BMW Group of America, LLC, Incorporated, Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 5641-5642 [2017-01005]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 18, 2017 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
MBUSA explained that the
recommended tire inflation pressure for
the labeled spare tire listed on the
FMVSS No. 110 tire placard is the same
inflation pressure that MBUSA would
recommend for the originally equipped
spare tire. The agency verified that both
spare tire sizes at the labeled
recommended inflation pressure are
appropriate for the maximum loaded
weight of the subject vehicles. If a
consumer inadvertently used the
labeled inflation pressure to inflate the
originally equipped spare tire, the tire
load rating would be sufficient for the
maximum loaded vehicle weight.
Furthermore, MBUSA explained that
the subject vehicle’s owner’s manuals
describe both spare tire sizes. The
agency believes this additional
information can be used by the
consumer to ensure either size is
appropriate for use.
NHTSA’s Decision: In consideration
of the foregoing, NHTSA finds that
MBUSA has met its burden of
persuasion that the subject FMVSS No.
110 noncompliance in the affected
vehicles is inconsequential to motor
vehicle safety. Accordingly, MBUSA’s
petition is hereby granted and MBUSA
is consequently exempted from the
obligation of providing notification of,
and a free remedy for, the subject
noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118
and 30120.
NHTSA notes that the statutory
provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to
file petitions for a determination of
inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to
exempt manufacturers only from the
duties found in sections 30118 and
30120, respectively, to notify owners,
purchasers, and dealers of a defect or
noncompliance and to remedy the
defect or noncompliance. Therefore, this
decision only applies to the subject
vehicles that MBUSA no longer
controlled at the time it determined that
the noncompliance existed. However,
the granting of this petition does not
relieve vehicle distributors and dealers
of the prohibitions on the sale, offer for
sale, or introduction or delivery for
introduction into interstate commerce of
the noncompliant vehicles under their
control after MBUSA 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 M. Giuseppe,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2017–01006 Filed 1–17–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:41 Jan 17, 2017
Jkt 241001
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2016–0115; Notice 1]
BMW Group of America, LLC,
Incorporated, Receipt of Petition for
Decision of Inconsequential
Noncompliance
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Receipt of petition.
AGENCY:
BMW of North America, LLC
(BMW), has determined that certain
model year (MY) 2016–2017 BMW,
Mini, and Rolls-Royce vehicles do not
fully comply with Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No.
209, Seat Belt Assemblies. BMW filed a
report dated October 13, 2016. BMW
also petitioned NHTSA on November 4,
2016, for a decision that the subject
noncompliance is inconsequential as it
relates to motor vehicle safety.
DATES: The closing date for comments
on the petition is February 17, 2017.
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 in the title 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 Delivery: 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 https://
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 comments you have
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00120
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
5641
submitted by mail were received, please
enclose a stamped, self-addressed
postcard with the comments. Note that
all comments received will be posted
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided.
All comments and supporting
materials received before the close of
business on the closing date indicated
above will be filed in the docket and
will be considered. All comments and
supporting materials received after the
closing date will also be filed and will
be considered to the fullest extent
possible.
When the petition is granted or
denied, notice of the decision will also
be published in the Federal Register
pursuant to the authority indicated at
the end of this notice.
All comments, background
documentation, and supporting
materials submitted to the docket may
be viewed by anyone at the address and
times given above. The documents may
also be viewed on the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov by following the
online instructions for accessing the
dockets. The docket ID number for this
petition is shown in the heading of this
notice.
DOT’s complete Privacy Act
Statement is available for review in a
Federal Register notice published on
April 11, 2000, (65 FR 19477–78).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Overview
BMW of North America, LLC (BMW),
has determined that certain model year
(MY) 2016–2017 BMW, Mini, and RollsRoyce vehicles do not fully comply with
paragraph 4.3(j)(2)(ii) of Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No.
209, Seat Belt Assemblies. BMW filed a
report dated October 13, 2016, pursuant
to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and
Noncompliance Responsibility and
Reports. BMW also petitioned NHTSA
on November 4, 2016, pursuant to 49
U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and 49
CFR part 556, for an exemption from the
notification and remedy requirements of
49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the basis that
this noncompliance is inconsequential
as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
This notice of receipt of BMW’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
Approximately 15,630 of the
following MY 2016–2017 BMW, Mini,
and Rolls-Royce vehicles manufactured
E:\FR\FM\18JAN1.SGM
18JAN1
5642
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 18, 2017 / Notices
between June 29, 2016 and October 10,
2016 are potentially involved:
• 2017 BMW X1 SAV (X1 sDrive28i, X1
xDrive28i)
• 2017 BMW 5 Series Gran Turismo
(535i Gran Turismo, 535i xDrive Gran
Turismo, 550i xDrive Gran Turismo)
• 2016 BMW 5 Series (528i, 528i
xDrive, 535i, 535i xDrive, 550i, 550i
xDrive, M5)
• 2016 BMW 5 Series (535d, 535d
xDrive)
• 2016 Mini Cooper Clubman and Mini
Cooper S Clubman
• Mini Hardtop 4-door Cooper and Mini
Hardtop 4-door Cooper S
• 2017 Rolls-Royce Ghost
III. Noncompliance
BMW explains that the
noncompliance involves the Emergency
Locking Retractor (ELR) in the safety
belt assembly of the vehicle’s front left
seat. These ELRs are equipped with a
vehicle-sensitive locking mechanism
and a webbing-sensitive locking
mechanism. The noncompliance
specifically involves the vehiclesensitive locking mechanism, which
does not lock as designed when
subjected to the requirements of
paragraph S4.3(j)(2)(ii) of FMVSS No.
209.
IV. Rule Text
Paragraph S4.3 of FMVSS No. 209
states in pertinent part:
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
S4.3 Requirements for hardware . . .
(j) Emergency-locking retractor . . .
(2) For seat belt assemblies manufactured
on or after February 22, 2007 and for
manufacturers opting for early compliance.
An emergency-locking retractor of a Type 1
or Type 2 seat belt assembly, when tested in
accordance with the procedures specified in
paragraph S5.2(j)(2) . . .
(ii) Shall lock before the webbing payout
exceeds the maximum limit of 25 mm when
the retractor is subjected to an acceleration of
0.7 g under the applicable test conditions of
S5.2(j)(2)(iii)(A) or (B). The retractor is
determined to be locked when the webbing
belt load tension is at least 35 N.
V. Summary of BMW’s Petition
BMW described the subject
noncompliance and stated its belief that
the noncompliance is inconsequential
as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
In support of its petition, BMW
submitted the following reasoning:
(a) The vehicle-sensitive locking
mechanism functions, but the noncompliance involves a slight exceedance
of the FMVSS No. 209 Section
S4.3(j)(2)(ii) requirement.
(b) The slight exceedance is such that,
based upon testing of non-compliant
units, the vehicle-sensitive locking
mechanism locks at approximately 1.0g
within 25mm, or at 0.7 g within 90mm.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:41 Jan 17, 2017
Jkt 241001
(c) The tilt-lock function of the ELR is
compliant, and locks at angles greater
than 15-deg up to 41-deg when
subjected to the FMVSS No. 209 Section
S4.3(j)(2) rollover requirements.
(d) The ELR also contains a voluntary
webbing-sensitive locking mechanism
which provides crash and rollover
restraint performance comparable to the
performance provided by an FMVSS No.
209 compliant vehicle-sensitive locking
mechanism.
(e) Crash test results comparing
FMVSS No. 209 S4.3(j)(2)(ii) compliant
ELRs and ELRs in which the vehiclesensitive locking mechanism has been
disabled (to demonstrate a ‘‘worst-case
scenario’’, even though in affected
vehicles the vehicle-sensitive
mechanism remains functional)
demonstrate comparable results
according to FMVSS No. 208
assessments.
Test results indicate that any
performance differences are with
normal ‘‘data scatter’’ and are attributed
to test tolerances.
(f) Affected safety belt assemblies
comply with all other applicable
provisions of FMVSS No. 209.
(g) NHTSA previously granted a
petition from General Motors in which
the ELR’s vehicle-sensitive locking
mechanism was completely nonfunctional, whereas the ELR’s vehiclesensitive locking mechanism in the
affected BMW vehicles is functional, but
may experience a slight exceedance of
the FMVSS no. 209 S4.3(j)(2)(ii)
requirement.
(h) BMW has not received any
customer complaints related to this
issue.
(i) BMW is not aware of any accidents
or injuries related to this issue.
(j) Vehicle production has been
corrected.
BMW concluded by expressing the
belief that the subject noncompliance is
inconsequential as it relates to motor
vehicle safety, and that its petition to be
exempted from providing notification of
the noncompliance, as required by 49
U.S.C. 30118, and a remedy for the
noncompliance, as required by 49
U.S.C. 30120, should be granted.
To view BMW’s petition, test data and
analyses in its entirety you can visit
https://www.regulations.gov by
following the online instructions for
accessing the dockets and by using the
docket ID number for this petition
shown in the heading of this notice.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00121
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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 BMW no longer
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 BMW notified them that
the subject noncompliance existed.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120:
delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.95 and
501.8.
Jeffrey M. Giuseppe,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2017–01005 Filed 1–17–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
Petition for Exemption From the
Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention
Standard; General Motors LLC
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.
AGENCY:
This document grants in full
the General Motors LLC’s (GM) petition
for an exemption of the Chevrolet Volt
vehicle line in accordance with 49 CFR
part 543, Exemption from Vehicle Theft
Prevention Standard. This petition is
granted because the agency has
determined that the antitheft device to
be placed on the line as standard
equipment is likely to be as effective in
reducing and deterring motor vehicle
theft as compliance with the partsmarking requirements of 49 CFR part
541, Federal Motor Vehicle Theft
Prevention Standard (Theft Prevention
Standard).
SUMMARY:
The exemption granted by this
notice is effective beginning with the
2018 model year (MY).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Deborah Mazyck, Office of International
Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer
Programs, NHTSA, W43–443, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC
20590. Ms. Mazyck’s phone number is
(202) 366–4139. Her fax number is (202)
493–2990.
DATES:
E:\FR\FM\18JAN1.SGM
18JAN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 11 (Wednesday, January 18, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5641-5642]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-01005]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2016-0115; Notice 1]
BMW Group of America, LLC, Incorporated, Receipt of Petition for
Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Receipt of petition.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: BMW of North America, LLC (BMW), has determined that certain
model year (MY) 2016-2017 BMW, Mini, and Rolls-Royce vehicles do not
fully comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No.
209, Seat Belt Assemblies. BMW filed a report dated October 13, 2016.
BMW also petitioned NHTSA on November 4, 2016, for a decision that the
subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle
safety.
DATES: The closing date for comments on the petition is February 17,
2017.
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 in the title 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 Delivery: 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 https://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 comments you have submitted by mail were
received, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard with the
comments. Note that all comments received will be posted without change
to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided.
All comments and supporting materials received before the close of
business on the closing date indicated above will be filed in the
docket and will be considered. All comments and supporting materials
received after the closing date will also be filed and will be
considered to the fullest extent possible.
When the petition is granted or denied, notice of the decision will
also be published in the Federal Register pursuant to the authority
indicated at the end of this notice.
All comments, background documentation, and supporting materials
submitted to the docket may be viewed by anyone at the address and
times given above. The documents may also be viewed on the Internet at
https://www.regulations.gov by following the online instructions for
accessing the dockets. The docket ID number for this petition is shown
in the heading of this notice.
DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement is available for review in a
Federal Register notice published on April 11, 2000, (65 FR 19477-78).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Overview
BMW of North America, LLC (BMW), has determined that certain model
year (MY) 2016-2017 BMW, Mini, and Rolls-Royce vehicles do not fully
comply with paragraph 4.3(j)(2)(ii) of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standard (FMVSS) No. 209, Seat Belt Assemblies. BMW filed a report
dated October 13, 2016, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and
Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. BMW also petitioned NHTSA on
November 4, 2016, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and 49
CFR part 556, for an exemption from the notification and remedy
requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the basis that this
noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
This notice of receipt of BMW'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
Approximately 15,630 of the following MY 2016-2017 BMW, Mini, and
Rolls-Royce vehicles manufactured
[[Page 5642]]
between June 29, 2016 and October 10, 2016 are potentially involved:
2017 BMW X1 SAV (X1 sDrive28i, X1 xDrive28i)
2017 BMW 5 Series Gran Turismo (535i Gran Turismo, 535i xDrive
Gran Turismo, 550i xDrive Gran Turismo)
2016 BMW 5 Series (528i, 528i xDrive, 535i, 535i xDrive, 550i,
550i xDrive, M5)
2016 BMW 5 Series (535d, 535d xDrive)
2016 Mini Cooper Clubman and Mini Cooper S Clubman
Mini Hardtop 4-door Cooper and Mini Hardtop 4-door Cooper S
2017 Rolls-Royce Ghost
III. Noncompliance
BMW explains that the noncompliance involves the Emergency Locking
Retractor (ELR) in the safety belt assembly of the vehicle's front left
seat. These ELRs are equipped with a vehicle-sensitive locking
mechanism and a webbing-sensitive locking mechanism. The noncompliance
specifically involves the vehicle-sensitive locking mechanism, which
does not lock as designed when subjected to the requirements of
paragraph S4.3(j)(2)(ii) of FMVSS No. 209.
IV. Rule Text
Paragraph S4.3 of FMVSS No. 209 states in pertinent part:
S4.3 Requirements for hardware . . .
(j) Emergency-locking retractor . . .
(2) For seat belt assemblies manufactured on or after February
22, 2007 and for manufacturers opting for early compliance. An
emergency-locking retractor of a Type 1 or Type 2 seat belt
assembly, when tested in accordance with the procedures specified in
paragraph S5.2(j)(2) . . .
(ii) Shall lock before the webbing payout exceeds the maximum
limit of 25 mm when the retractor is subjected to an acceleration of
0.7 g under the applicable test conditions of S5.2(j)(2)(iii)(A) or
(B). The retractor is determined to be locked when the webbing belt
load tension is at least 35 N.
V. Summary of BMW's Petition
BMW described the subject noncompliance and stated its belief that
the noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle
safety.
In support of its petition, BMW submitted the following reasoning:
(a) The vehicle-sensitive locking mechanism functions, but the non-
compliance involves a slight exceedance of the FMVSS No. 209 Section
S4.3(j)(2)(ii) requirement.
(b) The slight exceedance is such that, based upon testing of non-
compliant units, the vehicle-sensitive locking mechanism locks at
approximately 1.0g within 25mm, or at 0.7 g within 90mm.
(c) The tilt-lock function of the ELR is compliant, and locks at
angles greater than 15-deg up to 41-deg when subjected to the FMVSS No.
209 Section S4.3(j)(2) rollover requirements.
(d) The ELR also contains a voluntary webbing-sensitive locking
mechanism which provides crash and rollover restraint performance
comparable to the performance provided by an FMVSS No. 209 compliant
vehicle-sensitive locking mechanism.
(e) Crash test results comparing FMVSS No. 209 S4.3(j)(2)(ii)
compliant ELRs and ELRs in which the vehicle-sensitive locking
mechanism has been disabled (to demonstrate a ``worst-case scenario'',
even though in affected vehicles the vehicle-sensitive mechanism
remains functional) demonstrate comparable results according to FMVSS
No. 208 assessments.
Test results indicate that any performance differences are with
normal ``data scatter'' and are attributed to test tolerances.
(f) Affected safety belt assemblies comply with all other
applicable provisions of FMVSS No. 209.
(g) NHTSA previously granted a petition from General Motors in
which the ELR's vehicle-sensitive locking mechanism was completely non-
functional, whereas the ELR's vehicle-sensitive locking mechanism in
the affected BMW vehicles is functional, but may experience a slight
exceedance of the FMVSS no. 209 S4.3(j)(2)(ii) requirement.
(h) BMW has not received any customer complaints related to this
issue.
(i) BMW is not aware of any accidents or injuries related to this
issue.
(j) Vehicle production has been corrected.
BMW concluded by expressing the belief that the subject
noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety,
and that its petition to be exempted from providing notification of the
noncompliance, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118, and a remedy for the
noncompliance, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120, should be granted.
To view BMW's petition, test data and analyses in its entirety you
can visit https://www.regulations.gov by following the online
instructions for accessing the dockets and by using the docket ID
number for this petition shown in the heading of this notice.
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 BMW no longer
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 BMW
notified them that the subject noncompliance existed.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at
49 CFR 1.95 and 501.8.
Jeffrey M. Giuseppe,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2017-01005 Filed 1-17-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
