Quiero saber acerca de...

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 1 / Monday, January 4, 2021 / Notices FMVSS No. 110. Specifically, the rims on the subject vehicles do not contain the designation symbol E as required by paragraph S4.4.2a of FMVSS No.
110 and the certification symbol DOT
as required by paragraph S4.4.2c of FMVSS No. 110.
IV. Rule Requirements Paragraphs S4.4.2a and S4.4.2c of FMVSS 110, include the requirements relevant to this petition. In section S4.4.2a, each rim or, at the option of the manufacturer in the case of a singlepiece wheel, each wheel disc shall be marked with the designation that indicates the source of the rims published nominal dimensions.
Specifically, the noncompliant rims should have been marked with the letter E indicating the European Tire and Rim Technical Organization as the source of nominal dimensions. Section S4.4.2c requires each wheel disk to be marked with the symbol DOT, constituting a certification of compliance with all applicable FMVSS.
V. Summary of Porsches Petition Porsche described the subject noncompliance and stated its belief that the noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
In support of its petition, Porsche submitted the following reasoning:
1. With respect to FMVSS No. 110, paragraph S4.4.2c, the DOT marking signifies that the manufacturer of the rim has certified that the rim complies with all applicable FMVSSs. Porsche asserts that because the DOT marking is a certification, it is a violation of 49
U.S.C. 30115 Certification, which does not require notification or remedy.
Porsche asserts that this is consistent with NHTSAs prior decision on petitions for the same issue. See Volvo Cars of North America, LLC, Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 74 FR 69376, December 31, 2009.
2. With respect to FMVSS No. 110, paragraph S4.4.2a, Porsche believes that the omission of the designation symbol E will not prevent the proper matching of tires and rims because sufficient information about rim size is available from other markings on the rim and the corresponding owners manual instructions. More specifically, Porsche states, the rims are marked correctly with the size designation; the correct tire size information is listed on the Tire and Loading Information placard, and the tire size is marked on the tire sidewall. The vehicles Certification label also contains the correct tire and rim sizes. Porsche indicates that, importantly, the omitted
VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:28 Dec 31, 2020

Jkt 253001

marking does not affect the ability to identify the rims in the event of a recall and is not likely to have any effect on motor vehicle safety. Porsche asserts that this is again consistent with NHTSAs prior decision on petitions for the same. See 74 FR 69376.
3. The tire and rim of the affected spare wheels are properly matched and are appropriate for the load-carrying characteristics of the subject vehicle.
Porsche asserts that the incorrect association marking has no effect on the performance of the tire/rim combination.
4. The subject tire/rim assembly meets paragraph S4.4.1b rapid air loss requirement of FMVSS No. 110. All other applicable requirements of FMVSS Nos. 109 and 110 have been met.
5. Lastly, Porsche is unaware of any accidents, injuries, or customer complaints related to the omitted markings.
Porsche concluded by expressing the belief that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety, and that 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.
Porsches complete petition and all supporting documents are available by logging onto the Federal Docket Management System FDMS website at https www.regulations.gov and by following the online search instructions to locate the docket number as listed in the title of this notice.
VI. Comments NHTSA received one comment from the general public. While the Agency takes great interest in the publics concerns and appreciates the commenters feedback, the comment does not address the purpose of this particular petition.
VII. NHTSAs Analysis The intent of the labeling requirements in paragraphs 4.4.2a and S4.4.2c of FMVSS No. 110 is to provide safe operation of vehicles by ensuring that vehicles are equipped with rims of appropriate size and type designation mounted with compatible tires of appropriate size and load rating.
The purpose of the DOT marking is to certify compliance with all applicable standards. The DOT certification is also itself a requirement of the standard, 49 CFR 571.110, S.4.4.2c. However, NHTSA finds that the noncompliance with the DOT marking requirement is inconsequential in this situation, given
PO 00000

Frm 00137

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

185

Porsches representation that the vehicles comply with the standard, other than as discussed herein, and given that the vehicles have a vehiclelevel certification of compliance. See 49
U.S.C. 30115; 49 CFR 567.4.
Furthermore, while manufacturers are required to include the designation symbol required by S4.4.2a, its omission does not prevent the proper matching of tires and rims in this unique situation because sufficient information about rim size is available from other markings on the rims, as well as information available from the certification label required by 49 CFR
part 567 and the vehicle placard tire information label required by FMVSS
No. 110 that are present on the affected vehicles. In addition, the omitted marking does not affect the ability to identify the rims in the event of recall and is not likely to have a consequential effect on motor vehicle safety.
NHTSAs Decision In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Porsche has met its burden of persuasion that the failure to mark the wheels with the letter E as the source of wheel nominal dimensions, as required by paragraph S4.4.2a, and the symbol DOT for recognizing certification to all applicable FMVSSs, are inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
Accordingly, Porsches petition is granted, and it is exempted from providing the notification of noncompliance that is required by 49
U.S.C. 30118, and from remedying the noncompliance, as required by 49
U.S.C. 30120.
NHTSA notes that the statutory provisions 49 U.S.C. 30118d and 30120h 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 vehicles that Porsche no longer controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance existed. However, any decision on this petition does not relieve vehicle distributors and dealers of the prohibitions on the sale, offer for sale, or introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate commerce of the noncompliant vehicles under their control after Porsche notified them that the subject noncompliance existed.

E:FRFM04JAN1.SGM

04JAN1