[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 78 (Tuesday, April 23, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16930-16932]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-08124]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2018-0100; Notice 1]


Daimler Trucks North America, 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 Trucks North America (DTNA) has determined that 
certain model year (MY) 2010-2018 DTNA motor vehicles do not fully 
comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108, 
Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment. DTNA filed a 
noncompliance report dated September 19, 2018. DTNA subsequently 
petitioned NHTSA on October 11, 2018, for a decision that the subject 
noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety. 
This document announces receipt of DTNA's petition.

DATES: The closing date for comments on the petition is May 23, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written data, 
views, and arguments on this petition. Comments must refer to the 
docket 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 considered. All comments and supporting materials received 
after the closing date will also be filed and 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

[[Page 16931]]

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).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    I. Overview: DTNA has determined that certain MY 2011-2019 DTNA 
motor vehicles do not fully comply with paragraph S6.2 of FMVSS No. 
108, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment. (49 CFR 
571.108). DTNA filed a noncompliance report dated September 19, 2018, 
pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility 
and Reports. DTNA subsequently petitioned NHTSA on October 11, 2018, 
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 DTNA petition is published under 49 
U.S.C. 30118 and 30120, and does not represent any agency decision or 
other exercises of judgment concerning the merits of the petition.
    II. Vehicles Involved: Approximately 14,340 MY 2011-2019 Western 
Star 4700 and 4900, Freightliner Business Class M2, 114SD, 108SD, 
122SD, and Coronado motor vehicles, manufactured between May 4, 2010, 
and August 23, 2018, are potentially involved.
    III. Noncompliance: DTNA stated that the noncompliance is that the 
brake lights, in the subject vehicles, illuminate with Automatic 
Traction Control (ATC) activation and, therefore, do not meet the 
requirements specified in S6.2.1 of FMVSS No. 108.
    IV. Rule Requirements: Paragraph S6.2.1 of FMVSS No. 108, includes 
the requirements relevant to this petition:
     No additional lamp, reflective device, or other motor 
vehicles equipment is permitted to be installed that impairs the 
effectiveness of lighting equipment required by this FMVSS No. 108.
    V. Summary of DTNA Petition: DTNA described the subject 
noncompliance and stated its belief that the noncompliance is 
inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
    In support of its petition, DTNA submitted the following reasoning:
    1. FMVSS No.108 paragraph S6.2.1 states that ``No additional lamp, 
reflective device, or other motor vehicle equipment is permitted to be 
installed that impairs the effectiveness of lighting equipment required 
by'' Standard No. 108. DTNA cited an interpretation response to GM 
dated May 20, 2000, where NHTSA stated that brake lights should not be 
illuminated for ATC and concluded that installation of traction control 
systems, or any other equipment, that activates the stop lamps for 
purposes other than to indicate that the vehicle is stopping or slowing 
is prohibited by S5.1.3 and would create a noncompliance with Standard 
No. 108.
    2. ATC events occur during low traction conditions such as snow, 
ice and mud. The duration of the event can be very short and may not 
even be noticed by the following driver. If brake light illumination 
for an ATC event is noticed, it would help to provide early warning of 
an adverse road condition ahead and encourage the following driver to 
slow down.
    3. Below are several examples of ATC events:

a. Taking Off From a Stop

    ATC can be very helpful to a driver when taking off from a stop in 
low traction conditions. From time to time a vehicle will park with one 
drive axle wheel end right over a patch of ice, and without ATC, it can 
be difficult to take off. This happens after the vehicle has been 
stopped and is trying to move. It seems unlikely that the activation of 
the brake lights during this ATC event would cause a safety concern to 
following drivers since the vehicle is stationary.

b. Low Speed

    At low speed, hazard warning lights are commonly used to warn other 
drivers of adverse road conditions such as those that are in effect 
when an ATC event may occur. Since the hazard lights may already be 
applied in this case, the addition of momentary brake light activation 
is unlikely to cause confusion.
    NHTSA has stated in Docket No. NHTSA-2000-7312 (referenced below) 
that the momentary activation of the Center High Mounted Stop Lamp 
(CHMSL) and hazard warning lamps can augment the message that extra 
attention should be given to the leading vehicle. This is precisely the 
situation with low speed ATC events.

c. High Speed

    For an ATC event to occur at high speed, it would signify that road 
conditions have changed rapidly. One way it could happen is if the 
vehicle has been climbing a hill on dry roads in sub-freezing 
conditions and crosses a patch of ice. This causes a wheel to lose 
traction and the ATC applies brake force to that wheel end. The torque 
is transferred to other wheel ends causing a momentary brake light 
illumination. If it is a small ice patch, the event may be over and the 
vehicle may continue on its way. If the ice patch is large, it is 
imperative that the vehicle slows down to a safe speed under slick 
conditions and warns others of the impending slowdown. As soon as slick 
road conditions are noticed and wheels begin to slip, the driver would 
let up on the throttle.
    Brakes are commonly applied causing the brake lights to illuminate 
when a driver sees or senses a change in road conditions such and an 
icy patch. Reducing vehicle speed in adverse conditions increases 
safety, so signaling changing road conditions to following drivers 
would improve safety and give them the opportunity to increase the 
following distance. Department of Transportation guidance supports this 
goal:
    [cir] NHTSA's Winter Driving Tips says: ``Drive slowly. It's harder 
to control or stop your vehicle on a slick or snow-covered road. 
Increase your following distance enough so that you'll have plenty of 
time to stop for vehicles ahead of you.''
    [cir] FMCSA released CMV Driving Tips; Tip#1 is: Reduce Your 
Driving Speed in Adverse Road and/or Weather Conditions. ``You should 
reduce your speed by \1/3\ on wet roads and by \1/2\ or more on snow 
packed roads (i.e., if you would normally be traveling at a speed of 60 
mph on dry pavement, then on a wet road you should reduce your speed to 
40 mph, and on a snow-packed road you should reduce your speed to 30 
mph). When you come upon slick, icy roads you should drive slowly and 
cautiously and pull off the road if you can no longer safely control 
the vehicle.''
    In addition to the lack of safety impact from brake illumination 
under the various ATC activation conditions taking off from stop; low 
speed; or high speed DTNA is not aware of any accidents, injuries, 
owner complaints or field reports for brake light illumination for ATC 
events concerning the subject vehicles.
    4. DTNA notes that NHTSA has previously granted petitions for 
decisions of inconsequential noncompliance for lighting requirements 
where a technical noncompliance exists, but does not create a negative 
impact on safety.
    5. In Docket No. NHTSA-2000-7312 (published on June 18, 2001) a 
Petition

[[Page 16932]]

for inconsequentiality by GM was granted by NHTSA. In this instance, 
certain models could have unintended CHMSL illumination briefly if the 
hazard warning lamp switch is depressed to its limit of travel. NHTSA 
stated: ``The intended use of a hazard warning lamp and the momentary 
activation of a CHMSL do not provide a conflicting message. The 
illumination of the CHMSL is intended to signify that the vehicles 
brakes are being applied and that the vehicle might be decelerating. 
Hazard warning lamps are intended as a more general message to nearby 
drivers that extra attention should be given to the vehicle. A brief 
illumination of the CHMSL while activating the hazard warning lamps 
would not confuse the intended general message, nor would the brief 
illumination in the absence of the other brake lamps cause confusion 
that the brakes were unintentionally applied.''
    6. DTNA believes that the same situation exists in the present 
case, with temporary illumination of the brake lamps during ATC 
activation. The temporary brake light illumination serves to emphasize 
the message to following drivers that adverse or unusual road 
conditions may exist and they should pay close attention.
    7. In Docket No. NHTSA-2014-0125 (published on Feb 02, 2018) a 
Petition for inconsequentiality by GM was granted by NHTSA. In this 
instance, under certain conditions the parking lamps on the subject 
vehicles fail to meet the requirement that parking lamps must be 
activated when headlamps are activated in a steady burning state. NHTSA 
stated: ``. . . The Agency agrees with GM that in this case this 
situation would have a low probability of occurrence and, if it should 
occur, it would neither be long lasting nor likely to occur during a 
period when parking lamps are generally in use. Importantly, when the 
noncompliance does occur, other lamps remain functional. The 
combination of all of the factors, specific to this case, abate the 
risk to safety.''
    DTNA concluded by expressing the 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.
    DTNA's complete petition and all supporting documents are available 
by logging onto the Federal Docket Management System (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 vehicles that DTNA 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 DTNA 
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. 2019-08124 Filed 4-22-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P