[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 40 (Monday, March 3, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11089-11091]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-03387]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2020-0010; Notice 2]


Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC, Grant of Petition for Decision of 
Inconsequential Noncompliance

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

ACTION: Grant of petition.

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

SUMMARY: Mercedes-Benz AG (MBAG) and Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC (MBUSA) 
(collectively, ``Mercedes-Benz'') has determined that certain model 
year (MY) 2019-2020 Mercedes-Benz CLA-Class, A-Class, GLA-Class, and 
GLB-Class motor vehicles do not fully comply with Federal Motor Vehicle 
Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 135, Light Vehicle Brake Systems. Mercedes-
Benz filed a noncompliance report dated January 27, 2020, and 
subsequently petitioned NHTSA on February 10, 2020, for a decision that 
the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor 
vehicle safety. This notice announces the grant of Mercedes-Benz's 
petition.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vince Williams, Office of Vehicle 
Safety Compliance, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 
(NHTSA), telephone (202) 366-2319.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    I. Overview: Mercedes-Benz has determined that certain MY 2019-2020 
Mercedes-Benz CLA-Class, A-Class, GLA-Class, and GLB-Class motor 
vehicles do not fully comply with the requirements of paragraph S5.5.5 
of

[[Page 11090]]

FMVSS No. 135, Light Vehicle Brake Systems (49 CFR 571.135). Mercedes-
Benz filed a noncompliance report dated January 27, 2020, pursuant to 
49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports, 
and subsequently petitioned NHTSA on February 10, 2020, 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.
    Notice of receipt of Mercedes-Benz's petition was published with a 
30-day public comment period, on May 6, 2020, in the Federal Register 
(85 FR 27024). NHTSA received one comment from the general public. To 
view the petition and all supporting documents, log onto the Federal 
Docket Management System (FDMS) website at https://www.regulations.gov/. Then follow the online search instructions to 
locate docket number ``NHTSA-2020-0010.''
    II. Vehicles Involved: Approximately 27,375 of the following MY 
2019-2020 Mercedes-Benz CLA-Class, A-Class, GLA-Class, and GLB-Class 
motor vehicles manufactured between August 20, 2018, and January 16, 
2020, are potentially involved:

 Mercedes-Benz A220
 Mercedes-Benz A220 4MATIC
 Mercedes-Benz A35 AMG 4MATIC
 Mercedes-Benz CLA250
 Mercedes-Benz CLA250 4MATIC
 Mercedes-Benz CLA35 AMG 4MATIC
 Mercedes-Benz CLA45 AMG 4MATIC
 Mercedes-Benz GLA250 4MATIC
 Mercedes-Benz GLB250
 Mercedes-Benz GLB250 4MATIC

    III. Noncompliance: Mercedes-Benz explains that the noncompliance 
is that the instrument panel in the subject vehicles displays the 
braking telltales in a slightly smaller size than required by paragraph 
S5.5.5 of FMVSS No. 135. Specifically, the size of the text for the 
brake telltales in the subject vehicles ranges between 2.92 mm to 3.17 
mm when the minimum required is 3.2 mm.
    IV. Rule Requirements: Paragraph S5.5.5 of FMVSS No. 135, includes 
the requirements relevant to this petition. Each visual indicator shall 
display a word or words in accordance with the requirements of FMVSS 
No. 101 and S5.5 of FMVSS 135, which shall be legible to the driver 
under all daytime and nighttime conditions when activated. Unless 
otherwise specified, the words shall have letters not less than 3.2 mm 
(\1/8\ inch) high.
    V. Summary of Mercedes-Benz's Petition: The following views and 
arguments presented in this section, ``V. Summary of Mercedes-Benz's 
Petition,'' are the views and arguments provided by Mercedes-Benz and 
do not reflect the views of the Agency. In its petition, Mercedes-Benz 
describes the subject noncompliance and contends that the noncompliance 
is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
    In support of its petition, Mercedes-Benz offers the following 
reasoning:
    1. Mercedes-Benz believes that the letter height of the braking 
telltales, which in this instance is slightly smaller than the 
requirement, does not expose an occupant to any greater risk of injury 
than an occupant in a vehicle with slightly larger font size.
    2. Mercedes-Benz alleges that the purpose of the standardized size 
requirement for the brake system warning telltales is to ensure they 
are visually perceptible to drivers under all operating conditions. 
Mercedes-Benz says that the Agency has a long and consistent history of 
granting petitions for inconsequentiality for discrepancies involving a 
letter height requirement where the text appeared somewhat smaller than 
required. Mercedes-Benz says that NHTSA has granted petitions where the 
telltales displayed included lettering that was as much as a full 
millimeter less than the minimum size. See 47 FR 31347 (July 19, 1982) 
(granting a petition of Subaru of America, Inc., where the brake system 
indicator lettering was only 2.2 mm high, but the ISO symbol telltales 
were located within the driver's line of sight and continued to be 
``easily identifiable and very readable'').
    3. Mercedes-Benz asserts that in addressing similar noncompliances 
in the past, the Agency has determined that ``it is very unlikely that 
a vehicle user would either fail to see or fail to understand the 
meaning of the brake . . . warning light'' where the ``information 
presented by the telltales is correct.'' See 81 FR 92963 (December 20, 
2016) (granting General Motors' petition of over 46,000 vehicles where 
the ``Park'' indicator displayed at 2.44 mm). In the General Motors 
decision, the Agency found the discrepancy ``pose[d] little, if any, 
risk to motor vehicle safety'' where all other braking indicator 
requirements were met and the telltales were located in the instrument 
cluster, adjacent to the speedometer and in direct view of the driver); 
69 FR 41568 (July 9, 2004) (granting a petition of Hyundai Motor 
Company involving more than 237,000 vehicles, where the FMVSS No. 105 
braking system indicator letter height varied from 2.5 mm to 3.1 mm).
    4. In subject noncompliance, the letter height for the braking 
telltales are only slightly smaller than the 3.2 mm minimum. Depending 
on the particular indicator, the text size can be smaller by a range of 
0.03 mm up to a maximum of .28 mm. The electronic instrument cluster is 
located within the driver's direct field of vision, and the braking 
telltales are located adjacent to the speedometer and, therefore, 
remain within the driver's direct line of sight. Mercedes-Benz claims 
that this slight difference in size is not visually perceptible and 
does not affect the driver's ability to read or understand the 
telltales. Mercedes-Benz further asserts that the telltales are clearly 
illuminated and remain visible under all driving conditions.
    5. Mercedes-Benz states that all the telltales at issue here are 
accurately depicted and are displayed in the correct colors, consistent 
with FMVSS No. 101, Table 1. Thus, there should not be any confusion 
about the meaning of the telltales, and the standard symbol that is 
displayed continues to convey the intended meaning of the indicator. 
Further, although the lettering that appears below the ISO symbols is 
slightly smaller than 3.2 mm minimum height, the overall height of the 
ABS and Parking Brake symbols is more than 3.2 mm and exceeds the 
height requirement of the standard. Finally, the functionality of the 
brake telltales themselves is not affected by the software issue. The 
telltales properly display during both the instrument cluster warning 
lamp operation check and in the event a brake malfunction was to occur.
    6. Mercedes-Benz says that it has not received any reports related 
to the performance of the telltales included on the 10.25-inch displays 
in the subject vehicles. Nor has it received any reports related to 
customers' inability to read or decipher the brake telltales.
    Mercedes-Benz 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.
    Mercedes-Benz'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 by following the online 
search instructions to locate the docket number as listed in the title 
of this notice.

[[Page 11091]]

    VI. Public Comment: NHTSA received one comment from the general 
public. While the Agency takes great interest in the public's concerns 
and appreciates the commenter's feedback, the comment does not address 
the purpose of this particular petition.
    VI. NHTSA's Analysis: In determining inconsequentiality of a 
noncompliance, NHTSA focuses on the safety risk to individuals who 
experience the type of event against which a recall would otherwise 
protect.\1\ In general, NHTSA does not consider the absence of 
complaints or injuries when determining if a noncompliance is 
inconsequential to safety. The absence of complaints does not mean 
vehicle occupants have not experienced a safety issue, nor does it mean 
that there will not be safety issues in the future.\2\ Further, because 
each inconsequential noncompliance petition must be evaluated on its 
own facts and determinations are highly fact-dependent, NHTSA does not 
consider prior determinations as binding precedent. Petitioners are 
reminded that they have the burden of persuading NHTSA that the 
noncompliance is inconsequential to safety.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Gen. Motors, LLC; Grant of Petition for Decision of 
Inconsequential Noncompliance, 78 FR 35355 (June 12, 2013) (finding 
noncompliance had no effect on occupant safety because it had no 
effect on the proper operation of the occupant classification system 
and the correct deployment of an air bag); Osram Sylvania Prods. 
Inc.; Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential 
Noncompliance, 78 FR 46000 (July 30, 2013) (finding occupant using 
noncompliant light source would not be exposed to significantly 
greater risk than occupant using similar compliant light source).
    \2\ See Morgan 3 Wheeler Limited; Denial of Petition for 
Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 81 FR 21663, 21666 (Apr. 
12, 2016); see also United States v. Gen. Motors Corp., 565 F.2d 
754, 759 (D.C. Cir. 1977) (finding defect poses an unreasonable risk 
when it ``results in hazards as potentially dangerous as sudden 
engine fire, and where there is no dispute that at least some such 
hazards, in this case fires, can definitely be expected to occur in 
the future'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While reviewing the facts of the case, OVSC reached out to Mercedes 
to find out if there were additional warnings messages that triggered 
along with the brake indicator. Mercedes provided several screenshots 
that show supplemental warning messages that activate along with brake 
indicator and help convey the required brake warnings to the driver. 
Taking into consideration all of the information provided and the 
oversized height of the additional information, the Agency agrees with 
Mercedes-Benz that this noncompliance will not have an adverse effect 
on vehicle safety. Despite the letter height of the braking telltales 
being slightly smaller than the 3.2 mm requirement, the overall height 
of the adjacent ABS and Parking Brake ISO symbols is more than 3.2 mm 
and exceeds the height requirement of the standard. Additionally, the 
instrument cluster's braking telltales are adjacent to the speedometer 
and directly within the driver's direct field of view. The 
aforementioned facts support a conclusion that it would be unlikely for 
a driver to fail to perceive and understand the meaning of the 
illuminated telltale and symbols. As the symbols are accurately 
depicted and are displayed in the correct colors, consistent with FMVSS 
No. 101, Table 1, there should not be any confusion about the meaning 
of the telltales; and the standard symbol that is displayed continues 
to convey the intended meaning of the indicator. The information 
presented by the telltales is correct.
    VII. NHTSA's Decision: In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA 
finds that Mercedes-Benz has met its burden of persuasion that the 
subject FMVSS No. 135 noncompliance in the affected vehicles is 
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Mercedes-Benz's 
petition is hereby granted, and Mercedes-Benz is consequently exempted 
from the obligation of providing notification of, and a free remedy for 
that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.
    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 section 30118 and 30120, respectively, to 
notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or noncompliance and 
to remedy the defect or noncompliance. Therefore, this decision only 
applies to the subject vehicles that Mercedes-Benz no longer controlled 
at the time it determined that the noncompliance existed. However, the 
granting of 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 Mercedes-Benz 
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. 2025-03387 Filed 2-28-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P