[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 220 (Tuesday, November 16, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67206-67207]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-25424]



[[Page 67206]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA 2001-11041, Notice 3]


Toyota Motor North America Denial of Appeal of Decision on 
Inconsequential Noncompliance

    Toyota Motor North America (Toyota), on behalf of Toyota Motor 
Corporation, has appealed a decision by the National Highway Traffic 
Safety Administration (NHTSA) that denied its application for a 
determination that the noncompliance of certain Toyota vehicles with 
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108, ``Lamps, 
Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment,'' be deemed 
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Toyota has requested to be 
exempted from the notification and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. 
Chapter 301--``Motor Vehicle Safety.'' Notice of receipt of the 
original petition was published in the Federal Register on January 9, 
2002, (67 FR 1270). On April 15, 2004, NHTSA published a notice in the 
Federal Register denying Toyota's petition (69 FR 20112), stating that 
the petitioner had not met its burden of persuasion that the 
noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Toyota 
submitted an appeal of the agency's decision on May 4, 2004.
    Toyota manufactured 92,794 MY 2000-2001 Celicas between May 7, 1999 
and June 18, 2001 with daytime running lamps (DRLs) that do not meet 
the FMVSS No. 108 minimum spacing requirements for turn signals. FMVSS 
No. 108 requires that unless the maximum luminous intensity of the DRL 
is not more than 2,600 candela (cd) at any location in the beam, the 
optical center of the turn signal must be at least 100 millimeters (mm) 
from the lighted edge of the DRL. According to Toyota, the peak 
intensity of the Celica DRLs is 5,880 cd and the distance between the 
optical center of the turn signal and the lighted edge of the DRL is 
45.6 mm.
    To support its original petition, Toyota cited many factors, 
including that the lighted area of its turn signals is twice the 
minimum required by FMVSS No. 108, the luminous intensity of the turn 
signals is 2.8 times the minimum requirement, and an alternative 
measuring method which would result in 82 mm spacing instead of 45.6 
mm. Toyota also conducted an evaluation utilizing contractors which 
showed that the average subjective rating for the original Celica lamp 
was greater than the rating for a modified Celica lamp with the 
required minimum 100 mm spacing, a DRL intensity near the maximum, and 
a turn signal lamp with the minimum intensity allowed by the 
regulation. The agency previously considered these factors and noted 
its reluctance to be persuaded particularly when a noncompliance is so 
far from specified required levels. Additionally, the agency noted that 
the reason for specifying a spacing relationship is to lessen the 
likelihood of motor vehicle crashes, deaths, and injuries by ensuring 
visibility of a vehicle's turn signal lamps in daylight operation.
    In its appeal of the agency's decision, Toyota cited several 
supporting factors from its original petition and discussed their 
similarities with a General Motors (GM) petition which the agency 
granted in 1999 (64 FR 28864). Also, Toyota referenced a NHTSA 
sponsored research report titled ``Daytime Running Lights and Turn 
Signal Masking'' [DOT HS 808 221]. Specifically, Toyota indicated that:

    The NHTSA sponsored report concluded that equivalent detection 
was found between turn signals separated from DRLs by only 50 mm 
with that of turn signals separated from DRLs by the regulatory 
minimum of 100 mm, if the intensity of the turn signal located at 50 
mm from the DRL was increased to 3 times that of the turn signal 
that is 100 mm away from the DRL. Toyota believes that although the 
intensity of its turn signals are 2.8 times the minimum intensity 
(vs. 3 times in the research) and the separation distance is 45.6 mm 
(vs. 50 mm in the research), the NHTSA research supports its 
petition.
    The NHTSA sponsored research report found that turn signals 
larger than the minimum specified area (22 cm\2\) are less likely to 
be masked by DRL light output than smaller, compliant turn signals 
[with the minimum specified area]. The lighted area of Toyota's turn 
signals is 45.1 cm\2\. Toyota performed a field evaluation similar 
to one done by GM and reported to NHTSA, because of a similar 
noncompliance regarding a GM DRL spacing problem. Toyota emphasized 
that NHTSA, in granting GM's petition, cited as a factor, the larger 
size of the GM turn signals compared to the minimum required size.

    The agency has reviewed Toyota's additional arguments as well as 
the research report cited and the Federal Register notice granting the 
referenced GM petition. There are many differences between the Toyota 
lamps, the lamps studied in the referenced NHTSA research report, and 
the GM lamps for which the agency determined the noncompliance to be 
inconsequential. The GM lamps had values for several parameters that 
fell within the range studied in the NHTSA research; however, this is 
not the case for the Toyota lamps in question. The agency notes the 
following differences:
    While the area of Toyota's turn signals (45.1 cm\2\) is slightly 
more than double the minimum area requirement of 22 cm\2\, it is 
significantly less than the 116 cm\2\ area of the referenced GM lamps 
and the 161 cm\2\ area of the subject lamps used in the agency's 1994 
research report. Toyota incorrectly stated in its appeal that the 
agency found the larger size of the GM turn signal was an independent 
reason why the noncompliance was inconsequential. The agency considered 
and based its inconsequentiality decision on a combination of factors 
presented by GM. Simply having a turn signal greater in size than the 
regulatory minimum required was not the sole basis for granting the 
petition.
    The agency's 1994 research report [DOT HS 808 221] found that 
spatial relations between the turn signal lamp and the DRL had a 
significant effect on the results; specifically, the condition of 
abutting lamps was the worst case scenario for masking of the turn 
signal. Based on this report, Toyota's abutting lamp configuration with 
a 45.6 mm separation would be considered a worse case for masking 
compared to the 71 mm separation cited in GM's petition involving a 
diagonal configuration less severe for masking. Furthermore, in support 
of its petition, GM measured the photometric output of its turn signals 
with DRLs activated and compared the results to the photometric output 
of the turn signals with a portion of the DRLs blocked to simulate the 
required minimum 100 mm separation. GM utilized a video based 
photometer and determined the worst case difference in photometric 
results for a single zone was a 17.5% difference while the average 
difference in turn signal zonal photometric output was 12.7%. While the 
agency gave positive consideration to these factors in granting the GM 
petition, we are unable to do so in this case due to the lamp 
configuration utilized by Toyota and the absence of any analysis to 
determine the loss in turn signal photometric output (measured in 
photometric zone performance) associated with the worst case masking 
condition of the Toyota Celica lamps. Based on the Toyota Celica lamp 
configuration, we expect that the level of masking would be appreciably 
greater than that of the GM lamps involved in the referenced petition.
    In summary, when the agency considered GM's petition it found that 
the available information supported GM's contention that the level of 
masking was inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. While many factors 
were involved, all parameters related to the GM lamps were within the 
ranges specified in the available research

[[Page 67207]]

reports. However, the agency is not aware of any turn signal masking 
research involving lamps smaller than 75 cm\2\. The Toyota Celica turn 
signal lamps are slightly greater than half that size. Research was 
performed by the Society of Automotive Engineers in 1978 and 1993; 
however, neither of these studies involved turn signal areas less than 
75 cm\2\. Furthermore, the research report cited by Toyota to support 
its petition indicates that the lamp configuration on the Toyota Celica 
increases masking, which is not the case with the GM lamp 
configuration. Toyota also failed to quantify the level of masking 
present through analysis of turn signal photometric data as GM did in 
supporting its petition.
    FMVSS No. 108 currently permits DRLs to be deactivated when turn 
signal lamps are activated, in order to eliminate the effects of 
masking turn signals where the minimum 100 mm spacing requirement is 
not met. Additionally, the agency notes that Toyota issued a Technical 
Service Bulletin (EL011-00) on October 6, 2000 that addressed how to 
disable DRLs on the Celica for customers that made this request. This 
procedure does not appear to be complex.
    In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that the 
applicant has not met the burden of persuasion regarding the 
noncompliance described in its appeal, and the non-compliance is 
consequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Toyota's 
application is hereby denied and it must proceed to notify and remedy 
as required by statute, at no cost to the consumer.

    Authority: (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h); delegations of 
authority at 49 CFR 1.50 and 501.8).

    Issued on: November 8, 2004.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 04-25424 Filed 11-15-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P