Home Page American Government Reference Desk Shopping Special Collections About Us Contribute



Escort, Inc.





GM Icons
By accessing/using The Crittenden Automotive Library/CarsAndRacingStuff.com, you signify your agreement with the Terms of Use on our Legal Information page. Our Privacy Policy is also available there.

Chrysler Group, LLC, Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance


American Government Topics:  Jeep Cherokee, Dodge Dart

Chrysler Group, LLC, Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance

Jeffrey M. Giuseppe
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
June 30, 2014 

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 125 (Monday, June 30, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36868-36869]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-15211]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2014-0046; Notice 1]


Chrysler Group, 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: Chrysler Group, LLC, (Chrysler), a wholly owned subsidiary of 
Fiat S.p.A., has determined that certain model year (MY) 2014 Jeep 
Cherokee multipurpose passenger vehicles (MPV), and MY 2013-2014 Dodge 
Dart passenger cars (PC) do not fully comply with paragraph S5.2.1 of 
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 101, Controls and 
Displays and paragraph S5.5.5 of FMVSS No. 135,\1\ Light Vehicle Brake 
Systems. Chrysler has filed an appropriate report dated March 4, 2014 
pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility 
and Reports.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Subsequent to receiving Chrysler's petition, NHTSA was 
notified by the petitioner that it had inadvertently referred to 
FMVSS No. 105, a standard that does not apply to the subject 
vehicles, in its petition.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: The closing date for comments on the petition is July 30, 2014.

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 be 
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 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. Chrysler's Petition: Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) 
(see implementing rule at 49 CFR part 556), Chrysler 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 Chrysler'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 411 MY 2014 Jeep 
Cherokee MPV manufactured between June 17, 2013 and January 14, 2014 
and 22 MY 2013-2014 Dodge Dart PC manufactured between July 1, 2012 and 
December 13, 2013.
    III. Noncompliance: Chrysler explains that the noncompliance is 
that the telltale used for Brake Warning and Park Brake Warning is 
displayed using International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 
symbols instead of the telltale symbol required by S5.2.1 of FMVSS No. 
101 and paragraph S5.5.5 of FMVSS No. 135.

[[Page 36869]]

    IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S5.2.1 of FMVSS No. 101 requires in 
pertinent part:

    S5.2.1 Except for the Low Tire Pressure Telltale, each control, 
telltale and indicator that is listed in column 1 of Table 1 or 
Table 2 must be identified by the symbol specified for it in column 
2 or the word or abbreviation specified for it in column 3 of Table 
1 or Table 2. If a symbol is used, each symbol provided pursuant to 
this paragraph must be substantially similar in form to the symbol 
as it appears in Table 1 or Table 2. If a symbol is used, each 
symbol provided pursuant to this paragraph must have the 
proportional dimensional characteristics of the symbol as it appears 
in Table 1 or Table 2.

    Paragraph S5.5.5 of FMVSS No. 135 requires in pertinent part:

    S5.5.5. Labeling. (a) Each visual indicator shall display a word 
or words in accordance with the requirements of Standard No. 101 (49 
CFR 571.101) and this section, which shall be legible to the driver 
under all daytime and nighttime conditions when activated. Unless 
otherwise specified, the words shall have letters not less than 3.2 
mm (\1/8\ inch) high and the letters and background shall be of 
contrasting colors, one of which is red. Words or symbols in 
addition to those required by Standard No. 101 and this section may 
be provided for purposes of clarity.
    (b) Vehicles manufactured with a split service brake system may 
use a common brake warning indicator to indicate two or more of the 
functions described in S5.5.1(a) through S5.5.1(g). If a common 
indicator is used, it shall display the word ``Brake.'' . . .

    V. Summary of Chrysler's Analyses: Chrysler stated its belief that 
the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety 
for the following reasons:
    1. Chrysler notes that the purpose of the brake telltale is to warn 
the operator about either one of two conditions: (1) The parking brake 
is applied or is malfunctioning; or (2) the service brakes may be 
malfunctioning. The affected vehicles ``brake display telltale'' 
illuminates in red as required and, except for the missing identifier 
word ``Brake,'' the vehicles comply with all other applicable FMVSS 
requirements. When the telltale is not illuminated, there is no 
degradation of brake performance. All braking system functionality, 
including service brakes and the parking brake is unaffected by this 
noncompliance and the subject vehicles will operate as intended. Even 
though the word ``Brake'' is not used, Chrysler's stated its belief 
that in the event one of the affected vehicles displayed the red-color 
ISO brake telltale, the driver would recognize a possible brake system 
malfunction.
    2. Chrysler states that the telltale functions as both the 
vehicle's brake system symbol and the parking brake symbol. In the 
Dart, the parking brake is engaged by pulling up on the parking brake 
handle in view of the instrument cluster where the brake telltale is 
illuminated. In the Cherokee, the parking brake is electronic where a 5 
second ``Parking Brake Engaged'' message is displayed in the Electronic 
Vehicle Information Center (EVIC) and the brake telltale is illuminated 
in the instrument cluster. The brake telltale also illuminates during 
the cluster warning lamp function check. Due to the ISO telltale 
illumination during parking brake engagement and during lamp function 
checks, an operator is conditioned to associate the telltale with the 
braking system and would be alerted in the event of a possible brake 
system malfunction. In the unlikely event the ISO brake telltale is 
illuminated and the operator does not understand its meaning, the ISO 
brake telltale graphic is shown and described in the Owner's Manual for 
both vehicles. Thus, an operator could easily determine that the ISO 
telltale relates to the brake system.
    3. Chrysler also believes that in the subject vehicles, in the 
event the brake fluid level is less than the recommended level, the 
brake telltale is illuminated and the EVIC will display a five second 
``Brake Fluid Low'' message that continues until the condition is 
corrected. This additional visual input to the operator helps 
facilitate the association of the telltale with the braking system.
    4. Chrysler has stated its belief that NHTSA has previously granted 
a similar inconsequential noncompliance petition regarding the use of 
ISO symbols.
    5. Chrysler is not aware of any warranty claims, field reports, 
consumer complaints, legal claims or any incidents or injuries related 
to the subject noncompliance.
    Chrysler has additionally informed NHTSA that it has corrected the 
noncompliance so that all future production vehicles will comply with 
FMVSS No. 101 and FMVSS No. 135.
    In summation, Chrysler believes that the described noncompliance of 
the subject vehicles is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety, and 
that its petition, to exempt Chrysler 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 vehicles that Chrysler no 
longer controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance 
existed. However, any decision on this petition does not relieve 
Chrysler distributors and dealers of the prohibitions on the sale, 
offer for sale, or introduction or delivery for introduction into 
interstate commerce of the noncompliant motor vehicles under their 
control after Chrysler 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,
Acting Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2014-15211 Filed 6-27-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P




The Crittenden Automotive Library