7408 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 28 / Thursday, February 11, 2016 / Notices 

exempt Tesla from providing recall 

notification of noncompliance as 

required by 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 

remedying the noncompliance as 

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

granted. 

NHTSA’s Decision 

NHTSA’s Analysis: Tesla explained 

that although the malfunction indicator 

does not re-illuminate immediately after 

the vehicle is restarted, it will 

illuminate shortly thereafter—within 90 

seconds after the vehicle reaches a 

speed between 20 mph and 25 mph. 

NHTSA recognizes that the 

malfunction indicator will not 

illuminate as required for very short 

periods of time—when the vehicle is 

traveling at low speeds and thus poses 

little risk to vehicle safety. Under 

normal driving conditions, a driver will 

begin a trip by accelerating moderately 

beyond 20–25 mph, and as explained by 

Tesla, once the vehicle accelerates 

above 20–25 mph, the malfunction 

indicator re-illuminates and then it will 

remain illuminated for the entire 

ignition cycle, regardless of vehicle 

speed. We understand the 

noncompliance will only occur in the 

very rare case where the driver begins 

a trip and never exceeds the 20–25 mph 

threshold, the speed required to reactivate the malfunction indicator. No 

real safety risk exists because at such 

low speeds there is little risk of vehicle 

loss of control due to underinflated 

tires. Furthermore, the possibility that 

the vehicle will experience both a low 

inflation pressure condition and a 

malfunction simultaneously is highly 

unlikely. 

Tesla states that they provide 

warnings and alerts above and beyond 

what is required by regulations and that 

the subject vehicles are equipped with 

an ‘‘auxiliary’’ screen which displays a 

diagram of the vehicle with respective 

tire positions and status of those 

respective tires. Tesla explained that 

this type of detailed information and 

multiple alerts ensures the driver is well 

informed of a potential low tire pressure 

condition. 

The agency evaluated the displays 

Tesla uses in the noncompliant 

vehicles. In addition to the combination 

telltale indicator lamp, the subject 

vehicles are equipped with a ‘‘plan 

view’’ icon which displays the pressures 

for all four wheels individually. If any 

wheel has a malfunctioning pressure 

sensor the indicator for that wheel 

displays several dashes indicating that 

there is a problem with that respective 

wheel. The additional information is not 

required by the safety standard but can 

be used as an aid to the driver to 

determine the status of a vehicle’s tires. 

Tesla discussed that the 

noncompliance only involves one 

specific aspect of the malfunction 

functionality and that the primary 

function of the TPMS, identification of 

other malfunctions and of low inflation 

pressure scenarios, is not affected. Tesla 

explained that in the subject vehicles, 

the TPMS only fails to operate properly 

when a faulty, missing or non-approved 

sensor is detected and the ignition is 

recycled. According to Tesla, if such a 

fault is detected, and then the ignition 

is cycled off and back on, the MIL will 

reset, thus requiring the system to redetect the fault or missing/unapproved 

sensor versus immediately reilluminating the MIL from the 

previously detected fault. 

The agency agrees with Tesla’s 

reasoning that the primary function of 

the TPMS is to identify low tire 

inflation pressure conditions which 

Tesla’s system does as required by the 

safety standard. There are a variety of 

other malfunctions that can occur in 

addition to the incompatible wheel/tire 

malfunction identified in this petition. 

We understand from Tesla that its 

TPMS will perform as required during 

all other type system malfunctions. 

Tesla mentioned that they have not 

received or are aware of any consumer 

complaints, field communications, 

incidences or injuries related to this 

noncompliance. In addition to the 

analysis done by Tesla that looked at 

customer complaints, field 

communications, incidents or injuries 

related to this condition, NHTSA 

conducted additional checks of 

NHTSA’s Office of Defects 

Investigations consumer complaint 

database and found no related 

complaints. 

NHTSA’s Decision: In consideration 

of the foregoing analysis, NHTSA has 

decided that Tesla has met its burden of 

demonstrating that the FMVSS No. 138 

noncompliance is inconsequential to 

motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, 

Tesla’s petition is hereby granted and 

Tesla is exempted from the obligation of 

providing notification of, and a remedy 

for, that the subject 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 

nonconforming vehicles that Tesla no 

longer controlled at the time it 

determined that the noncompliance 

existed. However, the granting of this 

decision 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 Tesla 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. 

Jeffrey M. Giuseppe, 

Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance. 

[FR Doc. 2016–02722 Filed 2–10–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2014–0094; Notice 2] 

Ferrari North America, 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: Ferrari North America, Inc. 

(FNA), has determined that certain 

model year (MY) 2007–2009 Ferrari 

F430 passenger cars do not fully comply 

with paragraph S4.4(c)(2), of Federal 

Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 

No. 138, Tire Pressure Monitoring 

Systems. FNA filed a report dated July 

16, 2014, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, 

Defect and Noncompliance 

Responsibility and Reports. FNA then 

petitioned NHTSA under 49 CFR part 

556 requesting a decision that the 

subject noncompliance is 

inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. 

ADDRESSES: For further information on 

this decision contact Kerrin Bressant, 

Office of Vehicles Safety Compliance, 

the National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration (NHTSA), telephone 

(202) 366–1110, facsimile (202) 366– 

3081. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Overview 

Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 

30120(h) and the rule implementing 

those provisions at 49 CFR part 556, 

FNA submitted a petition for an 

exemption from the notification and 

remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 28 / Thursday, February 11, 2016 / Notices 7409 

Chapter 301 on the basis that this 

noncompliance is inconsequential to 

motor vehicle safety. 

Notice of receipt of the petition was 

published, with a 30-day public 

comment period, on June 17, 2015, in 

the Federal Register (80 FR 34787). No 

comments were received. To view the 

petition and all supporting documents 

log onto the Federal Docket 

Management System (FDMS) Web site 

at: http://www.regulations.gov/. Then 

follow the online search instructions to 

locate docket number ‘‘NHTSA–2014– 

0094.’’ 

II. Vehicles Involved 

Affected are approximately 1,975 MY 

2007–2009 Ferrari model F430 

passenger cars manufactured from 

September 1, 2007 through July 29, 

2009. 

III. Noncompliance 

FNA explains that the Tire Pressure 

Monitoring System (TPMS) malfunction 

indicator illuminates as required by 

FMVSS No. 138 when a malfunction is 

first detected, however, if the 

malfunction is caused by an 

incompatible wheel, when the vehicle 

ignition is deactivated and then 

reactivated to the ‘‘On’’ (‘‘Run’’) 

position after a five-minute period, the 

malfunction indicator does not reilluminate immediately as required. 

FNA added, that the malfunction 

indicator in the subject vehicles will reilluminate after a maximum of 40 

seconds of driving above 23 miles per 

hour (mph). 

IV. Rule Text 

Paragraph S4.4(c)(2) of FMVSS No. 

138 requires in pertinent part: 

S4.4 TPMS Malfunction. 

* * * * * 

(c) Combination low tire pressure/TPMS 

malfunction telltale. The vehicle meets the 

requirements of S4.4(a) when equipped with 

a combined Low Tire Pressure/TPMS 

malfunction telltale that: 

(2) Flashes for a period of at least 60 

seconds but no longer than 90 seconds upon 

detection of any condition specified in 

S4.4(a) after the ignition locking system is 

activated to the ‘‘On’’ (‘‘Run’’) position. After 

each period of prescribed flashing, the 

telltale must remain continuously 

illuminated as long as a malfunction exists 

and the ignition locking system is in the 

‘‘On’’ (‘‘Run’’) position. This flashing and 

illumination sequence must be repeated each 

time the ignition locking system is placed in 

the ‘‘On’’ (‘‘Run’’) position until the situation 

causing the malfunction has been 

corrected. . . . 

V. Summary of FNA’s Analyses 

FNA stated its belief that the subject 

noncompliance is inconsequential to 

motor vehicle safety for the following 

reasons: 

(A) FNA stated that the TPMS in the 

subject vehicles generally functions 

properly to alert the driver to a low tire 

pressure. Moreover, the TPMS 

malfunction indicator illuminates as 

required when a problem is first 

detected. If, however, there is an 

incompatible wheel and tire unit, when 

the vehicle ignition is deactivated and 

then reactivated after a five-minute 

period, the malfunction indicator does 

not re-illuminate immediately as 

required by FMVSS No. 138. According 

to FNA, the malfunction indicator will 

illuminate shortly thereafter, and, in any 

event, it will illuminate in no more than 

40 seconds after the vehicle accelerates 

above 23 mph. Once the vehicle has 

accelerated above 23 mph for a period 

of 15 seconds, the TPMS will seek to 

confirm the sensors fitted to the vehicle, 

and in the case a sensor is not fitted, the 

TPMS will detect this condition within 

a maximum of 25 additional seconds 

and activate the malfunction indicator. 

Thus, FNA explained that even in the 

presence of the noncompliance, drivers 

are warned of the malfunction in less 

than one minute of driving at or above 

normal urban speeds. 

(B) FNA further explained that if the 

TPMS fails to detect a compatible wheel 

sensor, the TPMS monitor will display 

no value for the tire pressure of the 

affected wheel(s). The TPMS monitor 

will alert the driver to the fact that 

something is not functioning properly 

with the system, pending the 

illumination of the malfunction 

indicator. 

(C) FNA said that the noncompliance 

is confined to one particular aspect of 

the functionality of the otherwise 

compliant TPMS malfunction indicator. 

All other aspects of the low-pressure 

monitoring system functionality are 

fully compliant with the requirements 

of FMVSS No. 138. 

(D) FNA said it is not aware of any 

customer complaints, field 

communications, incidents or injuries 

related to this condition. 

In summation, FNA believes that the 

described noncompliance of the subject 

vehicles is inconsequential to motor 

vehicle safety, and that its petition, to 

exempt FNA from providing notification 

of noncompliance as required by 49 

U.S.C. 30118 and remedying the 

noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 

30120 should be granted. 

NHTSA’s Decision 

NHTSA’s Analysis: FNA explained 

that although the malfunction indicator 

does not re-illuminate immediately after 

the vehicle is restarted, it will 

illuminate shortly thereafter—within 40 

seconds after the vehicle speed exceeds 

23 mph. 

NHTSA agrees with FNA that the 

malfunction indicator will not 

illuminate as required during very short 

periods of time when the vehicle is 

traveling at low speeds and thus poses 

little risk to vehicle safety. Under 

normal driving conditions, a driver will 

begin a trip by accelerating moderately 

beyond 23 mph, and as explained by 

FNA, once the vehicle accelerates above 

23 mph, the malfunction indicator reilluminates and then it will remain 

illuminated for the entire ignition cycle, 

regardless of vehicle speed. We agree 

the noncompliance will only occur in 

the very rare case where the driver 

begins a trip and never exceeds the 23 

mph threshold, the speed required to reactivate the malfunction indicator. No 

real safety risk exists because at such 

low speeds there is little risk of vehicle 

loss of control due to underinflated 

tires. Furthermore, the possibility that 

the vehicle will experience both a low 

inflation pressure condition and a 

malfunction simultaneously is highly 

unlikely. 

FNA stated that if the TPMS fails to 

detect the wheel sensors, a TPMS 

monitor is also provided that displays 

on its TPMS pressures screen ‘‘—’’ 

warning the driver that the status of the 

wheel sensor is not confirmed. The 

agency evaluated the displays FNA uses 

in the noncompliant vehicles. In 

addition to the combination telltale 

indicator lamp, the subject vehicles are 

equipped with a ‘‘plan view’’ icon 

which displays the pressures for all four 

wheels individually. If any wheel has a 

malfunctioning pressure sensor the 

indicator for that wheel displays several 

dashes indicating the there is a problem 

with that respective wheel. The 

additional information is not required 

by the safety standard, but can be used 

as an aid to the driver to determine the 

status of a vehicle’s tires. 

FNA discussed that the 

noncompliance only involves one 

specific aspect of the malfunction and 

that the primary functions of the TPMS, 

identification of other malfunctions and 

identification of low inflation pressure 

scenarios, is not affected. 

The agency agrees with FNA’s 

reasoning that the primary function of 

the TPMS is to identify low tire 

inflation pressure conditions which 

FNA’s system does as required by the 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

7410 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 28 / Thursday, February 11, 2016 / Notices 

safety standard. Also, there are a variety 

of other malfunctions that can occur in 

addition to the delayed re-illumination 

malfunction identified in this petition. 

We understand from FNA that the 

TPMS installed in the subject vehicles 

will otherwise perform as required. 

FNA mentioned that they have not 

received or are aware of any consumer 

complaints, field communications, 

incidences or injuries related to this 

noncompliance. In addition to the 

analysis done by FNA that looked at 

customer complaints, field 

communications, incidents or injuries 

related to this condition, NHTSA 

conducted additional checks of 

NHTSA’s Office of Defects 

Investigations consumer complaint 

database and found two subject vehicle 

complaints both of which were 

determined to be unrelated to this 

petition. 

NHTSA’s Decision: In consideration 

of the foregoing analysis, NHTSA has 

decided that FNA has met its burden of 

demonstrating that the FMVSS No. 138 

noncompliance is inconsequential to 

motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, 

FNA’s petition is hereby granted and 

FNA is exempted from the obligation of 

providing notification of, and a remedy 

for, the subject 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 

noncompliant vehicles that FNA 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 FNA 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. 

Jeffrey M. Giuseppe, 

Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance. 

[FR Doc. 2016–02726 Filed 2–10–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2014–0077; Notice 2] 

Automobili Lamborghini S.p.A., Grant 

of Petition for Decision of 

Inconsequential Noncompliance 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Grant of petition. 

SUMMARY: Automobili Lamborghini 

S.p.A.(Lamborghini) has determined 

that certain model year (MY) 2008–2014 

Lamborghini passenger cars do not fully 

comply with paragraph S4.4(c)(2), of 

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 

(FMVSS) No. 138, Tire Pressure 

Monitoring Systems. Lamborghini filed 

a report dated May 23, 2014, pursuant 

to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and 

Noncompliance Responsibility and 

Reports. Lamborghini then petitioned 

NHTSA under 49 CFR part 556 

requesting a decision that the subject 

noncompliance is inconsequential to 

motor vehicle safety. 

ADDRESSES: For further information on 

this decision contact Kerrin Bressant, 

Office of Vehicles Safety Compliance, 

the National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration (NHTSA), telephone 

(202) 366–1110, facsimile (202) 366– 

3081. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Overview: Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 

30118(d) and 30120(h) and the rule 

implementing those provisions at 49 

CFR part 556, Lamborghini submitted a 

petition for an exemption from the 

notification and remedy requirements of 

49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the basis that 

this noncompliance is inconsequential 

to motor vehicle safety. 

Notice of receipt of the petition was 

published, with a 30-day public 

comment period, on June 17, 2015, in 

the Federal Register (80 FR 34788). No 

comments were received. To view the 

petition and all supporting documents 

log onto the Federal Docket 

Management System (FDMS) Web site 

at: http://www.regulations.gov/. Then 

follow the online search instructions to 

locate docket number ‘‘NHTSA–2014– 

0077.’’ 

II. Vehicles Involved: Affected are 690 

MY 2012–2014 Lamborghini Aventador 

Coupe and Roadster model passenger 

cars manufactured between July 15, 

2011 and May 13, 2014; 456 MY 2008– 

2010 Lamborghini Muricielago Coupe 

and Roadster model passenger cars 

manufactured between April 3, 2007 

and April 29, 2010; and 2361 

Lamborghini Gallardo Coupe and 

Spyder model passenger cars 

manufactured between June 14, 2007 

and November 20, 2013, for a total of 

3507 vehicles. 

III. Noncompliance: Lamborghini 

explains that during testing of the tire 

pressure monitoring system (TPMS) it 

was noted that the fitment of an 

incompatible wheel and tire unit was 

correctly detected and the malfunction 

indicator telltale illuminated as required 

by FMVSS No. 138. However, when the 

vehicle ignition was deactivated and 

then reactivated after a five minute 

period, there was no immediate reillumination of the malfunction 

indicator telltale as required when the 

malfunction still exists. Although the 

malfunction indicator telltale does not 

re-illuminate immediately after the 

vehicle ignition is reactivated, it does 

illuminate in no more than 40 seconds 

after the vehicle is driven above 23 

miles per hour (mph). 

IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S4.4(c)(2) of 

FMVSS No. 138 requires in pertinent 

part: 

S4.4 TPMS Malfunction. 

* * * * * 

(c) Combination low tire pressure/TPMS 

malfunction telltale. The vehicle meets the 

requirements of S4.4(a) when equipped with 

a combined Low Tire Pressure/TPMS 

malfunction telltale that: 

(2) Flashes for a period of at least 60 

seconds but no longer than 90 seconds upon 

detection of any condition specified in 

S4.4(a) after the ignition locking system is 

activated to the ‘‘On’’ (‘‘Run’’) position. After 

each period of prescribed flashing, the 

telltale must remain continuously 

illuminated as long as a malfunction exists 

and the ignition locking system is in the 

‘‘On’’ (‘‘Run’’) position. This flashing and 

illumination sequence must be repeated each 

time the ignition locking system is placed in 

the ‘‘On’’ (‘‘Run’’) position until the situation 

causing the malfunction has been 

corrected. . . . 

V. Summary of Lamborghini’s 

Analyses: Lamborghini stated its belief 

that the subject noncompliance is 

inconsequential to motor vehicle safety 

for the following reasons: 

(A) Lamborghini stated that although 

the TPMS malfunction indicator telltale 

will not illuminate immediately after 

the vehicle is restarted, it will 

illuminate shortly thereafter and in any 

event it will illuminate in no more than 

40 seconds. Lamborghini further 

explained that once the vehicle has 

started and is moving above 23 mph for 

a period of 15 seconds, the TPMS will 

seek to confirm the sensors fitted to the 

vehicle. Lamborghini explains that a 

wheel without a sensor will be detected 

within an additional 15–25 seconds and 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES