Michelin North America, Inc., Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance |
|---|
Topics: Michelin
|
Otto G. Matheke III
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
16 April 2019
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 73 (Tuesday, April 16, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15675-15677]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-07520]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2017-0034; Notice 2]
Michelin North America, Inc., Grant of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Grant of petition.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Michelin North America, Inc. (MNA), has determined that
certain BFGoodrich gForce Rival S summer performance tires do not fully
comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 139, New
Pneumatic Radial Tires for Light Vehicles. MNA filed a noncompliance
report dated April 17, 2017. MNA also petitioned NHTSA on May 5, 2017,
for a decision that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it
relates to motor vehicle safety. NHTSA is granting the petition for the
reasons stated in this decision.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Abraham Diaz, Office of Vehicle Safety
Compliance, NHTSA, telephone (202) 366-5310, facsimile (202) 366-5930.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Overview: MNA has determined that certain BFGoodrich gForce
Rival S summer performance tires do not fully comply with paragraph
S5.2(d) of FMVSS No. 139, New Pneumatic Radial Tires for Light Vehicles
(49 CFR 571.139). MNA filed a noncompliance report dated April 17,
2017, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance
Responsibility and Reports. MNA also petitioned NHTSA on May 5, 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.
Notice of receipt of the petition was published, with a 30-day
public comment period, on July 11, 2017, in the Federal Register (82 FR
32049). No
[[Page 15676]]
comments were received. To view the petition and all supporting
documents, log onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) website
at: http://www.regulations.gov/. Then follow the online search
instructions to locate docket number ``NHTSA-2017-0034.''
II. Tires Involved: Approximately 370 BFGoodrich gForce Rival S
summer performance tires, size P335/30ZR18 95W LL, manufactured between
March 2, 2017, and March 30, 2017, are potentially involved.
III. Noncompliance: MNA explains that the noncompliance is that the
tire size designation markings on the sidewalls of the subject tires do
not contain the tire type code designator symbol from the United States
Tire and Rim Association (USTRA) yearbook, as required by paragraph
S5.2(d) of FMVSS No. 139. Specifically, the subject tire size reads
``335/30ZR18 95W LL'' but should read ``P335/30ZR18 95W LL.''
IV. Rule Requirements: Paragraph S5.2(d) of FMVSS No. 139 titled
``Performance Requirements'' includes the requirements relevant to this
petition:
Each tire shall conform to each of the following:
Its load rating shall be that specified either in a
submission made by an individual manufacturer, pursuant to paragraph
S4, or in one of the publications described in paragraph S4 for its
size designation, type and each appropriate inflation pressure.
If the maximum load rating for a particular tire size is
shown in more than one of the publications described in paragraph S4,
each tire of that size designation shall have a maximum load rating
that is not less than the published maximum load rating, or if there
are differing maximum load ratings for the same tire size designation,
not less than the lowest published maximum load rating.
V. Summary of MNA's Petition: MNA 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, MNA submitted the following reasoning:
(a) Application--The subject tires are marked with the correct
maximum load \1\, pressure, and load index, to ensure proper
application. Additionally, the tires have the correct tread sticker
label showing the correct size designation, part number, etc. to ensure
proper application.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The petitioner referred to ``Light Load'' meaning the
maximum load and pressure specified by USTRA publications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) Usage--These tires are marketed as performance tires and
normally used for competition events on tracks or autocross courses.
Thus, the tires are normally operated at the lightest loads possible
for performance optimization.
(c) Other Markings--All other markings conform to the applicable
regulations.
(d) Performance--The subject tires meet all performance
requirements of FMVSS No. 139. In the event, because of the missing
``P'' prefix, the tires are used to replace a 335/30ZR18 size tire,
which has a higher load carrying capacity than a P335/30ZR18 tire,
there should be no performance concerns.\2\ The tires have been tested
to FMVSS No. 139 using the higher standard load as a basis and they
fulfill all performance requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The standard load index for size 335/30ZR18 tire is 102
according to the European Tyre and Rim Technical Organization
(ETRTO) yearbook, which corresponds to a maximum load capacity of
850 kg. The P335/30ZR18 tire size according to the USTRA yearbook
has a load index of 95, which corresponds to a maximum load capacity
of 690 kg.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
MNA concluded by expressing the belief that the subject
noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety,
and that its petition to be exempt 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.
VI. NHTSA'S Analysis: NHTSA has evaluated the merits of the
inconsequential noncompliance petition submitted by MNA and has
determined that this particular noncompliance is inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety. Specifically, NHTSA considered the following
factors when analyzing the risk to safety for these noncompliant tires:
(a) Application--Because the subject tires are marked with the load
in accordance with the USTRA publications, and certified to the higher
load indicated by ETRTO and corresponding to the missing ``P'', the
omission of the letter ``P'' would not have an impact on safety with
respect to the application of the subject tires. With respect to the
tires having a sticker showing the correct size designation, part
number, and tire information at the point of sale, the agency does not
find this information compelling in terms of granting this petition
since once a tire is mounted on a vehicle, a motorist will rely on what
is marked on the tire sidewall and not on the sticker at the point of
sale.
(b) Usage--The petitioner contends that the subject tires are
marketed and normally used for competition events on tracks or
autocross courses. The petitioner further states that when used for
competition events, the tires are normally used in a lightly loaded
condition to optimize performance during the event. NHTSA does not find
this argument compelling because the tires are available for purchase
by the public and use of the tires in other circumstances, such as
driving to and from such competition events with multiple passengers
onboard, is foreseeable.
(c) Other Markings--MNA states they properly marked the subject
tires with the correct tire size, maximum pressure, intended load (1521
lbs/690 kgs), and load index. NHTSA finds these additional markings
will mitigate the potential risk that consumers will load the tires to
the higher load that applies to the ETRTO designation for tires having
the same size, without the ``P'' designation.
(d) Performance--MNA provided evidence that they certified these
tires to FMVSS No. 139 using the ETRTO specifications required for
tires without the ``P'' designation. NHTSA finds this a compelling
argument to support that, in the event the tires are used with the
ETRTO specification, due to the missing ``P,'' there is a basis to
believe they would be safe. This basis data was provided to the Agency
and indicates that the tires have been tested to the loads specified by
ETRTO specifications and thus are able to perform safely using the
USTRA specifications.
Together, these factors have led NHTSA to conclude that it would be
unlikely that an end user would disregard the tire load marked on the
sidewall of the tire and instead rely on the load specified in the
ETRTO yearbook. Furthermore, if a consumer were to load the tire to the
load specified in the ETRTO books, the tires are designed and
manufactured to comply with FMVSS No. 139 under those conditions, so
there would be no increased risk to safety.
VII. NHTSA's Decision: In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has
decided that Michelin North America has met its burden of persuasion
that the FMVSS No. 139 noncompliance for the replacement tires
identified in MNA's Noncompliance Information Report is inconsequential
to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, MNA's petition is hereby granted
and MNA is consequently exempted from the obligation of providing
notification of and free remedy for, that
[[Page 15677]]
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 MNA no longer controlled at the
time it determined that the noncompliance existed. However, the
granting of 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 MNA 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).
Otto G. Matheke III,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2019-07520 Filed 4-15-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P