[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 194 (Tuesday, October 12, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56753-56755]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-22088]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2021-0014; Notice 1]


Harbor Freight Tools, Receipt of Petition for Decision of 
Inconsequential Noncompliance

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

ACTION: Receipt of petition.

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

SUMMARY: Harbor Freight Tools (HFT) has determined that certain 
HaulMaster LED trailer light kits manufactured by Changzhou Nanxiashu 
Tool Company do not fully comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety 
Standard (FMVSS) No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated 
Equipment. HFT filed a noncompliance report dated February 12, 2021, 
and subsequently petitioned NHTSA on February 23, 2021, for a decision 
that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to 
motor vehicle safety. This notice announces receipt of HFT's petition.

DATES: Send comments on or before November 12, 2021.

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: Leroy Angeles, General Engineer, 
NHTSA, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, (202) 366-5304.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Overview

    HFT has determined that certain HaulMaster LED trailer light kits 
manufactured by Changzhou Nanxiashu Tool Company, do not fully comply 
with certain photometry requirements of FMVSS No. 108, Lamps, 
Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment (49 CFR 571.108). HFT 
filed a noncompliance report dated February 12, 2021, pursuant to 49 
CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. HFT 
subsequently petitioned NHTSA on February 23, 2021, 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.

[[Page 56754]]

    This notice of receipt of HFT'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. Equipment Involved

    Approximately 10,944 HaulMaster LED trailer light kits, 
manufactured by Changzhou Nanxiashu Tool Company between June 18, 2017, 
and June 24, 2017, are potentially involved. HFT's HaulMaster LED 
trailer light kit consists of a pair of replacement trailer lamps to be 
used on trailers less than 80 inches in overall width.

III. Noncompliance

    HFT explains that the noncompliance is that the subject trailer 
light kits are equipped with a turn signal and stop function which 
exceeds the maximum photometric intensity requirements.

IV. Rule Requirements

    Paragraphs S7.1.2, S7.1.2.13, S7.1.2.13.1, S7.3, S7.3.13, and 
S7.3.13.1 of FMVSS No. 108 include the requirements relevant to this 
petition. Each rear turn signal lamp must be designed to conform to the 
photometry requirements of Table VII which specifies the various 
minimum and maximum photometric intensity requirements for rear turn 
signal lamps at specified test points, when tested according to the 
procedure of paragraph S14.2.1, for the number of lamp compartments or 
individual lamps, the type of vehicle it is installed on, and the lamp 
color as specified by S7.1.2.2. Each stop lamp must be designed to 
conform to the photometry requirements of Table IX which specifies the 
various minimum and maximum photometric intensity requirements for stop 
lamps at specified test points, when tested according to the procedure 
of paragraph S14.2.1, for the number of lamp compartments or individual 
lamps and the type of vehicle it is installed on.

V. Summary of HFT's Petition

    The following views and arguments presented in this section, ``V. 
Summary of HFT's Petition,'' are the views and arguments provided by 
HFT. They have not been evaluated by the Agency and do not reflect the 
views of the Agency.
    HFT describes the subject noncompliance and contends that the 
noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety. 
In support of its petition, HFT submitted the following reasoning:
    1. In late 2018, NHTSA notified HFT that the agency had 
commissioned Calcoast to conduct FMVSS No. 108 compliance testing. The 
testing was carried out on samples from a specific batch of the 
HaulMaster LED trailer light kit, which were all produced in calendar 
week 25 of 2017. Calcoast's test findings were documented in two test 
reports dated December 20, 2018. In this case, a total of eight tests 
were conducted twice on eight samples from the same production batch 
produced in calendar week 25 of 2017. The test reports indicate that 
the samples were tested for NHTSA, once in October 2018 for a 
stabilization value at 30 minutes with 3% change in 15 minutes, and 
again in December 2018 for a stabilization value at 60 minutes with 1% 
change in 5 minutes. A multiplier was applied to achieve t=1 minute and 
t=10 minute values for the stop/turn lamps. In each test case, on both 
testing dates, 19 designated test points passed and 5 groups passed. 
Harbor Freight stated that the only noncompliance occurred when the 
beam pattern slightly exceeded the maximum photometric intensity output 
required by the standard. In the December 2018 testing, 3 out of 8 
units passed all elements of the testing and were found to be fully 
compliant.
    2. HFT contends that the trailer light kits' turn signal and stop 
functions deviate from the requirements only by small margins at the 
maximum value within the beam pattern and not by a degree that is 
sufficient enough to be noticeable to other road users or create an 
increased safety risk. Specifically, in certain individual units, 
portions of the LEDs have candela values that were above the luminous 
intensity output provided for turn signal and stop functions in FMVSS 
No. 108. HFT argues that the deviation from the photometry requirements 
is slight and all but two instances fall within 25% of the required 
output. Thus, HFT states, the actual performance of its lamps compared 
to compliant lamps would not be perceptible to the human eye and, 
therefore, would not create an enhanced risk to safety.
    3. HFT says that historically, NHTSA has granted inconsequentiality 
petitions when the noncompliance is imperceptible or nearly 
imperceptible to vehicle occupants or surrounding traffic. When the 
photometric intensity level is within 25% above or below the boundary 
limit, the difference in the light being emitted is typically not 
perceptible to other drivers. According to HFT, this objective metric 
has been applied to various types of lighting sources, including turn 
signal lighting.\1\ Further, HFT states that NHTSA has also applied 
this reasoning to noncompliances with particular zones, not just 
individual test points, as is the case with the HaulMaster lamps.\2\ In 
all but two of the samples described above, the deviation is within 25% 
of the required values.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Huey, R., Dekker, D., & Lyons, R. (1994). Driver perception 
of just-noticeable differences of automotive signal lamp 
intensities. Report No. DOT HS 808 209.
    \2\ Grant of Petition of General Motors; 61 FR 1663, January 22, 
1996.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    4. HFT says there is no increased risk of glare to oncoming 
motorists because the photometric exceedances are minimal and in most 
cases, below the threshold metric of 25% so that the differences are 
not perceptible to other drivers.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Grant of Petition of Hella, Inc., 55 FR 37601, September 21, 
1990.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. HFT believes that an alternative basis on which to grant the 
petition is the universal compliance with the photometric requirements 
in the test points and groups for every lamp Calcoast tested. HFT and 
its fabricating manufacturer previously conducted confirmatory 
compliance testing at various intervals before the lamps were sourced 
from the supplier and during production, through accredited U.S. test 
labs prior to import. The lamps were tested for compliance across the 
array of FMVSS No. 108 requirements. HFT contends that the reports 
demonstrate that the same HaulMaster product meets all of the FMVSS No. 
108 requirements to which they were tested. HFT's testing included 
batches before and after this production week and did not find any test 
anomalies.
    6. Separately, HFT says, NHTSA has recognized the inherent 
challenges to manufacture all lamps so that each and every test point 
within the lamp meets the minimum criteria. HFT argues that is the case 
here. When HFT commissioned Calcoast to review and confirm the 
performance of these lighting products, every test passed. This 
indicates that the LED lamps were in fact designed to comply with FMVSS 
No. 108 and that the results of the monitoring testing indicate an 
isolated number of random failures in one batch, not a systemic lapse 
in production processes.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Lamps, Reflective 
Devices, and Associated Equipment; 83 FR 51766, October 12, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    7. Finally, HFT has reviewed its systems and has not received any 
reports or complaints about the levels of brightness for these trailer 
lighting kits. HFT contends that the lack of reports or indications 
that the subject trailer lights are either too bright or too dim 
supports the conclusion that the condition is

[[Page 56755]]

undetectable to road users such as drivers following a vehicle equipped 
with either of the lighting products.
    HFT concludes 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.
    HFT's complete petition and all supporting documents are available 
by logging onto the FDMS website at https://www.regulations.gov and by 
following the online search instructions to locate the docket number as 
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 equipment that HFT no longer 
controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance existed. 
However, any decision on this petition does not relieve equipment 
distributors and dealers of the prohibitions on the sale, offer for 
sale, or introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate 
commerce of the noncompliant equipment under their control after HFT 
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. 2021-22088 Filed 10-8-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P