83 FR 22743 - Denial of Motor Vehicle Defect Petition, DP17-002

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 95 (May 16, 2018)

Page Range		22743-22744
FR Document		2018-10404

This document denies a January 11, 2017, petition, as submitted under Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) ID number 10944318, from Ms. Laura Nagel of Springfield, VA, requesting that the agency open an investigation into an alleged defect resulting in engine stall without warning after refueling in a model year (MY) 2007 Jeep Patriot. The petitioner's vehicle is a 2007 Jeep Patriot. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) evaluated the petition by analyzing consumer complaints submitted to the Agency, by reviewing two prior evaluations of the same apparent defect issue, and by reviewing technical and field information provided by FCA US, LLC (FCA) in response to an information request letter from the Agency. After completing this evaluation, NHTSA has concluded that further investigation of the alleged defect in the subject vehicles is unlikely to result in a determination that a safety related defect exists. The agency accordingly denies the petition.

Federal Register, Volume 83 Issue 95 (Wednesday, May 16, 2018)

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 95 (Wednesday, May 16, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22743-22744]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2018-10404]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2018-0052]


Denial of Motor Vehicle Defect Petition, DP17-002

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

ACTION: Denial of petition for a defect investigation.

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

SUMMARY: This document denies a January 11, 2017, petition, as 
submitted under Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) ID number 
10944318, from Ms. Laura Nagel of Springfield, VA, requesting that the 
agency open an investigation into an alleged defect resulting in engine 
stall without warning after refueling in a model year (MY) 2007 Jeep 
Patriot. The petitioner's vehicle is a 2007 Jeep Patriot. The National 
Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) evaluated the petition by 
analyzing consumer complaints submitted to the Agency, by reviewing two 
prior evaluations of the same apparent defect issue, and by reviewing 
technical and field information provided by FCA US, LLC (FCA) in 
response to an information request letter from the Agency. After 
completing this evaluation, NHTSA has concluded that further 
investigation of the alleged defect in the subject vehicles is unlikely 
to result in a determination that a safety related defect exists. The 
agency accordingly denies the petition.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Abhijit Sengupta, Office of 
Defects Investigation, NHTSA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 
20590. Telephone: (202) 366-4293.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Alleged Defect

    The petitioner alleges that her MY 2007 Jeep Patriot vehicle 
experienced multiple incidents of engine stall without warning shortly 
after refueling. The petitioner discovered that the defective part is a 
valve that is integral to the fuel tank, requiring tank replacement to 
repair the problem. The petitioner alleged that stalling without 
warning is an unreasonable risk to motor vehicle safety and requests 
the agency take action by opening a Preliminary Evaluation to fully 
evaluate the defect.

Engine Stall Defects

    The Safety Act, (Chapter 301 of Title 49 of the United States Code 
(49 U.S.C. 30101 et. seq.)) defines motor vehicle

[[Page 22744]]

safety as ``the performance of a motor vehicle or motor vehicle 
equipment in a way that protects the public against unreasonable risk 
of accidents occurring because of the design, construction, or 
performance of a motor vehicle, and against unreasonable risk of death 
or injury in an accident, and includes nonoperational safety of a motor 
vehicle.'' In this instance, the risk involved is a low speed engine 
stall happening immediately after the fuel tank is overfilled. NHTSA 
considers several factors when assessing the safety risk posed by 
conditions that may result in engine stall while driving. These include 
the speeds at which stalling may occur, the ability of the driver to 
restart the vehicle, the warning available to the driver prior to 
stalling, the effects of engine stall on vehicle controllability, when 
and where the stalling may occur and the effects of the condition on 
other safety systems of the vehicle. In general, conditions that result 
in engine stall during low-speed operation at idle, such as when 
slowing to a stop, and where the engine may be restarted right away, 
are considered by NHTSA to be among the least hazardous types of 
stalling problems and, absent other risk factors, are not considered to 
be unreasonable risks to safety.

Prior ODI Investigation PE13-016

    On February 10, 2014, ODI closed an investigation of an alleged 
defect in approximately 153,817 MY 2006 Chrysler 300, Dodge Charger and 
Dodge Magnum vehicles (LX cars) that may result in engine stall shortly 
after refueling (PE13-016). In response to ODI's information request 
for PE13-016, FCA identified a problem with the multifunction control 
valve (MFCV) fuel shutoff float integrated into 19-gallon fuel tanks in 
certain LX vehicles. According to FCA, the float may swell after 
exposure to fuels with high ethanol content, which may cause the valve 
to stick. A float valve that is stuck open during refueling could 
result in fuel tank overfill and allow raw fuel to enter the purge line 
and vapor canister. This could result in problems with engine 
drivability (e.g., stumble or hesitation) or stall due to a rich fuel 
mixture while driving, in the brief period immediately after filling 
the fuel tank.
    ODI's complaint review showed most of the engine stall incidents 
occurred when vehicles were stopped or travelling at low speeds. This 
review also revealed that no significant difficulty restarting the 
vehicle was reported and no crashes or injuries were identified in the 
subject vehicles, which had been in service for 7 to 8 years. The 
investigation (PE13-016) was closed without a finding of a defect due 
to the low safety risk associated with the alleged defect condition. 
Further details of the investigation are available at https://www.NHTSA.gov.

Prior ODI Petition DP14-002

    In response to ODI's information request letter for DP14-002, FCA 
indicated that the RS Minivan may experience MFCV float sticking 
similar to that investigated in PE13-016 and described above. Further 
details of the investigation are available at https://www.NHTSA.gov.
    As part of its evaluation of DP14-002, NHTSA's Vehicle Research and 
Test Center (VRTC) tested a 2005 Chrysler Town & Country LMT (3.6L SFI, 
20 gal. fuel tank) that was the subject of an ODI complaint (VOQ 
10641603) and proved the vehicle was affected by the sticking in-tank 
fuel valve. VRTC's examination assessed engine performance after 
refueling, including the driving conditions and ease of engine restart 
associated with any observed engine stalls. When refueling the vehicle 
up to the initial shut-off of the filling station pump nozzle, the VRTC 
testing was able to reproduce stalling incidents when the vehicle was 
stopped or coasting to a stop at low speed. The vehicle did not stall 4 
out of 5 times when travelling at 5 mph, but minor hesitation was 
noted. No stalls and only minor hesitation occurred when travelling at 
10 mph or above in tanks filled to the initial nozzle shut-off. 
Stalling was more likely to occur if the tank was overfilled (i.e., 
adding fuel past the initial fill nozzle shutoff). Testing after 
overfilling resulted in stalls in 4 of 5 tests at speeds up to 10 mph. 
Regardless of fill condition, the vehicle could always be immediately 
restarted after each engine stall.

2008 Jeep Patriot Analysis

    In response to ODI's information request letter for DP17-002, FCA 
indicated that the 2007 Jeep Patriot may experience a condition with 
MFCV float sticking similar to the one investigated in the LX Cars in 
PE13-016 and 2007 Chrysler Minivans in DP14-002. As described above in 
PE13-016, the failure mechanism is a result of a swollen refueling 
float within the multifunction control valve. The FCA response also 
indicated no reported accidents or property damage in a fleet of 29,573 
vehicles with more than 4 billion vehicle miles driven over 10 years of 
service. FCA believes that, predicated upon these findings, there is no 
unreasonable risk to motor safety. Further details of the investigation 
will be available in the near future at https://www.NHTSA.gov.
    ODI's complaint analysis of the alleged defect, completed in March 
2017, identified 39 post-refueling engine stall incidents in 
approximately 29,573 vehicles. Similar to the LX Car analysis in PE13-
016, and 2007 Chrysler Minivans analysis in DP14-002, the engine stalls 
occurred immediately after refueling when the vehicle was stopped or 
coasting to a stop at low speed. There were no allegations of 
significant difficulty restarting the engines immediately after the 
stalls occurred. None of the complaints alleged any crash or injury. 
Based upon the above facts and the conditions in which any stall 
occurs, ODI concludes that further investigation is unlikely to result 
in a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists.

Conclusion

    In the Agency's view, additional investigation is unlikely to 
result in a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety 
exists given the limited conditions under which the subject condition 
may result in engine stall. Although NHTSA can and will take action 
before a defect results in a crash, injury or death, the absence of any 
reported crashes or injuries in a fleet of nearly 30,000 vehicles 
estimated to have driven 4 billion vehicle miles indicates that further 
investigation is not warranted under the facts known to the Agency at 
this time. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize 
NHTSA's limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety 
mission, the petition is denied. The Agency will take further action if 
warranted by future circumstances.

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 30162(d); delegations of authority at CFR 
1.50 and 501.8.

Jeffrey M. Giuseppe,
Associate Administrator for Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2018-10404 Filed 5-15-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-59-P

Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 95 / Wednesday, May 16, 2018 / Notices 22743

on its X1 (MPV and passenger cars), X2, vehicle line from the parts-marking DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
X3, X4 and X5 vehicle lines, as well as requirements of 49 CFR part 541. The
its Carline 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, Z4, MINI and Agency notes that 49 CFR part 541, National Highway Traffic Safety
MINI Countryman vehicle lines, all Appendix A–1, identifies those lines Administration
which have been granted parts-marking that are exempted from the Theft [Docket No. NHTSA–2018–0052]
exemptions by the Agency. BMW asserts Prevention Standard for a given MY. 49
that theft data have indicated a decline CFR part 543.7(f) contains publication Denial of Motor Vehicle Defect Petition,
in theft rates for vehicle lines that have requirements incident to the disposition DP17–002
been equipped with antitheft devices of all Part 543 petitions. Advanced
similar to that which it proposes to AGENCY: National Highway Traffic
listing, including the release of future Safety Administration (NHTSA),
install on the 8 series vehicle line. BMW
product nameplates, the beginning Department of Transportation (DOT).
stated that for MY/CY 2014, the
Agency’s data show that the theft rates model year for which the petition is ACTION: Denial of petition for a defect
for its vehicle lines are: 0.47 (2-series), granted and a general description of the investigation.
0.91 (3-series), 0.80 (4-series), 0.90 (5- antitheft device is necessary in order to
notify law enforcement agencies of new SUMMARY: This document denies a
series), 1.83 (6-series) 2.85 (7-series),
vehicle lines exempted from the parts- January 11, 2017, petition, as submitted
0.30 (X1), 0.60 (X3), 0.00 (X5), 0.43 (Z4),
marking requirements of the Theft under Office of Defects Investigation
0.00 (i3), 0.00 (i8) and 0.41 (MINI
Prevention Standard. (ODI) ID number 10944318, from Ms.
Cooper). Using an average of 3 MYs data
Laura Nagel of Springfield, VA,
(2012–2014), NHTSA’s theft rates for If BMW decides not to use the
BMW’s 2 series, 3 series, 4 series, 5 requesting that the agency open an
exemption for this line, it must formally investigation into an alleged defect
series, 6 series, 7 series, X1, X3, X5, Z4, notify the Agency. If such a decision is
i3, i8 and MINI Cooper vehicle lines are resulting in engine stall without
made, the line must be fully marked as warning after refueling in a model year
0.7416, 0.7566, 0.8041, 1.0805, 2.5509, required by 49 CFR parts 541.5 and
2.0632, 0.2672, 0.6117, 0.0000, 0.8159, (MY) 2007 Jeep Patriot. The petitioner’s
541.6 (marking of major component vehicle is a 2007 Jeep Patriot. The
0.0000, 0.0000 and 0.2379 respectively,
parts and replacement parts). National Highway Traffic Safety
all below the median theft rate of
3.5826. NHTSA notes that if BMW wishes in Administration (NHTSA) evaluated the
Based on the supporting evidence the future to modify the device on petition by analyzing consumer
submitted by BMW, the Agency believes which this exemption is based, the complaints submitted to the Agency, by
that the antitheft device for the BMW 8 company may have to submit a petition reviewing two prior evaluations of the
series vehicle line is likely to be as to modify the exemption. same apparent defect issue, and by
effective in reducing and deterring reviewing technical and field
Part 543.7(d) states that a Part 543 information provided by FCA US, LLC
motor vehicle theft as compliance with
exemption applies only to vehicles that (FCA) in response to an information
the parts-marking requirements of the
Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR part belong to a line exempted under this request letter from the Agency. After
541). The Agency concludes that the part and equipped with the antitheft completing this evaluation, NHTSA has
device will provide four of the five device on which the line’s exemption is concluded that further investigation of
types of performance listed in based. Further, § 543.9(c)(2) provides for the alleged defect in the subject vehicles
§ 543.6(a)(3): Promoting activation; the submission of petitions ‘‘to modify is unlikely to result in a determination
preventing defeat or circumvention of an exemption to permit the use of an that a safety related defect exists. The
the device by unauthorized persons; antitheft device similar to but differing agency accordingly denies the petition.
preventing operation of the vehicle by from the one specified in that FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.
unauthorized entrants; and ensuring the exemption.’’ Abhijit Sengupta, Office of Defects
reliability and durability of the device. The Agency wishes to minimize the Investigation, NHTSA, 1200 New Jersey
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49 administrative burden that Part Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
CFR 543.7 (b), the Agency grants a Telephone: (202) 366–4293.
543.9(c)(2) could place on exempted
petition for exemption from the parts- SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
vehicle manufacturers and itself. The
marking requirements of Part 541, either
in whole or in part, if it determines that, Agency did not intend Part 543 to Alleged Defect
based upon supporting evidence, the require the submission of a modification The petitioner alleges that her MY
standard equipment antitheft device is petition for every change to the 2007 Jeep Patriot vehicle experienced
likely to be as effective in reducing and components or design of an antitheft multiple incidents of engine stall
deterring motor vehicle theft as device. The significance of many such without warning shortly after refueling.
compliance with the parts-marking changes could be de minimis. Therefore, The petitioner discovered that the
requirements of part 541. The Agency NHTSA suggests that if the defective part is a valve that is integral
finds that BMW has provided adequate manufacturer contemplates making any to the fuel tank, requiring tank
reasons for its belief that the antitheft changes the effects of which might be replacement to repair the problem. The
device for the 8 series vehicle line is characterized as de minimis, it should petitioner alleged that stalling without
likely to be as effective in reducing and consult the Agency before preparing and warning is an unreasonable risk to
deterring motor vehicle theft as submitting a petition to modify. motor vehicle safety and requests the
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES

compliance with the parts-marking agency take action by opening a
Issued in Washington, DC, under authority
requirements of the Theft Prevention delegated in 49 CFR Part 1.95 and 501.8. Preliminary Evaluation to fully evaluate
Standard (49 CFR part 541). This the defect.
conclusion is based on the information Raymond R. Posten,
BMW provided about its device. Associate Administrator for Rulemaking. Engine Stall Defects
For the foregoing reasons, the Agency [FR Doc. 2018–10428 Filed 5–15–18; 8:45 am] The Safety Act, (Chapter 301 of Title
hereby grants in full BMW’s petition for BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 49 of the United States Code (49 U.S.C.
exemption for the MY 2019 8 series 30101 et. seq.)) defines motor vehicle

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 May 15, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00133 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\16MYN1.SGM 16MYN1

22744 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 95 / Wednesday, May 16, 2018 / Notices

safety as ‘‘the performance of a motor without a finding of a defect due to the be available in the near future at https://
vehicle or motor vehicle equipment in low safety risk associated with the www.NHTSA.gov.
a way that protects the public against alleged defect condition. Further details ODI’s complaint analysis of the
unreasonable risk of accidents occurring of the investigation are available at alleged defect, completed in March
because of the design, construction, or https://www.NHTSA.gov. 2017, identified 39 post-refueling engine
performance of a motor vehicle, and stall incidents in approximately 29,573
against unreasonable risk of death or Prior ODI Petition DP14–002
vehicles. Similar to the LX Car analysis
injury in an accident, and includes In response to ODI’s information in PE13–016, and 2007 Chrysler
nonoperational safety of a motor request letter for DP14–002, FCA Minivans analysis in DP14–002, the
vehicle.’’ In this instance, the risk indicated that the RS Minivan may engine stalls occurred immediately after
involved is a low speed engine stall experience MFCV float sticking similar refueling when the vehicle was stopped
happening immediately after the fuel to that investigated in PE13–016 and or coasting to a stop at low speed. There
tank is overfilled. NHTSA considers described above. Further details of the were no allegations of significant
several factors when assessing the safety investigation are available at https:// difficulty restarting the engines
risk posed by conditions that may result www.NHTSA.gov. immediately after the stalls occurred.
in engine stall while driving. These As part of its evaluation of DP14–002, None of the complaints alleged any
include the speeds at which stalling NHTSA’s Vehicle Research and Test crash or injury. Based upon the above
may occur, the ability of the driver to Center (VRTC) tested a 2005 Chrysler facts and the conditions in which any
restart the vehicle, the warning available Town & Country LMT (3.6L SFI, 20 gal. stall occurs, ODI concludes that further
to the driver prior to stalling, the effects fuel tank) that was the subject of an ODI investigation is unlikely to result in a
of engine stall on vehicle controllability, complaint (VOQ 10641603) and proved finding that a defect related to motor
when and where the stalling may occur the vehicle was affected by the sticking vehicle safety exists.
and the effects of the condition on other in-tank fuel valve. VRTC’s examination
safety systems of the vehicle. In general, Conclusion
assessed engine performance after
conditions that result in engine stall refueling, including the driving In the Agency’s view, additional
during low-speed operation at idle, such conditions and ease of engine restart investigation is unlikely to result in a
as when slowing to a stop, and where associated with any observed engine finding that a defect related to motor
the engine may be restarted right away, stalls. When refueling the vehicle up to vehicle safety exists given the limited
are considered by NHTSA to be among the initial shut-off of the filling station conditions under which the subject
the least hazardous types of stalling condition may result in engine stall.
pump nozzle, the VRTC testing was able
problems and, absent other risk factors, Although NHTSA can and will take
to reproduce stalling incidents when the
are not considered to be unreasonable action before a defect results in a crash,
vehicle was stopped or coasting to a
risks to safety. injury or death, the absence of any
stop at low speed. The vehicle did not
Prior ODI Investigation PE13–016 stall 4 out of 5 times when travelling at reported crashes or injuries in a fleet of
5 mph, but minor hesitation was noted. nearly 30,000 vehicles estimated to have
On February 10, 2014, ODI closed an driven 4 billion vehicle miles indicates
investigation of an alleged defect in No stalls and only minor hesitation
occurred when travelling at 10 mph or that further investigation is not
approximately 153,817 MY 2006 warranted under the facts known to the
Chrysler 300, Dodge Charger and Dodge above in tanks filled to the initial nozzle
shut-off. Stalling was more likely to Agency at this time. Therefore, in view
Magnum vehicles (LX cars) that may
occur if the tank was overfilled (i.e., of the need to allocate and prioritize
result in engine stall shortly after
adding fuel past the initial fill nozzle NHTSA’s limited resources to best
refueling (PE13–016). In response to
shutoff). Testing after overfilling accomplish the agency’s safety mission,
ODI’s information request for PE13–016,
resulted in stalls in 4 of 5 tests at speeds the petition is denied. The Agency will
FCA identified a problem with the
up to 10 mph. Regardless of fill take further action if warranted by
multifunction control valve (MFCV) fuel
condition, the vehicle could always be future circumstances.
shutoff float integrated into 19-gallon
fuel tanks in certain LX vehicles. immediately restarted after each engine Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30162(d); delegations
According to FCA, the float may swell stall. of authority at CFR 1.50 and 501.8.
after exposure to fuels with high ethanol 2008 Jeep Patriot Analysis Jeffrey M. Giuseppe,
content, which may cause the valve to Associate Administrator for Enforcement.
stick. A float valve that is stuck open In response to ODI’s information
[FR Doc. 2018–10404 Filed 5–15–18; 8:45 am]
during refueling could result in fuel request letter for DP17–002, FCA
indicated that the 2007 Jeep Patriot may BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
tank overfill and allow raw fuel to enter
the purge line and vapor canister. This experience a condition with MFCV float
could result in problems with engine sticking similar to the one investigated
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
drivability (e.g., stumble or hesitation) in the LX Cars in PE13–016 and 2007
or stall due to a rich fuel mixture while Chrysler Minivans in DP14–002. As National Highway Traffic Safety
driving, in the brief period immediately described above in PE13–016, the Administration
after filling the fuel tank. failure mechanism is a result of a
ODI’s complaint review showed most swollen refueling float within the [Docket No. NHTSA–2018–0063]
of the engine stall incidents occurred multifunction control valve. The FCA
when vehicles were stopped or response also indicated no reported Reports, Forms, and Recordkeeping
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES

travelling at low speeds. This review accidents or property damage in a fleet Requirements
also revealed that no significant of 29,573 vehicles with more than 4 AGENCY: National Highway Traffic
difficulty restarting the vehicle was billion vehicle miles driven over 10 Safety Administration (NHTSA),
reported and no crashes or injuries were years of service. FCA believes that, Department of Transportation.
identified in the subject vehicles, which predicated upon these findings, there is
ACTION: Reinstatement of a previously
had been in service for 7 to 8 years. The no unreasonable risk to motor safety.
approved collection of information.
investigation (PE13–016) was closed Further details of the investigation will

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 May 15, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00134 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\16MYN1.SGM 16MYN1

Document Created: 2018-11-02 09:13:40
Document Modified: 2018-11-02 09:13:40

Category		Regulatory Information
Collection		Federal Register
sudoc Class		AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106:
Publisher		Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
Section		Notices
Action		Denial of petition for a defect investigation.
Contact		Dr. Abhijit Sengupta, Office of Defects Investigation, NHTSA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590. Telephone: (202) 366-4293.
FR Citation		83 FR 22743

83 FR 22743 - Denial of Motor Vehicle Defect Petition, DP17-002

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATIONNational Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 95 (May 16, 2018)

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration