
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 106 (Monday, June 5, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25908-25909]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-11525]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2016-0137; Notice 1]


Arconic Wheel and Transportation Products, Receipt of Petition 
for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance

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

ACTION: Receipt of petition.

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

SUMMARY: Arconic Wheel and Transportation Products, a business division 
of Arconic, Inc., formerly known as Alcoa, Inc. (Arconic), has 
determined that certain Alcoa aluminum wheels do not fully comply with 
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 120, Tire Selection 
and Rims and Motor Home/Recreation Vehicle Trailer Load Carrying 
Capacity Information for Motor Vehicles with a GVWR of more than 4,536 
kilograms (10,000 pounds). Alcoa, Inc. filed a noncompliance 
information report dated November 21, 2016. Arconic then petitioned 
NHTSA on December 5, 2016, for a decision that the subject 
noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.

DATES: The closing date for comments on the petition is July 5, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written data, 
views, and arguments on this petition. Comments must refer to the 
docket and notice number cited in the title of this notice and 
submitted by any of the following methods:
     Mail: Send comments by mail addressed to U.S. Department 
of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, 
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver comments by hand to U.S. Department 
of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, 
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. The 
Docket Section is open on weekdays from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. except 
Federal Holidays.
     Electronically: Submit comments electronically by logging 
onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Web site at https://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online instructions for submitting 
comments.
     Comments may also be faxed to (202) 493-2251.
    Comments must be written in the English language, and be no greater 
than 15 pages in length, although there is no limit to the length of 
necessary attachments to the comments. If comments are submitted in 
hard copy form, please ensure that two copies are provided. If you wish 
to receive confirmation that comments you have submitted by mail were 
received, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard with the 
comments. Note that all comments received will be posted without change 
to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information 
provided.
    All comments and supporting materials received before the close of 
business on the closing date indicated above will be filed in the 
docket and will be considered. All comments and supporting materials 
received after the closing date will also be filed and will be 
considered to the fullest extent possible.
    When the petition is granted or denied, notice of the decision will 
also be published in the Federal Register pursuant to the authority 
indicated at the end of this notice.
    All comments, background documentation, and supporting materials 
submitted to the docket may be viewed by anyone at the address and 
times given above. The documents may also be viewed on the Internet at 
https://www.regulations.gov by following the online instructions for 
accessing the dockets. The docket ID number for this petition is shown 
in the heading of this notice.
    DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement is available for review in a 
Federal Register notice published on April 11, 2000, (65 FR 19477-78).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    I. Overview: Arconic Wheel and Transportation Products (Arconic), 
has determined that certain Alcoa aluminum wheels do not fully comply 
with paragraph S5.2(b) of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 
No. 120, Tire Selection and Rims and Motor Home/Recreation Vehicle 
Trailer Load Carrying Capacity Information for Motor Vehicles with a 
GVWR of more than 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds). Alcoa, Inc. filed a 
noncompliance information report dated November 21, 2016, pursuant to 
49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. 
Arconic then petitioned NHTSA on December 5, 2016, pursuant to 49 
U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and 49 CFR part 556, 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.

[[Page 25909]]

    This notice of receipt of Arconic's petition is published under 49 
U.S.C. 30118 and 30120 and does not represent any agency decision or 
other exercise of judgment concerning the merits of the petition.
    II. Equipment Involved: Approximately 1,975 Alcoa model 88367X 
aluminum wheels, size 22.5'' Dia. x 8.25'', produced for the heavy duty 
truck wheel market, and manufactured between August 1, 2016, and 
November 7, 2016, are potentially involved.
    III. Noncompliance: Arconic explains that the noncompliance is that 
the wheel diameter was incorrectly marked on the subject wheels as 
24.5'' x 8.25'', when it should have been marked as 22.5'' x 8.25''. 
This marking error overstates the wheel diameter by 2''. Therefore, the 
subject wheels do not meet the requirements of paragraph S5.2(b) of 
FMVSS No. 120.
    IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S5.2(b) of FMVSS No. 120 states in 
pertinent part:

    S5.2 Rim marking. Each rim or, at the option of the manufacturer 
in the case of a single-piece wheel, wheel disc shall be marked with 
the information listed in paragraphs (a) through (e) of this 
paragraph, in lettering not less than 3 millimeters high, impressed 
to a depth or, at the option of the manufacturer, embossed to a 
height of not less than 0.125 millimeters . . .
    (b) The rim size designation, and in case of multipiece rims, 
the rim type designation. For example: 20x5.50, or 20x5.5.

    V. Summary of Arconic's Petition: Arconic 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, Arconic submitted the following 
reasoning:
    1. If the mounting technician relied solely on the incorrectly 
stated 24.5'' diameter stamped on the rim and tried to mount a 24.5'' x 
8.25'' tire, the tire will not inflate. Therefore, it would be obvious 
to the mounting technician that there is a tire/rim mismatch, because 
the air will immediately escape during inflation and no tire/rim seal 
will ever be achieved. Heavy-duty truck rim diameter sizes in the U.S. 
market are in increments 19.5'', 22.5'' and 24.5'', so any tire 
diameter other than 22.5'' will simply not mount and/or inflate on the 
mismarked 24.5'' rim.
    2. All product literature that accompanies the mislabeled 24.5'' x 
8.25'' aluminum wheels correctly identifies the wheel as having a 
22.5'' diameter. The part number stamped on the wheels correctly 
associates the wheels in catalogs (hard copy and electronic) as having 
a 22.5'' diameter. The vast majority of the affected wheels were sold 
for assembly on new heavy-duty semi-tractors and it is believed the 
certification label, tire pressure placard and all other literature 
accompanying the vehicle correctly states the required wheel diameter 
as 22.5''.
    3. The vast majority of the affected wheels were sold for assembly 
on new heavy-duty semi-tractors, which means the selection of tires and 
wheels during assembly does not require reliance on the actual size 
markings on the wheel. Rather, this selection is based upon part number 
matching during the tire/wheel subassembly process, and the part number 
descriptions correctly reflect the actual wheel size of 22.5'' x 
8.25''. Only one manufacturer, a trailer manufacturer, actually noticed 
the mismarking of the rim diameter. The remaining manufacturers that 
undertook tire and rim assembly were unaffected by rim mismarking.
    4. If a vehicle owner or operator must replace one of the affected 
rims they would most likely go to a facility that is familiar with 
tire/wheel replacements for heavy-duty trucks. Pursuant to 29 CFR 
1910.177(c) (Employee Training), federal regulations require that only 
trained technicians are permitted to mount tires and wheels on heavy-
duty vehicles and it should be obvious to the technician when a wheel 
marking is overstated by 2''.
    5. For rims that have an obvious incorrect size marking stamped 
into the wheel, the technician will have to rely on another source for 
the correct rim size including, when applicable, the certification 
label, tire pressure placard or any other literature to determine the 
correct wheel and tire size for the replacement.
    6. Because a tire/rim seal cannot be achieved with an overstated 
2'' rim diameter, there is no risk to the technician during attempted 
tire mounting operations.
    7. All other roll stamp rim marking information on the subject rims 
required by S5.2 of FMVSS No. 120 is correct. The rim is marked with 
the correct rim width, manufacturer, date of manufacture, and DOT.
    8. The agency has previously found to be inconsequential a 
noncompliance with the rim marking requirements of FMVSS No. 110 Tire 
selection and rims and motor home/recreation vehicle trailer load 
carrying capacity information for motor vehicles with a GVWR of 4,536 
kilograms (10,000 pounds) or less (citing Docket No. NHTSA-1999-6685, 
July 5, 2000).
    9. Arconic is not aware of any crashes or injuries associated with 
this roll stamp rim marking issue.
    Arconic states that they have corrected the roll stamp for all 
future production.
    Arconic 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.
    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 wheels that Arconic no longer 
controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance existed. 
However, any decision on this petition does not relieve equipment 
distributors and dealers of the prohibitions on the sale, offer for 
sale, or introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate 
commerce of the noncompliant wheels under their control after Arconic 
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)

Jeffrey M. Giuseppe,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2017-11525 Filed 6-2-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


