Cooper Tire & Rubber Company, Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 43708-43710 [2016-15750]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
43708
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 128 / Tuesday, July 5, 2016 / Notices
the public attending open meetings will
be allowed to present questions from the
floor or speak to any issue under
consideration by the BOV.
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 51312; 5 U.S.C. app.
552b; 41 CFR parts 102–3.140 through 102–
3.165.
By Order of the Maritime Administrator.
Dated: June 28, 2016.
Gabriel Chavez,
Secretary, Maritime Administration.
[FR Doc. 2016–15745 Filed 7–1–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–81–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Maritime Administration
Meeting Notice—U.S. Maritime
Transportation System National
Advisory Committee
Maritime Administration,
Department of Transportation
ACTION: Notice of advisory committee
name change and public meeting.
AGENCY:
The Maritime Administration
(MARAD) announces that the name of
the U.S. Marine Transportation System
National Advisory Council has been
changed to the U.S. Maritime
Transportation System National
Advisory Committee (MTSNAC or
Committee). Furthermore, MARAD
announces a public meeting of the
MTSNAC to discuss advice and
recommendations for the U.S.
Department of Transportation on issues
related to the maritime transportation
system. Issues the MTSNAC will
consider during this meeting include:
Impediments to short sea transportation;
expanding international gateway ports,
using waterborne transportation to
increase mobility throughout the
domestic transportation system;
modernizing the U.S. maritime
workforce; strengthening maritime
capabilities; and, encouraging maritime
innovation.
DATES: The meeting will be held on
Tuesday, July 19, 2016 from 8:00 a.m. to
5:00 p.m. and Wednesday, July 20, 2016
from 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. Eastern
Daylight Saving Time (EDT).
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at
the U.S. Department of Transportation,
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration, National Training
Center, 1310 North Courthouse Road,
Suite 600, Arlington, VA 22201–2508.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric
Shen, Co-Designated Federal Officer at:
(202) 308–8968, or Jeffrey Flumignan,
Co-Designated Federal Official at (212)
668–2064 or via email: MTSNAC@
sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:27 Jul 01, 2016
Jkt 238001
dot.gov or visit the MTSNAC Web site
at https://www.marad.dot.gov/ports/
marine-transportation-system-mts/
marine-transportation-system-nationaladvisory-committee-mtsnac/.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
MTSNAC is a Federal advisory
committee within MARAD that advises
the U.S. Department of Transportation
on issues related to the marine
transportation system. The MTSNAC
was originally established in 1999 and
mandated in 2007 by the Energy
Independence and Security Act of 2007.
The MTSNAC operates in accordance
with the provisions of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (FACA).
Agenda
The agenda will include: (1)
Welcome, opening remarks and
introductions; (2) formation of
subcommittees or work groups; (3)
development of work plans and
proposed recommendations; (4)
appointment of Vice Chair and (5)
public comment. The meeting agenda
will be posted on the MTSNAC Web site
at https://www.marad.dot.gov/ports/
marine-transportation-system-mts/
marine-transportation-system-nationaladvisory-committee-mtsnac/.
The Maritime Administration
requested that the MTSNAC consider
the following issues for potential
recommendations:
1. Impediments to effective use of
short sea transportation, including
America’s Marine Highways (see, 46
CFR part 393), and methods to expand
the use of the Marine Transportation
System for freight and passengers;
2. Expanding the capacity of U.S.
international gateway ports to
accommodate larger vessels;
3. Improving waterborne transport to
reduce congestion and increase mobility
throughout the domestic transportation
system;
4. Strengthening maritime capabilities
essential to economic and national
security;
5. Modernizing the maritime
workforce and inspire and educate the
next generation of mariners; and,
6. Driving maritime innovation.
In addition, the Maritime
Administrator may request the
MTSNAC to provide advice on other
issues relating to the marine
transportation system.
Public Participation
The meeting will be open to the
public. Members of the public who wish
to attend in person must RSVP to
MTSNAC@dot.gov with your name and
affiliation no later than 5:00 p.m. EDT
on July 8, 2016, in order to facilitate
PO 00000
Frm 00139
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
entry. Seating will be extremely limited
and available on a first-come-first-serve
basis.
Services for Individuals with
Disabilities: The public meeting is
physically accessible to people with
disabilities. Individuals requiring
accommodations, such as sign language
interpretation or other ancillary aids are
asked to notify Eric Shen at: (202) 308–
8968, or Jeffrey Flumignan at (212) 668–
2064 or MTSNAC@dot.gov five (5)
business days before the meeting.
Written comments: Persons who wish
to submit written comments for
consideration by the Committee must
email MTSNAC@dot.gov, or send them
to MTSNAC Designated Federal Officers
via email: MTSNAC@dot.gov, Maritime
Transportation System National
Advisory Committee, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., W21–307, Washington, DC
20590 no later than 5:00 p.m. EDT on
July 8, 2016 to provide sufficient time
for review.
Authority: 49 CFR part 1.93(a); 5 U.S.C.
552b; 41 CFR parts 102–3; 5 U.S.C. app.
Sections 1–16.
By Order of the Maritime Administrator.
Dated: June 28, 2016.
Gabriel Chavez,
Secretary, Maritime Administration.
[FR Doc. 2016–15769 Filed 7–1–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–81–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2016–0002; Notice 2]
Cooper Tire & Rubber Company, Grant
of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Grant of petition.
AGENCY:
Cooper Tire & Rubber
Company (Cooper), has determined that
certain Cooper tires do not fully comply
with paragraph S5.5.1(b) of Federal
Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS)
No. 139, New pneumatic radial tires for
light vehicles. Cooper filed a report
dated January 8, 2016, pursuant to 49
CFR part 573, Defect and
Noncompliance Responsibility and
Reports. Cooper then petitioned NHTSA
under 49 CFR part 556 requesting a
decision that the subject noncompliance
is inconsequential to motor vehicle
safety.
ADDRESSES: For further information on
this decision contact Abraham Diaz,
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\05JYN1.SGM
05JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 128 / Tuesday, July 5, 2016 / Notices
Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA), telephone
(202) 366–5310, facsimile (202) 366–
5930.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Overview
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h) (see implementing rule at 49
CFR part 556), Cooper submitted a
petition 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 the petition was
published, with a 30-day public
comment period, on March 25, 2016 in
the Federal Register (81 FR 16268). No
comments were received. To view the
petition and all supporting documents
log onto the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Web site
at: https://www.regulations.gov/. Then
follow the online search instructions to
locate docket number ‘‘NHTSA–2016–
0002.’’
II. Tires Involved
Affected are approximately 338
Cooper Discoverer A/T3 size 265/70R18
Standard Load Tubeless Radial tires that
were manufactured between September
27, 2015 and October 3, 2015.
III. Noncompliance
Cooper explains that the DOT serial
week and year appears upside down
and backwards in the tire identification
number (TIN) molded into the outboard
sidewalls of the subject tires and those
tires therefore do not meet the
requirements specified in paragraph
S5.5.1 of FMVSS No. 139.
IV. Rule Text
sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES
Paragraph S5.5.1 of FMVSS No. 139
requires in pertinent part:
S5.5.1 Tire Identification Number.
. . .
(b) Tires manufactured on or after
September 1, 2009. Each tire must be labeled
with the tire identification number required
by 49 CFR part 574 on the intended outboard
sidewall of the tire. Except for retreaded tires,
either the tire identification number or a
partial tire identification number, containing
all characters in the tire identification
number, except for the date code and, at the
discretion of the manufacturer, any optional
code, must be labeled on the other sidewall
of the tire. Except for retreaded tires, if a tire
does not have an intended outboard sidewall,
the tire must be labeled with the tire
identification number required by 49 CFR
part 574 on one sidewall and with either the
tire identification number or a partial tire
identification number, containing all
characters in the tire identification number
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:27 Jul 01, 2016
Jkt 238001
except for the date code and, at the discretion
of the manufacturer, any optional code, on
the other side wall.
V. Summary of Cooper’s Petition
Cooper believes that this
noncompliance is inconsequential as it
relates to motor vehicle safety.
In support of its petition, Cooper
submitted the following information
and analysis of the subject
noncompliance:
1. Cooper cited paragraph S5.5.1(b) of
FMVSS No. 139, which requires tires
manufactured on or after September 1,
2009 to be labeled with the TIN required
by 49 CFR part 574 on the intended
outboard sidewall of the tire.
2. Cooper also noted that 49 CFR
574.5 states that ‘‘[e]ach tire
manufacturer shall conspicuously label
on one sidewall of each tire it
manufactures . . . a tire identification
number containing the information set
forth in paragraphs (a) through (d) of
this section.’’ The company further
noted that 49 CFR 574.5(d) specifies that
‘‘[t]he fourth grouping, consisting of
four numerical symbols, must identify
the week and year of manufacture,’’
with the first two symbols identifying
the week and the last two identifying
the year.
3. Cooper stated that the subject tires,
on the outboard side only, were molded
with an upside down and backwards
DOT serial week and year. The serial
number stamping should read: ‘‘DOT
UPH4 1A6 3915.’’ The outboard side,
which includes the date code, was
molded with the date code information
oriented incorrectly upside down and
backwards, which resulted in the
characters being out of proper sequence.
4. Cooper explained that the existence
of the stamping error was determined by
visual examination of a subject tire on
October 21, 2015 by warehouse
personnel in Grand Prairie, TX. Upon
further investigation, it was determined
that only tires cured in one press
location (E10L) during one production
week (3915) were affected. Tires with
the same SKU code were also curing in
another press (Z11L), but these tires
were stamped correctly. Cooper stated
that sorting of its internal inventories
revealed that for curing press E10L,
during DOT serial week 3915, there was
a total net cure of 518 tires, of which
180 tires have been accounted for in its
warehouse. There were 338 tires
distributed. Cooper made the final
determination that a noncompliance
exists as to those 338 tires on January
6, 2015.
5. Cooper states that the 338 subject
tires do meet and/or exceed all
performance requirements and all other
PO 00000
Frm 00140
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
43709
labeling and marking requirements of
FMVSS No. 139.
Furthermore, Cooper is not aware of
any crashes, injuries, customer
complaints, or field reports associated
with the subject tires.
Cooper has informed NHTSA that the
subject tires located in its inventory
count reconciliation have been returned
to the company’s Findlay, OH plant,
where they will be corrected prior to
being released for sale.
In summation, Cooper believes that
the described noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety,
and that its petition, to exempt Cooper
from providing recall notification of the
noncompliance, as required by 49
U.S.C. 30118, and remedying the
noncompliance, as required by 49
U.S.C. 30120, should be granted.
NHTSA’S Decision
NHTSA’S Analysis: The agency
believes that in the case of a tire labeling
noncompliance, one measure of its
inconsequentiality to motor vehicle
safety is whether the mislabeling would
affect the manufacturer’s or consumer’s
ability to identify the mislabeled tires
properly, should the tires be recalled for
performance related noncompliance. In
this case, the nature of the labeling error
does not prevent the correct
identification of the affected tires. 49
CFR 574.5 requires the date code
portion of the tire identification number
to be placed in the last or correct
position. In Cooper’s case it is in the
right-most position, however, the
manufacturer date code is upside down.
Because the label is located on the tire
sidewall, it is not likely to be
misidentified. A reader will be able to
read the date code, by spinning the tire,
and therefore inverting the date code
will allow it to easily be read.
NHTSA’S Decision: In consideration
of the foregoing, NHTSA finds that
Cooper has met its burden of persuasion
that the subject FMVSS No. 139
noncompliance in the affected tires is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
Accordingly, Cooper’s petition is hereby
granted and Cooper is consequently
exempted from the obligation of
providing notification of, and a free
remedy for, that noncompliance under
49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.
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
E:\FR\FM\05JYN1.SGM
05JYN1
43710
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 128 / Tuesday, July 5, 2016 / Notices
defect or noncompliance. Therefore, this
decision only applies to the subject tires
that Cooper no longer controlled at the
time it determined that the
noncompliance existed. However, the
granting of this petition does not relieve
equipment 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.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120:
delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.95 and
501.8.
Jeffrey M. Giuseppe,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2016–15750 Filed 7–1–16; 8:45 am]
pertinent data the agency gathered. The
results of this review and NHTSA’s
analysis of the petition’s merit is set
forth in the DP15–008 Evaluation
Report, appearing in the public docket
referenced in the heading of this notice.
Forest River has recalled four (4) of
the eleven (11) issues. One issue was
addressed with a Technical Service
Bulletin (TSB), five (5) were addressed
in a consent order issued July 8, 2015
and it is unlikely that an order
concerning notification and remedy of a
safety-related defect would be issued as
a result of granting Mrs. Amy Green’s
request for the one remaining issue.
Therefore, an investigation into the
issues raised by the petition does not
appear to be warranted and the petition
is denied.
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30162(d); delegations
of authority at CFR 1.95 and 501.8.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Gregory K. Rea,
Associate Administrator for Enforcement.
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[FR Doc. 2016–15788 Filed 7–1–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
[Docket No. NHTSA–2016–0074]
Denial of Motor Vehicle Defect Petition
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation.
ACTION: Denial of petition for a defect
investigation.
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
AGENCY:
This notice sets forth the
reasons for the denial of a petition
submitted to NHTSA under 49 U.S.C.
30162, requesting that the agency
commence a proceeding to determine
the existence of a defect related to motor
vehicle safety in 2015 and 2016 Shasta
Airflyte recreational vehicles. After a
review of the petition and other
information, NHTSA has concluded that
all but one of the issues identified in the
petition have been addressed through
one of three other remedial actions. The
one issue not addressed by another
action was found not to represent an
unreasonable risk to motor vehicle
safety. The agency accordingly has
denied the petition. The petition is
hereinafter identified as DP15–008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Nate Seymour, Medium & Heavy Duty
Vehicle Division, Office of Defects
Investigation (ODI), NHTSA, 1200 New
Jersey Ave. SE., Washington, DC 20590.
Telephone: (202) 366–2069.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: By letter
dated September 1, 2015, Mrs. Amy
Green wrote to NHTSA requesting that
the agency investigate eleven (11) issues
identified in her letter.
NHTSA has reviewed the material
provided by the petitioners and other
SUMMARY:
sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES
[Docket No. NHTSA–2015–0116]
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:27 Jul 01, 2016
Jkt 238001
Agency Information Collection
Request
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of submission of
information collection request to Office
of Management and Budget (OMB).
AGENCY:
In compliance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this
notice announces that the Information
Collection Request (ICR) abstracted
below is being forwarded to the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) for
review and comments.
DATES: Comments must be submitted on
or before August 4, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Send comments to the
Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Office of Management and
Budget, 725 17th Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20503, Attention:
NHTSA Desk Officer.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julie
Kang, Ph.D., Contracting Officer’s
Technical Representative Task Order
Manager, Human Factors/Engineering
Integration Division, Office of Vehicle
Crash Avoidance and Electronic
Controls Research (NSR–310), National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration,
1200 New Jersey Ave. SE., Washington,
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00141
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
DC 20590. Dr. Kang’s phone number is
202–366–5677. Her email address is
julie.kang@dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A Federal
Register Notice with a 60-day comment
period soliciting comments on the
following information collection was
published on January 4, 2016 (81 FR
141–142).
Title: Recruitment and Debriefing of
Human Subjects for Head-Up Displays
and Distraction Potential.
OMB Control Number: None.
Type of Request: New Information
Collection.
Abstract: The National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration’s
(NHTSA) mission is to save lives,
prevent injuries, and reduce economic
losses resulting from motor vehicle
crashes. Head-up display (HUD)
technology presents many opportunities
and challenges for mitigating driver
distraction, improving driver comfort,
and engaging drivers with their
vehicles. On one hand, the reduction of
the distance that the eyes need to travel
between a focal point on the forward
road and a focal point on an in-vehicle
display can minimize the amount of
time required to view a display relative
to a traditional Head-Down Display
(HDD). There is also an added benefit in
that peripheral roadway information can
be processed while viewing a HUD,
allowing partial support of some aspects
of vehicle control, like lane keeping. On
the other hand, humans have difficulty
simultaneously processing two visual
displays overlaid on each other.
Viewing HUDs while driving may
therefore prevent drivers from
perceiving events in the environment,
particularly centrally located hazards
such as a braking lead vehicle. There is
a concern that if drivers perceive HUDs
to be safer than HDDs that they may not
regulate the length of time they spend
looking at the HUD. The HUD may
therefore negatively alter drivers’ visual
scanning behavior. The benefits and
drawbacks of using a HUD in a vehicle
must therefore be fully investigated and
properly understood.
The proposed study will examine the
distraction potential of HUD use on
driving performance. The information
collection involves collecting eligibility
information and demographic
information. The study focuses on HUD
technologies that display information
about the state of the vehicle (e.g.,
vehicle speed, navigation information)
near the driver’s forward field of view
(e.g., projected into the lower portion of
the windshield in front of the driver).
Affected Public: Voluntary study
participants.
E:\FR\FM\05JYN1.SGM
05JYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 128 (Tuesday, July 5, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43708-43710]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-15750]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2016-0002; Notice 2]
Cooper Tire & Rubber Company, Grant of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Grant of petition.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Cooper Tire & Rubber Company (Cooper), has determined that
certain Cooper tires do not fully comply with paragraph S5.5.1(b) of
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 139, New pneumatic
radial tires for light vehicles. Cooper filed a report dated January 8,
2016, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance
Responsibility and Reports. Cooper then petitioned NHTSA under 49 CFR
part 556 requesting a decision that the subject noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
ADDRESSES: For further information on this decision contact Abraham
Diaz,
[[Page 43709]]
Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone (202) 366-5310, facsimile
(202) 366-5930.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Overview
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) (see implementing rule
at 49 CFR part 556), Cooper submitted a petition 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 the petition was published, with a 30-day
public comment period, on March 25, 2016 in the Federal Register (81 FR
16268). No comments were received. To view the petition and all
supporting documents log onto the Federal Docket Management System
(FDMS) Web site at: https://www.regulations.gov/. Then follow the online
search instructions to locate docket number ``NHTSA-2016-0002.''
II. Tires Involved
Affected are approximately 338 Cooper Discoverer A/T3 size 265/
70R18 Standard Load Tubeless Radial tires that were manufactured
between September 27, 2015 and October 3, 2015.
III. Noncompliance
Cooper explains that the DOT serial week and year appears upside
down and backwards in the tire identification number (TIN) molded into
the outboard sidewalls of the subject tires and those tires therefore
do not meet the requirements specified in paragraph S5.5.1 of FMVSS No.
139.
IV. Rule Text
Paragraph S5.5.1 of FMVSS No. 139 requires in pertinent part:
S5.5.1 Tire Identification Number.
. . .
(b) Tires manufactured on or after September 1, 2009. Each tire
must be labeled with the tire identification number required by 49
CFR part 574 on the intended outboard sidewall of the tire. Except
for retreaded tires, either the tire identification number or a
partial tire identification number, containing all characters in the
tire identification number, except for the date code and, at the
discretion of the manufacturer, any optional code, must be labeled
on the other sidewall of the tire. Except for retreaded tires, if a
tire does not have an intended outboard sidewall, the tire must be
labeled with the tire identification number required by 49 CFR part
574 on one sidewall and with either the tire identification number
or a partial tire identification number, containing all characters
in the tire identification number except for the date code and, at
the discretion of the manufacturer, any optional code, on the other
side wall.
V. Summary of Cooper's Petition
Cooper believes that this noncompliance is inconsequential as it
relates to motor vehicle safety.
In support of its petition, Cooper submitted the following
information and analysis of the subject noncompliance:
1. Cooper cited paragraph S5.5.1(b) of FMVSS No. 139, which
requires tires manufactured on or after September 1, 2009 to be labeled
with the TIN required by 49 CFR part 574 on the intended outboard
sidewall of the tire.
2. Cooper also noted that 49 CFR 574.5 states that ``[e]ach tire
manufacturer shall conspicuously label on one sidewall of each tire it
manufactures . . . a tire identification number containing the
information set forth in paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section.''
The company further noted that 49 CFR 574.5(d) specifies that ``[t]he
fourth grouping, consisting of four numerical symbols, must identify
the week and year of manufacture,'' with the first two symbols
identifying the week and the last two identifying the year.
3. Cooper stated that the subject tires, on the outboard side only,
were molded with an upside down and backwards DOT serial week and year.
The serial number stamping should read: ``DOT UPH4 1A6 3915.'' The
outboard side, which includes the date code, was molded with the date
code information oriented incorrectly upside down and backwards, which
resulted in the characters being out of proper sequence.
4. Cooper explained that the existence of the stamping error was
determined by visual examination of a subject tire on October 21, 2015
by warehouse personnel in Grand Prairie, TX. Upon further
investigation, it was determined that only tires cured in one press
location (E10L) during one production week (3915) were affected. Tires
with the same SKU code were also curing in another press (Z11L), but
these tires were stamped correctly. Cooper stated that sorting of its
internal inventories revealed that for curing press E10L, during DOT
serial week 3915, there was a total net cure of 518 tires, of which 180
tires have been accounted for in its warehouse. There were 338 tires
distributed. Cooper made the final determination that a noncompliance
exists as to those 338 tires on January 6, 2015.
5. Cooper states that the 338 subject tires do meet and/or exceed
all performance requirements and all other labeling and marking
requirements of FMVSS No. 139.
Furthermore, Cooper is not aware of any crashes, injuries, customer
complaints, or field reports associated with the subject tires.
Cooper has informed NHTSA that the subject tires located in its
inventory count reconciliation have been returned to the company's
Findlay, OH plant, where they will be corrected prior to being released
for sale.
In summation, Cooper believes that the described noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety, and that its petition, to
exempt Cooper from providing recall notification of the noncompliance,
as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118, and remedying the noncompliance, as
required by 49 U.S.C. 30120, should be granted.
NHTSA'S Decision
NHTSA'S Analysis: The agency believes that in the case of a tire
labeling noncompliance, one measure of its inconsequentiality to motor
vehicle safety is whether the mislabeling would affect the
manufacturer's or consumer's ability to identify the mislabeled tires
properly, should the tires be recalled for performance related
noncompliance. In this case, the nature of the labeling error does not
prevent the correct identification of the affected tires. 49 CFR 574.5
requires the date code portion of the tire identification number to be
placed in the last or correct position. In Cooper's case it is in the
right-most position, however, the manufacturer date code is upside
down. Because the label is located on the tire sidewall, it is not
likely to be misidentified. A reader will be able to read the date
code, by spinning the tire, and therefore inverting the date code will
allow it to easily be read.
NHTSA'S Decision: In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA finds
that Cooper has met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No.
139 noncompliance in the affected tires is inconsequential to motor
vehicle safety. Accordingly, Cooper's petition is hereby granted and
Cooper is consequently exempted from the obligation of providing
notification of, and a free remedy for, that noncompliance under 49
U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.
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
[[Page 43710]]
defect or noncompliance. Therefore, this decision only applies to the
subject tires that Cooper no longer controlled at the time it
determined that the noncompliance existed. However, the granting of
this petition does not relieve equipment 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.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at
49 CFR 1.95 and 501.8.
Jeffrey M. Giuseppe,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2016-15750 Filed 7-1-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
