Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 249 / Tuesday, December 30, 2014 / Notices 78559 

1Subsequent to receiving Chrysler’s petition, 

NHTSA was notified by the petitioner that it had 

inadvertently referred to FMVSS No. 105, a 

standard that does not apply to the subject vehicles, 

in its petition. 

label that, among other things, identifies 

the vehicle’s manufacturer (defined as 

the person who actually assembles the 

vehicle), the vehicle’s date of 

manufacture, and the statement that the 

vehicle complies with all applicable 

Federal motor vehicle safety standards 

and, where applicable, Bumper and 

Theft Prevention Standards in effect on 

the date of manufacture. The label must 

also include the vehicle’s gross vehicle 

and gross axle weight ratings (GVWR 

and GAWRs), vehicle identification 

number, and vehicle type classification 

(i.e., passenger car, multipurpose 

passenger vehicle, truck, bus, trailer, 

motorcycle, low-speed vehicle). The 

regulations specify other labelling 

requirements for incomplete vehicle, 

intermediate, and final-stage 

manufacturers of vehicles built in two 

or more stages, such as commercial 

trucks that are built by adding work 

performing components, such as a cargo 

box or cement mixer, to a previously 

manufactured chassis or chassis-cab, 

and to persons who alter previously 

certified vehicles, other than by the 

addition, substitution, or removal of 

readily attachable components such as 

mirrors or tire and rim assemblies, or 

minor finishing operation such as 

painting, before the first purchase of the 

vehicle for purposes other than resale. 

Affected Public: Motor vehicle 

manufacturers, including incomplete 

vehicle manufacturers and intermediate 

and final-stage manufacturers of 

vehicles built in two or more stages, 

vehicle alterers, and Registered 

Importers of motor vehicles that are not 

originally manufactured to comply with 

all applicable Federal motor vehicle 

safety standards. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden: 542 

hours and $16,200 for supplying 

required VIN-deciphering information 

to NHTSA under part 565; 60,000 hours 

and $12,000,000 for meeting the 

labeling requirements of part 567. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments, within 30 

days, to the Office of Information and 

Regulatory Affairs, Office of 

Management and Budget, 725–17th 

Street NW., Washington, DC 20503, 

Attention NHTSA Desk Officer. 

Comments are Invited On: Whether 

the proposed collection of information 

is necessary for the proper performance 

of the functions of the Agency, 

including whether the information will 

have practical utility; the accuracy of 

the Agency’s estimate of the burden of 

the proposed information collection; 

ways to enhance the quality, utility and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and 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. 

A comment to OMB is most effective 

if OMB receives it within 30 days of 

publication. 

Nancy Lummen Lewis, 

Associate Administrator for Enforcement. 

[FR Doc. 2014–30239 Filed 12–29–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

Reports, Forms and Record Keeping 

Requirements Agency Information 

Collection Activity Under OMB Review 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration, U.S. Department 

of Transportation. 

ACTION: Notice; correction. 

SUMMARY: This document corrects the 

docket number in a Federal Register 

notice published on Tuesday, November 

25, 2014, that announced a request for 

public comment on proposed collection 

of information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Randy Reid, U.S. Department of 

Transportation, NHTSA, Room W48– 

311, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. Mr. Reid’s 

telephone number is (202) 366–4383 

and his email address is randy.reid@

dot.gov. 

Correction 

In the Federal Register of November 

25, 2014, in FR Doc. 2014–2127–0008, 

on page 70275, column 1 needs to be 

read: 

U.S. DOT Docket No. NHTSA–2014– 

0124. 

Correction 

In the Federal Register of November 

25, 2014, in FR Doc. 2014–2127–0008, 

on page 70275, column 2 before the 

Title: Consumer Complaint Information, 

needs to read: 

OMB Control Number: 2127–0008 

Issued on: November 25, 2014. 

Randy Reid, 

Chief, Correspondence Research Division, 

Office of Defects Investigation. 

[FR Doc. 2014–30310 Filed 12–29–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2014–0046; Notice 2] 

Chrysler Group, 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: Chrysler Group, LLC, 

(Chrysler), now known as Fiat Chrysler 

Automobiles NV, has determined that 

certain model year (MY) 2014 Jeep 

Cherokee multipurpose passenger 

vehicles (MPV), and MY 2013–2014 

Dodge Dart passenger cars (PC) do not 

fully comply with paragraph S5.2.1 of 

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 

(FMVSS) No. 101, Controls and Displays 

and paragraph S5.5.5 of FMVSS No. 

135,1 Light Vehicle Brake Systems. 

Chrysler has filed an appropriate report 

dated March 4, 2014 pursuant to 49 CFR 

part 573, Defect and Noncompliance 

Responsibility and Reports. 

ADDRESSES: For further information on 

this decision contact Stuart Seigel, 

Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration (NHTSA), telephone 

(202) 366–5287, facsimile (202) 366– 

5930. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Chrysler’s Petition: Pursuant to 49 

U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and the 

rule implementing those provisions at 

49 CFR part 556), Chrysler has 

petitioned 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 Chrysler’s petition 

was published, with a 30-Day public 

comment period, on June 30, 2014 in 

the Federal Register (79 FR 36868). 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– 

0046.’’ 

II. Vehicles Involved: Affected are 

vehicles built for the U.S. territories, 

approximately 411 MY 2014 Jeep 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

78560 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 249 / Tuesday, December 30, 2014 / Notices 

Cherokee MPV manufactured between 

June 17, 2013 and January 14, 2014 and 

22 MY 2013–2014 Dodge Dart PC 

manufactured between July 1, 2012 and 

December 13, 2013. 

III. Noncompliance: Chrysler explains 

that the noncompliance is that the 

telltale used for Brake Warning and Park 

Brake Warning is displayed using 

International Organization for 

Standardization (ISO) symbols instead 

of the telltale symbol required by S5.2.1 

of FMVSS No. 101 and paragraph S5.5.5 

of FMVSS No. 135. 

IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S5.2.1 of 

FMVSS No. 101 requires in pertinent 

part: 

S5.2.1 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. If a symbol is used, each symbol 

provided pursuant to this paragraph must be 

substantially similar in form to the symbol as 

it appears in Table 1 or Table 2. If a symbol 

is used, each symbol provided pursuant to 

this paragraph must have the proportional 

dimensional characteristics of the symbol as 

it appears in Table 1 or Table 2. 

Paragraph S5.5.5 of FMVSS No. 135 

requires in pertinent part: 

S5.5.5. Labeling. (a) Each visual indicator 

shall display a word or words in accordance 

with the requirements of Standard No. 101 

(49 CFR 571.101) and this section, which 

shall be legible to the driver under all 

daytime and nighttime conditions when 

activated. Unless otherwise specified, the 

words shall have letters not less than 3.2 mm 

(1⁄8inch) high and the letters and background 

shall be of contrasting colors, one of which 

is red. Words or symbols in addition to those 

required by Standard No. 101 and this 

section may be provided for purposes of 

clarity. 

(b) Vehicles manufactured with a split 

service brake system may use a common 

brake warning indicator to indicate two or 

more of the functions described in S5.5.1(a) 

through S5.5.1(g). If a common indicator is 

used, it shall display the word ‘‘Brake.’’. . . 

V. Summary of Chrysler’s Analyses: 

Chrysler stated its belief that the subject 

noncompliance is inconsequential to 

motor vehicle safety for the following 

reasons: 

1. Chrysler notes that the purpose of 

the brake telltale is to warn the operator 

about either one of two conditions: (1) 

The parking brake is applied or is 

malfunctioning; or (2) the service brakes 

may be malfunctioning. The affected 

vehicles ‘‘brake display telltale’’ 

illuminates in red as required and, 

except for the missing identifier word 

‘‘Brake,’’ the vehicles comply with all 

other applicable FMVSS requirements. 

When the telltale is not illuminated, 

there is no degradation of brake 

performance. All braking system 

functionality, including service brakes 

and the parking brake is unaffected by 

this noncompliance and the subject 

vehicles will operate as intended. Even 

though the word ‘‘Brake’’ is not used, 

Chrysler’s stated its belief that in the 

event one of the affected vehicles 

displayed the red-color ISO brake 

telltale, the driver would recognize a 

possible brake system malfunction. 

2. Chrysler states that the telltale 

functions as both the vehicle’s brake 

system symbol and the parking brake 

symbol. In the Dart, the parking brake is 

engaged by pulling up on the parking 

brake handle in view of the instrument 

cluster where the brake telltale is 

illuminated. In the Cherokee, the 

parking brake is electronic where a 5 

second ‘‘Parking Brake Engaged’’ 

message is displayed in the Electronic 

Vehicle Information Center (EVIC) and 

the brake telltale is illuminated in the 

instrument cluster. The brake telltale 

also illuminates during the cluster 

warning lamp function check. Due to 

the ISO telltale illumination during 

parking brake engagement and during 

lamp function checks, an operator is 

conditioned to associate the telltale with 

the braking system and would be alerted 

in the event of a possible brake system 

malfunction. In the unlikely event the 

ISO brake telltale is illuminated and the 

operator does not understand its 

meaning, the ISO brake telltale graphic 

is shown and described in the Owner’s 

Manual for both vehicles. Thus, an 

operator could easily determine that the 

ISO telltale relates to the brake system. 

3. Chrysler also believes that in the 

subject vehicles, in the event the brake 

fluid level is less than the recommended 

level, the brake telltale is illuminated 

and the EVIC will display a five second 

‘‘Brake Fluid Low’’ message that 

continues until the condition is 

corrected. This additional visual input 

to the operator helps facilitate the 

association of the telltale with the 

braking system. 

4. Chrysler has stated its belief that 

NHTSA has previously granted a similar 

inconsequential noncompliance petition 

regarding the use of ISO symbols. 

5. Chrysler is not aware of any 

warranty claims, field reports, consumer 

complaints, legal claims or any 

incidents or injuries related to the 

subject noncompliance. 

Chrysler has additionally informed 

NHTSA that it has corrected the 

noncompliance so that all future 

production vehicles will comply with 

FMVSS No. 101 and FMVSS No. 135. 

In summation, Chrysler believes that 

the described noncompliance of the 

subject vehicles is inconsequential to 

motor vehicle safety, and that its 

petition, to exempt Chrysler from 

providing recall notification of 

noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 

30118 and remedying the recall 

noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 

30120 should be granted. 

NHTSA Decision 

NHTSA Analysis: NHTSA has 

reviewed Chrysler’s justification for an 

inconsequential noncompliance 

decision and agrees that, based on the 

following analysis, the inadvertent use 

of an ISO label on the combined brake 

telltale for Brake Warning and the Park 

Brake Warning, poses little if any risk to 

motor vehicle safety. 

Chrysler stated that there are two 

conditions which will cause the subject 

combined brake warning telltale that is 

located on the instrument cluster and 

labeled with an ISO symbol instead of 

the required text ‘‘BRAKE’’, to 

illuminate: 

1. The parking brake is applied; and/ 

or 

2. The brake fluid level is less than 

the recommended level. 

For each condition, the subject 

combined telltale is illuminated as 

required with the background in 

contrasting colors, one of which is red. 

In the Cherokee, the parking brake is 

engaged electronically and a 5 second 

‘‘Parking Brake Engaged’’ message is 

displayed in the Electronic Vehicle 

Information Center. For the Dart, the 

parking brake is activated by pulling up 

on the parking brake handle which 

remains visible to the driver. 

In the Dart and Cherokee vehicles, in 

the event the brake fluid is less than the 

recommended level, in addition to the 

ISO symbol illumination, redundant 

notification is provided to the driver of 

the existence of the condition by the 

Electronic Vehicle Information Center 

which displays a five second ‘‘Brake 

Fluid Low’’ message that continues 

until the condition is corrected. 

NHTSA agrees with Chrysler’s 

statement that the functionality of both 

the parking brake system and the service 

brake system remains unaffected by the 

mislabeling. Vehicle stopping distance 

and thus collision avoidance is not 

compromised due to the mislabeling. 

The ISO symbol has been used on UScertified vehicles for many years in 

conjunction with the required text 

‘‘BRAKE.’’ In addition, each time the 

driver activates the parking brake he/she 

will visually be reminded of the 

meaning of the ISO symbol. The parking 

brake activation and the representative 

ISO symbol are operationally linked. 

The ISO symbol is also illuminated 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 249 / Tuesday, December 30, 2014 / Notices 78561 

during lamp function each time the 

vehicle is started. If not familiar with its 

meaning, the owner’s manual can be 

referenced which will explain the 

relationship with the brake system. Over 

time, the ISO symbol has evolved to 

become increasingly recognizable and 

understandable to drivers so if activated 

they would likely be alerted to a 

possible brake system malfunction. We 

further believe drivers recognize that a 

telltale illuminated in red, even if 

unlabeled, represents a malfunction 

which needs to be remedied. 

We believe that the combination of 

the red contrasting color of the ISO 

symbol, driver conditioning over time as 

to the meaning of the ISO symbol, the 

vehicle message center warning for the 

Cherokee indicating parking brake 

applied, the noticeable position of the 

DART parking brake lever when 

applied, the reduced drivability of the 

vehicles when the vehicle is driven with 

an applied parking brake, the message 

center warning ‘‘Low Brake Fluid’’ for 

both vehicles which remains activated 

until the condition is corrected, as well 

as the availability of the description of 

ISO symbol in the Owner’s manual are 

sufficient to adequately alert the driver 

should the indicated problems in the 

braking system occur. 

The manufacturer has shown that the 

discrepancy with the labeling 

requirement is unlikely to lead to any 

misunderstanding especially since other 

sources of correct information beyond 

the ISO symbol, are available. Lastly, we 

note that NHTSA has not received any 

consumer complaints regarding subject 

vehicles noncompliances. 

NHTSA Decision: In consideration of 

the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that 

Chrysler has met its burden of 

persuasion that the FMVSS No. 101 and 

FMVSS No. 135 noncompliances are 

inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. 

Accordingly, Chrysler’s petition is 

hereby granted and Chrysler is 

exempted from the obligation of 

providing notification of, and a 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, any 

decision on this petition only applies to 

the subject vehicles that Chrysler no 

longer controlled at the time it 

determined that the noncompliance 

existed. However, the granting of this 

petition does not relieve Chrysler 

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 Chrysler 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, 

Acting Director, Office of Vehicle Safety 

Compliance. 

[FR Doc. 2014–30240 Filed 12–29–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2014–0095; Notice 2] 

Michelin 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: Michelin North America, Inc. 

(MNA) has determined that certain 

Michelin Pilot Street Radial 

replacement motorcycle tires, do not 

fully comply with paragraph S6.5(f) of 

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 

(FMVSS) No. 119, New Pneumatic Tires 

for Motor Vehicles with a GVWR of 

More Than 4,536 kilograms (10,000 

pounds) and Motorcycles. MNA has 

filed an appropriate report dated July 3, 

2014, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, 

Defect and Noncompliance 

Responsibility and Reports. 

ADDRESSES: For further information on 

this decision contact Abraham Diaz, 

Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration (NHTSA), telephone 

(202) 366–5310, facsimile (202) 366– 

5930. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. MNA’s 

Petition: Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) 

and 30120(h) and the rule implementing 

those provisions at 49 CFR part 556, 

MNA has petitioned 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 September 23, 2014 

in the Federal Register (FR 56852). 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– 

0095.’’ 

II. Tires Involved: Affected are 

approximately 889 Michelin Pilot Street 

Radial motorcycle tires, involving a total 

of three dimensions (110/70 R17 54H, 

130/70 R17 62H, and 140/70 R17 66H), 

that were manufactured between August 

12, 2012 and December 21, 2013 in 

Phrapradaeng, Thailand. 

III. Noncompliance: MNA explains 

that the noncompliance is that on the 

sidewall containing the DOT Tire 

Identification Number (TIN,) the 

marking describing the generic material 

content of the casing plies for tread and 

sidewall, required by paragraph S6.5(f) 

of FMVSS No. 119, is incorrect. 

For the subject tires, the marking 

reads: 

Tread plies Sidewall plies 

2 polyamide 2 polyamide 

1 aramid ........................

The correct marking for these tires is: 

Tread plies Sidewall plies 

2 polyester 2 polyester 

1 aramid ........................

V. Rule Text: Paragraph S6.5(f) of 

FMVSS No. 119 requires in pertinent 

part: 

S6.5 Tire markings. Except as specified in 

this paragraph, each tire shall be marked on 

each sidewall with the information specified 

in paragraphs (a) through (j) of this section. 

. . . Markings may appear on only one 

sidewall and the entire sidewall area may be 

used in the case of motorcycle tires and 

recreational, boat, baggage, and special trailer 

tires. . . . 

(f) The actual number of plies and the 

composition of the ply cord material in the 

sidewall and, if different, in the tread area; 

. . . 

V. Summary of MNA’s Analyses: 

MNA stated its belief that the subject 

noncompliance is inconsequential to 

motor vehicle safety for the following 

reasons: 

(A) The subject tires meet or exceed 

all of the minimum performance 

requirements of FMVSS No. 119 for 

motorcycle tires, and carry on their 

sidewalls all the other required 

markings of FMVSS No. 119. The 

content of these tires is as designed; it 

is only the marking of the generic 

material for the casing plies which is 

inconsistent with the content. Since the 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES