Mercedes-Benz of North America, Inc.; Grant of Petition for Determination of Inconsequential Noncompliance

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. 94-12; Notice 2]

Mercedes-Benz of North America, Inc.; Grant of Petition for

Determination of Inconsequential Noncompliance

Mercedes-Benz of North America, Inc. (Mercedes) of Montvale, New

Jersey determined that the headlamps on some of its vehicles fail to

comply with the lens bonding requirements of 49 CFR 571.108, Motor

Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108, ``Lamps, Reflective Devices and

Associated Equipment,'' and filed an appropriate report pursuant to 49

CFR Part 573, ``Defect and Noncompliance Reports.'' Mercedes also

petitioned to be exempted from the notification and remedy requirements

of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1381 et

seq.) (now 49 U.C.C. 30118 and 30120) on the basis that the

noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.

Notice of receipt of the petition was published on February 11,

1994 and an opportunity afforded for comment (59 FR 6674). This notice

grants the petition.

Section S4 of Standard No. 108 defines ``replaceable bulb

headlamp'' as one that is comprised of a bonded lens and reflector

assembly. From August 1991 to December 1993, the petitioner imported

approximately 46,000 Mercedes-Benz vehicles for sale in the United

States in which the headlamps were not ``replaceable bulb headlamps''

because their lenses were clipped onto their reflectors as an assembly

rather than bonded. These vehicles included approximately 35,925 S-

Class, 7,379 E-Class, and 2,632 C-Class models. In addition,

approximately 1,873 noncompliant replacement part headlamps and

approximately 1,147 noncompliant replacement part headlamp lenses were

sold to Mercedes-Benz dealerships.

Mercedes supported its petition for inconsequential noncompliance

with the following.

1. Damaged Lenses Will Be Replaced With Complying Headlamp

Assemblies

Based on the number of replacement lenses sold in Model Years 1991-

92, [Mercedes] estimates that approximately 500 lenses are replaced

each year in the subject vehicles. Thus, the number of vehicles

involved is relatively low.

Effective November 2, 1993, [Mercedes] no longer sells lenses as a

replacement part. This means that no source for replacement lenses now

exists. Therefore, when lenses are damaged in the future, the owner's

only recourse will be to replace the entire headlamp assembly that

complies with Standard 108.

In the unlikely event that a noncomplying aftermarket lens market

were developed for the 46,000 vehicles produced, their use would be

restricted by state inspection laws. At the present time, approximately

two-thirds of all states have periodic inspection programs. As

evidenced by * * * state vehicle regulations [which Mercedes included

with its petition and are contained in the Docket], replacement

headlamp lenses are required to keep the headlamp in compliance with

Standard 108. It is our understanding that State Inspection garages

routinely reject cars if their headlamp lenses do not bear the ``DOT''

marking, since the lack of ``DOT'' quickly identifies the headlamp as a

non-U.S. unit. Therefore, in the unlikely event that a vehicle owner

replaces a damaged lens with a noncomplying aftermarket lens rather

than a complying headlamp assembly, the vehicle will fail inspection in

most states.

2. Headlamp Aim Not Affected

In a recently published Federal Register notice (Docket 93-57)

requesting comments on the subject of bonded versus unbonded headlamps,

NHTSA stated:

In previous denials of petitions to allow removable headlamp

lenses, NHTSA argued that mechanical aiming of lamps with lens-

mounted aiming pads could be affected by any change of the alignment

relationship established between lenses and reflectors at the time

of manufacture. Thus, alteration of the original alignment during

lens replacement could misaim the beam. [58 Fed. Reg. 42,924 (August

12, 1993).]

This concern is not relevant here because the vehicles in question

contain on-board aiming devices (vehicle headlamp aiming devices). No

aiming pads are needed in such advanced technology. Since the lens does

not participate in the aiming of the headlamp, aiming cannot be

affected by misalignment of the lens during lens replacement in the

Mercedes system.

3. Headlamp Beam Formation Not Affected

In the same Federal Register notice, NHTSA expressed concern that

replacement lenses may alter the headlamp beam formation due to the

fluting (prescription) of the lens. Several factors assure photometric

compliance with Standard 108 for the Mercedes-Benz unbonded headlamp.

First, in the headlamp manufacturing process, the headlamp is designed

so that the lens can be clipped onto any housing/reflector assembly and

be assured of meeting the photometric performance requirements of

Standard 108. * * * [T]he design permits only a positive and secure

attachment. There are no shims or adjustments that could influence the

lens mounting. Second, from a design point of view, the physical size

of the reflector and lens make the headlamp highly insensitive to

minute positioning variations in mounting and/or manufacture.

4. Vehicle Maintenance

All affected vehicles are within the time constraints of the

warranty period. Thus, within the next 12 months, [Mercedes] will be

able to remedy the noncompliance when the subject vehicles are brought

in for service. [Mercedes] will direct dealers to bond the headlamps of

all noncomplying vehicles brought to authorized dealers for service.

5. Conclusion

In view of the fact that the headlamps comply with all performance

aspects of Standard 108, that the replacement lenses are no longer

available from [Mercedes] or its dealers, and that the vehicles will be

remedied shortly through routine warranty maintenance, there is no

adverse impact on safety. Therefore, [Mercedes believes that] NHTSA

should grant [its] petition for an exemption for an inconsequential

noncompliance with Standard 108.

One comment was received, from Volkswagen of North America, Inc.,

which supported granting the petition.

NHTSA's principal concerns with headlamp compliance are photometric

performance and durability. The agency accepts the petitioner's

representation that the accuracy of headlamp aim is not affected by

lens replacement. The fact that the petitioner has undertaken to bond

the lenses on vehicles that come in for warranty service addresses the

agency's concern on durability. NHTSA deems it unlikely that, during

the warranty period which is early in the life of the headlamp, the

reflector assembly will deteriorate to a point that it affects

photometric performance because the lens is clipped rather than bonded.

Although 100% of the noncompliant vehicles may not be returned for

warranty work, it is the practice of most vehicle owners to have such

work done by a factory authorized dealer, and NHTSA deems it likely

that most cars will have the noncompliance corrected by the end of the

4-year warranty period.

The agency is currently considering a petition from Robert Bosch

GmbH, the manufacturer of the noncompliant headlamps, to permit the use

of unbonded lenses on replaceable bulb headlamps that are equipped with

on-vehicle aiming devices. If NHTSA were to grant the petition and to

propose such an amendment, it might be necessary to include enhanced

durability requirements that would help to ensure reflector integrity

and resistance to contaminants between the time the lens is damaged and

the time it is replaced. At this point, the agency does not know how

the unbonded Mercedes headlamps would perform under such enhanced

requirements that are yet to be fully developed and evaluated.

Therefore, the bonding by Mercedes of its vehicle headlamps seems to be

a prudent course of action under the circumstances.

The petition also covered replacement headlamps and replacement

lenses. NHTSA understands that these parts are intended to replace

parts on the headlamps covered by the petition, and deems it likely

that most of the vehicles equipped with the replacement headlamps or

lenses will be inspected and corrected during the warranty period as

well.

In consideration of the foregoing, it is hereby found that

Mercedes-Benz of North America, Inc., has met its burden of persuasion

that the noncompliance herein described is inconsequential as it

relates to motor vehicle safety and its petition is granted.

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120; delegations of authority at

49 CFR 1.50 and 49 CFR 501.8.

Issued on August 4, 1994.

Barry Felrice,

Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.

[FR Doc. 94-19442 Filed 8-9-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P