BMW of North America, LLC, Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance |
|---|
Topics: BMW R nineT
|
Jeffrey Giuseppe
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
June 4, 2015
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 107 (Thursday, June 4, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31966-31967]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-13600]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2015-0031; Notice 1]
BMW of North America, LLC, Receipt of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Receipt of petition.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: BMW of North America, LLC (BMW), a subsidiary of BMW AG in
Munich, Germany, has determined that certain model year (MY) 2014-2015
BMW R nineT motorcycles do not fully comply with paragraph S6.4.3(a)
(Table V-b) of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108,
Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated Equipment. BMW has filed an
appropriate report dated February 20, 2015, pursuant to 49 CFR part
573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports.
DATES: The closing date for comments on the petition is July 6, 2015.
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 at the beginning of this notice and
submitted by any of the following methods:
Mail: Send comments by mail addressed to: 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 Deliver: Deliver comments by hand to: 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
Federal Holidays.
Electronically: Submit comments electronically by: Logging
onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Web site at http://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
[[Page 31967]]
provided. If you wish to receive confirmation that your comments were
received, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard with the
comments. Note that all comments received will be posted without change
to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided.
Documents submitted to a docket may be viewed by anyone at the
address and times given above. The documents may also be viewed on the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by following the online
instructions for accessing the dockets. DOT's complete Privacy Act
Statement is available for review in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000, (65 FR 19477-78).
The petition, supporting materials, and all comments received
before the close of business on the closing date indicated below will
be filed and will be considered. All comments and supporting materials
received after the closing date will also be filed and will be
considered to the extent possible. When the petition is granted or
denied, notice of the decision will be published in the Federal
Register pursuant to the authority indicated below.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. BMW's Petition: Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) (see
implementing rule at 49 CFR part 556), BMW submitted a petition 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.
This notice of receipt of BMW's petition is published under 49
U.S.C. 30118 and 30120 and does not represent any agency decision or
other exercise of judgment concerning the merits of the petition.
II. Motorcycles Involved: Affected are approximately 1,792 MY 2014-
2015 BMW R nineT motorcycles manufactured between November 27, 2013 and
January 26, 2015.
III. Noncompliance: BMW explains that the noncompliance is that the
rear turn signal lamps were manufactured with a corner point of
5[ordm]IB. The turn signal lamps should have had a corner point of
20[ordm]IB as required by paragraph S6.4.3(a)(Table V-b) of FMVSS No.
108.
IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S6.4.3(a) of FMVSS No. 108 requires in
pertinent part:
S6.4.3 Visibility Options. A manufacturer must certify
compliance of each lamp function to one of the following visibility
requirement options, and it may not thereafter choose a different
option for that vehicle . . .
(a) Lens area options. When a vehicle is equipped with any lamp
listed in Table V-b each such lamp must provide not less than 1250
sq mm of unobstructed effective projected luminous lens area in any
direction throughout the pattern defined by the corner points
specified in Table V-b for each such lamp;
V. Summary of BMW's Analyses: BMW stated its belief that the
subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety for
the following reasons:
(A) BMW states that when the subject motorcycles are upright on a
level surface and equipped with standard tires at their recommended
cold tire inflation pressure; the lower edge of the rear turn signal
lenses are approximately 747 mm above ground, the lower edge of the
tail lamp lens is approximately 710 mm above ground and the tail lamp
lens extend upward. BMW believes that due to these geometric conditions
there is some overlap in the vertical direction between the rear turn
signal lenses and the tail lamp lens however, they are not aligned
along the same longitudinal centerline [of the turn signals].
Specifically, the tail lamp is on the motorcycle's longitudinal
centerline while the rear turn signals are on stalks offset from the
centerline. As a result, BMW believes that this has a very minor affect
upon the effective projected luminous lens area.
(B) BMW stated its belief that the obstruction from the tail lamp
only occurs if another road user in a following vehicle has an eye-
point of approximately 747 mm above ground (extremely low for an
average vehicle) and is a worst-case-scenario. For other road users
with a higher eye-point, there is no apparent obstruction and the turn
signal would appear to meet the requirements of FMVSS No. 108.
(C) BMW also stated its belief that the effect of the
noncompliance, i.e., the overlap or interference of the turn signal
lamp by the tail lamp does not occur during critical traffic
conditions. A road user, who is following an affected motorcycle, and
in the same lane as an affected motorcycle, will be able to fully view
an affected motorcycle's rear turn signal at a distance of
approximately 1,935 mm (approximately 6 ft). BMW believes that in most
traffic conditions, a road user would not want to be closer to a
motorcycle than 6 ft. Thus, this ``non-visible'' rear turn signal
condition is not likely to occur during the vast majority of traffic
conditions. BMW provided detailed analysis of specific travel
conditions including following directly behind an affected motorcycle
and overtaking/passing an affected motorcycle that it believes supports
its conclusion that the condition caused by the subject noncompliance
will not interfere with the safety of the motorcycle rider or another
road user.
(D) BMW Customer Relations has not received any contacts from
motorcycle riders, or other road users regarding this issue. Also, BMW
is not aware of any accidents or injuries that have occurred as a
result of this issue.
BMW has additionally informed NHTSA that it has corrected the
noncompliance so that all future production of the subject vehicles
will fully comply with FMVSS No. 108.
In summation, BMW believes that the described noncompliance of the
subject motorcycles is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety, and
that its petition, to exempt BMW 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.
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 motorcycles that BMW no
longer controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance
existed. However, any decision on this petition does not relieve
equipment distributors and dealers of the prohibitions on the sale,
offer for sale, or introduction or delivery for introduction into
interstate commerce of the noncompliant motorcycles under their control
after BMW 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)
Jeffrey Giuseppe,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2015-13600 Filed 6-3-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P