Document ID: NHTSA-2020-0116-0001
Agency: nhtsa
Document Type: Notice
Title: Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance: Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC
Posted Date: 2021-04-23T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 77 (Friday, April 23, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21792-21794]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-08453]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2020-0116; Notice 1]

Mercedes-Benz USA, 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: Mercedes-Benz AG (MBAG) and Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC (MBUSA), 
(collectively, ``Mercedes-Benz''), have determined that certain model 
year (MY) 2020-2021 Mercedes-Benz GLE and GLS Class motor vehicles do 
not fully comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 
110, Tire Selection and Rims and Motor Home/Recreation Vehicle Trailer 
Load Carrying Capacity Information for Motor Vehicles with a GVWR of 
4,536 Kilograms (10,000 pounds) or Less. Mercedes-Benz filed a 
noncompliance report dated October 30, 2020. Mercedes-Benz subsequently 
petitioned NHTSA on November 16, 2020, for a decision that the subject 
noncompliance

[[Page 21793]]

is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety. This notice 
announces receipt of Mercedes-Benz's petition.

DATES: Send comments on or before May 24, 2021.

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).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kerrin Bressant, Compliance Engineer, 
NHTSA, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, (202) 366-1110.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    I. Overview: Mercedes-Benz has determined that certain MY 2020-2021 
GLE and GLS Class motor vehicles do not fully comply with the 
requirements of paragraph S4.3(c) of FMVSS No. 110, Tire Selection and 
Rims and Motor Home/Recreation Vehicle Trailer Load Carrying Capacity 
Information for Motor Vehicles with a GVWR of 4,536 Kilograms (10,000 
pounds) or Less (49 CFR 571.110). Mercedes-Benz filed a noncompliance 
report dated October 30, 2020, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and 
Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. Mercedes-Benz subsequently 
petitioned NHTSA on November 16, 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.
    This notice of receipt of Mercedes-Benz's petition is published 
under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120 and does not represent any Agency 
decision or other exercise of judgment concerning the merits of the 
petition.
    II. Vehicles Involved: Approximately 22,439 MY 2020-2021 Mercedes-
Benz GLE350, GLE450, GLE580, GLS450, and GLS580 motor vehicles, 
manufactured between July 7, 2018, and October 16, 2020, are 
potentially involved.
    III. Noncompliance: Mercedes-Benz explains that the noncompliance 
is that the subject vehicles are equipped with a vehicle placard 
affixed to the driver's side B-pillar of the vehicle that erroneously 
overstates maximum permissible cold tire pressure and therefore, does 
not fully meet the requirements specified in paragraph S4.3(c) of FMVSS 
No. 110. Specifically, the vehicle placard overstates the maximum 
permissible cold tire pressure as 320 kPa, when it should state a 
maximum cold tire pressure of 300 kPa.
    IV. Rule Requirements: Paragraph S4.3(c) of FMVSS No. 110 includes 
the requirements relevant to this petition. Each vehicle, except for a 
trailer or incomplete vehicle, shall show the information specified in 
S4.3(a) through (g), and may show, at the manufacturer's option, the 
information specified in S4.3(h) and (i), on a placard permanently 
affixed to the driver's side B-pillar. This information shall be in the 
English language and conform in color and format, not including the 
border surrounding the entire placard, as shown in the example set 
forth in Figure 1 in this standard. At the manufacturer's option, the 
information specified in S4.3 (c), (d), and, as appropriate, (h) and 
(i) may be shown, alternatively to being shown on the placard, on a 
tire inflation pressure label which must conform in color and format, 
not including the border surrounding the entire label, as shown in the 
example set forth in Figure 2 in this standard.
    V. Summary of Mercedes-Benz's Petition: The following views and 
arguments presented in this section, ``V. Summary of Mercedes-Benz's 
Petition,'' are the views and arguments provided by Mercedes-Benz. They 
have not been evaluated by the Agency and do not reflect the views of 
the Agency. Mercedes-Benz describes the subject noncompliance and 
contends that the noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to 
motor vehicle safety.
    In support of its petition, Mercedes-Benz submitted the following 
reasoning:
    1. For the vehicles at issue in this petition, the placard lists 
the maximum tire inflation pressure as 320 kPa while the tire sidewall 
indicates that the maximum tire inflation pressure is 300 kPa. The tire 
pressure information located on the inside of the gas tank flap also 
indicates that the maximum tire pressure is 320 kPa. Mercedes-Benz 
asserts the difference in information between the tire sidewall and 
what is included on the vehicle and placard does not present any risk 
of over-inflation since, per the tire manufacturer, the tires were 
actually designed to a maximum permissible inflation pressure of 350 
kPa.
    2. Mercedes-Benz claims there is no risk of tire overloading here, 
even if the consumer were to inflate the tires based on the 320 kPa 
inflation pressure listed on the placard or on the gas tank flap. The 
tire manufacturer in this instance, Michelin, has confirmed that the 
Primacy Tour A/S tires that are equipped on the subject vehicles are 
designed and manufactured to withstand a maximum tire pressure of

[[Page 21794]]

350 kPa, which is even higher than what is listed on the placard or on 
the tire sidewall. The supplier has confirmed that there are no effects 
on vehicle performance and there would be no adverse safety 
consequences if the tires were inflated to the 320 kPa limit indicated 
on the placard or to the 300 kPa limit listed on the sidewall. 
Mercedes-Benz says the tires otherwise meet or exceed all applicable 
FMVSS performance requirements.
    3. Mercedes-Benz contends that in similar situations when 
evaluating the effect of a noncompliance with FMVSS No. 110, the Agency 
has recognized that slight discrepancies in the listed tire pressure 
and deviations in the information listed in the placard do not have a 
consequential effect on motor vehicle safety. For example, the Agency 
granted a petition where the placards incorrectly identified the size 
of the tires installed on the vehicles. Mercedes-Benz says that the 
Agency reasoned that the noncompliance was inconsequential because, 
among other reasons, the tires installed on the vehicles are 
appropriate to handle the vehicle's maximum loads when inflated to the 
maximum tire pressure. See Chrysler Group, LLC, Grant of Petition for 
Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 78 FR 38443 (June 26, 2013). 
Mercedes-Benz claims that this has also been the Agency's rationale 
when specific information was missing from the vehicle placard. See 
General Motors, LLC, Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential 
Noncompliance, 84 FR 25117 (May 30, 2019) (``vehicles are equipped with 
the appropriate matched spare tire and rim combination, and that when 
properly mounted on the subject vehicles, would allow the vehicles to 
be operated safely within the manufacturer's specified performance and 
loading limits.'') Further, Mercedes-Benz states, the Agency has 
recognized that the maximum tire inflation pressure indicated on the 
tire sidewall have somewhat limited safety value and that NHTSA 
ultimately decided to retain maximum inflation pressure labeling 
requirements simply ``as an aid in preventing over-inflation.'' See 
Grant of Petition of Michelin North America, 70 FR 10161 (March 2, 
2005).
    4. Mercedes-Benz asserts that there is no risk of over-inflation in 
this case because the tires have been designed and engineered to a 
higher maximum inflation pressure. The tires are sufficiently robust to 
accommodate the additional 20 kPa of pressure should the consumer rely 
on the information listed on the placard or under the gas tank flap. 
According to Mercedes-Benz, there is also no risk of under pressurizing 
the tire if the consumer relied upon the value listed on the tire 
sidewall because 300 kPa is also a sufficient maximum pressure for the 
tires installed on these vehicles. Inflating the tires at either 300 
kPa or 320 kPa is appropriate for the GVWR of the vehicle. Inflating 
the tires to the pressure listed on either the tire sidewall or the 
value listed on the placard would not impact the operation of the tire 
pressure monitoring system, and the vehicle's load-carrying capacity 
would not be impacted or reduced if the tire is inflated to 320 kPa (up 
to 350 kPa) if the consumer followed the inflation level on the placard 
or under the gas tank flap. Overall, from a vehicle performance 
perspective, 20 kPa in tire pressure difference is of no consequence, 
particularly where, as here, there is no effect on vehicle performance 
or load capacity.
    5. Mercedes-Benz says that owners may seek guidance on the 
appropriate tire pressure inflation value through its Roadside 
Assistance program which is available 24 hours a day and complimentary 
during the vehicle warranty period. Alternatively, any Mercedes-Benz 
customer may obtain information on tire pressure and other service-
related information from trained representatives by calling the 
Mercedes-Benz Customer Assistance Center. All of the remaining 
information on the vehicle placard is accurate, including the vehicle 
loading capacity and tire size and dimensions, which further confirms 
that the vehicle is not susceptible to overloading even if the tires 
are inflated to 320 kPa.
    6. Mercedes-Benz cites NHTSA as saying ``historically granted 
petitions for inconsequentiality for inaccurate tire placards where the 
grantee has supplied sufficient reasoning to support . . . a conclusion 
[that there is no adverse safety impact.''] See Kia Motors, Inc., Grant 
of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 85 FR 39676 
(July 1, 2020).
    Mercedes-Benz concludes by again contending that the subject 
noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety, 
and that its petition to 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.
    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 Mercedes-Benz 
no longer controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance 
existed. However, any decision on 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 
Mercedes-Benz 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. 2021-08453 Filed 4-22-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P