Ford Motor Company, Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance |
|---|
Topics: Ford F-650, Ford F-750
|
Jeff Giuseppe
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
April 17, 2014
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 74 (Thursday, April 17, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21836-21838]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-08713]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2012-0110; Notice 2]
Ford Motor Company, Grant of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Grant of Petition.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Ford Motor Company (Ford) has determined that certain model
year 2009-2012 Ford F-650 and F-750 trucks manufactured from April 14,
2008, through May 1, 2012 do not fully comply with paragraph S5.3.2(a)
of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 105, Hydraulic and
[[Page 21837]]
Electric Brake Systems. Ford has filed an appropriate report dated July
2, 2012 pursuant to 49 CFR part 573 Defect and Noncompliance
Responsibility and Reports.
ADDRESSES: For further information on this decision contact Stuart
Seigel, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone (202) 366-5287,
facsimile (202) 366-7002.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Ford's Petition
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and the rule
implementing those provisions at 49 CFR part 556, Ford has petitioned
for an exemption from the notification and remedy requirements of 49
U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the basis that this noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
On February 21, 2014 Ford supplemented its original petition of
July 23, 2012, by updating the number of affected vehicles and their
dates of manufacture, and including additional justification for a
decision of inconsequential noncompliance.
Notice of receipt of the July 23, 2012 petition was published, with
a 30-day public comment period, on January 25, 2013 in the Federal
Register (78 FR 5560). No comments were received. To view the petition
and all supporting documents log onto the Federal Docket Management
System (FDMS) Web site at: http://www.regulations.gov/. Then follow the
online search instructions to locate docket number ``NHTSA-2012-0110.''
II. Vehicles Involved
Affected are approximately 7,393 model year 2009-2012 Ford F-650
and F-750 trucks that were manufactured from April 14, 2008, through
May 1, 2012.
III. Noncompliance
Ford explains that the noncompliance is that the subject vehicles
do not illuminate the parking brake telltale lamp when the ignition
switch is in the ``on'' or ``start'' positions as required by FMVSS No.
105.
IV. Rule Text
Paragraph S5.3.2(a) of FMVSS No. 105 requires: Except as provided
in paragraph (b) of this section, all indicator lamps shall be
activated as a check of lamp function either when the ignition (start)
switch is turned to the ``on'' (run) position when the engine is not
running, or when the ignition (start) switch is in a position between
``on'' (run) and ``start'' that is designated by the manufacturer as a
check position.
V. Summary of Ford's Analyses
Ford stated its belief that although the affected vehicles do not
illuminate the parking brake telltale lamp when the ignition start
switch is in the ``on'' or ``start'' positions that the condition is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety for the following reasons:
1. The parking brake telltale lamp functions as intended--only the
telltale bulb check at start-up is not illuminated--unless the parking
brake is applied.
2. Unlike most other telltales, the parking brake telltale will
simultaneously illuminate when the customer applies the handbrake--
essentially functioning as a bulb check. And, if the lamp does not
illuminate when the handbrake is applied, the customer is able to
identify the condition.
3. If customers inadvertently operate the vehicle with the parking
brake applied, the service brakes will not be affected because the
design of the subject vehicles utilizes a separate, dedicated parking
brake mounted on the driveshaft. Additionally, inadvertent application
of the parking brake will result in poor vehicle acceleration and
``drag'' providing further indications that the parking brake is
engaged.
4. Instrument panel telltale bulbs are highly reliable. Engineering
has reported no parking telltale bulb warranty claims for any of the
affected F-650 & F-750 vehicles, from 2009 through 2012.
5. The physical position of the parking brake handle (on the
tunnel) provides a readily apparent indication when the parking brake
is applied. Partial parking brake applications are not a concern
because the handle mechanism utilizes an over-cam locking design, which
assures the parking brake is either fully applied or fully released.
This design precludes a parking brake from being partially applied.
6. The 2011-2012 model year vehicles incorporate a warning chime
which activates (in addition to the parking brake telltale) when the
parking brake is applied and the vehicle is driven over 4 miles-per-
hour.
7. The operators of these vehicles are typically professional
drivers, requiring additional licensing and are familiar with the
operation of these types of over-cam, driveshaft-mounted parking
brakes.
Ford is also unaware of any field reports, accidents or injuries
attributed to this condition.
Ford additionally indicated that changes were made in production on
May 1, 2012, and that they had taken multiple steps to help ensure that
the parking brake telltale ``check of lamp function'' issue that
resulted in the non-compliance does not occur in the future, including
Ford validation of the design with no planned cluster/parking brake
revisions until new model updates.
In summation, Ford believes that the described noncompliance of the
subject vehicles is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety, and that
its petition, to exempt from providing recall notification of
noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118 and remedying the recall
noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120 should be granted.
VI. NHTSA Decision
NHTSA has reviewed Fords analyses that the subject noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Specifically, the parking
brake telltale is not activated as a check of lamp function either when
the ignition (start) switch is turned to the ``on'' (run) position when
the engine is not running, or when the ignition (start) switch is in a
position between ``on'' (run) and ``start'' as required by Paragraph
S5.3.2(a) of FMVSS No. 105.
If the parking brake telltale lamp bulb fails, the vehicle operator
would not be alerted by illumination of the parking brake telltale that
the vehicle's parking brake is applied. However, as the vehicle in this
condition is driven, a number of indicators would provide feedback to
the vehicle operator that the parking brake is applied. First, the
vehicle drivability would be affected with poor acceleration and
``drag.'' A warning chime for the 2011-2012 model year vehicles would
be activated when the vehicle is driven over 4 miles per hour. Lastly,
the physical position of the parking brake handle located on the
tunnel, would provide a visual indication that the parking brake is
applied. The parking brake has an over-cam locking design that assures
that the brake is not partially applied. The combination of the
aforementioned operator feedback indicators is sufficient that in the
event of a non-operative parking brake telltale light, an operator
would have sufficient warning and information to take corrective
action. In addition, the parking brake is mounted on the drive shaft
and, therefore, separate from the service brake system. Thus, in the
unlikely event that the vehicle was driven with an applied parking
brake the service brake system would not be
[[Page 21838]]
compromised thereby reducing the severity of the noncompliance.
We also note that this telltale is specific only to the application
of the parking brake, and is not a combined indicator for multiple
brake malfunctions. As a separate indicator, the severity of the
noncompliance is further reduced as it indicates only one versus
multiple brake system malfunctions.
Furthermore, each application of the parking brake activates the
dedicated parking brake indicator telltale. This effectively functions
as a secondary de-facto bulb check. Drivers that routinely use the
parking brake in the subject vehicles will become accustomed to seeing
a telltale with the word ``Park'' activated when setting the parking
brake and are consequently likely to recognize a malfunction if this
expected telltale does not illuminate.
The affected vehicles, the F-650 and F-750 trucks, are medium duty
work trucks typically operated by professional drivers that are
experienced with and knowledgeable of their work equipment including
the operation of the over-cam, driveshaft-mounted parking brake
systems. It is highly likely that even without a visual indicator,
these individuals will readily determine when the parking brake is set
simply by the altered feel of vehicle drivability.
In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Ford has
met its burden of persuasion that the FMVSS No. 105 noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Ford's petition
is hereby granted and Ford is exempted from the obligation of providing
notification of, and a 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 sections 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 noncompliant vehicles that Ford 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 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.
Jeff Giuseppe,
Acting Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2014-08713 Filed 4-16-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P