[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 233 (Tuesday, December 6, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-29884]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: December 6, 1994]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. 94-66; Notice 2]

 

Cooper Tire and Rubber Company; Grant of Petition for 
Determination of Inconsequential Noncompliance

    The Cooper Tire and Rubber Company (Cooper) of Findlay, Ohio, 
determined that some of its tires failed to comply with 49 CFR 571.109, 
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 109, ``New Pneumatic 
Tires,'' and filed an appropriate report pursuant to 49 CFR Part 573, 
``Defect and Noncompliance Reports.'' Cooper also petitioned to be 
exempted from the notification and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. 
Chapter 301--Motor Vehicle Safety'' on the basis that the noncompliance 
is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
    Notice of receipt of the petition was published on July 29, 1994, 
and an opportunity was afforded for comment (59 FR 38659). This notice 
grants the petition.
    Paragraph S4.3(a) of FMVSS No. 109 specifies that each tire be 
labeled with ``[o]ne size designation, except that equivalent inch and 
metric size designations may be used.''
    During the periods of the 8th week through the 18th week of 1994, 
Cooper produced 8,097 175/70R13, Cooper Sport 1000 Metric GT, 
polyester/steel belted, tubeless, black sidewall, radial tires with 
incorrect size designations. These tires were incorrectly stamped near 
the beads with a designation of 175/75R13 in characters 0.156 inch in 
height, whereas they should have been stamped 175/70R13. However, the 
tires are correctly labeled with 175/70R13, in characters 0.400 inch 
high, on the mid-sidewall area. Cooper has recovered 1,281 of these 
tires to correct them prior to sale. At the time it petitioned the 
agency, 6,816 remained unaccounted for.
    Cooper supported its petition for inconsequential noncompliance 
with the following, and also provided mold stamp drawings which show 
the two areas on each side of the subject tires where the size is 
molded into them.
    The tires in question are incorrectly stamped on both sides, in the 
area of the sidewall closest to the bead, with the designation 175/
75R13. The tires are correctly stamped on both sides in the mid-
sidewall of the tire with the correct designation 175/70R13 in 
characters 0.400 inch in height. In addition, each tire contains an 
adhesive paper tread label which is attached to the tread area of each 
tire indicating the correct size of 175/70R13.
    The mislabel on each tire is incorrect only as to the aspect ratio 
(or series), that is 75, of the tire. The cross section width of 175, 
the designation of radial, and the rim diameter of 13 are all correct. 
Also the maximum load and inflation stampings on both sidewalls of each 
tire are correct for a 175/70R13 tire.
    Further, a 175/75R13 [tire] has never been produced by Cooper, has 
never been standardized by the Tire and Rim Association, and to the 
best of [Cooper's] knowledge, has never been produced by anyone, 
therefore, the possibility of misapplication does not exist.
    The tires produced from this mold during the aforementioned time 
period comply with all other requirements of 49 CFR 571.
    No comments were received on the petition.
    The mislabeled aspect ratio does not affect the ability of the tire 
to be identified in the event of a recall. It has no effect upon the 
performance of the tire. The correct aspect ratio appears elsewhere on 
the tire, on both sides, and in larger characters. This minimizes the 
presence of the noncompliance. Moreover, there has never been a 175/
7513 tire standardized by the Tire and Rim Association, nor has Cooper 
produced one. Therefore, there is no possibility of misapplication.
    In consideration of the foregoing, the Administrator has decided 
that Cooper has met its burden of persuasion and that the noncompliance 
with FMVSS No. 109 herein described is inconsequential to motor vehicle 
safety. Accordingly, the Administrator exempts Cooper from the 
notification requirements of 49 U.S.C. 30118 and the remedy 
requirements of 49 U.S.C. 30120.

(49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120; delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.50, 
501.8).

    Issued on: November 30, 1994.
Barry Felrice,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 94-29884 Filed 12-5-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P