Document ID: NHTSA-2012-0025-0004
Agency: nhtsa
Document Type: Notice
Title: Petitions for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance: Bridgestone Americas Tire Operations, LLC
Posted Date: 2013-06-12T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 113 (Wednesday, June 12, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35357-35358]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-13924]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2012-0025; Notice 2]

Bridgestone Americas Tire Operations, LLC, Grant of Petition for 
Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Grant of Petition.

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

SUMMARY: Bridgestone Americas Tire Operations, LLC (Bridgestone) \1\, 
has determined that certain Firestone Transforce AT, size LT265/70R17, 
light truck replacement tires manufactured between November 20, 2011 
and December 10, 2011, do not fully comply with paragraph Sec.  5.5(d) 
of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 139, New Pneumatic 
Radial Tires for Light Vehicles. Bridgestone has filed an appropriate 
report pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance 
Responsibility and Reports, dated January 9, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Bridgestone Americas Tire Operations, LLC is a Delaware 
corporation that manufactures and imports replacement equipment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and the rule 
implementing those provisions at 49 CFR part 556, Bridgestone 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. Notice of 
receipt of the petition was published, with a 30-day public comment 
period, on April 4, 2012 in the Federal Register (77 FR 20482). No 
comments were received. To view the petition and all supporting 
documents log onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Web site 
at: http://www.regulations.gov/. Then follow the online search 
instructions to locate docket number ``NHTSA-2012-0025.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information on this 
decision contact Mr. Jack Chern, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, 
the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone 
(202) 366-0661, facsimile (202) 366-7002.
    Tires Involved: Affected are approximately 467 Firestone brand 
Transforce AT, size LT265/70R17, light truck replacement tires 
manufactured between November 20, 2011 and December 10, 2011, at the 
Bridgestone Canada, Inc., plant located in Uoliette, Quebec, Canada and 
imported into the United States by Bridgestone.
    Summary of Bridgstone's Analysis and Arguments: Bridgestone 
explains that the noncompliance is that the sidewall marking on the 
intended outboard sidewall of the subject tires describes the maximum 
load in kilograms incorrectly. Specifically, the tires in question were 
inadvertently marked with a maximum load of 1350 kg. The labeling 
should have read 1320 kg.
    Bridgestone stated its belief that the subject noncompliance is

[[Page 35358]]

inconsequential to motor vehicle safety for the following reasons:
    1. While the noncompliant tires are mislabeled; the tires do in 
fact have the correct marking for the maximum load in pounds on the 
intended outboard sidewall, and the maximum load marking in both pounds 
and kg is correct on the intended inboard sidewall. The tires also meet 
or exceed all other applicable FMVSS.
    2. The subject mismarking is inconsequential as it relates to motor 
vehicle safety and is unlikely to have an adverse impact on motor 
vehicle safety since the actual performance of the subject tires will 
not be affected by the mismarking. Bridgestone supports this belief by 
stating that the tires met the performance requirements of FMVSS No. 
139 for endurance and high speed when tested at the 1350 kg load.
    Bridgestone also points out its belief that NHTSA has previously 
granted similar petitions for non-compliances in sidewall marking.
    Bridgestone has additionally informed NHTSA that it has corrected 
the noncompliance so that all future production tires will comply with 
FMVSS No. 139.
    In summation, Bridgestone believes that the described noncompliance 
of its tires to meet the requirements of FMVSS No. 139 is 
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety, and that its petition, to 
exempt from providing recall notification of noncompliance as required 
by 49 U.S.C. 30118 and remedying the recall noncompliance as required 
by 49 U.S.C. 30120 should be granted.

    Requirement Background:

    Sec.  5.5 Tire markings. Except as specified in paragraphs (a) 
through (i) of Sec.  5.5, each tire must be marked on each sidewall 
with the information specified in Sec.  5.5(a) through (d) and on one 
sidewall with the information specified in Sec.  5.5(e) through (i) 
according to the phase-in schedule specified in Sec.  7 of this 
standard. The markings must be placed between the maximum section width 
and the bead on at least one sidewall, unless the maximum section width 
of the tire is located in an area that 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, those markings must 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 must be in 
letters and numerals not less than 0.078 inches high and raised above 
or sunk below the tire surface not less than 0.015 inches* * *

    (d) The maximum load rating and for LT tires, the letter 
designating the tire load range;* * *

    NHTSA'S Analysis and Decision: NHTSA believes the true measure of 
inconsequentiality with respect to the noncompliance with FMVSS No. 139 
paragraph Sec.  5.5(d), is whether a consumer and/or retailer who 
relied on the incorrect information could experience a safety problem.
    In the case of this noncompliance, the subject tires are primarily 
sold in the domestic replacement market, where the load in pounds would 
be the predominant consumer unit of measurement. Thus, making the rated 
maximum load value marked in English units and overstated in metric 
unit's inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
    NHTSA has conducted a series of focus groups as required by the 
TREAD Act, to examine consumer perceptions and understanding of tire 
labeling. A few of the focus group participants had knowledge of tire 
labeling beyond the tire brand name, tire size, and tire pressure. 
Since FMVSS No. 139 applies to tires sold in the U.S., and since 
consumers in the U.S. overwhelmingly rely on units of English measure 
for loading information, the safety issue associated with overloading 
tires as a result of the noncompliance is very small.
    NHTSA has reviewed and accepts Bridgestone's analyses that the 
noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Bridgestone 
has provided sufficient documentation that the sidewall mismarkings do 
comply with all other safety performance requirements of the standard, 
except the sidewall mismarking.
    In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has determined that 
Bridgestone has met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 
139 sidewall marking noncompliance in the tires identified in 
Bridgestone's Noncompliance Information Report is inconsequential to 
motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Bridgestone's petition is granted 
and Bridgestone is exempted from the obligation of providing 
notification of, and a remedy for, that 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 approximately 467 tires that Bridgestone no longer 
controlled at the time that it determined that a noncompliance existed 
in the subject tires. 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 
Bridgestone 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.

    Issued On: June 5, 2013.
Claude H. Harris,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2013-13924 Filed 6-11-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P