General Motors, LLC, Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance
General Motors, LLC (GM) has determined that certain model year (MY) 2024 Cadillac XT4, Chevrolet Colorado, and GMC Canyon motor vehicles do not fully comply with Federal Motor ...
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION:
Receipt of petition.
SUMMARY:
General Motors, LLC (GM) has determined that certain model year (MY) 2024 Cadillac XT4, Chevrolet Colorado, and GMC Canyon motor vehicles do not fully comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108,
Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment.
GM filed a noncompliance report dated April 25, 2024, and subsequently petitioned NHTSA (the “Agency”) on May 17, 2024, for a decision that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety. This document announces receipt of GM's petition.
DATES:
Send comments on or before October 13, 2026.
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 may be 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
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
( printed page 57958)
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
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
www.regulations.gov
by following the online instructions for accessing the dockets. 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).
I. Overview:
GM determined that certain MY 2024 Cadillac XT4, Chevrolet Colorado, and GMC Canyon motor vehicles do not fully comply with paragraphs S7.2.5, S7.4.4, and S7.7.5 of FMVSS No. 108,
Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment
(49 CFR 571.108) and filed a noncompliance report on April 25, 2024, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573,
Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports.
GM petitioned NHTSA on May 17, 2024, 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.
This notice of receipt of GM's petition is published under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120 and does not represent any agency decision or another exercise of judgment concerning the merits of the petition.
II. Vehicles Involved:
Approximately 10,241 MY 2024 Cadillac XT4, Chevrolet Colorado, and GMC Canyon motor vehicles, manufactured between November 16, 2023, and March 19, 2024, were reported by the manufacturer.
III. Rule Requirements:
Paragraphs S7.2.5, S7.4.5, and S7.7.5 of FMVSS No. 108 include the requirements relevant to this petition. Paragraphs S7.2.5, S7.4.5, and S7.7.5 require that taillamps, side marker lamps, and license plate lamps, respectively, meet the activation requirements outlined in Table 1-a. Specifically, taillamps, side marker lamps, and license plate lamps on all passenger cars, Multipurpose Passenger Vehicles (MPV), trucks, and buses, less than 2,032 millimeters (mm) (80 inches) in overall width must be activated when the parking lamps are activated.[1]
IV. Noncompliance:
GM explains that, under specific conditions, when the parking lamps are activated, the taillamps, side marker lamps and license plate lamp are not activated as required by Table I-a of FMVSS No. 108. GM describes the conditions as having the master lighting control switched from “AUTO” to “OFF,” while the ambient lighting conditions are dark, and the vehicle's transmission is not in the “PARK” position.
V. Summary of GM's Petition:
The following views and arguments presented in this section, “V. Summary of GM's Petition,” are the views and arguments provided by GM. They have not been evaluated by the Agency and do not reflect the views of the Agency. GM describes the subject noncompliance and contends that the noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
GM states that the subject noncompliance would be apparent to a driver of a subject vehicle because the parking lamps will remain “on,”
i.e.,
activated, and be visible in dark conditions, and that the noncompliance,
i.e.,
the deactivation of the taillamps, side marker lamps, and license plate lamp, will persist only as long as all three of the conditions stated in section IV, above, are met exactly as described. For example, GM states that if the driver turns the master lighting control to “OFF” while the vehicle's transmission is in the “PARK” position, the subject noncompliance will not occur. Next, GM states that if the master lighting switch is set to positions other than “OFF,” the parking lamps will activate and deactivate simultaneously with the taillamps, side marker lamps and license plate lamp. Finally, GM states that if the driver shifts the subject vehicles' transmission into the “PARK” position, after triggering the subject noncompliance to occur, and while the master lighting control is set to “OFF,” the parking lamps will deactivate and remain deactivated if the vehicle is subsequently put into a transmission state other than “PARK.”
GM outlines several reasons why the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
A.
This noncompliance does not adversely impact the safety function of the parking lamps.
GM states that because the noncompliance cannot arise when a subject vehicle's transmission is in “PARK,” or is immediately corrected if the transmission is subsequently put into “PARK,” the parking lamps' function “to mark the vehicle
when parked
or serve as a reserve front position indicating system in the event of headlamp failure” is unaffected.
B.
The parking lamps remaining activated while a vehicle with the subject noncompliance is operated in a propulsion gear in the dark has no negative impact and may improve vehicle safety.
GM states that the noncompliance “can only occur at night” and with a subject vehicle's transmission in a gear other than “PARK.” GM asserts that under these operating conditions, having parking lamps activated [2]
has no adverse safety impact, suggesting that safety will be improved by illuminating the vehicle to other roadway users, and providing some visibility for the driver in very dark conditions.
C.
The noncompliance is highly detectible and corrected through routine vehicle operations.
Further, GM states that because the noncompliance “can only occur when it is dark,” the driver will be “immediately” aware that the parking lamps did not deactivate, and that their continued illumination will be readily apparent as shown in Figure 1 of its petition.[3]
GM adds that the noncompliance can be corrected in multiple ways, by changing the position
( printed page 57959)
of the master lighting control or the vehicle's transmission. See Item C. in Section II. of GM's petition for details.
D.
The noncompliance only occurs after a unique set of circumstances that do not reflect typical driver behavior in the field.
GM claims that a driver adjusting the master lighting control from “AUTO” to “OFF” while driving in dark conditions are not reflective of expected driver behavior in the field. GM states that it expects most drivers to utilize automatic light operation, particularly while driving at night, and that either in response to the noncompliance occurring, or a desire to turn off all exterior lighting, a driver would be expected to stop the vehicle and put the transmission in the “PARK” position to adjust the lighting control.
E.
GM is not aware of any related field reports.
GM is not aware of any customer or warranty complaints associated with this noncompliance.
F.
NHTSA has granted similar petitions.
GM believes that the following inconsequential noncompliance petitions granted by NHTSA support the granting of the current petition.
General Motors LLC, Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance;83 FR 7848 (Feb. 22, 2018). The noncompliance in GM's 2018 petition concerned parking lamps that were not activated as required by Table 1-a of FMVSS No. 108 while taillamps, side marker lamps, license plate lamps and headlamps continued to operate.
Daimler Trucks North America (DTNA), Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance;87 FR 14325 (Mar. 14, 2022). The noncompliance in DTNA's petition concerned automatic illumination of the stop lamps in the absence of brake activation when the low air brake pressure warning indicator light illuminated.
GM contends that the activation of the parking lamps provides a safety benefit, even if the taillamps, side marker lamps, and license plate lamp are not activated, compared to operating the subject vehicle in the dark without any lamps. GM maintains that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety because it only occurs when the parking lamps are not required under a unique set of circumstances, is not reflective of typical driver behavior, and will correct itself through normal vehicle operations.
GM adds that the subject noncompliance was addressed in production for all applicable vehicles manufactured on or after March 19, 2024.
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 GM no longer controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance 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 vehicles under their control after GM notified them that the subject noncompliance existed.
www.regulations.gov/
49 CFR 571.108
49 U.S.C. Chapter 301