81_FR_11687 81 FR 11644 - Cooper Tire & Rubber Company, Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance

81 FR 11644 - Cooper Tire & Rubber Company, Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 43 (March 4, 2016)

Page Range11644-11645
FR Document2016-04698

Cooper Tire & Rubber Company (Cooper), has determined that certain Cooper tires do not fully comply with paragraph S5.5.1(b) of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 139, New Pneumatic Tires Radial Tires for Light Vehicles. Cooper filed a report dated August 13, 2015, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. Cooper then petitioned NHTSA under 49 CFR part 556 requesting a decision that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.

Federal Register, Volume 81 Issue 43 (Friday, March 4, 2016) 
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 43 (Friday, March 4, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11644-11645]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2016-04698]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2015-0091; Notice 2]


Cooper Tire & Rubber Company, Grant of Petition for Decision of 
Inconsequential Noncompliance

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

ACTION: Grant of petition.

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

SUMMARY: Cooper Tire & Rubber Company (Cooper), has determined that 
certain Cooper tires do not fully comply with paragraph S5.5.1(b) of 
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 139, New Pneumatic 
Tires Radial Tires for Light Vehicles. Cooper filed a report dated 
August 13, 2015, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance 
Responsibility and Reports. Cooper then petitioned NHTSA under 49 CFR 
part 556 requesting a decision that the subject noncompliance is 
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.

ADDRESSES: For further information on this decision contact Abraham 
Diaz, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the National Highway Traffic 
Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone (202) 366-5310, facsimile 
(202) 366-5930.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    I. Overview: Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) (see 
implementing rule at 49 CFR part 556), Cooper submitted a petition for 
an exemption from the notification and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. 
Chapter 301 on the basis that this noncompliance is inconsequential to 
motor vehicle safety.
    Notice of receipt of Cooper's petition was published, with a 30-day 
public comment period, on October 22, 2015 in the Federal Register (80 
FR 64057). No comments were received. To view the petition and all 
supporting documents log onto the Federal Docket Management System 
(FDMS) Web site at: http://www.regulations.gov/. Then follow the online 
search instructions to locate docket number ``NHTSA-2015-0091.''
    II. Tires Involved: Affected are approximately 1,350 Cooper 
Weather-Master S/T2 size 215/70R15 tires manufactured between April 26, 
2015 and May 29, 2015.
    III. Noncompliance: Cooper explains that the noncompliance is that 
the inboard sidewalls of the subject tires are labeled with an 
incorrect manufacturer's identification mark and therefore do not fully 
meet all applicable requirements of paragraph S5.5.1(b) of FMVSS No. 
139. Specifically, the tires are labeled with manufacturer's 
identification mark ``U8'' instead of ``U9.''
    IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S5.5.1 of FMVSS No. 139 requires in 
pertinent part:

S5.5.1 Tire Identification Number.

    . . .
    (b) Tires manufactured on or after September 1, 2009. Each tire 
must be labeled with the tire identification number required by 49 
CFR part 574 on the intended outboard sidewall of the tire. Except 
for retreaded tires, either the tire identification number or a 
partial tire identification number, containing all characters in the 
tire identification number, except for the date code and, at the 
discretion of the manufacturer, any optional code, must be labeled 
on the other sidewall of the tire. Except for retreaded tires, if a 
tire does not have an intended outboard sidewall, the tire must be 
labeled with the tire identification number required by 49 CFR part 
574 on one sidewall and with either the tire identification number 
or a partial tire identification number, containing all characters 
in the tire identification number except for the date code and, at 
the discretion of the manufacturer, any optional code, on the other 
side wall.

    V. Summary of Cooper's Petition: Cooper states its belief that the 
subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety 
because while the subject tires contain an incorrect manufacturer's 
identification mark on

[[Page 11645]]

the inboard sidewall, the full and correct tire code (including the 
correct manufacturer's identification mark) is available on the 
intended outboard sidewall. In addition, Cooper stated that the tires 
are marked with the Cooper Weather-Master S/T2 brand name that is 
exclusively owned by Cooper Tire & Rubber Company.
    Cooper also indicated that it has taken the following steps to 
ensure proper registration of the subject tires:
    (a) Cooper has informed all internal personnel responsible for 
manual processing of tire registration cards about the ``U8'' issue so 
that cards containing the ``U8'' designation will be accepted and 
properly processed when all other information accurately identifies the 
subject tires. And, Cooper will follow up with the consumer seeking 
additional information by providing a prepaid response card.
    (b) Cooper is in the process of modifying its database to accept 
``U8'' when other information (brand, serial weeks affected etc.) is 
accurate.
    (c) Cooper has contacted Computerized Information and Management 
Services, Inc. (CIMS) so that tire registration cards will not be 
rejected solely due to improper plant code information.
    Cooper additionally informed NHTSA that on May 29, 2015 the 
incorrect mold was pulled and the stamping error that caused the 
subject noncompliance was corrected at that time.
    Refer to Coopers' petition for their complete reasoning. The 
petition and all supporting documents are available by logging onto the 
Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Web site at: http://www.regulations.gov/ and following the online search instructions to 
locate the docket number listed in the title of this notice.
    In summation, Cooper believes that the described noncompliance of 
the subject tires is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety, and that 
its petition, to exempt Cooper 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: While the first grouping of the tire 
identification number (TIN) on the subject tires is marked with the 
incorrect manufacturer's identification code ``U8,'' instead of the 
correct code ``U9,'' this mismarking is only on the inner sidewall. The 
correct full TIN is properly marked on the outside sidewall, and the 
correct corporate brand name is marked on both sidewalls. NHTSA 
believes this noncompliance will not cause misidentification of the 
tire manufacturer should a safety defect be identified in the subject 
tires.
    Cooper additionally informed NHTSA that the subject tires meet and/
or exceed all performance requirements and all other labeling markings 
as required by FMVSS No. 139 and that Cooper is not aware of any 
crashes, injuries, customer complaints, or field reports associated 
with the subject tires.
    Cooper also notified NHTSA that proper registration of the tires 
will be accepted with the erroneous code. Cooper collectively worked 
with CIMS (Computerized Information and Management Services), Inc., to 
ensure that the subject tires are correctly registered regardless of 
the incorrect code.
    The agency believes that the true measure of inconsequentiality to 
motor vehicle safety in this case is that there is no effect of the 
noncompliance on the operational safety of vehicles on which these 
tires are mounted and that the manufacturer of the tires can be readily 
identified.
    Cooper also informed NHTSA that on May 29, 2015 it corrected the 
mold problem that originated the non-compliance.
    NHTSA Decision: In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA finds that 
Cooper has met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 139 
noncompliance in the affected tires is inconsequential to motor vehicle 
safety. Accordingly, Cooper's petition is hereby granted and Cooper is 
consequently exempted from the obligation of providing notification of, 
and a free remedy for, the subject 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 tires that Cooper no longer controlled at 
the time it determined that the noncompliance existed. However, the 
granting of 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 Cooper notified them 
that the subject noncompliance existed.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: Delegations of authority at 
49 CFR 1.95 and 501.8.

Jeffrey M. Giuseppe,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2016-04698 Filed 3-3-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-59-P

11644 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 43 / Friday, March 4, 2016 / Notices listed in the notice of November 2, 2015 Hector J. Lopez (NC) SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: (80 FR 67472). John V. Narretto, Jr. (LA) I. Overview: Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. We recognize that the vision of an Branden J. Ramos (CA) 30118(d) and 30120(h) (see applicant may change and affect his/her Sonny Scott (OH) implementing rule at 49 CFR part 556), ability to operate a CMV as safely as in Jarrod R. Seirer (KS) Cooper submitted a petition for an the past. As a condition of the Vince A. Thompson (OR) exemption from the notification and exemption, therefore, FMCSA will Daniel R. Viscaya (NC) remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. Carlos Vives, Jr. (NJ) impose requirements on the 28 Otis H. Wright, Jr. (MD) Chapter 301 on the basis that this individuals consistent with the noncompliance is inconsequential to In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) grandfathering provisions applied to motor vehicle safety. and 31315, each exemption will be valid Notice of receipt of Cooper’s petition drivers who participated in the for 2 years unless revoked earlier by was published, with a 30-day public Agency’s vision waiver program. FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked comment period, on October 22, 2015 in Those requirements are found at 49 if: (1) The person fails to comply with the Federal Register (80 FR 64057). No CFR 391.64(b) and include the the terms and conditions of the comments were received. To view the following: (1) That each individual be exemption; (2) the exemption has petition and all supporting documents physically examined every year (a) by resulted in a lower level of safety than log onto the Federal Docket an ophthalmologist or optometrist who was maintained before it was granted; or attests that the vision in the better eye Management System (FDMS) Web site (3) continuation of the exemption would continues to meet the requirement in 49 at: http://www.regulations.gov/. Then not be consistent with the goals and CFR 391.41(b)(10) and (b) by a medical follow the online search instructions to objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136 and 31315. examiner who attests that the individual If the exemption is still effective at the locate docket number ‘‘NHTSA–2015– is otherwise physically qualified under end of the 2-year period, the person may 0091.’’ 49 CFR 391.41; (2) that each individual II. Tires Involved: Affected are apply to FMCSA for a renewal under provide a copy of the ophthalmologist’s approximately 1,350 Cooper Weather- procedures in effect at that time. or optometrist’s report to the medical Master S/T2 size 215/70R15 tires examiner at the time of the annual Issued on: February 24, 2016. manufactured between April 26, 2015 medical examination; and (3) that each Larry W. Minor, and May 29, 2015. individual provide a copy of the annual Associate Administrator for Policy. III. Noncompliance: Cooper explains medical certification to the employer for [FR Doc. 2016–04801 Filed 3–3–16; 8:45 am] that the noncompliance is that the retention in the driver’s qualification BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P inboard sidewalls of the subject tires are file, or keep a copy in his/her driver’s labeled with an incorrect manufacturer’s qualification file if he/she is self- identification mark and therefore do not employed. The driver must have a copy DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION fully meet all applicable requirements of of the certification when driving, for paragraph S5.5.1(b) of FMVSS No. 139. presentation to a duly authorized National Highway Traffic Safety Specifically, the tires are labeled with Administration manufacturer’s identification mark Federal, State, or local enforcement official. [Docket No. NHTSA–2015–0091; Notice 2] ‘‘U8’’ instead of ‘‘U9.’’ IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S5.5.1 of V. Discussion of Comments Cooper Tire & Rubber Company, Grant FMVSS No. 139 requires in pertinent FMCSA received no comments in this of Petition for Decision of part: proceeding. Inconsequential Noncompliance S5.5.1 Tire Identification Number. IV. Conclusion AGENCY: National Highway Traffic . . . Safety Administration (NHTSA), (b) Tires manufactured on or after Based upon its evaluation of the 28 September 1, 2009. Each tire must be labeled Department of Transportation (DOT). exemption applications, FMCSA with the tire identification number required exempts the following drivers from the ACTION: Grant of petition. by 49 CFR part 574 on the intended outboard vision requirement in 49 CFR SUMMARY: Cooper Tire & Rubber sidewall of the tire. Except for retreaded tires, 391.41(b)(10), subject to the either the tire identification number or a Company (Cooper), has determined that requirements cited above (49 CFR partial tire identification number, containing certain Cooper tires do not fully comply all characters in the tire identification 391.64(b)): with paragraph S5.5.1(b) of Federal number, except for the date code and, at the Bruce D. Amundson (IA) Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) discretion of the manufacturer, any optional Terry M. Baldwin (PA) No. 139, New Pneumatic Tires Radial code, must be labeled on the other sidewall Gene B. Clyde, Jr. (NY) Tires for Light Vehicles. Cooper filed a of the tire. Except for retreaded tires, if a tire Joseph Coelho Jr. (RI) report dated August 13, 2015, pursuant does not have an intended outboard sidewall, Levi R. Coutcher (WA) to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and the tire must be labeled with the tire Leonard H. Culbertson (GA) Noncompliance Responsibility and identification number required by 49 CFR Craig L. Dawson, Sr. (OH) part 574 on one sidewall and with either the Reports. Cooper then petitioned NHTSA Jason R. Gast (MO) tire identification number or a partial tire under 49 CFR part 556 requesting a identification number, containing all Nirmal S. Gill (CA) decision that the subject noncompliance Robert C. Green, Jr. (PA) characters in the tire identification number is inconsequential to motor vehicle except for the date code and, at the discretion Stanley Grubb (KY) safety. of the manufacturer, any optional code, on jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Louis M. Hankins (IL) ADDRESSES: For further information on the other side wall. Nathan H. Jacobs (NM) Danny L. Keplinger (VA) this decision contact Abraham Diaz, V. Summary of Cooper’s Petition: Kimber S. Krushinski (NY) Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the Cooper states its belief that the subject Carmelo Lana (NJ) National Highway Traffic Safety noncompliance is inconsequential to Keith A. Lang (TX) Administration (NHTSA), telephone motor vehicle safety because while the Nathan D. Langham (IL) (202) 366–5310, facsimile (202) 366– subject tires contain an incorrect Michael S. Lewis (NC) 5930. manufacturer’s identification mark on VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:22 Mar 03, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00137 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04MRN1.SGM 04MRN1

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 43 / Friday, March 4, 2016 / Notices 11645 the inboard sidewall, the full and brand name is marked on both control after Cooper notified them that correct tire code (including the correct sidewalls. NHTSA believes this the subject noncompliance existed. manufacturer’s identification mark) is noncompliance will not cause Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: available on the intended outboard misidentification of the tire Delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.95 and sidewall. In addition, Cooper stated that manufacturer should a safety defect be 501.8. the tires are marked with the Cooper identified in the subject tires. Jeffrey M. Giuseppe, Weather-Master S/T2 brand name that is Cooper additionally informed NHTSA exclusively owned by Cooper Tire & that the subject tires meet and/or exceed Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance. Rubber Company. all performance requirements and all [FR Doc. 2016–04698 Filed 3–3–16; 8:45 am] Cooper also indicated that it has taken other labeling markings as required by BILLING CODE 4910–59–P the following steps to ensure proper FMVSS No. 139 and that Cooper is not registration of the subject tires: aware of any crashes, injuries, customer (a) Cooper has informed all internal complaints, or field reports associated DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION personnel responsible for manual with the subject tires. processing of tire registration cards National Highway Traffic Safety Cooper also notified NHTSA that Administration about the ‘‘U8’’ issue so that cards proper registration of the tires will be containing the ‘‘U8’’ designation will be accepted with the erroneous code. [Docket No. NHTSA–2016–0025; Notice 1] accepted and properly processed when Cooper collectively worked with CIMS all other information accurately (Computerized Information and BMW of North America, LLC, Receipt identifies the subject tires. And, Cooper Management Services), Inc., to ensure of Petition for Decision of will follow up with the consumer that the subject tires are correctly Inconsequential Noncompliance seeking additional information by registered regardless of the incorrect AGENCY: National Highway Traffic providing a prepaid response card. code. Safety Administration (NHTSA), (b) Cooper is in the process of The agency believes that the true Department of Transportation (DOT). modifying its database to accept ‘‘U8’’ measure of inconsequentiality to motor when other information (brand, serial ACTION: Receipt of petition. vehicle safety in this case is that there weeks affected etc.) is accurate. is no effect of the noncompliance on the SUMMARY: BMW of North America, LLC (c) Cooper has contacted (BMW), has determined that certain operational safety of vehicles on which Computerized Information and model year (MY) 2016 BMW 7 Series these tires are mounted and that the Management Services, Inc. (CIMS) so passenger cars do not fully comply with manufacturer of the tires can be readily that tire registration cards will not be paragraph S7.7.13.3 of Federal Motor identified. rejected solely due to improper plant Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. Cooper also informed NHTSA that on code information. 108, Lamps, reflective devices and Cooper additionally informed NHTSA May 29, 2015 it corrected the mold problem that originated the non- associated equipment. BMW filed a that on May 29, 2015 the incorrect mold report dated January 21, 2016, pursuant was pulled and the stamping error that compliance. NHTSA Decision: In consideration of to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and caused the subject noncompliance was Noncompliance Responsibility and corrected at that time. the foregoing, NHTSA finds that Cooper has met its burden of persuasion that Reports. BMW then petitioned NHTSA Refer to Coopers’ petition for their the subject FMVSS No. 139 under 49 CFR part 556 requesting a complete reasoning. The petition and all noncompliance in the affected tires is decision that the subject noncompliance supporting documents are available by inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. is inconsequential to motor vehicle logging onto the Federal Docket Accordingly, Cooper’s petition is hereby safety. Management System (FDMS) Web site at: http://www.regulations.gov/ and granted and Cooper is consequently DATES: The closing date for comments following the online search instructions exempted from the obligation of on the petition is April 4, 2016. to locate the docket number listed in the providing notification of, and a free ADDRESSES: Interested persons are title of this notice. remedy for, the subject noncompliance invited to submit written data, views, In summation, Cooper believes that under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120. and arguments on this petition. the described noncompliance of the NHTSA notes that the statutory Comments must refer to the docket and subject tires is inconsequential to motor provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and notice number cited in the title of this vehicle safety, and that its petition, to 30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to notice and submitted by any of the exempt Cooper from providing recall file petitions for a determination of following methods: notification of noncompliance as inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to • Mail: Send comments by mail required by 49 U.S.C. 30118 and exempt manufacturers only from the addressed to: U.S. Department of remedying the recall noncompliance as duties found in sections 30118 and Transportation, Docket Operations, M– required by 49 U.S.C. 30120 should be 30120, respectively, to notify owners, 30, West Building Ground Floor, Room granted. purchasers, and dealers of a defect or W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., noncompliance and to remedy the Washington, DC 20590. NHTSA’S Decision defect or noncompliance. Therefore, this • Hand Deliver: Deliver comments by NHTSA’s Analysis: While the first decision only applies to the subject tires hand to: U.S. Department of grouping of the tire identification that Cooper no longer controlled at the Transportation, Docket Operations, M– number (TIN) on the subject tires is time it determined that the jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 30, West Building Ground Floor, Room marked with the incorrect noncompliance existed. However, the W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., manufacturer’s identification code granting of this petition does not relieve Washington, DC 20590. The Docket ‘‘U8,’’ instead of the correct code ‘‘U9,’’ tire distributors and dealers of the Section is open on weekdays from 10 this mismarking is only on the inner prohibitions on the sale, offer for sale, a.m. to 5 p.m. except Federal Holidays. sidewall. The correct full TIN is or introduction or delivery for • Electronically: Submit comments properly marked on the outside introduction into interstate commerce of electronically by: Logging onto the sidewall, and the correct corporate the noncompliant tires under their Federal Docket Management System VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:22 Mar 03, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00138 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04MRN1.SGM 04MRN1


Document Created: 2018-02-02 15:05:12
Document Modified: 2018-02-02 15:05:12
CategoryRegulatory Information
CollectionFederal Register
sudoc ClassAE 2.7:
GS 4.107:
AE 2.106:
PublisherOffice of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
SectionNotices
ActionGrant of petition.
FR Citation81 FR 11644 
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR