[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 244 (Wednesday, December 18, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66745-66746]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-32029]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
[Docket No. 96-124; Notice 1]
Philips Lighting Company, U.S.A.; Receipt of Application for
Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance
Philips Lighting Company (PLC) has determined that certain of its
Model 9004 replacement halogen headlamp bulbs fail to comply with the
requirements of 49 CFR 571.108, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard
(FMVSS) 108, ``Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated Equipment,''
and has filed an appropriate report pursuant to 49 CFR part 573
``Defect and Noncompliance Information Report.'' PLC has also applied
to be exempted from the notification and remedy requirements of 49
U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) on the basis that the noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
This notice of receipt of an application is published under 49
U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and does not represent any agency decision
or other exercise of judgment concerning the merits of the application.
Paragraph S5.1.1 of FMVSS No. 108 states in part that lamps,
reflective devices, and associated equipment specified in Tables I and
III and S7, as applicable, shall be designed to conform to the SAE
Standards or Recommended Practices referenced in those tables. Table I
applies to multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, trailers, and
buses, 80 or more inches in overall width. Table III applies to
passenger cars and motorcycles, and to multipurpose passenger vehicles
trucks, trailers, and buses, less than 80 inches in overall width.
PLC's description of the noncompliance follows:
Some lamps have dimensions that do not comply with FMVSS No. 108
Figures 3-1, 3-3 and 3-8 of FMVSS No. 108. Some lamps do not comply
with Paragraph S9 of FMVSS 108 ``Deflection test for replaceable light
sources.'' The noncompliance is caused by process variations at the
supplier's manufacturing site. The dimensional noncompliance and the
bulb deflection noncompliance are described in Exhibits ``A'' and ``B''
of the application. These exhibits reflect the results of test data
identifying several deviations from the FMVSS No. 108 specification.
PLC supported its application for inconsequential noncompliance
with the following:
``Dimension K Low, Figure 3-1: The ``K'' low dimension defines the
location of the low[er] beam filament within the lamp. In a random test
sample, two lamps were found whose measurements
[[Page 66746]]
on this point were outside of the requirement by .002'' and .005''
respectively. This small deviation from the minimum limit is not
material to any safety issue based upon PLC's experience with
measurement of completed headlamp assemblies, which demonstrates that a
deviation of this type and magnitude, will not affect safety. In fact,
the condition is detectable only under precise testing conditions and
is not even detectable by visual examination. The most likely
consequence of the discrepancy--a problem with headlamp aim/beam
quality--is more likely to be affected by other conditions, such as
foreign debris (which can accumulate on seating plane surfaces during
installation), automobile loading (a full trunk can significantly
affect automobile alignment and alter headlamp aim), dirty headlamp
lenses or weathering of headlamp lenses than by the failure to comply
precisely with the standard. This may explain why PLC has not received
any complaints from end users or state inspection agencies concerning
conditions related to this deviation from the standard.
``Dimension V, Figure 3-1: This dimension defines the length of the
9004 replacement lamp electrical terminals (pins). The terminals on
some test lamps were found to be slightly below the minimum length
requirement. However, all test lamps functioned properly and made good
electrical contact with the automobile lighting system connectors. The
electrical connectors locked in place as designed and no difficulty was
encountered with installation or electrical operation. This
noncompliance does not affect lamp operation or performance (i.e., aim
or beam quality) and is thus inconsequential and not safety-related.
Again, PLC has not received any complaints from any party concerning
conditions related to this deviation from the standard.
``Dimension F, Figure 3-3: The ``F'' dimension defines the location
of the terminal cavity in relation to the centerline of the lamp. Some
test lamps had terminal cavities that were from .002'' to .012'' below
the minimum specification for location. The cavity size (opening) is
within specification limits in all respects. The automobile lighting
system electrical connector fits into the cavity freely and locks in
place as designed. This noncompliance does not affect headlamp system
performance in any way (i.e., aim or beam quality), and PLC has not
received any complaints from any party concerning conditions related to
this deviation from the standard. Thus this deviation also has no
adverse effect on safety and is inconsequential.
``Dimension J, Figure 3-3: This dimension defines the location of
the lower electrical terminals (pins) in relation to the lamp
centerline. One of the test lamps measured slightly above the upper
specification limit for this characteristic. Since the ``R'' dimension
and ``S'' dimension on the same lamp are within limits, the
noncompliance could be related to measurement error or handling damage.
However, all test lamps functioned properly and made good electrical
contact with the automobile lighting system connectors. The electrical
connectors locked in place as designed and no difficulty was
encountered with installation or electrical operation. This
noncompliance also does not affect lamp operation or performance (i.e.,
aim or beam quality), and PLC has not received any complaints from any
party concerning conditions related to this deviation from the
standard. This deviation also has no adverse effect on safety and is
inconsequential.
``Bulb Deflection, Figure 3-8: PLC understands that the bulb
deflection criteria for the 9004 replacement headlamp bulb are included
in the FMVSS No. 108 to ensure that bulbs which are handled by
automated or robotic insertion equipment are strong enough to withstand
the stresses that such equipment may put on the bulb. PLC agrees that
deflection criteria for bulbs inserted by automated/robotic equipment
are necessary and the criteria defined by FMVSS No. 108 are reasonable
for bulbs that are inserted by automated/robotic equipment. However,
because PLC currently furnishes 9004 replacement headlamp bulbs for
aftermarket use only, all 9004 replacement bulbs that PLC furnishes are
installed by human beings. Manual insertion of the 9004 replacement
bulb does not pose a risk that permanent deflection will result because
of the much lower forces that are exerted on the bulb when robotic
insertion is not involved.''
``When inserting a replacement bulb into the headlamp housing the
glass bulb is placed through an opening in the back of the reflector
which is approximately two times larger than the bulb diameter. During
manual insertion, little to no force is placed on the glass bulb. Force
during manual insertion is placed on the plastic base and not the glass
bulb. Nor are there other sources of stress that can cause deflection
of the bulb. Common road hazards such as large potholes cannot cause
sufficient force to equal that required to permanently deflect the bulb
(which is also called a ``burner'') * * *. While the bulb is in the
headlamp housing, unacceptable permanent deflection can be caused only
by force equal to that which would be experienced in a high speed
collision. No bulbs exhibited deflection or distortion prior to the
test or after manual insertion, confirming that this noncompliance is
inconsequential and does not constitute a potential safety hazard for
bulbs furnished to the aftermarket. PLC has not received any complaints
from any party concerning conditions related to this deviation from the
standard.''
SAE Tolerances: PLC notes that the 1996 edition of the Society of
Automotive Engineers (SAE) Ground Vehicle Lighting Standards Manual,
specifically HS-34, provides for greater dimensional tolerances than
those contained in FMVSS No. 108. At least two of those tolerances are
relevant to PLC's Petition for Exemption, as they involve two of the
dimensions for which PLC's 9004 replacement bulbs do not comply with
FMVSS No. 108:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dimension FMVSS No. 108 Tol. SAE Tol.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
V (Fig. 3-1).................... +/- 0.10 mm....... +/- 0.50 mm.
F (Fig. 3-3).................... +/- 0.10 mm....... +/- 0.15 mm''.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments on the application of PLC, described above. Comments should
refer to the docket number and be submitted to: Docket Section,
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Room 5109, 400 Seventh
Street, SW, Washington, D.C., 20590. It is requested but not required
that six copies be submitted.
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 filed and will be considered to the extent 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: January 17, 1997.
(49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120, delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.50
and 501.8)
Issued on: December 11, 1996.
L. Robert Shelton,
Associate Administrator for Safety Performance Standards.
[FR Doc. 96-32029 Filed 12-17-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
