Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 168 / Thursday, September 2, 2021 / Notices 49411 

subjects any other crewmember 

responsible to individual liability 

proceedings, including disqualification 

and/or civil penalties. See 49 CFR 

240.117(e)(5), 240.305(a)(5), and 

242.403(b) and (e)(5). 

(2) Immediately conduct a complete 

audit of the PTC onboard design of all 

locomotives and cab cars equipped with 

PTC to determine how the onboard PTC 

equipment is integrated into each 

railroad’s locomotive and cab car’s 

braking system, to ascertain what 

percentage of the locomotive and cab 

car fleet is subject to the interface design 

issue described above; 

(3) Within ten (10) days of the 

publication of this Safety Advisory, 

provide FRA, via the SIR site, with a 

report of the number and type of 

locomotives and cab cars that have this 

interface design issue; 

(4) Upon completion of item (2) 

above, determine the mitigating 

measures and/or corrective actions 

necessary to address the safety risk 

presented by the design issue, and 

provide FRA, via the SIR site, with a 

report documenting the planned 

measures and/or actions, including a 

schedule for completion; and 

(5) Immediately commence 

implementation of the planned 

measures and/or actions to address the 

safety risk presented by the design issue 

per the documented schedule, and 

provide FRA, via the SIR site, 

confirmation of completion. 

Issued in Washington, DC. 

John Karl Alexy, 

Associate Administrator for Railroad Safety, 

Chief Safety Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2021–18997 Filed 9–1–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2019–0132; Notice 2] 

Hankook Tire America Corporation, 

Grant of Petition for Decision of 

Inconsequential Noncompliance 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Grant of petition. 

SUMMARY: Hankook Tire America 

Corporation (Hankook) has determined 

that certain Hankook Ventus V2 

Concept 2 tires manufactured by 

Hankook’s indirect subsidiary, Hankook 

Tire Manufacturing Tennessee, LP, do 

not fully comply with Federal Motor 

Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 

139, New Pneumatic Radial Tires for 

Light Vehicles. Hankook filed a 

noncompliance report dated November 

19, 2019, and subsequently petitioned 

NHTSA on December 5, 2019, for a 

decision that the subject noncompliance 

is inconsequential as it relates to motor 

vehicle safety. This notice announces 

and explains the grant of Hankook’s 

petition. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Abraham Diaz, Office of Vehicle Safety 

Compliance, the National Highway 

Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

telephone (202) 366–5310, facsimile 

(202) 366–3081. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Overview: Hankook has determined 

that certain Hankook Ventus V2 

Concept 2 tires, do not fully comply 

with paragraph S5.5.1(b) of FMVSS No. 

139, New Pneumatic Radial Tires for 

Light Vehicles (49 CFR 571.139). 

Hankook filed a noncompliance 

report dated November 19, 2019, 

pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and 

Noncompliance Responsibility and 

Reports, and subsequently petitioned 

NHTSA on December 5, 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 Hankook’s 

petition was published with a 30-day 

public comment period, on April 17, 

2020, in the Federal Register (85 FR 

21504). 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/, and then 

follow the online search instructions to 

locate docket number ‘‘NHTSA–2019– 

0132.’’ 

II. Tires Involved: Approximately 467 

Hankook Ventus V2 Concept 2 tires, size 

235/45R17V XL H457, manufactured 

between October 7, 2019, and October 

12, 2019, are potentially involved. 

III. Noncompliance: Hankook 

explains that the noncompliance is due 

to a mold error in which the subject 

tires, were marked with the date-code in 

the Tire Identification Number (TIN) 

inverted and; therefore, they do not 

meet the requirements of paragraph 

S5.5.1(b) of FMVSS No. 139. 

Specifically, the date code was printed 

upside down. 

IV. Rule Requirements: Paragraph 

S5.5.1(b) of FMVSS No. 139 includes 

the requirements relevant to the 

petition. Each tire must be labeled with 

the TIN required by 49 CFR part 574.5 

on the intended outboard sidewall of 

the tire. Except for retreaded tires, if a 

tire does not have an intended outboard 

sidewall, the tire must be labeled with 

the TIN required by 49 CFR part 574.5 

on one sidewall and with either the TIN 

or a partial TIN, containing all 

characters in the TIN except for the date 

code and, at the discretion of the 

manufacturer, any optional code, on the 

other sidewall. Each tire must be 

marked on each sidewall with the TIN 

required by 49 CFR part 574.5 as listed 

in the documents and publications 

specified in paragraph (b) TIN content 

requirement. 

V. Summary of Hankook’s Petition: 

Hankook describes the subject 

noncompliance and contends that the 

noncompliance is inconsequential as it 

relates to motor vehicle safety. In 

support of its petition, Hankook offers 

the following reasoning: 

1. The purpose of the labeling 

requirements in Part 574 is to ‘‘facilitate 

notification to purchasers of defective or 

nonconforming tires.’’ See Part 574.2. 

The date code portion of the TIN is 

required so that purchasers can identify 

the week and year of the tire’s 

manufacture in the event the tire is 

subject to a safety recall. 

2. The date-code characters reflect the 

correct week and year of the tires’ 

manufacture, but the date code is 

technically out of compliance because 

the characters are inverted. Despite the 

inversion, the date code meets the 

character height requirements of Part 

574 and is readily identifiable, 

permitting tire owners to easily 

determine the week and year of 

manufacture. 

3. NHTSA has previously granted a 

petition for inconsequential 

noncompliance for a similar issue. In 

granting a petition from Cooper Tire & 

Rubber Company, 81 FR 43708 (July 5, 

2016), the Agency explained: 

The Agency believes that in the case 

of a tire labeling noncompliance, one 

measure of its inconsequentiality to 

motor vehicle safety is whether the 

mislabeling would affect the 

manufacturer’s or consumer’s ability to 

identify the mislabeled tires properly, 

should the tires be recalled for 

performance-related noncompliance. In 

this case, the nature of the labeling error 

does not prevent the correct 

identification of the affected tires. 49 

CFR 574.5 requires the date code 

portion of the tire identification number 

to be placed in the last or correct 

position. In Cooper’s case, it is in the 

right-most position, however, the 

manufacture date code is upside down. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
49412 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 168 / Thursday, September 2, 2021 / Notices 

1Cf. Gen. Motors Corporation; Ruling on Petition 

for Determination of Inconsequential 

Noncompliance, 69 FR 19897, 19899 (Apr. 14, 

2004) (citing prior cases where noncompliance was 

expected to be imperceptible, or nearly so, to 

vehicle occupants or approaching drivers). 

2See Gen. Motors, LLC; Grant of Petition for 

Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 78 FR 

35355 (June 12, 2013) (finding noncompliance had 

no effect on occupant safety because it had no effect 

on the proper operation of the occupant 

classification system and the correct deployment of 

an air bag); Osram Sylvania Prods. Inc.; Grant of 

Petition for Decision of Inconsequential 

Noncompliance, 78 FR 46000 (July 30, 2013) 

(finding occupant using noncompliant light source 

would not be exposed to significantly greater risk 

than occupant using similar compliant light 

source). 

3 Morgan 3 Wheeler Limited; Denial of Petition for 

Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 81 FR 

21663, 21666 (Apr. 12, 2016). 

4United States v. Gen. Motors Corp., 565 F.2d 

754, 759 (D.C. Cir. 1977) (finding defect poses an 

unreasonable risk when it ‘‘results in hazards as 

potentially dangerous as sudden engine fire, and 

where there is no dispute that at least some such 

hazards, in this case fires, can definitely be 

expected to occur in the future’’). 

5See Mercedes-Benz, U.S.A., L.L.C.; Denial of 

Application for Decision of Inconsequential 

Noncompliance, 66 FR 38342 (July 23, 2001) 

(rejecting argument that noncompliance was 

inconsequential because of the small number of 

vehicles affected); Aston Martin Lagonda Ltd.; 

Denial of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential 

Noncompliance, 81 FR 41370 (June 24, 2016) 

(noting that situations involving individuals 

trapped in motor vehicles—while infrequent—are 

consequential to safety); Morgan 3 Wheeler Ltd.; 

Denial of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential 

Noncompliance, 81 FR 21663, 21664 (Apr. 12, 

2016) (rejecting argument that petition should be 

granted because the vehicle was produced in very 

low numbers and likely to be operated on a limited 

basis). 

6See Gen. Motors Corp.; Ruling on Petition for 

Determination of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 

69 FR 19897, 19900 (Apr. 14, 2004); Cosco Inc.; 

Denial of Application for Decision of 

Inconsequential Noncompliance, 64 FR 29408, 

29409 (June 1, 1999). 

Because the label is located on the tire 

sidewall, it is not likely to be 

misidentified. A reader will be able to 

read the date code, by spinning the tire, 

and therefore inverting the date code 

will allow it to easily be read. 

The petitioner argues that, as with the 

Cooper tires, the date code on the 

subject tires is located on the sidewall, 

is not likely to be misidentified, and a 

reader will be able to read and 

understand the date code. Hankook 

communicated in an email to the agency 

on November 19, 2020, that a partial 

TIN is labeled on at least one sidewall 

of the tire. The subject tires otherwise 

meet the marking and performance 

requirements of FMVSS No. 139. 

4. Hankook is not aware of any 

complaints, claims, or incidents related 

to the subject noncompliance. 

Hankook 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. 

VI. NHTSA’s Analysis: In evaluating 

this tire labeling noncompliance issue, 

NHTSA considered if the incorrectly 

marked date code could mislead a 

consumer about the actual age of the tire 

or make it difficult to correctly 

determine if the tire has been recalled. 

The burden of establishing the 

inconsequentiality of a failure to comply 

with a performance requirement in a 

standard—as opposed to a labeling 

requirement with no performance 

implications—is more substantial and 

difficult to meet. Accordingly, the 

Agency has not found many such 

performance-related noncompliances 

inconsequential.1 Potential performance 

failures of safety-critical equipment, like 

seat belts or air bags, are rarely deemed 

inconsequential. 

An important issue to consider in 

determining inconsequentiality is the 

safety risk to individuals who 

experience the type of event against 

which the recall would otherwise 

protect.2 In general, NHTSA does not 

consider the absence of complaints or 

injuries to show that the issue is 

inconsequential to safety. ‘‘Most 

importantly, the absence of a complaint 

does not mean there have not been any 

safety issues, nor does it mean that there 

will not be safety issues in the future.’’ 3

‘‘[T]he fact that in past reported cases 

good luck and swift reaction have 

prevented many serious injuries does 

not mean that good luck will continue 

to work.’’ 4

Arguments that only a small number 

of vehicles or items of motor vehicle 

equipment are affected have also not 

justified granting an inconsequentiality 

petition.5 Similarly, NHTSA has 

rejected petitions based on the assertion 

that only a small percentage of vehicles 

or items of equipment are likely to 

actually exhibit a noncompliance. The 

percentage of potential occupants that 

could be adversely affected by a 

noncompliance does not determine the 

question of inconsequentiality. Rather, 

the issue to consider is the consequence 

to an occupant who is exposed to the 

consequence of that noncompliance.6

These considerations are also relevant 

when considering whether a defect is 

inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. 

In the instant case, the date code 

required by FMVSS No. 139 is properly 

located in the right-most position and 

shows the correct week and year of 

manufacture but has been imprinted 

upside-down, and the upside-down font 

cannot be confused with right-side up 

font. If a consumer reads the label as it 

is, the fact that the date code is inverted 

would become self-evident. In such a 

case, it would not be difficult to rotate 

the tire to a position where the code 

could be read and deciphered. The tire’s 

age would then be available as needed 

and the tire could also be identified if 

recalled. 

VII. NHTSA’s Decision: In 

consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA 

finds that Hankook has met its burden 

of persuasion that the subject FMVSS 

No. 139 noncompliance is 

inconsequential as it relates to motor 

vehicle safety. Accordingly, Hankook’s 

petition is hereby granted, and Hankook 

is exempted from the obligation of 

providing notification of, and a remedy 

for, the 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 Hankook no longer controlled at the 

time it determined that the 

noncompliance existed. However, the 

granting of this petition does not relieve 

tire 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 Hankook 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. 2021–18953 Filed 9–1–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS 

AFFAIRS 

[OMB Control No. 2900–0219] 

Agency Information Collection Activity 

Under OMB Review: CHAMPVA 

Benefits—Application, Claim, Other 

Health Insurance, Potential Liability & 

Miscellaneous Expenses 

AGENCY: Veterans Health 

Administration, Department of Veterans 

Affairs. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1