Toyota Motor North America, Inc., Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance |
|---|
Topics: Toyota C-HR
|
Otto G. Matheke III
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
23 April 2021
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 77 (Friday, April 23, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21782-21784]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-08456]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2021-0015; Notice 1]
Toyota Motor North America, Inc., Receipt of Petition for
Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Receipt of petition.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Toyota Motor North America, Inc. (TMNA) on behalf of Toyota
Motor Corporation (TMC) (collectively referred to as ``Toyota''), has
determined that certain model year (MY) 2020-2021 Toyota C-HR motor
vehicles do not fully comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard
(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. Toyota filed a
noncompliance report dated February 3, 2021, and subsequently
petitioned NHTSA on February 26, 2021, for a decision that the subject
noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
This notice announces receipt of Toyota's petition.
DATES: Send comments on or before May 24, 2021.
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 the 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 the 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 for Federal holidays.
Electronically: Submit comments electronically by logging
onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) website 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 docket. 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).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kerrin Bressant, General Engineer,
NHTSA, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, (202) 366-1110.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Overview
Toyota has determined that certain MY 2020-2021 Toyota C-HR motor
vehicles do not fully comply with the requirements of paragraph S4.3(d)
of FMVSS No. 110, Tire Selection and Rims and Motor Home/Recreation
Vehicle Trailer Load Carrying Capacity Information for Motor Vehicles
with a
[[Page 21783]]
GVWR of 4,536 Kilograms (10,000 pounds) or Less (49 CFR 571.110).
Toyota filed a noncompliance report dated February 3, 2021, pursuant to
49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports.
Toyota subsequently petitioned NHTSA on February 26, 2021, 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, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h) and 49 CFR part 556, Exemption for Inconsequential Defect or
Noncompliance.
This notice of receipt of Toyota'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. Vehicles Involved
Approximately 3,981 MY 2020-2021 Toyota C-HR motor vehicles,
manufactured between September 16, 2019, and November 30, 2020, are
potentially involved.
III. Noncompliance
Toyota explains that the noncompliance is that the subject vehicles
are equipped with tire information pressure labels that incorrectly
state the tire size information for the front and rear tires and,
therefore, do not fully meet the requirements specified in paragraph
S4.3(d) of FMVSS No. 110. Specifically, the subject vehicles were
originally equipped with 17-inch wheels, however, the tire information
pressure labels indicate that the vehicles were originally equipped
with 18-inch tires.
IV. Rule Requirements
Paragraph S4.3(d) of FMVSS No. 110 includes the requirements
relevant to this petition. Each vehicle, except for a trailer or
incomplete vehicle, shall show the information specified in S4.3 (a)
through (g), and may show, at the manufacturer's option, the
information specified in S4.3 (h) and (i) on a placard permanently
affixed to the driver's side B-pillar. Specifically, tire size
designation, indicated by the headings ``size'' or ``original tire
size'' or original size'' must be shown.
V. Summary of Toyota's Petition
The following views and arguments presented in this section, ``V.
Summary of Toyota's Petition,'' are the views and arguments provided by
Toyota. They have not been evaluated by the Agency and do not reflect
the views of the Agency. Toyota describes the subject noncompliances
and contends that the noncompliances is inconsequential as it relates
to motor vehicle safety.
In support of its petition, Toyota submitted the following
reasoning:
1. Toyota states that the tires installed on the vehicle (215/
60R17) meet all other applicable FMVSS requirements. They are the tires
that were designed for the subject vehicle and are appropriate for the
maximum vehicle loads. Only the front and rear tire size information
indicated on the placard is incorrect and reflects the tire size used
on other grade C-HR vehicles. Further, Toyota claims, all the other
information on the placard is accurate, including the spare tire size,
the cold tire inflation pressure, and maximum combined weight of
occupants and cargo.
Toyota believes that, because the tires installed on the vehicles
are the appropriate tires for the vehicle performance and maximum
loading requirements, there is no risk to motor vehicle safety.
2. Toyota says that if the vehicle owner is replacing the tires on
the vehicle, the owner can notice that the tire size specified on the
placard does not match the tires installed on the vehicle. Further, the
18-inch wheels are visually different because they are alloy wheels as
opposed to the 17-inch wheels, which are steel. To find the correct
information, the owner could check the tire size that is molded into
the sidewall of each tire or check the tire size listed in the owner's
manual. As required in FMVSS No. 110, the tire placard also directs the
owner to ``SEE OWNER'S MANUAL FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.'' The owner's
manual specifies the appropriate tire and wheel sizes for the vehicle.
The wheel size is also marked on the wheel itself.
3. Toyota also says that if the owner attempts to replace the
original tires installed on the 17-inch wheel with tires of the size
indicated on the incorrect placard (225/50R18), the installer would not
be able to physically mount them on the 17-inch wheels and would either
need to also replace the wheels with 18-inch wheels or refer to the
tire size information from other sources. As stated above, the correct
information is available in various locations such as the tire size
indicated on the sidewall of the tires that are installed on the
vehicle or the owner's manual.
4. Toyota states, that in the event that the vehicle owner decided
to change the tire/wheel combination to the size indicated on the
incorrect placard, the replacement tires would be appropriate for the
vehicle. Other grade C-HRs, with the same maximum loading requirements,
use the 225/50R18 tire/wheel combination. This tire wheel size
combination is appropriate for the vehicle maximum loads.
5. Toyota claims that in similar situations, NHTSA has granted
petitions for inconsequential noncompliance relating to the subject
requirement of FMVSS No. 110.
a. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc., (81 FR 88728, December 8, 2016)
In their petition, Volkswagen stated that the vehicles, in that
case, had a tire placard that is misprinted with an incorrect tire size
as compared to the tires the vehicle was originally equipped with and
therefore did not fully conform to paragraph S4.3(d) of FMVSS No. 110.
Utilizing the ETRTO Tire and Rim Association Manual of 2016, NHTSA
confirmed that the incorrectly listed size tires would still have a
load capacity sufficient to support the listed weight limitation of
occupants and cargo which is printed on the placard. Both the installed
original equipment manufacturer (OEM) tires on the vehicle and the
installation of the incorrect sized tires listed on those vehicles'
placard, when inflated to the placard's recommended cold inflation
pressure, were identified as appropriate to handle the vehicle maximum
loads. Based on that information, NHTSA determined that the
noncompliance, in that case, should not cause any unsafe conditions
associated with the incorrect tire size listed on the placard.
Similarly, for the Toyota C-HR, the originally installed tires and
the installation of the incorrect sized tires listed on the subject
vehicle's placard, when inflated to the placard's recommended cold
inflation pressure, are appropriate to handle the vehicle maximum
loads.
b. BMW of North America, LLC., (84 FR 26505, June 6, 2019)
In their petition, BMW stated that the vehicles were equipped, as
designed, with 17-inch tires but the FMVSS No. 110 tire information
placard states that the vehicles were equipped with 18-inch tires. BMW
also explained that the placard overstated the cold tire inflation
pressure for the rear tires (it stated 240 kPa/35 psi when it should
have read 220 kPa/32 psi). Instead of the information for the 17-inch
tires, the placard incorrectly included the cold tire inflation
pressure and tire size designation for the 18-inch tires. Therefore,
BMW stated that the affected vehicles did not conform to FMVSS No. 110
S4.3(c) and 4.3(d). NHTSA agreed,
[[Page 21784]]
in their response, that if the vehicle owner installed 18-inch tires on
the vehicle, those tires at the listed cold inflation pressure would
also be appropriate for the vehicle's front and rear GAWRs. In
addition, NHTSA stated that, if a vehicle owner inflated his tires to
the inflation pressure listed for the 18-inch tires, the result would
be an increase to 240 kPa/35 psi for the rear tires and a net increase
in load capacity for the vehicle overall. Alternatively, if the vehicle
owner installed 18-inch tires on the vehicle, those tires at the listed
cold inflation pressure would also be appropriate for the vehicle's
front and rear GAWRs. The agency agreed with BMW that the noncompliance
is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety and that there is no risk of
possible underinflating or overloading of the tires as a result of this
issue. Further, should a vehicle owner question the correct tire size
or corresponding recommended cold tire inflation pressures for their
vehicle, this information is available in other locations such as the
sidewall markings and the owner's manual.
Similarly, for the Toyota C-HR, the installation of the incorrect
sized tires listed on the subject vehicle's placard when inflated to
the placard's recommended cold inflation pressure are appropriate to
handle the vehicle maximum loads. In addition, as in the BMW petition,
the tire size information is available in other locations such as the
sidewall markings and the owner's manual. Unlike the BMW issue,
however, the cold tire inflation pressure listed on the placard for the
Toyota C-HR is correct.
c. DaimlerChrysler Corporation (73 FR 11462, March 3, 2008); Mercedes-
Benz USA, LLC (MBUSA), (78 FR. 43967, July 22, 2013); Mercedes-Benz
USA, LLC (82 FR 5640, January 18, 2017); General Motors, LLC, (84 FR
25117, May 30, 2019)
NHTSA has also previously granted at least four similar petitions
for inconsequential noncompliance for the incorrect spare tire size
indicated on the placard, such as those listed above.
In those cases, NHTSA determined that the noncompliance was
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety for reasons that included the
following: (1) Both the spare tire size indicated on the placard and
the spare tire size installed on the vehicles meet the FMVSS No. 110
loading requirements when inflated to the pressure indicated on the
placard; and (2) other than the vehicle placard error, the vehicles
comply with all other safety performance requirements of FMVSS No. 110.
These reasons also apply to the subject Toyota C-HR front and rear
tires.
Toyota concludes 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 vehicles that Toyota no
longer controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance
existed. However, any decision on this petition does not relieve
vehicle distributors and dealers of the prohibitions on the sale, offer
for sale, or introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate
commerce of the noncompliant vehicles under their control after Toyota
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. 2021-08456 Filed 4-22-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P