|
|---|
|
Daimler Coaches North America, LLC, Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance Publication: Federal Register Agency: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Byline: Otto G. Matheke III Date: 26 March 2024 Subject: American Government  , Buses, Safety
Topics: Setra S407, Setra S417 |
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 59 (Tuesday, March 26, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21168-21170]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-06281]
[[Page 21168]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2020-0084; Notice 2]
Daimler Coaches 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: Daimler Coaches North America, LLC, (DCNA), a subsidiary of
Daimler AG, has determined that certain model year (MY) 2012-2019 Setra
S407 and MY 2009-2020 Setra S417 buses do not fully comply with Federal
Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 101, Controls and Displays.
DCNA filed a noncompliance report dated July 15, 2020, and amended it
on July 16, 2020, and March 24, 2021. DCNA subsequently petitioned
NHTSA (the ``Agency'') on August 4, 2020, later amended it on October
1, 2020, and provided supplemental information on February 5, 2021,
March 5, 2021, and March 25, 2021, for a decision that the subject
noncompliances are inconsequential as they relate to motor vehicle
safety. This notice announces receipt of DCNA's petition and
supplemental information.
DATES: Send comments on or before April 25, 2024.
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 the 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 Delivery: Deliver comments by hand to the 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 for Federal holidays.
Electronically: Submit comments electronically by logging
onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) website at https://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 https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided.
All comments and supporting materials 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 fullest 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 comments, background documentation, and supporting materials
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
https://www.regulations.gov by following the online instructions for
accessing the docket. The docket ID number for this petition is shown
in the heading of this notice.
DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement is available for review in a
Federal Register notice published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Frederick Smith, General Engineer,
NHTSA, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, (202) 366-7487.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Overview: DCNA has determined that certain MY 2012-2019 Setra
S407 and MY 2009-2020 Setra S417 buses do not fully comply with the
requirements of paragraphs S.5.3.1, S5.3.2, and Table 1 of FMVSS No.
101, Controls and Displays (49 CFR 571.101). DCNA filed a noncompliance
report dated July 16, 2020, and amended it on March 24, 2021, pursuant
to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and
Reports. DCNA subsequently petitioned NHTSA on August 4, 2020, later
amended it on October 1, 2020,\1\ and submitted supplemental
information on February 5, 2021, March 5, 2021, and March 25, 2021, for
an exemption from the notification and remedy, requirements of 49
U.S.C. chapter 301 on the basis that this noncompliances are
inconsequential as they relate to motor vehicle safety, pursuant to 49
U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and 49 CFR part 556, Exemption for
Inconsequential Defect or Noncompliance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ DCNA's amended petition is dated August 4, 2020, but was
submitted on October 1, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NHTSA previously published notice of receipt of DCNA's petition on
November 9, 2020, (85 FR 71392). DCNA provided supplemental information
to NHTSA on February 5, 2021, March 5, 2021, and March 25, 2021, that
broadened the scope of DCNA's petition. Therefore, NHTSA invites
interested persons to comment on DCNA's petition and supplemental
information. This notice of receipt of DCNA'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. Buses Involved: Approximately 538 MY 2012-2019 Setra S407 and
MY 2009-2020 Setra S417 motorcoach buses manufactured between May 19,
2009, and January 30, 2019, are potentially involved.
III. Noncompliance: DCNA explains that the noncompliance is that
the windshield defogging/defrosting indicators, the hazard warning
signal indicators, and the HVAC indicators in the subject buses do not
meet the timing and brightness of illumination requirements provided in
paragraphs S5.3.1 and S5.3.2 of FMVSS No. 101. Specifically, the
brightness of the windshield defogging/defrosting and HVAC indicators
cannot be adjusted, and the hazard warning signal indicator does not
illuminate.
IV. Rule Requirements: Paragraphs S5.3.1 and S5.3.2 of FMVSS No.
101 include the requirements relevant to this petition. Means must be
provided for controlling the timing of illuminating indicators, the
brightness of illuminating indicators, identification of indicators,
and the identification of controls listed in Table 1 to make them
visible to the driver under daylight and nighttime driving conditions.
The means of providing the visibility required by paragraph S5.3.2.
must be adjustable to provide at least two levels of brightness.
V. Summary of DCNA's Petition: The following views and arguments
presented in this section, ``V. Summary of DCNA's Petition,'' are the
views and arguments provided by DCNA. They have not been evaluated by
the Agency and do not reflect the views of the Agency. DCNA describes
the subject
[[Page 21169]]
noncompliances and contends that the noncompliances are inconsequential
as they relate to motor vehicle safety.
In support of its petition, which is available in full on the
docket, DCNA explains its understanding of FMVSS No. 101 and states its
belief that the subject noncompliances do not increase risk to motor
vehicle safety. DCNA says that FMVSS No. 101, ``is premised on ensuring
the various controls, telltales, and indicators can easily be
recognized in order to facilitate the driver's selection under day and
nighttime conditions, to prevent the mistaken selection of controls and
to reduce potential safety hazards when the driver's attention is
diverted from the driving task.'' DCNA further explains that FMVSS No.
101 sets requirements for the location (S5.1), identification (S5.2),
and illumination (S5.3) of various controls and displays, and Table 1
of the standard provides the illumination and color requirements for
those controls, telltales, and indicators. Specifically, DCNA explains
that S5.3.1(b) requires that the controls listed in Table 1 of FMVSS
No. 101, including those for the hazard and windshield defrost/defog
control, are required to be illuminated when the headlamps are
activated, and the brightness of the control must be adjustable to at
least two levels.
DCNA believes that ``the lack of illumination on the hazard warning
lamp symbol included on the control and inability to adjust the
brightness of the defrost/defog control'' does not present an increased
risk to motor vehicle safety. DCNA states that the affected controls
are fully operable. DCNA describes the operation and design of the
hazard warning lamp control for the subject buses and provides its
assessment of the risk to motor vehicle safety. DCNA explains that the
``hazard warning lamp is controlled by a large red plastic toggle
switch that is 19 mm across by 40 mm high'' and to activate the control
the driver would press the bottom half of the switch downward with one
finger until there is a clicking noise. DCNA states that operation of
the hazard warning lamp ``is confirmed because the hazard lamp itself
will flash on and off and both the right and left turn signal
indicators in the instrument cluster will flash on and off and in
unison with the hazard warning lamps on the exterior of the vehicle.''
Therefore, DCNA claims that a driver of the subject buses would still
be able to confirm that the hazard warning lamp is operating as
intended.
DCNA further states that a driver of the affected buses would be
able to identify and locate the hazard warning lamp switch even under
nighttime conditions because the switch is located to the immediate
right of the driver, is at eye level, and is the only switch in that
area that is red, rather than black or grey. Thus, DCNA believes that
the hazard warning lamp switch is conspicuous and ``readily apparent
under all operating conditions.''
DCNA describes the operation and design of the windshield defrost/
defog control for the subject buses and states that the windshield
defrost/defog symbol is located adjacent to the turn-style control knob
DCNA also states that it activates the windshield defrost/defog
function and that both the symbol and control knob are automatically
illuminated when the subject bus's headlamps are activated but cannot
be dimmed, which is required by S5.3.2.1 of FMVSS No. 101. DCNA claims
that each of the functions surrounding the windshield defrost/defog
symbol, many of which are not regulated by FMVSS No. 101, Table 1, are
illuminated. DCNA explains that there is a master switch that allows
the driver to adjust the brightness of the area surrounding them and
dimming can be controlled ``within the meter assembly menu for the
dashboard lights and is adjustable to more than two different levels of
brightness.'' Furthermore, DCNA states that the controls at issue are
located within a group of controls that is ``responsible for the
heating, cooling, and temperature operations of the driver's
compartment of the vehicle.'' Therefore, DCNA contends that a driver of
the subject bus would be familiar with the location of the defrost/
defog control because it is located within a cluster of controls that
operate similar functions. Thus, DCNA believes that ``there is little
to no risk that the driver's vision would otherwise be impaired if the
display was too bright or too dim.''
DCNA notes that a driver of the subject bus would be professionally
trained and would therefore be likely to have experience operating the
bus and be ``knowledgeable about the location and function of all of
the controls and devices within the vehicle.'' DCNA says that the area
forward of the driver's seat in the subject buses' interior cabin is
``sufficiently lit by roadway lighting, other illuminated controls,
telltales, and the light emitted from the display of the instrument
cluster.'' According to DCNA, when operating the subject buses with the
headlamps turned on, the dashboard lamps will also be illuminated which
will illuminate the hazard warning lamp as well as other controls and
indicators.
DCNA states that NHTSA has granted prior petitions for
inconsequential noncompliance ``where certain controls, telltales, and
indicators listed in Table 1 were not visible to the driver under all
day and night driving conditions.'' Specifically, DCNA refers to a
petition in which ``an electrical condition which could cause the
headlamp upper beam indicator telltale to extinguish for various
periods of time and under certain conditions.'' In this case, DCNA says
that NHTSA determined that the upper beam telltale would only need to
be illuminated during nighttime driving conditions, when a
comparatively small portion of driving occurs at night, the time of
headlamp activation.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See General Motors Corp.; Grant of Petition for
Determination of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 56 FR 33323 (July
19, 1991).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DCNA reiterates that the subject buses are mostly used
commercially, therefore, the drivers are trained and ``should be
familiar with the layout, placement, and operation of the hazard
warning lamp and defog/defrost controls.'' DCNA states that NHTSA has
also granted prior petitions where the potential safety consequence of
a noncompliance with FMVSS No. 101 would be diminished because it is
expected that the driver would monitor the condition of the vehicle
closely ``to ensure the systems are properly operating.'' Additionally,
DCNA says that there are several petitions where NHTSA found that the
potential risk to motor vehicle safety was diminished when the vehicle
is operated by a trained driver because professional drivers will
become familiar with the meaning of the telltales and other warnings
and understand them.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Mack Trucks, Inc., and Volvo Trucks North America, Grant
of Petitions for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 84 FR
67766 (December 11, 2019); Autocar Industries, LLC, and Hino Motors
Sales U.S.A., Inc., Grant of Petitions for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance, 84 FR 11162 (March 25, 2019); Daimler
Trucks North America, LLC, Grant of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance, 82 FR 33551 (July 20, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DCNA concludes by stating its belief that the subject
noncompliances are inconsequential as they relate to motor vehicle
safety, and that its petition to be exempted from providing
notification of the noncompliances, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118, and
a remedy for the noncompliances, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120, should
be granted.
On February 5, 2021, March 5, 2021, and March 25, 2021, DCNA
submitted supplemental information. In the supplemental submission
dated February 5, 2021, DCNA clarifies that the reference to dimming
through the meter assembly menu means that within the instrument
cluster that is directly in front of the driver, there is a master
[[Page 21170]]
switch that operates the dimming function for the controls that
surround the driver.
On March 5, 2021, DCNA provided photos \4\ depicting the
noncompliance under various conditions. Further, in the same
supplemental submission, DCNA noted that, under further testing, the
illumination of the HVAC controls did not cause any driver glare and
did not appear brighter than any of the adjacent markings of the HVAC
controls and indicators were still sufficiently recognizable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ These photos are available on the FDMS website.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March 25, 2021, DCNA submitted that in addition to the issues
originally noted in its petitions, the controls for the vehicle's HVAC
system that are covered by FMVSS No. 101, Table 1 can be illuminated
but are not dimmable as required by S5.3.2. Specifically, the heating
and air-conditioning system and heating and air-conditioning fan are
affected. DCNA states that despite the condition that these two
controls cannot be dimmed on the vehicles at issue, this does not
create an increased safety risk. These two controls are located in the
same area as all the other vehicle HVAC controls and their location
would be readily known to the experienced professional drivers that
operate the motor coaches at issue here. Additionally, the master
switch used for adjusting the brightness of the area surrounding the
driver is fully operable and adjustable to more than two different
levels of brightness. Consequently, DCNA believes that there is little
to no risk of illumination of controls for the heating and air-
conditioning system and heating and air-conditioning fan could be
overly bright and impair the vision of the driver.
DCNA's complete petition and all supporting documents are available
by logging onto the FDMS website at: https://www.regulations.gov and
following the online search instructions to locate the docket number
listed in the title of this notice.
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 buses that DCNA no longer
controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliances 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 buses under their control after DCNA
notified them that the subject noncompliances existed.
(Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at 49
CFR 1.95 and 501.8)
Otto G. Matheke III,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2024-06281 Filed 3-25-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P