Decision That Nonconforming Model Year 2010 European Market Ferrari California Passenger Cars Are Eligible for Importation |
|---|
Topics: Ferrari F149 California
|
Jeffrey Giuseppe
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
May 4, 2015
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 85 (Monday, May 4, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25356-25358]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-10264]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2013-0107, Notice 2]
Decision That Nonconforming Model Year 2010 European Market
Ferrari California Passenger Cars Are Eligible for Importation
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Grant of petition.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document announces a decision by the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration that certain Model Year (MY) 2010 Ferrari
California passenger cars (PCs) that were not originally manufactured
to comply with all applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards
(FMVSS) are eligible for importation into the United States because
they are substantially similar to vehicles originally manufactured for
importation into and sale in the United States that were certified by
their manufacturer as complying with the safety standards (the U.S.
certified version of the MY 2010 Ferrari California PC), and they are
capable of being readily altered to conform to the standards.
DATES: This decision became effective on April 28, 2015.
ADDRESSES: For further information contact George Stevens, Office of
Vehicle Safety Compliance, NHTSA (202-366-5308).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Under 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A), a motor vehicle that was not
originally manufactured to conform to all applicable FMVSS shall be
refused admission into the United States unless NHTSA has decided that
the motor vehicle is substantially similar to a motor vehicle
originally manufactured for importation into and sale in the United
States, certified as required under 49 U.S.C. 30115, and of the same
model year as the model of the motor vehicle to be compared, and is
capable of being readily altered to conform to all applicable FMVSS.
Petitions for eligibility decisions may be submitted by either
manufacturers or importers who have registered with NHTSA pursuant to
49 CFR part 592. As specified in 49 CFR 593.7, NHTSA publishes notice
in the Federal Register of each petition that it receives, and affords
interested persons an opportunity to comment on the petition. At the
close of the comment period, NHTSA decides, on the basis of the
petition and any comments that it has received, whether the vehicle is
eligible for importation. The agency then publishes this decision in
the Federal Register.
J.K. Technologies, LLC, of Baltimore, Maryland (``JK'') (Registered
Importer #RI-90-006), petitioned NHTSA to decide whether certain MY
2010 Ferrari California PCs are eligible for importation into the
United States. NHTSA published a notice of the petition on March 21,
2014 (79 FR 15800) to afford an opportunity for public comment. The
reader is referred to that notice for a thorough description of the
petition.
Comments
On April 21, 2014, NHTSA received comments from Ferrari North
America (FNA), the vehicle's original manufacturer. In its comments,
Ferrari stated that while it agreed that the U.S. and the non-U.S.
versions of the vehicle are ``substantially similar'' within the
meaning of section 30141(a)(1)(A)(i), it strongly disputed JK's
assertions that the non-U.S. version could be readily altered to comply
with all applicable FMVSS. FNA elaborated by presenting detailed
reasons for its assertions with respect to specific FMVSS.
On May 21, 2014, NHTSA forwarded FNA's comments to JK and asked
that it respond by June, 4, 2014. By letter dated June 10, 2014, JK
requested a 45 day extension in order to gather engineering data to
adequately address the concerns raised by FNA. NHTSA approved JK's
request for this extension and JK responded on August 15, 2014.
A summary of FNA's comments, JK's responses, and the conclusions
that NHTSA has reached with regard to the issues raised by the parties
is set forth below.
Review of Comments and Conclusions
NHTSA has reviewed the petition, FNA's comments and JK's responses
to those comments, and has concluded that the vehicles covered by the
petition are capable of being readily altered to comply with all
applicable FMVSS. However, NHTSA has also decided that an RI who
imports or modifies one of these vehicles must include in the statement
of conformity and associated documents (referred to as a ``conformity
package'') it submits to NHTSA under 49 CFR 592.6(d) specific proof to
confirm that the vehicle was manufactured to conform to, or was
successfully altered to conform to, each of the following standards:
[[Page 25357]]
FMVSS No. 101, Controls and displays; FNA commented that the
Electronic Control Unit (``ECU'') for the instrument cluster would have
to be reflashed with a ``Proxy'' file from the Ferrari factory to
ensure that all of the other ECUs on the Control Area Network (``CAN'')
are aware of the new ECU and are communicating properly. FNA
additionally commented that the necessary reprogramming to achieve
conformity to the standard can only be completed with proprietary
hardware and software which is not available to RI's and can only be
obtained from Ferrari and/or FNA.
JK responded that they have the necessary equipment and can obtain
the files from a donor vehicle.
NHTSA has decided that a description of how the programming changes
were completed and how compliance with the standard was verified must
be included in each conformity package. Photographs, printouts, and/or
images of the installation computer's monitor (``screenshots''), as
practicable, must also be submitted as proof that the reprogramming was
carried out successfully.
FMVSS No. 108, Lamps, reflective devices, and associated equipment;
FNA commented that the reprogramming identified by JK would necessitate
reflashing [the control system] with a ``Proxy'' file from the Ferrari
Factory in order to assure that all aspects of the lighting system
perform in accordance with this standard.
JK responded that they have the necessary equipment and can obtain
the files from a donor vehicle.
NHTSA has decided that a description of how the programming changes
were accomplished and how compliance with FMVSS No. 108 is verified
must accompany each conformity package. Photographs, printouts, and/or
screenshots, as practicable, must also be submitted as proof that the
reprogramming was carried out successfully.
FMVSS No. 111, Rearview mirrors; FNA commented that in addition to
the modifications noted in the petition, the driver's outside rearview
mirror would need to be replaced.
JK responded that no comment is necessary.
NHTSA has decided that proof, including photographs, must be
submitted with each conformity package to show that the vehicle is
equipped with a driver's side rear view mirror that allows the vehicle
to meet the applicable requirements of FMVSS No. 111.
FMVSS No. 114 Theft protection and rollaway prevention; As was the
case with FMVSS Nos. 101 and 108, FNA contended that reprogramming
could only be completed with proprietary hardware and software which is
not available to RI's and can only be obtained from Ferrari and/or FNA.
JK responded that they have the necessary equipment and can obtain
the files from a donor vehicle.
NHTSA has decided that a description of how the programming changes
were completed and how compliance was verified must accompany each
conformity package. Additionally, photographs, printouts, and/or
screenshots, as practicable, must be submitted as proof that the
reprogramming was carried out successfully.
FMVSS No. 118, Power-Operated window, Partition, and Roof Panel
Systems; FNA commented that the reprogramming identified by JK is not
necessary for the vehicles to conform to the standard.
NHTSA has decided that a description of how the vehicle's
conformity was determined must accompany each conformity package.
Descriptions of any modifications necessary to achieve conformity must
accompany each conformity package.
FMVSS No. 138, Tire pressure monitoring systems; In its petition JK
claims that the subject non-U.S. certified vehicles conform to FMVSS
No. 138 as originally manufactured. FNA commented that tire pressure
monitoring systems (TPMS) are not standard equipment on all European
Ferrari California vehicles and that substantial work would be required
to bring vehicles into compliance with the standard. FNA further
asserted that because of the extent and complexity of the required
changes, vehicles not originally equipped with TPMS cannot be ``readily
altered'' to comply with the standard.
JK responded that most non-U.S. certified MY 2010 Ferrari
California PCs are equipped with TPMS, but that due to varying
regulations around the world, some vehicles may be missing the system.
JK further stated that all vehicles entering the U.S. would have to be
inspected for compliance, both with regard to the material components
of the system and to the programming of the system. JK also states that
the vehicle they inspected had a system identical to that found in the
U.S.-certified vehicle.
NHTSA has decided that a description of how any applicable
modifications and/or programming changes were completed and how
compliance was verified must accompany each conformity package.
Additionally, photographs, printouts, and/or screenshots, as
practicable, must be submitted as proof that the reprogramming and/or
modifications were carried out successfully.
FMVSS No. 208, Occupant Protection; FNA commented that JK did not
identify all components that need to be replaced in order to bring the
airbag system into compliance. FNA specifically notes that the European
versions of the subject of vehicles are not equipped with a ``PASS AIR
BAG OFF'' telltale, which is required for compliance. Additionally, FNA
stated that JK did not identify certain portions of the instrument
panel that differ from those on the U.S.-certified version of the
vehicle and that would have to be changed to assure compliance with the
unbelted crash requirements of the standard.
JK responded that all vehicles processed under this petition must
be inspected for compliance with all requirements of FMVSS No. 208. JK
commented that the modifications for this standard concern the airbags,
seats, seatbelts, wiring harnesses, air bag light, passenger air bag
off light, instrument cluster, child seat tethers, and other hardware.
JK also responded that the entire system would need to be programmed
with the U.S. advanced air bag programs and that they will run all
system checks with their ``in house'' weighted dummies in order to
confirm compliance.
NHTSA has decided that each conformity package must include a
detailed description of the occupant protection system in place on the
vehicle at the time it was delivered to the RI, and a similarly
detailed description of the occupant protection system in place after
the vehicle is altered, including photographs of all required labeling.
The description must also include; assembly diagrams and associated
part numbers for all components that were removed from and installed on
the vehicle, a description of how the programming changes were
completed, and a description of how compliance was verified.
Additionally, photographs (e.g., screenshots) or report printouts, as
practicable, must be submitted as proof that the reprogramming was
carried out successfully. Proof must also be furnished that all
portions of the instrument panel in the vehicle, as altered, are
identical to the U.S. version instrument panel, or proof in the form of
dynamic test results that, as altered, the vehicle conforms to the
unbelted occupant requirements of FMVSS No. 208.
[[Page 25358]]
FMVSS No. 209, Seat belt assemblies; FNA commented that as pointed
out by JK in their petition, some European market vehicles are equipped
with four-point seat belt assemblies that do not comply with this
standard. FNA contends that the belts could not simply be replaced by a
registered importer, due to the absence of an anchorage on the B-
pillar.
JK responded that all vehicles processed under this petition would
need to be inspected for compliance and that all parts of the system
are available.
NHTSA has decided that each conformity package must include
photographic evidence that conforming safety belts have been installed
in the vehicle. Safety belt anchorages are addressed in the following
FMVSS No. 210 discussion.
FMVSS No. 210, Seat belt assembly anchorages; In its petition JK
claims that the subject non-U.S. certified vehicles conform to FMVSS
No. 210 as originally manufactured. FNA commented that European-market
vehicles that were equipped with optional four point harnesses lack b-
pillar anchorages which are necessary for the installation of compliant
three point harnesses. FNA expresses concern about the ability of an RI
to install this anchorage and ensure that it meets the performance
requirements of the standard without Ferrari's templates and tools,
which are only used during production.
JK responded that any vehicle found to be equipped with the
optional belts and lacking the mentioned anchorage would have to be
modified to meet this standard. JK further states that they will draw a
template from the U.S. donor vehicle and that as a result all parts and
engineering of the anchorage would then be identical to the Ferrari
mounting point. JK asserts that less than one percent of production is
equipped with the optional belts.
NHTSA has decided that conformity packages for vehicles that
require modification must include a detailed description of the
alterations made to achieve conformity with the standard. The
description must include sufficient information to validate how the
alterations allowed the vehicle to meet the requirements of the
standard. This information must include photographic evidence that the
modification was carried out, as well as testing and/or engineering
analysis reports documenting how the RI has verified that the
alterations will allow the vehicle to meet all applicable requirements
of the standard.
FMVSS No. 301 Fuel system integrity; FNA stated that the
modifications to the fuel system that JK identified in its petition,
while necessary to comply with emissions requirements, have no bearing
on compliance with FMVSS No. 301.
JK responded that the rollover valves incorporated in the U.S.
market system are an integral part of the fuel system integrity of the
vehicle and necessary for compliance.
NHTSA has decided that the fuel system modifications are necessary
to bring vehicles into compliance with the standard. Additionally,
NHTSA has decided that each conformity package must include a detailed
description of all modifications made to achieve conformity with the
standard. This description must include part numbers for each part
replaced and be supported with photographic evidence of the
modifications made to achieve conformity.
FMVSS No. 401 Interior trunk release; FNA expressed agreement that
the modifications noted in the petition are necessary to conform the
vehicle. The company noted, however, that the reprogramming could only
be completed with proprietary hardware and software which is not
available to RI's and can only be obtained from Ferrari and/or FNA.
JK responded that it has the necessary programs from its U.S. model
vehicle.
NHTSA has decided that each conformity package must include a
description of how the programming changes were completed and how
compliance was verified. Additionally, photographs, printouts, and/or
screenshots, as practicable, must be submitted as proof that the
reprogramming was carried out.
49 CFR part 581, Bumper Standard; FNA commented that in addition to
the modifications noted by JK in its petition, additional bumper
reinforcements would have to be installed in both the front and the
rear of the vehicle.
JK responded that no comment was necessary.
NHTSA has decided that each conformity package must include a
detailed description of all modifications made to achieve conformity
with the standard, including necessary modifications to the bumper
reinforcements. This description must include part numbers for each
part replaced and be supported with photographic evidence of the
modifications made to achieve conformity.
In addition to the information specified above, each conformity
package must include evidence showing how the RI verified that the
changes it made in loading or reprograming vehicle software to achieve
conformity with each separate FMVSS, did not also cause the vehicle to
fall out of compliance with any other applicable FMVSS.
Decision
Accordingly, on the basis of the foregoing, NHTSA hereby decides
that model year 2010 European model Ferrari California passenger cars
that were not originally manufactured to comply with all applicable
FMVSS, are substantially similar to model year 2010 Ferrari California
passenger cars manufactured for importation into and/or sale in the
United States, and certified under 49 U.S.C. 30115, and are capable of
being readily altered to conform to all applicable Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety Standards.
Vehicle Eligibility Number for Subject Vehicles
The importer of a vehicle admissible under any final decision must
indicate on the form HS-7 accompanying entry the appropriate vehicle
eligibility number indicating that the vehicle is eligible for entry.
VSP-570 is the vehicle eligibility number assigned to vehicles
admissible under this notice of final decision.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at
49 CFR 1.95 and 501.8.
Jeffrey Giuseppe,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2015-10264 Filed 5-1-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P