22620 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 73 / Friday, April 15, 2022 / Notices 

railroad’s RFA to its PTCSP at FRA’s 

sole discretion. 

Privacy Act Notice 

In accordance with 49 CFR 211.3, 

FRA solicits comments from the public 

to better inform its decisions. DOT posts 

these comments, without edit, including 

any personal information the 

commenter provides, to https://

www.regulations.gov, as described in 

the system of records notice (DOT/ALL– 

14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at 

https://www.transportation.gov/privacy. 

See https://www.regulations.gov/ 

privacy-notice for the privacy notice of 

regulations.gov. To facilitate comment 

tracking, we encourage commenters to 

provide their name, or the name of their 

organization; however, submission of 

names is completely optional. If you 

wish to provide comments containing 

proprietary or confidential information, 

please contact FRA for alternate 

submission instructions. 

Issued in Washington, DC. 

Carolyn R. Hayward-Williams, 

Director, Office of Railroad Systems and 

Technology. 

[FR Doc. 2022–08132 Filed 4–14–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2019–0131; Notice 2] 

FCA US LLC, Grant of Petition for 

Decision of Inconsequential 

Noncompliance 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Grant of petition. 

SUMMARY: FCA US LLC (f/k/a Chrysler 

Group LLC) ‘‘FCA’’ has determined that 

certain model year (MY) 2004–2020 

Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep, Fiat, and Alfa 

Romeo motor vehicles do not comply 

with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety 

Standard (FMVSS) No. 101, Controls 

and Displays. FCA filed a 

noncompliance report dated November 

15, 2019, and later amended it on 

December 9, 2019. FCA subsequently 

petitioned NHTSA on December 9, 

2019, for a decision that the subject 

noncompliance is inconsequential as it 

relates to motor vehicle safety. This 

document announces the grant of FCA’s 

petition. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Neil 

Dold, Office of Vehicle Safety 

Compliance, the National Highway 

Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

telephone (202) 366–7352, facsimile 

(202) 366–3081. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Overview 

FCA has determined that certain MY 

2004–2020 Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep, Fiat, 

and Alfa Romeo motor vehicles do not 

comply with paragraph S5.2.1 of 

FMVSS No. 101, Controls and Displays 

(49 CFR 571.101). FCA filed a 

noncompliance report dated November 

15, 2019, and later amended it on 

December 9, 2019, pursuant to 49 CFR 

573, Defect and Noncompliance 

Responsibility and Reports. FCA also 

petitioned NHTSA on December 9, 

2019, 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 40 U.S.C. 30118 and 49 

U.S.C. 30120, Exemption for 

Inconsequential Defect or 

Noncompliance. 

Notice of receipt of FCA’s petition 

was published with a 30-day public 

comment period, on July 13, 2020, in 

the Federal Register (85 FR 42066). One 

comment was received. To view the 

petition and all supporting documents 

log onto the Federal Docket 

Management System (FDMS) website at 

https://www.regulations.gov/. Then 

follow the online search instructions to 

locate docket number ‘‘NHTSA–2019– 

0131.’’ 

II. Vehicles Involved 

Approximately 2,507,693 MY 2004– 

2020 Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep, Fiat, and 

Alfa Romeo motor vehicles, 

manufactured between November 25, 

2002, and November 9, 2019, are 

potentially involved. 

III. Noncompliance 

FCA explains that the noncompliance 

is that the subject vehicles are equipped 

with speedometers that allow the driver 

to configure the speedometer to display 

the vehicle’s speed in kilometers-perhour (km/h) only and therefore do not 

meet the requirements set forth in 

paragraph S5.2.1 and Table 1, Column 

3 of FMVSS No. 101. 

IV. Rule Requirements 

Paragraph S5.2.1 and Table 1, Column 

3 of FMVSS No. 101 provide that each 

passenger car, multipurpose passenger 

vehicle, truck and bus that is fitted with 

a control, a telltale, or an indicator 

listed in Table 1 or Table 2 must meet 

the requirements of FMVSS No. 101 for 

the location, identification, color, and 

illumination of that control, telltale or 

indicator. Each control, telltale and 

indicator that is listed in column 1 of 

Table 1 or Table 2 must be identified by 

the symbol specified for it in column 2 

or the word or abbreviation specified for 

it in column 3 of Table 1 or Table 2. 

Specifically, the speedometer must only 

allow the speed to be displayed in miles 

per hour (MPH) or km/h and MPH. 

V. Summary of FCA’s Petition 

The following views and arguments 

presented in this section, ‘‘V. Summary 

of FCA’s Petition,’’ are the views and 

arguments provided by FCA and do not 

reflect the views of the Agency. In its 

petition, FCA describes the subject 

noncompliance and contends that the 

noncompliance is inconsequential as it 

relates to motor vehicle safety. 

In support of its petition, FCA offers 

the following reasoning: 

1. FCA states that the vehicles are 

initially delivered for first-sale in a 

compliant state (vehicle speed 

displayed in MPH) and that it is only 

through vehicle operator interaction that 

the settings can be changed from MPH 

to km/h. FCA believes that this 

adjustment cannot be accomplished 

inadvertently. 

2. FCA states that the two 

speedometer settings are clearly and 

continuously identified as ‘‘km/h’’ or 

‘‘MPH’’. In addition, the two 

speedometer scales are noticeably 

different, and if a previous vehicle 

operator changed the units, a 

subsequent vehicle operator would be 

able to tell in a glance that the scale is 

not in MPH. 

3. FCA states that the vehicle speed in 

km/h is 1.6 times greater than speed in 

MPH [in terms of numeric value 

displayed by the speedometer—1km/h 

is approximately 0.62 MPH]. FCA 

believes that if a vehicle operator 

changes the display to km/h and then 

later forgets that the change had been 

made, the operator will recognize that 

the vehicle is moving at a slower speed 

than intended and adjust the speed to 

match the road and vehicle conditions. 

This should alert the operator to (at the 

next appropriate opportunity) perform 

the appropriate steps to adjust the 

speedometer. 

4. FCA also states that the owner’s 

manuals for all of the affected vehicles 

contain instructions to change the 

speedometer display. Therefore, if a 

vehicle operator needs assistance to 

reconfigure the display to MPH, 

instructions are available. 

5. FCA further states that the owner’s 

manuals contain toll-free numbers to the 

FCA customer help-lines. Therefore, if a 

vehicle operator notices that the speed 

is unintentionally displayed in km/h 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 73 / Friday, April 15, 2022 / Notices 22621 

1Cf. Gen. Motors Corporation; Ruling on Petition 

for Determination of Inconsequential 

Noncompliance, 69 FR 19897, 19899 (Apr. 14, 

2004) (citing prior cases where noncompliance was 

expected to be imperceptible, or nearly so, to 

vehicle occupants or approaching drivers). 

2See Gen. Motors, LLC; Grant of Petition for 

Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 78 FR 

35355 (June 12, 2013) (finding noncompliance had 

no effect on occupant safety because it had no effect 

on the proper operation of the occupant 

classification system and the correct deployment of 

an air bag); Osram Sylvania Prods. Inc.; Grant of 

Petition for Decision of Inconsequential 

Noncompliance, 78 FR 46000 (July 30, 2013) 

(finding occupant using noncompliant light source 

would not be exposed to significantly greater risk 

than occupant using similar compliant light 

source). 

3Morgan 3 Wheeler Limited; Denial of Petition 

for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 81 

FR 21663, 21666 (Apr. 12, 2016). 

4United States v. Gen. Motors Corp., 565 F.2d 

754, 759 (D.C. Cir. 1977) (finding defect poses an 

unreasonable risk when it ‘‘results in hazards as 

potentially dangerous as sudden engine fire, and 

where there is no dispute that at least some such 

hazards, in this case fires, can definitely be 

expected to occur in the future’’). 

5See Mercedes-Benz, U.S.A., L.L.C.; Denial of 

Application for Decision of Inconsequential 

Noncompliance, 66 FR 38342 (July 23, 2001) 

(rejecting argument that noncompliance was 

inconsequential because of the small number of 

vehicles affected); Aston Martin Lagonda Ltd.; 

Denial of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential 

Noncompliance, 81 FR 41370 (June 24, 2016) 

(noting that situations involving individuals 

trapped in motor vehicles—while infrequent—are 

consequential to safety); Morgan 3 Wheeler Ltd.; 

Denial of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential 

Noncompliance, 81 FR 21663, 21664 (Apr. 12, 

2016) (rejecting argument that petition should be 

granted because the vehicle was produced in very 

low numbers and likely to be operated on a limited 

basis). 

6See Gen. Motors Corp.; Ruling on Petition for 

Determination of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 

69 FR 19897, 19900 (Apr. 14, 2004); Cosco Inc.; 

Denial of Application for Decision of 

Inconsequential Noncompliance, 64 FR 29408, 

29409 (June 1, 1999). 

and does not know how to re-set the 

speed to display in MPH, e.g., as set by 

a previous operator, the vehicle operator 

can easily contact FCA for assistance. 

6. FCA has not received any customer 

contacts regarding this issue, even 

though this condition exists as in 

approximately 2.5 million vehicles, 

some of which have been in service for 

over 16 years. 

7. FCA is not aware of any crashes, 

injuries, or customer complaints 

associated with this condition. 

8. FCA states that NHTSA has 

previously granted inconsequential 

treatment for FMVSS No. 101 

noncompliance for display of the 

vehicle speed in km/h only. An example 

of the Agency granting a similar 

inconsequentiality petition for display 

of the vehicle speed in km/h only is: 

• BMW of North America, LLC, a 

subsidiary of BMW AG, 80 FR 61884 

(October 14, 2015). 

9. It is FCA’s belief that the 

information described above satisfies 

the intent of 49 CFR part 556 and 

operators can safely utilize their 

vehicles for the intended purposes. FCA 

believes that pursuant to 49 CFR part 

556, 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and § 30120(h), 

and FMVSS 101 S5.2.1, this display of 

the vehicle speed in km/h only 

noncompliance is inconsequential to 

motor vehicle safety and FCA should be 

exempted from the notification and 

remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. 

chapter 301, ‘‘Motor Vehicle Safety’’ for 

the reasons supporting exemption cited 

above. 

FCA’s complete petition and all 

supporting documents are available at 

the Federal Docket Management System 

(FDMS) website at: https://

www.regulations.gov by following the 

online search instructions to locate the 

docket number as listed in the title of 

this notice. 

VI. Public Comment 

NHTSA received one comment from 

the public. This comment was 

submitted by an individual who 

expressed concerns over a vehicle they 

own that was manufactured by FCA. 

While the Agency takes great interest in 

the public’s concerns and appreciates 

the commenter’s feedback, the comment 

does not address the purpose of this 

particular petition. 

VII. NHTSA’s Analysis 

The burden of establishing the 

inconsequentiality of a failure to comply 

with a performance requirement in a 

standard—as opposed to a labeling 

requirement with no performance 

implications—is more substantial and 

difficult to meet. Accordingly, the 

Agency has not found many such 

noncompliances inconsequential.1

Potential performance failures of safetycritical equipment, like seat belts or air 

bags, are rarely deemed inconsequential. 

An important issue to consider in 

determining inconsequentiality based 

upon NHTSA’s prior decisions on 

noncompliance issues was the safety 

risk to individuals who experience the 

type of event against which the recall 

would otherwise protect.2 In general, 

NHTSA does not consider the absence 

of complaints or injuries to show that 

the issue is inconsequential to safety. 

‘‘Most importantly, the absence of a 

complaint does not mean there have not 

been any safety issues, nor does it mean 

that there will not be safety issues in the 

future.’’ 3 ‘‘[T]he fact that in past 

reported cases good luck and swift 

reaction have prevented many serious 

injuries does not mean that good luck 

will continue to work.’’ 4

Arguments that only a small number 

of vehicles or items of motor vehicle 

equipment are affected have also not 

justified granting an inconsequentiality 

petition.5 Similarly, NHTSA has 

rejected petitions based on the assertion 

that only a small percentage of vehicles 

or items of equipment are likely to 

actually exhibit a noncompliance. The 

percentage of potential occupants that 

could be adversely affected by a 

noncompliance does not determine the 

question of inconsequentiality. Rather, 

the issue to consider is the consequence 

to an occupant who is exposed to the 

consequence of that noncompliance.6

These considerations are also relevant 

when assessing whether a defect is 

inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. 

FMVSS No. 101 requires 

speedometers to be labeled with units of 

MPH or both MPH and km/h 

simultaneously. The purpose of FMVSS 

No. 101 is to reduce safety hazards 

caused by the diversion of the driver’s 

attention from the driving task when 

using controls, telltales, and indicators. 

In its petition, FCA explains that 

speedometers in certain vehicles are not 

compliant with FMVSS No. 101 because 

they may be set to display speed in 

units of km/h without simultaneously 

displaying speed in MPH. 

NHTSA has evaluated the merits of 

the inconsequential noncompliance 

petition submitted by FCA and has 

determined that this particular 

noncompliance is inconsequential to 

motor vehicle safety. Specifically, the 

Agency considered the following when 

making its decision: 

1. FCA explained that vehicles are 

delivered with speedometers displaying 

units in MPH and that switching the 

speedometer to display speed in units of 

km/h can only be accomplished by a 

vehicle operator adjusting the settings of 

the vehicle. 

2. FCA explained that speedometers 

are clearly labeled at all times in either 

MPH or km/h and that an operator can 

change the setting back to MPH. If an 

operator were unaware of the means to 

change the setting from km/h to MPH, 

FCA indicated that instructions are 

available within the owner’s manual or 

via FCA’s customer-help phone service. 

3. NHTSA agrees with FCA that it is 

unlikely that the switch from MPH to 

km/h could be done inadvertently 

because physical interactions with the 

vehicle settings controls are required by 

the operator to make the change. We 

believe that if an operator were to make 

this change it would be done 

intentionally and with some 

understanding of the implications and 

would be unlikely to cause any impact 

to vehicle safety. Also, if an operator 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
22622 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 73 / Friday, April 15, 2022 / Notices 

were unaware that a speedometer had 

been changed to display speed in km/ 

h, they would be likely to travel at a 

slower speed rather than a faster speed 

that might impact safety because the 

indicated numeric value of the speed in 

km/h would be 1.6 times greater than 

the numeric value of the speed in MPH. 

For example, a driver attempting to 

match a speed limit of 40 MPH using a 

speedometer reading ‘‘40’’ in km/h 

would be traveling approximately 25 

MPH and have an opportunity to safely 

detect the difference between their 

speedometer reading and the speed of 

nearby traffic. 

4. Based on the information provided 

by FCA, NHTSA agrees with FCA that 

their petition is highly similar to 

petitions previously granted 

inconsequential treatment (80 FR 61884 

and 85 FR 39675). 

VIII. NHTSA’s Decision 

In consideration of the foregoing, 

NHTSA finds that FCA has met its 

burden of persuasion that the subject 

FMVSS No. 101 noncompliance in the 

affected vehicles is inconsequential to 

motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, 

FCA’s petition is hereby granted and 

FCA is consequently exempted from the 

obligation of providing notification of, 

and a free 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 FCA 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 FCA notified them that the 

subject noncompliance existed. 

(Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: 

delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.95 and 

501.8) 

Otto G. Matheke III, 

Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance. 

[FR Doc. 2022–08107 Filed 4–14–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2021–0074; Notice 1] 

Daimler Trucks North America, LLC, 

Receipt of Petition for Decision of 

Inconsequential Noncompliance 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Receipt of petition. 

SUMMARY: Daimler Trucks North 

America, LLC, (DTNA) has determined 

that certain model year (MY) 2020–2022 

Freightliner Cascadia and Western Star 

motor vehicles do not fully comply with 

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 

(FMVSS) No. 205, Glazing Materials. 

DTNA filed an original noncompliance 

report dated June 30, 2021, and later 

amended it on July 16, 2021. DTNA 

petitioned NHTSA on July 29, 2021, for 

a decision that the subject 

noncompliance is inconsequential as it 

relates to motor vehicle safety. This 

notice announces receipt of DTNA’s 

petition. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jack 

Chern, Office of Vehicle Safety 

Compliance, the National Highway 

Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

(202) 366–0661, jack.chern@dot.gov. 

DATES: Send comments on or before 

May 16, 2022. 

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 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 https://

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 

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 https://

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 https:// 

www.regulations.gov by following the 

online instructions for accessing the 

docket. 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). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Overview 

DTNA has determined that certain 

MY 2020–2022 Freightliner Cascadia 

and Western Star motor vehicles do not 

fully comply with the requirements of 

paragraph S5.1 of FMVSS No. 205, 

Glazing Materials (49 CFR 571.205). 

DTNA filed an original noncompliance 

report dated June 30, 2021, and later 

amended it on July 16, 2021, pursuant 

to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and 

Noncompliance Responsibility and 

Reports. DTNA subsequently petitioned 

NHTSA on July 29, 2021, 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 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1