SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Overview: MNA determined that certain Michelin X Multi D+ replacement tires do not fully comply with paragraph S6.5(j) of FMVSS No. 119, New Pneumatic Tires for Motor Vehicles with a GVWR of more than 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds), Specialty Tires, and Tires for Motorcycles. (49 CFR 571.119).

MNA filed an original noncompliance report dated March 25, 2022, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. MNA subsequently petitioned NHTSA on April 19, 2022, for an ( printed page 41381) 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.

This notice of receipt of MNA's petition is published under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120 and does not represent any agency decision or another exercise of judgment concerning the merits of the petition.

II. Tires Involved: Approximately 160 Michelin X Multi D+, size11R22.5, replacement tires, manufactured between May 26, 2019, and June 29, 2019, are potentially involved.

III. Noncompliance: MNA explains that the noncompliance was due to a mold error in which the subject tires are missing the letter designating the tire load range as required by paragraph S6.5(j) of FMVSS No. 119. Specifically, the sidewalls of the subject tires omit the designated load range letter “H.”

IV. Rule Requirements: Paragraph S6.5(j) of FMVSS No. 119 includes the requirements relevant to this petition. The subject tires are required to be marked on each sidewall with the tire load range letter.

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 have not been evaluated by the Agency and 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 noncompliance was found when a Michelin Field Engineer was notified that some of the subject tires “had a different tread pattern than the customer was accustomed to.” MNA explains that the subject tires were intended for the Asia and India tire markets, yet were certified to the applicable U.S. FMVSS, and properly labeled with the certification symbol “DOT.” MNA states that the tires “entered the U.S. through channels outside of Michelin's control.” MNA says that the subject tires have not been sold through MNA's sales or distribution channels. MNA also states that it has taken corrective measures to prevent the shipping or sale of the tires by blocking the SKUs in its internal databases.

MNA claims that the subject tires were manufactured as a load index 148 single/145 dual tire with a maximum single load rating of 3150 kilograms or 6940 pounds at 830 kPa or 120 psi cold inflation pressure and a maximum dual load rating of 2900 kilograms or 6395 pounds at 830 kPa or 120 psi cold inflation pressure. In regard to operational safety, MNA asserts that it tested the subject tires and found that they comply with the necessary performance requirements required by FMVSS No. 119. Except for the subject noncompliance, MNA also claims that the subject tires meet all marking requirements and “are also marked with load indices for single and dual applications,” which MNA contends will “provide both dealers and consumers with the necessary information to enable proper selection and application of the tires.”

MNA states that it has blocked the SKU for the subject tires in its systems to prevent shipment to the U.S. and sale through MNA. MNA also states that the molds will be updated to include the required load range letter designation and until then, the SKU will remain blocked in its systems.

MNA says that NHTSA has previously granted petitions which it believes are similar to the subject petition. MNA refers to the granting of the petition submitted by China Manufacturers Alliance, LLC, for 1,753,089 truck & bus radial replacement tires that were missing the letter marking that designates the tire load range on the tire sidewall.

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.

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, any decision on this petition only applies to the subject tires that MNA no longer controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance existed. However, any decision on 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)