Home Page American Government Reference Desk Shopping Special Collections About Us Contribute



Escort, Inc.






GM Icons
By accessing/using The Crittenden Automotive Library/CarsAndRacingStuff.com, you signify your agreement with the Terms of Use on our Legal Information page. Our Privacy Policy is also available there.

Sumitomo Rubber USA, LLC, Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance


American Government Topics:  Sumitomo

Sumitomo Rubber USA, LLC, Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance

Jeffrey M. Giuseppe
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
20 April 2017


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 75 (Thursday, April 20, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18684-18686]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-08008]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2017-0010; Notice 1]


Sumitomo Rubber USA, LLC, Receipt of Petition for Decision of 
Inconsequential Noncompliance

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

ACTION: Receipt of petition.

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

SUMMARY: Sumitomo Rubber USA, LLC (SRUSA), has determined that certain 
Sumitomo Kelly brand commercial truck tires do not fully comply with 
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 119, New Pneumatic 
Tires for Motor Vehicles with a GVWR of more than 4,536 kilograms 
(10,000

[[Page 18685]]

pounds) and Motorcycles. SRUSA filed a noncompliance report dated 
January 3, 2017. SRUSA also petitioned NHTSA on January 31, 2017, 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 May 22, 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: Sumitomo Rubber USA, LLC (SRUSA), has determined that 
certain Sumitomo Kelly brand commercial truck tires do not fully comply 
with S6.5 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 101, New 
Pneumatic Tires for Motor Vehicles with a GVWR of more than 4,536 
kilograms (10,000 pounds) and Motorcycles. SRUSA filed a noncompliance 
report dated January 3, 2017, and amended on January 25, 2017, pursuant 
to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and 
Reports. SRUSA also petitioned NHTSA on January 31, 2017, 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.
    This notice of receipt of SRUSA'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 approximately 138 Sumitomo Kelly 
KDA size 11R22.5 commercial truck tires manufactured between December 
4, 2016, and December 17, 2016.
    III. Noncompliance: SRUSA explains that the noncompliance is that 
the required markings on the sidewall of the subject tires were 
inadvertently omitted and therefore do not comply with paragraph S6.5 
of FMVSS No. 119.
    IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S6.5 of FMVSS No. 119 states in pertinent 
part:

    S6.5 Tire markings. Except as specified in this paragraph, each 
tire shall be marked on each sidewall with the information specified 
in paragraphs (a) through (j) of this section. The markings shall be 
placed between the maximum section width (exclusive of sidewall 
decorations or curb ribs) and the bead on at least one sidewall, 
unless the maximum section width of the tire is located in an area 
which is not more than one-fourth of the distance from the bead to 
the shoulder of the tire . . .

    V. Summary of SRUSA's Petition: SRUSA 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, SRUSA submitted the following 
reasoning:
    SRUSA submits that the condition described above is inconsequential 
as it relates to motor vehicle safety. The tires were manufactured as 
designed and meet or exceed all performance requirements of applicable 
Federal motor vehicle safety standards. All of the subject tires are 
marked with the correct information; however, the information appears 
only on one sidewall. Therefore, the noncompliant condition does not 
affect motor vehicle safety because the required information is still 
visible and available to the consumer on one sidewall of the tire. 
Additionally, SRUSA is not aware of any customer complaints related to 
this condition. The affected tire mold was immediately corrected and no 
additional tires were or will be manufactured with this noncompliance.
    NHTSA previously granted petitions for similar noncompliance 
conditions related to tire information on tires because of surveys that 
show most consumers do not base tire purchases on tire information 
found on the tire sidewall.
    Moreover, the absence of the markings on one sidewall has no impact 
on the operational performance of the tires at issue or on the safety 
of the vehicles on which these tires may be mounted.
    SRUSA 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.
    In a supplemental email dated February 24, 2017, SRUSA stated that 
the subject tires are not Asymmetric tires and is not labeled as 
``OUTERSIDE'' or ``OUTER.'' SRUSA also stated that there is no specific 
outboard or inner sidewall, thus, the tires may be mounted either way.
    To view SRUSA's petition, analyses, and any supplemental 
documentation in its entirety you can visit https://www.regulations.gov 
by following the online instructions for accessing the dockets and by 
using the docket ID number for this petition show in the heading of 
this notice.
    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

[[Page 18686]]

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 SRUSA 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 SRUSA 
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. 2017-08008 Filed 4-19-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-59-P




The Crittenden Automotive Library