Nissan North America, Inc., Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 2757-2759 [2023-00684]
Download as PDF
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 17, 2023 / Notices
paragraph S4.3.3 of FMVSS No. 138
include the requirements relevant to
this petition:
• Except when a starter interlock is in
operation, each ESC malfunction telltale
must be activated as a check of lamp
function either when the ignition
locking system is turned to the ‘‘On’’
(‘‘Run’’) position when the engine is not
running, or when the ignition locking
system is in a position between ‘‘On’’
(‘‘Run’’) and ‘‘Start’’ that is designated
by the manufacturer as a check position.
• All indicators shall be activated as
a check function by either: (1) automatic
activation when the ignition (start)
switch is turned to the ‘‘On’’ (‘‘Run’’)
position when the engine is not
running, or when the ignition (‘‘Start’’)
switch is in a position between ‘‘On’’
(‘‘Run’’) and ‘‘Start’’ that is designated
by the manufacturer as a check position,
or (2) a single manual action by the
driver, such as momentary activation of
a test button or switch mounted on the
instrument panel in front of and in clear
view of the driver, or, in the case of an
indicator for application of the parking
brake, by applying the parking brake
when the ignition is in the ‘‘On’’
(‘‘Run’’) position. In the case of a
vehicle that has an interlock device that
prevents the engine from being started
under one or more conditions, check
functions meeting the two
aforementioned requirements need not
be operational under any condition in
which the engine cannot be started. The
manufacturer must explain the brake
check function test procedure in the
owner’s manual.
• Except when a starter interlock is in
operation, each low tire pressure
warning telltale must illuminate as a
check of lamp function either when the
ignition locking system is activated to
the ‘‘On’’ (‘‘Run’’) position when the
engine is not running, or when the
ignition locking system is in a position
between ‘‘On’’ (‘‘Run’’) and ‘‘Start’’ that
is designated by the manufacturer as a
check position.
V. Summary of Porsche’s Petition:
The following views and arguments
presented in this section, ‘‘V. Summary
of Porsche’s Petition,’’ are the views and
arguments provided by Porsche. They
have not been evaluated by the Agency
and do not reflect the views of the
Agency. Porsche begins by describing
the subject noncompliance and stating
its belief that the noncompliance is
inconsequential as it relates to motor
vehicle safety.
Porsche explains that the telltale
displays for several systems found in
the subject vehicles, including the ESC
system, brake system, and the tire
pressure monitoring system (TPMS), do
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:16 Jan 13, 2023
Jkt 259001
not use light bulbs or lamps but instead
‘‘utilize Thin-film-transistor (TFT) LCD
technology.’’ Therefore, according to
Porsche, ‘‘the bulb check or lamp check
requirements of the cited FMVSS would
not fulfill the safety purpose for which
these requirements were originally
written.’’
Porsche claims that despite the
subject noncompliance, ‘‘there is no
adverse effect on the function on the
warning telltale itself in the intended
(warning) cases for any of the FMVSSrequired telltales’’ because in the event
that the system fails, the corresponding
light would still illuminate.
Porsche states that when the bulb
check requirements were first developed
in 1969, vehicles used light bulbs with
filament which ‘‘had a limited life span
and were expected to fail routinely
during the life of the vehicle,’’ therefore
the bulb check requirements were
intended to notify the driver of these
anticipated bulb failures. According to
Porsche, because the subject vehicles
instead use LCD displays which ‘‘do not
use filaments and have an expected life
span that far exceeds the expected
useful life of the vehicle,’’ the required
bulb check function is ‘‘superfluous to
safety.’’
Furthermore, Porsche says that ‘‘even
in the event of an illumination failure of
the subject displays, the nature of the
LCD cluster would make the failure
obvious to the driver, eliminating the
need for a bulb check.’’ If the display
were to malfunction, Porsche explains
that ‘‘the entire LCD display would go
dark, leaving a substantial, and obvious
portion of the instrument cluster dark’’
which would immediately alert the
driver. Therefore, Porsche claims that
NHTSA’s stated purpose of the bulb
check requirement 1 would be fulfilled.
Additionally, Porsche claims that
‘‘NHTSA also has recognized that these
types of multi-function displays would
not be expected to have the same
functionality as traditional telltales and
therefore may meet bulb check
requirements in different ways.’’
Porsche references the FMVSS No. 126
final rule published by NHTSA on April
6, 2007,2 to support its assertion that
NHTSA has previously determined that
a bulb check is not relevant or necessary
to the type of display technology
utilized for information/message
centers. Therefore, if the display
experiences a problem analogous to one
which would be found by a telltale’s
1 See Letter from A. Cooke, Chief Counsel,
NHTSA, to R. Clarke, President, Truck
Manufacturers Association (March 5, 2007) https://
isearch.nhtsa.gov/files/001402rls.htm.
2 See 72 FR 17235.
PO 00000
Frm 00159
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
2757
bulb check, the entire message center
would be non-operational, a situation
likely to be rapidly discovered by the
driver.
Porsche concludes by stating its 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.
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 Porsche 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 Porsche 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.)
Otto G. Matheke III,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2023–00682 Filed 1–13–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2022–0064; Notice 1]
Nissan North America, Inc., Receipt of
Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Receipt of petition.
AGENCY:
Nissan North America, Inc.,
(Nissan), has determined that certain
model year (MY) 2022 Nissan Altima
motor vehicles do not fully comply with
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard
(FMVSS) No. 110, Tire Selection and
Rims and Motor Home/Recreation
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\17JAN1.SGM
17JAN1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
2758
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 17, 2023 / Notices
Vehicle Trailer Load Carrying Capacity
Information for Motor Vehicles with a
GVWR of 4,536 kilograms (10,000
pounds) or less. Nissan filed an original
noncompliance report dated June 14,
2022. Nissan petitioned NHTSA on July
7, 2022, for a decision that the subject
noncompliance is inconsequential as it
relates to motor vehicle safety. This
document announces receipt of Nissan’s
petition.
DATES: Send comments on or before
February 16, 2023.
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 may be submitted by any of
the following methods:
• Mail: Send comments by mail
addressed to the 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 the 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 for Federal
Holidays.
• Electronically: Submit comments
electronically by logging onto the
Federal Docket Management System
(FDMS) website 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.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:16 Jan 13, 2023
Jkt 259001
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).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ahmad Barnes, General Engineer,
NHTSA, Office of Vehicle Safety
Compliance, (202) 366–7236.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Overview: Nissan determined that
certain MY 2022 Nissan Altima
Midnight Edition 2WD motor vehicles
do not fully comply with paragraph
S4.3(d) of FMVSS No. 110, Tire
Selection and Rims and Motor Home/
Recreation Vehicle Trailer Load
Carrying Capacity Information for Motor
Vehicles with a GVWR of 4,536
kilograms (10,000 pounds) or less. (49
CFR 571.110).
Nissan filed an original
noncompliance report dated June 14,
2022, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573,
Defect and Noncompliance
Responsibility and Reports. Nissan
petitioned NHTSA on July 7, 2022, 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, pursuant
to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and
49 CFR part 556, Exemption for
Inconsequential Defect or
Noncompliance.
This notice of receipt of Nissan’s
petition is published under 49 U.S.C.
30118 and 30120 and does not represent
any agency decision or another exercise
of judgment concerning the merits of the
petition.
II. Vehicles Involved: Approximately
4,537 MY 2022 Nissan Altima Midnight
Edition 2WD motor vehicles,
manufactured between November 3,
2021, and April 4, 2022, are potentially
involved.
III. Noncompliance: Nissan explains
that the subject vehicles are equipped
with a spare tire that does not match the
spare tire size designation identified on
the tire placard. Specifically, the subject
PO 00000
Frm 00160
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
vehicles were equipped with the allwheel drive (AWD) T135/90D16 sized
spare tire instead of the two-wheel drive
(2WD) T135/70D16 sized spare tire as
intended and stated on the vehicle
placard. Therefore, the vehicle placard
does not state the correct spare tire size
as required by paragraph S4.3(d) of
FMVSS No. 110.
IV. Rule Requirements: Paragraph
S4.3(d) of FMVSS No. 110 includes the
requirements relevant to this petition.
Each vehicle, except for a trailer or
incomplete vehicle, must show the tire
size designation on a placard
permanently affixed to the driver’s side
B-pillar and indicated by the headings
‘‘size’’ or ‘‘original tire size’’ or ‘‘original
size,’’ and ‘‘spare tire’’ or ‘‘spare,’’ for
the tires installed at the time of the first
purchase for purposes other than resale.
For full size spare tires, the statement
‘‘see above’’ may, at the manufacturer’s
option replace the tire size designation.
If no spare tire is provided, the word
‘‘none’’ must replace the tire size
designation.
V. Summary of Nissan’s Petition: The
following views and arguments
presented in this section, ‘‘V. Summary
of Nissan’s Petition,’’ are the views and
arguments provided by Nissan. They
have not been evaluated by the Agency
and do not reflect the views of the
Agency. Nissan describes the subject
noncompliance and contends that the
noncompliance is inconsequential as it
relates to motor vehicle safety.
Nissan explains that the subject
vehicles were equipped with an AWD
tire instead of the intended 2WD that is
identified on the vehicle placard with
the tire size designation ‘‘T135/70D16.’’
However, Nissan claims ‘‘that the AWD
tire was an acceptable fitment for the
subject vehicles and the tire pressures
are the same for both spare tire sizes
(AWD and 2WD).’’ According to Nissan,
overloading would not occur if the tire
pressure stated on the vehicle placard is
applied to the spare tire, and other than
the subject noncompliance, the tires
equipped on the subject vehicles meet
the requirements provided in FMVSS
No. 110.
Nissan says that the tire inflation
pressure stated on the vehicle placard is
correct for both the spare tire equipped
on the subject vehicle (T135/90D16) and
the spare tire size designation stated on
the vehicle placard (T135/70D16).
Therefore, Nissan believes the subject
noncompliance ‘‘is unlikely to result in
overloading because when checking the
placard to determine inflation pressure
for the spare tire, the customer will find
the correct tire pressure value on the
label.’’
E:\FR\FM\17JAN1.SGM
17JAN1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 17, 2023 / Notices
Nissan states that both tire sizes can
be used on the subject vehicles because
the AWD (T135/90D16) tire equipped
on the subject vehicle has a higher load
rating (102) than the 2WD (T135/70D16)
tire indicated on the vehicle placard
(100). Nissan also states that the
purpose of FMVSS No. 110 is to prevent
tire overloading which would not occur
due to the subject noncompliance
because both the equipped AWD tire
and the intended 2WD tire can be used
on the subject vehicle.
Nissan states that correct information
for both the AWD and 2WD spare tire
sizes is readily available to the
consumer in the owner’s manual
provided with the vehicle. Furthermore,
Nissan says that its belief that the
subject noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety
is supported by field data. Nissan also
states that it is not aware of any
customer complaints, accidents, or
injuries regarding the subject
noncompliance.
NHTSA has previously granted
petitions for inconsequentiality for
noncompliances Nissan believes to be
similar to the subject noncompliance.
Nissan refers to a petition submitted by
Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC,1 in which
the tire placard incorrectly identifies the
spare tire size due to a labeling error. In
that case, NHTSA found the
noncompliance to be inconsequential
because (1) both the tire equipped on
those vehicles and the tire indicated by
the tire placard could be used and are
appropriate for the affected vehicle’s
maximum loaded weight conditions, (2)
in the event that 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, and (3) the
owner’s manual for the affected vehicles
describes both spare tire sizes which
can be used by the consumer to ensure
either tire size is appropriate for use.
Nissan concludes by stating its belief
that the subject noncompliance is
inconsequential as it relates to motor
vehicle safety and 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.
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
1 Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC, Grant of Petition for
Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 82 FR
5640 (January 18, 2017).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:16 Jan 13, 2023
Jkt 259001
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 Nissan 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 Nissan 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.)
Otto G. Matheke III,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2023–00684 Filed 1–13–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2022–0113; Notice 1]
Mack Trucks, Inc., Receipt of Petition
for Decision of Inconsequential
Noncompliance
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Receipt of petition.
AGENCY:
Mack Trucks, Inc., (Mack
Trucks), has determined that certain
model year (MY) 2015–2023 Mack GU/
GR Class 8 trucks and truck-tractors do
not fully comply with Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No.
108, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and
Associated Equipment. Mack Trucks
filed an original noncompliance report
dated November 1, 2022, and amended
the report on November 3, 2022. Mack
Trucks petitioned NHTSA on November
23, 2022, for a decision that the subject
noncompliance is inconsequential as it
relates to motor vehicle safety. This
document announces receipt of Mack
Trucks’ petition.
DATES: Send comments on or before
February 16, 2023.
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
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00161
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
2759
notice and may be submitted by any of
the following methods:
• Mail: Send comments by mail
addressed to the 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 the 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 for Federal
holidays.
• Electronically: Submit comments
electronically by logging onto the
Federal Docket Management System
(FDMS) website 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
E:\FR\FM\17JAN1.SGM
17JAN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 10 (Tuesday, January 17, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2757-2759]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-00684]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2022-0064; Notice 1]
Nissan North America, Inc., Receipt of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Receipt of petition.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Nissan North America, Inc., (Nissan), has determined that
certain model year (MY) 2022 Nissan Altima motor vehicles do not fully
comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 110, Tire
Selection and Rims and Motor Home/Recreation
[[Page 2758]]
Vehicle Trailer Load Carrying Capacity Information for Motor Vehicles
with a GVWR of 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) or less. Nissan filed an
original noncompliance report dated June 14, 2022. Nissan petitioned
NHTSA on July 7, 2022, for a decision that the subject noncompliance is
inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety. This document
announces receipt of Nissan's petition.
DATES: Send comments on or before February 16, 2023.
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 may be
submitted by any of the following methods:
Mail: Send comments by mail addressed to the 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 the 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 for Federal Holidays.
Electronically: Submit comments electronically by logging
onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) website 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).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ahmad Barnes, General Engineer, NHTSA,
Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, (202) 366-7236.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Overview: Nissan determined that certain MY 2022 Nissan Altima
Midnight Edition 2WD motor vehicles do not fully comply with paragraph
S4.3(d) of FMVSS No. 110, Tire Selection and Rims and Motor Home/
Recreation Vehicle Trailer Load Carrying Capacity Information for Motor
Vehicles with a GVWR of 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) or less. (49
CFR 571.110).
Nissan filed an original noncompliance report dated June 14, 2022,
pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility
and Reports. Nissan petitioned NHTSA on July 7, 2022, 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, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h)
and 49 CFR part 556, Exemption for Inconsequential Defect or
Noncompliance.
This notice of receipt of Nissan's petition is published under 49
U.S.C. 30118 and 30120 and does not represent any agency decision or
another exercise of judgment concerning the merits of the petition.
II. Vehicles Involved: Approximately 4,537 MY 2022 Nissan Altima
Midnight Edition 2WD motor vehicles, manufactured between November 3,
2021, and April 4, 2022, are potentially involved.
III. Noncompliance: Nissan explains that the subject vehicles are
equipped with a spare tire that does not match the spare tire size
designation identified on the tire placard. Specifically, the subject
vehicles were equipped with the all-wheel drive (AWD) T135/90D16 sized
spare tire instead of the two-wheel drive (2WD) T135/70D16 sized spare
tire as intended and stated on the vehicle placard. Therefore, the
vehicle placard does not state the correct spare tire size as required
by paragraph S4.3(d) of FMVSS No. 110.
IV. Rule Requirements: Paragraph S4.3(d) of FMVSS No. 110 includes
the requirements relevant to this petition. Each vehicle, except for a
trailer or incomplete vehicle, must show the tire size designation on a
placard permanently affixed to the driver's side B-pillar and indicated
by the headings ``size'' or ``original tire size'' or ``original
size,'' and ``spare tire'' or ``spare,'' for the tires installed at the
time of the first purchase for purposes other than resale. For full
size spare tires, the statement ``see above'' may, at the
manufacturer's option replace the tire size designation. If no spare
tire is provided, the word ``none'' must replace the tire size
designation.
V. Summary of Nissan's Petition: The following views and arguments
presented in this section, ``V. Summary of Nissan's Petition,'' are the
views and arguments provided by Nissan. They have not been evaluated by
the Agency and do not reflect the views of the Agency. Nissan describes
the subject noncompliance and contends that the noncompliance is
inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
Nissan explains that the subject vehicles were equipped with an AWD
tire instead of the intended 2WD that is identified on the vehicle
placard with the tire size designation ``T135/70D16.'' However, Nissan
claims ``that the AWD tire was an acceptable fitment for the subject
vehicles and the tire pressures are the same for both spare tire sizes
(AWD and 2WD).'' According to Nissan, overloading would not occur if
the tire pressure stated on the vehicle placard is applied to the spare
tire, and other than the subject noncompliance, the tires equipped on
the subject vehicles meet the requirements provided in FMVSS No. 110.
Nissan says that the tire inflation pressure stated on the vehicle
placard is correct for both the spare tire equipped on the subject
vehicle (T135/90D16) and the spare tire size designation stated on the
vehicle placard (T135/70D16). Therefore, Nissan believes the subject
noncompliance ``is unlikely to result in overloading because when
checking the placard to determine inflation pressure for the spare
tire, the customer will find the correct tire pressure value on the
label.''
[[Page 2759]]
Nissan states that both tire sizes can be used on the subject
vehicles because the AWD (T135/90D16) tire equipped on the subject
vehicle has a higher load rating (102) than the 2WD (T135/70D16) tire
indicated on the vehicle placard (100). Nissan also states that the
purpose of FMVSS No. 110 is to prevent tire overloading which would not
occur due to the subject noncompliance because both the equipped AWD
tire and the intended 2WD tire can be used on the subject vehicle.
Nissan states that correct information for both the AWD and 2WD
spare tire sizes is readily available to the consumer in the owner's
manual provided with the vehicle. Furthermore, Nissan says that its
belief that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor
vehicle safety is supported by field data. Nissan also states that it
is not aware of any customer complaints, accidents, or injuries
regarding the subject noncompliance.
NHTSA has previously granted petitions for inconsequentiality for
noncompliances Nissan believes to be similar to the subject
noncompliance. Nissan refers to a petition submitted by Mercedes-Benz
USA, LLC,\1\ in which the tire placard incorrectly identifies the spare
tire size due to a labeling error. In that case, NHTSA found the
noncompliance to be inconsequential because (1) both the tire equipped
on those vehicles and the tire indicated by the tire placard could be
used and are appropriate for the affected vehicle's maximum loaded
weight conditions, (2) in the event that 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, and (3) the owner's manual for the affected vehicles
describes both spare tire sizes which can be used by the consumer to
ensure either tire size is appropriate for use.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC, Grant of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance, 82 FR 5640 (January 18, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nissan concludes by stating its belief that the subject
noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety
and 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.
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 Nissan 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 Nissan
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.)
Otto G. Matheke III,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2023-00684 Filed 1-13-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P