Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Notices 14323 

V. Summary of Volkswagen’s Petition 

The following views and arguments 

presented in this section, ‘‘V. Summary 

of Volkswagen’s Petition,’’ are the views 

and arguments provided by 

Volkswagen. They have not been 

evaluated by the Agency and do not 

reflect the views of the Agency. 

Volkswagen describes the subject 

noncompliance and contends that the 

noncompliance is inconsequential as it 

relates to motor vehicle safety. 

Volkswagen says that although the 

owner’s manual does not accurately 

state the duration of time that the 

‘‘Passenger Airbag On’’ light is 

illuminated, Volkswagen claims that the 

light ‘‘is neither required nor regulated’’ 

by FMVSS No. 208. Volkswagen 

contends that although the light does 

not remain illuminated, the ‘‘system 

itself is switched on, is ready to 

function, and is otherwise accurately 

described within the owner’s manual.’’ 

Volkswagen explains that the owner’s 

manual for the subject vehicles 

‘‘provides an explanation of how the 

system’s components function together, 

as well as how the ‘‘Passenger Airbag 

Off’’ light functions,’’ as required by 

FMVSS No. 208. Volkswagen further 

explains that the owner’s manual also 

provides ‘‘a presentation and 

explanation of the main components of 

the advanced passenger air bag system, 

an explanation of how the components 

function, and the basic requirements for 

proper operations, among other 

important relevant safety information.’’ 

Volkswagen notes that it has corrected 

the noncompliance for vehicles still in 

its control by adding a supplemental 

page with the accurate information into 

the owner’s manual. 

Volkswagen states that it is aware of 

one customer inquiry related to the 

subject noncompliance which has been 

resolved but is not aware of any 

accidents or injuries that have occurred 

as a result of the subject noncompliance. 

Volkswagen concludes by stating its 

belief that the subject noncompliance is 

inconsequential as it relates to motor 

vehicle safety and 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 Volkswagen 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 Volkswagen 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. 2022–05306 Filed 3–11–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2020–0083; Notice 1] 

Cooper Tire & Rubber Company, 

Receipt of Petition for Decision of 

Inconsequential Noncompliance 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Receipt of petition. 

SUMMARY: Cooper Tire & Rubber 

Company (Cooper Tire) has determined 

that certain Cooper Discoverer AT3 

tubeless radial light truck tires do not 

fully comply with Federal Motor 

Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 

139, New Pneumatic Radial Tires for 

Light Vehicles. Cooper Tire filed a 

noncompliance report dated July 6, 

2020. Cooper subsequently petitioned 

NHTSA on July 31, 2020, and 

supplemented its petition on May 28, 

2021, for a decision that the subject 

noncompliance is inconsequential as it 

relates to motor vehicle safety. This 

notice announces receipt of Cooper 

Tire’s petition. 

DATES: Send comments on or before 

April 13, 2022. 

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). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
14324 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Notices 

1See NHSTA’s ‘‘Safety in Numbers,’’ June 2013, 

Volume 1, Issue 3, available at https://

www.nhtsa.gov/nhtsa/Safety1nNum3ers/june2013/ 

9719_images/9719_S1N_Tires_Nwsltr_June13_

062713_v4_tag.pdf. 

2See Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc.; Grant of 

Application for Decision of Inconsequential 

Noncompliance, 64 FR 29080 (May 28, 1999); see 

also Cooper Tire & Rubber Company, Grant of 

Application for Decision of Inconsequential 

Noncompliance, 68 FR 16115 (April 2, 2003) 

(same). 

3See Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc., Grant of 

Application, 66 FR 45076 (Aug. 27, 2001). 

I. Overview 

Cooper Tire has determined that 

certain Cooper Discoverer AT3 tubeless 

radial light truck tires do not fully 

comply with the requirements of 

paragraph S.5.5.1 of FMVSS No. 139, 

New Pneumatic Radial Tires for Light 

Vehicles (49 CFR 571.139). Cooper Tire 

filed a noncompliance report dated July 

6, 2020, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, 

Defect and Noncompliance 

Responsibility and Reports. Cooper Tire 

subsequently petitioned NHTSA on July 

31, 2020, and supplemented its petition 

on May 28, 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 Cooper Tire’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 

Approximately 271 Cooper Discoverer 

AT3 tubeless radial light truck tires, size 

LT 245/75R16, manufactured between 

May 3, 2020, and May 31, 2020, are 

potentially involved. 

III. Noncompliance 

Cooper Tire explains that the 

noncompliance is that the subject tires 

were manufactured having additional 

characters representing the press 

location inserted into the tire 

identification number (TIN) and 

therefore, do not meet the requirements 

of paragraph S5.5.1 of FMVSS No. 139. 

Specifically, the additional grouping of 

characters representing the press 

location are insterted before the date 

code. The subject tires were 

manufactured with ‘‘UT 11 1M1 V02R 

1820,’’ when they should have been 

manufactured with ‘‘UT 11 1M1 1820,’’ 

followed by V02R. 

IV. Rule Requirements 

Paragraph S5.5.1(b) of FMVSS No. 

139 includes the requirements relevant 

to this petition for tires having an 

intended outboard sidewall. Each tire 

must be labeled with the tire 

identification number required by 49 

CFR part 574 on the intended outboard 

sidewall of the tire. Either the tire 

identification number or a partial tire 

identification number, containing all 

characters in the tire identification 

number, except for the date code and, at 

the discretion of the manufacturer, any 

optional code, must be labeled on the 

other sidewall of the tire. 

V. Summary of Cooper Tire’s Petition 

The following views and arguments 

presented in this section, ‘‘V. Summary 

of Cooper Tire’s Petition,’’ are the views 

and arguments provided by Cooper Tire. 

They have not been evaluated by the 

Agency and do not reflect the views of 

the Agency. Cooper Tire described the 

subject noncompliance and stated their 

belief that the noncompliance is 

inconsequential as it relates to motor 

vehicle safety. 

In support of its petition, Cooper Tire 

submitted the following reasoning: 

1. Cooper Tire says that while the 271 tires 

in the subject population contain an 

additional grouping of letters/numbers before 

the required date code on the intended 

outboard sidewall, these tires are in all other 

respects properly labeled and meet all 

performance requirements under the 

FMVSSs. The additional press location 

grouping has no bearing on the performance 

or operation of the tires and does not create 

a safety concern to either the operator of the 

vehicle on which the tires are mounted, or 

the safety of personnel in the tire repair, 

retread, and recycling industry. 

2. Tires produced by manufacturers that 

continue to use two-digit plant codes 

(available through 2025) can have TINs that 

vary in length depending on the use of the 

optional brand name owner code. The 

addition of the press location (V02R), while 

incorrectly placed on the tire, will not cause 

confusion for the consumer or dealer that is 

selecting and mounting the tire. Consumers/ 

dealers will continue to see the date code 

appear at the end of the series of letters and 

numbers that begin with ‘‘DOT.’’ NHTSA’s 

guidance states that ‘‘the last four digits of 

the TIN show the week and year of 

manufacture.’’ 1 That guidance is still 

accurate here. Consumers and dealers will be 

able to easily identify the date of 

manufacture (week/year). 

3. Tire registration and traceability will not 

be interrupted. Cooper Tire’s internally 

controlled online registration system has 

been modified to be able to accept the TINs 

with the additional press location grouping. 

Any tires registered with that TIN will be 

identified and recorded properly. This will 

ensure that Cooper Tire is able to identify 

these tires in the event they must be recalled. 

4. Cooper states that NHTSA has granted 

a number of previous inconsequentiality 

petitions relating to out-of-order or 

mislabeled TINs, provided that the 

mislabeling does not affect the 

manufacturer’s ability to identify the tires. 

‘‘The purpose of the date code is to identify 

a tire so that, if necessary, the appropriate 

action can be taken in the interest of public 

safety-such as, a safety recall notice.’’ 2

Accordingly, Cooper states that NHTSA has 

explained in multiple instances that ‘‘[t]he 

Agency believes that the true measure of 

inconsequentiality to motor vehicle safety in 

this case is the effect of the noncompliance 

on the ability of the tire manufacturer to 

identify the tires in the event of recall.’’ 3

5. As a result, Cooper states that NHTSA 

has granted petitions and found that TIN 

noncompliance is inconsequential to safety 

in cases where the TIN is out of sequence or 

mislabeled. Cooper cited the following 

examples: 

a. Bridgestone Firestone North America 

Tire, LLC, Grant of Petition, 71 FR 4396, 

January 26, 2006, (granting petition where 

date code was missing because manufacturer 

could still identify and recall the tires). 

b. Cooper Tire & Rubber Company, Grant 

of Application, 68 FR 16115, April 2, 2003, 

(granting petition where tires were labeled 

with wrong plant code, because ‘‘’the tires 

have a unique DOT identification’’). 

c. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc., Grant of 

Application for Decision That 

Noncompliance Is Inconsequential to Motor 

Vehicle Safety, 66 FR 45076, August 27, 

2001, (granting petition where the date code 

was labeled incorrectly, because ‘‘the 

information included on the tire 

identification label and the manufacturer’s 

tire production records is sufficient to ensure 

that these tires can be identified in the event 

of a recall’’). 

d. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc.; Grant of 

Application for Decision of Inconsequntial 

Noncompliance, 64 FR 29080, May 28, 1999, 

(granting petition where the wrong year was 

marked in date code on the tires). 

e. Cooper Tire & Rubber Company; Grant 

of Application for Decision of 

Inconsequential Noncompliance, 63 FR 

29059, May 27, 1998, (granting petition 

where date code was missing where tires had 

a unique TIN for recall purposes). 

f. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc.; Grant of 

Application for Decision of Inconsequential 

Noncompliance, 60 FR 57617, Nov. 16, 1995, 

(granting petition where date code was out of 

sequence). 

g. Uniroyal Goodrich Tire Company; Grant 

of Petition for Determination of 

Inconsequential Noncompliance, 59 FR 

64232, December 13, 1994, (granting petition 

where week and year were mislabeled on 

tires). 

6. Cooper will be able identify the tires that 

are the subject of this petition in the event 

of recall. As described above, these tires will 

have a unique DOT identifier that will allow 

for Cooper to identify and recall them in the 

event that any issues arise in the future. 

7. Cooper Tire states that it has taken steps 

over the last few years to add additional 

checks in its processes to prevent TIN errors. 

Cooper tire is undertaking additional process 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Notices 14325 

reviews at this time including measures such 

as color coding portions of the mold, 

makding software changes to remove manual 

data entry, and adding additional visual 

quality checks of the molds when 

information is changed. Cooper Tire is also 

reviewing its inspection processes to ensure 

that any errors are identified earlier and/or 

prevented before they occur. 

Cooper Tire concluded by expressing 

the belief that the subject 

noncompliances are inconsequential as 

they relate 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 tires that Cooper Tire 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 buses under their 

control after Cooper Tire 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. 2022–05305 Filed 3–11–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2019–0008; Notice 2] 

Daimler Trucks North America, Grant 

of Petition for Decision of 

Inconsequential Noncompliance 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Grant of petition. 

SUMMARY: Daimler Trucks North 

America (DTNA) has determined that 

certain model year (MY) 2017–2019 

Freightliner Cascadia motor vehicles do 

not fully comply with Federal Motor 

Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 

108, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and 

Associated Equipment. DTNA filed a 

noncompliance report dated January 16, 

2019. DTNA subsequently petitioned 

NHTSA on February 8, 2019, for a 

decision that the subject noncompliance 

is inconsequential as it relates to motor 

vehicle safety. This document 

announces the grant of DTNA’s petition. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Leroy Angeles, Office of Vehicle Safety 

Compliance, the National Highway 

Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

telephone (202) 366–5304, leroy.angles@

dot.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Overview 

DTNA has determined that certain 

MY 2017–2019 Freightliner Cascadia 

motor vehicles do not fully comply with 

paragraph S6.2.1 of FMVSS No. 108, 

Lamps, Reflective Devices, and 

Associated Equipment (49 CFR 

571.108). DTNA filed a noncompliance 

report dated January 16, 2019, pursuant 

to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and 

Noncompliance Responsibility and 

Reports. DTNA subsequently petitioned 

NHTSA on February 8, 2019, 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. 

Notice of receipt of DTNA’s petition 

was published with a 30-day public 

comment period, on February 27, 2020, 

in the Federal Register (85 FR 11450). 

No comments were received. To view 

the petition and all supporting 

documents log onto the Federal Docket 

Management System (FDMS) website at 

https://www.regulations.gov/. Then 

follow the online search instructions to 

locate docket number ‘‘NHTSA–2019– 

0008.’’ 

II. Trucks Involved 

Approximately 74,675 MY 2017–2019 

Freightliner Cascadia motor vehicles, 

manufactured between May 3, 2016, and 

December 17, 2018, are potentially 

involved. 

III. Noncompliance 

DTNA described the noncompliance 

as automatic illumination of the stop 

lamps when the low air pressure 

warning indicator light illuminates. 

Since low air pressure does not 

necessarily activate the brakes or result 

in braking without driver intervention, 

this activation of the stop lamps does 

not meet the requirements of S6.2.1 of 

FMVSS No. 108. 

IV. Rule Requirements 

Paragraph S6.2.1 of FMVSS No. 108 

includes the requirements relevant to 

this petition. No additional lamp, 

reflective device, or other motor vehicle 

equipment is permitted to be installed 

that impairs the effectiveness of lighting 

equipment required by FMVSS No. 108. 

V. Summary of DTNA’s Petition 

The following views and arguments 

presented in this section, ‘‘V. Summary 

of DTNA’s Petition,’’ are the views and 

arguments provided by DTNA. 

DTNA described the subject 

noncompliance and stated its belief that 

the noncompliance is inconsequential 

as it relates to motor vehicle safety. 

DTNA submitted the following 

background information on how their 

air brake system affects the stop lamps: 

DTNA’s air brake system is comprised 

of two brake systems, primary and 

secondary. The primary system controls 

the service brakes on the drive axles, 

and the secondary system controls the 

service brakes on the steer axle, in 

which the higher pressure of these two 

controls the trailer service brakes. These 

two systems are isolated from each other 

so that if there is an air loss in one 

system, the other system will still be 

functional to control the vehicle service 

brakes. When either one of the systems 

drops below 70 psi, the low air warning 

indicator light on the dash turns ON and 

the stop lamps illuminate. However, if 

this occurs, it does not mean that the 

drive axle parking brakes being applied, 

since the other brake system may still be 

functional and keeping the brake from 

applying. In such a situation, the air that 

holds off the drive axle parking brakes 

would be the higher pressure of either 

primary or secondary air brake. In other 

words, if the primary air brake pressure 

falls below 70 psi, the indicator light 

and stop lamps illuminate, but the 

parking brakes do not start to drag since 

the secondary air (presumably 

unaffected) remains high and holds off 

the parking springs. In the same 

manner, the trailer parking brakes are 

held off by the higher of either primary 

or secondary air brake system. Only 

when both air systems drop below about 

70 psi will the trailer parking brakes 

begin to apply. 

DTNA submitted the following views 

and arguments in support of the 

petition: 

1. The normal operating air pressure 

of the vehicle is between 110 and 130 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1