Document ID: NHTSA-2010-0063-0002
Agency: nhtsa
Document Type: Rule
Title: Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance: Foreign Tire Sales, Inc.
Posted Date: 2010-06-08T04:00Z

[Federal Register: June 8, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 109)]
[Notices]               
[Page 32536-32538]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr08jn10-170]                         

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2010-0063; Notice 1]

 
Foreign Tire Sales, Inc., Receipt of Petition for Decision of 
Inconsequential Noncompliance

    Foreign Tire Sales, Inc. (FTS) \1\, as importer of record for 
ProMeter brand medium truck radial replacement tires manufactured by 
Shandlong Linglong Rubber Company Limited has determined that certain 
replacement tires manufactured during the period between the 15th week 
of 2008 and 22nd week of 2009 do not fully comply with paragraph 
S6.5(d) of 49 CFR 571.119 Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 
No. 119, New Pneumatic Tires for Motor Vehicles With a GVWR of More 
than 4,536 Kilograms (10,000 pounds) and Motorcycles. FTS has filed an 
appropriate report pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and 
Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Foreign Tire Sales, Inc. is an importer of replacement motor 
vehicle equipment, incorporated under the laws of the State of New 
Jersey, with offices at 2204 Morris Avenue, Suite L-5, Union, New 
Jersey.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) (see implementing rule 
at 49 CFR part 556), FTS has petitioned for an exemption from the 
notification and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the 
basis that this noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle 
safety.
    This notice of receipt of FTS'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.
    Affected are approximately 2,659 size 285/75R-24.5 14 ply (steer 
and drive) and 295/75R-22.5 14 ply (steer and drive) ProMeter brand 
medium truck radial tires manufactured during the period between the 
15th week of 2008 and 22nd week of 2009 with DOT Numbers: 285/75R-
24.5--OU4CFTS1508-0U4CFT2209 and
    295/75R-22.5--OU34FTS1508-0U34FTS2209. FTS stated that it believed 
that 100% of the 2,659 tires involved contained the identified non-
compliance.
    FTS sold these tires to eleven customers who are distributors. 
Three of the eleven distributors have not sold any tires to their 
customers.
    In a supplemental letter dated April 14, 2010, FTS submitted 
corrections of typographical errors in its petition and stated that 
subsequent to submitting its petition it had decided to remedy all of 
the subject tires that it held in its possession as well as those that 
had not been sold by its customers (tire distributers). FTS also 
revised its estimate of the number of affected tires that had been sold 
and not retrieved for remedy as 2000. Therefore, it is only those 2000 
tires for which FTS is requesting exemption because it claims that the 
remaining 659 tires have been remedied.
    Paragraph S6.5(d) of 49 CFR 571.119 (FMVSS 119) requires in 
pertinent part:

    S6.5 Tire markings. Except as specified in this paragraph, each 
tire shall be marked on

[[Page 32537]]

each sidewall with the information specified in paragraphs (a) 
through (j) of this section. The markings shall be placed between 
the maximum section width (exclusive of sidewall decorations or curb 
ribs) and the bead on at least one sidewall, unless the maximum 
section width of the tire is located in an area which is not more 
than one-fourth of the distance from the bead to the shoulder of the 
tire. If the maximum section width falls within that area, the 
markings shall appear between the bead and a point one-half the 
distance from the bead to the shoulder of the tire, on at least one 
sidewall. The markings shall be in letters and numerals not less 
than 2 mm (0.078 inch) high and raised above or sunk below the tire 
surface not less than 0.4 mm (0.015 inch), except that the marking 
depth shall be not less than 0.25 mm (0.010 inch) in the case of 
motorcycle tires. The tire identification and the DOT symbol 
labeling shall comply with part 574 of this chapter. Markings may 
appear on only one sidewall and the entire sidewall area may be used 
in the case of motorcycle tires and recreational, boat, baggage, and 
special trailer tires * * *
    (d) The maximum load rating and corresponding inflation pressure 
of the tire, shown as follows:
    (Mark on tires rated for single and dual load): Max load single 
------kg (------lb) at ------kPa (------psi) cold. Max load dual --
----kg (------lb) at ------kPa (------psi) cold.
    (Mark on tires rated only for single load): Max load ------kg 
(------lb) at ------kPa (------psi) cold.

    FTS describes the noncompliance as its failure to provide accurate 
load and inflation information as required by FMVSS No. 119. The 
maximum load rating and corresponding inflation pressure that are 
erroneously marked on the FTS tires and the correct information for the 
non-conforming tires are as follows:
    295/75R22.5/14 is marked:

Max. Load Single 2800 kg (6175 lbs) at 720 kPa (105 psi) cold.
Max. Load Dual 2650 kg (5840 lbs) at 720 kPa (105 psi) cold.

    295/75R22.5/14 should be marked:

Max. Load Single 2800 kg (6175 lbs) at 760 kPa (110 psi) cold.
Max. Load Dual 2575 kg (5675 lbs) at 760 kPa (110 psi) cold.

    285/75R24.5/14 is marked:

Max. Load Single 3000 kg (6610 lbs) at 720 kPa (105 psi) cold.
Max. Load Dual 2725 kg (6005 lbs) at 720 kPa (105 psi) cold.

    285/75R24.5/14 should be marked:

Max. Load Single 2800 kg (6175 lbs) at 760 kPa (110 psi) cold.
Max. Load Dual 2575 kg (5675 lbs) at 760 kPa (110 psi) cold.

    FTS states that the non-compliance of their tires was brought to 
their attention on June 9, 2009, ``when new molds were ordered and the 
old molds were compared to the new molds.''
    FTS also states that it has advised the manufacturer to hold any 
additional non-conforming tires and to change the inaccurate 
information before exporting them to the United States.
    FTS argues that the inaccurate markings on the tires are 
inconsequential because the difference between the proper load ranges 
and inflation pressures are minimal. FTS bases their conclusion on 
their testing of the subject tires using the inaccurate information 
noted on their tires, and FTS asserts that the tires ``greatly exceed 
all FMVSS testing result requirements.'' Specifically, FTS points out 
that they subjected the tested tires to a modified FMVSS No. 119 
endurance test which they state ``is far more demanding than the 
requirements of FMVSS 119.''
    FTS submitted with their application for exemption from 
notification and recall a copy of the original Chinese and English 
translation of the eight endurance test reports. FTS states that 
``These tests performed using the load inflation information which 
appears on the subject tires clearly indicates that even at the wrong 
inflation pressure, these tires greatly exceed FMVSS 119 and are 
safe.'' FTS additionally states that ``the mislabeling of the tires 
poses absolutely no safety issue since even if a user of the tires 
inflates the tire to the load inflation pressure contained on the side 
wall of the subject tire, we know that the tire greatly exceeds all 
requirements (i.e. the tires ran almost three times longer than 
required by FMVSS 119 at loads increased by 10% every ten hours (nine 
times over 130 hours)).''
    Based on the foregoing, FTS requests that NHTSA deem this issue as 
``incidental mislabeling'' and that it has no bearing on the safety of 
the tires, and that FTS be exempted from providing notification as 
required by 49 U.S.C. 30118 and remedy as required by 49 U.S.C. 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.
    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and 
arguments on this petition. Comments must refer to the docket and 
notice number cited at the beginning of this notice and be submitted by 
any of the following methods:
    a. By mail addressed to: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket 
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
    b. By hand delivery to 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 am to 5 pm except Federal Holidays.
    c. Electronically: by logging onto the Federal Docket Management 
System (FDMS) Web site at http://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the 
online instructions for submitting comments. Comments may also be faxed 
to 1-202-493-2251.
    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 your comments were received, please 
enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard with the comments. Note that 
all comments received will be posted without change to http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.
    Documents submitted to a docket may be viewed by anyone at the 
address and times given above. The documents may also be viewed on the 
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by following the online 
instructions for accessing the dockets. DOT's complete Privacy Act 
Statement is available for review in the Federal Register published on 
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).
    The petition, supporting materials, and all comments received 
before the close of business on the closing date indicated below will 
be filed and will be considered. All comments and supporting materials 
received after the closing date will also be filed and will be 
considered to the extent possible. When the petition is granted or 
denied, notice of the decision will be published in the Federal 
Register pursuant to the authority indicated below.
    Comment closing date: July 8, 2010.

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at 
CFR 1.50 and 501.8.

[[Page 32538]]

    Issued on: June 2, 2010.
Claude H. Harris,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2010-13612 Filed 6-7-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P