BMW of North America, LLC, Denial of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 24203-24204 [2017-10743]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 100 / Thursday, May 25, 2017 / Notices http://www.regulations.gov at any time or to the Docket Management Facility in Room W12–140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lynette Mitterer, ANM–113, Federal Aviation Administration, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356, email Lynette.Mitterer@faa.gov, phone (425) 227–1047. This notice is published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85. Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 13, 2017. Victor Wicklund, Manager, Transport Standards Staff. Petition for Exemption Docket No.: FAA–2017–0269. Petitioner: Gulfstream. Section of 14 CFR Affected: § 25.981(a)(3). Description of Relief Sought: Allow a simpler lightning protection design that is less susceptible to inadvertent failure conditions that could result in ignition sources. [FR Doc. 2017–10692 Filed 5–24–17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [Docket No. NHTSA–2015–0040; Notice 2] BMW of North America, LLC, Denial of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Denial of petition. AGENCY: BMW of North America, LLC, (BMW) a subsidiary of BMW AG in Munich, Germany, has determined that certain model year (MY) 2013 BMW 5 Series sedan passenger cars do not fully comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated Equipment. BMW filed a noncompliance report dated March 26, 2015. BMW also petitioned NHTSA on April 17, 2015, for a decision that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety. ADDRESSES: For further information on this decision contact Mike Cole, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the National Highway Traffic Safety SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 May 24, 2017 Jkt 241001 Administration (NHTSA), telephone (202) 366–5319, facsimile (202) 366– 3081. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Overview BMW of North America, LLC, (BMW) a subsidiary of BMW AG in Munich, Germany, has determined that certain model year (MY) 2013 BMW 5 Series sedan passenger cars do not fully comply with paragraph S8.1.11 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated Equipment. BMW filed a noncompliance report dated March 26, 2015, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) (see implementing rule at 49 CFR part 556), BMW also petitioned NHTSA on April 17, 2015, for an exemption from the notification and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the basis that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety. Notice of receipt of the petition was published with a 30-day public comment period, on June 11, 2015, in the Federal Register (80 FR 33332). No comments were received. To view the petition and all supporting documents log onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Web site at: https://www.regulations.gov/. Then follow the online search instructions to locate docket number ‘‘NHTSA–2015– 0040.’’ II. Vehicles Involved Affected are approximately 13,899 MY 2013 BMW 5 Series sedan passenger cars manufactured between January 30, 2013 and June 28, 2013. III. Noncompliance BMW explains the noncompliance as a failure of some of the rear reflex reflectors on the affected vehicles to fully conform to the minimum photometric performance required by paragraph S8.1.11 of FMVSS No. 108. IV. Rule Text Paragraph S8.1.11 of FMVSS No. 108 requires in pertinent part: S8.1.11 Photometry. Each reflex reflector must be designed to conform to the photometry requirements of Table XVI–a when tested according to the procedure of S14.2.3 for the reflex reflector color as specified by this section. V. Summary of BMW’s Analyses BMW used Ricco’s Law to determine a minimum required reflection PO 00000 Frm 00109 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 24203 coefficient in its analysis. BMW chose Ricco’s Law because they believe it best corresponds to the human physiological condition in which a light source of a given size and intensity is minimally capable (i.e., illumination threshold) of producing visual perception. As such, BMW created a graph whereby the y-axis represented the reflection coefficient in units consistent with FMVSS No. 108 and the x-axis represented the distance between two vehicles in order to simulate the condition of an approaching vehicle and a parked or stopped vehicle. BMW provided the graph to illustrate that even with parameters representing a ‘‘worst-case scenario,’’ sufficient visibility of the rear reflex reflectors of the affected vehicles exists. BMW stated that it has not received any contacts from vehicle owners or other road users regarding issues related to the subject noncompliance and is also not aware of any accidents or injuries that have occurred as a result of this issue. BMW has additionally informed NHTSA that it has corrected the noncompliance so that subsequent vehicle production will conform to paragraph 8.1.11 of FMVSS No. 108. In summation, BMW believes that the described noncompliance of the subject vehicles is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety, and that its petition, to exempt BMW from providing recall notification of noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118 and remedying the recall noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120 should be granted. NHTSA’s Decision NHTSA’s Analysis: Reflex reflectors make a vehicle conspicuous to drivers of other vehicles at night and at other times when there is reduced ambient light including dawn and dusk. The advance warning provided by the rear reflex reflectors has the potential to enable drivers to avoid a collision when approaching from the rear. In reviewing BMW’s technical arguments, BMW claims that 2.5 mcd/ lux is sufficient ‘‘visibility’’ for reflex reflectors. BMW bases this claim on an equation known as Ricco’s law, and provided a link to a University of Calgary Web page (http://ucalgary.ca/ pip369/mod3/brightness/threelaws) that provides a very limited description of this science. When compared to the FMVSS No. 108 required minimum performance of 420, 280, and 140 mcd/ lux at certain test points and observation angles, the value that BMW claims is sufficient, 2.5 mcd/lux, represents only 0.5%, 0.8%, and 1.7% E:\FR\FM\25MYN1.SGM 25MYN1 24204 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 100 / Thursday, May 25, 2017 / Notices of the required minimum performance requirements. Based on the agency’s review of BMW’s technical analysis, we do not believe they have fully accounted for the complexities of real world driving in their proposed minimum perceivable performance. Additional factors must be accounted for in the determination of minimum performance, some include: Dirt buildup on the device, older driver’s visual perception skills, a variety of ambient illumination and surrounding contrast scenes, and the continually changing viewing geometry between the reflex reflector and observer. In consideration that the primary function of a rear reflex reflector is to reduce crashes by permitting early detection of unlighted preceding motor vehicles or those parked by the side of the road, NHTSA has concluded that BMW’s assessment that 2.5 mcd/lux is a suitable ‘‘required reflection coefficient,’’ a value representing less than 1.7% of the FMVSS No. 108 required minimum values, is not compelling. BMW did not provide any test reports detailing the performance of its noncompliant rear reflex reflectors; however, it did indicate that the worst measured values were 154, 120, and 91 mcd/lux at certain test points. These values are substantially below the minimum values required by FMVSS No. 108 (420, 280, and 140 mcd/lux) by 63%, 57%, and 35%, respectively. Based on these photometric performance failures, NHTSA believes that BMW’s noncompliant reflex reflectors present a consequential risk to motor vehicle safety. BMW also states that it had not received contacts from vehicle owners, or other road users, regarding this issue. Nor is it aware of any accidents or injuries that have occurred as a result of this issue. NHTSA does not consider the absence of complaints to show that a noncompliance is inconsequential to safety. Vehicle lighting functions as a signal to other motorists and pedestrians; if other motorists found the noncompliant lighting confusing, it is unlikely that those motorists would have been able to identify the subject vehicle and make a complaint to either NHTSA or BMW. Most importantly, the absence of a complaint does not mean there have not been any safety issues, nor does it mean that there will not be safety issues in the future. NHTSA’s Decision: In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA finds that VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 May 24, 2017 Jkt 241001 BMW has not met its burden of persuasion that the FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, BMW’s petition is hereby denied and BMW is obligated to provide notification of, and a remedy for, that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120. Authority: (49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.95 and 501.8). Jeffrey M. Giuseppe, Acting Associate Administrator, Enforcement. [FR Doc. 2017–10743 Filed 5–24–17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–59–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [Docket No. NHTSA–2015–0092; Notice 2] DRV, LLC, Denial of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Denial of Petition. AGENCY: DRV, LLC (DRV), a wholly owned subsidiary of Thor Industries, Inc., has determined that certain model year (MY) 2003–2016 DRV trailers do not fully comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment. DRV filed a noncompliance report dated July 31, 2015, that was later revised on August 18, 2015. DRV also petitioned NHTSA on August 14, 2015, for a decision that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety. ADDRESSES: For further information on this decision contact Michael Cole, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone (202) 366–5319, facsimile (202) 366– 3081. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: SUMMARY: I. Overview DRV, LLC (DRV), a wholly owned subsidiary of Thor Industries, Inc., has determined that certain model year (MY) 2003–2016 DRV trailers do not fully comply with paragraph S8.1 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard PO 00000 Frm 00110 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 (FMVSS) No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment. DRV filed a noncompliance report dated July 31, 2015, that was later revised on August 18, 2015, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. DRV also petitioned NHTSA on August 14, 2015, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) (see implementing rule at 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 to motor vehicle safety. Notice of receipt of the petition was published, with a 30-day public comment period, on October 8, 2015, in the Federal Register (80 FR 60955). No comments were received. To view the petition and all supporting documents, log onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Web site at: http://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online search instructions to locate docket number ‘‘NHTSA–2015–0092.’’ II. Trailers Involved Affected are approximately 7,465 of the following trailers: • MY 2003–2016 DRV Mobile Suites (Manufactured between April 22, 2003 and July 22, 2015) • MY 2014–2015 DRV Traditions (Manufactured between April 1, 2013 and July 24, 2015) • MY 2013–2016 DRV Estates (Manufactured between April 1, 2012 and July 24, 2015) • MY 2006–2016 DRV Elite Suites (Manufactured April 1, 2005 and July 24, 2015) • MY 2014–2016 DRV Full House (Manufactured April 1, 2013 and July 24, 2015) III. Noncompliance DRV explained the noncompliance as the location of the front side reflex reflectors on the subject trailers at approximately 8″ and 10″ above the maximum 60″ height-above-road surface required by paragraph S8.1 of FMVSS No. 108. IV. Rule Text Paragraph S8.1 of FMVSS No. 108 requires in pertinent part: S8.1 Reflex reflectors. . . . S8.1.4 Mounting Height. See Tables I– a, I–b, I–c. . . . E:\FR\FM\25MYN1.SGM 25MYN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 100 (Thursday, May 25, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24203-24204]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-10743]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2015-0040; Notice 2]


BMW of North America, LLC, Denial of Petition for Decision of 
Inconsequential Noncompliance

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

ACTION: Denial of petition.

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

SUMMARY: BMW of North America, LLC, (BMW) a subsidiary of BMW AG in 
Munich, Germany, has determined that certain model year (MY) 2013 BMW 5 
Series sedan passenger cars do not fully comply with Federal Motor 
Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices and 
Associated Equipment. BMW filed a noncompliance report dated March 26, 
2015. BMW also petitioned NHTSA on April 17, 2015, for a decision that 
the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor 
vehicle safety.

ADDRESSES: For further information on this decision contact Mike Cole, 
Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the National Highway Traffic 
Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone (202) 366-5319, facsimile 
(202) 366-3081.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Overview

    BMW of North America, LLC, (BMW) a subsidiary of BMW AG in Munich, 
Germany, has determined that certain model year (MY) 2013 BMW 5 Series 
sedan passenger cars do not fully comply with paragraph S8.1.11 of 
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108, Lamps, 
Reflective Devices and Associated Equipment. BMW filed a noncompliance 
report dated March 26, 2015, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and 
Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports.
    Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) (see implementing rule 
at 49 CFR part 556), BMW also petitioned NHTSA on April 17, 2015, for 
an exemption from the notification and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. 
Chapter 301 on the basis that the subject noncompliance is 
inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
    Notice of receipt of the petition was published with a 30-day 
public comment period, on June 11, 2015, in the Federal Register (80 FR 
33332). No comments were received. To view the petition and all 
supporting documents log onto the Federal Docket Management System 
(FDMS) Web site at: https://www.regulations.gov/. Then follow the 
online search instructions to locate docket number ``NHTSA-2015-0040.''

II. Vehicles Involved

    Affected are approximately 13,899 MY 2013 BMW 5 Series sedan 
passenger cars manufactured between January 30, 2013 and June 28, 2013.

III. Noncompliance

    BMW explains the noncompliance as a failure of some of the rear 
reflex reflectors on the affected vehicles to fully conform to the 
minimum photometric performance required by paragraph S8.1.11 of FMVSS 
No. 108.

IV. Rule Text

    Paragraph S8.1.11 of FMVSS No. 108 requires in pertinent part:

S8.1.11 Photometry. Each reflex reflector must be designed to 
conform to the photometry requirements of Table XVI-a when tested 
according to the procedure of S14.2.3 for the reflex reflector color 
as specified by this section.

V. Summary of BMW's Analyses

    BMW used Ricco's Law to determine a minimum required reflection 
coefficient in its analysis. BMW chose Ricco's Law because they believe 
it best corresponds to the human physiological condition in which a 
light source of a given size and intensity is minimally capable (i.e., 
illumination threshold) of producing visual perception.
    As such, BMW created a graph whereby the y-axis represented the 
reflection coefficient in units consistent with FMVSS No. 108 and the 
x-axis represented the distance between two vehicles in order to 
simulate the condition of an approaching vehicle and a parked or 
stopped vehicle.
    BMW provided the graph to illustrate that even with parameters 
representing a ``worst-case scenario,'' sufficient visibility of the 
rear reflex reflectors of the affected vehicles exists.
    BMW stated that it has not received any contacts from vehicle 
owners or other road users regarding issues related to the subject 
noncompliance and is also not aware of any accidents or injuries that 
have occurred as a result of this issue.
    BMW has additionally informed NHTSA that it has corrected the 
noncompliance so that subsequent vehicle production will conform to 
paragraph 8.1.11 of FMVSS No. 108.
    In summation, BMW believes that the described noncompliance of the 
subject vehicles is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety, and that 
its petition, to exempt BMW from providing recall notification of 
noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118 and remedying the recall 
noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120 should be granted.

NHTSA's Decision

    NHTSA's Analysis: Reflex reflectors make a vehicle conspicuous to 
drivers of other vehicles at night and at other times when there is 
reduced ambient light including dawn and dusk. The advance warning 
provided by the rear reflex reflectors has the potential to enable 
drivers to avoid a collision when approaching from the rear.
    In reviewing BMW's technical arguments, BMW claims that 2.5 mcd/lux 
is sufficient ``visibility'' for reflex reflectors. BMW bases this 
claim on an equation known as Ricco's law, and provided a link to a 
University of Calgary Web page (http://ucalgary.ca/pip369/mod3/brightness/threelaws) that provides a very limited description of this 
science. When compared to the FMVSS No. 108 required minimum 
performance of 420, 280, and 140 mcd/lux at certain test points and 
observation angles, the value that BMW claims is sufficient, 2.5 mcd/
lux, represents only 0.5%, 0.8%, and 1.7%

[[Page 24204]]

of the required minimum performance requirements. Based on the agency's 
review of BMW's technical analysis, we do not believe they have fully 
accounted for the complexities of real world driving in their proposed 
minimum perceivable performance. Additional factors must be accounted 
for in the determination of minimum performance, some include: Dirt 
buildup on the device, older driver's visual perception skills, a 
variety of ambient illumination and surrounding contrast scenes, and 
the continually changing viewing geometry between the reflex reflector 
and observer.
    In consideration that the primary function of a rear reflex 
reflector is to reduce crashes by permitting early detection of 
unlighted preceding motor vehicles or those parked by the side of the 
road, NHTSA has concluded that BMW's assessment that 2.5 mcd/lux is a 
suitable ``required reflection coefficient,'' a value representing less 
than 1.7% of the FMVSS No. 108 required minimum values, is not 
compelling.
    BMW did not provide any test reports detailing the performance of 
its noncompliant rear reflex reflectors; however, it did indicate that 
the worst measured values were 154, 120, and 91 mcd/lux at certain test 
points. These values are substantially below the minimum values 
required by FMVSS No. 108 (420, 280, and 140 mcd/lux) by 63%, 57%, and 
35%, respectively. Based on these photometric performance failures, 
NHTSA believes that BMW's noncompliant reflex reflectors present a 
consequential risk to motor vehicle safety.
    BMW also states that it had not received contacts from vehicle 
owners, or other road users, regarding this issue. Nor is it aware of 
any accidents or injuries that have occurred as a result of this issue. 
NHTSA does not consider the absence of complaints to show that a 
noncompliance is inconsequential to safety. Vehicle lighting functions 
as a signal to other motorists and pedestrians; if other motorists 
found the noncompliant lighting confusing, it is unlikely that those 
motorists would have been able to identify the subject vehicle and make 
a complaint to either NHTSA or BMW. Most importantly, the absence of a 
complaint does not mean there have not been any safety issues, nor does 
it mean that there will not be safety issues in the future.
    NHTSA's Decision: In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA finds 
that BMW has not met its burden of persuasion that the FMVSS No. 108 
noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, 
BMW's petition is hereby denied and BMW is obligated to provide 
notification of, and a remedy for, that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 
30118 and 30120.

    Authority: (49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at 
49 CFR 1.95 and 501.8).

Jeffrey M. Giuseppe,
Acting Associate Administrator, Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2017-10743 Filed 5-24-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P