[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 81 (Wednesday, April 28, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Page 22897]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-10495]



[[Page 22897]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-99-5461; Notice 1]


General Motors Corporation; Application for Determination of 
Inconsequential Noncompliance With Federal Motor Vehicle Safety 
Standard 108--Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated Equipment

    General Motors Corporation (GM) determined that some of the GM 1997 
EV1 electric passenger cars fail to meet the turn signal requirements 
found in Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108--Lamps, 
Reflective Devices and Associated Equipment. In accordance with 49 CFR 
556.4(b)(6), GM submitted a 49 CFR Part 573.5 noncompliance 
notification to the agency. Pursuant to 49 U. S. C., sections 30118 and 
30120, GM petitioned the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 
(NHTSA) for a decision that the noncompliance is inconsequential to 
motor vehicle safety.
    GM states that the EV1 is equipped with an electronic turn signal 
module that controls turn signal operation. A subset of the module 
population can be affected by random inputs that cause the internal 
timing of the electronic circuit to become un-synchronized. If this 
occurs, it can cause the left turn signal circuit on affected vehicles 
to operate improperly and not in compliance with FMVSS No. 108. The 
left front turn signal lamp may flash at a rapid rate while the left 
rear turn signal lamp illuminates but does not flash. These conditions 
can continue after the turn signal lever automatically returns to the 
off position, but stop if the driver manually cancels the turn signal 
or turns the car off. The right turn signal is not affected.
    GM believes that this noncompliance is inconsequential to motor 
vehicle safety for these reasons:
     The potential for this condition is confined to a very 
small population of vehicles, 558.
     The condition is not found on every vehicle. Only a subset 
of vehicles are affected, based on the build variation of the turn 
signal module.
     GM knows of only eight customers who have reported the 
condition. The turn signal module in these vehicles has been replaced.
     While it has not been able to determine the exact 
percentage of affected vehicles (the anomaly is not readily repeatable 
in the laboratory, and the small production run has severely limited 
the number of parts available for testing), the likelihood of 
experiencing the condition is extremely rare. The worst case part, 
found in laboratory testing, exhibited the anomaly 16 times in 40,000 
cycles (0.0004 times per cycle). Other tested parts did not exhibit the 
condition as often, or at all.
     The left turn signal does not fail completely. An oncoming 
driver would see the front turn signal flashing at a rapid rate. A 
following driver would see the left turn signal lamp on, although it 
would not be flashing. Both of these results are similar to a vehicle 
that has a burned out turn signal lamp.
     Like a vehicle with a burned out lamp, a driver 
experiencing this condition is alerted that the turn signal system is 
not functioning properly because the turn signal indicator light does 
not flash.
     A turn signal with this condition does not self-cancel, 
but it can easily be canceled manually.
     GM knows of no accidents or injuries associated with this 
condition.
    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and 
arguments on the application described above. Comments should refer to 
the docket number and be submitted to: Docket Management, Room PL-401 
Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC 20590. It is requested but not 
required that two copies be submitted. Docket hours are 10:00 a.m. to 
5:00 p.m.
    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 extend 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: May 28, 1999.
(49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120; delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.50 and 
501.8)

    Issued on: April 21, 1999.
L. Robert Shelton,
Associate Administrator for Safety Performance Standards.
[FR Doc. 99-10495 Filed 4-26-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P