Mack Trucks, Inc., and Volvo Trucks North America, Grant of Petitions for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance |
|---|
Topics: Mack, Volvo
|
Otto G. Matheke III
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
11 December 2019
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 238 (Wednesday, December 11, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67766-67768]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-26685]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2019-0029; NHTSA-2019-0030; Notice 2]
Mack Trucks, Inc., and Volvo Trucks North America, Grant of
Petitions for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Grant of petitions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Mack Trucks Inc., (Mack) and Volvo Trucks North America
(Volvo) have determined that certain model year (MY) 2014-2019 Mack
Trucks and certain MY 2014-2019 Volvo Trucks do not comply with Federal
Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 101, Controls and Displays. Both
Mack and Volvo filed noncompliance reports dated August 16, 2018, and
later amended them on August 23, 2018, and June 2, 2019. Both Mack and
Volvo subsequently petitioned NHTSA on October 9, 2018, and later
amended their respective petitions on May 29, 2019, for a decision that
the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor
vehicle safety. This notice announces grant of both Mack and Volvo's
petitions.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Finneran, Office of Vehicle
Safety Compliance, NHTSA, telephone (202) 366-5289, facsimile (202)
366-3081.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Overview
Mack and Volvo have determined that certain MY 2014-2019 Mack
Trucks and that certain MY 2014-2019 Volvo Trucks do not comply with
Table 2 of FMVSS 101, Controls and Displays (49 CFR 571.101). Both Mack
and Volvo filed noncompliance reports dated August 16, 2018, and later
amended
[[Page 67767]]
them on August 23, 2018, and June 2, 2019, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573,
Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. Both Mack and
Volvo subsequently petitioned NHTSA on October 9, 2018, and later
amended their petitions on May 29, 2019, for an exemption from the
notification and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the
basis that this noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates 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.
Notice of receipt of Mack's and Volvo's petitions was published
with a 30-day public comment period on August 21, 2019, in the Federal
Register (84 FR 43663). No comments were received.
II. Vehicles Involved
Approximately 95,000 MY 2014-2019 Mack Anthem, Granite, LR,
Pinnacle, TerraPro, and Titan Trucks, manufactured between September 1,
2013, and August 13, 2018, are potentially involved.
Approximately 130,000 MY 2014-2019 Volvo VAH, VHD, VNL, VNM, VNR
VNX, and VT Trucks, manufactured between September 1, 2013, and August
13, 2018, are potentially involved.
III. Noncompliance
Mack and Volvo explained that the noncompliance is that the Low
Brake Air Pressure telltale for air brake systems does not display the
words ``Brake Air,'' as specified in Table 2 of FMVSS No. 101. The
subject Mack vehicles include various combinations of low air
telltales, pressure gauges, and available alerts, and the subject Volvo
vehicles include both visual and audible warnings that are not an exact
match to the ``Brake Air'' telltale requirement.
IV. Rule Requirements
Paragraphs S5 and S5.2.1 of FMVSS No. 101 include the requirements
relevant to these petitions. Each passenger car, multipurpose passenger
vehicle, truck and bus that is fitted with a control, a telltale, or an
indicator listed in Table 1 or Table 2 must meet the requirements of
FMVSS No. 101 for the location, identification, color, and illumination
of that control, telltale or indicator.
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.
V. Summary of Petition
Mack and Volvo both described the subject noncompliance and stated
its belief that the noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to
motor vehicle safety.
Mack and Volvo submitted the following views and arguments in
support of the petitions:
1. Both Mack and Volvo provide a visual and audible alarm along
with air pressure gauges and feel that their vehicles, even though non-
compliant, meet the intent of the regulation to provide a clear and
visible warning to the driver when the air pressure in the service
reservoir system is below 60 psi.
2. For Mack Granite, Pinnacle, and Titan model vehicles that are
2018 and earlier, the display includes two gauges and a red low air
pressure indicator lamp for each gauge. When a low air pressure
situation occurs, the driver is warned through the gauge, a red
indicator lamp in each gauge, and an audible warning.
3. For Mack LR model vehicles, two pressure gauges, a low air
telltale, a popup in the display, and an audible alarm are provided.
4. For Mack TerraPro model vehicles, pressure gauges, a low air
telltale, and an audible alarm are provided.
5. In 2019 and later Anthem, Pinnacle, and Granite model vehicles,
pressure gauges, a low air pressure pop-up (System Air Pressure is
Low), and an audible alarm are provided.
6. For Volvo, 2014-2019 models, the display includes two gauges and
a red low air pressure indicator lamp for each gauge. When a low air
pressure situation occurs, the driver is warned through the gauge, a
red indicator lamp in each gauge, and an audible warning. On all models
and model years, a pop-up (Low System Air Pressure) is provided in
addition to the gauges, a low-pressure indicator, and an audible alarm.
Both Mack and Volvo concluded by expressing the belief that the
subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle
safety, and that their petitions to be exempted from providing
notification of the noncompliance, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118, and
a remedy for the noncompliance, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120, should
be granted.
VI. NHTSA's Consideration
Any manufacturer that determines a noncompliance to exist and
intends to petition the agency, pursuant to 49 CFR part 556.4(c), must
submit their petition no later than 30 days after such determination.
Both Mack and Volvo submitted their petitions 25 days past the 30-day
requirement. However, due to the nature of the noncompliance and
considering that the agency has previously granted similar
inconsequential noncompliance petitions, in this case, the agency has
decided to accept both Mack and Volvo's petitions.
VII. NHTSA's Analysis
NHTSA has considered the arguments presented by Mack and Volvo and
has determined that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety. NHTSA believes that the subject noncompliance
poses no risk to motor vehicle safety for the reasons discussed below:
1. When a low air pressure situation exists, each vehicle has a low
system air pressure indicator illuminated in red with a black
background. There are no requirements in FMVSS No. 101 for the color of
the telltale but the petitioner's use of red, which is an accepted
color representing an urgent condition, provides a definitive
indication of a situation that needs attention.
2. Simultaneous to the illumination of the low system air pressure
indicators is activation of an audible alert, further notifying the
operator that a malfunction exists, requiring corrective action.
Although the alert would not, in and of itself, identify the problem, a
driver would be prompted by the warning tone to heed the other
indicators.
3. In a low-pressure situation, the operator is provided additional
feedback by the primary and secondary instrument cluster air gauges
which are marked with numerical values in PSI units with red shading
denoting the low-pressure range.
4. The Agency believes that the functionality of the parking brake
system and the braking performance of the service brake system remain
unaffected by the use of multiple different indicators and audible
alerts instead of the words ``Brake Air'' on the subject vehicles.
5. Lastly, NHTSA believes that, as the affected trucks are
predominately used as commercial vehicles with professional drivers,
operators will monitor their vehicle's condition and take note of any
warning signs and gauge readings to ensure proper functionality of all
systems. Also, professional drivers will become familiar with the
meaning of the telltales and other warnings and the feedback provided
to the driver in these vehicles, if a low brake pressure condition
exists, would be well understood.
[[Page 67768]]
NHTSA concludes that simultaneous activation of the red low air
pressure indicators, an audible alert for a low air pressure condition,
along with the primary and secondary air gauge indicators, provide
adequate notification to the operator that a brake malfunction exists.
VIII. NHTSA's Decision
In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA finds that Mack and Volvo
have met their burden of persuasion that the FMVSS No. 101
noncompliance is, in each case, inconsequential as it relates to motor
vehicle safety. Accordingly, Mack and Volvo's petitions are hereby
granted, and they are exempted from the obligation to provide
notification of and remedy for, the subject noncompliance in the
affected vehicles 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 vehicle that Mack and Volvo 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 Mack
and Volvo 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)
Otto G. Matheke III,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2019-26685 Filed 12-10-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P