
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 203 (Monday, October 23, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 72809-72812]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-23341]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2021-0089, 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 USA, LLC (Mercedes-Benz) has determined that 
certain model year (MY) 2019-2021 Mercedes-Benz motor vehicles do not 
fully comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 
101, Controls and Displays, and FMVSS No. 102, Transmission Shift 
Position. Mercedes-Benz filed a noncompliance report dated September 
24, 2021, and subsequently petitioned NHTSA (the ``Agency'') on October 
25, 2021, for a decision that the subject noncompliance is 
inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety. This document 
announces receipt of Mercedes-Benz's petition.

DATES: Send comments on or before November 22, 2023.

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 may be 
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

[[Page 72810]]

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 dockets. 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: Frederick Smith, General Engineer, 
NHTSA, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, (202) 366-7487 or Ahmad 
Barnes, General Engineer, NHTSA, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, 
(202) 366-7236.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    I. Overview: Mercedes-Benz determined that certain MY 2020 
Mercedes-Benz CLS450, MY 2019 Mercedes-Benz E300, MY 2019-2020 
Mercedes-Benz E450, MY 2019 Mercedes-Benz AMG E53, MY 2019-2020 
Mercedes-Benz AMG G63, MY 2020-2021 Mercedes-Benz E350, MY 2019-2020 
Mercedes-Benz G550 do not fully comply with paragraph S5.3.1(a), 
S5.3.1(b), S5.3.2.1, S5.3.2.2(a), S5.3.3(a). of FMVSS No. 101, Controls 
and Displays (49 CFR 571.101) and paragraph S3.1.4.1 of FMVSS No. 102, 
Transmission Shift Position, (49 CFR 571.102.) Mercedes-Benz filed a 
noncompliance report dated September 24, 2021, pursuant to 49 CFR part 
573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. Mercedes-Benz 
petitioned NHTSA on October 25, 2021, 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 another exercise of judgment concerning the merits of the 
petition.
    II. Vehicles Involved: Approximately 27,742 MY 2020 Mercedes-Benz 
CLS450, MY 2019 Mercedes-Benz E300, MY 2019-2020 Mercedes-Benz E450, MY 
2019 Mercedes-Benz AMG E53, MY 2019-2020 Mercedes-Benz AMG G63, MY 
2020-2021 Mercedes-Benz E350, MY 2019-2020 Mercedes-Benz G550, 
manufactured between January 29, 2018, and August 25, 2020, were 
reported by the manufacturer.
    III. Noncompliance: Mercedes-Benz explains that the illumination of 
the instrument cluster in the subject vehicles may be interrupted under 
certain circumstances, and therefore does not comply with paragraph 
S5.3.1(a), S5.3.1(b), S5.3.2.1, S5.3.2.2(a), S5.3.3(a). of FMVSS No. 
101 and paragraph S3.1.4.1 of FMVSS No. 102. Specifically, the digital 
indicators including the shift position indicator, digital/analog 
speedometer, tachometer, time, and temperature may briefly fade to dark 
for a maximum of 2.5 seconds and then intensify back to full 
illumination.
    IV. Rule Requirements: Paragraph S5.3.1(a), S5.3.1(b), S5.3.2.1, 
S5.3.2.2(a), S5.3.3(a). of FMVSS No. 101 and paragraph S3.1.4.1. of 
FMVSS No. 102 include the requirements relevant to this petition. 
Except as provided in FMVSS 101 S5.3.1(c), the identifications of 
controls for which the word ``Yes'' is specified in column 5 of Table 1 
must be capable of being illuminated whenever the headlamps are 
activated. This requirement does not apply to a control located on the 
floor, floor console, steering wheel, steering column, or in the area 
of windshield header, or to a control for a heating and air-
conditioning system that does not direct air upon the windshield. 
Except as provided in S5.3.1(c), the indicators and their 
identifications for which the word ``Yes'' is specified in column 5 of 
Table 1 must be illuminated whenever the vehicle's propulsion system 
and headlamps are activated. Means must be provided for illuminating 
the indicators, identifications of indicators and identifications of 
controls listed in Table 1 to make them visible to the driver under 
daylight and nighttime driving conditions. The means of providing the 
visibility required by S5.3.2.1: must be adjustable to provide at least 
two levels of brightness. Means must be provided for illuminating 
telltales and their identification sufficiently to make them visible to 
the driver under daylight and nighttime driving conditions. Except as 
specified in FMVSS 102 S3.1.4.3, if the transmission shift position 
sequence includes a park position, identification of shift positions, 
including the positions in relation to each other and the position 
selected, shall be displayed in view of the driver whenever the 
ignition is in a position where the transmission can be shifted, or the 
transmission is not in park.
    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.
    Mercedes-Benz claims that the conditions needed to cause the FMVSS 
No. 101 noncompliance is rare. In order for the subject FMVSS No. 101 
noncompliance to occur, three events must occur simultaneously. First, 
the CPU load must approach the limits of the instrument cluster's input 
capacity. Second, while there is a high CPU load, a specific diagnostic 
function must be activated and the combined effect of the already high 
CPU load and the diagnostics is sufficient to threaten an instrument 
cluster freeze, which would trigger a preventative reset. Finally, 
during the reset, which would last no more than 2.5 seconds, a separate 
equipment malfunction or condition must occur that would activate an 
indicator or telltale.
    Mercedes-Benz believes that ``the likelihood of a telltale being 
activated in any particular 2.5 second period is very low.'' Compounded 
with the probability of the being activated following the first two 
events, the Mercedes-Benz contends that the likelihood of the subject 
noncompliance occurring is ``negligible.''
    Mercedes-Benz says that its engineers determined that the maximum 
duration of illumination loss is 2.5 seconds, and the maximum time of 
analog display illumination loss is 0.8 seconds. Additionally, 
Mercedes-Benz claims that the subject noncompliance ``would not cause 
the instrument cluster to report inaccurate information.''
    Mercedes-Benz also claims that a driver is unlikely to be confused 
if the display experiences diminished illumination for 2.5 seconds and 
the driver would be unlikely to notice a 2.5 second interruption of 
illumination. Mercedes-Benz refers to a prior NHTSA decision in which 
the agency granted a similar petition based on its belief that a reset 
of the instrument panel would happen quickly within seconds before the 
driver would be distracted to realize what was happening.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Grant of Petition for Inconsequential Noncompliance to 
General Motors, Docket No. NHTSA-2013-0134, 81 FR 6928. (February 9, 
2016)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to Mercedes-Benz, it is difficult to formulate an outcome 
in a

[[Page 72811]]

situation had the instrument cluster displays made the driver aware of 
the situation 2.5 seconds sooner. Mercedes-Benz explains that the 
purpose of the IC displays is to inform the driver of the vehicle and 
equipment functions, metrics, and status. They have no control over the 
vehicle's operation or the equipment and functions that they monitor 
and report on. The subject noncompliance would therefore have no effect 
on the vehicle's operation.
    Finally, Mercedes-Benz contends that the IC reset is a functional 
safety measure designed to prevent a permanent IC display failure. 
Mercedes-Benz asserts that if this reset feature is determined to be 
consequential to vehicle safety and manufacturers were required to 
remove or disable it, vehicle occupants would be exposed ``to a much 
higher and enduring safety risk.
    Mercedes-Benz believes that NHTSA precedent supports the granting 
of its petition for the subject noncompliance. According to Mercedes-
Benz, ``NHTSA has consistently held that brief interruption of vehicle 
display visibility, lasting only seconds, is inconsequential to motor 
vehicle safety.'' Mercedes-Benz says that the subject noncompliance is 
similar to the noncompliances at issue in past petitions that were 
granted. Mercedes-Benz says that NHTSA granted a petition by General 
Motors, LLC, in which MY 2014 Chevrolet Silverado motor vehicles were 
noncompliant with FMVSS No. 101 and FMVSS No. 102 due to an instrument 
cluster reset. According to Mercedes-Benz, in this case, the affected 
vehicles were equipped with an instrument cluster that would reset if 
the driver used the steering wheel controls to operate an external 
device connected to the vehicle's USB port. All warning lights would go 
out, the shift position indicator (PRNDM) would extinguish, and the 
analog gauges (such as the speedometer) would drop to zero for 1.5 
seconds. All telltales would then turn on for 5 seconds following the 
reset. Mercedes-Benz notes that the noncompliance in the Chevrolet 
Silverado vehicles would cause telltale activation to be obscured for 
6.5 seconds in total which is more than 2.5 times the maximum time the 
digital displays in the subject vehicles would be affected in the 
present case and more than eight times the maximum time the analog 
meters would be affected. Mercedes-Benz says that NHTSA found that the 
noncompliance in the Chevrolet Silverado vehicles was inconsequential 
to vehicle safety because the reset would be corrected within seconds, 
``before the driver would be distracted, or realize what was 
happening.''
    Mercedes-Benz contends that the granting of another petition by 
General Motors, LLC, further supports the granting of the current 
petition. In 2016, NHTSA granted General Motors' petition in which GMC 
Denali motor vehicles were equipped with an instrument cluster that 
``would reset if the design input rate of the CPU was exceeded due to 
simultaneous use of multiple functions (such as navigation, Bluetooth 
calling, pairing a media device, or others).'' In this case, the reset 
would cause a loss of illumination to all digital warning lights and 
the shift position indicator, and the indicator gauges would drop to 
zero for 1.3 seconds. After the reset, all telltales would illuminate 
for 5 seconds. Mercedes-Benz says that NHTSA determined this 
noncompliance to be inconsequential to vehicle safety because the reset 
would be a momentary condition and ``the instrument panel telltales and 
indicators would extinguish and return to normal very quickly, with 
little, if any, impact to the driver.''
    Mercedes-Benz contends that the subject noncompliance is similar to 
the aforementioned noncompliances because the instrument cluster reset 
in question is likely to be infrequent because the reset is ``triggered 
by the simultaneous occurrence of two unusual and independent events.'' 
Mercedes-Benz claims that the subject noncompliance has been difficult 
for its engineers ``to induce or observe, in large part because of the 
infrequent coincidence of the two events.''
    Mercedes-Benz believes that the loss of display visibility is not 
likely to cause driver distraction or other increased risk to motor 
vehicle safety. The subject noncompliance causes the illumination of 
the speedometer and tachometer to be interrupted for up to 0.8 seconds 
and would interrupt the illumination of the digital indicators and 
telltale lamps for less than 2.5 seconds. Mercedes-Benz contends that 
it is unlikely that an IC indicator or telltale would activate during 
this reset period and even in the event that it did, activation of the 
indicator or telltale after the 2.5 second reset would not cause an 
increased risk to motor vehicle safety.
    According to Mercedes-Benz, NHTSA has not previously required a 
recall ``to address a seconds-long interruption of instrument cluster 
illumination.'' The interruption of illumination affecting the 
Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Denali motor vehicles in the aforementioned 
General Motors petitions is more than twice the duration of the reset 
in the subject Mercedes-Benz motor vehicles. Mercedes-Benz contends 
that NHTSA found that the displays ``would return to normal quickly 
with little to no impact to the driver,'' and should therefore have the 
same finding for the subject noncompliance. Like the Chevrolet 
Silverado and GMC Denali motor vehicles, none of the subject vehicles' 
operating functions would be affected by the instrument cluster reset. 
Mercedes-Benz adds that many signals on the digital main instrument 
cluster involve comfort or convenience features unrelated to vehicle 
safety and conditions communicated by other indicators or telltales 
would not be significantly affected by a driver response that is 2.5 
seconds earlier. Furthermore, the analog gauges, like the speedometer, 
would continue to display the correct information when illumination is 
interrupted and during daylight, the analog gauges remain visible.
    Finally, Mercedes-Benz contends that any risk to motor vehicle 
safety related to the subject noncompliance is ``lower than the risk 
posed by instrument cluster malfunctions NHTSA has previously 
exempted.'' Mercedes-Benz says that the analog gauge readings in the 
Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Denali noncompliances dropped to zero 
during a reset and the instrument clusters would stop functioning 
whereas the analog gauges in the subject vehicles continue to display 
accurate information and the instrument clusters would lack 
illumination but would otherwise remain functional during the reset. 
Further, the operation of the instrument panels in the Chevrolet 
Silverado and GMC Denali vehicles was interrupted and only the 
illumination of the instrument panels in the subject vehicles is 
interrupted. In the Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Denali vehicles, any 
meaningful message would be further obscured for 5 seconds while all 
the telltales are illuminated which Mercedes-Benz claims could cause 
confusion, but no such confusion would occur in the subject vehicles 
because once the reset is completed, only those controls or telltales 
that have been activated would be displayed to the driver. Therefore, 
Mercedes-Benz believes that the instrument cluster reset in the subject 
vehicles poses an even lower risk to safety than the Chevrolet 
Silverado and GMC Denali noncompliance which NHTSA determined to be 
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
    Mercedes-Benz claims that the subject noncompliance has no effect 
on the operation of headlights, taillights, or

[[Page 72812]]

other vehicle lights. Mercedes-Benz states that they are not aware of 
any reports or claims regarding crashes or injuries concerning the 
subject noncompliance.
    Mercedes-Benz concludes by stating its belief that the subject 
noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety 
and 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 
vehicles 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. 2023-23341 Filed 10-20-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


