BMW of North America, LLC, Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance |
|---|
Topics: BMW 7-Series
|
Jeffrey M. Giuseppe
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
4 March 2016
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 43 (Friday, March 4, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11645-11647]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-04862]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2016-0025; 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), has determined that certain
model year (MY) 2016 BMW 7 Series passenger cars do not fully comply
with paragraph S7.7.13.3 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard
(FMVSS) No. 108, Lamps, reflective devices and associated equipment.
BMW filed a report dated January 21, 2016, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573,
Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. BMW then
petitioned NHTSA under 49 CFR part 556 requesting a decision that the
subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
DATES: The closing date for comments on the petition is April 4, 2016.
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 in the title 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
[[Page 11646]]
(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 provided. If you wish
to receive confirmation that comments you have submitted by mail 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.
The petition, supporting materials, and all comments received
before the close of business on the closing date indicated above will
be filed in the docket 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
also be published in the Federal Register pursuant to the authority
indicated at the end of this notice.
All documents submitted to the 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. The docket ID number for this
petition is shown at the heading of this notice.
DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement is available for review in the
Federal Register published on April 11, 2000, (65 FR 19477-78).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Overview: 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. Vehicles Involved: Affected are approximately 5,076 MY 2016 BMW
7 Series passenger cars that were manufactured between August 03, 2015
and November 20, 2015.
III. Noncompliance: BMW states that the rear license plate lamp may
not fully conform to paragraph S7.7.13.3 of FMVSS No. 108 because it
exceeds the illumination ratio specified in that paragraph.
IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S7.7.13.3 of FMVSS No. 108 requires, in
pertinent part:
S7.7.13.3 The ratio of the average of the two highest
illumination values divided by the average of the two lowest
illumination values must not exceed 20:1 for vehicles other than
motorcycles and motor driven cycles.
V. Summary of BMW's Petition: BMW described the subject
noncompliance and stated its belief that the noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety for the following reasons:
The out-of-specification lamps satisfy all other
requirements of FMVSS No. 108.
The out-of-specification lamps only deviate from paragraph
7.7.13.3 of FMVSs No. 108 with regard to the lamp's illumination ratio
and not the lamp's actual illumination.
Personnel who participated in a company assessment
reported no difference in their visual perception of the simulated
license plates that were used as test specimens.
BMW has not received any customer complaints related to
the issue.
BMW is not aware of any accidents or injuries related to
this issue.
NHTSA has previously granted petitions in which the
illumination of test points remains well above the requirements.
Vehicle production has been corrected.
In support of its petition, BMW submitted the following information
pertaining to laboratory testing and analysis of the subject
noncompliance:
(1) FMVSS No. 108 Lamp Certification: BMW submitted a test report
dated April 7, 2015 pertaining to lamps manufactured by U-SHIN Italia
S.p.A. (U-SHIN) prior to vehicle production. According to BMW, this
report indicates that the lamp satisfies FMVSS No. 108 requirements, as
the ratio of the average of the two highest illumination values divided
by the average of the two lowest illumination values is 14.1, and FMVSS
No. 108 requires that the value be less than 20.
(2) Evaluation by Measurement Equipment: Both BMW and U-SHIN
performed a number of tests of both in-specification and out-of-
specification lamps to assess the performance of the subject lamps to
the pertinent requirement of FMVSS No. 108. BMW submitted one
representative test report for each test condition. The results are as
follows:
--U-SHIN out-of-specification lamp tests: These showed an illumination
ratio of 22.0. BMW noted, however, that each of the eight (8) test
points satisfies the applicable FMVSS No. 108 photometric
(illumination) requirements.
--BMW out-of-specification lamp tests: BMW performed its own out-of-
specification tests to verify U-SHIN's test results and to obtain
results for the lamps when equipped within a vehicle. These showed an
illumination ratio of 22.2. BMW noted, however, that each of the eight
(8) test points satisfies the applicable FMVSS No. 108 photometric
(illumination) requirements.
--U-SHIN in-specification lamp tests: These showed an illumination
ratio of 13.8. As with the previously described tests, BMW noted,
however, that each of the eight (8) test points satisfies the
applicable FMVSS No. 108 photometric (illumination) requirements.
--BMW in-specification tests: BMW performed their own in-specification
tests to verify U-SHIN's test results and to obtain results for the
lamps when equipped within a vehicle. These showed an illumination
ratio of 13.9. BMW again noted, however, that each of the eight (8)
test points satisfies the applicable FMVSS No. 108 applicable
photometric (illumination) requirements.
(3) Evaluation by human assessment: In addition to the laboratory
testing performed by both BMW and U-SHIN using specific lamp
measurement equipment, BMW also compared the out-of-specification lamps
to the in-specification lamps via human assessment. BMW performed this
assessment to determine whether or not the condition caused by the non-
compliance was perceptible to other road users (i.e., drivers
approaching an affected vehicle) and, if so, its effect on safety.
BMW submitted photographs that depict the illumination of a test
specimen simulating a rear license plate by both in-specification and
out-of-specification lamps. According to BMW, while there may be a
slightly perceptible difference in the photographs depicting the test
specimen illuminated by in-specification and out-of-specification
lamps, this is due to tolerances of the camera equipment related to
exposure time and shutter speed. BMW stated that the personnel
[[Page 11647]]
who participated in this assessment reported no difference in their
visual perception of the test specimens.
Additionally, BMW noted that even for the out-of-specification
lamp, all of the eight (8) test points satisfy the applicable FMVSS No.
108 photometric (illumination) requirements. BMW emphasized that the
noncompliance pertains to the illumination ratio, not to the actual
lamp illumination. As a consequence, BMW asserts that while the
noncompliance condition can be measured in a laboratory, it cannot be
detected by the human eye, and therefore drivers of approaching
vehicles will be afforded the same level of visibility as if
approaching a non-affected vehicle. According to BMW, these analyses
support the conclusion that the condition caused by the noncompliance
does not affect the safety of affected vehicle occupants or other road
users such as drivers approaching affected vehicles.
(4) Field Experience: BMW states that its Customer Relations
division has not received any contacts from vehicle owners regarding
the matter at issue. As a consequence, BMW believes that, consistent
with the results of the laboratory tests and human assessments
described above, the condition is undetectable to road users such as
drivers approaching affected vehicles. BMW further notes that it is not
aware of any accidents or injuries that have occurred as a result of
the condition.
(5) Prior NHTSA Rulings: BMW states that NHTSA has previously
granted petitions from other manufacturers involving various issues
pertaining to FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance. BMW believes that in some of
those petitions, the photometry (illumination) of the test points
remains well above the FMVSS No. 108 requirements as the noncompliance
has no affect upon the illumination of the test points.
(6) Vehicle Production: BMW stated that subsequent vehicle
production has been corrected to conform to paragraph 7.7.13.3 of FMVSS
No. 108.
In summation, BMW expressed the belief that the subject
noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety, and that its
petition, to exempt BMW from providing notification of the
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 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 vehicles that BMW no longer
controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance existed.
However, any decision on 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 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 M. Giuseppe,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2016-04862 Filed 3-3-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P