Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 74 / Monday, April 18, 2022 / Notices 23017 

of the information to be collected; and 

(iv) ways to minimize the burden of the 

collection of information on 

respondents, including the use of 

automated collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology. 

Authority: The Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C. chapter 35, as 

amended; 49 CFR 1.49; and DOT Order 

1351.29. 

Nanda Narayanan Srinivasan, 

Associate Administrator, Research and 

Program Development. 

[FR Doc. 2022–08151 Filed 4–15–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2020–0033; Notice 2] 

Mack Trucks Inc., Grant of Petition for 

Decision of Inconsequential 

Noncompliance 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Grant of petition. 

SUMMARY: Mack Trucks Inc. (Mack 

Trucks) has determined that certain 

model year (MY) 2016–2020 Mack 

heavy duty motor vehicles do not fully 

comply with Federal Motor Vehicle 

Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 101, 

Controls and Displays. Mack Trucks 

filed a noncompliance report dated 

October 9, 2019, and later amended the 

report on May 29, 2020. Mack Trucks 

subsequently petitioned NHTSA for a 

decision that the subject noncompliance 

is inconsequential as it relates to motor 

vehicle safety on November 2, 2019, and 

later amended this petition on May 29, 

2020, and July 9, 2020. This notice 

announces the grant of Mack Trucks’ 

petition as amended. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Neil 

Dold, Office of Vehicle Safety 

Compliance, the National Highway 

Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

(202) 366–7352, Neil.Dold@dot.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Overview 

Mack Trucks determined that certain 

MY 2016–2020 Mack heavy duty motor 

vehicles do not fully comply with the 

requirements of paragraph S5.2.1 of 

FMVSS No. 101, Controls and Displays 

(49 CFR 571.101). Mack Trucks filed a 

noncompliance report dated October 9, 

2019, and later amended the report on 

May 29, 2020, pursuant to 49 CFR part 

573, Defect and Noncompliance 

Responsibility and Reports. Mack 

Trucks subsequently petitioned NHTSA 

on November 2, 2019, and later 

amended the petition on May 29, 2020, 

and July 9, 2020, 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. 

Notice of receipt of Mack Trucks’ 

petition was published with a 30-day 

public comment period, on September 

18, 2020 in the Federal Register (85 FR 

58423). 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–2020– 

0033.’’ 

II. Vehicles Involved 

Approximately 47,742 MY 2019–2020 

Anthem, Pinnacle, and Granite model 

vehicles and MY 2016–2020 LR model 

vehicles manufactured between July 12, 

2015, and October 3, 2019, are 

potentially involved. 

III. Noncompliance 

Mack Trucks explains that the 

noncompliance is that the subject 

vehicles are equipped with certain 

controls that are not properly labeled 

with the appropriate symbols or words 

as required by paragraph S5.2.1, Table 

1 of FMVSS No. 101. Specifically, in the 

Anthem, Pinnacle, Granite, and LR 

vehicles there is no identifier for the 

heating and air conditioning fan control 

and the incorrect identifier was used for 

the position side marker control. In the 

LR vehicles the master lighting switch 

control is not identified with the 

required symbol. 

IV. Rule Requirements 

Paragraph S5.2.1 of FMVSS No. 101 

includes the requirements relevant to 

this petition. Except for the Low Tire 

Pressure Telltale, 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. 

V. Summary of Mack Trucks’ Petition 

The following views and arguments 

presented in this section, ‘‘V. Summary 

of Mack Trucks’ Petition,’’ are the views 

and arguments provided by Mack 

Trucks and do not reflect the views of 

the Agency. Mack Trucks describes the 

subject noncompliance and contends 

that the noncompliance is 

inconsequential as it relates to motor 

vehicle safety. 

In support of its petition, Mack 

Trucks offers the following reasoning: 

1. For the heating and air conditioning fan 

control, the requirement specified that the 

control must be labeled with the fan symbol 

or the word ‘‘fan.’’ The required symbol or 

the word ‘‘fan’’ is not on the control. The 

rotary control has numbers 0 to 4 and is 

located on the HVAC panel; therefore, it is 

obvious to the driver that the control is for 

the fan speed. The owner’s manual shows the 

control and informs that the control is the fan 

speed. Operation of the vehicles requires a 

Commercial Driver’s License (CDL); 

therefore, the driver will be a licensed 

professional driver. 

2. For the position side marker, end-outline 

marker, or identification or clearance lamps 

control, the control must be labeled with the 

required symbol or the words ‘‘Marker 

Lamps’’ or ‘‘MK Lps.’’ The control uses a 

different symbol to identify the marker. The 

rotary control has a symbol that indicates 

that the position is for the parking lights. The 

position in the sequence makes it discernible 

to the driver. The owner’s manual shows the 

control and informs that the pictured symbol 

is for the marker lamps. Operation of the 

vehicle requires a CDL; therefore, the driver 

will be a licensed professional. 

3. For the Master Lighting Control, the 

control must be labeled with the identified 

symbol or the word ‘‘lights.’’ The control is 

not identified with the symbol or the word. 

The control is a three-position toggle switch 

and includes the low beam headlight symbol 

and the parking light symbol and, therefore, 

is discernible to the driver. The owner’s 

manual includes information on the control 

and its purpose. Operation of the vehicles 

requires a CDL; therefore, the driver will be 

a licensed professional driver. 

4. Mack Trucks views these 

noncompliances as inconsequential to the 

safe operation of the vehicle. Mack Trucks 

states that there are no customer complaints, 

field reports, warranty claims, or accidents 

associated with these noncompliances. 

5. Class 7 & 8 vehicles require that the 

driver have CDL to operate the vehicle. 

Mack Trucks concludes by again 

contending that the subject 

noncompliance is inconsequential as it 

relates to motor vehicle safety and that 

its petition be exempted from providing 

notification of the noncompliance, as 

required by 49 U.S.C. 30118, and a 

remedy for the noncompliance, as 

required by 49 U.S.C. 30120, should be 

granted. 

Mack Trucks’ complete petition and 

all supporting documents are available 

by logging onto the Federal Docket 

Management System (FDMS) website at: 

https://www.regulations.gov and by 

following the online search instructions 

to locate the docket number as listed in 

the title of this notice. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
23018 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 74 / Monday, April 18, 2022 / Notices 

1The symbol used by Mack Trucks described in 

the petition is a parking light symbol that is not 

recognized in FMVSS No. 101. 

2The standard permits omission of a separate 

marker lamp identifier when the marker lamp 

control is included as part of the master lighting 

switch (see 49 CFR 571.101 Table 1, Note 8); 

however, the standard does not permit use of a 

marker lamp identifier (symbol or word) other than 

those specified in the standard. 

VI. Comment 

NHTSA received one comment from 

the public. 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 

NHTSA has evaluated the merits of 

the inconsequential noncompliance 

petition and supplemental materials 

submitted by Mack Trucks and has 

determined that this particular 

noncompliance is inconsequential to 

motor vehicle safety. Specifically, the 

Agency considered the following when 

making its decision: 

1. Each of the noncompliances described in 

Mack Truck’s petition involve deviations 

from the identification requirements in 

FMVSS No.101, specifically mislabeled 

controls. Mislabeling may affect a driver’s 

recognition of a specific control, but it does 

not affect the function of a control. For each 

of the mislabeled controls described herein, 

the absence of a required label or use of an 

incorrect label does not otherwise affect 

FMVSS No. 101’s identification and 

illumination requirements because other 

identifying labels are present for each subject 

control, which assist the driver in selecting 

the appropriate control. 

2. Mack Trucks explained that the subject 

vehicles have a heating and air conditioning 

fan control that is missing the required label 

using the fan symbol or words specified in 

Table 1 of FMVSS No. 101. While the subject 

rotary control is missing the required label, 

it includes labeling of numbers 0 through 4 

corresponding to increasing fan speed, and 

the rotary control is adjacent to and grouped 

with other labeled controls associated with 

heating and air conditioning functions on the 

same control panel; consequently, in this 

instance, it would be evident to a driver that 

the numbered rotary control is associated 

with fan speed for heating and air 

conditioning, and the noncompliance would 

not be consequential to safety. 

3. Mack Trucks explained that the subject 

vehicles have marker lamp controls that are 

labeled with a symbol 1 that does not match 

the symbol specified in Table 1 of FMVSS 

No. 101, and that the symbol is still a lighting 

symbol rather than an arbitrary symbol. Each 

subject vehicle’s marker lamp control is part 

of a master lighting control that includes 

multiple individually labeled positions as 

either a rotary control or three-position 

switch lever. For all subject vehicles except 

for the LR vehicles, the master lighting 

control is labeled with the master lighting 

switch label specified in Table 2 of FMVSS 

No. 101. The LR model vehicles are equipped 

with a master lighting toggle switch that is 

not labeled with the required symbol or word 

for identifying the master light control as 

specified in Table 2 of FMVSS No. 101. 

For the Anthem, Pinnacle, and Granite 

model vehicles, the incorrect marker lamp 

control label (which is an internationally 

recognized parking light symbol, similar in 

nature to the marker light symbol) would not 

be enough for a driver to confuse the function 

of the control because it is part of the master 

lighting switch; the master lighting switch 

otherwise includes the master lighting switch 

label specified by the standard and other 

commonly used lighting symbols. Notably, 

FMVSS No. 101 permits omission of the 

marker lamp label when it is part of the 

master lighting switch.2

For the LR model vehicle, the master 

lighting switch is not labeled with master 

lighting switch label, and the position for the 

marker lamps is labeled with the same 

incorrect symbol for the marker lamps. Still, 

all symbols that appear on the master lighting 

switch (marker lamps and head lamps) are 

commonly recognizable as lighting control 

symbols. Consequently, the specific control 

implementations described in Mack Truck’s 

petition and supplemental materials are 

unlikely to alter a driver’s understanding of 

the lighting controls in a manner that would 

be consequential to safety. 

4. As explained by Mack Trucks, the 

subject vehicles are trucks that may only be 

driven by a professional driver holding a 

commercial driver’s license (CDL). NHTSA 

believes that the qualifications required to 

drive these subject vehicles further mitigates 

any remaining safety risk from the 

noncompliance. 

VIII. NHTSA’s Decision 

In consideration of the foregoing, 

NHTSA finds that Mack Trucks has met 

its burden of persuasion that the subject 

FMVSS No. 101 noncompliance in the 

affected vehicles is inconsequential to 

motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Mack 

Trucks’ petition is hereby granted and 

Mack Trucks 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 on this petition only applies to 

the subject vehicles that Mack Trucks 

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 Mack Trucks 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. 2022–08228 Filed 4–15–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2018–0110; Notice 2] 

Great Dane, LLC, Denial of Petition for 

Decision of Inconsequential 

Noncompliance 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Denial of petition. 

SUMMARY: Great Dane, LLC (Great Dane) 

has determined that certain model year 

(MY) 2019 Great Dane Freedom 

Platform trailers do not comply with 

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards 

(FMVSS) No. 223, Rear Impact Guards, 

and FMVSS No. 224, Rear Impact 

Protection. Great Dane filed a 

noncompliance report dated January 2, 

2019, and subsequently petitioned 

NHTSA on January 2, 2019, for a 

decision that the subject noncompliance 

is inconsequential as it relates to motor 

vehicle safety. This document 

announces the denial of Great Dane’s 

petition. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Natasha Iwegbu, Office of Vehicle Safety 

Compliance, the National Highway 

Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

telephone (202) 366–2334. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Overview 

Great Dane has determined that 

certain MY 2019 Great Dane Freedom 

Platform trailers do not fully comply 

with paragraph S5.3 of FMVSS No. 223, 

Rear Impact Guards (49 CFR 571.223), 

and paragraph S5.1 of FMVSS No 224, 

Rear Impact Protection (49 CFR 

571.224). Great Dane filed a 

noncompliance report dated January 2, 

2019, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, 

Defect and Noncompliance 

Responsibility and Reports, and 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES