Daimler Coaches North America, LLC, Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 21168-21170 [2024-06281]

Agencies

• National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
• DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 59 (Tuesday, March 26, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21168-21170]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-06281]



[[Page 21168]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2020-0084; Notice 2]


Daimler Coaches North America, LLC, Receipt of Petition for 
Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance

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

ACTION: Receipt of petition.

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

SUMMARY: Daimler Coaches North America, LLC, (DCNA), a subsidiary of 
Daimler AG, has determined that certain model year (MY) 2012-2019 Setra 
S407 and MY 2009-2020 Setra S417 buses do not fully comply with Federal 
Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 101, Controls and Displays. 
DCNA filed a noncompliance report dated July 15, 2020, and amended it 
on July 16, 2020, and March 24, 2021. DCNA subsequently petitioned 
NHTSA (the ``Agency'') on August 4, 2020, later amended it on October 
1, 2020, and provided supplemental information on February 5, 2021, 
March 5, 2021, and March 25, 2021, for a decision that the subject 
noncompliances are inconsequential as they relate to motor vehicle 
safety. This notice announces receipt of DCNA's petition and 
supplemental information.

DATES: Send comments on or before April 25, 2024.

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 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 docket. 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: Frederick Smith, General Engineer, 
NHTSA, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, (202) 366-7487.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    I. Overview: DCNA has determined that certain MY 2012-2019 Setra 
S407 and MY 2009-2020 Setra S417 buses do not fully comply with the 
requirements of paragraphs S.5.3.1, S5.3.2, and Table 1 of FMVSS No. 
101, Controls and Displays (49 CFR 571.101). DCNA filed a noncompliance 
report dated July 16, 2020, and amended it on March 24, 2021, pursuant 
to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and 
Reports. DCNA subsequently petitioned NHTSA on August 4, 2020, later 
amended it on October 1, 2020,\1\ and submitted supplemental 
information on February 5, 2021, March 5, 2021, and March 25, 2021, for 
an exemption from the notification and remedy, requirements of 49 
U.S.C. chapter 301 on the basis that this noncompliances are 
inconsequential as they relate 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ DCNA's amended petition is dated August 4, 2020, but was 
submitted on October 1, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NHTSA previously published notice of receipt of DCNA's petition on 
November 9, 2020, (85 FR 71392). DCNA provided supplemental information 
to NHTSA on February 5, 2021, March 5, 2021, and March 25, 2021, that 
broadened the scope of DCNA's petition. Therefore, NHTSA invites 
interested persons to comment on DCNA's petition and supplemental 
information. This notice of receipt of DCNA'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. Buses Involved: Approximately 538 MY 2012-2019 Setra S407 and 
MY 2009-2020 Setra S417 motorcoach buses manufactured between May 19, 
2009, and January 30, 2019, are potentially involved.
    III. Noncompliance: DCNA explains that the noncompliance is that 
the windshield defogging/defrosting indicators, the hazard warning 
signal indicators, and the HVAC indicators in the subject buses do not 
meet the timing and brightness of illumination requirements provided in 
paragraphs S5.3.1 and S5.3.2 of FMVSS No. 101. Specifically, the 
brightness of the windshield defogging/defrosting and HVAC indicators 
cannot be adjusted, and the hazard warning signal indicator does not 
illuminate.
    IV. Rule Requirements: Paragraphs S5.3.1 and S5.3.2 of FMVSS No. 
101 include the requirements relevant to this petition. Means must be 
provided for controlling the timing of illuminating indicators, the 
brightness of illuminating indicators, identification of indicators, 
and the identification of controls listed in Table 1 to make them 
visible to the driver under daylight and nighttime driving conditions. 
The means of providing the visibility required by paragraph S5.3.2. 
must be adjustable to provide at least two levels of brightness.
    V. Summary of DCNA's Petition: The following views and arguments 
presented in this section, ``V. Summary of DCNA's Petition,'' are the 
views and arguments provided by DCNA. They have not been evaluated by 
the Agency and do not reflect the views of the Agency. DCNA describes 
the subject

[[Page 21169]]

noncompliances and contends that the noncompliances are inconsequential 
as they relate to motor vehicle safety.
    In support of its petition, which is available in full on the 
docket, DCNA explains its understanding of FMVSS No. 101 and states its 
belief that the subject noncompliances do not increase risk to motor 
vehicle safety. DCNA says that FMVSS No. 101, ``is premised on ensuring 
the various controls, telltales, and indicators can easily be 
recognized in order to facilitate the driver's selection under day and 
nighttime conditions, to prevent the mistaken selection of controls and 
to reduce potential safety hazards when the driver's attention is 
diverted from the driving task.'' DCNA further explains that FMVSS No. 
101 sets requirements for the location (S5.1), identification (S5.2), 
and illumination (S5.3) of various controls and displays, and Table 1 
of the standard provides the illumination and color requirements for 
those controls, telltales, and indicators. Specifically, DCNA explains 
that S5.3.1(b) requires that the controls listed in Table 1 of FMVSS 
No. 101, including those for the hazard and windshield defrost/defog 
control, are required to be illuminated when the headlamps are 
activated, and the brightness of the control must be adjustable to at 
least two levels.
    DCNA believes that ``the lack of illumination on the hazard warning 
lamp symbol included on the control and inability to adjust the 
brightness of the defrost/defog control'' does not present an increased 
risk to motor vehicle safety. DCNA states that the affected controls 
are fully operable. DCNA describes the operation and design of the 
hazard warning lamp control for the subject buses and provides its 
assessment of the risk to motor vehicle safety. DCNA explains that the 
``hazard warning lamp is controlled by a large red plastic toggle 
switch that is 19 mm across by 40 mm high'' and to activate the control 
the driver would press the bottom half of the switch downward with one 
finger until there is a clicking noise. DCNA states that operation of 
the hazard warning lamp ``is confirmed because the hazard lamp itself 
will flash on and off and both the right and left turn signal 
indicators in the instrument cluster will flash on and off and in 
unison with the hazard warning lamps on the exterior of the vehicle.'' 
Therefore, DCNA claims that a driver of the subject buses would still 
be able to confirm that the hazard warning lamp is operating as 
intended.
    DCNA further states that a driver of the affected buses would be 
able to identify and locate the hazard warning lamp switch even under 
nighttime conditions because the switch is located to the immediate 
right of the driver, is at eye level, and is the only switch in that 
area that is red, rather than black or grey. Thus, DCNA believes that 
the hazard warning lamp switch is conspicuous and ``readily apparent 
under all operating conditions.''
    DCNA describes the operation and design of the windshield defrost/
defog control for the subject buses and states that the windshield 
defrost/defog symbol is located adjacent to the turn-style control knob 
DCNA also states that it activates the windshield defrost/defog 
function and that both the symbol and control knob are automatically 
illuminated when the subject bus's headlamps are activated but cannot 
be dimmed, which is required by S5.3.2.1 of FMVSS No. 101. DCNA claims 
that each of the functions surrounding the windshield defrost/defog 
symbol, many of which are not regulated by FMVSS No. 101, Table 1, are 
illuminated. DCNA explains that there is a master switch that allows 
the driver to adjust the brightness of the area surrounding them and 
dimming can be controlled ``within the meter assembly menu for the 
dashboard lights and is adjustable to more than two different levels of 
brightness.'' Furthermore, DCNA states that the controls at issue are 
located within a group of controls that is ``responsible for the 
heating, cooling, and temperature operations of the driver's 
compartment of the vehicle.'' Therefore, DCNA contends that a driver of 
the subject bus would be familiar with the location of the defrost/
defog control because it is located within a cluster of controls that 
operate similar functions. Thus, DCNA believes that ``there is little 
to no risk that the driver's vision would otherwise be impaired if the 
display was too bright or too dim.''
    DCNA notes that a driver of the subject bus would be professionally 
trained and would therefore be likely to have experience operating the 
bus and be ``knowledgeable about the location and function of all of 
the controls and devices within the vehicle.'' DCNA says that the area 
forward of the driver's seat in the subject buses' interior cabin is 
``sufficiently lit by roadway lighting, other illuminated controls, 
telltales, and the light emitted from the display of the instrument 
cluster.'' According to DCNA, when operating the subject buses with the 
headlamps turned on, the dashboard lamps will also be illuminated which 
will illuminate the hazard warning lamp as well as other controls and 
indicators.
    DCNA states that NHTSA has granted prior petitions for 
inconsequential noncompliance ``where certain controls, telltales, and 
indicators listed in Table 1 were not visible to the driver under all 
day and night driving conditions.'' Specifically, DCNA refers to a 
petition in which ``an electrical condition which could cause the 
headlamp upper beam indicator telltale to extinguish for various 
periods of time and under certain conditions.'' In this case, DCNA says 
that NHTSA determined that the upper beam telltale would only need to 
be illuminated during nighttime driving conditions, when a 
comparatively small portion of driving occurs at night, the time of 
headlamp activation.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See General Motors Corp.; Grant of Petition for 
Determination of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 56 FR 33323 (July 
19, 1991).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DCNA reiterates that the subject buses are mostly used 
commercially, therefore, the drivers are trained and ``should be 
familiar with the layout, placement, and operation of the hazard 
warning lamp and defog/defrost controls.'' DCNA states that NHTSA has 
also granted prior petitions where the potential safety consequence of 
a noncompliance with FMVSS No. 101 would be diminished because it is 
expected that the driver would monitor the condition of the vehicle 
closely ``to ensure the systems are properly operating.'' Additionally, 
DCNA says that there are several petitions where NHTSA found that the 
potential risk to motor vehicle safety was diminished when the vehicle 
is operated by a trained driver because professional drivers will 
become familiar with the meaning of the telltales and other warnings 
and understand them.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Mack Trucks, Inc., and Volvo Trucks North America, Grant 
of Petitions for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 84 FR 
67766 (December 11, 2019); Autocar Industries, LLC, and Hino Motors 
Sales U.S.A., Inc., Grant of Petitions for Decision of 
Inconsequential Noncompliance, 84 FR 11162 (March 25, 2019); Daimler 
Trucks North America, LLC, Grant of Petition for Decision of 
Inconsequential Noncompliance, 82 FR 33551 (July 20, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DCNA concludes by stating its belief that the subject 
noncompliances are inconsequential as they relate to motor vehicle 
safety, and that its petition to be exempted from providing 
notification of the noncompliances, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118, and 
a remedy for the noncompliances, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120, should 
be granted.
    On February 5, 2021, March 5, 2021, and March 25, 2021, DCNA 
submitted supplemental information. In the supplemental submission 
dated February 5, 2021, DCNA clarifies that the reference to dimming 
through the meter assembly menu means that within the instrument 
cluster that is directly in front of the driver, there is a master

[[Page 21170]]

switch that operates the dimming function for the controls that 
surround the driver.
    On March 5, 2021, DCNA provided photos \4\ depicting the 
noncompliance under various conditions. Further, in the same 
supplemental submission, DCNA noted that, under further testing, the 
illumination of the HVAC controls did not cause any driver glare and 
did not appear brighter than any of the adjacent markings of the HVAC 
controls and indicators were still sufficiently recognizable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ These photos are available on the FDMS website.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 25, 2021, DCNA submitted that in addition to the issues 
originally noted in its petitions, the controls for the vehicle's HVAC 
system that are covered by FMVSS No. 101, Table 1 can be illuminated 
but are not dimmable as required by S5.3.2. Specifically, the heating 
and air-conditioning system and heating and air-conditioning fan are 
affected. DCNA states that despite the condition that these two 
controls cannot be dimmed on the vehicles at issue, this does not 
create an increased safety risk. These two controls are located in the 
same area as all the other vehicle HVAC controls and their location 
would be readily known to the experienced professional drivers that 
operate the motor coaches at issue here. Additionally, the master 
switch used for adjusting the brightness of the area surrounding the 
driver is fully operable and adjustable to more than two different 
levels of brightness. Consequently, DCNA believes that there is little 
to no risk of illumination of controls for the heating and air-
conditioning system and heating and air-conditioning fan could be 
overly bright and impair the vision of the driver.
    DCNA's complete petition and all supporting documents are available 
by logging onto the FDMS website at: https://www.regulations.gov and 
following the online search instructions to locate the docket number 
listed in the title 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 buses that DCNA no longer 
controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliances 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 buses under their control after DCNA 
notified them that the subject noncompliances 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. 2024-06281 Filed 3-25-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P