
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 128 (Monday, July 6, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38507-38508]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-16439]



[[Page 38507]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2013-0139; Notice 1]


Aston Martin Lagonda Limited, Receipt of Petition for Decision of 
Inconsequential Noncompliance

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Receipt of petition.

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

SUMMARY: Aston Martin Lagonda Limited (AML) has determined that certain 
MY 2009-2013 Aston Martin 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. AML has filed an appropriate 
report dated November 4, 2013, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and 
Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports.

DATES: The closing date for comments on the petition is August 5, 2015.

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 at the beginning of this notice and 
submitted by any of the following methods:
     Mail: Send comments 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.
     Hand Deliver: Deliver comments by hand 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.
     Electronically: Submit comments 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 (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.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    I. AML's Petition: Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and 
the rule implementing those provisions at 49 CFR part 556, AML 
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.
    This notice of receipt of AML'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: Affected are approximately 3,282 of the 
following AML model passenger cars manufactured from September 2009 
through October 2013:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      Registered      Dealer un-
                       Model                          AMLNA fleet     registered             Build range
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DB9 Coupe.........................................             211              41                   10/09-10/13
DB9 Volante.......................................             225              53                   10/09-10/13
DBS Coupe.........................................             153               1                   10/09-08/12
DBS Volante.......................................             147               1                   10/09-08/12
Virage Coupe......................................             120               0                   12/10-08/12
Virage Volante....................................             156               0                   12/10-08/12
V8 Vantage Coupe..................................             385              54                   10/09-10/13
V8 Vantage Roadster...............................             279              56                   10/09-10/13
V8 Vantage S Coupe................................             170               9                   06/10-10/13
V8 Vantage S Roadster.............................             122              12                   06/10-10/13
Rapide............................................             671               0                   09/09-02/13
Rapide S..........................................              74              65                   01/13-10/13
Vanquish Coupe....................................             197              80                   09/12-10/13
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.........................................           2,910             372                           N/A
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    III. Noncompliance: AML explains that during testing of the TPMS it 
was noted that the fitment of an incompatible wheel and tire unit was 
correctly detected and the malfunction indicator 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 re-illumination of the malfunction indicator as required 
when the malfunction still exists. Although the malfunction indicator 
does not re-illuminate immediately after the vehicle ignition is 
reactivated, it does illuminate within 40 seconds after the vehicle 
accelerates above 23 mph.
    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:

[[Page 38508]]

    (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 AML's Analyses: AML stated its belief that the 
subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety for 
the following reasons:
    (A) AML stated that although the malfunction indicator does not re-
illuminate immediately after the vehicle is restarted, it generally 
will illuminate shortly thereafter, and in any event it will illuminate 
in no more than about 40 seconds, even in vehicles containing the 
noncompliance. Once a vehicle has started and is accelerating above 23 
mph for a period of 15 seconds, the TPMS will seek to confirm the 
sensors fitted to the vehicle. If a sensor is not fitted, the TPMS will 
detect this within a further period of 15-20 seconds (up to a maximum 
of 25 seconds) and the TPMS malfunction indicator will illuminate 
correctly. Once the malfunction indicator is illuminated, it will 
remain illuminated throughout that ignition cycle, regardless of the 
vehicle's speed.
    (B) AML also stated that if the TPMS fails to detect the wheel 
sensors, the TPMS monitor will display on the TPMS pressures screen 
``--'' warning the driver that the status of the wheel sensor is 
unconfirmed. Once the vehicle starts moving, the system will then 
accurately determine if a sensor is present or not.
    (C) AML says 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) AML is not aware of any customer complaints, field 
communications, incidents or injuries related to this condition.
    AML has additionally informed NHTSA that all unsold vehicles in 
AML's custody and control will have the TPMS Electronic Control Unit 
reprogrammed prior to being sold.
    In summation, AML believes that the described noncompliance of the 
subject vehicles is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety, and that 
its petition, to exempt AML 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 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 AML 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 AML 
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 Giuseppe,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2015-16439 Filed 7-2-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


