Continental Tire North America Inc., Grant of Application for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 14748 [05-5650]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
14748
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 55 / Wednesday, March 23, 2005 / Notices
of the exemption; (2) the exemption has
resulted in a lower level of safety than
was maintained before it was granted; or
(3) continuation of the exemption would
not be consistent with the goals and
objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31315 and
31136(e).
Basis for Renewing Exemptions
Under 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(1), an
exemption may be granted for no longer
than two years from its approval date
and may be renewed upon application
for additional two year periods. In
accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315 and
31136(e), each of the 13 applicants has
satisfied the entry conditions for
obtaining an exemption from the vision
requirements (63 FR 66226; 64 FR
16517; 66 FR 17994; 68 FR 15037; 65 FR
66286; 66 FR 13825; 68 FR 10300; 68 FR
13360; 65 FR 78256; 66 FR 16311; 67 FR
68719; 68 FR 2629; 67 FR 76439; 68 FR
10298). Each of these 13 applicants has
requested timely renewal of the
exemption and has submitted evidence
showing that the vision in the better eye
continues to meet the standard specified
at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) and that the
vision impairment is stable. In addition,
a review of each record of safety while
driving with the respective vision
deficiencies over the past two years
indicates each applicant continues to
meet the vision exemption standards.
These factors provide an adequate basis
for predicting each driver’s ability to
continue to drive safely in interstate
commerce. Therefore, FMCSA
concludes that extending the exemption
for each renewal applicant for a period
of two years is likely to achieve a level
of safety equal to that existing without
the exemption.
Comments
FMCSA will review comments
received at any time concerning a
particular driver’s safety record and
determine if the continuation of the
exemption is consistent with the
requirements at 49 U.S.C. 31315 and
31136(e). However, FMCSA requests
that interested parties with specific data
concerning the safety records of these
drivers submit comments by April 22,
2005.
In the past FMCSA has received
comments from Advocates for Highway
and Auto Safety (Advocates) expressing
continued opposition to FMCSA’s
procedures for renewing exemptions
from the vision requirement in 49 CFR
391.41(b)(10). Specifically, Advocates
objects to the agency’s extension of the
exemptions without any opportunity for
public comment prior to the decision to
renew, and reliance on a summary
statement of evidence to make its
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:27 Mar 22, 2005
Jkt 205001
decision to extend the exemption of
each driver.
The issues raised by Advocates were
addressed at length in 69 FR 51346
(August 18, 2004). FMCSA continues to
find its exemption process appropriate
to the statutory and regulatory
requirements.
Rose A. McMurray,
Associate Administrator, Policy and Program
Development.
[FR Doc. 05–5760 Filed 3–22–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA 2002–13743; Notice 2]
Continental Tire North America Inc.,
Grant of Application for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
Continental Tire North America Inc.,
(Continental) has determined that a total
of 159 P265/70R16 AmeriTrac SUV
Radial Passenger Tires and 7,131 P265/
70R16 ContiTrac SUV Radial Tires do
not meet the labeling requirements
mandated by Federal Motor Vehicle
Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 109,
‘‘New Pneumatic Tires.’’ The
noncompliant tires were produced
during the periods March 11–24, 2001,
and May 14, 2000–March 24, 2001,
respectively. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C.
30118(d) and 30120(h), Continental has
petitioned for a determination that this
noncompliance is inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety and has filed an
appropriate report pursuant to 49 CFR
part 573, ‘‘Defect and Noncompliance
Reports.’’
Notice of receipt of the application
was published, with a 30-day comment
period, on November 15, 2002, in the
Federal Register (67 FR 69300). NHTSA
received no comments.
The petitioner argued as follows:
FMVSS No. 109 (S4.3.4(b)) requires both
the maximum load in kilograms and
pounds be molded on the tire’s
sidewall. The rated maximum kilogram
load was incorrectly marked 1190 kg
rather than 1090 kg. The rated
maximum load in pounds was marked
correctly. These tires are primarily sold
in the domestic replacement market,
where the load in pounds would be the
predominant consumer unit of
measurement. Continental stated that
test results confirm that the subject tires
meet all other test requirements of
FMVSS No. 109, support the petition of
an inconsequential stamping error,
PO 00000
Frm 00114
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
which does not affect performance, and
is not safety related.
The agency believes the true measure
of inconsequentiality with respect to the
noncompliance with FMVSS No. 109,
paragraph (S4.3.4(b)), is whether a
consumer and/or retailer who relied on
the incorrect information could
experience a safety problem. In the case
of this noncompliance, the maximum
load value is marked correctly in
English units. However, while the
corresponding load value is correctly
marked in English units, it is overstated
in Metric units. The agency has
conducted a series of focus groups, as
required by the TREAD Act, to examine
consumer perceptions and
understanding of tire labeling. Few of
the focus group participants had
knowledge of tire labeling beyond the
tire brand name, tire size, and tire
pressure.
Since FMVSS No. 109 applies to tires
sold in the U.S., and since consumers in
the U.S. overwhelmingly rely on units
of English measure for loading
information, the safety issue associated
with overloading tires as a result of this
noncompliance is very small.
In consideration of the foregoing,
NHTSA has decided that the applicant
has met its burden of persuasion that
the noncompliance described is
inconsequential to safety. Accordingly,
Continental’s application is hereby
granted and the applicant is exempted
from providing the notification of the
noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C.
30118, and from remedying the
noncompliance, as required by as
required by 49 U.S.C. 30120.
(49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120; delegations of
authority at 49 CFR 1.50 and 501.8)
Issued on: March 17, 2005.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 05–5650 Filed 3–22–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2005–20545; Notice 1]
IC Corporation, Receipt of Petition for
Decision of Inconsequential
Noncompliance
IC Corporation (IC) has determined
that certain school buses that it
manufactured in 2001 through 2004 do
not comply with S5.2.3.2(a)(4) of 49
CFR 571.217, Federal Motor Vehicle
Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 217, ‘‘Bus
emergency exits and window retention
E:\FR\FM\23MRN1.SGM
23MRN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 55 (Wednesday, March 23, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 14748]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-5650]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA 2002-13743; Notice 2]
Continental Tire North America Inc., Grant of Application for
Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance
Continental Tire North America Inc., (Continental) has determined
that a total of 159 P265/70R16 AmeriTrac SUV Radial Passenger Tires and
7,131 P265/ 70R16 ContiTrac SUV Radial Tires do not meet the labeling
requirements mandated by Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS)
No. 109, ``New Pneumatic Tires.'' The noncompliant tires were produced
during the periods March 11-24, 2001, and May 14, 2000-March 24, 2001,
respectively. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h), Continental
has petitioned for a determination that this noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety and has filed an appropriate
report pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, ``Defect and Noncompliance
Reports.''
Notice of receipt of the application was published, with a 30-day
comment period, on November 15, 2002, in the Federal Register (67 FR
69300). NHTSA received no comments.
The petitioner argued as follows: FMVSS No. 109 (S4.3.4(b))
requires both the maximum load in kilograms and pounds be molded on the
tire's sidewall. The rated maximum kilogram load was incorrectly marked
1190 kg rather than 1090 kg. The rated maximum load in pounds was
marked correctly. These tires are primarily sold in the domestic
replacement market, where the load in pounds would be the predominant
consumer unit of measurement. Continental stated that test results
confirm that the subject tires meet all other test requirements of
FMVSS No. 109, support the petition of an inconsequential stamping
error, which does not affect performance, and is not safety related.
The agency believes the true measure of inconsequentiality with
respect to the noncompliance with FMVSS No. 109, paragraph (S4.3.4(b)),
is whether a consumer and/or retailer who relied on the incorrect
information could experience a safety problem. In the case of this
noncompliance, the maximum load value is marked correctly in English
units. However, while the corresponding load value is correctly marked
in English units, it is overstated in Metric units. The agency has
conducted a series of focus groups, as required by the TREAD Act, to
examine consumer perceptions and understanding of tire labeling. Few of
the focus group participants had knowledge of tire labeling beyond the
tire brand name, tire size, and tire pressure.
Since FMVSS No. 109 applies to tires sold in the U.S., and since
consumers in the U.S. overwhelmingly rely on units of English measure
for loading information, the safety issue associated with overloading
tires as a result of this noncompliance is very small.
In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that the
applicant has met its burden of persuasion that the noncompliance
described is inconsequential to safety. Accordingly, Continental's
application is hereby granted and the applicant is exempted from
providing the notification of the noncompliance as required by 49
U.S.C. 30118, and from remedying the noncompliance, as required by as
required by 49 U.S.C. 30120.
(49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120; delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.50 and
501.8)
Issued on: March 17, 2005.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 05-5650 Filed 3-22-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
