Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company, Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 1760-1761 [E9-517]
Download as PDF
1760
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 8 / Tuesday, January 13, 2009 / Notices
facility and yard locations; locations for
interconnecting passenger services
between the existing South Florida Rail
Corridor that is served by Tri-Rail
Commuter services and the FEC Railway
corridor; costs; funding; ridership;
economic development; land use;
engineering feasibility; and
environmental factors in a selected
corridor. To satisfy the § 5309
Alternatives Analysis requirement,
FDOT will also evaluate options for
transportation improvements in the
study area that do not involve
significant capital investment including
TSM improvements and the
implications of taking no action (i.e., the
‘‘no build’’ alternative). It is the purpose
of this early scoping-ETDM process, to
identify mode and general alignment in
the SFECC and develop a well defined
locally preferred alternative.
In conjunction with issuance of this
notice, and consistent with provisions
of 23 U.S.C. 139, a plan for coordinating
public and agency participation in and
comment on the environmental review
process for issues and alternatives under
consideration here and at subsequent
phases of the process will be prepared.
Interim Report Availability
The SFECCTA was begun using a
Tiered Environmental Impact Statement
NEPA process. In processing the Tier 1
Draft Final Programmatic
Environmental Impact Statement
(FPEIS), FTA and FDOT agreed that the
process followed for Tier 1 is consistent
with the NEPA early scoping process,
and that this early scoping process will
be continued through the next study
phase including selection of one or
more locally preferred alternatives
(proposed actions) in the corridor.
Under this process, the Tier 1 Draft
FPEIS will be considered an interim
planning report and, as such, has been
renamed the Conceptual AA/ESR. FTA
and FDOT will no longer engage in the
NEPA tiering process.
In Tier 1, an iterative screening
process was applied to a broad range of
conceptual alternatives. A shortlist of
modal technologies and a generalized
alignment were selected consistent with
the FTA definition of conceptual
alternatives. The study applied corridorlevel NEPA principles and processes in
the evaluation of alternatives and their
potential environmental impacts as well
as in the collaboration with
governmental agencies and the public
involvement program. The entire
process was documented in a
programmatic Tier 1 DEIS that was
circulated to affected Federal, State, and
local government agencies and to other
interested stakeholders. A Notice of
VerDate Nov<24>2008
19:10 Jan 12, 2009
Jkt 217001
Availability was published on October
13, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 198) for
this document, and a public hearing was
conducted on November 8, 9, and 15,
2006 at different venues in the study
area.
The Tier 1 DEIS and the Conceptual
AA/ESR serve as the administrative
record documenting the NEPA analysis
performed to support the advanced
alternatives analysis phase of decisionmaking, federal agency oversight,
agency coordination, and public
comments and responses. As mentioned
above, the AA/ESR will serve as an
interim report for the early scopingETDM process now being used and is
renamed as the final report, Conceptual
AA/ESR. The report may be viewed or
downloaded from the project’s Web site
at www.sfeccstudy.com. An electronic
copy of this interim report is available
upon request from the contact above.
Also, bound copies of the Conceptual
AA/ESR will be available for public
review, between January 9, 2009 to
March 10, 2009, at the following
locations:
Florida Department of Transportation,
District 4 Planning and
Environmental Management, 3400
West Commercial Boulevard, Fort
Lauderdale, FL 33309–3421, Phone:
(954) 777–4632.
Florida Department of Transportation,
District 6 Planning and
Environmental Management Office,
1000 NW. 111th Avenue, Miami, FL
33172, Phone: (305) 470–5220.
Issued on: January 7, 2009.
Ms. Yvette G. Taylor,
Regional Administrator, FTA Region 4.
[FR Doc. E9–435 Filed 1–12–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–57–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2008–0213; Notice 1]
Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company,
Receipt of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company
(Goodyear), has determined that certain
passenger car tires manufactured during
the period January 25, 2007 through July
24, 2008 do not fully comply with
paragraph S5.5(e) of Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) No.
139 New Pneumatic Radial Tires for
Light Vehicles. Goodyear has filed an
appropriate report pursuant to 49 CFR
Part 573, Defect and Noncompliance
Responsibility and Reports.
PO 00000
Frm 00099
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h) (see implementing rule at 49
CFR part 556), Goodyear has petitioned
for an exemption from the notification
and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C.
Chapter 301 on the basis that this
noncompliance is inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety.
This notice of receipt of Goodyear’s
petition is published under 49 U.S.C.
30118 and 30120 and does not represent
any agency decision or other exercise of
judgment concerning the merits of the
petition.
Affected are approximately 9,864 size
245/45R17 95H Fierce HP brand
passenger car tires manufactured during
the period January 25, 2007 through July
24, 2008.
Paragraph S5.5(e) of FMVSS No. 139
requires in pertinent part:
S5.5 Tire markings. Except as specified in
paragraphs (a) through (i) of S5.5, each tire
must be marked on each sidewall with the
information specified in S5.5(a) through (d)
and on one sidewall with the information
specified in S5.5(e) through (i) according to
the phase-in schedule specified in S7 of this
standard. The markings must be placed
between the maximum section width and the
bead on at least one sidewall, unless the
maximum section width of the tire is located
in an area that is not more than one-fourth
of the distance from the bead to the shoulder
of the tire. If the maximum section width
falls within that area, those markings must
appear between the bead and a point one-half
the distance from the bead to the shoulder of
the tire, on at least one sidewall. The
markings must be in letters and numerals not
less than 0.078 inches high and raised above
or sunk below the tire surface not less than
0.015 inches * * *.
(e) The generic name of each cord material
used in the plies (both sidewall and tread
area) of the tire;* * *
Goodyear explains that the
noncompliance is that the sidewall
marking incorrectly identifies the
generic material of the plies in the body
of the tire as Nylon when they are in
fact polyester. Specifically, the tires in
question were inadvertently
manufactured with ‘‘Tread: 1 Polyester
+ 2 Steel Cords + 1 Nylon Cord. The
labeling should have been ‘‘Thread: 1
Polyester Cord + 2 Steel Cords + 1
Polyester Cord’’ (emphasis added).
Goodyear states that it discovered the
mold labeling error that caused the noncompliance during a routine quality
audit.
Goodyear argues that the
noncompliance is inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety because the tires
meet or exceed all applicable Federal
Motor Vehicle Safety performance
standards. All of the markings related to
tire service (load capacity,
corresponding inflation pressure, etc.)
E:\FR\FM\13JAN1.SGM
13JAN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 8 / Tuesday, January 13, 2009 / Notices
are correct. The mislabeling of these
tires creates no unsafe condition.
Goodyear states that the affected tire
molds have been modified and all future
production will have the correct
material information shown on the
sidewall.
Goodyear also points out that NHTSA
has previously granted petitions for
sidewall marking noncompliances that
it believes are similar to the present
noncompliance.
In summation, Goodyear states that it
believes that because the
noncompliances are inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety that no corrective
action is warranted.
NHTSA notes that the statutory
provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to
file petitions for a determination of
inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to
exempt manufacturers only from the
duties found in sections 30118 and
30120, respectively, to notify owners,
purchasers, and dealers of a defect or
noncompliance and to remedy the
defect or noncompliance. Therefore,
these provisions only apply to vehicles
and equipment that have already passed
from the manufacturer to an owner,
purchaser, or dealer.
Interested persons are invited to
submit written data, views, and
arguments on this petition. Comments
must refer to the docket and notice
number cited at the beginning of this
notice and be submitted by any of the
following methods:
a. By mail addressed to: U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M–30, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington,
DC 20590.
b. By hand delivery to U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M–30, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington,
DC 20590. The Docket Section is open
on weekdays from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m.
except Federal Holidays.
c. Electronically: by logging onto the
Federal Docket Management System
(FDMS) Web site at https://
www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Comments may also be faxed to 1–202–
493–2251.
Comments must be written in the
English language, and be no greater than
15 pages in length, although there is no
limit to the length of necessary
attachments to the comments. If
comments are submitted in hard copy
form, please ensure that two copies are
provided. If you wish to receive
confirmation that your comments were
VerDate Nov<24>2008
19:10 Jan 12, 2009
Jkt 217001
received, please enclose a stamped, selfaddressed postcard with the comments.
Note that all comments received will be
posted without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided.
Anyone is able to search the
electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the
comment (or signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). DOT’s
complete Privacy Act Statement in the
Federal Register published on April 11,
2000 (65 FR 19477–78).
You may view documents submitted
to a docket at the address and times
given above. You may also view the
documents on the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov by following the
online instructions for accessing the
dockets available at that Web site.
The petition, supporting materials,
and all comments received before the
close of business on the closing date
indicated below will be filed and will be
considered. All comments and
supporting materials received after the
closing date will also be filed and will
be considered to the extent possible.
When the petition is granted or denied,
notice of the decision will be published
in the Federal Register pursuant to the
authority indicated below.
Comment closing date: February 12,
2009.
Authority: (49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120:
delegations of authority at CFR 1.50 and
501.8).
Issued on: January 8, 2009.
Claude H. Harris
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. E9–517 Filed 1–12–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Submission for OMB
Review; Comment Request
AGENCY: Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency (OCC), Treasury.
ACTION: Notice and request for comment.
SUMMARY: The OCC, as part of its
continuing effort to reduce paperwork
and respondent burden, invites the
general public and other Federal
agencies to take this opportunity to
comment on a continuing information
collection, as required by the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995. An agency may
not conduct or sponsor, and a
respondent is not required to respond
to, an information collection unless the
PO 00000
Frm 00100
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
1761
information collection displays a
currently valid OMB control number.
Currently, the OCC is soliciting
comment concerning its extension,
without change, of an information
collection titled, ‘‘Release of Non-Public
Information—12 CFR 4, Subpart C.’’ The
OCC is also giving notice that it has
submitted the collection to OMB for
review.
DATES: You should submit written
comments by February 12, 2009.
ADDRESSES: You should direct all
written comments to: Communications
Division, Office of the Comptroller of
the Currency, Public Information Room,
Mailstop 1–5, Attention: 1557–0200,
250 E Street, SW., Washington, DC
20219. In addition, comments may be
sent by fax to (202) 874–4448, or by
electronic mail to
regs.comments@occ.treas.gov. You can
inspect and photocopy the comments at
the OCC’s Public Information Room, 250
E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20219.
For security reasons, the OCC requires
that visitors make an appointment to
inspect comments. You may do so by
calling (202) 874–5043. Upon arrival,
visitors will be required to present valid
government-issued photo identification
and submit to security screening in
order to inspect and photocopy
comments.
Additionally, you should send a copy
of your comments to: OCC Desk Officer,
1557–0200, by mail to U.S. Office of
Management and Budget, 725 17th
Street, NW., #10235, Washington, DC
20503, or by fax to (202) 395–6974.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: You
can request additional information or a
copy of the collection from Mary H.
Gottlieb, OCC Clearance Officer, (202)
874–5090, Legislative and Regulatory
Activities Division, Office of the
Comptroller of the Currency, 250 E
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20219.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The OCC
is proposing to extend OMB approval of
the following information collection:
Title: Release of Non-Public
Information—12 CFR 4, Subpart C.
OMB Control No.: 1557–0200.
Form No.: None.
Description: This submission covers
an existing regulation and involves no
change to the regulation or to the
information collections embodied in the
regulation. The OCC requests only that
OMB renew its approval of the
information collections in the current
regulation.
The information requirements require
individuals who are requesting nonpublic OCC information to provide the
OCC with information regarding the
requester’s legal grounds for the request.
E:\FR\FM\13JAN1.SGM
13JAN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 8 (Tuesday, January 13, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1760-1761]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-517]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2008-0213; Notice 1]
Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company, Receipt of Petition for Decision
of Inconsequential Noncompliance
Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company (Goodyear), has determined that
certain passenger car tires manufactured during the period January 25,
2007 through July 24, 2008 do not fully comply with paragraph S5.5(e)
of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) No. 139 New Pneumatic
Radial Tires for Light Vehicles. Goodyear has filed an appropriate
report pursuant to 49 CFR Part 573, Defect and Noncompliance
Responsibility and Reports.
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) (see implementing rule
at 49 CFR part 556), Goodyear has petitioned for an exemption from the
notification and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the
basis that this noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle
safety.
This notice of receipt of Goodyear's petition is published under 49
U.S.C. 30118 and 30120 and does not represent any agency decision or
other exercise of judgment concerning the merits of the petition.
Affected are approximately 9,864 size 245/45R17 95H Fierce HP brand
passenger car tires manufactured during the period January 25, 2007
through July 24, 2008.
Paragraph S5.5(e) of FMVSS No. 139 requires in pertinent part:
S5.5 Tire markings. Except as specified in paragraphs (a)
through (i) of S5.5, each tire must be marked on each sidewall with
the information specified in S5.5(a) through (d) and on one sidewall
with the information specified in S5.5(e) through (i) according to
the phase-in schedule specified in S7 of this standard. The markings
must be placed between the maximum section width and the bead on at
least one sidewall, unless the maximum section width of the tire is
located in an area that is not more than one-fourth of the distance
from the bead to the shoulder of the tire. If the maximum section
width falls within that area, those markings must appear between the
bead and a point one-half the distance from the bead to the shoulder
of the tire, on at least one sidewall. The markings must be in
letters and numerals not less than 0.078 inches high and raised
above or sunk below the tire surface not less than 0.015 inches * *
*.
(e) The generic name of each cord material used in the plies
(both sidewall and tread area) of the tire;* * *
Goodyear explains that the noncompliance is that the sidewall
marking incorrectly identifies the generic material of the plies in the
body of the tire as Nylon when they are in fact polyester.
Specifically, the tires in question were inadvertently manufactured
with ``Tread: 1 Polyester + 2 Steel Cords + 1 Nylon Cord. The labeling
should have been ``Thread: 1 Polyester Cord + 2 Steel Cords + 1
Polyester Cord'' (emphasis added).
Goodyear states that it discovered the mold labeling error that
caused the non-compliance during a routine quality audit.
Goodyear argues that the noncompliance is inconsequential to motor
vehicle safety because the tires meet or exceed all applicable Federal
Motor Vehicle Safety performance standards. All of the markings related
to tire service (load capacity, corresponding inflation pressure, etc.)
[[Page 1761]]
are correct. The mislabeling of these tires creates no unsafe
condition.
Goodyear states that the affected tire molds have been modified and
all future production will have the correct material information shown
on the sidewall.
Goodyear also points out that NHTSA has previously granted
petitions for sidewall marking noncompliances that it believes are
similar to the present noncompliance.
In summation, Goodyear states that it believes that because the
noncompliances are inconsequential to motor vehicle safety that no
corrective action is warranted.
NHTSA notes that the statutory provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to file petitions for a
determination of inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to exempt manufacturers
only from the duties found in sections 30118 and 30120, respectively,
to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or noncompliance
and to remedy the defect or noncompliance. Therefore, these provisions
only apply to vehicles and equipment that have already passed from the
manufacturer to an owner, purchaser, or dealer.
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments on this petition. Comments must refer to the docket and
notice number cited at the beginning of this notice and be submitted by
any of the following methods:
a. By mail addressed to: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
b. By hand delivery to U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. The Docket Section is open on
weekdays from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. except Federal Holidays.
c. Electronically: by logging onto the Federal Docket Management
System (FDMS) Web site at https://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the
online instructions for submitting comments. Comments may also be faxed
to 1-202-493-2251.
Comments must be written in the English language, and be no greater
than 15 pages in length, although there is no limit to the length of
necessary attachments to the comments. If comments are submitted in
hard copy form, please ensure that two copies are provided. If you wish
to receive confirmation that your comments were received, please
enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard with the comments. Note that
all comments received will be posted without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.
Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). DOT's complete Privacy
Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65
FR 19477-78).
You may view documents submitted to a docket at the address and
times given above. You may also view the documents on the Internet at
https://www.regulations.gov by following the online instructions for
accessing the dockets available at that Web site.
The petition, supporting materials, and all comments received
before the close of business on the closing date indicated below will
be filed and will be considered. All comments and supporting materials
received after the closing date will also be filed and will be
considered to the extent possible. When the petition is granted or
denied, notice of the decision will be published in the Federal
Register pursuant to the authority indicated below.
Comment closing date: February 12, 2009.
Authority: (49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at
CFR 1.50 and 501.8).
Issued on: January 8, 2009.
Claude H. Harris
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. E9-517 Filed 1-12-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P