80_FR_68816 80 FR 68602 - BMW of North America, Inc., Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance

80 FR 68602 - BMW of North America, Inc., Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 214 (November 5, 2015)

Page Range68602-68603
FR Document2015-28130

BMW of North America, Inc. (BMW) has determined that certain model year (MY) 2015 MINI Cooper, Cooper S hardtop 2 door, and Cooper S hardtop 4 door passenger cars do not fully comply with paragraph S4.2.3(a) of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 226, Ejection Mitigation. BMW has filed an appropriate report dated May 20, 2015, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports.

Federal Register, Volume 80 Issue 214 (Thursday, November 5, 2015) 
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 214 (Thursday, November 5, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68602-68603]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2015-28130]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2015-0053; Notice 2]


BMW of North America, Inc., Grant of Petition for Decision of 
Inconsequential Noncompliance

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Grant of Petition.

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

SUMMARY: BMW of North America, Inc. (BMW) has determined that certain 
model year (MY) 2015 MINI Cooper, Cooper S hardtop 2 door, and Cooper S 
hardtop 4 door passenger cars do not fully comply with paragraph 
S4.2.3(a) of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 226, 
Ejection Mitigation. BMW has filed an appropriate report dated May 20, 
2015, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance 
Responsibility and Reports.

ADDRESSES: For further information on this decision contact Karen 
Nuschler, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the National Highway 
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone (202) 366-5829, 
facsimile (202) 366-3081.

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.
    Notice of receipt of the petition was published, with a 30-day 
public comment period, on September 1, 2015 in the Federal Register (80 
FR 52845). 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-2015-0053.''
    II. Vehicles Involved: Affected are approximately 4,208 MY 2015 
MINI Cooper, Cooper S hardtop 2 door, and Cooper S hardtop 4 door 
passenger cars manufactured from February 25, 2015 to April 24, 2015.
    III. Noncompliance: BMW explains that written information 
describing the ejection mitigation countermeasure installed in the 
vehicles was not provided to the vehicle consumers as required by 
paragraph S4.2.3(a) of FMVSS No. 226.
    IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S4.2.3 of FMVSS No. 226 requires in 
pertinent part:

    S4.2.3 Written information.
    (a) Vehicles with an ejection mitigation countermeasure that 
deploys in the event of a rollover must be described as such in the 
vehicle's owner manual or in other written information provided by 
the vehicle manufacturer to the consumer. . . .

    V. Summary of BMW's Arguments: BMW stated its belief that the 
subject noncompliance in the affected vehicles is inconsequential to 
motor vehicle safety. A summary of its reasoning is provided as 
follows. Detailed explanations of its reasoning are included in its 
petition:
    1. The vehicles are equipped with a countermeasure that meets the 
performance requirements of FMVSS No. 226.
    2. The owner's manuals contain a description of the ejection 
mitigation countermeasure in the context of side impact.
    3. The owner's manuals contain precautions related to the [ejection 
mitigation] system even though not required by FMVSS No. 226.
    4. The [ejection mitigation] system uses the FMVSS No. 208 required 
readiness indicator, as allowed by FMVSS No. 226.
    5. BMW has not received any customer complaints due to this issue.
    6. BMW is not aware of any accidents or injuries due to this issue.
    7. NHTSA may have granted similar manufacturer petitions re owner's 
manuals.
    8. BMW has corrected the noncompliance so that all future 
production vehicles will comply with FMVSS No. 226.
    In summation, BMW believes that the described noncompliance of the 
subject vehicles is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety, and that 
its petition, to exempt BMW 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's Decision

    NHTSA's Analysis: NHTSA believes that while written information was 
not provided to vehicle owners describing the installed head air bags 
(side curtain) as vehicle occupant ejection mitigation countermeasures 
that deploy in the event of a rollover, the owner's manuals for the 
affected vehicles otherwise effectively describe, and illustrate the 
location of, the head air bags. NHTSA also believes that the status of 
the head air bags is monitored by the vehicle's air bag readiness 
indicator intended to show operational readiness of the entire airbag 
system. Therefore, drivers should be alerted to a malfunction of the 
head air bags that are intended to provide ejection countermeasures in 
the event of a rollover event, and occupant protection in the event of 
a significant side impact event.
    BMW has also reported that they have not received any complaints 
from vehicle owners regarding the subject noncompliance and that 
vehicle production was corrected so that the noncompliance did not 
occur in subsequent vehicles. NHTSA's Decision: In consideration of the 
foregoing, NHTSA has decided that BMW has met its burden of persuasion 
that the subject FMVSS No. 226 noncompliance in the affected vehicles 
is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, BMW's petition 
is hereby granted and BMW is exempted from the obligation of providing 
notification of, and a remedy for, that 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 vehicles that BMW 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 BMW notified them 
that the subject noncompliance existed.


[[Page 68603]]


(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. 2015-28130 Filed 11-4-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P

68602 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 214 / Thursday, November 5, 2015 / Notices Rotorcraft Occupant Protection Working at: http://www.regulations.gov/. Then remedying the recall noncompliance as Group are not open to the public, except follow the online search instructions to required by 49 U.S.C. 30120 should be to the extent individuals with an locate docket number ‘‘NHTSA–2015– granted. interest and expertise are selected to 0053.’’ participate. The FAA will make no II. Vehicles Involved: Affected are NHTSA’s Decision public announcement of working group approximately 4,208 MY 2015 MINI NHTSA’s Analysis: NHTSA believes meetings. Cooper, Cooper S hardtop 2 door, and that while written information was not Issued in Washington, DC, on October 30, Cooper S hardtop 4 door passenger cars provided to vehicle owners describing 2015. manufactured from February 25, 2015 to the installed head air bags (side curtain) Lirio Liu, April 24, 2015. as vehicle occupant ejection mitigation III. Noncompliance: BMW explains Designated Federal Officer, Aviation countermeasures that deploy in the that written information describing the Rulemaking Advisory Committee. event of a rollover, the owner’s manuals ejection mitigation countermeasure [FR Doc. 2015–28151 Filed 11–4–15; 8:45 am] for the affected vehicles otherwise installed in the vehicles was not BILLING CODE 4910–13–P effectively describe, and illustrate the provided to the vehicle consumers as location of, the head air bags. NHTSA required by paragraph S4.2.3(a) of FMVSS No. 226. also believes that the status of the head DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION air bags is monitored by the vehicle’s air IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S4.2.3 of FMVSS No. 226 requires in pertinent bag readiness indicator intended to National Highway Traffic Safety show operational readiness of the entire Administration part: airbag system. Therefore, drivers should S4.2.3 Written information. be alerted to a malfunction of the head [Docket No. NHTSA–2015–0053; Notice 2] (a) Vehicles with an ejection mitigation countermeasure that deploys in the event of air bags that are intended to provide BMW of North America, Inc., Grant of a rollover must be described as such in the ejection countermeasures in the event of Petition for Decision of vehicle’s owner manual or in other written a rollover event, and occupant Inconsequential Noncompliance information provided by the vehicle protection in the event of a significant AGENCY: National Highway Traffic manufacturer to the consumer. . . . side impact event. Safety Administration (NHTSA), V. Summary of BMW’s Arguments: BMW has also reported that they have Department of Transportation (DOT). BMW stated its belief that the subject not received any complaints from ACTION: Grant of Petition. noncompliance in the affected vehicles vehicle owners regarding the subject is inconsequential to motor vehicle noncompliance and that vehicle SUMMARY: BMW of North America, Inc. safety. A summary of its reasoning is production was corrected so that the (BMW) has determined that certain provided as follows. Detailed noncompliance did not occur in model year (MY) 2015 MINI Cooper, explanations of its reasoning are subsequent vehicles. NHTSA’s Decision: Cooper S hardtop 2 door, and Cooper S included in its petition: In consideration of the foregoing, hardtop 4 door passenger cars do not 1. The vehicles are equipped with a NHTSA has decided that BMW has met fully comply with paragraph S4.2.3(a) of countermeasure that meets the its burden of persuasion that the subject Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard performance requirements of FMVSS FMVSS No. 226 noncompliance in the (FMVSS) No. 226, Ejection Mitigation. No. 226. affected vehicles is inconsequential to BMW has filed an appropriate report 2. The owner’s manuals contain a motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, dated May 20, 2015, pursuant to 49 CFR description of the ejection mitigation BMW’s petition is hereby granted and part 573, Defect and Noncompliance countermeasure in the context of side BMW is exempted from the obligation of Responsibility and Reports. impact. providing notification of, and a remedy ADDRESSES: For further information on 3. The owner’s manuals contain for, that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. this decision contact Karen Nuschler, precautions related to the [ejection 30118 and 30120. Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the mitigation] system even though not required by FMVSS No. 226. NHTSA notes that the statutory National Highway Traffic Safety provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and Administration (NHTSA), telephone 4. The [ejection mitigation] system uses the FMVSS No. 208 required 30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to (202) 366–5829, facsimile (202) 366– file petitions for a determination of 3081. readiness indicator, as allowed by FMVSS No. 226. inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 5. BMW has not received any exempt manufacturers only from the I. Overview: Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. customer complaints due to this issue. duties found in sections 30118 and 30118(d) and 30120(h) (see 6. BMW is not aware of any accidents 30120, respectively, to notify owners, implementing rule at 49 CFR part 556), or injuries due to this issue. purchasers, and dealers of a defect or BMW submitted a petition for an 7. NHTSA may have granted similar noncompliance and to remedy the exemption from the notification and manufacturer petitions re owner’s defect or noncompliance. Therefore, this remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. manuals. decision only applies to the subject Chapter 301 on the basis that this 8. BMW has corrected the vehicles that BMW no longer controlled noncompliance is inconsequential to noncompliance so that all future at the time it determined that the motor vehicle safety. production vehicles will comply with noncompliance existed. However, the Notice of receipt of the petition was FMVSS No. 226. Granting of this petition does not relieve jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES published, with a 30-day public In summation, BMW believes that the vehicle distributors and dealers of the comment period, on September 1, 2015 described noncompliance of the subject prohibitions on the sale, offer for sale, in the Federal Register (80 FR 52845). vehicles is inconsequential to motor or introduction or delivery for No comments were received. To view vehicle safety, and that its petition, to introduction into interstate commerce of the petition, and all supporting exempt BMW from providing recall the noncompliant vehicles under their documents log onto the Federal Docket notification of noncompliance as control after BMW notified them that Management System (FDMS) Web site required by 49 U.S.C. 30118 and the subject noncompliance existed. VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:06 Nov 04, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00111 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\05NON1.SGM 05NON1

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 214 / Thursday, November 5, 2015 / Notices 68603 (Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: although there is no limit to the length specified in 49 CFR 593.7, NHTSA delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.95 and of necessary attachments to the publishes notice in the Federal Register 501.8) comments. If comments are submitted of each petition that it receives, and Jeffrey M. Giuseppe, in hard copy form, please ensure that affords interested persons an Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance. two copies are provided. If you wish to opportunity to comment on the petition. receive confirmation that your At the close of the comment period, [FR Doc. 2015–28130 Filed 11–4–15; 8:45 am] comments were received, please enclose NHTSA decides, on the basis of the BILLING CODE 4910–59–P a stamped, self-addressed postcard with petition and any comments that it has the comments. Note that all comments received, whether the vehicle is eligible DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION received will be posted without change for importation. The agency then to http://www.regulations.gov, including publishes this decision in the Federal National Highway Traffic Safety any personal information provided. Register. Administration Please see the Privacy Act heading Wallace Environmental Testing below. Laboratories (WETL), Inc. of Houston, [Docket No. NHTSA–2015–0016; Notice 1] Texas (Registered Importer R–90–005) Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments has petitioned NHTSA to decide Notice of Receipt of Petition for whether nonconforming MY 2009 Ford Decision That Nonconforming Model received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the F–150 trucks are eligible for importation Year 2009 Ford F–150 Trucks Are into the United States. The vehicles Eligible for Importation comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, which WETL believes are substantially AGENCY: National Highway Traffic business, labor union, etc.). You may similar are MY 2009 Ford F–150 trucks Safety Administration, DOT. review DOT’s complete Privacy Act that were manufactured for sale in the ACTION: Receipt of petition. Statement in the Federal Register United States and certified by their published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR manufacturer as conforming to all SUMMARY: This document announces 19477–78). applicable FMVSS. receipt by the National Highway Traffic How To Read Comments Submitted to The petitioner claims that it compared Safety Administration (NHTSA) of a the Docket: You may read the comments non-U.S. certified MY 2009 Ford F–150 petition for a decision that received by Docket Management at the truck to their U.S.-certified nonconforming model year (MY) 2009 address and times given above. You may counterparts, and found the vehicles to Ford F–150 trucks that were not also view the documents from the be substantially similar with respect to originally manufactured to comply with Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. compliance with most FMVSS. all applicable Federal motor vehicle WETL submitted information with its Follow the online instructions for safety standards (FMVSS), are eligible petition intended to demonstrate that accessing the dockets. The docket ID for importation into the United States non-U.S. certified MY 2009 Ford F–150 number and title of this notice are because they are substantially similar to trucks, as originally manufactured, shown at the heading of this document vehicles that were originally conform to many FMVSS in the same notice. Please note that even after the manufactured for sale in the United manner as their U.S.-certified comment closing date, we will continue States and that were certified by their counterparts, or are capable of being to file relevant information in the manufacturer as complying with the readily altered to conform to those Docket as it becomes available. Further, standards. Specifically, the petitioner safety standards (the U.S.-certified some people may submit late comments. version of the MY 2009 Ford F–150 claims that non-U.S. certified MY 2009 Accordingly, we recommend that you Ford F–150 trucks are identical to their truck) and they are capable of being periodically search the Docket for new readily altered to conform to the U.S.-certified counterparts with respect material. to compliance with Standard Nos. 102 standards. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Transmission Shift Lever Sequence, DATES: The closing date for comments George Stevens, Office of Vehicle Safety Starter Interlock, and Transmission on the petition is December 7, 2015. Compliance, NHTSA (202–366–5308). Braking Effect, 103 Windshield ADDRESSES: Comments should refer to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Defrosting and Defogging Systems, 104 the docket and notice numbers above Windshield Wiping and Washing Background and be submitted by any of the Systems, 105 Hydraulic and Electric following methods: Under 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A), a Brake Systems, 106 Brake Hoses, 108 • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to motor vehicle that was not originally Lamps, Reflective Devices, and http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the manufactured to conform to all Associated Equipment, 110 Tire online instructions for submitting applicable FMVSS shall be refused selection and rims and motor home/ comments. admission into the United States unless recreation vehicle trailer load carrying • Mail: Docket Management Facility: NHTSA has decided that the motor capacity information for motor vehicles U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 vehicle is substantially similar to a with a GVWR of 4,536 kilograms (10,000 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building motor vehicle originally manufactured pounds) or less, 111 Rearview Mirrors, Ground Floor, Room W12–140, for importation into and sale in the 113 Hood Latch System, 114 Theft Washington, DC 20590–0001. United States, certified under 49 U.S.C. Protection, 116 Motor Vehicle Brake • Hand Delivery or Courier: West 30115, and of the same model year as Fluids, 118 Power-Operated Window, the model of the motor vehicle to be Partition, and Roof panel System, 119 jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., between compared, and is capable of being New Pneumatic Tires, 124 Accelerator 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, Monday through readily altered to conform to all Control Systems, 135 Light Vehicle Friday, except Federal holidays. applicable FMVSS. Brake Systems, 138 Tire Pressure • Fax: 202–493–2251. Petitions for eligibility decisions may Monitoring Systems, 201 Occupant Instructions: Comments must be be submitted by either manufacturers or Protection in Interior Impact, 202 written in the English language, and be importers who have registered with Head Restraints, 204 Steering Control no greater than 15 pages in length, NHTSA pursuant to 49 CFR part 592. As Rearward Displacement, 205 Glazing VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:06 Nov 04, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00112 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\05NON1.SGM 05NON1


Document Created: 2015-12-14 15:03:54
Document Modified: 2015-12-14 15:03:54
CategoryRegulatory Information
CollectionFederal Register
sudoc ClassAE 2.7:
GS 4.107:
AE 2.106:
PublisherOffice of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
SectionNotices
ActionGrant of Petition.
FR Citation80 FR 68602 
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR