[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 227 (Friday, November 28, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54860-54862]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-21527]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2023-0047; Notice 2]


Michelin North America, Inc., Grant of Petition for Decision of 
Inconsequential Noncompliance

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Grant of petition.

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

SUMMARY: Michelin North America, Inc. (MNA) has determined that certain 
Michelin LTX A/T2 tires do not fully comply with Federal Motor Vehicle 
Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 139, New Pneumatic Radial Tires For Light 
Vehicles. MNA filed an original noncompliance report dated April 14, 
2023, and later amended the report on July 3, 2023. MNA subsequently 
petitioned NHTSA (the ``Agency'') on April 17, 2023, and later amended 
the petition on July 6, 2023, for a decision that the subject 
noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety. 
This document announces the grant of MNA's petition.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jayton Lindley, General Engineer, 
NHTSA, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, (325) 655-0547.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    I. Overview: MNA determined that certain Michelin LTX A/T2 tires 
size LT275/65R20 126/123R, do not fully comply with paragraphs S5.5(e) 
and S5.5(f) of FMVSS No. 139, New Pneumatic Radial Tires For Light 
Vehicles (49 CFR 571.139).
    MNA filed an original noncompliance report dated April 14, 2023, 
and later amended the report on July 3, 2023, pursuant to 49 CFR part 
573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. MNA 
petitioned NHTSA on April 17, 2023, and later amended the petition on 
July 6, 2023, 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 MNA's petition was published with a 30-day 
public comment period, on March 26, 2024, in the Federal Register (89 
FR 21170). No comments were received. To view the petition and all 
supporting documents log onto the Federal Docket

[[Page 54861]]

Management System (FDMS) website at https://www.regulations.gov/. Then 
follow the online search instructions to locate docket number ``NHTSA-
2023-0047.''
    II. Tires Involved: Approximately 7,153 Michelin LTX A/T2 tires 
sized LT275/65R20 126/123R Load Range E, manufactured between January 
15, 2023, and February 8, 2023, were reported by the manufacturer.
    III. Noncompliance: MNA explains that the subject tires contain 
incorrect information regarding the general name of cord materials and 
the actual number of plies on the intended outboard sidewall of the 
tires, and therefore, do not fully comply with paragraphs S5.5(e) and 
S5.5(f) of FMVSS No. 139. Specifically, the sidewall of the subject 
tires states ``TREAD PLIES: 2 POLYESTER + 2 STEEL SIDEWALL PLIES: 2 
POLYESTER,'' when they should state ``TREAD PLIES: 2 POLYESTER + 1 
POLYAMIDE + 2 STEEL SIDEWALL PLIES: 2 POLYESTER.''
    IV. Rule Requirements: Paragraphs S5.5(e) and S5.5(f) of FMVSS No. 
139 include the requirements relevant to this petition. Paragraph 
S5.5(e) requires that the sidewall be marked with the generic name of 
each cord material used in the plies (both sidewall and tread area) of 
the tire, and paragraph S5.5(f) requires that the sidewall be marked 
with the actual number of plies in the sidewall, and the actual number 
of plies in the tread area, if different.
    V. Summary of MNA's Petition: The following views and arguments 
presented in this section, ``V. Summary of MNA's Petition,'' are the 
views and arguments provided by MNA. They do not reflect the views of 
the Agency. MNA describes the subject noncompliance and contends that 
the noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle 
safety.
    MNA explains that the subject noncompliance occurred as a result of 
an error made by a maintenance employee at the manufacturing site. On 
January 15, 2023, the employee accidentally used the incorrect 
plaquette when replacing a loose one in a mold for the subject tire. A 
tire verification employee noticed a gap in the information in the 
tread plies plaquette on the intended outboard side of the tire and 
notified the Quality team. MNA says that its internal investigation 
revealed that of the 7,997 tires produced, approximately 813 affected 
tires were identified and contained and approximately 598 affected 
tires (8 percent) of the production during this time period had entered 
the US market.
    MNA asserts that the subject tires comply with all applicable FMVSS 
tire safety performance standards and they are marked with the correct 
tire size information, including the load range and maximum single and 
dual loads at the specified pressures. Further, MNA says that the 
subject tires were tested and passed all applicable FMVSS No. 139 
performance tests. MNA says that it has taken corrective measures and 
removed the incorrect plaquette from the mold used on the subject tires 
and replaced it with the correct plaquette.
    MNA contends that NHTSA has found petitions for similar 
noncompliances to be inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. MNA 
provides the following examples:
    1. Michelin North America, Inc., NHTSA docket number 2020-0092, 
granted 7 February 2022.
    2. Hankook Tire America Corporation, NHTSA docket number 2020-0020, 
granted 21 January 2022.
    3. Continental Tire the Americas, LLC, NHTSA docket number 2017-
0040, granted 30 July 2018.
    4. Sumitomo Rubber Industries, Ltd., NHTSA docket number 2017-0071, 
granted 26 March 2018.
    5. The Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company, NHTSA docket number 2016-
0107, granted 17 April 2017.
    MNA 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.
    VI. NHTSA's Analysis: In determining inconsequentiality of a 
noncompliance, NHTSA focuses on the safety risk to individuals who 
experience the type of event against which a recall would otherwise 
protect.\1\ In general, NHTSA does not consider the absence of 
complaints or injuries when determining if a noncompliance is 
inconsequential to safety. The absence of complaints does not mean 
vehicle occupants have not experienced a safety issue, nor does it mean 
that there will not be safety issues in the future.\2\ Further, because 
each inconsequential noncompliance petition must be evaluated on its 
own facts and determinations are highly fact-dependent, NHTSA does not 
consider prior determinations as binding precedent. Petitioners are 
reminded that they have the burden of persuading NHTSA that the 
noncompliance is inconsequential to safety.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 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).
    \2\ See Morgan 3 Wheeler Limited; Denial of Petition for 
Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 81 FR 21663, 21666 (Apr. 
12, 2016); see also United 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'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NHTSA has evaluated the merits of the inconsequential noncompliance 
petition submitted by Michelin and agrees to grant the petitioner's 
request for an exemption from the notification and remedy requirements 
of 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 49 U.S.C. 30120 based on the following:
    NHTSA agrees that, based on the facts presented, this specific 
noncompliance of the subject tires is inconsequential to motor vehicle 
safety. The Agency considered the following prior to making this 
determination:
    1. Operational Safety & Performance: NHTSA agrees that in this 
case, the missing marking for the polyamide tread ply on the tire has 
no effect on the operational safety of vehicle. Additionally, the 
agency has no basis to believe that the affected tires do not meet all 
other performance and labeling requirements of the applicable FMVSS.
    2. Tire Identification and Traceability: The tires have the 
required information per 49 CFR 574.5 to ensure that the tires may be 
properly registered for the purposes of a safety recall. The entire 
TIN, including the plant code and manufacturing date, is both legible 
and easily discernible.
    3. Downstream Operations: The Agency must also consider other 
stakeholders, in addition to the manufacturer and end-user. Downstream 
entities involved in tire repair, retreading, and recycling operations 
require certain information to determine if tires may be safely used in 
their operations. The existence of steel in a tire's sidewall and tread 
can be relevant to the manner in which it should be repaired or 
retreaded. The use of steel cord construction in the sidewall and tread 
is the primary safety concern of these industries. The Agency believes 
the noncompliance of the subject tires will have no measurable effect 
on the safety of the tire retread,

[[Page 54862]]

repair, and recycling industries since the tire sidewalls are marked 
correctly for the number of steel plies.
    4. Consumer Feedback and Focus Groups: The Agency has concluded, 
based on previous feedback, that the tire construction information, 
specifically the number of plies and cord material in the sidewall and 
tread plies, influences very few consumers when they are deciding to 
buy a motor vehicle or replacement tires. This conclusion is based on 
information gathered from the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 
(ANPRM) that was published in the Federal Register on December 1, 2000, 
(65 FR 75222).
    VII. NHTSA's Decision: In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA 
finds that MNA has met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS 
No. 139 noncompliance in the affected tires is inconsequential to motor 
vehicle safety. Accordingly, MNA's petition is hereby granted and MNA 
is consequently exempted from the obligation of providing notification 
of, and a free 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 the subject tires that MNA 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 MNA 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. 2025-21527 Filed 11-26-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P