[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 102 (Friday, May 26, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30473-30474]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-8151]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration


Denial of Motor Vehicle Defect Petition

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

ACTION: Denial of petition for a defect investigation.

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

SUMMARY: This notice sets forth the reasons for the denial of a 
petition submitted by Mr. Brad Lamb to NHTSA's Office of Defects 
Investigation (ODI), received December 2, 2005, under 49 U.S.C. 30162, 
requesting that the agency commence a proceeding to determine the 
existence of a defect related to motor vehicle safety with respect to 
the parking brakes on: (1) Model year (MY) 1999-2003 Chevrolet 
Silverado and GMC Sierra pickup trucks; (2) MY 2002-2003 Cadillac 
Escalade and Chevrolet Avalanche sport-utility vehicles (SUV); and (3) 
MY 2000-2003 Chevrolet Suburban/Tahoe and GMC Yukon SUV. After a review 
of the petition and other information,

[[Page 30474]]

NHTSA has concluded that further expenditure of the agency's 
investigative resources on the issues raised by the petition does not 
appear to be warranted. The agency accordingly has denied the petition. 
The petition is hereinafter identified as DP05-009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Gregory Magno, Defects Assessment 
Division, Office of Defects Investigation, NHTSA, 400 Seventh Street, 
SW., Washington, DC 20590. Telephone: (202) 366-5226.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On December 2, 2005, NHTSA received a 
petition from Mr. Brad Lamb, the Executive Director of North Carolina 
Consumers Council, Inc. (NCCC), requesting that the agency investigate 
parking brake failures on the aforementioned vehicles. The petitioner 
stated that NCCC is a non-profit consumer advocacy group with thousands 
of members across North Carolina and the nation, and that NCCC has 
received complaints regarding repeated parking brake failures in the 
aforementioned vehicles, several of which allege that the redesigned 
clip intended to remedy the problem is failing too.
    The concern raised by the petitioner was investigated by the Office 
of Defects Investigation (ODI) of NHTSA, initially as a Preliminary 
Evaluation (PE03-057), which was opened on December 8, 2003, on MY 
1999-2003 Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra 1500 series pickups with 
manual transmissions. PE03-057 was later upgraded to an Engineering 
Analysis (EA04-011) on April 9, 2004. During the investigation, ODI 
collected data concerning the manual transmission-equipped Silverado/
Sierra pickups and millions of peer vehicles that included half ton 
pickup trucks manufactured by Ford Motor Company (Ford) and 
DaimlerChrysler Corporation, as well as all MY 1999-2004 automatic 
transmission-equipped General Motors Corporation (GM) C/K pickups and 
sport-utility vehicles based on the same platform as that used in the 
Silverado/Sierra 1500 series pickups.
    On April 20, 2005, GM notified NHTSA by letter that it had decided 
to recall (NHTSA Recall No. 05V-161) MY 1999-2002 \1\ Silverado/Sierra 
1500 series pickups with manual transmissions to install a low-force 
spring clip retainer in the parking brake system supplied by PBR 
International, and MY 2001-2005 Silverado/Sierra 2500 and 3500 series 
pickups with manual transmissions to install a redesigned parking brake 
cable in the parking brake system supplied by TRW Automotive. The 
remedies were necessary to correct the conditions that cause the 
friction linings to wear to an extent where the parking brakes can 
become ineffective in immobilizing a parked vehicle. Similar GM 
vehicles built on the same platforms with automatic transmissions were 
not recalled because ODI's extensive study conducted during the 
investigation indicated that they had a roll-away event rate less than 
one fiftieth (\1/50\) of the rate for the recalled vehicles (equipped 
with manual transmissions) and that the rate was also similar to peer 
vehicles with automatic transmissions manufactured by Ford and 
DaimlerChrysler Corporation. Automatic transmission reduces unattended 
roll-aways because of the presence of a mechanical ``park pawl'' that 
immobilizes the drivetrain when the transmission is placed in park.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ MY 2003 Silverado/Sierra pickups were not included in recall 
because they already utilized the low force clip.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ODI received sixty-five (65) consumer complaints concerning the 
parking brake systems in MY 1999-2003 half ton pickups after EA04-011 
was closed. Of these 65 vehicles, three were equipped with manual 
transmissions, sixty one (61) were equipped with automatic 
transmissions, and one was equipped with an unknown transmission type. 
The only alleged roll-away event involved a MY 2002 Chevrolet Silverado 
1500 series 4-wheel drive pickup with an automatic transmission. The 
complainant indicated that he parked the vehicle on his sloped driveway 
and set the parking brakes. However, he also had the 4-wheel drive 
transfer case shifted to ``N'' (normally used only when the vehicle is 
being towed) which allowed all four wheels to rotate even with the 
automatic transmission in the ``Park'' position.
    ODI received a total of thirty-three (33) consumer complaints on 
the parking brake system used in the MY 2002-2003 Cadillac Escalade and 
Chevrolet Avalanche SUV. Of the 33 consumer complaints, only nine were 
received after EA04-011 was closed on May 10, 2005 and none of these 
nine complaints involved a roll-away event. Only automatic 
transmissions were used in these vehicles.
    ODI received a total of one hundred and eighty-one (181) consumer 
complaints concerning the parking brake system used in the MY 2000-2003 
Chevrolet Suburban/Tahoe and GMC Yukon SUV. Of these 181 complaints, 
forty-four (44) were received after EA04-011 was closed and none of 
these 44 complaints involved a roll-away event. Only automatic 
transmissions were used in these vehicles.
    With respect to the effectiveness of the redesigned clip in 
extending parking brake lining life, ODI identified very few complaints 
during EA04-011 that cited a parking brake failure after installation 
of the newer clip. Likewise, parking brake wear-out complaint figures 
pertaining to newer (MY 2003-2004 half ton) vehicles that incorporated 
the clip at the original equipment level were and are significantly 
lower. This is consistent with data furnished by GM during EA04-011 
that support the conclusion that the redesigned clip will contribute to 
a significantly longer parking brake lining life.
    To summarize, GM's recall remedies with regard to the Silverado and 
Sierra vehicles appear to be effective with regard to the safety 
problem outlined in the petition as ODI has received only one parking 
brake complaint on the recalled vehicles (equipped with a manual 
transmission) since the investigation was closed (this vehicle did 
receive the recall remedy in mid August 2005). All the other model 
vehicles (Cadillac Escalade, Chevrolet Avalanche, Suburban, Tahoe, and 
GMC Yukon) involved in the petition were equipped only with automatic 
transmissions, which present a substantially lower safety risk in the 
event of parking brake failure than vehicles with manual transmissions, 
and, to our knowledge, have not been involved in roll-away events. The 
downward trend in the number of consumer complaints since the closing 
of the investigation and the lack of any roll-away trend are further 
reasons that the vehicles equipped with automatic transmissions do not 
warrant an investigation at this time.
    In view of the foregoing, it is unlikely that NHTSA would issue an 
order for the notification and remedy of the alleged defect as defined 
by the petitioner at the conclusion of the investigation requested in 
the petition. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize 
NHTSA's limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety 
mission, the petition is denied.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30162(d); delegations of authority at CFR 
1.50 and 501.8.

Daniel Smith,
Associate Administrator for Enforcement.
[FR Doc. E6-8151 Filed 5-25-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P