Toyo Tire Holdings of Americas, Inc., Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 67513-67516 [2024-18578]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2024 / Notices because the construction date is not expected until 2026 or later. khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES Scoping and Public Review The project team developed an Agency Coordination Plan and a Public Involvement Plan. These plans will guide CDOT through the scoping and public review process. The Public Involvement Plan and the Agency Coordination Plan are attached to the NOI Additional Information Document. CDOT and FHWA identified agencies with jurisdiction over resources within the study area. On June 8, 2023, FHWA and CDOT conducted an agency coordination meeting. After the meeting agencies were formally contacted by FHWA through the United States Postal Service and email to determine Cooperating and Participating Agency status. Another agency coordination meeting was held on November 1, 2023. Additional meetings with Cooperating and Participating Agencies will be held throughout the environmental review process. The Agency Coordination Plan and Public Involvement Plan included within the NOI Additional Information Document describes how the public and agencies will continue to be engaged during EIS development. The project held a public open house on October 10, 2023, at the Eagle Pointe Recreation Center (Commerce City), to present the draft purpose and need and the draft proposed alternatives to the public. The public open house had 81 participants sign in to the event; attendees were highly engaged and provided detailed comments and thoughts. Participants were a mixture of local residents, commuters, interested groups, agency staff, and elected officials. A summary of the October public open house is available on the project website. Agencies were briefed on the public open house and input received at the November 1, 2023, agency coordination meeting. In December 2023, CDOT hosted community ‘‘listening sessions’’ to gather additional feedback from area residents. The listening sessions were held at community locations in the study area; all included Spanish and English-speaking staff. CDOT has also conducted numerous one-on-one meetings with stakeholders. Additional public and agency meetings are planned before the Draft EIS is published, and the Draft EIS will be available for public and agency review and comment prior to the Public Hearing. VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:24 Aug 19, 2024 Jkt 262001 67513 Request for Identification of Potential Alternatives, Information, and Analyses Relative to the Proposed Action DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION To ensure that a full range of issues related to the study are addressed and all potential issues are identified, FHWA and CDOT invite comments and suggestions from the public and all federal, state, tribal, and local agencies. FHWA and CDOT request comments and suggestions on potential alternatives and impacts, and the identification of any relevant information, studies, or analyses of any kind concerning impacts affecting the quality of the human environment. Specifically, agencies and the public are asked to identify and submit potential alternatives for consideration and any information, such as anticipated significant issues or environmental impacts and analyses relevant to the proposed action, will be considered by the Lead and Cooperating agencies in developing the Draft EIS. Comments must be received by September 19, 2024. Any information presented herein, including the preliminary purpose and need, preliminary range of alternatives and identification of impacts may be revised after consideration of the comments. The purpose of this request is to bring relevant comments, information, and analyses to the Lead Agencies’ attention, as early in the process as possible, to enable the agencies to make maximum use of this information in decision making. There are several methods to submit comments as described in the ADDRESSES section of this notice. Any questions concerning this proposed action, including comments relevant to alternatives, information, and analyses, should be directed to FHWA or CDOT at the physical addresses, email addresses, or phone numbers provided in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this notice. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.; 23 U.S.C. 139; 23 CFR part 771. [Docket No. NHTSA–2023–0052; Notice 1] John M. Cater, Division Administrator, Lakewood, Colorado, Federal Highway Administration. [FR Doc. 2024–18587 Filed 8–19–24; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–22–P PO 00000 Frm 00107 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Toyo Tire Holdings of Americas, Inc., Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Receipt of petition. AGENCY: Toyo Tire Holdings of Americas, Inc. (Toyo Tire) has determined that certain Proxes ST III passenger tires do not fully comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 139, New Pneumatic Radial Tires for Light Vehicles. Toyo Tire filed a noncompliance report dated July 19, 2023, and subsequently petitioned NHTSA (the ‘‘Agency’’) on August 17, 2023, for a decision that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety. This document announces receipt of Toyo Tire’s petition. SUMMARY: Send comments on or before September 19, 2024. ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments on this petition. Comments must refer to the docket and notice number cited in the title of this notice and may be submitted by any of the following methods: • Mail: Send comments by mail addressed to the U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590. • Hand Delivery: Deliver comments by hand to the U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590. The Docket Section is open on weekdays from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. except for Federal Holidays. • Electronically: Submit comments electronically by logging onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) website at https:// www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. • Comments may also be faxed to (202) 493–2251. Comments must be written in the English language, and be no greater than 15 pages in length, although there is no limit to the length of necessary attachments to the comments. If DATES: E:\FR\FM\20AUN1.SGM 20AUN1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES 67514 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2024 / Notices comments are submitted in hard copy form, please ensure that two copies are provided. If you wish to receive confirmation that comments you have submitted by mail were received, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard with the comments. Note that all comments received will be posted without change to https:// www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. All comments and supporting materials received before the close of business on the closing date indicated above will be filed in the docket and will be considered. All comments and supporting materials received after the closing date will also be filed and will be considered to the fullest extent possible. When the petition is granted or denied, notice of the decision will also be published in the Federal Register pursuant to the authority indicated at the end of this notice. All comments, background documentation, and supporting materials submitted to the docket may be viewed by anyone at the address and times given above. The documents may also be viewed on the internet at https:// www.regulations.gov by following the online instructions for accessing the dockets. The docket ID number for this petition is shown in the heading of this notice. DOT’s complete Privacy Act Statement is available for review in a Federal Register notice published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477–78). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jayton Lindley, General Engineer, NHTSA, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, (325) 655–0547. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Overview: Toyo Tire determined that certain Proxes ST III passenger tires do not fully comply with paragraph S5.5.1(b) of FMVSS No. 139, New Pneumatic Radial Tires for Light Vehicles (49 CFR 571.139). Toyo Tire filed a noncompliance report dated July 19, 2023, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. Toyo Tire petitioned NHTSA on August 17, 2023, for an exemption from the notification and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the basis that this noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and 49 CFR part 556, Exemption for Inconsequential Defect or Noncompliance. This notice of receipt of Toyo Tire’s petition is published under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120 and does not represent VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:24 Aug 19, 2024 Jkt 262001 any agency decision or another exercise of judgment concerning the merits of the petition. II. Tires Involved: Approximately 232 Toyo Proxes ST III passenger tires, manufactured between May 21, 2023, and May 27, 2023, were reported by the manufacturer. III. Noncompliance: Toyo Tire explains that the noncompliance is due to a mold error causing the subject tires to contain a tire identification number (TIN) with a three-digit date code rather than a four-digit date code as required by paragraph S5.5.1(b) of FMVSS No. 139 and 49 CFR part 574. Specifically, the subject tires were marked with an incorrect date code of ‘‘213’’ rather than the compliant four-digit date code, ‘‘2123.’’ IV. Rule Requirements: Paragraph S5.5.1(b) of FMVSS No. 139 and 49 CFR 574.5(b)(3) include the requirements relevant to this petition. Each tire (manufactured on or after September 1, 2009) must be labeled with the TIN, as required by 49 CFR part 574, on the intended outboard sidewall of the tire. The date code, consisting of four numerical symbols, is the final group of the TIN and must identify the tire’s week and year of manufacture. The first and second symbols of the date code must identify the week of the year by using ‘‘01’’ for the first full calendar week in each year, ‘‘02’’ for the second full calendar week, and so on. The third and fourth symbols of the date code must identify the last two digits of the year of manufacture. V. Summary of Toyo Tire’s Petition: The following views and arguments presented in this section, ‘‘V. Summary of Toyo Tire’s Petition,’’ are the views and arguments provided by Toyo Tire. They have not been evaluated by the Agency and do not reflect the views of the Agency. Toyo Tire describes the subject noncompliance and contends that the noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety. Toyo Tire states that, except for the subject noncompliance, the affected tires comply with the performance and labeling requirements of FMVSS No. 139 and the requirements of 49 CFR part 574. Toyo Tire also says that it is not aware of any complaints or injuries related to the subject tires. Toyo Tire summarizes NHTSA’s regulatory history for tire labeling requirements and the purpose of these requirements, specifically relating to the date code. Toyo Tire asserts that the TIN date code ‘‘primarily serves to facilitate identification of tires in the event the tires need to be recalled for a noncompliance that is consequential to PO 00000 Frm 00108 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 safety or for a safety related defect.’’ Toyo Tire also notes NHTSA’s view that the date code offers consumers valuable information regarding the actual age of the tire. Toyo Tire argues that the incorrect date code on the subject tires would not hinder the identification and notification process in the event of a recall. Toyo Tire explains that the date code accurately indicates the week of the subject tires’ manufacture but is missing a character indicating the year of manufacture. Toyo Tire says that despite being noncompliant, these TINs uniquely identify the tires, enabling consumers to accurately identify them in the event of a recall. Toyo Tire contends that prior Agency decisions on petitions for inconsequential noncompliance involving ‘‘incorrect date codes, missing date codes, misplaced date codes, and inverted date codes’’ were granted because NHTSA found that the noncompliance did not inhibit the identification of the affected tires. Toyo Tire offers the following as examples: 1. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc., (Toyo Tire incorrectly cites Cooper Tire & Rubber Co.) Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 71 FR 4396 (Jan. 26, 2006). In that decision, the agency agreed that the missing date code was inconsequential because a consumer notification of a recall of the tires could be accomplished by referring to the noncompliant TIN. 2. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc., Grant of Application for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 60 FR 57617 (Nov. 16, 1995). In this decision NHTSA agreed that placing the date code at the beginning of the TIN rather than at the end was inconsequential in this case because enough information exists on the tires to trace the tires back to their plant of manufacture should a future recall be required. Additionally, any recall notification letter would explain the transposed marking so that owners could properly identify the tires. 3. Yokohama Tire Corp., Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 71 FR 33333 (Jun. 8, 2006). In this decision, NHTSA agreed that exceeding the spacing limit for the date code in the TIN was inconsequential to safety in this case because correct information is present, and it is therefore likely to achieve the safety purposes of the requirement. 4. Cooper Tire & Rubber Co., Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 81 FR 43708 (Jul. 5, 2016). In this decision, the affected tires contained an inverted date code and NHTSA agreed with the petitioner that E:\FR\FM\20AUN1.SGM 20AUN1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2024 / Notices the error was inconsequential to safety because it is not likely to be misidentified. Toyo Tire believes that the granting of its petition would align with NHTSA’s decisions on these prior petitions because the date code on the subject tires provides adequate information for consumers to properly identify the tires and for the tires to be properly traced to the manufacturing plant. Toyo Tire says that it has also updated its website to accept a 12-digit TIN, allowing consumers to register the tires with the incorrectly marked date code. Toyo Tire says that the subject tires contain a unique 12-digit TIN, as opposed to the standard 13 digits for properly labeled tires, ensuring that there will be no duplication in the future. Toyo Tire explains that the mislabeling occurred at the manufacturing plant during a period when a manual process was temporarily being used to enter codes into a new piece of equipment used for stamping the TIN plates. Toyo Tire says that it has since corrected this issue by implementing an automated process that directly transmits the codes to the stamping equipment. Additionally, Toyo Tire says that it has revised its quality inspection process to ensure that the date code is verified by two people each time a new plate is installed into a mold. Toyo Tire notes that in the aforementioned 2016 Cooper Tire decision 81 FR 43708, the nature of the labeling error did not prevent the correct identification of the affected tires. Similarly, Toyo Tire contends that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety because the affected tires otherwise comply with the marking and performance requirements of FMVSS No. 139, and the primary purpose of the TIN markings is fulfilled. Next, Toyo Tire argues that the incorrectly marked date code on the subject tires is unlikely to mislead consumers as to the age of the tire. According to Toyo Tire, NHTSA’s secondary purpose in adopting the fourdigit date code was to prevent confusing consumers with respect to the actual age of the tire. Expanding the date code from three digits to four would result in more accurate date codes, simplifying the process for prospective consumers to determine the age of the tires they are considering purchasing. Toyo Tire then cites NHTSA’s tire aging work published in March 2014 and states that NHTSA found that adding a tire aging requirement to FMVSS No. 139 was unnecessary. Overall, Toyo Tire says that NHTSA’s safety concerns regarding tire aging VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:24 Aug 19, 2024 Jkt 262001 were attenuated based on the improved standards in FMVSS No. 139 and mandatory tire-pressure monitoring systems. Furthermore, Toyo Tire asserts that the data that raised aging concerns primarily came from states in the Sun Belt Region and, as a result, NHTSA shifted its focus toward consumer awareness programs. Based on this focus, Toyo Tire says NHTSA’s determinations on inconsequentiality petitions concerning the date code have distinguished between noncompliances where mislabeling would not mislead consumers about the actual age of the tires and those where mislabeling would lead consumers to believe the tires were newer than they actually are. Toyo Tire provides NHTSA’s decision on another petition by Cooper Tire (86 FR 47726; Aug. 26, 2021) as an example, in which the affected tires contained the date code ‘‘1723’’ rather than the correct date code ‘‘2317’’. Toyo Tire states this petition was denied due to concerns that dealers may store tires for multiple years before selling them, leading to potential confusion for consumers regarding the tires’ actual age. Additionally, while steps to identify the mislabeling were acknowledged, Toyo Tire says NHTSA determined that these actions did not negate the safety risk caused by the incorrect date code as tires may not be registered or may change hands subsequent to registration. In its rationale, Toyo Tire says that NHTSA specifically differentiated this case from a 1998 petition by Cooper Tire where NHTSA determined that the absence of a date code on the affected tires was inconsequential to vehicle safety. In that case, Toyo Tire says NHTSA found that the missing date code did not mislead consumers about the age of the tire. Conversely, NHTSA granted a petition by Michelin North America (MNA) where the date code was mislabeled as ‘‘0126’’ rather than ‘‘0216.’’ (81 FR 76412; Nov. 2, 2016). Toyo Tire believes that the subject noncompliance will not impact customers’ ability to identify the subject tires in the event of a recall because Toyo Tire is accepting registration cards and internet registrations for the mislabeled tires, and they are prepared to address inquiries from customers regarding the subject tires. Toyo Tire believes these points support a grant of its petition. Toyo Tire argues that the three-digit date code on the subject tires does not have the misleading effect found in NHTSA’s 2021 denial of the Cooper Tire petition. Unlike the mislabeling in the denied Cooper Tire petition, the threedigit date in the subject tires would not PO 00000 Frm 00109 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 67515 mislead purchasers as to the age of the tire. The missing digit causes the date code to not conform to a compliant fourdigit date code and cannot be interpreted as a future date code. Toyo Tire contends that because NHTSA discontinued the use of three-digit date codes over 20 years ago, any confusion regarding the date code is more likely to suggest that the tire is significantly older than it actually is. Toyo Tire further explains that the mislabeled date code on the subject tires would indicate that the tires were manufactured in the 21st week of 1993, over 30 years ago. Overall, Toyo Tire believes that consumers will readily notice the incorrect date code if they consult online sources to interpret it. Toyo Tire adds that while NHTSA did not express concerns about tire aging in the MNA decision (81 FR 76412; Nov. 2, 2016), the impact of the mislabeling in that case is comparable to the subject noncompliance. Toyo Tire says that other possible interpretations of the subject noncompliance would be that the tires were manufactured in 2013 (based on the last two digits, ‘‘13’’) or in 2021 (based on the first two digits, ‘‘21’’) Since the actual year of manufacture for the subject tires is 2023, either of these interpretations would again suggest that the tires are older than they actually are and would not pose a risk of the consumer using the subject tire beyond its maximum service life. Toyo Tire notes that, in contrast, Cooper Tire’s petition was denied because the tires would appear newer than their actual age. Toyo Tire says that it recognizes the possibility that the mislabeled date code on the subject tires could be mistaken as indicating the year of manufacture as ‘‘2033,’’ 2043,’’ ‘‘2053,’’ etc. However, Toyo Tire considers this risk remote, given these years are far in the future. Toyo Tire believes that the risk is comparable to the mislabeled date code in MNA’s petition (81 FR 76412, Nov. 2, 2016), which NHTSA deemed inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Further, Toyo Tire believes that the subject noncompliance poses an even lesser risk than MNA’s noncompliance because the three-digit date code is more likely to indicate an error. Therefore, Toyo Tire is confident that consumers will not be misled into believing that the subject tires are newer than their actual date of manufacture, and the subject noncompliance does not create a risk that the tire would be used beyond the maximum service life. Toyo Tire concludes by stating its belief that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety and its petition to be E:\FR\FM\20AUN1.SGM 20AUN1 67516 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 20, 2024 / Notices khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES exempted from providing notification of the noncompliance, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118, and a remedy for the noncompliance, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120, should be granted. 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 VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:24 Aug 19, 2024 Jkt 262001 30120, respectively, to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or noncompliance and to remedy the defect or noncompliance. Therefore, any decision on this petition only applies to the subject tires that Toyo Tire no longer controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance existed. However, any decision on this petition does not relieve tire distributors and dealers of the prohibitions on the sale, offer for sale, or introduction or delivery for PO 00000 Frm 00110 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 introduction into interstate commerce of the noncompliant tires under their control after Toyo Tire 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) Otto G. Matheke III, Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance. [FR Doc. 2024–18578 Filed 8–19–24; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–59–P E:\FR\FM\20AUN1.SGM 20AUN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 161 (Tuesday, August 20, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67513-67516]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-18578]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2023-0052; Notice 1]


Toyo Tire Holdings of Americas, Inc., Receipt of Petition for 
Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Receipt of petition.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Toyo Tire Holdings of Americas, Inc. (Toyo Tire) has 
determined that certain Proxes ST III passenger tires do not fully 
comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 139, New 
Pneumatic Radial Tires for Light Vehicles. Toyo Tire filed a 
noncompliance report dated July 19, 2023, and subsequently petitioned 
NHTSA (the ``Agency'') on August 17, 2023, for a decision that the 
subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle 
safety. This document announces receipt of Toyo Tire's petition.

DATES: Send comments on or before September 19, 2024.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written data, 
views, and arguments on this petition. Comments must refer to the 
docket and notice number cited in the title of this notice and may be 
submitted by any of the following methods:
     Mail: Send comments by mail addressed to the U.S. 
Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building 
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 
20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver comments by hand to the U.S. 
Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building 
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 
20590. The Docket Section is open on weekdays from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. 
except for Federal Holidays.
     Electronically: Submit comments electronically by logging 
onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) website at https://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online instructions for submitting 
comments.
     Comments may also be faxed to (202) 493-2251.
    Comments must be written in the English language, and be no greater 
than 15 pages in length, although there is no limit to the length of 
necessary attachments to the comments. If

[[Page 67514]]

comments are submitted in hard copy form, please ensure that two copies 
are provided. If you wish to receive confirmation that comments you 
have submitted by mail were received, please enclose a stamped, self-
addressed postcard with the comments. Note that all comments received 
will be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov, including 
any personal information provided.
    All comments and supporting materials received before the close of 
business on the closing date indicated above will be filed in the 
docket and will be considered. All comments and supporting materials 
received after the closing date will also be filed and will be 
considered to the fullest extent possible.
    When the petition is granted or denied, notice of the decision will 
also be published in the Federal Register pursuant to the authority 
indicated at the end of this notice.
    All comments, background documentation, and supporting materials 
submitted to the docket may be viewed by anyone at the address and 
times given above. The documents may also be viewed on the internet at 
https://www.regulations.gov by following the online instructions for 
accessing the dockets. The docket ID number for this petition is shown 
in the heading of this notice.
    DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement is available for review in a 
Federal Register notice published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jayton Lindley, General Engineer, 
NHTSA, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, (325) 655-0547.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    I. Overview: Toyo Tire determined that certain Proxes ST III 
passenger tires do not fully comply with paragraph S5.5.1(b) of FMVSS 
No. 139, New Pneumatic Radial Tires for Light Vehicles (49 CFR 
571.139).
    Toyo Tire filed a noncompliance report dated July 19, 2023, 
pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility 
and Reports. Toyo Tire petitioned NHTSA on August 17, 2023, for an 
exemption from the notification and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. 
Chapter 301 on the basis that this noncompliance is inconsequential as 
it relates to motor vehicle safety, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 
30120(h) and 49 CFR part 556, Exemption for Inconsequential Defect or 
Noncompliance.
    This notice of receipt of Toyo Tire's petition is published under 
49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120 and does not represent any agency decision or 
another exercise of judgment concerning the merits of the petition.
    II. Tires Involved: Approximately 232 Toyo Proxes ST III passenger 
tires, manufactured between May 21, 2023, and May 27, 2023, were 
reported by the manufacturer.
    III. Noncompliance: Toyo Tire explains that the noncompliance is 
due to a mold error causing the subject tires to contain a tire 
identification number (TIN) with a three-digit date code rather than a 
four-digit date code as required by paragraph S5.5.1(b) of FMVSS No. 
139 and 49 CFR part 574. Specifically, the subject tires were marked 
with an incorrect date code of ``213'' rather than the compliant four-
digit date code, ``2123.''
    IV. Rule Requirements: Paragraph S5.5.1(b) of FMVSS No. 139 and 49 
CFR 574.5(b)(3) include the requirements relevant to this petition. 
Each tire (manufactured on or after September 1, 2009) must be labeled 
with the TIN, as required by 49 CFR part 574, on the intended outboard 
sidewall of the tire. The date code, consisting of four numerical 
symbols, is the final group of the TIN and must identify the tire's 
week and year of manufacture. The first and second symbols of the date 
code must identify the week of the year by using ``01'' for the first 
full calendar week in each year, ``02'' for the second full calendar 
week, and so on. The third and fourth symbols of the date code must 
identify the last two digits of the year of manufacture.
    V. Summary of Toyo Tire's Petition: The following views and 
arguments presented in this section, ``V. Summary of Toyo Tire's 
Petition,'' are the views and arguments provided by Toyo Tire. They 
have not been evaluated by the Agency and do not reflect the views of 
the Agency. Toyo Tire describes the subject noncompliance and contends 
that the noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor 
vehicle safety.
    Toyo Tire states that, except for the subject noncompliance, the 
affected tires comply with the performance and labeling requirements of 
FMVSS No. 139 and the requirements of 49 CFR part 574. Toyo Tire also 
says that it is not aware of any complaints or injuries related to the 
subject tires.
    Toyo Tire summarizes NHTSA's regulatory history for tire labeling 
requirements and the purpose of these requirements, specifically 
relating to the date code. Toyo Tire asserts that the TIN date code 
``primarily serves to facilitate identification of tires in the event 
the tires need to be recalled for a noncompliance that is consequential 
to safety or for a safety related defect.'' Toyo Tire also notes 
NHTSA's view that the date code offers consumers valuable information 
regarding the actual age of the tire.
    Toyo Tire argues that the incorrect date code on the subject tires 
would not hinder the identification and notification process in the 
event of a recall. Toyo Tire explains that the date code accurately 
indicates the week of the subject tires' manufacture but is missing a 
character indicating the year of manufacture. Toyo Tire says that 
despite being noncompliant, these TINs uniquely identify the tires, 
enabling consumers to accurately identify them in the event of a 
recall.
    Toyo Tire contends that prior Agency decisions on petitions for 
inconsequential noncompliance involving ``incorrect date codes, missing 
date codes, misplaced date codes, and inverted date codes'' were 
granted because NHTSA found that the noncompliance did not inhibit the 
identification of the affected tires. Toyo Tire offers the following as 
examples:
    1. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc., (Toyo Tire incorrectly cites Cooper 
Tire & Rubber Co.) Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential 
Noncompliance, 71 FR 4396 (Jan. 26, 2006). In that decision, the agency 
agreed that the missing date code was inconsequential because a 
consumer notification of a recall of the tires could be accomplished by 
referring to the noncompliant TIN.
    2. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc., Grant of Application for Decision 
of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 60 FR 57617 (Nov. 16, 1995). In this 
decision NHTSA agreed that placing the date code at the beginning of 
the TIN rather than at the end was inconsequential in this case because 
enough information exists on the tires to trace the tires back to their 
plant of manufacture should a future recall be required. Additionally, 
any recall notification letter would explain the transposed marking so 
that owners could properly identify the tires.
    3. Yokohama Tire Corp., Grant of Petition for Decision of 
Inconsequential Noncompliance, 71 FR 33333 (Jun. 8, 2006). In this 
decision, NHTSA agreed that exceeding the spacing limit for the date 
code in the TIN was inconsequential to safety in this case because 
correct information is present, and it is therefore likely to achieve 
the safety purposes of the requirement.
    4. Cooper Tire & Rubber Co., Grant of Petition for Decision of 
Inconsequential Noncompliance, 81 FR 43708 (Jul. 5, 2016). In this 
decision, the affected tires contained an inverted date code and NHTSA 
agreed with the petitioner that

[[Page 67515]]

the error was inconsequential to safety because it is not likely to be 
misidentified.
    Toyo Tire believes that the granting of its petition would align 
with NHTSA's decisions on these prior petitions because the date code 
on the subject tires provides adequate information for consumers to 
properly identify the tires and for the tires to be properly traced to 
the manufacturing plant. Toyo Tire says that it has also updated its 
website to accept a 12-digit TIN, allowing consumers to register the 
tires with the incorrectly marked date code.
    Toyo Tire says that the subject tires contain a unique 12-digit 
TIN, as opposed to the standard 13 digits for properly labeled tires, 
ensuring that there will be no duplication in the future. Toyo Tire 
explains that the mislabeling occurred at the manufacturing plant 
during a period when a manual process was temporarily being used to 
enter codes into a new piece of equipment used for stamping the TIN 
plates. Toyo Tire says that it has since corrected this issue by 
implementing an automated process that directly transmits the codes to 
the stamping equipment. Additionally, Toyo Tire says that it has 
revised its quality inspection process to ensure that the date code is 
verified by two people each time a new plate is installed into a mold. 
Toyo Tire notes that in the aforementioned 2016 Cooper Tire decision 81 
FR 43708, the nature of the labeling error did not prevent the correct 
identification of the affected tires. Similarly, Toyo Tire contends 
that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle 
safety because the affected tires otherwise comply with the marking and 
performance requirements of FMVSS No. 139, and the primary purpose of 
the TIN markings is fulfilled.
    Next, Toyo Tire argues that the incorrectly marked date code on the 
subject tires is unlikely to mislead consumers as to the age of the 
tire. According to Toyo Tire, NHTSA's secondary purpose in adopting the 
four-digit date code was to prevent confusing consumers with respect to 
the actual age of the tire. Expanding the date code from three digits 
to four would result in more accurate date codes, simplifying the 
process for prospective consumers to determine the age of the tires 
they are considering purchasing.
    Toyo Tire then cites NHTSA's tire aging work published in March 
2014 and states that NHTSA found that adding a tire aging requirement 
to FMVSS No. 139 was unnecessary.
    Overall, Toyo Tire says that NHTSA's safety concerns regarding tire 
aging were attenuated based on the improved standards in FMVSS No. 139 
and mandatory tire-pressure monitoring systems. Furthermore, Toyo Tire 
asserts that the data that raised aging concerns primarily came from 
states in the Sun Belt Region and, as a result, NHTSA shifted its focus 
toward consumer awareness programs. Based on this focus, Toyo Tire says 
NHTSA's determinations on inconsequentiality petitions concerning the 
date code have distinguished between noncompliances where mislabeling 
would not mislead consumers about the actual age of the tires and those 
where mislabeling would lead consumers to believe the tires were newer 
than they actually are. Toyo Tire provides NHTSA's decision on another 
petition by Cooper Tire (86 FR 47726; Aug. 26, 2021) as an example, in 
which the affected tires contained the date code ``1723'' rather than 
the correct date code ``2317''. Toyo Tire states this petition was 
denied due to concerns that dealers may store tires for multiple years 
before selling them, leading to potential confusion for consumers 
regarding the tires' actual age. Additionally, while steps to identify 
the mislabeling were acknowledged, Toyo Tire says NHTSA determined that 
these actions did not negate the safety risk caused by the incorrect 
date code as tires may not be registered or may change hands subsequent 
to registration. In its rationale, Toyo Tire says that NHTSA 
specifically differentiated this case from a 1998 petition by Cooper 
Tire where NHTSA determined that the absence of a date code on the 
affected tires was inconsequential to vehicle safety. In that case, 
Toyo Tire says NHTSA found that the missing date code did not mislead 
consumers about the age of the tire. Conversely, NHTSA granted a 
petition by Michelin North America (MNA) where the date code was 
mislabeled as ``0126'' rather than ``0216.'' (81 FR 76412; Nov. 2, 
2016). Toyo Tire believes that the subject noncompliance will not 
impact customers' ability to identify the subject tires in the event of 
a recall because Toyo Tire is accepting registration cards and internet 
registrations for the mislabeled tires, and they are prepared to 
address inquiries from customers regarding the subject tires. Toyo Tire 
believes these points support a grant of its petition.
    Toyo Tire argues that the three-digit date code on the subject 
tires does not have the misleading effect found in NHTSA's 2021 denial 
of the Cooper Tire petition. Unlike the mislabeling in the denied 
Cooper Tire petition, the three-digit date in the subject tires would 
not mislead purchasers as to the age of the tire. The missing digit 
causes the date code to not conform to a compliant four-digit date code 
and cannot be interpreted as a future date code. Toyo Tire contends 
that because NHTSA discontinued the use of three-digit date codes over 
20 years ago, any confusion regarding the date code is more likely to 
suggest that the tire is significantly older than it actually is. Toyo 
Tire further explains that the mislabeled date code on the subject 
tires would indicate that the tires were manufactured in the 21st week 
of 1993, over 30 years ago. Overall, Toyo Tire believes that consumers 
will readily notice the incorrect date code if they consult online 
sources to interpret it.
    Toyo Tire adds that while NHTSA did not express concerns about tire 
aging in the MNA decision (81 FR 76412; Nov. 2, 2016), the impact of 
the mislabeling in that case is comparable to the subject 
noncompliance. Toyo Tire says that other possible interpretations of 
the subject noncompliance would be that the tires were manufactured in 
2013 (based on the last two digits, ``13'') or in 2021 (based on the 
first two digits, ``21'') Since the actual year of manufacture for the 
subject tires is 2023, either of these interpretations would again 
suggest that the tires are older than they actually are and would not 
pose a risk of the consumer using the subject tire beyond its maximum 
service life. Toyo Tire notes that, in contrast, Cooper Tire's petition 
was denied because the tires would appear newer than their actual age.
    Toyo Tire says that it recognizes the possibility that the 
mislabeled date code on the subject tires could be mistaken as 
indicating the year of manufacture as ``2033,'' 2043,'' ``2053,'' etc. 
However, Toyo Tire considers this risk remote, given these years are 
far in the future. Toyo Tire believes that the risk is comparable to 
the mislabeled date code in MNA's petition (81 FR 76412, Nov. 2, 2016), 
which NHTSA deemed inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Further, 
Toyo Tire believes that the subject noncompliance poses an even lesser 
risk than MNA's noncompliance because the three-digit date code is more 
likely to indicate an error. Therefore, Toyo Tire is confident that 
consumers will not be misled into believing that the subject tires are 
newer than their actual date of manufacture, and the subject 
noncompliance does not create a risk that the tire would be used beyond 
the maximum service life.
    Toyo Tire concludes by stating its belief that the subject 
noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety 
and its petition to be

[[Page 67516]]

exempted from providing notification of the noncompliance, as required 
by 49 U.S.C. 30118, and a remedy for the noncompliance, as required by 
49 U.S.C. 30120, should be granted.
    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, any decision on 
this petition only applies to the subject tires that Toyo Tire no 
longer controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance 
existed. However, any decision on this petition does not relieve tire 
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 Toyo Tire 
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)

Otto G. Matheke III,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2024-18578 Filed 8-19-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.