[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 142 (Monday, July 28, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35575-35576]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-14123]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2025-0005; Notice 1]
PACCAR, Inc., Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential
Noncompliance
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Receipt of petition.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: PACCAR, Inc. (PACCAR) has determined that certain model year
(MY) 2022-2025 Peterbilt and Kenworth trucks do not fully comply with
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 121, Air Brake
Systems. PACCAR filed a noncompliance report dated December 17, 2024,
and amended the report on January 14, 2025. PACCAR petitioned NHTSA
(the ``Agency'') on January 9, 2025, for a decision that the subject
noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
This document announces receipt of PACCAR's petition.
DATES: Send comments on or before August 27, 2025.
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 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 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 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).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ahmad Barnes, General Engineer, NHTSA,
Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, (202) 366-7236.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Overview: PACCAR determined that certain MY 2022-2025 Peterbilt
and Kenworth trucks do not fully comply with paragraph S5.3.4.1 of
FMVSS No. 121, Air Brake Systems (49 CFR 571.121).
PACCAR filed a noncompliance report dated December 17, 2024, and
amended the report on January 14, 2025, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573,
Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. PACCAR petitioned
NHTSA on January 9, 2025, 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 PACCAR's petition is published under 49
U.S.C. 30118 and 30120 and does not represent any agency decision or
another exercise of judgment concerning the merits of the petition.
II. Vehicles Involved: Approximately 13,767 of the following
vehicles, manufactured between July 16, 2021 and August 16, 2024, were
reported by the manufacturer:
MY 2022-2025 Peterbilt 579
MY 2025 Peterbilt 537
MY 2025 Peterbilt 548
MY 2025 Kenworth T880
MY 2025 Kenworth T480
MY 2022-2025 Kenworth T680
MY 2025 Kenworth T380
III. Rule Requirements: Paragraph S5.3.4.1 of FMVSS No. 121
includes the requirements relevant to this petition. Paragraph
S5.3.4.1(a) of FMVSS No. 121 provides that the air pressure in each of
the service brake chambers of a truck must drop from 95 to 5 psi in
0.55 seconds or less upon the first movement of the service brake
control. Paragraph S5.3.4.1(b) of FMVSS No. 121 requires that for
trucks designed to tow vehicles equipped with air brakes, the pressure
in a 50-cubic-inch test reservoir (connected to the control line output
coupling) must drop to 5 psi within 0.75 seconds or less after the
first movement of the service brake control.
IV. Noncompliance: PACCAR explains that the subject vehicles may
exceed the intended service brake release timing, and therefore do not
comply with paragraphs S5.3.4.1 of FMVSS No. 121. Specifically, the
subject vehicles exceed the brake release timing requirement by 0.07-
0.25 seconds.
V. Summary of PACCAR's Petition: The following views and arguments
presented in this section, ``V. Summary of PACCAR's Petition,'' are the
views and arguments provided by PACCAR. They have not been evaluated by
the
[[Page 35576]]
Agency and do not reflect the views of the Agency. PACCAR describes the
subject noncompliance and contends that the noncompliance is
inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
PACCAR explains that tests performed by its engineers in June of
2024 found that while battery electric vehicle (BEV) trucks met the
maximum brake release timing requirements in paragraph S5.3.4.1 of
FMVSS No. 121, internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles failed to meet
the timing requirements. PACCAR notes that while the BEV and ICE
vehicles share a ``similar air routing structure'' and similar
interacting driver assist systems (such as Hill Start, Adaptive Cruise
Control, and Stop & Auto-Go), ICE vehicles have a differing valve
placement. In September of 2024, PACCAR contracted Link Commercial
Vehicle Testing (Link) to conduct further compliance testing of the air
brakes on a model T680 Kenworth truck. Link tested the air brakes on
the T680 Kenworth truck both with and without a check valve (meant to
prevent air backflow) installed. The tests conducted by Link found that
the air brakes performed within FMVSS No. 121 standards with the check
valve installed or with the ABS system active while the trucks are in
operation. The same tests found that vehicles without the control valve
or an active ABS system exceeded the brake release timing requirements
because of air backflow from the Hill Start Aid valve assembly back
into the Stop & Auto-Go control line.
PACCAR prefaces its arguments by quoting sections of the Federal
Registry on the nature and purpose of FMVSS No. 121. PACCAR quotes
NHTSA as saying that FMVSS No. 121 is ``a set of requirements to govern
the braking behavior of a vehicle during application of the service
brakes'' (. . .) ``(p)rincipal among these are stopping performance
requirements that include a minimum stopping distance requirement for
trucks and buses and lateral stability and wheel lockup requirements
for all vehicles.'' The brake release time requirements are to assure
that air brake systems ``can meet the [standard's] stopping distance
requirements without lockup.'' \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ FMVSS No. 121 Final Rule, 36 FR 3817 (Feb. 27, 1971)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PACCAR then quoted a research report regarding pneumatic brake
release timing in heavy duty vehicles released by NHTSA in 1985:
Pneumatic release timing, defined as the time required for the
pressure in the brake chambers to fall from 95 psi to 5 psi after
the driver releases the brake control, also effects air brake system
performance. If the driver in attempting to stop a vehicle, locks
the wheels causing the vehicle to begin to skid immediate release of
the brakes is necessary if the driver is to regain control.
Therefore, release timing should also be as fast as possible. (R.
Radlinski & S. Williams, NHTSA Heavy Duty Vehicle Brake Research
Program Report No. 5--Pneumatic Timing, Report No. DOT HS 806 897
(NHTSA Dec. 1985))
PACCAR argues that the subject vehicles meet the purposes of FMVSS
No. 121 as described in NHTSA's own statements in the Federal Register
and the above-mentioned research report by ``minimizing stopping
distance, avoiding lockup, and maintaining vehicle stability'' although
they do not conform with the brake release times as required in FMVSS
No. 121.
PACCAR states that the longer braking time does not adversely
affect braking performance, and thereby meets the purpose of the
regulations, for the following reasons:
1. PACCAR believes that the vehicle's stopping distance is not
negatively impacted by the vehicle's inability to meet the brake timing
requirements. PACCAR explains that the test vehicle was able to meet
the stopping distance requirements of FMVSS No. 121 S5.3.1 with or
without the control valve installed.
2. PACCAR contends that the vehicle's inability to meet brake
timing requirements does not create an increased risk of vehicle
lockup. Link tested the vehicle's ABS performance according to the
stability and control test specified in FMVSS No. 121, paragraph
S5.3.6, both with and without the control valve, and found the
performance to meet requirements under either condition.
3. PACCAR argues that longer brake timing in the vehicle without a
control valve was not found to impact vehicle stability control because
the vehicle is equipped with an electronic stability control system
(ESC). With an ESC system, the brake air pressure is released from the
ABS modulator in the ``delivery air circuit,'' thus circumventing the
need for a ``control air circuit'' that contains the check valve.
Therefore, PACCAR states that the vehicle is still in compliance with
FMVSS No. 136 with or without the check valve.
4. PACCAR states that NHTSA's Pneumatic Timing Report mentions that
the risk of dangerous destabilization in tractor trucks hauling
trailers can be mitigated by ensuring that the trailer release timing
is equal to or slower than the tractor release timing. PACCAR states
that the noncompliant vehicles (with or without a check valve) achieve
this desired timing between tractor brakes and trailer brakes by
ensuring that the tractor brake timing will be faster than the brakes
on the trailer. In the test published by Link, it was found that the
tractor release time is 0.70 seconds, whereas the release timing for
the 50-in reservoir (and by extension the trailer's brakes) is slower
at 1 second. Regardless of whether or not the trailer is equipped with
ABS, PACCAR states, the ESC system will correct any instability caused
by noncompliant release times.
PACCAR reiterates that the purpose of the regulation is met, even
if the vehicles not equipped with a check valve do not comply with the
exact brake release timing requirements in the regulation. PACCAR
states that there is no decrease in stopping distance, increased risk
of wheel lock-up, or increase in vehicle instability.
PACCAR concludes by stating its belief that the subject
noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety
and 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.
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 PACCAR 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 PACCAR
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. 2025-14123 Filed 7-25-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P