Grote preliminary evaluation PE10013
Fire In Grote LED Clearance/Marker Lamps. NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation opened this preliminary evaluation about the exterior lighting on 1 model year (2006). Opened Apr 30, 2010, closed Sep 2, 2010 after 4 months without a recall. closed
What NHTSA says
Source: Office of Defects Investigation, as filedThe subject Grote Clearance / Marker lamps have not demonstrated that they represent an unreasonable risk to motor vehicle safety. In the past five years of operational exposure ODI is only aware of 124 failures representing a failure rate of less than .02%.In the year leading up to this investigation ODI is only aware of 13 failures of the subject lamps. Of 124 failures ODI is not aware of any where the burning lamp resulted in damage to the vehicle beyond just the lamp. These lamps are often mounted on aluminum surfaces that help prevent the burning lamp from causing damage to the vehicle. At a very early stage in the subject lamps exposure life Grote took steps to address the potential failures modes of the subject lamps. Grote made the necessary design changes to the lamps to prevent lamps from being susceptible to water intrusion. With these design changes Grote appears to have acted responsibly in proactively identifying and remedying potential design issues with the subject lamps even when the failure rates were very low. In light of these findings, a safety-related defect trend has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that no safety-related defect exists. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances. For more detailed information, please see the attached closing report.
A Preliminary Evaluation is the first formal stage: NHTSA has decided the complaints and other information it screened are worth a closer look, and asks the manufacturer for its own data on the condition. The summary is the agency’s own text from its investigation file, unedited; the resumes carrying the full reasoning are linked below.
The paperwork NHTSA filed
Source: every document on this action, at nhtsa.gov- Opening resume — ODI’s own summary of why it opened this — the subject, what prompted it, and the vehicles in scope.
- Closing resume — ODI’s own summary of why it closed this, and what it concluded.
| Document | Code | Filed | At NHTSA |
|---|---|---|---|
| Opening resume | INOA | 2010 | |
| Closing resume | INCLA | 2010 | |
| Information request to the manufacturer | INIM | 2010 | |
| Manufacturer's response — full submission | INRL | 2010 | |
| Memo granting a response extension | INRE | 2010 | |
| Filed document | INLM | 2010 | |
| Correspondence | INLO | 2010 |
These are NHTSA’s own files, served from the agency’s site — the resumes are what ODI wrote when it opened and closed the action, and the rest is the correspondence behind them, including what the manufacturer sent when the agency asked. They are linked, not copied: where a document names the people who wrote in, that redaction is the agency’s to make and its copy is the one you should read.
What this means for an owner
Source: and what happens nextAn investigation is not a finding that a defect exists, and it puts no duty on anyone. NHTSA opens a Preliminary Evaluation when complaints and other reports suggest a condition worth asking the manufacturer about; it upgrades to an Engineering Analysis when the answers warrant testing; it closes either when it recommends a recall, when the manufacturer recalls on its own, or when no defect trend is found. The agency’s own goals are about four months for a petition, eight for a Preliminary Evaluation or a Recall Query and eighteen for an Engineering Analysis; many run longer.
This one closed without a recall. That means NHTSA found no defect trend it chose to act on at the time, or the manufacturer addressed the condition another way (a service campaign or a bulletin, which have their own pages). A closed file can be reopened if new reports arrive.
Model years it names
Source: as NHTSA filed themAlso named: 2006 Grote Clearance/marker Lamp.
A vehicle page’s investigation list carries the same action; a name here is the scope NHTSA opened, not a list of affected VINs.
Common questions
Source: NHTSA Office of Defects InvestigationIs PE10013 a recall?
No. A preliminary evaluation is NHTSA asking questions, not a recall. A safety recall carries an NHTSA campaign number and a duty to repair for free; this one closed without one. Whether one particular vehicle has an open recall is a VIN question at nhtsa.gov/recalls.
Is PE10013 still open?
No. It closed on Sep 2, 2010 without a recall.
Which vehicles does PE10013 cover?
NHTSA opened it on 1 model year: 2006 Grote Clearance/marker Lamp. That is the scope of the inquiry, not a list of affected vehicles; a recall, if one follows, defines its own population by VIN.