Denial of Motor Vehicle Defect Petition, 43733-43735 [2018-18506]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 166 / Monday, August 27, 2018 / Notices
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
time of entry. Also included is the
petition that an RI or manufacturer may
submit to NHTSA for the agency to
decide that a vehicle that was not
originally manufactured to comply with
all applicable FMVSS is capable of
being modified to conform to those
standards and is therefore eligible for
importation under 49 U.S.C. 30141. The
information collection also includes
applications that are filed with NHTSA
for permission to import nonconforming
vehicles for purposes of research,
investigations, demonstrations, training,
competitive racing events, and show or
display, as well as applications
requesting that the agency recognize
vehicles manufactured for racing
purposes as being qualified to be
imported as vehicles that were not
primarily manufactured for use on
public roads, precluding the need for
those vehicles to comply with the
FMVSS. This information collection is
necessary to ensure that motor vehicles
and motor vehicle equipment subject to
the Federal motor vehicle safety,
bumper, and theft prevention standards
are lawfully imported into the United
States and that RIs and applicants for RI
status are capable of meeting their
obligations under the statutes and
regulations governing the importation of
nonconforming vehicles.
Affected Public: Individuals and
commercial entities that import motor
vehicles or motor vehicle equipment
subject to the FMVSS and vehicles that
are not primarily manufactured for use
on public roads, as well as applicants
for RI status and existing RIs.
Estimated Total Annual Burden:
252,622 hours; $9,880,590.
ADDRESS: Send comments, within 30
days, to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget, 725 17th
Street NW, Washington, DC 20503,
Attention NHTSA Desk Officer.
Comments are invited on: Whether
the proposed collection of information
is necessary for the proper performance
of the functions of the Department,
including whether the information will
have practical utility; the accuracy of
the Department’s estimate of the burden
of the proposed information collection;
ways to enhance the quality, utility and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information
on respondents, including the use of
automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:51 Aug 24, 2018
Jkt 244001
A comment to OMB is most effective
if OMB receives it within 30 days of
publication.
Michael A. Cole,
Acting Director, Office of Vehicle Safety
Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2018–18423 Filed 8–24–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2018–0062]
Denial of Motor Vehicle Defect Petition
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Denial of petition for a defect
investigation.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This is a notice of denial of
a petition submitted to the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration
(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 Michelin Model XZU–3, size 305/85/
R22.5 Load Range J transit bus tires.
After a review of the petition and other
information, NHTSA has concluded that
a defects investigation is unlikely to
result in a finding that a defect related
to motor vehicle safety exists, or a
NHTSA order for the notification and
remedy of a safety related defect as
alleged, at the conclusion of the
requested investigation.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Bruce York, Medium & Heavy Duty
Vehicle Division, Office of Defects
Investigation, NHTSA, 1200 New Jersey
Ave. SE, Washington, DC 20590. Email:
Bruce.York@dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: By letter
dated July 14, 2016, Paul Koleber from
Intercity Transit wrote to NHTSA
requesting that the Agency investigate
the existence of a defect related to motor
vehicle safety in Michelin Model XZU–
3, size 305/85/R22.5 Load Range J
transit bus tires. Mr. Koleber alleges the
tires are structurally unsound and that
this defect can result in sidewall
blowouts at any time whether the tires
are new or re-tread. Mr. Koleber stated
that Michelin had previously recalled
similar tires (12T–009) and the Intercity
Transit fleet experienced failures with
the same characteristics as those
specified in the recall. Mr. Koleber
submitted a forensics lab report from
CASE Forensics to support his
allegation.
PO 00000
Frm 00100
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
43733
NHTSA has reviewed the material
provided by the petitioner and other
information. The results of this review
and NHTSA’s analysis of the petition
are set forth in the DP17–001 Evaluation
Report, published in its entirety as an
appendix to this notice.
For the reasons presented in the
DP17–001 Evaluation Report, it is
unlikely that a defects investigation will
result in a finding that a defect related
to motor vehicle safety exists. It is also
unlikely that an order for the
notification and remedy of a safetyrelated defect would be issued as a
result of granting Mr. Koleber’s request.
Therefore, the petition is denied. This
action does not constitute a finding by
NHTSA that a safety related defect does
not exist. The Agency will take further
action if warranted by future
circumstances.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30162(d); delegations
of authority at CFR 1.50 and 501.8.
Jeffrey M. Giuseppe,
Associate Administrator for Enforcement.
Nate Seymour
Safety Defects Engineer
NEF–106ns
DP17–001
BASIS:
Paul Koleber, from Intercity Transit
petitioned the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA) by
letter dated July 14, 2016, requesting
that a defect investigation be conducted
concerning motor vehicle safety in
Michelin Model XZU–3, size 305/85/
R22.5 Load Range J transit bus tires. The
facts described in this report are based
on the Office of Defect Investigations’
(ODI) assessment of the information
provided by the petitioner and
information gathered by ODI from
relevant sources.
The petitioner alleged that a defect
exists involving the design of tires used
in commercial bus operations which
have resulted in rapid air loss. The
petitioner claimed that failures identical
to those described in recall 12T–009
have happened on the subject post
recall tires. The petitioner stated that
failures occurred on steer and drive
wheel positions of both new and retread
tires. The petitioner hired a forensics lab
to perform scientific failure analysis of
failed tires. The lab concluded the tires
were of similar design and construction
to those in recall 12T–009 and that the
failures were caused by corrosion
induced degradation of the ply strands.
DESCRIPTION OF TIRE:
The subject tires are Michelin XZU–
3, size 305/85/R22.5 Load Range J
transit bus tires. They are designed to be
E:\FR\FM\27AUN1.SGM
27AUN1
43734
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 166 / Monday, August 27, 2018 / Notices
used in all wheel positions for urban
operations involving frequent stopping
and starting. The tread pattern is nondirectional and designed for efficient
traction on wet and slippery surfaces
through Michelin’s patented Matrix
Siping technology. The tires have a
robust casing and bead design to allow
for retreading. The sidewalls are extra
thick to resist curb scrub and include
scrub depth indicators to aid inspection
of the tires to help extend casing life.
OWNER REPORTS:
The Office of Defects Investigation
received two (2) complaints related to
Michelin XZU–3 transit bus tires. The
first Vehicle Owner’s Questionnaire
(VOQ) was received in April 2012, the
same month that voluntary recall 12T–
009 was received from Michelin. A
second VOQ was received in April
2017, one month after DP17–001 was
opened to assess failures on Michelin
XZU–3 transit bus tires. Both reports
were submitted by transit fleets. Neither
VOQ alleged any crashes, injuries or
fatalities.
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
ANALYSIS:
On March 23, 2017, ODI sent
Michelin an Information Request letter
asking for information related to the
subject tires. Michelin’s response was
received May 5, 2017, where design and
application data were presented. ODI’s
assessment of that data follows.
Michelin reported a tire population
(2012–2014 production) of 17,487
subject tires. The subject tire was
discontinued in 2014, upon the
introduction of the X InCity Z 305/
85R22.5 LRJ tire, which offers increased
scrub resistance. The initial tread life of
the subject tire is expected to range from
60,000 to 100,000 miles. The casing life
is expected to range from two (2) to four
(4) years, with one (1) to three (3)
retread applications. Therefore, a
limited number of subject tires are
believed to still be in service.
When asked how Michelin
determined the recall population for
12T–009, Michelin stated that the bead
design of the recalled tires had
undergone a design change. A reduction
in the number of strands was
determined to be the cause of failures
associated with recall 12T–009. Once
the defect was identified, Michelin
reinstated the original bead design
specification, which marked the
endpoint of the recall population. The
scope of the recalled tires included tires
manufactured from the date of the bead
design change through the date when
the design was changed back to the
original specification.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:51 Aug 24, 2018
Jkt 244001
The tires identified by the petitioner
were produced after the bead design
was corrected.
Michelin queried its databases and
found no complaints and one claim for
property damage on tires manufactured
after the 12T–009 recall scope. Michelin
denied this claim based on the
following. Michelin evaluated twelve
(12) tires from the fleet. All had been
retreaded one time, but not at a
Michelin Retread Technologies (MRT)
approved facility. Michelin’s analysis of
the tires revealed operational or
maintenance failures in ten (10) of the
twelve (12) tires. These tires had high
levels of moisture and damage or
evidence of damage repair adjacent to
the rupture. The combination of these
conditions allows for corrosion to
develop in the belt package, which leads
to failure. The other two (2) could not
be determined. ODI queried its database
and found one (1) Vehicle Owner
Questionnaire (VOQ) related to the
subject population, which was received
after the investigation was opened. In
March 2017, Michelin visited the fleet
that submitted the VOQ, and analyzed
its tires. Similar to the property damage
claim above, an MRT was not used. Nor
was an air dryer for tire inflation. This
leaves in question the integrity of the
casings and moisture content which is
detrimental to tire life. Michelin
submitted to ODI, inspection
documentation. Reports of the tires
showed signs of overloading. Personnel
interviews supported these findings as
the fleet followed the vehicle
manufacturer’s recommended inflation
pressure, which is known to be
inadequate for true operational loads on
the specific vehicles operated by the
fleet.
MRT facilities utilize inspection
equipment not available to out of
network retread facilities. The use of
Grazing Light Inspection, X-ray, and
Casing Integrity Analyzer (CIA)
minimize the risk of tire failure after
retreading. MRT facilities also utilize
approved processes to repair tire
damage prior to retreading to prevent
moisture from entering the belt package.
The Altoona Bus Study, Michelin’s
weight study of fleet buses, and ODI’s
weight study are all in agreement. Each
independently found that the Gillig Low
Floor 40′ transit bus as used by the
petitioner and other fleets would be
overloaded with a foreseeable load.
And, the greatest overloading would
occur at the left rear wheel-end. ODI
went further to assess the average
passenger weight. ODI found that the
150-pound weight specified in the Code
of Federal Regulations (CFR), 49 C.F.R.
Part 567.4(g)(3) and Subtitle B-Chapter
PO 00000
Frm 00101
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
VI Part 665 Subpart A is not
representative of today’s population.
The 150-pound value was established in
1971 based on data derived from the
National Health Examination Survey
from 1960–1962. A more recent value
from the National Center for Health
Statistics determined the average male
and female weight to be 195 and 165
respectively. In both cases, the study
participants were not truck/bus drivers
or transit passengers. ODI notes that a
luggage allowance for each passenger is
necessary given the vehicle usage. ODI
also surveyed heavy vehicle
manufacturers to learn what design
weight they use for the driver.
Responses ranged from 150 to 312
pounds depending on market. The
Federal Transit Authority (FTA)
initiated a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM) action in 2011, to
increase the average passenger weight
and standing passenger floor space
square footage, but this rule was never
enacted.
As required by 49 CFR part 567, the
vehicle manufacturer is responsible for
the data on the vehicle certification
label. The manufacturer will set the tire
pressure based on the anticipated axle
load. The anticipated loads will drive
the selection of components to meet the
owner’s specifications.
Michelin released a Technical
Bulletin in November 2015,
recommending 120 psi be used in all
subject tires. Michelin met with Gillig in
January 2016, and recommended the use
of 315/80R22.5 tires and an inflation
pressure of 120 psi to provide sufficient
load-carrying capacity to support actual
loads. Gillig, who produced the
petitioner’s buses, elected not to adopt
this action.
CONCLUSION:
Based on the available information
and previous agency experience, ODI
believes the tires manufactured after
those identified in recall 12T–009 failed
as a result of overloading by the fleets
operating the buses. In our view, a
defects investigation is unlikely to result
in a finding that a defect related to
motor vehicle safety exists, or a NHTSA
order for the notification and remedy of
a safety related defect as alleged, at the
conclusion of the requested
investigation. Therefore, given a
thorough analysis of the potential for
finding a safety related defect in the
vehicle, and in view of NHTSA’s
enforcement priorities and its previous
investigations into this issue, the
petition is denied. This action does not
constitute a finding by NHTSA that a
safety related defect does not exist. The
E:\FR\FM\27AUN1.SGM
27AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 166 / Monday, August 27, 2018 / Notices
Agency will take further action if
warranted by future circumstances.
RECOMMENDATION:
Deny the petition.
CONCUR:
Bruce York, Chief
Medium and Heavy Duty Vehicle
Defects & Assessment Division
[FR Doc. 2018–18506 Filed 8–24–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency
[Docket ID OCC–2018–0024]
Mutual Savings Association Advisory
Committee and Minority Depository
Institutions Advisory Committee
Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency, Department of the Treasury
(OCC).
ACTION: Request for nominations.
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The OCC is seeking
nominations for members of the Mutual
Savings Association Advisory
Committee (MSAAC) and the Minority
Depository Institutions Advisory
Committee (MDIAC). The MSAAC and
the MDIAC assist the OCC in assessing
the needs and challenges facing mutual
savings associations and minority
depository institutions, respectively.
The OCC is seeking nominations of
individuals who are officers and/or
directors of federal mutual savings
associations, or officers and/or directors
of federal stock savings associations that
are part of a mutual holding company
structure, to be considered for selection
as MSAAC members. The OCC also is
seeking nominations of individuals who
are officers and/or directors of OCCregulated minority depository
institutions, or officers and/or directors
of other OCC-regulated depository
institutions with a commitment to
supporting minority depository
institutions, to be considered for
selection as MDIAC members.
DATES: Nominations must be received
on or before October 15, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Nominations of MSAAC
members should be sent to
msaac.nominations@occ.treas.gov or
mailed to: Michael R. Brickman, Deputy
Comptroller for Thrift Supervision, 400
7th Street SW, Washington, DC 20219.
Nominations of MDIAC members
should be sent to mdiac.nominations@
occ.treas.gov or mailed to: Beverly F.
Cole, Deputy Comptroller for
Compliance Supervision, 400 7th Street
SW, Washington, DC 20219.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:51 Aug 24, 2018
Jkt 244001
For
inquiries regarding the MSAAC,
Michael R. Brickman, Deputy
Comptroller for Thrift Supervision, 400
7th Street SW, Washington, DC 20219;
(202) 649–6450; email:
msaac.nominations@occ.treas.gov.
For inquiries regarding the MDIAC,
Beverly F. Cole, Deputy Comptroller for
Compliance Supervision, 400 7th Street
SW, Washington, DC 20219; (202) 649–
5688; email: mdiac.nominations@
occ.treas.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
MSAAC and the MDIAC will be
administered in accordance with the
Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5
U.S.C. App. 2. The MSAAC will advise
the OCC on ways to meet the goals
established by section 5(a) of the Home
Owners’ Loan Act, 12 U.S.C. 1464. The
MSAAC will advise the OCC with
regard to mutual savings associations on
means to: (1) Provide for the
organization, incorporation,
examination, operation and regulation
of associations to be known as federal
savings associations (including federal
savings banks); and (2) issue charters
therefore, giving primary consideration
of the best practices of thrift institutions
in the United States. The MSAAC will
help meet those goals by providing the
OCC with informed advice and
recommendations regarding the current
and future circumstances and needs of
mutual savings associations. The
MDIAC will advise the OCC on ways to
meet the goals established by section
308 of the Financial Institutions Reform,
Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989,
Public Law 101–73, Title III, 103 Stat.
353, 12 U.S.C. 1463 note. The goals of
section 308 are to preserve the present
number of minority institutions,
preserve the minority character of
minority-owned institutions in cases
involving mergers or acquisitions,
provide technical assistance, and
encourage the creation of new minority
institutions. The MDIAC will help the
OCC meet those goals by providing
informed advice and recommendations
regarding a range of issues involving
minority depository institutions.
Nominations should describe and
document the proposed member’s
qualifications for MSAAC or MDIAC
membership, as appropriate. Existing
MSAAC or MDIAC members may
reapply themselves or may be
renominated. The OCC will use this
nomination process to achieve a
balanced advisory committee
membership and ensure that diverse
views are represented among the
membership of officers and directors of
mutual and minority institutions. The
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
PO 00000
Frm 00102
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
43735
MSAAC and MDIAC members will not
be compensated for their time, but will
be eligible for reimbursement of travel
expenses in accordance with applicable
federal law and regulations.
Dated: August 21, 2018.
Joseph M. Otting,
Comptroller of the Currency.
[FR Doc. 2018–18493 Filed 8–24–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810–33–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Multiemployer Pension Plan
Application To Reduce Benefits
Department of the Treasury.
Notice of availability; Request
for comments.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Board of Trustees of the
Laborers Local 265 Pension Plan, a
multiemployer pension plan, has
submitted an application to reduce
benefits under the plan in accordance
with the Multiemployer Pension Reform
Act of 2014 (MPRA). The purpose of
this notice is to announce that the
application submitted by the Board of
Trustees of the Laborers Local 265
Pension Plan has been published on the
website of the Department of the
Treasury (Treasury), and to request
public comments on the application
from interested parties, including
participants and beneficiaries, employee
organizations, and contributing
employers of the Laborers Local 265
Pension Plan.
DATES: Comments must be received by
October 11, 2018.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
electronically through the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov, in accordance
with the instructions on that site.
Electronic submissions through
www.regulations.gov are encouraged.
Comments may also be mailed to the
Department of the Treasury, MPRA
Office, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue NW,
Room 1224, Washington, DC 20220,
Attn: Danielle Norris. Comments sent
via facsimile or email will not be
accepted.
Additional Instructions. All
comments received, including
attachments and other supporting
materials, will be made available to the
public. Do not include any personally
identifiable information (such as your
Social Security number, name, address,
or other contact information) or any
other information in your comment or
supporting materials that you do not
want publicly disclosed. Treasury will
make comments available for public
E:\FR\FM\27AUN1.SGM
27AUN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 166 (Monday, August 27, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43733-43735]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-18506]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2018-0062]
Denial of Motor Vehicle Defect Petition
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Denial of petition for a defect investigation.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This is a notice of denial of a petition submitted to the
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (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 Michelin
Model XZU-3, size 305/85/R22.5 Load Range J transit bus tires. After a
review of the petition and other information, NHTSA has concluded that
a defects investigation is unlikely to result in a finding that a
defect related to motor vehicle safety exists, or a NHTSA order for the
notification and remedy of a safety related defect as alleged, at the
conclusion of the requested investigation.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bruce York, Medium & Heavy Duty
Vehicle Division, Office of Defects Investigation, NHTSA, 1200 New
Jersey Ave. SE, Washington, DC 20590. Email: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: By letter dated July 14, 2016, Paul Koleber
from Intercity Transit wrote to NHTSA requesting that the Agency
investigate the existence of a defect related to motor vehicle safety
in Michelin Model XZU-3, size 305/85/R22.5 Load Range J transit bus
tires. Mr. Koleber alleges the tires are structurally unsound and that
this defect can result in sidewall blowouts at any time whether the
tires are new or re-tread. Mr. Koleber stated that Michelin had
previously recalled similar tires (12T-009) and the Intercity Transit
fleet experienced failures with the same characteristics as those
specified in the recall. Mr. Koleber submitted a forensics lab report
from CASE Forensics to support his allegation.
NHTSA has reviewed the material provided by the petitioner and
other information. The results of this review and NHTSA's analysis of
the petition are set forth in the DP17-001 Evaluation Report, published
in its entirety as an appendix to this notice.
For the reasons presented in the DP17-001 Evaluation Report, it is
unlikely that a defects investigation will result in a finding that a
defect related to motor vehicle safety exists. It is also unlikely that
an order for the notification and remedy of a safety-related defect
would be issued as a result of granting Mr. Koleber's request.
Therefore, the petition is denied. This action does not constitute a
finding by NHTSA that a safety related defect does not exist. The
Agency will take further action if warranted by future circumstances.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30162(d); delegations of authority at CFR
1.50 and 501.8.
Jeffrey M. Giuseppe,
Associate Administrator for Enforcement.
Nate Seymour
Safety Defects Engineer
NEF-106ns
DP17-001
BASIS:
Paul Koleber, from Intercity Transit petitioned the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) by letter dated July 14,
2016, requesting that a defect investigation be conducted concerning
motor vehicle safety in Michelin Model XZU-3, size 305/85/R22.5 Load
Range J transit bus tires. The facts described in this report are based
on the Office of Defect Investigations' (ODI) assessment of the
information provided by the petitioner and information gathered by ODI
from relevant sources.
The petitioner alleged that a defect exists involving the design of
tires used in commercial bus operations which have resulted in rapid
air loss. The petitioner claimed that failures identical to those
described in recall 12T-009 have happened on the subject post recall
tires. The petitioner stated that failures occurred on steer and drive
wheel positions of both new and retread tires. The petitioner hired a
forensics lab to perform scientific failure analysis of failed tires.
The lab concluded the tires were of similar design and construction to
those in recall 12T-009 and that the failures were caused by corrosion
induced degradation of the ply strands.
DESCRIPTION OF TIRE:
The subject tires are Michelin XZU-3, size 305/85/R22.5 Load Range
J transit bus tires. They are designed to be
[[Page 43734]]
used in all wheel positions for urban operations involving frequent
stopping and starting. The tread pattern is non-directional and
designed for efficient traction on wet and slippery surfaces through
Michelin's patented Matrix Siping technology. The tires have a robust
casing and bead design to allow for retreading. The sidewalls are extra
thick to resist curb scrub and include scrub depth indicators to aid
inspection of the tires to help extend casing life.
OWNER REPORTS:
The Office of Defects Investigation received two (2) complaints
related to Michelin XZU-3 transit bus tires. The first Vehicle Owner's
Questionnaire (VOQ) was received in April 2012, the same month that
voluntary recall 12T-009 was received from Michelin. A second VOQ was
received in April 2017, one month after DP17-001 was opened to assess
failures on Michelin XZU-3 transit bus tires. Both reports were
submitted by transit fleets. Neither VOQ alleged any crashes, injuries
or fatalities.
ANALYSIS:
On March 23, 2017, ODI sent Michelin an Information Request letter
asking for information related to the subject tires. Michelin's
response was received May 5, 2017, where design and application data
were presented. ODI's assessment of that data follows.
Michelin reported a tire population (2012-2014 production) of
17,487 subject tires. The subject tire was discontinued in 2014, upon
the introduction of the X InCity Z 305/85R22.5 LRJ tire, which offers
increased scrub resistance. The initial tread life of the subject tire
is expected to range from 60,000 to 100,000 miles. The casing life is
expected to range from two (2) to four (4) years, with one (1) to three
(3) retread applications. Therefore, a limited number of subject tires
are believed to still be in service.
When asked how Michelin determined the recall population for 12T-
009, Michelin stated that the bead design of the recalled tires had
undergone a design change. A reduction in the number of strands was
determined to be the cause of failures associated with recall 12T-009.
Once the defect was identified, Michelin reinstated the original bead
design specification, which marked the endpoint of the recall
population. The scope of the recalled tires included tires manufactured
from the date of the bead design change through the date when the
design was changed back to the original specification.
The tires identified by the petitioner were produced after the bead
design was corrected.
Michelin queried its databases and found no complaints and one
claim for property damage on tires manufactured after the 12T-009
recall scope. Michelin denied this claim based on the following.
Michelin evaluated twelve (12) tires from the fleet. All had been
retreaded one time, but not at a Michelin Retread Technologies (MRT)
approved facility. Michelin's analysis of the tires revealed
operational or maintenance failures in ten (10) of the twelve (12)
tires. These tires had high levels of moisture and damage or evidence
of damage repair adjacent to the rupture. The combination of these
conditions allows for corrosion to develop in the belt package, which
leads to failure. The other two (2) could not be determined. ODI
queried its database and found one (1) Vehicle Owner Questionnaire
(VOQ) related to the subject population, which was received after the
investigation was opened. In March 2017, Michelin visited the fleet
that submitted the VOQ, and analyzed its tires. Similar to the property
damage claim above, an MRT was not used. Nor was an air dryer for tire
inflation. This leaves in question the integrity of the casings and
moisture content which is detrimental to tire life. Michelin submitted
to ODI, inspection documentation. Reports of the tires showed signs of
overloading. Personnel interviews supported these findings as the fleet
followed the vehicle manufacturer's recommended inflation pressure,
which is known to be inadequate for true operational loads on the
specific vehicles operated by the fleet.
MRT facilities utilize inspection equipment not available to out of
network retread facilities. The use of Grazing Light Inspection, X-ray,
and Casing Integrity Analyzer (CIA) minimize the risk of tire failure
after retreading. MRT facilities also utilize approved processes to
repair tire damage prior to retreading to prevent moisture from
entering the belt package.
The Altoona Bus Study, Michelin's weight study of fleet buses, and
ODI's weight study are all in agreement. Each independently found that
the Gillig Low Floor 40' transit bus as used by the petitioner and
other fleets would be overloaded with a foreseeable load. And, the
greatest overloading would occur at the left rear wheel-end. ODI went
further to assess the average passenger weight. ODI found that the 150-
pound weight specified in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), 49
C.F.R. Part 567.4(g)(3) and Subtitle B-Chapter VI Part 665 Subpart A is
not representative of today's population. The 150-pound value was
established in 1971 based on data derived from the National Health
Examination Survey from 1960-1962. A more recent value from the
National Center for Health Statistics determined the average male and
female weight to be 195 and 165 respectively. In both cases, the study
participants were not truck/bus drivers or transit passengers. ODI
notes that a luggage allowance for each passenger is necessary given
the vehicle usage. ODI also surveyed heavy vehicle manufacturers to
learn what design weight they use for the driver. Responses ranged from
150 to 312 pounds depending on market. The Federal Transit Authority
(FTA) initiated a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) action in 2011,
to increase the average passenger weight and standing passenger floor
space square footage, but this rule was never enacted.
As required by 49 CFR part 567, the vehicle manufacturer is
responsible for the data on the vehicle certification label. The
manufacturer will set the tire pressure based on the anticipated axle
load. The anticipated loads will drive the selection of components to
meet the owner's specifications.
Michelin released a Technical Bulletin in November 2015,
recommending 120 psi be used in all subject tires. Michelin met with
Gillig in January 2016, and recommended the use of 315/80R22.5 tires
and an inflation pressure of 120 psi to provide sufficient load-
carrying capacity to support actual loads. Gillig, who produced the
petitioner's buses, elected not to adopt this action.
CONCLUSION:
Based on the available information and previous agency experience,
ODI believes the tires manufactured after those identified in recall
12T-009 failed as a result of overloading by the fleets operating the
buses. In our view, a defects investigation is unlikely to result in a
finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists, or a
NHTSA order for the notification and remedy of a safety related defect
as alleged, at the conclusion of the requested investigation.
Therefore, given a thorough analysis of the potential for finding a
safety related defect in the vehicle, and in view of NHTSA's
enforcement priorities and its previous investigations into this issue,
the petition is denied. This action does not constitute a finding by
NHTSA that a safety related defect does not exist. The
[[Page 43735]]
Agency will take further action if warranted by future circumstances.
RECOMMENDATION:
Deny the petition.
CONCUR:
Bruce York, Chief
Medium and Heavy Duty Vehicle
Defects & Assessment Division
[FR Doc. 2018-18506 Filed 8-24-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
