[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 166 (Wednesday, August 27, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45474-45475]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-22796]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. 97-28, Notice 2]


Cooper Tire & Rubber Co.; Grant of Application for Decision of 
Inconsequential Noncompliance

    Cooper Tire & Rubber Company (Cooper) has determined that some of 
its tires fail to comply with the labeling requirements of 49 CFR 
571.119, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 119, ``New 
Pneumatic Tires for Vehicles Other Than Passenger Cars'' and has filed 
an appropriate report pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, ``Defect and 
Noncompliance Reports.'' Cooper has also applied to be exempted from 
the notification and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301,

[[Page 45475]]

``National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety'' on the basis that the 
noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
    Notice of receipt of the application was published, with a 30-day 
comment period, on April 22, 1997, in the Federal Register (62 FR 
19651). This notice grants the application.
    In FMVSS No. 119, paragraph S6.5(d) specifies that tires be marked 
on each sidewall with the maximum load rating and corresponding 
inflation pressure of the tire, and paragraph S6.5(j) specifies that 
each tire be marked with the letter designating the tire load range.
    During the forty-seventh and forty-eighth production weeks of 1996, 
Cooper manufactured 553 tires with the incorrect load and inflation 
label on the serial side. The tires were the Dean Wildcat Radial (LT 
235/85R16, tubeless, outline white letters, and 10 ply rating). The 
incorrect label reads ``Load Range D Max at 65 PSI.'' The correct 
information should have been ``Load Range E Max at 80 PSI.''
    Cooper supported its application for inconsequential noncompliance 
with the following information:

    The mislabeling on each tire does not present a safety-related 
defect. The involved tires are designed to carry a heavier load 
(load range E at 80 PSI) than the incorrect labeling specified (load 
range D at 65 PSI). Consequently, any misapplication of the tire 
would be for the user to carry a lighter load than the maximum load 
for which the tires are designed.
    The involved tires have the correct load and inflation 
information on the non-serial side which is the side with the 
outline white letters. In addition, each tire had a paper tread 
label affixed to it reflecting the correct load information.
    The involved tires produced from this mold during the production 
periods comply with all other requirements of 49 CFR 571.
    The incorrect load range and inflation information is within the 
design parameters of the tire and would not result in any 
overloading or overinflation of the involved tires.
    The forty-eight (48) tires remaining in Cooper's inventory will 
be re-stamped with the correct load and inflation information.

    NHTSA received no comments on this application during the 30-day 
comment period.
    The primary safety purpose of requiring the load range label on a 
motor vehicle tire is to ensure that the end-users can select a tire 
appropriate for their vehicles. The absence of the vehicle label 
specifying the tire range load would likely result in an improper tire 
selection by the tire dealer or vehicle owner. In this case, Cooper 
understated the load carrying capability of the tire. Similarly, the 
labeled maximum inflation pressure of 65 PSI is lower than the tire's 
designed maximum inflation pressure of 80 PSI. Cooper, in effect, 
produced a better tire than the label would indicate to the end-user. 
The agency agrees with Cooper's rationale that a vehicle equipped with 
the subject tires and loaded per the incorrect maximum load rating 
would not cause an unsafe condition, because the end-user would carry a 
lighter load than the load for which the tires are designed.
    In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that the 
applicant has met its burden of persuasion that the noncompliance it 
describes is inconsequential to safety. Accordingly, its application is 
granted, and the applicant is exempted from providing the notification 
of the noncompliance that is required by 49 U.S.C. 30118, and from 
remedying the noncompliance, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120.

(49 U.S.C. 30118, delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.50 and 501.8)

    Issued on: August 21, 1997.
L. Robert Shelton,
Associate Administrator for Safety Performance Standards.
[FR Doc. 97-22796 Filed 8-26-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-U