Tesla Motors, Inc. (Tesla), Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance |
|---|
Topics: Tesla Roadster
|
Jeffrey M. Giuseppe
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
11 February 2016
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 28 (Thursday, February 11, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7407-7408]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-02722]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2014-0096; Notice 2]
Tesla Motors, Inc. (Tesla), Grant of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Grant of petition.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Tesla Motors, Inc. (Tesla) has determined that certain model
year (MY) 2008 Tesla Roadster passenger cars do not fully comply with
paragraph S4.4(c)(2), of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS)
No. 138, Tire Pressure Monitoring Systems. Tesla filed a report dated
August 1, 2014, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance
Responsibility and Reports. Tesla then petitioned NHTSA under 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 Kerrin
Bressant, Office of Vehicles Safety Compliance, the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone (202) 366-1110,
facsimile (202) 366-3081.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Overview
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and the rule
implementing those provisions at 49 CFR part 556, Tesla 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.
Notice of receipt of the petition was published, with a 30-day
public comment period, on June 24, 2015, in the Federal Register (80 FR
36403). 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-2014-0096.''
II. Vehicles Involved
Affected are approximately 542 MY 2008 Roadster model passenger
cars manufactured from February 1, 2008 through October 29, 2009.
III. Noncompliance
Tesla explains that if a fault is detected in a sensor, because the
sensor is faulty, missing or unapproved, the Tire Pressure Monitoring
System (TPMS) malfunction telltale will flash for 60 to 90 seconds and
then remain continuously illuminated as required by FMVSS No. 138.
However, the TPMS malfunction telltale fails to operate properly when a
faulty, missing or unapproved sensor is detected and then the vehicle's
ignition is cycled off and back on. In this situation, the malfunction
telltale in the subject vehicles does not re-illuminate immediately as
required when the vehicle's ignition system is re-activated. Instead,
the affected vehicles must reach a speed between 20 miles per hour
(mph) and 25 mph for a maximum period of at least 90 seconds before the
TPMS malfunction telltale re-illuminates.
IV. Rule Text
Paragraph S4.4(c)(2) of FMVSS No. 138 requires in pertinent part:
S4.4 TPMS Malfunction.
* * * * *
(c) Combination low tire pressure/TPMS malfunction telltale. The
vehicle meets the requirements of S4.4(a) when equipped with a
combined Low Tire Pressure/TPMS malfunction telltale that:
(2) Flashes for a period of at least 60 seconds but no longer
than 90 seconds upon detection of any condition specified in S4.4(a)
after the ignition locking system is activated to the ``On''
(``Run'') position. After each period of prescribed flashing, the
telltale must remain continuously illuminated as long as a
malfunction exists and the ignition locking system is in the ``On''
(``Run'') position. This flashing and illumination sequence must be
repeated each time the ignition locking system is placed in the
``On'' (``Run'') position until the situation causing the
malfunction has been corrected. . . .
V. Summary of Tesla's Analyses
Tesla stated its belief that the subject noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety for the following reasons:
(A) Tesla stated that although the TPMS malfunction indicator
will not illuminate immediately after the vehicle is restarted, it
generally will illuminate shortly thereafter and in any event it
will illuminate in no more than 90 seconds after the vehicle
accelerates between 20-25 mph. Tesla further explained that
additional warnings via the ``fault'' display in the dashboard and
the auxiliary display warnings will appear anew. Clearing this
``new'' warning in the auxiliary screen will require the driver to
``actively'' (take positive action) to clear the screen. Tesla
believes these additional steps required to clear the auxiliary
screen warning ensures driver attention to the issue.
(B) Tesla states that they provide warnings and alerts above and
beyond what is required by regulations. Checks include wheel sensor
fitment (compatibility) and tire pressures. If sensors are ``new''
(i.e., different from those verified at the previous ignition
cycle), the sensors are ``learned'' and after calibrations
performed, a check of all tires is again performed for any low
pressure conditions. In addition, the subject vehicles are equipped
with an ``auxiliary'' screen which displays a diagram of the vehicle
with respective tire positions and status of those respective tires.
Tesla explained that this type of detailed information and multiple
alerts ensures the driver is well informed of a potential low tire
pressure condition.
(C) Tesla said that the noncompliance is confined to one
particular aspect of the functionality of the otherwise compliant
TPMS malfunction indicator. All other aspects of the low-pressure
monitoring system functionality are fully compliant with the
requirements of FMVSS No. 138.
(D) Tesla stated that it is not aware of any customer
complaints, field communications, incidents or injuries related to
the failure of the TPMS noncompliance.
In summation, Tesla believes that the described noncompliance of
the subject vehicles is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety, and
that its petition, to
[[Page 7408]]
exempt Tesla from providing recall notification of noncompliance as
required by 49 U.S.C. 30118 and remedying the noncompliance as required
by 49 U.S.C. 30120 should be granted.
NHTSA's Decision
NHTSA's Analysis: Tesla explained that although the malfunction
indicator does not re-illuminate immediately after the vehicle is
restarted, it will illuminate shortly thereafter--within 90 seconds
after the vehicle reaches a speed between 20 mph and 25 mph.
NHTSA recognizes that the malfunction indicator will not illuminate
as required for very short periods of time--when the vehicle is
traveling at low speeds and thus poses little risk to vehicle safety.
Under normal driving conditions, a driver will begin a trip by
accelerating moderately beyond 20-25 mph, and as explained by Tesla,
once the vehicle accelerates above 20-25 mph, the malfunction indicator
re-illuminates and then it will remain illuminated for the entire
ignition cycle, regardless of vehicle speed. We understand the
noncompliance will only occur in the very rare case where the driver
begins a trip and never exceeds the 20-25 mph threshold, the speed
required to re-activate the malfunction indicator. No real safety risk
exists because at such low speeds there is little risk of vehicle loss
of control due to underinflated tires. Furthermore, the possibility
that the vehicle will experience both a low inflation pressure
condition and a malfunction simultaneously is highly unlikely.
Tesla states that they provide warnings and alerts above and beyond
what is required by regulations and that the subject vehicles are
equipped with an ``auxiliary'' screen which displays a diagram of the
vehicle with respective tire positions and status of those respective
tires. Tesla explained that this type of detailed information and
multiple alerts ensures the driver is well informed of a potential low
tire pressure condition.
The agency evaluated the displays Tesla uses in the noncompliant
vehicles. In addition to the combination telltale indicator lamp, the
subject vehicles are equipped with a ``plan view'' icon which displays
the pressures for all four wheels individually. If any wheel has a
malfunctioning pressure sensor the indicator for that wheel displays
several dashes indicating that there is a problem with that respective
wheel. The additional information is not required by the safety
standard but can be used as an aid to the driver to determine the
status of a vehicle's tires.
Tesla discussed that the noncompliance only involves one specific
aspect of the malfunction functionality and that the primary function
of the TPMS, identification of other malfunctions and of low inflation
pressure scenarios, is not affected. Tesla explained that in the
subject vehicles, the TPMS only fails to operate properly when a
faulty, missing or non-approved sensor is detected and the ignition is
recycled. According to Tesla, if such a fault is detected, and then the
ignition is cycled off and back on, the MIL will reset, thus requiring
the system to re-detect the fault or missing/unapproved sensor versus
immediately re-illuminating the MIL from the previously detected fault.
The agency agrees with Tesla's reasoning that the primary function
of the TPMS is to identify low tire inflation pressure conditions which
Tesla's system does as required by the safety standard. There are a
variety of other malfunctions that can occur in addition to the
incompatible wheel/tire malfunction identified in this petition. We
understand from Tesla that its TPMS will perform as required during all
other type system malfunctions.
Tesla mentioned that they have not received or are aware of any
consumer complaints, field communications, incidences or injuries
related to this noncompliance. In addition to the analysis done by
Tesla that looked at customer complaints, field communications,
incidents or injuries related to this condition, NHTSA conducted
additional checks of NHTSA's Office of Defects Investigations consumer
complaint database and found no related complaints.
NHTSA's Decision: In consideration of the foregoing analysis, NHTSA
has decided that Tesla has met its burden of demonstrating that the
FMVSS No. 138 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
Accordingly, Tesla's petition is hereby granted and Tesla is exempted
from the obligation of providing notification of, and a remedy for,
that the subject 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 nonconforming vehicles that Tesla no longer
controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance existed.
However, the granting of this decision 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 Tesla
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. 2016-02722 Filed 2-10-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P