81 FR 51267 - Cooper Tire & Rubber Company, Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 149 (August 3, 2016)

Page Range		51267-51268
FR Document		2016-18306

Cooper Tire & Rubber Company (Cooper), has determined that certain Mastercraft and Big O tires do not fully comply with paragraph S5.5(f) of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 139, New Pneumatic Radial Tires for Light Vehicles. Cooper filed a report dated May 24, 2016, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. Cooper then petitioned NHTSA under 49 CFR part 556 for a decision that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.

Federal Register, Volume 81 Issue 149 (Wednesday, August 3, 2016)

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 149 (Wednesday, August 3, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51267-51268]
From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2016-18306]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2016-0072; Notice 1]

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

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

ACTION: Receipt of petition.

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

SUMMARY: Cooper Tire & Rubber Company (Cooper), has determined that
certain Mastercraft and Big O tires do not fully comply with paragraph
S5.5(f) of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 139, New
Pneumatic Radial Tires for Light Vehicles. Cooper filed a report dated
May 24, 2016, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance
Responsibility and Reports. Cooper then petitioned NHTSA under 49 CFR
part 556 for a decision that the subject noncompliance is
inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.

DATES: The closing date for comments on the petition is September 2,
2016.

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 be
submitted by any of the following methods:
Mail: Send comments by mail addressed to 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 Deliver: Deliver comments by hand to 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
Federal Holidays.
Electronically: Submit comments electronically by logging
onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Web site at http://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 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 http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided.
The petition, supporting materials, and all comments 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 extent possible.
When the petition is granted or denied, notice of the decision will
also

[[Page 51268]]

be published in the Federal Register pursuant to the authority
indicated at the end of this notice.
All documents 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 http://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).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Overview: Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and their
implementing regulations 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 as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
This notice of receipt of Cooper's petition is published under 49
U.S.C. 30118 and 30120 and does not represent any agency decision or
other exercise of judgment concerning the merits of the petition.
II. Tires Involved: Affected are 22,188 of the following tubeless
radial tires manufactured between January 10, 2016, and April 30, 2016:
Mastercraft LSR Grand Touring size 215/60R16.
Mastercraft LSR Grand Touring size 225/60R16.
Big O Legacy Tour Plus size 215/60R16.
Big O Legacy Tour Plus size 225/60R16.
III. Noncompliance: Cooper explains that due to a mold error, the
number of tread plies indicated on the sidewall of the subject tires
does not match the actual number of plies in the tire construction. The
tires are marked ``TREAD 1 PLY NYLON + 2 PLY STEEL + 2 PLY POLYESTER''
whereas the correct marking should be: ``TREAD 1 PLY NYLON + 2PLY STEEL
+ 1 PLY POLYESTER.'' As a consequence, these tires do not meet the
requirements specified in paragraph S5.5(f) of FMVSS No. 139.
IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S5.5(f) of FMVSS No. 139 states, in
pertinent part:

S5.5 Tire Markings. Except as specified in paragraph (a) through
(i) of S5.5, each tire must be marked on each sidewall with the
information specified in S5.5(a) through (d) and on one sidewall
with the information specified in S5.5(e) through (i) according to
the phase-in schedule specified in S7 of this standard . . .
(f) The actual number of plies in the sidewall, and the actual
number of plies in the tread area, if different.

V. Summary of Cooper's Petition: Cooper described the subject
noncompliance and stated its belief that the noncompliance is
inconsequential as it relates motor vehicle safety and is unlikely to
have an adverse impact on motor vehicle safety.
In support of its petition, Cooper submitted the following
information pertaining to the subject noncompliance:
(a) Cooper states that the mislabeled number of plies indicated on
the sidewalls has no impact on the operational performance or
durability of the subject tires or on the safety of vehicles on which
those tires are mounted. Cooper states that while the subject tires do
not indicate the correct number of plies in the tread on the outboard
side, they meet all other performance requirements under the Federal
Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. Cooper notes that the number of plies
in the tread does not impact the performance or operation of a tire and
does not create a safety concern to either the operator of the vehicle
on which the tires are mounted, or the safety of personnel in the tire
repair, retread and recycle industry.
(b) Cooper also states that the subject tires were built as
designed and meet or exceed all performance requirements and testing
requirements specified under FMVSS No. 139. Cooper states that the
subject tires completed all Cooper Tire internal compliance testing
criteria, including passing shipping certification testing in January
2016. In addition, the 215/60R16, Mastercraft LRS Grand Touring, serial
week 1116, passed all surveillance testing conducted in early March
2016.
(c) Cooper's states that the stamping deviation occurred as a
result of an administrative error when incorrect information was
entered into Cooper Tire's electronic specification system at the
corporate level. That system communicates information to the mold
management system which in turn generates the construction stamping
pocket plate. The electronic specification system incorrectly listed
the specific tire sizes and brands as two-ply, when the tires were
actually designed with an HPL construction or as having a single ply in
the tread. The incorrect construction information was then engraved in
the pocket plate and then installed in the affected molds.
(d) Cooper states that it is not aware of any crashes, injuries,
customer complaints, or field reports associated with the mislabeling.
Cooper states that the mislabeling has been corrected at the
corporate level and the pocket plates of the molds have been replaced,
therefore, no additional tires will be manufactured or sold with the
noncompliance. Cooper also states that it has conducted training with
tire engineers at the corporate level responsible for inputting
information into the electronic specification system on the importance
of the information they are submitting.
Cooper observed that NHTSA has previously granted inconsequential
noncompliance petitions regarding noncompliances that are similar to
the subject noncompliance.
Cooper concluded by expressing the belief that the subject
noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety,
and that its petition to be 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 Cooper no longer
controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance existed.
However, any decision on this petition does not relieve equipment
distributors and dealers of the prohibitions on the sale, offer for
sale, or introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate
commerce of the noncompliant tires under their control after Cooper
notified them that the subject noncompliance existed.

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

Jeffrey M. Giuseppe,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2016-18306 Filed 8-2-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P

51268 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 149 / Wednesday, August 3, 2016 / Notices

be published in the Federal Register the phase-in schedule specified in S7 of this (d) Cooper states that it is not aware
pursuant to the authority indicated at standard . . . of any crashes, injuries, customer
the end of this notice. (f) The actual number of plies in the complaints, or field reports associated
sidewall, and the actual number of plies in
All documents submitted to the with the mislabeling.
the tread area, if different.
docket may be viewed by anyone at the Cooper states that the mislabeling has
address and times given above. The V. Summary of Cooper’s Petition:
been corrected at the corporate level and
documents may also be viewed on the Cooper described the subject
noncompliance and stated its belief that the pocket plates of the molds have been
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov
the noncompliance is inconsequential replaced, therefore, no additional tires
by following the online instructions for
accessing the dockets. The docket ID as it relates motor vehicle safety and is will be manufactured or sold with the
number for this petition is shown in the unlikely to have an adverse impact on noncompliance. Cooper also states that
heading of this notice. motor vehicle safety. it has conducted training with tire
DOT’s complete Privacy Act In support of its petition, Cooper engineers at the corporate level
Statement is available for review in a submitted the following information responsible for inputting information
Federal Register notice published on pertaining to the subject into the electronic specification system
April 11, 2000, (65 FR 19477–78). noncompliance: on the importance of the information
(a) Cooper states that the mislabeled they are submitting.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
number of plies indicated on the Cooper observed that NHTSA has
I. Overview: Pursuant to 49 U.S.C.
sidewalls has no impact on the previously granted inconsequential
30118(d) and 30120(h) and their
operational performance or durability of
implementing regulations at 49 CFR part noncompliance petitions regarding
the subject tires or on the safety of
556, Cooper submitted a petition for an noncompliances that are similar to the
vehicles on which those tires are
exemption from the notification and subject noncompliance.
mounted. Cooper states that while the
remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. Cooper concluded by expressing the
subject tires do not indicate the correct
Chapter 301 on the basis that this belief that the subject noncompliance is
number of plies in the tread on the
noncompliance is inconsequential as it inconsequential as it relates to motor
outboard side, they meet all other
relates to motor vehicle safety.
performance requirements under the vehicle safety, and that its petition to be
This notice of receipt of Cooper’s Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. exempted from providing notification of
petition is published under 49 U.S.C. Cooper notes that the number of plies in the noncompliance, as required by 49
30118 and 30120 and does not represent the tread does not impact the U.S.C. 30118, and a remedy for the
any agency decision or other exercise of performance or operation of a tire and noncompliance, as required by 49
judgment concerning the merits of the does not create a safety concern to either
petition. U.S.C. 30120, should be granted.
the operator of the vehicle on which the
II. Tires Involved: Affected are 22,188 tires are mounted, or the safety of NHTSA notes that the statutory
of the following tubeless radial tires personnel in the tire repair, retread and provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
manufactured between January 10, recycle industry. 30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to
2016, and April 30, 2016: (b) Cooper also states that the subject file petitions for a determination of
• Mastercraft LSR Grand Touring size tires were built as designed and meet or inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to
215/60R16. exceed all performance requirements exempt manufacturers only from the
• Mastercraft LSR Grand Touring size and testing requirements specified duties found in sections 30118 and
225/60R16. under FMVSS No. 139. Cooper states 30120, respectively, to notify owners,
• Big O Legacy Tour Plus size 215/ that the subject tires completed all purchasers, and dealers of a defect or
60R16. Cooper Tire internal compliance testing noncompliance and to remedy the
• Big O Legacy Tour Plus size 225/ criteria, including passing shipping defect or noncompliance. Therefore, any
60R16. certification testing in January 2016. In decision on this petition only applies to
III. Noncompliance: Cooper explains addition, the 215/60R16, Mastercraft the subject tires that Cooper no longer
that due to a mold error, the number of LRS Grand Touring, serial week 1116, controlled at the time it determined that
tread plies indicated on the sidewall of passed all surveillance testing the noncompliance existed. However,
the subject tires does not match the conducted in early March 2016. any decision on this petition does not
actual number of plies in the tire (c) Cooper’s states that the stamping relieve equipment distributors and
construction. The tires are marked deviation occurred as a result of an dealers of the prohibitions on the sale,
‘‘TREAD 1 PLY NYLON + 2 PLY STEEL administrative error when incorrect offer for sale, or introduction or delivery
+ 2 PLY POLYESTER’’ whereas the information was entered into Cooper for introduction into interstate
correct marking should be: ‘‘TREAD 1 Tire’s electronic specification system at commerce of the noncompliant tires
PLY NYLON + 2PLY STEEL + 1 PLY the corporate level. That system
under their control after Cooper notified
POLYESTER.’’ As a consequence, these communicates information to the mold
them that the subject noncompliance
tires do not meet the requirements management system which in turn
existed.
specified in paragraph S5.5(f) of FMVSS generates the construction stamping
No. 139. pocket plate. The electronic Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120:
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S5.5(f) of specification system incorrectly listed delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.95 and
FMVSS No. 139 states, in pertinent part: the specific tire sizes and brands as two- 501.8.
S5.5 Tire Markings. Except as specified in
ply, when the tires were actually
Jeffrey M. Giuseppe,
paragraph (a) through (i) of S5.5, each tire designed with an HPL construction or as
having a single ply in the tread. The Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
must be marked on each sidewall with the
incorrect construction information was [FR Doc. 2016–18306 Filed 8–2–16; 8:45 am]
information specified in S5.5(a) through (d)
and on one sidewall with the information then engraved in the pocket plate and BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
specified in S5.5(e) through (i) according to then installed in the affected molds.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:21 Aug 02, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00095 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\03AUN1.SGM 03AUN1

Document Created: 2016-08-02 23:44:04
Document Modified: 2016-08-02 23:44:04

Category		Regulatory Information
Collection		Federal Register
sudoc Class		AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106:
Publisher		Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
Section		Notices
Action		Receipt of petition.
Dates		The closing date for comments on the petition is September 2, 2016.
FR Citation		81 FR 51267

81 FR 51267 - Cooper Tire & Rubber Company, Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATIONNational Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 149 (August 3, 2016)

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration