BMW of North America, LLC, Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 62970-62972 [2016-21978]
Download as PDF
62970
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 177 / Tuesday, September 13, 2016 / Notices
that are final within the meaning of 23
U.S.C. 139(l)(1). The environmental
review, consultation, and other actions
required by applicable Federal
environmental laws for this project are
being, or have been, carried-out by
TxDOT pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 327 and
a Memorandum of Understanding dated
December 16, 2014 and executed by
FHWA and TxDOT. The actions relate
to a proposed highway project, I–35
Improvements from Rundberg Lane to
US 290 East in Austin, Travis County,
in the State of Texas. Those actions
grant licenses, permits, and approvals
for the project. Under MAP–21 section
1319, TxDOT has issued a Finding of No
Significant Impact for this action.
By this notice, TxDOT is
advising the public of final agency
actions subject to 23 U.S.C. 139(l)(1). A
claim seeking judicial review of the
Federal agency actions on the highway
project will be barred unless the claim
is filed on or before February 9, 2017.
If the Federal law that authorizes
judicial review of a claim provides a
time period of less than 150 days for
filing such claim, then that shorter time
period still applies.
DATES:
Mr.
Carlos Swonke, P.G., Environmental
Affairs Division, Texas Department of
Transportation, 125 East 11th Street,
Austin, Texas 78701; telephone: (512)
416–2734; email: carlos.swonke@
txdot.gov. TxDOT’s normal business
hours are 8:00 a.m.–5:00 p.m. (central
time), Monday through Friday.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Notice is
hereby given that TxDOT and Federal
agencies have taken final agency actions
by issuing licenses, permits, and
approvals for the following highway
project in the State of Texas: I–35
Improvements from Rundberg Lane to
US 290 East in Austin, Travis County.
The project is approximately 1.6 miles
in length on US 183 and approximately
2.35 miles in length on I–35, would
require approximately 7 acres of
additional right-of-way, and would
provide direct connectors (flyovers)
between I–35 southbound to US 183
southbound; US 183 northbound to I–35
northbound; and I–35 southbound to US
183 northbound. The project will also
add lanes to the I–35 frontage road in
both directions to bypass the St. Johns
Avenue signalized intersection; replace
the existing St. Johns Avenue bridge
over I–35 to provide the required
vertical clearance; provide frontage road
U-turns for the northbound and
southbound directions at St. Johns
Avenue; modify the I–35 northbound to
US 183 northbound flyover; and provide
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:27 Sep 12, 2016
Jkt 238001
bicycle and pedestrian facilities along
the frontage roads.
The actions by TxDOT and the
Federal agencies, and the laws under
which such actions were taken, are
described in the Environmental
Assessment (EA) and Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI) issued on
August 1, 2016, and in other documents
in the TxDOT project file. The EA,
FONSI, and other documents in the
TxDOT project file are available by
contacting TxDOT at the addresses
provided above. The TxDOT EA and
FONSI can be viewed and downloaded
from the project Web site at
www.My35.org/Capital or by visiting the
TxDOT Austin District Office at 7901
North I–35, Austin, TX 78753.
This notice applies to all Federal
agency decisions as of the issuance date
of this notice and all laws under which
such actions were taken, including but
not limited to:
1. General: National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) [42 U.S.C. 4321–
4351]; Federal-Aid Highway Act [23
U.S.C. 109].
2. Air: Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7401–
7671(q).
3. Land: Section 4(f) of the
Department of Transportation Act of
1966 [49 U.S.C. 303]; Landscaping and
Scenic Enhancement (Wildflowers), 23
U.S.C. 319.
4. Wildlife: Endangered Species Act
[16 U.S.C. 1531–1544 and Section
1536], Marine Mammal Protection Act
[16 U.S.C. 1361], Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act [16 U.S.C. 661–
667(d)], Migratory Bird Treaty Act [16
U.S.C. 703–712].
5. Historic and Cultural Resources:
Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966, as amended
[16 U.S.C. 470(f) et seq.]; Archeological
Resources Protection Act of 1977 [16
U.S.C. 470(aa)–11]; Archeological and
Historic Preservation Act [16 U.S.C.
469–469(c)]; Native American Grave
Protection and Repatriation Act
(NAGPRA) [25 U.S.C. 3001–3013].
6. Social and Economic: Civil Rights
Act of 1964 [42 U.S.C. 2000(d)–
2000(d)(1)]; American Indian Religious
Freedom Act [42 U.S.C. 1996]; Farmland
Protection Policy Act (FPPA) [7 U.S.C.
4201–4209].
7. Wetlands and Water Resources:
Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251–1377
(Section 404, Section 401, Section 319);
Land and Water Conservation Fund
(LWCF), 16 U.S.C. 4601–4604; Safe
Drinking Water Act (SDWA), 42 U.S.C.
300(f)–300(j)(6); Rivers and Harbors Act
of 1899, 33 U.S.C. 401–406; Wild and
Scenic Rivers Act, 16 U.S.C. 1271–1287;
Emergency Wetlands Resources Act, 16
U.S.C. 3921, 3931; TEA–21 Wetlands
PO 00000
Frm 00117
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Mitigation, 23 U.S.C. 103(b)(6)(m),
133(b)(11); Flood Disaster Protection
Act, 42 U.S.C. 4001–4128.
8. Executive Orders: E.O. 11990
Protection of Wetlands; E.O. 11988
Floodplain Management; E.O. 12898,
Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low Income
Populations; E.O. 11593 Protection and
Enhancement of Cultural Resources;
E.O. 13007 Indian Sacred Sites; E.O.
13287 Preserve America; E.O. 13175
Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments; E.O. 11514
Protection and Enhancement of
Environmental Quality; E.O. 13112
Invasive Species. (Catalog of Federal
Domestic Assistance Program Number
20.205, Highway Planning and
Construction. The regulations
implementing Executive Order 12372
regarding intergovernmental
consultation on Federal programs and
activities apply to this program.)
Authority: 23 U.S.C. 139(l)(1).
Issued on: August 31, 2016.
Michael T. Leary,
Director, Planning and Program Development,
Federal Highway Administration.
[FR Doc. 2016–21406 Filed 9–12–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2014–0118; Notice 2]
BMW of North America, LLC, Grant of
Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT)
ACTION: Grant of petition.
AGENCY:
BMW of North America, LLC,
(BMW) a subsidiary of BMW AG in
Munich, Germany, has determined that
certain Model year (MY) 2015 BMW
model X5 xDrive35i and model X5
xDrive35d multipurpose passenger
vehicles (MPV) do not fully comply
with paragraph S4.3.3 of Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No.
110, Tire Selection and Rims and Motor
Home/Recreation Vehicle Trailer Load
Carrying Capacity Information for Motor
Vehicles with a GVWR of 4,536
kilograms (10,000 pounds) or less. BMW
filed a report dated October 22, 2014,
pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and
Noncompliance Responsibility and
Reports. BMW then petitioned NHTSA
under 49 CFR part 556 requesting a
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\13SEN1.SGM
13SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 177 / Tuesday, September 13, 2016 / Notices
decision that the subject noncompliance
is inconsequential to motor vehicle
safety.
For further information on
this decision contact Stu Seigel, Office
of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA), telephone
(202) 366–5287, facsimile (202) 366–
7002.
ADDRESSES:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES
I. BMW’s Petition: Pursuant to 49
U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) (see
implementing rule at 49 CFR part 556),
BMW 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 BMW’s petition
was published, with a 30-day public
comment period, on April 3, 2015 in the
Federal Register (80 FR 18294). 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–2014–
0118.’’
II. Vehicles Involved: Affected are
approximately 68 MY 2015 BMW model
X5 xDrive35i and model X5 xDrive35d
MPVs manufactured between October 3,
2014 through October 7, 2014.
III. Noncompliance: BMW explains
that the vehicle certification labels
required by 49 CFR part 567, and some
of the tire information labels required by
FMVSS No. 110, affixed to the subject
vehicles show that the vehicles were
originally equipped with 18-inch tires
and rims. The vehicles were actually
originally equipped with 19-inch tires
and rims. BMW believes that the
noncompliance is that the certification
label required by 49 CFR part 567, and
in some cases the tire information labels
required by FMVSS No. 110, do not list
rim information for the tires installed on
the vehicles as original equipment as
required by paragraph S4.3.3 of FMVSS
No. 110.
Rule Text: Paragraph S4.3.3 of FMVSS
No. 110 requires in pertinent part:
S4.3.3 Additional labeling information
for vehicles other than passenger cars. Each
vehicle shall show the size designation and,
if applicable, the type designation of rims
(not necessarily those on the vehicle)
appropriate for the tire appropriate for use on
that vehicle, including the tire installed as
original equipment on the vehicle by the
vehicle manufacturer, after each GAWR
listed on the certification label required by
§ 567.4 or § 567.5 of this chapter . . .
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:27 Sep 12, 2016
Jkt 238001
V. Summary of BMW’s Analyses:
BMW stated its belief that the subject
noncompliance is inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety for the following
reasons:
In the case of the subject vehicles
with an incorrect Part 567 certification
label but a correct FMVSS No. 110 tire
information label, BMW states that
when a person checks or adjusts the
inflation of a tire and uses this (correct)
FMVSS No. 110 tire information label,
the person will have the correct
inflation pressure available from that
label. If, however, the person only looks
at the certification label, or both the
certification and tire information labels,
BMW states that the person may then
become unsure of what tires have been
installed on the vehicle. Should this
occur, BMW states that a number of
information sources and services are
available which can be used to
determine the correct tire size and
recommended cold inflation pressure.
BMW states that these information
sources include the tires installed on the
vehicle which have the tire size
information contained on their
sidewalls, the vehicle’s Owner’s Manual
which contains information pertaining
to the various tire sizes and tire pressure
for use on the affected vehicles, and
BMW’s Roadside AssistanceTM program
which is available 24 hours/day and
provides representatives who have
information on all available tire sizes
and specifications for a given model and
model year of BMW. BMW states its
belief that all of the above listed sources
would lead the driver to obtaining the
correct recommended cold inflation
pressure when attempting to inflate the
tires mounted on their vehicle.
For the subject vehicles containing
both incorrect 49 CFR part 567
certification labels’ and incorrect
FMVSS No. 110 tire information labels
BMW states that the driver can use the
labeling on the sidewall of the installed
tires, the vehicle’s owner’s manual, and
BMW Roadside AssistanceTM to
determine the recommended cold
inflation pressure for the tires installed
on their vehicle.
BMW also maintains that if a driver
were to use the cold inflation pressure
shown on the incorrect labels for the 18inch tires when inflating the 19-inch
tires, that pressure would be sufficient
to support vehicle loading. Their
calculations using the MY 2015 X5
xDrive35i for example show that the
determined load rating for two 19-inch
tires inflated to the pressure meant for
18-inch tires is 1,572 kg. Because the
front gross axle weight rating (GAWR) is
1,279 kg, BMW concludes that the 19inch tires would be adequately inflated.
PO 00000
Frm 00118
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
62971
BMW also included calculations to
demonstrate that the information on the
certification labels is correct for the 18inch tires mounted on the subject
vehicles.
BMW states that BMW Customer
Relations have not received any contact
from vehicle owners regarding this issue
and, therefore, are unaware that any
vehicle owner has encountered this
issue in the field. They state that they
are also unaware of any accident or
injuries that have occurred as a result of
this noncompliance.
BMW has additionally informed
NHTSA that it has corrected the subject
noncompliance.
In summation, BMW believes that the
described noncompliance of the subject
vehicles is inconsequential to motor
vehicle safety, and that its petition, to
exempt BMW 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’s Decision
NHTSA’s Analysis: The 68 affected
vehicles were all originally equipped
with 19 inch tires but the Part 567
certification label on these vehicles
incorrectly only lists rim type and size
information for an 18 inch tire violating
the requirements of FMVSS No. 110
section S4.3.3., which effectively
requires that the rim size on the label be
appropriate for the tire size installed on
the vehicle as original equipment.
Additionally, for some of the 68
vehicles, the FMVSS No.110 required
vehicle placard lists information for an
18 inch tire, including tire size and
recommended inflation pressure, when
a 19 inch tire was originally installed on
the vehicle violating FMVSS No.110
sections S4.3(c) and (d). Section S4.3(c)
requires that the placard identify the
manufacturer recommended cold tire
inflation pressure for the fitted tires, and
section S4.3(d) requires the tire size
designation for the tires installed at the
time of the first purchase.
For all 68 vehicles where the rim type
and size is not provided for the
originally installed 19 inch tire, the
agency believes the vehicle owners will
not encounter any safety problems if
their rims need to be replaced. First, in
addition to the rim size information that
was inadvertently not included on the
certification label required by 49 CFR
part 567, FMVSS No. 110 requires that
the rim size, along with other
information, be stamped on the rim
itself. Also, the tire size stamped on the
sidewall of the tire indicates the
corresponding rim diameter.
E:\FR\FM\13SEN1.SGM
13SEN1
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES
62972
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 177 / Tuesday, September 13, 2016 / Notices
Furthermore, BMW mentioned that their
owner’s manual contains tire
information and that vehicle owners can
contact BMW Roadside Assistance,
BMW Assist, and BMW Customer
Relations for additional assistance.
For the vehicles where the FMVSS
No. 110 required vehicle placard lists
information for an 18 inch tire,
including tire size and recommended
inflation pressure, when a 19 inch tire
was originally installed on the vehicle,
a different analysis needs to be
considered. FMVSS No. 110 requires
that the original tires installed on a
vehicle and the tires listed on the
vehicle placard be the same size, and
that the tires at the manufacturer
recommended inflation pressure be
appropriate for the designed vehicle
maximum load conditions. If a customer
were to look at the vehicle placard to
determine recommended inflation
pressure values they would see values
intended for the 18 inch tire and not the
19 inch tire. If that customer did not
notice that their vehicle had 19 inch
wheels installed they may use the 18
inch tire inflation values which are less
than required for the 19 inch tires. If
this were the case, calculations show
that the 19 inch tire load carrying
capacities at the 18 inch tire delineated
pressures (with tire load capacity
reduced/divided by a 1.1 reduction
factor as required in FMVSS No. 110 for
passenger car tires used on multipurpose passenger vehicles) is
appropriate for the front and rear
specified GAWR’s in all affected vehicle
models except for the ‘‘worst case’’
model with the heaviest GAWR which
is the axle rating assigned by BMW to
the X5xDrive35i 7-seater rear axle. For
a 19 inch tire at an 18 inch
recommended inflation pressure of 33
PSI and 41 PSI front and rear axles
respectively, a front tire load rating is
810 kg, then, with a 10% reduction
factor results in a value of 736 kg or a
total of 1,472 kg front axle load carrying
capacity. This value exceeds all four
front GAWR values provided by BMW
for the four models of vehicles with the
largest axle rating value of 1334 kg. At
41 psi, the per tire load rating equates
to 950 kg, then with a 10% reduction
factor becomes 864 kg per tire or 1727
kg rear axle load carrying capacity. The
1727 kg value is larger than rear axle
GAWR values provided by BMW on
three models, but not on the fourth
model, the 7-seat X5 vehicle which has
a rear GAWR of 1742 kg. For this model
at full load capacity, the tires
technically, are undersized for the rear
axle by 15 kg (1742kg–1727 kg) or
approximately 33 pounds divided by
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:27 Sep 12, 2016
Jkt 238001
the two tires resulting in approximately
15 pounds per tire. In follow-up
discussions with BMW, they indicated
that only five of the 68 non-compliant
vehicles are the 7-seat model, and
agreed that for those five vehicles new
corrected FMVSS No. 110 vehicle
placard labels will be sent to the
owners. On 08/16/2016, BMW
confirmed that the respective five
owners were contacted and new vehicle
placards were mailed out.
NHTSA’s Decision: Considering the
above analysis, the fact that BMW stated
they have no reports of accidents or
injuries due to this noncompliance, and
that BMW is providing corrected
replacement labels to the five owners of
the 7-seat model X5 which has tire
overload potential, NHTSA finds that
BMW has met its burden of persuasion
that the subject FMVSS No. 110 rim and
tire size labeling noncompliances on the
subject vehicles are inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety. Accordingly,
BMW’s petition is hereby granted and
BMW 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
defect or noncompliance. Therefore, this
decision only applies to the subject
vehicles that BMW no longer controlled
at the time it determined that the
noncompliance existed. However, the
granting of this petition does not relieve
vehicle distributors and dealers of the
prohibitions on the sale, offer for sale,
or introduction or delivery for
introduction into interstate commerce of
the noncompliant vehicles under their
control after BMW 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. 2016–21978 Filed 9–12–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
PO 00000
Frm 00119
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration
[Docket No. PHMSA–2016–0064, Notice No.
2016–8]
Hazardous Materials: International
Regulations for the Safe Transport of
Radioactive Material (SSR–6); Draft
Revision Available for Comment
Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration
(PHMSA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice; document availability
and request for comments.
AGENCY:
PHMSA seeks public
comment on a draft revision of the
International Atomic Energy Agency’s
(IAEA) ‘‘Regulations for the Safe
Transport of Radioactive Material’’
(SSR–6), which is scheduled for
publication in 2018. PHMSA and the
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC) will submit comments jointly to
the IAEA regarding the draft document.
PHMSA thereby requests public input to
assist in U.S. comment development.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before October 28, 2016. Comments
received after this date will be
considered if it is practical to do so;
however, we are only able to assure
consideration for comments received on
or before this date.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by any of the following methods:
• Federal Rulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Fax: 1–202–493–2251.
• Mail: Dockets Management System;
U.S. Department of Transportation,
Dockets Operations, M–30, Ground
Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590–
0001.
• Hand Delivery: To U.S. Department
of Transportation, Dockets Operations,
M–30, Ground Floor, Room W12–140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590–0001, between
9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Instructions: Include the agency name
and docket number PHMSA–2016–0064
for this notice at the beginning of your
comment. Note that all comments
received will be posted without change
to https://www.regulations.gov including
any personal information provided. If
sent by mail, comments must be
submitted in duplicate. Persons wishing
to receive confirmation of receipt of
their comments must include a selfaddressed stamped postcard.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\13SEN1.SGM
13SEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 177 (Tuesday, September 13, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62970-62972]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-21978]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2014-0118; Notice 2]
BMW of North America, LLC, Grant of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT)
ACTION: Grant of petition.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: BMW of North America, LLC, (BMW) a subsidiary of BMW AG in
Munich, Germany, has determined that certain Model year (MY) 2015 BMW
model X5 xDrive35i and model X5 xDrive35d multipurpose passenger
vehicles (MPV) do not fully comply with paragraph S4.3.3 of Federal
Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 110, Tire Selection and Rims
and Motor Home/Recreation Vehicle Trailer Load Carrying Capacity
Information for Motor Vehicles with a GVWR of 4,536 kilograms (10,000
pounds) or less. BMW filed a report dated October 22, 2014, pursuant to
49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports.
BMW then petitioned NHTSA under 49 CFR part 556 requesting a
[[Page 62971]]
decision that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor
vehicle safety.
ADDRESSES: For further information on this decision contact Stu Seigel,
Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone (202) 366-5287, facsimile
(202) 366-7002.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. BMW's Petition: Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) (see
implementing rule at 49 CFR part 556), BMW 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 BMW's petition was published, with a 30-day
public comment period, on April 3, 2015 in the Federal Register (80 FR
18294). 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-2014-0118.''
II. Vehicles Involved: Affected are approximately 68 MY 2015 BMW
model X5 xDrive35i and model X5 xDrive35d MPVs manufactured between
October 3, 2014 through October 7, 2014.
III. Noncompliance: BMW explains that the vehicle certification
labels required by 49 CFR part 567, and some of the tire information
labels required by FMVSS No. 110, affixed to the subject vehicles show
that the vehicles were originally equipped with 18-inch tires and rims.
The vehicles were actually originally equipped with 19-inch tires and
rims. BMW believes that the noncompliance is that the certification
label required by 49 CFR part 567, and in some cases the tire
information labels required by FMVSS No. 110, do not list rim
information for the tires installed on the vehicles as original
equipment as required by paragraph S4.3.3 of FMVSS No. 110.
Rule Text: Paragraph S4.3.3 of FMVSS No. 110 requires in pertinent
part:
S4.3.3 Additional labeling information for vehicles other than
passenger cars. Each vehicle shall show the size designation and, if
applicable, the type designation of rims (not necessarily those on
the vehicle) appropriate for the tire appropriate for use on that
vehicle, including the tire installed as original equipment on the
vehicle by the vehicle manufacturer, after each GAWR listed on the
certification label required by Sec. 567.4 or Sec. 567.5 of this
chapter . . .
V. Summary of BMW's Analyses: BMW stated its belief that the
subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety for
the following reasons:
In the case of the subject vehicles with an incorrect Part 567
certification label but a correct FMVSS No. 110 tire information label,
BMW states that when a person checks or adjusts the inflation of a tire
and uses this (correct) FMVSS No. 110 tire information label, the
person will have the correct inflation pressure available from that
label. If, however, the person only looks at the certification label,
or both the certification and tire information labels, BMW states that
the person may then become unsure of what tires have been installed on
the vehicle. Should this occur, BMW states that a number of information
sources and services are available which can be used to determine the
correct tire size and recommended cold inflation pressure. BMW states
that these information sources include the tires installed on the
vehicle which have the tire size information contained on their
sidewalls, the vehicle's Owner's Manual which contains information
pertaining to the various tire sizes and tire pressure for use on the
affected vehicles, and BMW's Roadside Assistance\TM\ program which is
available 24 hours/day and provides representatives who have
information on all available tire sizes and specifications for a given
model and model year of BMW. BMW states its belief that all of the
above listed sources would lead the driver to obtaining the correct
recommended cold inflation pressure when attempting to inflate the
tires mounted on their vehicle.
For the subject vehicles containing both incorrect 49 CFR part 567
certification labels' and incorrect FMVSS No. 110 tire information
labels BMW states that the driver can use the labeling on the sidewall
of the installed tires, the vehicle's owner's manual, and BMW Roadside
Assistance\TM\ to determine the recommended cold inflation pressure for
the tires installed on their vehicle.
BMW also maintains that if a driver were to use the cold inflation
pressure shown on the incorrect labels for the 18-inch tires when
inflating the 19-inch tires, that pressure would be sufficient to
support vehicle loading. Their calculations using the MY 2015 X5
xDrive35i for example show that the determined load rating for two 19-
inch tires inflated to the pressure meant for 18-inch tires is 1,572
kg. Because the front gross axle weight rating (GAWR) is 1,279 kg, BMW
concludes that the 19-inch tires would be adequately inflated. BMW also
included calculations to demonstrate that the information on the
certification labels is correct for the 18-inch tires mounted on the
subject vehicles.
BMW states that BMW Customer Relations have not received any
contact from vehicle owners regarding this issue and, therefore, are
unaware that any vehicle owner has encountered this issue in the field.
They state that they are also unaware of any accident or injuries that
have occurred as a result of this noncompliance.
BMW has additionally informed NHTSA that it has corrected the
subject noncompliance.
In summation, BMW believes that the described noncompliance of the
subject vehicles is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety, and that
its petition, to exempt BMW 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's Decision
NHTSA's Analysis: The 68 affected vehicles were all originally
equipped with 19 inch tires but the Part 567 certification label on
these vehicles incorrectly only lists rim type and size information for
an 18 inch tire violating the requirements of FMVSS No. 110 section
S4.3.3., which effectively requires that the rim size on the label be
appropriate for the tire size installed on the vehicle as original
equipment. Additionally, for some of the 68 vehicles, the FMVSS No.110
required vehicle placard lists information for an 18 inch tire,
including tire size and recommended inflation pressure, when a 19 inch
tire was originally installed on the vehicle violating FMVSS No.110
sections S4.3(c) and (d). Section S4.3(c) requires that the placard
identify the manufacturer recommended cold tire inflation pressure for
the fitted tires, and section S4.3(d) requires the tire size
designation for the tires installed at the time of the first purchase.
For all 68 vehicles where the rim type and size is not provided for
the originally installed 19 inch tire, the agency believes the vehicle
owners will not encounter any safety problems if their rims need to be
replaced. First, in addition to the rim size information that was
inadvertently not included on the certification label required by 49
CFR part 567, FMVSS No. 110 requires that the rim size, along with
other information, be stamped on the rim itself. Also, the tire size
stamped on the sidewall of the tire indicates the corresponding rim
diameter.
[[Page 62972]]
Furthermore, BMW mentioned that their owner's manual contains tire
information and that vehicle owners can contact BMW Roadside
Assistance, BMW Assist, and BMW Customer Relations for additional
assistance.
For the vehicles where the FMVSS No. 110 required vehicle placard
lists information for an 18 inch tire, including tire size and
recommended inflation pressure, when a 19 inch tire was originally
installed on the vehicle, a different analysis needs to be considered.
FMVSS No. 110 requires that the original tires installed on a vehicle
and the tires listed on the vehicle placard be the same size, and that
the tires at the manufacturer recommended inflation pressure be
appropriate for the designed vehicle maximum load conditions. If a
customer were to look at the vehicle placard to determine recommended
inflation pressure values they would see values intended for the 18
inch tire and not the 19 inch tire. If that customer did not notice
that their vehicle had 19 inch wheels installed they may use the 18
inch tire inflation values which are less than required for the 19 inch
tires. If this were the case, calculations show that the 19 inch tire
load carrying capacities at the 18 inch tire delineated pressures (with
tire load capacity reduced/divided by a 1.1 reduction factor as
required in FMVSS No. 110 for passenger car tires used on multi-purpose
passenger vehicles) is appropriate for the front and rear specified
GAWR's in all affected vehicle models except for the ``worst case''
model with the heaviest GAWR which is the axle rating assigned by BMW
to the X5xDrive35i 7-seater rear axle. For a 19 inch tire at an 18 inch
recommended inflation pressure of 33 PSI and 41 PSI front and rear
axles respectively, a front tire load rating is 810 kg, then, with a
10% reduction factor results in a value of 736 kg or a total of 1,472
kg front axle load carrying capacity. This value exceeds all four front
GAWR values provided by BMW for the four models of vehicles with the
largest axle rating value of 1334 kg. At 41 psi, the per tire load
rating equates to 950 kg, then with a 10% reduction factor becomes 864
kg per tire or 1727 kg rear axle load carrying capacity. The 1727 kg
value is larger than rear axle GAWR values provided by BMW on three
models, but not on the fourth model, the 7-seat X5 vehicle which has a
rear GAWR of 1742 kg. For this model at full load capacity, the tires
technically, are undersized for the rear axle by 15 kg (1742kg-1727 kg)
or approximately 33 pounds divided by the two tires resulting in
approximately 15 pounds per tire. In follow-up discussions with BMW,
they indicated that only five of the 68 non-compliant vehicles are the
7-seat model, and agreed that for those five vehicles new corrected
FMVSS No. 110 vehicle placard labels will be sent to the owners. On 08/
16/2016, BMW confirmed that the respective five owners were contacted
and new vehicle placards were mailed out.
NHTSA's Decision: Considering the above analysis, the fact that BMW
stated they have no reports of accidents or injuries due to this
noncompliance, and that BMW is providing corrected replacement labels
to the five owners of the 7-seat model X5 which has tire overload
potential, NHTSA finds that BMW has met its burden of persuasion that
the subject FMVSS No. 110 rim and tire size labeling noncompliances on
the subject vehicles are inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
Accordingly, BMW's petition is hereby granted and BMW 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 defect or noncompliance. Therefore, this decision
only applies to the subject vehicles that BMW no longer controlled at
the time it determined that the noncompliance existed. However, the
granting of this petition does not relieve vehicle distributors and
dealers of the prohibitions on the sale, offer for sale, or
introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate commerce of
the noncompliant vehicles under their control after BMW 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. 2016-21978 Filed 9-12-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P