDRESSES section of this notice.

Authority: 49 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 30118(e), 30120(e); 49 CFR
557.6(d), 557.7; delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.95(a) and
501.2(a)(1).

Issued: June 16, 2015.
Mark R. Rosekind,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2015-15246 Filed 6-19-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.