[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 244 (Wednesday, December 18, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66744-66745]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-32030]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
[Docket No. 96-128; Notice 1]
Nissan Motor Corporation, U.S.A.; Receipt of Application for
Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance
Nissan Motor Manufacturing Corporation USA, (Nissan) has determined
that certain Nissan Sentra 4-door sedans fail to comply with the
requirements of 49 CFR 571.108, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard
(FMVSS) 108, ``Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated Equipment,''
and has filed an appropriate report pursuant to 49 CFR part 573
``Defect and Noncompliance Information Report.'' Nissan has also
applied to be exempted from the notification and remedy requirements of
49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) on the basis that the noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
This notice of receipt of an application is published under 49
U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and does not represent any agency decision
or other exercise of judgment concerning the merits of the application.
Paragraph S5.1.1 of FMVSS No. 108 requires that each vehicle shall
be equipped with certain lamps and reflective devices that shall be
designed to conform to applicable SAE Standards or Recommended
Practices referenced in the Standard. The stop lamp function of a rear
combination lamp assembly must meet the photometric performance
requirements of SAE J586 FEB84. To determine photometric performance
requirements of SAE J586 FEB84, light intensity measurements are taken
at 19 test points in a geometric grid. The grid is further broken down
into five separate zones. The measured test point values that are
located within a zone are summed to provide a zone total which must
meet a minimum value. The stop lamp function of the rear combination
lamp assemblies in the subject vehicles meet the requirements in Zones
1, 2, 4, and 5. However, in certain vehicles the minimum requirements
in Zone 3 may not be met. The photometric results for the tested lamps
of the Sentra 4-door sedan stop lamp function in Zone 3 are contained
in the inconsequential application and are available in the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration Docket Section. The tail lamp
function of the subject
[[Page 66745]]
combination lamps meet or exceed all test criteria and is in compliance
with FMVSS No. 108.
Nissan's description of the noncompliance follows:
From December 11, 1995, through September 1996, Nissan manufactured
approximately 65,000 1996 and 1997 model year Nissan Sentra 4-door
sedans with stop lamp assemblies that do not comply with the
photometric requirements in SAE J586 FEB84 as referenced in 49 CFR
571.108, S5.1.1. The Sentra 4-door sedan uses a combination stop and
tail lamp assembly that was designed to conform to FMVSS 108 and the
photometric requirements in SAE J586 FEB84 as referenced in 49 CFR
571.108, S5.1.1. J586 FEB84 defines 19 test points that must receive a
specified range of light intensity. These test points are grouped into
five zones and their intensities are summed to arrive at a total within
each zone. Each zone's total has a required value, measured in candela,
that must be met with none of the test points falling below 60% of its
specified value.
Nissan stated that based on testing of production lamps, it was
discovered that the summation of the five test points measured across
Zone 3 did not meet the required stop lamp zone total of 380 candela in
some of the lamps. All other zone totals were within FMVSS No. 108
specifications for the stop lamp function, and all FMVSS 108 criteria
were met for the tail lamp function.
Nissan supported its application for inconsequential noncompliance
with the following:
``Nissan [we] believe the failure of the stop lamp portion of the
rear combination lamp assembly to meet photometric requirements in one
of five zones is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety for the
following reasons:
``A NHTSA sponsored study titled ``Driver Perception of Just
Noticeable Difference[s] in [of Automotive] Signal Lamp Intensities''
[DOT HS 808 209, September 1994] demonstrated a change in luminous
intensity of 25 percent or less is not noticeable by most drivers.
Since all of the stop lamps Nissan tested, except one, were closer to
the standard than 25 percent, the noncompliance is likely undetectable
to the human eye. The single worst case sample was 25.5 percent below
the standard in zone 3 but exceeds the photometric requirements of
zones one, two, four, and five and meets or exceeds all other FMVSS and
SAE requirements.
``The stop lamp is more than five times brighter than the tail
lamp. A following driver will have no problem detecting the moment of
brake application.
``The two combination lamp assemblies are supplemented by a Center
High Mounted Stop Lamp (CHMSL). The Sentra's CHMSL illuminates at over
two times the minimum standard to provide not only strong warning of
brake application to the following driver, but also vehicles further
back in the traffic flow. Nissan believes the supplementary benefit of
the bright CHMSL helps to compensate for any diminished stop lamp
performance.
``The combination tail/stop lamp assemblies are mounted high in the
vehicle's body near the beltline. This mounting location provides
excellent line of sight visibility to a following driver.
``Nissan is not aware of any accidents, injuries, owner complaints
or field reports related to this condition.
``In similar situations NHTSA has granted the applications of
various other petitioners. See, for example, 61 FR, January 22, 1996
(petition by General Motors); 56 FR 59971, November 26, 1991 (petition
by Subaru of America); and 55 FR 37601, September 12, 1990 (petition by
Hella Inc.).''
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments on the application of Nissan, described above. Comments
should refer to the docket number and be submitted to: Docket Section,
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Room 5109, 400 Seventh
Street, SW, Washington, DC, 20590. It is requested but not required
that six copies be submitted.
All comments received before the close of business on the closing
date indicated below will be considered. The application and supporting
materials, and all comments received after the closing date, will also
be filed and will be considered to the extent possible. When the
application is granted or denied, the notice will be published in the
Federal Register pursuant to the authority indicated below.
Comment closing date: January 17, 1997.
(49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120; delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.50 and
501.8)
Issued on: December 11, 1996.
L. Robert Shelton.
Associate Administrator for Safety Performance Standards.
[FR Doc. 96-32030 Filed 12-17-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P