Arconic Wheel and Transportation Products, Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance |
|---|
Topics: Arconic, Alcoa
|
Jeffrey M. Giuseppe
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
5 June 2017
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 106 (Monday, June 5, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25908-25909]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-11525]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2016-0137; Notice 1]
Arconic Wheel and Transportation Products, Receipt of Petition
for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Receipt of petition.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Arconic Wheel and Transportation Products, a business division
of Arconic, Inc., formerly known as Alcoa, Inc. (Arconic), has
determined that certain Alcoa aluminum wheels do not fully comply with
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 120, Tire Selection
and Rims and Motor Home/Recreation Vehicle Trailer Load Carrying
Capacity Information for Motor Vehicles with a GVWR of more than 4,536
kilograms (10,000 pounds). Alcoa, Inc. filed a noncompliance
information report dated November 21, 2016. Arconic then petitioned
NHTSA on December 5, 2016, 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 July 5, 2017.
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
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 Delivery: 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 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 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).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Overview: Arconic Wheel and Transportation Products (Arconic),
has determined that certain Alcoa aluminum wheels do not fully comply
with paragraph S5.2(b) of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS)
No. 120, Tire Selection and Rims and Motor Home/Recreation Vehicle
Trailer Load Carrying Capacity Information for Motor Vehicles with a
GVWR of more than 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds). Alcoa, Inc. filed a
noncompliance information report dated November 21, 2016, pursuant to
49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports.
Arconic then petitioned NHTSA on December 5, 2016, pursuant to 49
U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and 49 CFR part 556, 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.
[[Page 25909]]
This notice of receipt of Arconic'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. Equipment Involved: Approximately 1,975 Alcoa model 88367X
aluminum wheels, size 22.5'' Dia. x 8.25'', produced for the heavy duty
truck wheel market, and manufactured between August 1, 2016, and
November 7, 2016, are potentially involved.
III. Noncompliance: Arconic explains that the noncompliance is that
the wheel diameter was incorrectly marked on the subject wheels as
24.5'' x 8.25'', when it should have been marked as 22.5'' x 8.25''.
This marking error overstates the wheel diameter by 2''. Therefore, the
subject wheels do not meet the requirements of paragraph S5.2(b) of
FMVSS No. 120.
IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S5.2(b) of FMVSS No. 120 states in
pertinent part:
S5.2 Rim marking. Each rim or, at the option of the manufacturer
in the case of a single-piece wheel, wheel disc shall be marked with
the information listed in paragraphs (a) through (e) of this
paragraph, in lettering not less than 3 millimeters high, impressed
to a depth or, at the option of the manufacturer, embossed to a
height of not less than 0.125 millimeters . . .
(b) The rim size designation, and in case of multipiece rims,
the rim type designation. For example: 20x5.50, or 20x5.5.
V. Summary of Arconic's Petition: Arconic described the subject
noncompliance and stated its belief that the noncompliance is
inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
In support of its petition, Arconic submitted the following
reasoning:
1. If the mounting technician relied solely on the incorrectly
stated 24.5'' diameter stamped on the rim and tried to mount a 24.5'' x
8.25'' tire, the tire will not inflate. Therefore, it would be obvious
to the mounting technician that there is a tire/rim mismatch, because
the air will immediately escape during inflation and no tire/rim seal
will ever be achieved. Heavy-duty truck rim diameter sizes in the U.S.
market are in increments 19.5'', 22.5'' and 24.5'', so any tire
diameter other than 22.5'' will simply not mount and/or inflate on the
mismarked 24.5'' rim.
2. All product literature that accompanies the mislabeled 24.5'' x
8.25'' aluminum wheels correctly identifies the wheel as having a
22.5'' diameter. The part number stamped on the wheels correctly
associates the wheels in catalogs (hard copy and electronic) as having
a 22.5'' diameter. The vast majority of the affected wheels were sold
for assembly on new heavy-duty semi-tractors and it is believed the
certification label, tire pressure placard and all other literature
accompanying the vehicle correctly states the required wheel diameter
as 22.5''.
3. The vast majority of the affected wheels were sold for assembly
on new heavy-duty semi-tractors, which means the selection of tires and
wheels during assembly does not require reliance on the actual size
markings on the wheel. Rather, this selection is based upon part number
matching during the tire/wheel subassembly process, and the part number
descriptions correctly reflect the actual wheel size of 22.5'' x
8.25''. Only one manufacturer, a trailer manufacturer, actually noticed
the mismarking of the rim diameter. The remaining manufacturers that
undertook tire and rim assembly were unaffected by rim mismarking.
4. If a vehicle owner or operator must replace one of the affected
rims they would most likely go to a facility that is familiar with
tire/wheel replacements for heavy-duty trucks. Pursuant to 29 CFR
1910.177(c) (Employee Training), federal regulations require that only
trained technicians are permitted to mount tires and wheels on heavy-
duty vehicles and it should be obvious to the technician when a wheel
marking is overstated by 2''.
5. For rims that have an obvious incorrect size marking stamped
into the wheel, the technician will have to rely on another source for
the correct rim size including, when applicable, the certification
label, tire pressure placard or any other literature to determine the
correct wheel and tire size for the replacement.
6. Because a tire/rim seal cannot be achieved with an overstated
2'' rim diameter, there is no risk to the technician during attempted
tire mounting operations.
7. All other roll stamp rim marking information on the subject rims
required by S5.2 of FMVSS No. 120 is correct. The rim is marked with
the correct rim width, manufacturer, date of manufacture, and DOT.
8. The agency has previously found to be inconsequential a
noncompliance with the rim marking requirements of FMVSS No. 110 Tire
selection and rims and motor home/recreation vehicle trailer load
carrying capacity information for motor vehicles with a GVWR of 4,536
kilograms (10,000 pounds) or less (citing Docket No. NHTSA-1999-6685,
July 5, 2000).
9. Arconic is not aware of any crashes or injuries associated with
this roll stamp rim marking issue.
Arconic states that they have corrected the roll stamp for all
future production.
Arconic 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 wheels that Arconic 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 wheels under their control after Arconic
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. 2017-11525 Filed 6-2-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P