
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 166 (Friday, August 26, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53532-53533]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-21951]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2011-0063; Notice 1]


Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC, on Behalf of Jaguar Cars 
Limited, Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential 
Noncompliance

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Receipt of Petition for Inconsequential Noncompliance.

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

SUMMARY: Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC,\1\ on behalf of Jaguar 
Cars Limited \2\ (collectively referred to as ``Jaguar'') has 
determined that model year 2010 and certain 2011 Jaguar XJ passenger 
cars manufactured between September 11, 2009 and March 28, 2011, do not 
fully comply with paragraphs S5.2.1 and S5.5.2 of Federal Motor Vehicle 
Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 101,\3\ Controls and displays. Jaguar has 
filed an appropriate report pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and 
Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports (dated April 15, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC manufactures and 
imports motor vehicles and is registered under the laws of the state 
of New Jersey.
    \2\ Jaguar Cars Limited, manufactures motor vehicles and is 
organized under the laws of the United Kingdom.
    \3\ NHTSA notes that the noncompliances identified by Jaguar in 
its petition are also noncompliances to identical requirements in 
FMVSS No. 135, Hydraulic Brakes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) (see implementing rule 
at 49 CFR part 556), Jaguar 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.
    This notice of receipt of Jaguar'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.
    Affected are approximately 8621 model year 2010 and 2011 Jaguar XJ 
passenger cars that were manufactured at Jaguar's Castle Bromwich 
assembly plant between September 11, 2009 and March 28, 2011.
    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, these provisions 
only apply to the 8621 \4\ model year 2011 Jaguar XJ passenger cars 
that Jaguar no longer controlled at the time it determined that the 
noncompliance existed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Jaguar's petition, which was filed under 49 CFR part 556, 
requests an agency decision to exempt Jaguar as a vehicle 
manufacturer from the notification and recall responsibilities of 49 
CFR part 573 for 8621 of the affected vehicles. However, the agency 
cannot relieve vehicle distributors and dealers of the prohibitions 
on the sale, offer for sale, introduction or delivery for 
introduction into interstate commerce of the noncompliant vehicles 
under their control after Jaguar notified them that the subject 
noncompliance existed. Those vehicles must be brought into 
conformance, exported, or destroyed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Paragraphs S5.2.1 and S5.5.2 of FMVSS No. 101 require 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 * * *
    S5.5.2 The telltales for any brake system malfunction required 
by Table 1 to be red, air bag malfunction, low tire pressure, 
electronic stability control malfunction (as of September 1, 2011), 
passenger air bag off, high beam, turn signal, and seat belt must 
not be shown in the same common space.

    Jaguar explains that the noncompliance is that the telltales used 
for Brake Warning, Park Brake Warning and Antilock Braking System (ABS) 
failure warnings are displayed using International Organization for 
Standardization (ISO) symbols instead of the telltale symbols required 
by FMVSS No. 101.
    Jaguar stated its belief that although the instrument cluster 
telltales are marked with ISO symbols, the noncompliance is 
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety for the following reasons:
    (1) The functionality of all primary braking systems is not 
affected by this noncompliance and the vehicle will operate as 
intended.
    (2) The owner's manual shows clearly the ISO warning symbols that 
may be displayed along with the FMVSS No. 101 compliant equivalents. 
Further, the owner's manual instructions on required actions to take in 
the event of a warning being displayed are the same for each telltale 
regardless of it being marked with an ISO symbol or with it's FMVSS No. 
101 compliant equivalent.
    (3) The colors of the telltales adhere to a common color scheme and 
are consistent between ISO and FMVSS requirements. The Owner's manual 
provides the following guidance to the driver:
    a. RED warning lamps are for primary warnings. A primary warning 
must be investigated immediately by the driver or seek qualified 
assistance as soon as possible.
    b. AMBER warning lamps are for secondary warnings. Some indicate 
that a vehicle system is in operation, others indicate that the driver 
must take action and then seek qualified assistance as soon as 
possible.
    (4) The driver will receive ISO symbol based warnings of any 
affected system malfunction. These warnings, although displaying 
telltales marked with ISO symbols, are augmented with a message center 
text providing further details as to the nature of the warning symbol:
    a. If low brake fluid is detected or an Electronic Brakeforce 
Distribution (EBD) fault identified, the ISO Brake Warning Symbol and 
the words ``Brake Fluid Low'' or ``EBD Fault'' will be displayed in the 
message center.
    b. If the park brake is applied, the ISO Parking Brake symbol will 
be displayed. If the vehicle is moving in excess of 1.8 mph, the 
message displayed in the message center is ``Caution! Park Brake 
Applied'' and a continuous chime will sound.
    c. If an antilock brake system (ABS) malfunction is detected, the 
ISO ABS

[[Page 53533]]

symbol illuminates display a message in the message center stating 
``ABS Fault''.
    (5) Jaguar is not aware of any incidents or injuries related to 
this condition.
    Jaguar also explains that all unsold vehicles in the dealer stock 
will have the instrument cluster software configuration file settings 
updated to display the correct warning telltales as required by FMVSS 
No. 101 prior to sale.
    In summation, Jaguar believes that the described noncompliance of 
its vehicles to be inconsequential to motor vehicle safety, and that 
its petition, to exempt 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.
    Comments: Interested persons are invited to submit written data, 
views, and arguments on this petition. Comments must refer to the 
docket and notice number cited at the beginning of this notice and be 
submitted by any of the following methods:
    a. By mail addressed to: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket 
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
    b. By hand delivery to 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 Federal holidays.
    c. Electronically: By logging onto the Federal Docket Management 
System (FDMS) Web site at http://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the 
online instructions for submitting comments. Comments may also be faxed 
to 1-202-493-2251.
    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 your comments were received, please 
enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard with the comments. Note that 
all comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.
    Documents submitted to a docket may be viewed by anyone at the 
address and times given above. The documents may also be viewed on the 
Internet at  http://www.regulations.gov by following the online 
instructions for accessing the dockets. DOT's complete Privacy Act 
Statement is available for review in the Federal Register published on 
April 11, 2000, (65 FR 19477-78).
    The petition, supporting materials, and all comments received 
before the close of business on the closing date indicated below will 
be filed and will be considered. All comments and supporting materials 
received after the closing date will also be filed and will be 
considered to the extent possible. When the petition is granted or 
denied, notice of the decision will be published in the Federal 
Register pursuant to the authority indicated below.
    Comment closing date: September 26, 2011.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at 
CFR 1.50 and 501.8.

    Issued on: August 22, 2011.
Claude H. Harris,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2011-21951 Filed 8-25-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


