Cooper Tire & Rubber Tire Company, Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 10615-10616 [2012-4030]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 35 / Wednesday, February 22, 2012 / Notices
that occurred without warning in the
past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or
more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in
the last 5 years. His endocrinologist
certifies that Mr. Wood understands
diabetes management and monitoring,
has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV
safely. Mr. Wood meets the vision
requirements of 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
His ophthalmologist examined him in
2011 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A
CDL from New York.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Richard P. Wright
Mr. Wright, 31, has had ITDM since
1998. His endocrinologist examined him
in 2011 and certified that he has had no
severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting
in loss of consciousness, requiring the
assistance of another person, or
resulting in impaired cognitive function
that occurred without warning in the
past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or
more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in
the last 5 years. His endocrinologist
certifies that Mr. Wright understands
diabetes management and monitoring,
has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV
safely. Mr. Wright meets the vision
requirements of 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
His ophthalmologist examined him in
2011 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class C
operator’s license from Oregon.
Request for Comments
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315, FMCSA requests public
comment from all interested persons on
the exemption petitions described in
this notice. We will consider all
comments received before the close of
business on the closing date indicated
in the DATE section of the notice.
FMCSA notes that section 4129 of the
Safe, Accountable, Flexible and
Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A
Legacy for Users requires the Secretary
to revise its diabetes exemption program
established on September 3, 2003 (68 FR
52441).1 The revision must provide for
individual assessment of drivers with
diabetes mellitus, and be consistent
with the criteria described in section
4018 of the Transportation Equity Act
for the 21st Century (49 U.S.C. 31305).
Section 4129 requires: (1) Elimination
of the requirement for 3 years of
experience operating CMVs while being
treated with insulin; and (2)
establishment of a specified minimum
1 Section 4129(a) refers to the 2003 notice as a
‘‘final rule.’’ However, the 2003 notice did not issue
a ‘‘final rule’’ but did establish the procedures and
standards for issuing exemptions for drivers with
ITDM.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:37 Feb 21, 2012
Jkt 226001
period of insulin use to demonstrate
stable control of diabetes before being
allowed to operate a CMV.
In response to section 4129, FMCSA
made immediate revisions to the
diabetes exemption program established
by the September 3, 2003 notice.
FMCSA discontinued use of the 3-year
driving experience and fulfilled the
requirements of section 4129 while
continuing to ensure that operation of
CMVs by drivers with ITDM will
achieve the requisite level of safety
required of all exemptions granted
under 49 USC. 31136(e).
Section 4129(d) also directed FMCSA
to ensure that drivers of CMVs with
ITDM are not held to a higher standard
than other drivers, with the exception of
limited operating, monitoring and
medical requirements that are deemed
medically necessary.
The FMCSA concluded that all of the
operating, monitoring and medical
requirements set out in the September 3,
2003 notice, except as modified, were in
compliance with section 4129(d).
Therefore, all of the requirements set
out in the September 3, 2003 notice,
except as modified by the notice in the
Federal Register on November 8, 2005
(70 FR 67777), remain in effect.
Issued on: February 9, 2012.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2012–3996 Filed 2–21–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2011–0054; Notice 2]
Cooper Tire & Rubber Tire Company,
Grant of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Grant of Petition.
AGENCY:
Cooper Tire & Rubber Tire
Company, (Cooper) 1, has determined
that approximately 6,964 passenger car
replacement tires manufactured
between January 23, 2011 and March 26,
2011, do not fully comply with
paragraph S5.5(f) of Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No.
139, New Pneumatic Radial Tires for
Light Vehicles. Cooper has filed an
appropriate report dated March 31,
2011, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573,
SUMMARY:
1 Cooper Tire & Rubber Tire Company (Cooper) is
a replacement equipment manufacturer
incorporated in the state of Delaware.
PO 00000
Frm 00144
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
10615
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), Cooper 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.
Notice of receipt of Cooper’s petition
was published, with a 30-day public
comment period, on May 17, 2011, in
the Federal Register (76 FR 28502). No
comments were received. To view the
petition and all supporting documents
log onto the Federal Docket
Management System Web site at:
https://www.regulations.gov/. Then
follow the online search instructions to
locate docket number ‘‘NHTSA–2011–
0054.’’
For further information on this
decision, contact Mr. George Gillespie,
Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA), telephone
(202) 366–5299, facsimile (202) 366–
7002.
Affected are approximately 6,964 size
LT285/75R16 Cooper brand Discoverer
S/T MAXX model passenger car
replacement tires manufactured
between January 23, 2011 and March 26,
2011, at Cooper’s plant located in
Texarkana, Arkansas.
Cooper explains that the
noncompliance is that, due to a mold
labeling error, the sidewall marking on
the reference side of the tires, required
by paragraph S5.5(f), incorrectly
describes the actual number of plies in
the tread area of the tires. Specifically,
the tires in question were inadvertently
manufactured with ‘‘TREAD 1 PLY
NYLON + 2 PLY STEEL + 3 PLY
POLYESTER; SIDEWALL 3 PLY
POLYESTER.’’ The labeling should have
been ‘‘TREAD 2 PLY NYLON + 2 PLY
STEEL + 3 PLY POLYESTER;
SIDEWALL 3 PLY POLYESTER.’’
Cooper also explains that while the
non-compliant tires are mislabeled, the
tires do in fact have 2 Nylon tread plies
and meet or exceed all other applicable
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards.
Cooper reported that this
noncompliance was discovered during a
review of the specified stamping
requirements and visual inspection of
tire stamping.
Cooper argues that this
noncompliance is inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety because the
noncompliant sidewall marking does
not create an unsafe condition and all
other labeling requirements have been
met.
E:\FR\FM\22FEN1.SGM
22FEN1
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
10616
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 35 / Wednesday, February 22, 2012 / Notices
Cooper points out that NHTSA has
previously granted similar petitions for
non-compliances in sidewall marking.
In summation, Cooper believes that
the described noncompliance of its tires
to meet the requirements of FMVSS No.
139 is inconsequential to motor vehicle
safety, and that its petition, to exempt
from providing recall notification of
noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C.
30118 and remedying the recall
noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C.
30120 should be granted.
NHTSA Decision: The agency agrees
with Cooper that the noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
The agency believes that the true
measure of inconsequentiality to motor
vehicle safety in this case is that there
is no effect of the noncompliances on
the operational safety of the vehicles on
which these tires are mounted. The
safety of people working in the tire
retread, repair, and recycling industries
must also be considered. Although tire
construction affects the strength and
durability, neither the agency nor the
tire industry provides information
relating tire strength and durability to
the number of plies and types of ply
cord material in the tread and sidewall.
Therefore, tire dealers and customers
should consider the tire construction
information along with other
information such as load capacity,
maximum inflation pressure, and tread
wear, temperature, and traction ratings,
to assess performance capabilities of
various tires. In the agency’s judgment,
the incorrect labeling of the tire
construction information will have an
inconsequential effect on motor vehicle
safety because most consumers do not
base tire purchases or vehicle operation
parameters on the ply material in a tire.
The agency also believes the
noncompliance will have no measurable
effect on the safety of the tire retread,
repair, and recycling industries. The use
of steel cord construction in the
sidewall and tread is the primary safety
concern of these industries. In this case,
since the tire sidewalls do not contain
steel plies, this potential safety concern
does not exist.
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, this
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:37 Feb 21, 2012
Jkt 226001
decision only applies to the 6,964 2 tires
that Cooper no longer controlled at the
time that it determined that a
noncompliance existed in the subject
tires.
In consideration of the foregoing,
NHTSA has decided that Cooper has
met its burden of persuasion that the
subject FMVSS No. 139 labeling
noncompliances are inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety. Accordingly,
Cooper’s petition is granted and the
petitioner is exempted from the
obligation of providing notification of,
and a remedy for, the subject
noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118
and 30120.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120:
delegations of authority at CFR 1.50 and
501.8.
Issued on: February 15, 2012.
Claude H. Harris,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2012–4030 Filed 2–21–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Research and Innovative Technology
Administration
Advisory Council on Transportation
Statistics; Notice of Meeting
Research and Innovative
Technology Administration (RITA),
Department of Transportation.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
This notice announces, pursuant to
Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (FACA) (Pub. L. 72–363;
5 U.S.C. app. 2), a meeting of the
Advisory Council on Transportation
Statistics (ACTS). The meeting will be
held on Tuesday, March 6, from 9 a.m.
to 4:30 p.m. EST in the Oklahoma City
Room at the U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Ave.
SE., Washington, DC. Section 5601(o) of
the Safe, Accountable, Flexible,
Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A
Legacy for Users (SAFETEA–LU) directs
the U.S. Department of Transportation
to establish an Advisory Council on
Transportation Statistics subject to the
Federal Advisory Committee Act (5
U.S.C. app. 2) to advise the Bureau of
2 Cooper’s petition, which was filed under 49 CFR
part 556, requests an agency decision to exempt
Cooper as a manufacturer from the notification and
recall responsibilities of 49 CFR part 573 for the
affected tires. However, a decision on this petition
cannot relieve distributors and dealers of the
prohibitions on the sale, offer for sale, or
introduction or delivery for introduction into
interstate commerce of the noncompliant tires
under their control after Cooper notified them that
the subject noncompliance existed.
PO 00000
Frm 00145
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Transportation Statistics (BTS) on the
quality, reliability, consistency,
objectivity, and relevance of
transportation statistics and analyses
collected, supported, or disseminated by
the Bureau and the Department.
The following is a summary of the
draft meeting agenda: (1) USDOT
welcome and introduction of Council
Members; (2) Overview of prior meeting;
(3) Discussion of the FY 2013 budget; (4)
Update on BTS data programs and
future plans; (5) Council Members
review and discussion of BTS programs
and plans; (6) Public Comments and
Closing Remarks. Participation is open
to the public. Members of the public
who wish to participate must notify
Courtney Freiberg at
Courtney.Freiberg@dot.gov, not later
than February 24, 2012. Members of the
public may present oral statements at
the meeting with the approval of
Patricia Hu, Director of the Bureau of
Transportation Statistics. Noncommittee
members wishing to present oral
statements or obtain information should
contact Courtney Freiberg via email no
later than February 17, 2012.
Questions about the agenda or written
comments may be emailed or submitted
by U.S. Mail to: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Research and Innovative
Technology Administration, Bureau of
Transportation Statistics, Attention:
Courtney Freiberg, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Room # E34–429,
Washington, DC 20590,
Courtney.Freiberg@dot.gov, or faxed to
(202) 366–3640. BTS requests that
written comments be received by
February 17, 2012. Access to the DOT
Headquarters building is controlled;
therefore, all persons who plan to attend
the meeting must notify Courtney
Freiberg at 202–366–1270 prior to
February 27, 2012. Individuals
attending the meeting must report to the
main DOT entrance on New Jersey
Avenue SE. for admission to the
building. Attendance is open to the
public, but limited space is available.
Persons with a disability requiring
special services, such as an interpreter
for the hearing impaired, should contact
Courtney Freiberg at 202–366–1270 at
least seven calendar days prior to the
meeting. Notice of this meeting is
provided in accordance with the FACA
and the General Services
Administration regulations (41 CFR part
102–3) covering management of Federal
advisory committees.
E:\FR\FM\22FEN1.SGM
22FEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 35 (Wednesday, February 22, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10615-10616]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-4030]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2011-0054; Notice 2]
Cooper Tire & Rubber Tire Company, Grant of Petition for Decision
of Inconsequential Noncompliance
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Grant of Petition.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Cooper Tire & Rubber Tire Company, (Cooper) \1\, has
determined that approximately 6,964 passenger car replacement tires
manufactured between January 23, 2011 and March 26, 2011, do not fully
comply with paragraph S5.5(f) of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard
(FMVSS) No. 139, New Pneumatic Radial Tires for Light Vehicles. Cooper
has filed an appropriate report dated March 31, 2011, pursuant to 49
CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Cooper Tire & Rubber Tire Company (Cooper) is a replacement
equipment manufacturer incorporated in the state of Delaware.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) (see implementing rule
at 49 CFR part 556), Cooper 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.
Notice of receipt of Cooper's petition was published, with a 30-day
public comment period, on May 17, 2011, in the Federal Register (76 FR
28502). No comments were received. To view the petition and all
supporting documents log onto the Federal Docket Management System Web
site at: https://www.regulations.gov/. Then follow the online search
instructions to locate docket number ``NHTSA-2011-0054.''
For further information on this decision, contact Mr. George
Gillespie, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone (202) 366-5299,
facsimile (202) 366-7002.
Affected are approximately 6,964 size LT285/75R16 Cooper brand
Discoverer S/T MAXX model passenger car replacement tires manufactured
between January 23, 2011 and March 26, 2011, at Cooper's plant located
in Texarkana, Arkansas.
Cooper explains that the noncompliance is that, due to a mold
labeling error, the sidewall marking on the reference side of the
tires, required by paragraph S5.5(f), incorrectly describes the actual
number of plies in the tread area of the tires. Specifically, the tires
in question were inadvertently manufactured with ``TREAD 1 PLY NYLON +
2 PLY STEEL + 3 PLY POLYESTER; SIDEWALL 3 PLY POLYESTER.'' The labeling
should have been ``TREAD 2 PLY NYLON + 2 PLY STEEL + 3 PLY POLYESTER;
SIDEWALL 3 PLY POLYESTER.''
Cooper also explains that while the non-compliant tires are
mislabeled, the tires do in fact have 2 Nylon tread plies and meet or
exceed all other applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards.
Cooper reported that this noncompliance was discovered during a
review of the specified stamping requirements and visual inspection of
tire stamping.
Cooper argues that this noncompliance is inconsequential to motor
vehicle safety because the noncompliant sidewall marking does not
create an unsafe condition and all other labeling requirements have
been met.
[[Page 10616]]
Cooper points out that NHTSA has previously granted similar
petitions for non-compliances in sidewall marking.
In summation, Cooper believes that the described noncompliance of
its tires to meet the requirements of FMVSS No. 139 is inconsequential
to motor vehicle safety, and that its petition, to exempt from
providing recall notification of noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C.
30118 and remedying the recall noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C.
30120 should be granted.
NHTSA Decision: The agency agrees with Cooper that the
noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. The agency
believes that the true measure of inconsequentiality to motor vehicle
safety in this case is that there is no effect of the noncompliances on
the operational safety of the vehicles on which these tires are
mounted. The safety of people working in the tire retread, repair, and
recycling industries must also be considered. Although tire
construction affects the strength and durability, neither the agency
nor the tire industry provides information relating tire strength and
durability to the number of plies and types of ply cord material in the
tread and sidewall.
Therefore, tire dealers and customers should consider the tire
construction information along with other information such as load
capacity, maximum inflation pressure, and tread wear, temperature, and
traction ratings, to assess performance capabilities of various tires.
In the agency's judgment, the incorrect labeling of the tire
construction information will have an inconsequential effect on motor
vehicle safety because most consumers do not base tire purchases or
vehicle operation parameters on the ply material in a tire.
The agency also believes the noncompliance will have no measurable
effect on the safety of the tire retread, repair, and recycling
industries. The use of steel cord construction in the sidewall and
tread is the primary safety concern of these industries. In this case,
since the tire sidewalls do not contain steel plies, this potential
safety concern does not exist.
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, this decision
only applies to the 6,964 \2\ tires that Cooper no longer controlled at
the time that it determined that a noncompliance existed in the subject
tires.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Cooper's petition, which was filed under 49 CFR part 556,
requests an agency decision to exempt Cooper as a manufacturer from
the notification and recall responsibilities of 49 CFR part 573 for
the affected tires. However, a decision on this petition cannot
relieve distributors and dealers of the prohibitions on the sale,
offer for sale, or introduction or delivery for introduction into
interstate commerce of the noncompliant tires under their control
after Cooper notified them that the subject noncompliance existed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Cooper
has met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 139
labeling noncompliances are inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
Accordingly, Cooper's petition is granted and the petitioner is
exempted from the obligation of providing notification of, and a remedy
for, the subject noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at
CFR 1.50 and 501.8.
Issued on: February 15, 2012.
Claude H. Harris,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2012-4030 Filed 2-21-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
