67206 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 220 / Tuesday, November 16, 2004 / Notices 

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 cm2) 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 cm2. 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 cm2) is slightly more than double 

the minimum area requirement of 22 

cm2, it is significantly less than the 116 

cm2 area of the referenced GM lamps 

and the 161 cm2 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 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 220 / Tuesday, November 16, 2004 / Notices 67207

reports. However, the agency is not 

aware of any turn signal masking 

research involving lamps smaller than 

75 cm2. 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 cm2. 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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2004–19547] 

Notice of Receipt of Petition for 

Decision That Nonconforming 2003–

2004 BMW X5 Multipurpose Passenger 

Vehicles, Manufactured From January 

1, 2003, Through December 31, 2004, 

Are Eligible for Importation

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of receipt of petition for 

decision that nonconforming 2003–2004 

BMW X5 multipurpose passenger 

vehicles manufactured from January 1, 

2003, through December 31, 2004, are 

eligible for importation. 

SUMMARY: This document announces 

receipt by the National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA) of a 

petition for a decision that 2003–2004 

BMW X5 multipurpose passenger 

vehicles manufactured from January 1, 

2003, through December 31, 2004, that 

were not originally manufactured to 

comply with all applicable Federal 

motor vehicle safety standards, are 

eligible for importation into the United 

States because (1) they are substantially 

similar to vehicles that were originally 

manufactured for importation into and 

sale in the United States and that were 

certified by their manufacturer as 

complying with the safety standards, 

and (2) they are capable of being readily 

altered to conform to the standards.

DATES: The closing date for comments 

on the petition is December 16, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Comments should refer to 

the docket number and notice number, 

and be submitted to: Docket 

Management, Room PL–401, 400 

Seventh St., SW., Washington, DC 

20590. (Docket hours are from 9 a.m. to 

5 p.m.) Anyone is able to search the 

electronic form of all comments 

received into any of our dockets by the 

name of the individual submitting the 

comment (or signing the comment, if 

submitted on behalf of an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). You may 

review DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

Statement in the Federal Register

published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 

65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78) or you 

may visit http://dms.dot.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Coleman Sachs, Office of Vehicle Safety 

Compliance, NHTSA (202–366–3151).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Under 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A), a 

motor vehicle that was not originally 

manufactured to conform to all 

applicable Federal motor vehicle safety 

standards shall be refused admission 

into the United States unless NHTSA 

has decided that the motor vehicle is 

substantially similar to a motor vehicle 

originally manufactured for importation 

into and sale in the United States, 

certified under 49 U.S.C. 30115, and of 

the same model year as the model of the 

motor vehicle to be compared, and is 

capable of being readily altered to 

conform to all applicable Federal motor 

vehicle safety standards. 

Petitions for eligibility decisions may 

be submitted by either manufacturers or 

importers who have registered with 

NHTSA pursuant to 49 CFR Part 592. As 

specified in 49 CFR 593.7, NHTSA 

publishes notice in the Federal Register

of each petition that it receives, and 

affords interested persons an 

opportunity to comment on the petition. 

At the close of the comment period, 

NHTSA decides, on the basis of the 

petition and any comments that it has 

received, whether the vehicle is eligible 

for importation. The agency then 

publishes this decision in the Federal 

Register. 

Automobile Concepts, Inc. (‘‘AMC’’), 

of North Miami, Florida (Registered 

Importer 01–278) has petitioned NHTSA 

to decide whether nonconforming 2003–

2004 BMW X5 multipurpose passenger 

vehicles manufactured from January 1, 

2003 through December 31, 2004, are 

eligible for importation into the United 

States. The vehicles which AMC 

believes are substantially similar are 

2003–2004 BMW X5 multipurpose 

passenger vehicles manufactured from 

January 1, 2003 through December 31, 

2004, that were manufactured for 

importation into, and sale in, the United 

States and certified by their 

manufacturer as conforming to all 

applicable Federal motor vehicle safety 

standards. 

The petitioner claims that it carefully 

compared non-U.S. certified 2003–2004 

BMW X5 multipurpose passenger 

vehicles manufactured from January 1, 

2003 through December 31, 2004, to 

their U.S.-certified counterparts, and 

found the vehicles to be substantially 

similar with respect to compliance with 

most Federal motor vehicle safety 

standards.

AMC submitted information with its 

petition intended to demonstrate that 

non-U.S. certified 2003–2004 BMW X5 

multipurpose passenger vehicles 

manufactured from January 1, 2003 

through December 31, 2004, as 

originally manufactured, conform to 

many Federal motor vehicle safety 

standards in the same manner as their 

U.S. certified counterparts, or are 

capable of being readily altered to 

conform to those standards. 

Specifically, the petitioner claims that 

non-U.S. certified 2003–2004 BMW X5 

multipurpose passenger vehicles 

manufactured from January 1, 2003 

through December 31, 2004, are 

identical to their U.S-certified 

counterparts with respect to compliance 

with Standard Nos. 102 Transmission 

Shift Lever Sequence, Starter Interlock, 

and Transmission Braking Effect, 103 

Windshield Defrosting and Defogging 

Systems, 104 Windshield Wiping and