Cooper Tire & Rubber Company, Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance |
|---|
Topics: Cooper Tire
|
Jeffrey M. Giuseppe
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
4 March 2016
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 43 (Friday, March 4, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11644-11645]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[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