General Motors LLC, Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance |
|---|
Topics: Chevrolet Silverado, GMC Sierra
|
Jeffrey M. Giuseppe
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
9 February 2016
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 26 (Tuesday, February 9, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6928-6930]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-02415]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2013-0134; Notice 2]
General Motors LLC, Grant of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Grant of petition.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: General Motors LLC, (GM) has determined that certain model
year 2014
[[Page 6929]]
Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra trucks manufactured between January
29, 2013, and October 28, 2013, do not fully comply with paragraph
S5.3.1(e) of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 101,
Controls and Displays, and paragraph S3.1.4.1 of FMVSS No. 102,
Transmission Shift Position Sequence, Starter Interlock, and
Transmission Braking Effect. GM filed a report dated October 31, 2013,
pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility
and Reports. GM then petitioned NHTSA in accordance with 49 CFR part
556 requesting a decision that the subject noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
ADDRESSES: For further information on this decision contact Amina
Fisher, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone (202) 366-5307,
facsimile (202) 366-5930.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. GM's Petition: Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and
the rule implementing those provisions at 49 CFR part 556, GM 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.
Notice of receipt of the petition was published, with a 30-day
public comment period, on February 24, 2014, in the Federal Register
(79 FR 10226). Four individuals and the Advocates for Highway and Auto
Safety (Advocates) provided comments to the receipt notice. To view the
petition, the comments, 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-2013-0134.''
II. Vehicles Involved: Affected are approximately 200,921 model
year 2014 Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra trucks manufactured
between January 29, 2013, and October 28, 2013.
III. Noncompliance: GM explains that the noncompliance is that
under certain circumstances when an owner uses the steering wheel
controls to browse and select songs to play from an external device
(i.e., MP3 player) that is plugged into one of the vehicle's USB ports,
the instrument cluster may reset. When the instrument cluster resets
the analog gauges and identifications, the PRNDM [shift position]
indicator, and the cruise control telltale, if illuminated, will
briefly extinguish. In addition, some of the instrument cluster
telltales may also illuminate briefly during a bulb check without the
condition the telltale is designed to indicate being present.
IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S5.3.1 of FMVSS No. 101 states
specifically:
S5.3.1 Timing of illumination
. . .
(e) A telltale must not emit light except when identifying the
malfunction or vehicle condition it is designed to indicate, or
during a bulb check.
Paragraph S3.1.4. of FMVSS No. 102 states specifically:
S3.1.4 Identification of shift positions and of shift position
sequence.
S3.1.4.1 Except as specified in S3.1.4.3, if the transmission
shift position sequence includes a park position, identification of
shift positions, including the positions in relation to each other
and the position selected, shall be displayed in view of the driver
whenever any of the following conditions exist:
(a) The ignition is in a position where the transmission can be
shifted; or
(b) The transmission is not in park. . . .
V. Summary of GM's Analyses: GM states that the subject
noncompliance is unlikely to occur in that all of the following
conditions have to exist: The driver must operate a media device
inserted into one of the vehicle's USB ports in a very specific way;
the redundant steering wheel controls must be used to select a song;
the driver must then search for a particular song by depressing the
left arrow on the right spoke of the steering wheel, then select
``audio'' using the steering wheel controls, then select ``browse''
using the steering wheel controls, then scroll to a particular song
using the steering wheel control, then select a song to play. If the
driver selects ``browse'' using the steering wheel controls to select a
second song, the subject condition may occur, but only if the total
information in titles of the buffered songs exceeds 2000 bytes.
GM believes that the condition is short-lived as disruption of the
PRNDM is said to persist for one and one half seconds, and the telltale
bulb check is said to persist for approximately five seconds. GM cited
a 1979 interpretation to Ford in which NHTSA acknowledged that a short-
lived inability to view telltales does not necessarily warrant
manufacturers correcting the condition.\1\ NHTSA is quoted as stating,
``This means that the tell-tales and their identification need not be
visible to the driver when the tell-tales are struck by direct
sunlight. Since conditions such as these are typically short-lived, the
NHTSA does not believe that the length of time the driver may be unable
to view the tell-tales is significant enough to warrant requiring the
manufacturer to prevent their occurrence.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ A copy of this letter is attached to GM's petition and is
available in the docket at www.regulations.gov, Docket No. NHTSA-
2013-0134-0001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
GM states that the noncompliance that is the subject of the
petition has little effect on the normal operation of the vehicle. GM
states that when the operation of the instrument panel is briefly
affected by the noncompliance, none of the other vehicle operations are
affected; any underlying messages remain in place and will continue to
be displayed after the instrument panel resets; other operations, like
cruise control, are unaffected by the noncompliance (only the displays
on the instrument panel are briefly affected by the condition); and if
the noncompliance were to occur, it is unlikely the brief disruption of
the PRNDM will affect the driver.
Lastly, GM states that NHTSA has previously granted petitions for a
determination of inconsequential noncompliance, finding no risk to
motor vehicle safety, where the sequence of events causing the
noncompliant condition is exceptionally rare. GM states that these
granted petitions allow specific telltales to extinguish for a limited
period of time while the vehicle is being operated.
In summation, GM believes that the described noncompliance of the
subject vehicles is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety, and that
its petition, to be exempt from providing recall notification of the
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's Decision
NHTSA'S Analysis: NHTSA has reviewed GM's justification for an
inconsequential noncompliance determination and agrees that the
specific noncompliance addressed is inconsequential to motor vehicle
safety.
GM states its belief that the subject condition is unlikely to
occur due to the series of events that must take place before the
instrument cluster resets. GM explains that the driver must operate a
USB media device by using the steering wheel controls to search for a
song, select ``audio'', select ``browse'', and select another song to
play while the total information in titles of the buffered songs
exceeds 2000 bytes for the condition to occur.
GM states that the condition is short-lived with the disruption of
the PRNDM illumination lasting approximately one and one half seconds
and the telltale
[[Page 6930]]
bulb check lasting approximately five seconds. According to GM, the
condition will have little effect on the normal operation of the
vehicle as no underlying systems are affected by the failure.
After receipt of GM's petition, NHTSA requested more information
regarding the subject noncompliance. GM submitted videos showing that
when the condition occurs any existing warning lights extinguish, the
indicators (gauges) drop to zero, and operation of the entire
instrument panel is interrupted. Specifically, any illuminated
telltales extinguish for approximately one and one half seconds before
a bulb check that lasts approximately five seconds is initiated. At the
conclusion of the bulb check, any previously illuminated telltales will
illuminate and remain illuminated.
NHTSA agrees with GM that if the instrument panel reset were to
happen it would only be a momentary condition, the instrument panel
telltales and indicators would extinguish and return to normal very
quickly, with little, if any, impact to the driver.
GM mentioned two previous petitions that the agency granted due to
the loss or failure of telltale indications. In the first petition,
General Motors Corp.; Grant of Petition for Determination of
Inconsequential Noncompliance, 56 FR 33323 (July 19, 1991), the
noncompliance would only manifest itself when the headlight high beams
were turned on and the cigar lighter was activated. In this situation
the required high beam telltale could dim or extinguish altogether for
a short period of time while the cigar lighter was being powered. The
petition was granted because the agency determined there was no
consequence to motor vehicle safety attached to the extinguishment of
the high beam telltale.
In the second petition, submitted by Nissan, Nissan North America,
Incorporated, Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential
Noncompliance, 78 FR 59090, (Sept. 25, 2013), under rare circumstances
the transmission gear selected was not always displayed correctly as
required. The petition was granted because it was only possible for the
gear indication to extinguish when the engine was inactive and the
vehicle was inoperable. Upon reactivating the engine the gear indicator
displayed the correct gear.
Five commenters (four individuals and the Advocates for Highway and
Auto Safety) provided comments about GM's petition when NHTSA issued
the notice of receipt in the Federal Register.
One individual stated that ``there is no such potential product
recall as `inconsequential' '' and that ``all product recalls must be
effectively enforced against the vehicle manufacturer.'' We note that
the Motor Vehicle Safety Act requires the Secretary of Transportation
to provide the vehicle manufacturers an opportunity to submit
information, views, and arguments showing that a noncompliance does not
impact motor vehicle safety. NHTSA is then required to consider
information and arguments submitted and make a determination whether
the noncompliance is, or is not, inconsequential to motor vehicle
safety. If NHTSA determines that the subject noncompliance has no
consequence to motor vehicle safety, the manufacturer is exempted from
notification and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.
The second individual commenter believes that GM should conduct a
recall because the touch screen is not covered by the vehicle's
warranty. The agency feels that this comment is not relevant because
the steering wheel controls (rather than the touch screen on the center
console) are the controls that must be used for the subject
noncompliance to occur.
The two remaining individuals that provided comments believe that
anything causing a distraction to the occupants of a motor vehicle
under operation should be recalled. One of the commenters expressed
that using a USB music device would be distracting and the other
believes that the cluster becoming inoperable, even for a second, is
enough time to distract the driver and cause an accident.
After reviewing the video provided by GM, the agency believes that
a reset of the instrument panel would be corrected quickly within
seconds, before the driver would be distracted, or realize what was
happening.
The Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety does not specifically
support the granting or denial of GM's petition, but believes that the
existence of such a malfunction raises serious questions regarding
vehicle design which can lead to this kind of situation.
Finally, GM stated that a Service Update Bulletin was issued to
update the software of all IP clusters whenever any service to the
affected vehicles is done at the dealership. The agency understands
that GM's action to update the IP cluster software on these vehicles as
they are brought in for regular service should reduce considerably the
number of affected vehicles.
NHTSA'S Decision: In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has
decided that GM has met its burden of persuasion that the FMVSS No. 101
and FMVSS No. 102 noncompliance in the affected vehicles is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, GM's petition is
hereby granted and GM is not obligated to provide notification of, and
a free 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 GM 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 GM
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 M. Giuseppe,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2016-02415 Filed 2-8-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P