Overview
Title
Gillig, LLC, Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance
Agencies
ELI5 AI
Gillig, a bus company, found out that some of their buses from 2013-2019 had a small problem with how their gear systems work, but this problem doesn't make them unsafe. The government agreed and said they don't have to fix or tell bus owners, but dealers can't sell these buses without fixing the issue.
Summary AI
Gillig LLC discovered that certain buses from 2013-2019 don't fully comply with a federal safety standard, specifically FMVSS No. 102, related to transmission safety. They reported this issue in 2019 and requested the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to consider the noncompliance as minor and not affecting vehicle safety. NHTSA agreed with Gillig's assessment, noting that the interlock system in these buses prevents unintended movement, and therefore granted Gillig's petition, exempting them from needing to notify owners or fix the buses. However, dealers can't sell the noncompliant buses without addressing the issue.
Abstract
Gillig LLC, determined that certain model year (MY) 2013-2019 Gillig Low Floor buses do not fully comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 102, Transmission Shift Position Sequence, Starter Interlock, and Transmission Braking Effect. Gillig filed a noncompliance report dated April 1, 2019, and later amended the report on April 23, 2019. Gillig subsequently petitioned NHTSA on May 8, 2019, for a decision that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety. This notice announces the grant of Gillig's petition.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
General Summary
This document details the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's (NHTSA) decision regarding a noncompliance issue identified by Gillig LLC in certain bus models produced between 2013 and 2019. Specifically, these buses did not fully adhere to the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 102, which concerns the operation and safety standards of vehicle transmission systems. Gillig LLC reported the deviation and petitioned NHTSA to classify it as inconsequential to safety. After evaluating the petition, NHTSA concluded that the noncompliance presents no significant safety risk due to the presence of an interlock system that effectively prevents unintended vehicle movement. Consequently, NHTSA granted the petition, exempting Gillig LLC from notifying vehicle owners or correcting the noncompliance.
Significant Issues or Concerns
One primary concern in this decision is the technical complexity associated with the transmission interlock system described in the document. This complexity may hinder understanding among the general public, who may not have specialized knowledge in automotive engineering. Additionally, the document cites various legal references, such as specific U.S. codes and Federal regulations, which could further complicate comprehension for readers not acquainted with regulatory language.
Another issue is the lack of public input during the 30-day comment period. No feedback was received, which might suggest that involved stakeholders were either not adequately informed or did not grasp the importance of the noncompliance matter. This is concerning as public consultations are a critical aspect of consumer safety oversight and an opportunity for stakeholders to express their opinions and concerns.
Public Impact
The NHTSA's decision could have broad implications for consumer safety and confidence. By deeming the noncompliance as inconsequential, NHTSA reinforces trust in its regulatory standards, suggesting that even minor deviations have been thoroughly assessed and found to be harmless to public safety. However, ensuring clear communication about such decisions is essential to maintain consumer confidence and understanding.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
For Gillig LLC, the decision to grant the petition is beneficial as it alleviates the company from the logistical and financial burdens associated with recalling or repairing the affected buses. The company can continue operations without the stigma of a significant safety recall, potentially preserving its reputation.
Conversely, vehicle dealerships and distributors are affected in a different manner. While they cannot sell the noncompliant buses without addressing the identified issue, the NHTSA's decision underscores the necessity for strict adherence to safety standards, even in cases where noncompliance is considered minor. This enforcement ensures that vehicle operators and other road users are not exposed to potential risks, albeit small, thus highlighting the vital role of regulatory bodies in public safety assurance.
Issues
• The language describing the technical details of the transmission interlock system may be overly complex for a general audience not familiar with automotive engineering, making it difficult to understand.
• The document contains several legal references and citations (e.g., 49 U.S.C., 49 CFR) that could be unclear without additional context or explanation for readers unfamiliar with regulatory language.
• The absence of public comments during the 30-day comment period might suggest a lack of awareness or understanding of the issue among stakeholders, which could be concerning depending on the significance of this noncompliance.
• The decision to grant the petition might be seen as favoring Gillig LLC if the noncompliance is perceived as significant by affected parties or safety advocates.
• The document makes assumptions about the safety risk without providing empirical evidence or data to substantiate claims of inconsequential impact, which might be considered insufficient for stakeholders concerned with vehicle safety.