[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 145 (Thursday, July 31, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36091-36093]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-14475]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2024-0098; Notice 1]
Ford Motor Company, Receipt of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Receipt of petition.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Ford Motor Company (Ford) has determined that certain model
year (MY) 2018-2024 Ford and Lincoln motor vehicles do not fully comply
with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 101, Controls
and Displays, FMVSS No. 105, Hydraulic and Electric Brake Systems, and
FMVSS No. 135, Light Vehicle Brake Systems. Ford filed a noncompliance
report dated September 13, 2024, and subsequently petitioned NHTSA (the
``Agency'') on October 4, 2024, for a decision that the subject
noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
This document announces receipt of Ford's petition.
DATES: Send comments on or before September 2, 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
[[Page 36092]]
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: Kelley Adams-Campos, General Engineer,
NHTSA, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, (202) 366-7479.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Overview: Ford determined that certain MY 2018-2024 Ford and
Lincoln motor vehicles do not fully comply with paragraph S2 of and
Table 1 FMVSS No. 101, Controls and Displays, paragraphs S2 and S5.3 of
FMVSS No. 105, Hydraulic and Electric Brake Systems, and paragraphs S2
and S5.5 of FMVSS No. 135, Light Vehicle Brake Systems (49 CFR 571.101,
105, and 135).
Ford filed a noncompliance report dated September 13, 2024,
pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility
and Reports. Ford petitioned NHTSA on October 4, 2024, 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 Ford'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 5,829 of the following Ford
and Lincoln motor vehicles manufactured between November 2, 2017, and
June 24, 2024, were reported by the manufacturer:
MY 2018-2024 Ford F-150
MY 2023 Ford F-150 Lightning
MY 2022-2023 Ford Mustang Mach-E
MY 2019-2023 Lincoln Nautilus
MY 2023-2024 Lincoln Corsair
MY 2018-2024 Ford Super Duty (F-250, F-350, F-450, F-550)
MY 2019-2024 Ford Transit
MY 2019 Ford Fusion
MY 2019-2021 Ford E-Series
MY 2019 Ford Edge
III. FMVSS Requirements: Paragraphs of FMVSS Nos. 101, 105, and 135
include the requirements relevant to this petition. Ford references the
general purpose of FMVSS No. 101 as outlined in paragraph S2 and the
Brake System Malfunction Indicator, which Ford explains is required to
illuminate when a malfunction is detected within the braking system.
The petition also refers to FMVSS No. 105, paragraph S5.3 and FMVSS
No. 135, paragraph S5.5, which require that a vehicle with hydraulic
and electric brake systems (FMVSS No. 105) and light vehicle brake
systems (FMVSS No. 135), respectively, be equipped with one or more
visual indicator lamps that provide the driver with a warning in the
event of specific brake system malfunctions.
IV. Noncompliance: Ford explains that the instrument panel of the
subject vehicles displays a brake telltale that is configured to use
the International Organization for Standardization (ISO)/Economic
Commission for Europe (ECE) symbol ``!'' instead of text telltale
symbol ``BRAKE'' required by the FMVSS.
V. Summary of Ford's Petition: The following views and arguments
presented in this section, ``V. Summary of Ford's Petition,'' are the
views and arguments provided by Ford. They have not been evaluated by
the Agency and do not reflect the views of the Agency. Ford describes
the subject noncompliance and contends that the noncompliance is
inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
Ford starts the petition by explaining the events that led to this
noncompliance being discovered and its attempts to remedy the issue.
Ford states that they were made aware of an issue with the brake
telltales on the instrument panel of certain Ford and Lincoln vehicles
exported to U.S. territories (Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, US Virgin
Islands, Puerto Rico and American Samoa) by Ford's Critical Concern
Review Group (CCRG) on April 18 and June 14, 2024. The vehicles were
found to use the symbol for brake related issues on the instrument
panel recognized by the ISO/ECE instead of the required ``BRAKE'' text
telltale. In response to this finding, Ford issued ``Stop Ship'' orders
to the Dearborn Truck Plant and Kansas City Assembly Plant assembling
the F-150 model vehicles for U.S. territories on June 15, 2024, and to
the Louisville Assembly Plant assembling Lincoln Corsair vehicles for
the Guam and Puerto Rico markets on June 25, 2024.
Ford gives five reasons why the subject noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety:
1. Ford states that the telltale on the subject vehicles meets all
other requirements of the FMVSSs and will illuminate to alert drivers
of braking system malfunctions. The ISO/ECE telltale still illuminates
to alert the driver to any malfunction in the braking system and is in
a position that is in ``the driver's direct field of vision, is easily
legible, and the colors are compliant and in contrast to the background
of the text.''
2. Ford highlights that the ISO/ECE telltale is featured alongside
the required ``BRAKE'' telltale text in the owner's manual. Ford
references and provides images from the owner's manuals included with
each vehicle to demonstrate this claim. Ford suggests that even if
drivers do ``not recognize (the ISO/ECE compliant) regulatory symbol,
the owner's manual clarifies the symbol's meaning. Ford also argues
that the fact that the symbol is ``universally recognized'' and defined
in the owner's manual, using the ISO/ECE symbol on the instrument panel
instead of the FMVSS mandated ``BRAKE'' telltale does not pose any
additional risk to public safety.
3. Ford states that the vehicle's information display prominently
shows pop-up messages and makes an audible chime alongside the telltale
that alerts the driver to issues related to the brake system. This
display popup is intended to give additional information about any
malfunctions in the brake system, that cannot be conveyed with a simple
telltale; it displays messages such as: ``Park Brake On'', ``Brake
Fluid Level Low'', etc. Ford believes that the message on the display,
along with the
[[Page 36093]]
chime, will mitigate any potential confusion by the driver that the
ISO/ECE symbol telltale is related to issues with the brake system.
4. Ford reports that it is not aware of any reports of crashes,
injuries, or deaths that might be related to this particular
noncompliance nor for this condition as a whole. While Ford recognizes
that a lack of reports of injury does not guarantee future safety in
all cases, Ford believes that this clearly illustrates that drivers are
not confused by the use of the ISO/ECE brake telltale instead of the
FMVSS compliant telltale.
5. Ford lists a number of petitions for inconsequential
noncompliance granted by NHTSA that it believes are substantively
similar to this petition:
a. A 2017 petition submitted by Porsche Cars North America, Inc.,
for Porsche 911 vehicles that used the ISO/ECE symbol instead of the
required ``BRAKE'' text was granted by NHTSA after Porsche noted that
the vehicles had described the symbol in the owner's manual, there was
a chime and message on the display, and there were no known complaints
of injuries related to this condition. (82 FR 4976, October 25, 2017).
b. A 2014 petition submitted by Chrysler Group, LLC, for Jeep and
Dodge vehicles using the ISO/ECE symbol instead of the ``BRAKE'' text
was granted by NHTSA after Chrysler argued that the symbol is listed in
the owner's manual, the presence of redundant warning systems, and the
lack of reported incidents. (79 FR 78559, December 30, 2014.)
c. A petition submitted by General Motors in 2012 for Chevrolet and
Buick vehicles that used the ISO/ECE symbol for the parking brake
instead of the ``BRAKE'' text was granted by NHTSA after GM pointed out
that the vehicles had redundant warning systems, automatic release of
the parking brake, and the lack of reported incidents relating to the
condition. (79 FR 9041, February 14, 2014.)
d. Another petition was submitted by General Motors in 2016 for
Cadillac vehicles that used the FMVSS mandated ``PARK'' telltale, but
the height of the lettering was insufficient. The petition was granted
by NHTSA on the grounds that these vehicles had redundant warning
systems, automatic release of the parking brake, and the lack of
reported incidents relating to the condition. (81 FR 92963, December
20, 2016.)
Ford argues that the NHTSA should grant this petition for
inconsequential noncompliance because it has already set a precedent by
granting the above listed similar petitions.
Ford finishes by reiterating and summarizing the arguments listed
above. Ford believes that NHTSA should grant its petition because the
existing telltales in these vehicles otherwise conform to FMVSS
requirements, the meaning of the nonconforming symbol is clearly
described in the owner's manual, there are redundant notification
systems that will alert the driver of issues with the braking system,
there are no know reports of crashes or injuries related to this issue,
and finally that NHTSA has granted similar petitions in the past.
Ford 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 Ford 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 Ford
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. 2025-14475 Filed 7-30-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P