Motor vehicle safety standards; exemption petitions, etc.: General Motors Corp.,

[Federal Register: April 28, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 81)]

[Notices]

[Page 22897]

From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

[DOCID:fr28ap99-77]

[[Page 22897]]

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-99-5461; Notice 1]

General Motors Corporation; Application for Determination of Inconsequential Noncompliance With Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 108--Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated Equipment

General Motors Corporation (GM) determined that some of the GM 1997 EV1 electric passenger cars fail to meet the turn signal requirements found in Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108--Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated Equipment. In accordance with 49 CFR 556.4(b)(6), GM submitted a 49 CFR Part 573.5 noncompliance notification to the agency. Pursuant to 49 U. S. C., sections 30118 and 30120, GM petitioned the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) for a decision that the noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.

GM states that the EV1 is equipped with an electronic turn signal module that controls turn signal operation. A subset of the module population can be affected by random inputs that cause the internal timing of the electronic circuit to become un-synchronized. If this occurs, it can cause the left turn signal circuit on affected vehicles to operate improperly and not in compliance with FMVSS No. 108. The left front turn signal lamp may flash at a rapid rate while the left rear turn signal lamp illuminates but does not flash. These conditions can continue after the turn signal lever automatically returns to the off position, but stop if the driver manually cancels the turn signal or turns the car off. The right turn signal is not affected.

GM believes that this noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety for these reasons:

‹bullet› The potential for this condition is confined to a very small population of vehicles, 558.

‹bullet› The condition is not found on every vehicle. Only a subset of vehicles are affected, based on the build variation of the turn signal module.

‹bullet› GM knows of only eight customers who have reported the condition. The turn signal module in these vehicles has been replaced.

‹bullet› While it has not been able to determine the exact percentage of affected vehicles (the anomaly is not readily repeatable in the laboratory, and the small production run has severely limited the number of parts available for testing), the likelihood of experiencing the condition is extremely rare. The worst case part, found in laboratory testing, exhibited the anomaly 16 times in 40,000 cycles (0.0004 times per cycle). Other tested parts did not exhibit the condition as often, or at all.

‹bullet› The left turn signal does not fail completely. An oncoming driver would see the front turn signal flashing at a rapid rate. A following driver would see the left turn signal lamp on, although it would not be flashing. Both of these results are similar to a vehicle that has a burned out turn signal lamp.

‹bullet› Like a vehicle with a burned out lamp, a driver experiencing this condition is alerted that the turn signal system is not functioning properly because the turn signal indicator light does not flash.

‹bullet› A turn signal with this condition does not self-cancel, but it can easily be canceled manually.

‹bullet› GM knows of no accidents or injuries associated with this condition.

Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments on the application described above. Comments should refer to the docket number and be submitted to: Docket Management, Room PL-401 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC 20590. It is requested but not required that two copies be submitted. Docket hours are 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

All comments received before the close of business on the closing date indicated below will be considered. The application and supporting materials, and all comments received after the closing date, will also be filedand will be considered to the extend possible. When the application is granted or denied, the notice will be published in the Federal Register pursuant to the authority indicated below.

Comment closing date: May 28, 1999. (49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120; delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.50 and 501.8)

Issued on: April 21, 1999. L. Robert Shelton, Associate Administrator for Safety Performance Standards.

[FR Doc. 99-10495Filed4-26-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P