60036 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

§ 178.37 Specification 3AA and 3AAX 

seamless steel cylinders. 

* * * * * 

(j) Flattening test. A flattening test 

must be performed on one cylinder 

taken at random out of each lot of 200 

or less, by placing the cylinder between 

wedge shaped knife edges having a 60 

° included angle, rounded to 1⁄2-inch 

radius. The longitudinal axis of the 

cylinder must be at a 90-degree angle to 

knife edges during the test. For lots of 

30 or less, flattening tests are authorized 

to be made on a ring at least 8 inches 

long cut from each cylinder and 

subjected to the same heat treatment as 

the finished cylinder. Cylinders may be 

subjected to a bend test in lieu of the 

flattening test. Two bend test specimens 

must be taken in accordance with ISO 

9809–1 or ASTM E 290–97a (IBR, see 

§ 171.7 of this subchapter), and must be 

subjected to the bend test specified 

therein. 

* * * * * 

(l) Acceptable results for physical, 

flattening and bend tests. An acceptable 

result for physical and flattening tests is 

elongation of at least 20 percent for 2 

inches of gauge length or at least 10 

percent in other cases. Flattening is 

required, without cracking, to 6 times 

the wall thickness of the cylinder. An 

acceptable result for the alternative 

bend test is no crack when the cylinder 

is bent inward around the mandrel until 

the interior edges are not further apart 

than the diameter of the mandrel. 

* * * * * 

49. In § 178.71, paragraphs (c) and 

(o)(6) are revised to read as follows: 

§ 178.71 Specifications for UN pressure 

receptacles. 

* * * * * 

(c) Following the final heat treatment, 

all cylinders, except those selected for 

batch testing must be subjected to a 

proof pressure or a hydraulic volumetric 

expansion test. 

* * * * * 

(o) * * * 

(6) The test pressure in bar, preceded 

by the letters ‘‘PH’’ and followed by the 

letters ‘‘BAR’’. 

* * * * * 

50. In § 178.320, in paragraph (a), the 

definition of ‘‘Cargo tank wall’’ is revised 

to read as follows: 

§ 178.320 General requirements applicable 

to all DOT specification cargo tank motor 

vehicles. 

(a) * * * 

Cargo tank wall means those parts of 

the cargo tank that make up the primary 

lading retention structure, including 

shell, bulkheads, and fittings and, when 

closed, yield the minimum volume of 

the completed cargo tank motor vehicle. 

* * * * * 

51. In § 178.345–1, paragraph (i)(2) is 

revised to read as follows: 

§ 178.345–1 General requirements. 

* * * * * 

(i) * * * 

(2) The strength of the connecting 

structure joining multiple cargo tanks in 

a cargo tank motor vehicle must meet 

the structural design requirements in 

§ 178.345–3. Any void within the 

connecting structure must be equipped 

with a drain located on the bottom 

centerline that is accessible and kept 

open at all times. For carbon steel, selfsupporting cargo tanks, the drain 

configuration may consist of a single 

drain of at least 1.0 inch diameter, or 

two or more drains of at least 0.5 inch 

diameter, 6.0 inches apart, one of which 

is located as close to the bottom 

centerline as practicable. Vapors 

trapped in a void within the connecting 

structure must be allowed to escape to 

the atmosphere either through the drain 

or a separate vent. 

* * * * * 

52. In § 178.347–1, paragraphs (c) and 

(d) introductory text are revised to read 

as follows: 

§ 178.347–1 General requirements. 

* * * * * 

(c) Any cargo tank motor vehicle built 

to this specification with a MAWP 

greater than 35 psig or any cargo tank 

motor vehicle built to this specification 

designed to be loaded by vacuum must 

be constructed and certified in 

accordance with Section VIII of the 

ASME Code (IBR, see § 171.7 of this 

subchapter). The external design 

pressure for a cargo tank loaded by 

vacuum must be at least 15 psi. 

(d) Any cargo tank motor vehicle built 

to this specification with a MAWP of 35 

psig or less or any cargo tank motor 

vehicle built to this specification 

designed to withstand full vacuum but 

not equipped to be loaded by vacuum 

must be constructed in accordance with 

Section VIII of the ASME Code. 

* * * * * 

53. In § 178.347–4, paragraph (b) is 

revised to read as follows: 

§ 178.347–4 Pressure relief. 

* * * * * 

(b) Type and construction. Vacuum 

relief devices are not required for cargo 

tank motor vehicles that are designed to 

be loaded by vacuum in accordance 

with § 178.347–1(c) or built to 

withstand full vacuum in accordance 

with § 178.347–1(d). 

* * * * * 

PART 180—CONTINUING 

QUALIFICATION AND MAINTENANCE 

OF PACKAGINGS 

54a. The authority citation for part 

180 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101–5128; 49 CFR 

1.53. 

54b. In § 180.417, paragraph (b)(1)(v) 

is revised to read as follows: 

§ 180.417 Reporting and record retention 

requirements. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(v) Minimum thickness of the cargo 

tank shell and heads when the cargo 

tank is thickness tested in accordance 

with § 180.407(d)(5), § 180.407(e)(3), 

§ 180.407(f)(3), or § 180.407(i); 

* * * * * 

Issued in Washington, DC, on September 

22, 2010, under authority delegated in 49 

CFR part 106. 

Magdy El-Sibaie, 

Associate Administrator for Hazardous 

Materials Safety, Pipeline and Hazardous 

Materials Safety Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2010–24274 Filed 9–28–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–60–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

49 CFR Part 571 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2010–0132] 

RIN 2127–AK17 

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety 

Standards; New Pneumatic Tires for 

Motor Vehicles With a GVWR of More 

Than 4,536 Kilograms (10,000 Pounds) 

and Motorcycles 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: This NPRM proposes to 

upgrade Federal Motor Vehicle Safety 

Standard (FMVSS) No. 119, which 

specifies requirements for new truck 

tires. We propose to amend FMVSS No. 

119 to adopt more stringent endurance 

test requirements and a new high speed 

test for several heavy load range tires for 

vehicles with gross vehicle weight 

rating (GVWR) of more than 4,536 

kilograms (10,000 pounds). We are also 

proposing that FMVSS No. 119 require 

that the tire sidewall be labeled with the 

tire’s maximum speed rating. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 60037 

1Section 10 of the TREAD Act stated that the 

Secretary of Transportation shall conduct a 

rulemaking to revise and update the tire standards 

published at 49 CFR 571.109 and 49 CFR 571.119. 

The Act provided that the Secretary shall complete 

the rulemaking under this section not later than 

June 1, 2002. November 1, 2000, Public Law 106– 

414, 114 Stat. 1800. 

2 68 FR 38116; June 26, 2003, Docket NHTSA–03– 

15400; response to petitions for reconsideration, 71 

FR 877, January 6, 2006, Docket 2005–23439; 

technical amendments, 72 FR 49207, August 28, 

2007, Docket 2007–29083. See also final rule, 

correcting amendments, 73 FR 72357; November 28, 

2008, Docket 2007–29083. 

3The term ‘‘load range’’ with a letter (C, D, E, etc.) 

is used to identify the load and inflation limits of 

tires used on light or heavy trucks, which increase 

in alphabetical sequence. For example, a load range 

E tire is able to handle greater loads and higher 

inflation pressures than a load range D tire. 

4FMVSS No. 119 has been in effect since the 

original rule was published in 1973. The original 

standard applied to tires used on vehicles other 

than passenger cars, which included pickup trucks, 

multipurpose passenger vehicles, vans, and heavy 

vehicles. As a result of the TREAD Act mandate to 

upgrade FMVSS No. 109 and FMVSS No. 119, the 

agency revised the applicability of the tire 

standards to reflect the weight of the vehicle on 

which the tire is used. Given the increased 

consumer use to light trucks and vans (LTVs) for 

passenger transportation purposes over the past 20 

years, the agency believed it was important to revise 

the applicability of the standards. As a result, the 

new tire standard for light vehicle tires, FMVSS No. 

139, which was published in 2003, applies to tires 

used on vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating 

of 4,536 kg (10,000 pounds) or less, and FMVSS No. 

119 now applies to tires for vehicles with a gross 

vehicle weight rating of over 4,536 kg (10,000 

pounds). (It is noted that other tires required to 

comply with No. 119 are new pneumatic light truck 

tires with tread depth of 18/32 inch or greater, light 

truck bias-ply tires, bias-ply tires used on vehicles 

with a GVWR of more than 4,536 kg (10,000 lb), and 

tires for use on special-use trailer (ST, farm 

implement and 8–12 rim or lower diameter code). 

The tires affected by this rulemaking are those used 

on heavy vehicles with a GVWR of more than 4,536 

kg (10,000 lb) that are not for speed-restricted 

service.) 

DATES: You should submit your 

comments early enough to ensure that 

the Docket receives them not later than 

November 29, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

(identified by the NHTSA Docket ID 

Number above) by any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Mail: Docket Management Facility: 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590–0001. 

• Hand Delivery or Courier: West 

Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., between 

9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

Instructions: For detailed instructions 

on submitting comments and additional 

information on the rulemaking process, 

see the Public Participation heading of 

the Supplementary Information section 

of this document. Note that all 

comments received will be posted 

without change to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided. Please 

see the Privacy Act heading below. 

Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search 

the electronic form of all comments 

received into any of our dockets by the 

name of the individual submitting the 

comment (or signing the comment, if 

submitted on behalf of an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). You may 

review DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

Statement in the Federal Register 

published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 

19477–78). 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments received, go to http:// 

www.regulations.gov or the street 

address listed above. Follow the online 

instructions for accessing the dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

technical issues, you may call George 

Soodoo, NHTSA Office of Rulemaking 

(Telephone: 202–366–2720) (Fax: 202– 

493–2739). For legal issues, you may 

call Steve Wood, NHTSA Office of Chief 

Counsel (Telephone: 202–366–2992) 

(Fax: 202–366–3820). The mailing 

address for these officials is: National 

Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building, 

Washington, DC 20590. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. Overview of Endurance Test and High 

Speed Test Proposals 

a. Endurance Test 

b. High Speed Test 

III. NHTSA Tire Testing 

a. Test Program 

b. Summary 

IV. Proposed Endurance Test 

a. Test Speed 

b. Load 

c. Inflation Pressure 

d. Duration 

e. Ambient Temperature 

f. Endurance Test Conclusions 

V. Proposed High Speed Test 

a. Test Speed and Break-In Procedure 

b. Load 

c. Inflation Pressure 

d. Duration 

e. Ambient Temperature 

VI. Tire Maximum Speed Marking 

VII. Other Issues 

a. Alternatives Considered 

1. International Standards 

2. ASTM Truck/Bus Tire Test Development 

Task Group 

3. Rubber Manufacturers Association 

b. Deep Tread Truck Tires 

c. Correction of Table III 

d. Separate Standard 

VIII. Proposed Effective Date 

IX. Costs and Benefits 

X. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices 

XI. Public Participation 

I. Background 

This NPRM proposes to upgrade 

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 

(FMVSS) No. 119 (49 CFR 571.119) 

which, prior to the passage of the 

Transportation Recall Enhancement, 

Accountability and Documentation 

(TREAD) Act of 2000, had a wide 

application to new pneumatic tires for 

vehicles other than passenger cars. In 

response to the TREAD Act,1 a June 26, 

2003 final rule upgraded the standard’s 

requirements 2 for tires designed for 

multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks 

and buses with a GVWR of 4,536 

kilograms (kg) (10,000 pounds (lb)) or 

less, and moved those enhanced 

requirements to a new Federal Motor 

Vehicle Safety Standard No. 139 for new 

pneumatic radial tires for light vehicles. 

Requirements for load range C, D, and 

E tires used on light trucks and vans 

formerly set forth in FMVSS No. 119 

were thus moved from that standard to 

FMVSS No. 139.3 The June 26, 2003 

final rule changed the title, scope, 

purpose and application sections of 

FMVSS No. 119 to reflect that the 

standard thereafter applied to only tires 

for motorcycles and vehicles with a 

GVWR greater than 4,536 kg (10,000 lb), 

but made no changes to FMVSS No. 

119’s performance requirements for 

those tires.4

NHTSA stated in the NPRM 

developing FMVSS No. 139 that the 

TREAD Act deadline to complete the 

tire upgrade by June 2002 did not allow 

the agency time to study and analyze 

sufficiently the different issues 

presented by medium and heavy vehicle 

tires, and that NHTSA will examine 

these types of tires after completion of 

the FMVSS No. 139 rulemaking (67 FR 

10050, 10061; March 5, 2002). In today’s 

document, we are proceeding to propose 

to make more stringent FMVSS No. 

119’s endurance test, adopt a new high 

speed test for several load range tires 

used on heavy vehicles, and require that 

the tire sidewall be labeled with the 

tire’s maximum speed rating. 

The agency is initiating this 

rulemaking to upgrade radial truck tires 

that have a load range of F, G, H, J, and 

L, and that are not for speed-restricted 

service (‘‘non-speed-restricted service 

tires’’). Tires used for speed-restricted 

service, known as ‘‘speed-restricted 

service tires,’’ are those with a maximum 

speed rating of 90 km/h (55 mph) or 

less. Non-speed-restricted service tires 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
60038 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

5This NPRM would define these terms in FMVSS 

No. 119 to differentiate the types of service for 

which tires are used and the requirements in the 

standard that would apply to the different types of 

tire. 

6See, e.g., S6.2 of FMVSS No. 139. 

are those with a maximum speed rating 

above 90 km/h (55 mph). ‘‘Maximum 

speed rating’’ is the maximum speed, as 

specified by the manufacturer, at which 

the tire can carry a load corresponding 

to its maximum load rating for single 

usage at the corresponding inflation 

pressure.5 We have commenced this 

rulemaking primarily because we have 

tentatively determined that the FMVSS 

No. 119 performance tests developed in 

1973 should be updated to reflect the 

increased operational speeds and 

duration of truck tires in commercial 

service. NHTSA has tentatively 

determined that this NPRM would have 

a beneficial effect on safety in that it 

would increase tire durability as tires 

are held to more stringent standards 

than currently required. 

FMVSS No. 119 

FMVSS No. 119 specifies performance 

and marking requirements for tires for 

use on motorcycles and on motor 

vehicles with a GVWR of more than 

4,536 kg (10,000 lb). Heavy vehicle tires 

regulated by FMVSS No. 119 are used 

in a wide variety of vehicle 

applications, such as delivery trucks, 

line haul trucks, transit buses, and 

logging trucks. FMVSS No. 119 includes 

a static test for tire strength, and 

dynamic tests for tire endurance and 

high-speed performance. The endurance 

test evaluates resistance to heat buildup 

when the tire is run at stepped-up loads 

at or near its rated load nonstop for a 

total of 47 hours. A high-speed test 

evaluates resistance to heat buildup 

when the tire is run at a certain 

percentage of its maximum load at 

stepped-up speeds for a specified 

interval at each speed.6 FMVSS No. 

119’s high-speed performance 

requirement applies only to motorcycle 

tires and those with a rim diameter code 

of 14.5 or less (tires made to fit rims of 

diameter of 14.5 inches or less). Since 

this size restriction excludes all heavy 

vehicle tires currently listed in the Tire 

and Rim Association 2009 Year Book, 

the endurance test is currently the only 

dynamic test to which heavy vehicle 

tires must comply. 

Today’s NPRM would upgrade 

FMVSS No. 119 by proposing to adopt 

a more stringent endurance test, add a 

new high speed test, and include 

maximum speed rating labeling 

requirements for new radial tires used 

on heavy truck and bus applications, 

i.e., load range F, G, H, J, and L tires that 

are not for speed-restricted service, 

which the agency believes comprise 

about 98 percent of the truck tires sold 

in the United States. These load range 

tires are typically used on heavy trucks 

for regional haul and long haul 

operations as well as on motorcoaches, 

and these load range tires have speed 

ratings ranging from 55–81 mph. Higher 

load range tires (i.e., load ranges M and 

N) are more often used in heavy mixeduse service (on/off-road operations in 

lower speed applications), such as 

construction, logging, crane, and rigging 

operations. However, the agency is also 

considering requiring non-speedrestricted, load range M radial tires to 

comply with the upgraded endurance 

and new high speed test because some 

of these tires are used in similar 

applications in which the load range L 

tires are used. The agency is not 

proposing to upgrade non-speedrestricted service load range N radial 

tires since they represent less than 1 

percent of the heavy vehicle tire market 

and are typically used in lower speed 

operations. 

II. Overview of Endurance Test and 

High Speed Test Proposals 

The proposed upgrade to the 

endurance test and the proposed 

adoption of a high speed test are based 

on the results of NHTSA’s heavy truck 

tire tests, discussed later in the ‘‘NHTSA 

Tire Testing’’ section of this preamble. 

a. Endurance Test 

The purpose of the endurance test is 

to evaluate heavy truck tire performance 

at highway speeds for a long duration. 

The endurance test in FMVSS No. 119 

applies to truck tires with load ranges F 

through N that are not for speedrestricted service. The test parameters 

used for the endurance test in FMVSS 

No. 119 include test speed, load, 

inflation pressure, duration, and 

ambient temperature. This NPRM 

proposes to upgrade the endurance test 

by changing some of these parameters to 

achieve more stringent conditions when 

testing load range F, G, H, J, and L radial 

tires that are not for speed-restricted 

service. Current endurance test 

parameters for load range N radial tires, 

load range F, G, H, J, L, M, and N tires 

that are for speed-restricted service, 

bias-ply tires, light truck tires (tread 

depth 18/32 inch or more), and 

motorcycle tires, would remain 

unchanged in the standard. 

Test Speed 

The current test speed for the 

endurance test in FMVSS No. 119 

depends on the load range of the tire. 

Load range F tires are tested at 64 km/ 

h (40 mph) on the 67-inch diameter test 

road wheel; load range G tires are tested 

at 56 km/h (35 mph); and tires with a 

load range H, J, L, M, or N are tested at 

48 km/h (30 mph). NHTSA proposes to 

raise the test speed for the endurance 

test to 80 km/h (50 mph) for load range 

F, G, H, J, and L tires. This represents 

a 25 percent increase in speed for a load 

range F tire, a 43 percent increase for a 

load range G tire, and a 67 percent 

increase for load range H, J, and L tires 

that are not for speed-restricted service. 

Load 

The current test loads for the 

endurance test in FMVSS No. 119, 

identical for all the load ranges F 

through N, are specified as a percentage 

of the maximum load rating of the tire, 

and are 66 percent, 84 percent, and 101 

percent. The loads are applied in a 

stepped fashion for durations of 7 hours, 

16 hours, and 24 hours, respectively. 

NHTSA proposes to change the load 

combination for the endurance test to 

85/90/100 percent of the tire’s 

maximum load rating labeled on the 

tire’s sidewall, from the 66/84/101 

percent combination currently required. 

Inflation Pressure 

The current test inflation pressure 

specified in FMVSS No. 119 is the 

inflation pressure corresponding to the 

maximum load rating labeled on the 

tire’s sidewall. NHTSA proposes to set 

the test inflation pressure at 80 percent 

of the sidewall-labeled inflation 

pressure that corresponds to the tire’s 

maximum load rating. This represents a 

20 percent decrease from the current 

endurance test, which requires tires to 

be fully inflated. 

Duration 

The current duration for the 

endurance test in FMVSS No. 119 is 47 

hours: 7 hours at 66 percent load, 16 

hours at 84 percent load, and 24 hours 

at 101 percent load. NHTSA proposes to 

leave FMVSS No. 119’s endurance test 

duration at 47 hours. 

Ambient Temperature 

The ambient temperature specified for 

the endurance test in FMVSS No. 119 is 

35 °C (95 °F). NHTSA proposes to add 

an ambient temperature tolerance, and 

thus proposes an ambient of 35 °C ± 3 

°C (95 °F ± 5 °F) for the endurance test. 

b. High Speed Test 

The high speed test evaluates tire 

performance at higher speeds for shorter 

durations. FMVSS No. 119’s high speed 

test currently applies only to motorcycle 

tires and to tires with rim diameters of 

14.5 inches or below, and does not 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 60039 

7See Docket No. NHTSA 2002–13707–0016.1, 

RMA Perspective on the FMVSS 119 Revisions and 

Updates Mandated by the TREAD Act. 

8Throughout this preamble, we use test speeds in 

miles per hour (mph) when presenting the test 

matrices, the test conditions, and the test results for 

the baseline tests, as specified in the current 

FMVSS No. 119. However, for the other tests in 

both the endurance and high speed test matrices, 

we selected test speeds in kilometers per hour (km/ 

h) to be consistent with the metrification of the 

Federal motor vehicle safety standards. Some of the 

Tables presented in the preamble show speeds in 

miles per hour only, to facilitate comparison with 

the baseline test speeds. 

9 In the tire size description, the ‘‘11’’ represents 

the tire section width in inches, the ‘‘R’’ identifies 

the tire as a radial tire, and the ‘‘22.5’’ represents 

the tire rim diameter code, which equates to a rim 

diameter of 22.5 inches. 

10See Docket No. NHTSA–2002–13707. 

11Test Method 1A is considered a part of Test 

Method 1. 

apply to truck tires. The test parameters 

used for the high speed test in FMVSS 

No. 119 and in other tire standards 

include speed, load, inflation pressure, 

duration, and ambient temperature. This 

NPRM proposes to adopt a high speed 

test for load range F, G, H, J, and L tires 

that are not for speed-restricted service, 

as these are typically installed on 

vehicles in regional or long-haul service. 

The high-speed test would be initiated 

after a 2-hour break-in at 80 km/h (50 

mph) and 85 percent of maximum load 

rating, with inflation pressure at 90 

percent of maximum. 

Test Speed 

NHTSA proposes to set the test speed 

for the high-speed test at the tire’s 

maximum speed less 20 km/h (12 mph) 

for step 1, maximum speed less 10 km/ 

h (6 mph) for step 2, and at maximum 

speed for the final step. This would be 

a new approach for testing tires under 

the Federal motor vehicle safety 

standards, as motorcycle and passenger 

car tires are tested to one unvarying set 

of test speeds. The approach proposed 

in this NPRM is similar to that used by 

the United Nations Economic 

Commission for Europe (ECE) tire 

Regulations which establish tire test 

speeds based on the maximum rated 

speed of the tire, and is along the lines 

of a suggestion from the Rubber 

Manufacturers Association (RMA).7

Load 

NHTSA proposes to set the test load 

for the high-speed test at 85 percent of 

the maximum load rating for the tire. 

The maximum load rating would be 

based on the tire sidewall marking per 

single tire use application. 

Inflation Pressure 

NHTSA proposes that the high-speed 

test inflation pressure be set at 90 

percent of the sidewall-labeled inflation 

pressure that corresponds to the tire’s 

maximum load rating. 

Duration 

NHTSA proposes a 90-minute 

duration for FMVSS No. 119’s highspeed test, consisting of three 30-minute 

speed steps at the proposed test speeds. 

Ambient Temperature 

NHTSA proposes an ambient 

temperature range of 35 °C ± 3 °C (95 

°F ± 5 °F) for the FMVSS No. 119 high 

speed test upgrade. 

III. NHTSA Tire Testing 

a. Test Program 

After passage of the TREAD Act, 

NHTSA began testing new heavy truck 

tires to assess the performance of 

current tires in endurance and high 

speed tests, and how load, inflation 

pressure, speed and duration affect tire 

performance. We tested more than 430 

new heavy truck tires with load ranges 

G through N that were designed for 

commercial vehicle applications. The 

tires selected included a mixture of tire 

brands, models and sizes. 

Testing was performed in two phases. 

In Phase I, new load range G tires were 

tested for durability (‘‘endurance’’) and 

robustness at speed (‘‘high speed’’). 

Since the purpose of Phase I testing was 

to assess the current level of 

performance for truck tires, the test 

matrix for this phase included both 

destructive (extended duration) and 

non-destructive tests. The purpose of 

Phase II testing was to generate data 

with which specific proposals could be 

developed for an NPRM to upgrade 

FMVSS No. 119. In Phase II, the test 

conditions were further refined from 

Phase I, and the group of tires tested 

was expanded to include load ranges H, 

J, L and N. Additional testing was also 

conducted for tires with load ranges F, 

J, and L, and speed ratings less than 75 

mph. 

All of the tires tested were 

commercially available at the time of 

testing. For both Phases I and II, NHTSA 

developed test matrices that included 

the performance parameters of speed, 

load, inflation pressure, and test 

duration. The test matrices were 

developed with a series of test 

conditions that increased in severity for 

tire performance. The ambient 

temperature used in the testing for both 

Phase I and Phase II was 35 °C ± 3 °C 

(95 °F ± 5 °F). All tires were conditioned 

at the ambient temperature of 35 °C ± 3 

°C (95 °F ± 5 °F) for 3 hours prior to 

testing. Testing was conducted on a 67- 

inch diameter curved test road wheel.8

Phase I Testing 

In Phase I, NHTSA conducted testing 

on 180 new, size 11R22.5, load range G, 

heavy truck tires with a rib-type tread.9

The 11R22.5 tire size was chosen due to 

its use in on-road applications for heavy 

vehicles: tire size 11R22.5 represents 

approximately 24 percent and 22 

percent of the original equipment and 

replacement tire markets, respectively. 

We tested tires from brands Hankook, 

Dayton, Bridgestone, and General, all 

with tire size 11R22.5, load range G, and 

rib-type treads. Based on suggestions 10

from the Rubber Manufacturers 

Association (RMA), the Tire Industry 

Association (TIA), and the Tread 

Rubber/Tire Repair Materials 

Manufacturers Group (TRMG), we tested 

only rib-type tires, typically used on 

steer axle and trailer axle positions, to 

focus on a single tread type. Tires were 

tested to determine levels of endurance 

and high-speed performance under a 

variety of test conditions. 

Phase I Endurance Test: 

For the endurance test, we selected 

120 new load range G tires from 

Hankook, Dayton, Bridgestone and 

General. The Phase I endurance test 

matrix consisted of 10 groups of varied 

test conditions, or ‘‘Test Methods,’’ 11 as 

shown below in Table 1, ‘‘Phase I 

Endurance Test Matrix.’’ Other than in 

Test Methods 1 and 1A, three samples 

of each tire brand were tested for each 

Test Method (TM) in the matrix. Test 

Method 1 used one sample of each tire 

brand, and Test Method 1A used two 

samples of each tire brand. 

Each TM consisted of a combination 

of the selected tire load, inflation 

pressure, test speed, and a specified 

duration at each load condition. Testing 

was performed so that each TM varied 

in severity by changing the load, 

inflation pressure or speed. 

The applied test loads ranged from 66 

percent of the maximum load rating to 

110 percent of the maximum load 

rating. The loads used are similar to 

those used in the light vehicle tire 

research program that was conducted in 

2001–2002 to support the upgrade of the 

endurance test for FMVSS No. 139. The 

stepped-up load combinations included 

85, 90, and 100 percent; 90, 100, and 

110 percent; and 100, 110, and 115 

percent, which allowed the agency to 

understand limits of performance for 

light vehicle tires, including light truck 

tires with load ranges C, D, and E. For 

this research on medium and heavy 

duty truck tires, the agency also wanted 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
60040 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

12See Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration, Final Report, ‘‘Commercial Vehicle 

Tire Condition Sensors,’’ November 2003, at 7. 

to understand the upper limits of 

performance for these tires when they 

are tested at normal loading conditions 

and at loads beyond their maximum 

load rating. As a result, we included 

stepped-up loads to 90/100/110 percent 

of the maximum load rating of the tires, 

since this represents an overloading 

condition for a truck tire on the test 

road-wheel. 

Inflation pressures ranged from 80 to 

100 percent of the maximum inflation 

pressure stated on the sidewall of the 

tires. The current endurance test in 

FMVSS No. 119 requires that the tire be 

tested at 100 percent of its maximum 

inflation pressure, but the agency sought 

to evaluate truck tires’ performance 

when tested at some level of underinflation, because that condition is 

occurring in real-world operation.12 We 

chose 80 percent of the maximum 

inflation pressure as the lowest value for 

this testing, primarily because the truck 

industry considers a tire at that level of 

under-inflation to be significantly 

under-inflated. 

The test speeds ranged from 56 km/ 

h (35 mph) to 120 km/h (75 mph), 

which we believe represented the 

typical operating range of speeds for 

trucks using tires with the specified 

load ranges. Each tire was conditioned 

at the ambient test temperature of 35 °C 

± 3 °C (95 °F ± 5 °F) for three hours. No 

break-in procedure was performed on 

tires tested for endurance performance 

since none is performed in the existing 

FMVSS No. 119 endurance test 

procedure. Table 1, ‘‘Phase I Endurance 

Test Matrix,’’ below shows the test 

parameters used for the endurance test 

in Phase I and the structure of the test 

duration for the three samples in each 

Test Method. We note that for TMs 2– 

9, tire sample number 3 was tested for 

an additional amount of time after the 

rest of the TM was completed, which is 

why Table 1 shows an extra line for 

sample number 3 for these TMs. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 60041 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1EP29SE10.005</GPH>
60042 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

The test parameters for the baseline 

tests (Test Method 1, load step 1–3) 

represent the current FMVSS No. 119 

level for the endurance test. The tires 

(one sample of each tire brand) were 

tested at 56 km/h (35 mph), with a load 

of 66 percent of maximum load rating 

for 7 hours, 84 percent of maximum 

load rating for 16 hours, 101 percent of 

maximum load for 24 hours, and with 

an inflation pressure of 100 percent of 

the maximum inflation pressure value 

labeled on the sidewall. After the end of 

the 47-hour test, the tires were tested for 

an additional 48 hours, at a load of 110 

percent of maximum load rating, and 

with the test parameters of speed, 

inflation pressure, and ambient 

temperature unchanged. Therefore, the 

total duration for the baseline 

endurance tests in Test Method 1 was 

95 hours (47 hours per FMVSS No. 119 

plus an additional 48 hours). 

There were no failures in the baseline 

tests completed on the first of three 

samples for each tire brand. We then 

conducted a second baseline test by 

increasing the test speed for the 

remaining two samples to 80 km/h (50 

mph) for the entire test, as shown in 

Test Method 1A. The inflation pressure 

and load parameters for the second 

baseline test were the same as in Test 

Method 1. The test load for the 

remaining two samples was 110 percent 

of maximum load rating for the last 48 

hours of the test. The objective of the 

baseline tests in Test Method 1A was to 

determine how well tires performed 

under conditions slightly more stringent 

than the current endurance test in 

FMVSS No. 119. 

As shown in Test Methods 2 through 

9 (Table 1, above), test severity was 

increased by increasing the test speed, 

increasing the test loads, and reducing 

the inflation pressure. Road-wheel tests 

(not to failure) were conducted for 47 

hours on two samples. The third sample 

was tested to 95 hours or until failure, 

whichever occurred first, with the load 

for the last 48 hours of the test being the 

same load applied in the last step for the 

47-hour portion of the test. 

All tires were inspected for belt 

separation, tread separation, and any 

other visual evidence of damage. For 

Test Method 10, all three tire samples 

were tested to 95 hours or until failure, 

whichever occurred first. 

Phase I Endurance Test Results: 

Of the 120 new tires tested for 

endurance performance under a variety 

of test conditions, 24 experienced 

failures. Of the 24 failures, 15 failed as 

a result of tread separation, 2 failed as 

a result of belt separation; 2 failed as a 

result of shoulder split; and 2 failed as 

a result of chunking. The remaining 3 

failures consisted of other failure types 

such as tread splitting and sidewall 

separation. Table 2, ‘‘Phase I Endurance 

Test Results,’’ summarizes the results for 

the endurance test on the four tire 

brands tested. Data for individual tests 

have been placed in the docket 

(NHTSA–2002–13707). 

The Test Methods included in Table 

2 are the same test methods for which 

the test conditions are shown in detail 

in Table 1. The test results in Table 2 

show that the first sample for each of 

the four tire brands completed 95 hours 

for the baseline test in Test Method 1. 

The remaining two tire samples for each 

brand were tested to Test Method 1A, 

using the same test parameters, except 

for the test speed, which was increased 

from 56 km/h (35 mph) to 80 km/h (50 

mph). Also note that for Test Methods 

2 through 10, the first two samples of 

each Test Method were tested to 47 

hours, while the third sample was tested 

to 95 hours. Four test errors occurred, 

where the test road-wheel stopped due 

to equipment or mechanical failure. 

These test errors are noted in Table 2 

with an asterisk. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1EP29SE10.006</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 60043 

TABLE 2—PHASE I ENDURANCE TEST RESULTS

Tire brands (hours completed) 

Target (hours) Hankook Dayton Bridgestone General 

Test Method No. Sample No. 

1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 

1 .................................................... 95 ........ ........ 95 ........ ........ 95 ........ ........ 95 ........ ........ 95 ........ ........

1A ................................................. ........ 95 95 ........ 95 95 ........ 95 95 ........ 95 95 ........ 95 95 

2 .................................................... 47 47 95 47 47 95 47 47 95 47 47 95 47 47 95 

3 .................................................... 47 47 95 1 47 95 47 47 95 47 47 95 47 47 95 

4 .................................................... 47 47 95 47 47 95 47 47 37 47 47 37 47 47 95 

5 .................................................... 47 47 95 47 47 95 43 44 53 47 44* 95 47 47 95 

6 .................................................... 47 47 95 47 47 95 47 47 95 47 47 95 47 47 95 

7 .................................................... 47 47 95 47 47 95 47 47 69 47 47 95 47 47 95 

8 .................................................... 47 47 95 47 44* 95 47 47 95 47 47 92 47 47 32 

9 .................................................... 47 47 95 47 47 95 28 28 23 47 47 95 42 47 41 

10 .................................................. 47 47 95 12 50 46* 27 3 14 31* 27 30 25 36 24 

Note: * Test error. 

Overall, the tires tested performed 

well throughout the endurance test 

matrix, particularly Test Methods 1 

through 8, for which each tire brand had 

at least one sample that completed 47 

hours of those Test Methods. The results 

indicate that decreased inflation 

pressure and increased speed of Test 

Method 9, and the even higher speed of 

Test Method 10, define the upper 

boundary of current new tire 

performance. For Test Methods 8 and 9, 

the inflation pressure was decreased to 

80 percent of maximum inflation 

pressure, and the test speed was 

increased from 88 km/h (55 mph) to 100 

km/h (63 mph). In addition, the test 

loads were increased in Test Method 9 

to 90/100/110 percent of the tire’s 

maximum load rating. For Test Method 

10, inflation was increased to 100 

percent and test speed raised to 120 km/ 

h (75 mph), the same test speed used in 

the endurance test for light vehicle tires 

in FMVSS No. 139. The results indicate 

that higher speeds and lower inflation 

pressure appear to have the most impact 

on tire failure compared with changes in 

test load or duration. 

Phase I High Speed Test: 

We tested 60 new load range G tires 

from major tire manufacturers Hankook, 

Dayton, Bridgestone, and General for 

high speed performance. Since the 

FMVSS No. 119 high speed 

requirements currently apply only to 

tires with a rim diameter code of 14.5 

or less and to motorcycle tires, the 

performance levels for the high speed 

baseline tests in our heavy truck tire test 

program (see Test Method A of Table 3 

below, ‘‘Phase I High Speed Test 

Matrix’’) were set at the FMVSS No. 119 

levels of performance for those tires, 

simply as a starting point for the test 

program. Test conditions were varied to 

produce different levels of severity by 

changing the load, inflation pressure 

and speed. See Table 3, ‘‘Phase I High 

Speed Test Matrix,’’ below for a 

summary of the high speed test matrix. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
60044 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

Test severity, as defined by more 

severe running conditions (i.e. increased 

load, higher speed, or reduced inflation 

pressure), increased from Test Method 

A to Test Method E. In Test Method A, 

the first three speed steps represent the 

current conditions in FMVSS No. 119 

(specified for applicable tires) and the 

next three test speeds represent speed 

conditions beyond those currently in 

FMVSS No. 119. The tires were tested 

to a stepped-up speed profile starting at 

120 km/h (75 mph), with a load 

condition of 88 percent of maximum 

load rating for 30 minutes. The test 

speed was increased in 5-mph 

increments every 30 minutes until 

failure or a speed of 160 km/h (100 

mph) was achieved, whichever occurred 

first. Therefore, the target completion 

time for the baseline high speed test was 

3 hours for a total of six speed steps for 

Test Method A only. The primary 

reason for testing beyond 137 km/h (85 

mph) in the baseline tests was to assess 

the upper boundary of high speed 

performance for heavy truck tires. 

The initial test speed for Test 

Methods B through E was set to 120 km/ 

h (75 mph), and increased to 130 km/ 

h (81 mph) and 140 km/h (88 mph) in 

30-minute intervals for a total of three 

test steps. The 10-km/h increments were 

used to increase the speed severity 

moderately for tire samples as they 

advanced through the different test 

methods. For each tire brand tested, the 

first two samples were tested for three 

30-minute speed steps, for a total test 

duration of 1.5 hours. The third sample 

was tested for an additional hour at the 

last speed step of 140 km/h (88 mph), 

resulting in a test duration of 2.5 hours. 

The test load was based on the 

maximum load rating for the subject tire 

as labeled on the sidewall. The test load 

ranged from 80 percent of maximum 

load rating to 90 percent of maximum 

load rating. Inflation pressures ranged 

from 90 percent to 100 percent of 

maximum pressure labeled on the 

sidewall. 

Each tire was conditioned for the test 

at an ambient temperature of 35 °C ± 3 

°C (95 °F ± 5 °F) for three hours, and 

then broken in for two hours under 88 

percent of maximum load and 100 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1EP29SE10.007</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 60045 

13Traditionally, a high speed test has an initial 

break-in step that involves a tire running on the 

roadwheel under specified conditions to allow for 

tire growth. The endurance test does not need a 

break-in step primarily because the 47-hour test 

duration allows time for break-in during the test. 

percent maximum inflation pressure at 

80 km/h (50 mph).13 The tire was 

allowed to cool to 35 °C ± 3 °C (95 °F 

± 5 °F) and the inflation pressure was 

adjusted to applicable pressure 

immediately before the test. The breakin procedure was performed to bring the 

tire to operating temperature, which 

allows the tire to flex, expand and 

contract such that air within the tire 

may fully permeate into the tire cavity. 

The break-in procedure also removes 

mold release agents and flashings 

produced by the molding process, 

which could contribute to variability in 

the test. 

At the completion of the test, tires 

were visually inspected for belt 

separation, tread separation, and 

evidence of damage. 

Phase I High Speed Test Results: 

Of the 60 new tires tested for high 

speed performance under a variety of 

test conditions, 7 experienced test 

failures. Of these 7 failures, 4 failed as 

a result of tread chunking, 2 failed as a 

result of tread separation, and 1 failed 

due to belt separation. Most of these 

failures occurred in Test Method A at 

test speeds of 152 km/h (95 mph) or at 

160 km/h (100 mph). Table 4 below, 

‘‘Phase I High Speed Test Results (Hours 

Completed),’’ shows how the tires 

performed, as tested under each test 

method. The Test Methods included in 

Table 4 are the same Test Methods for 

which the test conditions are shown in 

detail in Table 3. 

TABLE 4—PHASE I HIGH SPEED TEST RESULTS (HOURS COMPLETED) 

Tire Brands (hours completed) 

Target hours Hankook Dayton Bridgestone General 

Test Method Sample No. 

1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 

A ................................................... 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.3 2.8 2.5 2.9 3.0 2.9 3.0 3.0 2.8 

B ................................................... 1.5 1.5 2.5 1.5 1.5 2.5 1.5 1.5 2.5 1.5 1.5 2.5 1.5 1.5 2.5 

C ................................................... 1.5 1.5 2.5 1.5 1.5 2.5 1.5 1.5 2.5 1.5 1.5 2.5 1.5 1.5 2.5 

D ................................................... 1.5 1.5 2.5 1.5 1.5 2.5 1.5 1.5 2.5 1.5 1.5 2.5 1.5 1.5 2.5 

E ................................................... 1.5 1.5 2.5 1.5 1.5 2.5 1.5 1.5 1.8 1.5 1.5 2.5 1.5 1.5 2.5 

Test Method A was extended so that 

samples would be tested to the baseline 

FMVSS No. 119 conditions and then 

tested at increased speeds. For Test 

Method A, speed was increased beyond 

the FMVSS No. 119 test speeds to 90, 

95, and 100 mph, in 30-minute 

increments (the total test duration target 

was three hours). Inflation pressure and 

load were unchanged. Each sample was 

tested at 88 percent of maximum load 

rating, 100 percent inflation pressure 

and to speeds that were increased in 30- 

minute increments to a stepped profile, 

initiating at 120 km/h (75 mph) and 

concluding at 160 km/h (100 mph) or 

failure, whichever occurred first. 

Overall, the new tires tested to the 

high-speed matrix performed well, as 

shown in Table 4. All of the 7 tires that 

failed completed at least 1.5 hours, 

which represents the first three 30- 

minute speed steps of the targeted test 

duration. Test Method A was designed 

to test tires to 100 mph or failure, 

whichever occurred first. The results for 

Test Method A reveal that all of the tires 

were able to withstand speeds of up to 

90 mph, when inflated at 100 percent of 

maximum inflation pressure. The 

results also show that all of the tires 

tested to Test Methods B through E were 

able to complete the 1.5 hours at test 

speeds of 120, 130, and 140 km/h (75, 

81 and 88 mph). In addition, when 

tested to an additional hour at the last 

speed step of 140 km/h (88 mph), all the 

tires tested, except one Dayton tire, were 

able to complete the entire 2.5 hours of 

the high-speed test. 

Phase II Testing 

While Phase I testing provided 

NHTSA with a general understanding of 

the current level of performance for new 

heavy duty truck tires, Phase II testing 

refined the test matrices to develop 

possible, practicable, proposals to 

upgrade the endurance and high speed 

tests in FMVSS No. 119. In Phase II, 

NHTSA tested 365 new tires. Testing 

also was expanded to include test tires 

of additional tire sizes (385/65 R 22.5 

and 315/80 R 22.5), load ranges (F, H, 

J, L, and N tires, and load range G ‘‘bias 

ply’’ type tires), brands from other 

manufacturers (Continental, Goodyear, 

Michelin, Kumho, and Yokohama), and 

steer, drive, and all-position tread types, 

as shown in Table 5. 

These tires included speed ratings 

ranging from 56 mph to 75 mph. Most 

of the tires were tested for both 

endurance performance and for highspeed performance. Some tire models 

were tested in 2005, and certain tire 

models tested were retested in 2008 to 

validate their performance. In the 

results section, superscripts were used 

to identify which tires were tested first. 

FMVSS No. 119 does not apply to 

speed-restricted service and bias-ply 

tires, therefore those tires were not 

included in the costs and benefits 

analysis section. The data for those tires 

were collected to learn about their 

performance levels. Of the 365 tires 

tested, 159 tires were tested to the 

proposed methods. Seventy-eight tires 

were tested for Endurance and 81 were 

tested for High Speed performance. 

TABLE 5—PHASE II TIRE INFORMATION

Group No. Manufacture/model Tire size and LR Max speed 

(mph) Application 

1 ................ Goodyear G647 RSS ................................................... 225/70R19.5 LR F .................................. 75 Regional/P&D 

2 ................ Michelin XRV ................................................................ 225/70R19.5 LR F .................................. 75 Long haul 

3 ................ Bridgestone R293 ......................................................... 11R24.5 LR G ......................................... 75 Long haul 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
60046 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 5—PHASE II TIRE INFORMATION—Continued 

Group No. Manufacture/model Tire size and LR Max speed 

(mph) Application 

4 ................ Bridgestone M1X 711 ................................................... 11R24.5 LR G ......................................... 75 Long haul 

5 ................ General D460 ............................................................... 11R24.5 LR G ......................................... 75 Long haul 

6 ................ Michelin XZY3 .............................................................. 11R24.5 LR G ......................................... 65 Mixed service 

7 ................ General S580 ............................................................... 11R24.5 LR H ......................................... 75 Long haul 

8 ................ Goodyear G167 ............................................................ 11R24.5 LR H ......................................... 75 Long haul 

9 ................ Goodyear G395 ............................................................ 11R24.5 LR H ......................................... 75 Long haul 

10 .............. Goodyear Marathon LHT .............................................. 245/70R17.5 LR H .................................. 62 N/A 

11 .............. Kumho 943 ................................................................... 11R24.5 LR H ......................................... 75 Regional/P&D 

12 .............. Kumho KRS02 .............................................................. 11R24.5 LR H ......................................... 75 N/A 

13 .............. Yokohama TY303 ......................................................... 11R24.5 LR H ......................................... 75 Long haul 

14 .............. Yokohama RY023 ........................................................ 11R24.5 LR H ......................................... 75 Long haul 

15 .............. Bridgestone R184 CZ ................................................... 215/75R17.5 LR H .................................. 65 High Load Trailer 

16 .............. Bridgestone L320 ......................................................... 11.00R24.5 LR H .................................... 65 Mixed service 

17 .............. Goodyear Unisteel G291 .............................................. 315/80R22.5 LR J ................................... 75 Regional/P&D 

18 .............. Goodyear G286 (wb) .................................................... 385/65R22.5 LR J ................................... 68 Mixed service 

19 .............. Michelin XZY3 (wb) ...................................................... 385/80R22.5 LR J ................................... 65 Mixed service 

20 .............. Michelin XTA ................................................................ 215/75R17.5 LR J ................................... 62 L. haul/Regional 

21 .............. Kumho KRT02 .............................................................. 235/75R17.5 LR J ................................... 62 Regional/P&D 

22 .............. Yokohama RY253 (wb) ................................................ 385/65R22.5 LR J ................................... 65 Long haul 

23 .............. Continental HMS 45+ ................................................... 315/80R22.5 LR L .................................. 56 Mixed service 

24 .............. Michelin XZUS .............................................................. 315/80R22.5 LR L .................................. 65 Regional/P&D 

25 .............. Michelin XZA2 Energy .................................................. 315/80R22.5 LR L .................................. 75 Long haul 

26 .............. Milestar TRX (bias-ply) ................................................. N/A LR G ................................................ N/A N/A 

27 .............. Prime X Rockmaster .................................................... N/A LR N ................................................ N/A N/A 

Note: (wb) means it is a wide-base tire; * means speed-restricted service tire. 

Phase II Endurance Test 

NHTSA tested new tires with load 

ranges F, G, H, J, L and N from several 

major tire manufacturers. Table 6, 

‘‘Phase II Endurance Test Matrix,’’ shows 

the endurance test conditions used for 

Phase II testing. These test conditions 

were selected based on our analysis of 

the Phase I results. We varied the 

severity of the test conditions by 

adjusting load, inflation pressure and/or 

speed. For each test method, the test 

load was stepped-up through 85, 90, 

and 100 percent of maximum load 

rating. Inflation pressures ranged from 

80 percent to 90 percent of maximum 

inflation pressure stated on the 

sidewall. Test speeds ranged from 80 

km/h (50 mph) to 100 km/h (62 mph). 

Each tire was conditioned at ambient 

temperature 35 °C ± 3 °C (95 °F ± 5 °F) 

for three hours. All the tires were tested 

for a total duration of 71 hours 

consisting of the 47 hours of the current 

FMVSS No. 119 endurance test plus an 

additional 24 hours. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 60047 

The results of the endurance tests for 

new tires in Phase I indicated that 

higher speeds and lower inflation 

pressure appear to have the most impact 

on tire failure compared with changes in 

test load or duration. Based on these 

results, in the Phase II program NHTSA 

decided to moderately increase the 

severity of its endurance test matrix 

over the current requirements in FMVSS 

No. 119. The least severe test condition, 

Test Method 1, had the lowest test 

speed (80 km/h or 50 mph), and the 

highest inflation pressure (90 percent of 

maximum inflation pressure). The most 

severe test condition, Test Method 6, 

had the highest test speed (100 km/h or 

62 mph), and the lowest inflation 

pressure (80 percent of maximum 

inflation pressure). 

Phase II Endurance Test Results 

Tables 7 through 14 of this preamble, 

below, summarize the results of the 

endurance testing in Phase II. The 

results indicate that as the test severity 

increased, in going from Test Method 1 

to Test Method 6, tire failure rate 

increased. Tires tested under Test 

Method 1 were more likely to achieve 

the target of 71 hours compared to tires 

tested to Test Method 6. All of the load 

range G (radial) and H tires tested under 

Test Methods 1 and 2 achieved the 

target of 71 hours, whereas only a few 

of the load range G tires and none of the 

load range H tires tested to Test 

Methods 5 and 6 were able to achieve 

the target of 71 hours. The dashes in the 

tables represent Test Methods that were 

not performed for that specified tire. 

Three tire groups (Nos. 10, 20, and 21) 

were speed-rated 62 mph. These groups 

were tested with a variation in speed. 

Samples #1 from these three tire groups 

were tested at 50 mph. If sample #1 did 

not complete the 71-hour test, sample 

#2 was tested at 45 mph and sample #3 

was tested at 40 mph. If sample #1 

completed the 71-hour test at 50 mph, 

the remaining samples were tested at 

the same speed. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1EP29SE10.008</GPH>
60048 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 7—PHASE II ENDURANCE TEST RESULTS, LOAD RANGE F 

Proposed (hours) Tire Brands (Hours Completed) 

Goodyear 647 RSS Michelin XRV 

Test Method No. Sample No. 

1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 

2 ........................................................................................................................... 47 47 47 71 71 71 71 71 71 

TABLE 8—PHASE II ENDURANCE TEST RESULTS, LOAD RANGE G 

Tire Brands (Hours Completed) 

Proposed (hours) Bridgestone 

R293—Steer 

Bridgestone MIX 

711—Drive 

General D460— 

Drive 

Test Method No. Sample No. 

1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 

1 ....................................................................................... 47 47 47 71 71 71 71 71 71 ........ ........ ........

2 ....................................................................................... 47 47 47 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 

3 ....................................................................................... 47 47 47 71 71 71 71 71 65 ........ ........ ........

4 ....................................................................................... 47 47 47 71 71 71 71 71 71 ........ ........ ........

5 ....................................................................................... 47 47 47 71 71 44 40 37 32 ........ ........ ........

6 ....................................................................................... 47 47 47 24 71 33 33 33 34 ........ ........ ........

TABLE 9—PHASE II ENDURANCE TEST RESULTS, LOAD RANGE H 

 Group Samples (Hours Completed) 

Proposed (hours) Goodyear G395— 

Steer 

Goodyear G167— 

Drive 

Kumho 943—Drive Kumho KRS02— 

Drive 

Yokohama 

RY023—Steer 

Test Method No. Sample No. 

1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 

1 ................................................ 47 47 47 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........

2 ................................................ 47 47 47 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 

3 ................................................ 47 47 47 41 35 50 46 69 71 ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........

4 ................................................ 47 47 47 71 55 56 47 48 56 ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........

5 ................................................ 47 47 47 18 19 19 24 5 27 ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........

6 ................................................ 47 47 47 13 25 17 19 8 7 ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........

TABLE 10—PHASE II ENDURANCE TEST RESULTS, LOAD RANGE H 

 Group Samples (Hours Completed) 

Proposed (hours) Goodyear Marathon 

LHT 

Bridgestone R184 

CZ 

Bridgestone L320 Yokohama TY303 General S580 

Test Method No. Sample No. 

1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 

2 ................................................ 47 47 47 22 30 35 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 

Samples 2 and 3 from Goodyear LHT were tested at 45 and 40 mph. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 60049 

TABLE 11—PHASE II ENDURANCE TEST RESULTS, LOAD RANGE J 

 Tire Brands (Hours Completed) 

Proposed (hours) Yokohama RY253 

(wb)—All Pos. 

Goodyear G286 

(wb)—Steer 

1 Michelin XZY3 

(wb)—All Pos. 

Goodyear Unisteel 

G291 

2 Michelin XZY3 

(wb)—All Pos. 

Test Method No. Sample No. 

1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 

1 ................................................ 47 47 47 71 71 71 7 4 7 71 71 71 ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........

2 ................................................ 47 47 47 71 71 71 7 5 7 65 44 71 71 71 71 71 65 71 

3 ................................................ 47 47 47 55 45 42 2 2 5 6 70 44 ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........

4 ................................................ 47 47 47 42 43 34 ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........

Superscripts 1 and 2: 1 represents tires tested in 2005; 2 represents tires tested in 2008. 

TABLE 12—PHASE II ENDURANCE TEST RESULTS, LOAD RANGE J 

Group Samples (Hours Completed) 

Proposed (hours) 2Yokohama RY253 

(wb) 

Michelin XTA Kumho KRT02 

Test Method No. Sample No. 

1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 

2 ....................................................................................... 47 47 47 71 71 71 71 71 71 27 56 71 

Samples 2 and 3 from Kumho KRT02 were tested at 45 and 40 mph. 

TABLE 13—PHASE II ENDURANCE TEST RESULTS, LOAD RANGE L 

 Tire Brands (Hours Completed) 

Proposed (hours) 1 Conti. HMS45 + 

Steer 

1 Michelin XZUS— 

All Pos. 

1 Michelin XZA2 

Energy—All 

Conti.HMS45 + ¥ 

Steer 

2 Michelin XZUS— 

All Pos. 

Test Method No. Sample No. 

1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 

1 ................................................ 47 47 47 19 21 20 30 28 33 ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........

2 ................................................ 47 47 47 29 20 30 30 32 48 64 59 56 55 46.7 43 55 40 41 

3 ................................................ 47 47 47 8 9 4 ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........

4 ................................................ 47 47 47 14 14 17 ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........

5 ................................................ 47 47 47 3 2 3 ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........

6 ................................................ 47 47 47 4 4 3 ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........

Note: Superscript 1 represents tires tested in 2005, 2 represents tires tested in 2008. 

TABLE 14—PHASE II ENDURANCE TEST RESULTS, LOAD RANGE G BIAS PLY (TRAILER APPLICATION) AND N 

Tire Brands (Hours Completed) 

Proposed (hours) (G-Bias) Milestar 

TRX 

(G-Bias) Milestar 

TRX 

(G-Bias) Milestar 

TRX 

(N) Prime X 

Rockmaster 

Test Method No. Sample No. 

1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 

1 .................................................................................... 47 47 47 71 71 71 71 71 70 71 71 64 5 6 4 

2 .................................................................................... 47 47 47 52 10 48 71 66 62 71 53 67 ........ ........ ........

3 .................................................................................... 47 47 47 45 71 35 54 67 55 3 71 71 ........ ........ ........

Test results also indicate that some 

higher load range J, L, and N tires were 

overall less likely to achieve their target 

of 71 hours than the load range G and 

H tires. Some load range J and L tires 

are also used on inter-city coach buses 

(motorcoaches), which are operated at 

highway speeds. (Tire industry data 

show that load range J and L tires 

comprise 8 percent of the new truck tire 

market share (see Docket NHTSA–2002– 

13707, item 18.1).) Nineteen out of the 

24 (79%) load range J tires met the 

proposed 47-hour test. Five out of the 9 

(56%) load range L tires tested met the 

proposed conditions. The load range J 

and L tires we tested had speed ratings 

ranging from 62 to 75 mph, and all 9 

tires speed-rated 75 mph met the 

proposed 47-hour endurance test 

requirements. The agency assumes that 

most load range J and L tires are speedrated 75 mph, and that the tires would 

thus meet the proposed endurance 

requirements. The agency is seeking 

comment on the percentage of these 

tires that are speed-rated 75 mph. 

All of the tires were not tested to 

every test method for several reasons. 

For load range G and H tires, the 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
60050 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

14Most failures occurred in Test Method A at test 

speeds of 152 km/h (95 mph) or at 160 km/h (100 

mph). 

Bridgestone and Goodyear tires were 

tested to Test Method 1 through Test 

Method 6. The Continental D 460, 

Kumho 943, Kumho KRS02, and 

Yokohama RY023 tires were not tested 

to Test Method 1 and Test Methods 3 

through 6, primarily because failures 

from the other groups began to surface 

when tested to Test Method 3. In similar 

fashion, tires for load range J, L, N, and 

G (bias ply), were not tested once a 

pattern of failures indicated that a 

particular test method was beginning to 

result in failures for those tires. 

Phase II High Speed Test 

Based on the results of the high speed 

tests of new tires in Phase I,14 we 

revised the high speed test matrix for 

Phase II by reducing the test speeds to 

speeds that are more representative of 

the upper limit for heavy vehicle 

application. Table 15 below summarizes 

the test conditions used for the high 

speed test in Phase II. 

We tested new tires of load ranges F, 

G, H, J, and L from several major tire 

manufacturers. Test conditions varied in 

severity by adjusting load, inflation 

pressure and/or speed. The applied load 

was based on the single maximum load 

for the subject tire, stated on the 

sidewall. The applied load ranged from 

85 percent of maximum load rating to 

90 percent of maximum load rating. In 

Test Method (TM) C, the least severe 

test method, the test load was set to 85 

percent of maximum load rating, and 

inflation pressure at 95 percent of 

maximum. In the most severe Test 

Method (B), the load was set at 90 

percent of maximum load rating, and 

inflation at 90 percent of maximum. 

Inflation pressures ranged from 90 

percent to 95 percent of maximum 

pressure stated on the sidewall. 

Generally, test speeds were 100/110/120 

km/h (62/68/75 mph). Each tire was 

conditioned at an ambient temperature 

of 35 °C ± 3 °C (95 °F ± 5 °F) for three 

hours, broken in for two hours at 80 km/ 

h (50 mph) under 88 percent of 

maximum load rating, and then run for 

duration of 2.5 hours. The duration for 

the final speed step of 120 km/h (75 

mph) was 1.5 hours, which represents 

an additional hour beyond the normal 

speed step of 30 minutes. 

Phase II High Speed Test Results 

Tables 16 through 24, below, 

summarize the results of the high-speed 

test for new tires tested in Phase II, and 

indicate that heavy truck tires 

performed well under the test matrix of 

Phase II. For the 138 tires tested for 

high-speed durability, only 10 tires 

failed to meet the set target of 2.5 hours 

at speed. For example, the Goodyear 

Drive tire samples 1, 2, and 3 (load 

range H) under Test Method C, 

completed 2.5, 2.4 and 2.1 hours, 

respectively (see Table 17). Similarly, 

the same tire brand completed 2.1, 2.4 

and 1.9 hours under Test Method B. 

Eighty-one out of the 138 tires were 

tested to the proposed high speed 

requirements. Ninety-nine percent (80/ 

81) met the 1.5-hour proposed 

requirement, Test Method D. Several 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1EP29SE10.009</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 60051 

tire models from Bridgestone and 

Goodyear tire brands were tested first 

and yielded very positive results under 

Test Methods C and D, which were less 

severe because of the lower loading 

conditions. Additional tire brands 

(Bridgestone, Continental, Michelin, 

Kumho and Yokohama) were tested to 

Test Methods C and D to validate the 

test conditions for use in a potential 

upgrade for the heavy truck tire 

standard. 

TABLE 16—PHASE II HIGH SPEED TEST RESULTS, LOAD RANGE F 

Tire Brands (Hours Completed) 

Target (hours) Goodyear 647 

RSS—Steer 

Michelin XRV—All 

Pos. 

Test Method No. Sample No. 

1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 

D ........................................................................................................................... 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 

TABLE 17—PHASE II HIGH SPEED TEST RESULTS, LOAD RANGE G 

Tire Brands (Hours Completed) 

Target Hours Bridgestone 

R293—Steer 

Bridgestone MIX 

711—Drive 

General D460— 

Drive 

Michelin XZY3 

Test Method No. Sample No. 

1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 

A ................................................... 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........

B ................................................... 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........

C ................................................... 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 

D ................................................... 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 

TABLE 18—PHASE II HIGH SPEED TEST RESULTS, LOAD RANGE H 

Tire Brands (Hours Completed) 

Target Hours Goodyear G395— 

Steer 

Goodyear G167— 

Drive 

Kumho 943—Drive Kumho KRS02— 

Drive 

Yokohama 

RY023—Steer 

Test Method No. Sample No. 

1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 

A ................................................ 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 1.6 2.2 1.9 ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........

B ................................................ 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.1 2.4 1.9 ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........

C ................................................ 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.4 2.1 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 

D ................................................ 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.2 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 

TABLE 19—PHASE II HIGH SPEED TEST RESULTS, LOAD RANGE H 

Group Samples (Hours Completed) 

Target Hours Goodyear 

Marathon LHT 

Bridgestone R184 

CZ 

Bridgestone L320 Yokohama 

TY303—Drive 

Test Method No. Sample No. 

1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 

C ................................................... 2.5 2.5 2.5 ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ 2.5 2.5 2.5 

D ................................................... 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.3 2.5 1.6 2.5 2.5 2.5 1.3 1.8 1.8 2.5 2.5 2.5 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
60052 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 20—PHASE II HIGH SPEED TEST RESULTS, LOAD RANGE J 

Tire Brands (Hours Completed) 

Target (hours) Goodyear Unisteel 

G291—All Pos. 

Yokohama RY253 

(wb)—All Pos. 

Michelin XZY3 

(wb)—All Pos. 

Test Method No. Sample No. 

1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 

D ....................................................................................... 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 

TABLE 21—PHASE II HIGH SPEED TEST RESULTS, LOAD RANGE J 

Target Hours Tire Brands (Hours Completed) 

Michelin XTA Kumho KRT02 

Test Method No. Sample No. 

1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 

D ........................................................................................................................... 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.3 2.5 2.5 

TABLE 22—PHASE II HIGH SPEED TEST RESULTS, LOAD RANGE L 

Tire Brands (Hours Completed) 

Target Hours Continental HMS 

45+ 

Michelin XZUS—All 

Pos. 

Michelin XZA2 

Energy—All Pos. 

Test Method No. Sample No. 

1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 

D ....................................................................................... 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.25 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 

TABLE 23—PHASE II HIGH SPEED TEST RESULTS, LOAD RANGE J, NO BREAK-IN STEP

Tire Brands (Hours Completed) 

Target (hours) Michelin XZY3 

(wb)—All Pos. 

Goodyear Unisteel 

G291—All Pos. 

Yokohama RY253 

(wb)—All Pos. 

Test Method No. Sample No. 

1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 

D ....................................................................................... 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 1.5 2. 5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 

TABLE 24—PHASE II HIGH SPEED TEST RESULTS, LOAD RANGE L, NO BREAK-IN STEP

Tire Brands (Hours Completed) 

Target (hours) Michelin XZUS—All 

Pos. 

Michelin XZA2 

Energy—All Pos. 

Test Method No. Sample No. 

1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 

D ........................................................................................................................... 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.15 2.5 2.3 2.5 2.5 2.5 

b. Summary 

The results of the endurance and high 

speed tests indicated that the test 

requirements of FMVSS No. 119 can be 

upgraded for radial tires to specify more 

stringent, yet practicable, levels of 

performance that ensure better 

durability in real-world applications. 

Based on these test results, NHTSA 

proposes to upgrade the endurance 

performance requirement and establish 

a new high-speed performance 

requirement for radial tires of load 

ranges F, G, H, J, and L, that are not for 

speed-restricted service, which 

comprise about 98 percent of the truck 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 60053 

15New truck tire market share by load range is 

as follows: F–5 percent, G–64 percent, H–23 

percent, J–3 percent, L–5 percent, M and N is less than 1 percent. See Docket NHTSA–2002–13707, 

item 18.1. 

tires sold in the United States.15 These 

tires are typically used for regional haul 

and long haul operations and on 

motorcoaches. The remaining 2 percent 

represent the higher load rating tires 

and bias ply tires, which are more often 

used in mixed service (on/off-road 

operations in lower speed applications), 

such as construction, logging, crane, and 

rigging operations. However, the agency 

is also considering requiring non-speedrestricted, load range M radial tires to 

comply with the upgraded endurance 

and new high speed tests because some 

of these tires are used in similar 

applications as load range L tires. The 

agency is not proposing any new 

requirements for load range N tires, 

which represent less than 1 percent of 

new tires sold and are typically used in 

lower speed operations. The agency is 

also not proposing any new 

requirements for bias ply tires, primarily 

because they are typically not installed 

on new heavy vehicles and they 

represent a very small portion of the 

tires sold as replacement tires. These 

tires would continue to be required to 

comply with the current requirements. 

In addition, the agency is not proposing 

updated requirements for light truck 

tires with tread depth 18⁄32 inch or 

greater or for speed-restricted tires; 

these tires, used on light truck 

applications, are load range E category, 

and are not the focus of this rulemaking. 

The agency is not proposing any new 

requirements for bias ply tires, primarily 

because we are not aware that they are 

installed on new heavy vehicles, and we 

aimed at upgrading radial tires, which 

represent the vast majority of the tires 

used on heavy vehicles. 

IV. Proposed Endurance Test 

NHTSA is proposing to upgrade 

FMVSS No. 119’s requirements for load 

ranges F, G, H, J, and L tires that are not 

for speed-restricted service by setting 

more stringent requirements for the 

endurance test. NHTSA proposes that 

the endurance test be conducted using 

the parameters shown in Table 25. The 

proposed and current endurance test 

parameters may be compared as shown 

in Tables 25 and 26 below: 

TABLE 25—PROPOSED FMVSS NO. 119 ENDURANCE TEST CONDITIONS

Load ranges Steps Load 

(% max) 

Duration 

(hrs) 

Speed 

(km/h) 

Inflation 

pressure 

(% max) 

1 85 7 

F, G, H, J, and L ...................................................................................... 2 90 16 80 80 

3 100 24 .................... ....................

TABLE 26—CURRENT FMVSS NO. 119 ENDURANCE TEST CONDITIONS

Load ranges Speed 

(km/h) 

Inflation 

pressure 

(% max) 

Load (% max) 

Duration (hrs) 

7 16 24 

F ......................................................................................................................... 64 .................. .................. .................. ..................

G ........................................................................................................................ 56 100 66 84 101 

H, J, L, M, N ...................................................................................................... 48 .................. .................. .................. ..................

A tire would comply with the 

proposed requirements if, at the end of 

the endurance test as currently defined 

by the standard, there is no visual 

evidence of tread, sidewall, ply, cord, 

inner liner, belt or bead separation, 

chunking, open splices, cracking or 

broken cords, and the tire pressure, 

when measured at any time between 15 

and 25 minutes after the end of the test, 

is not less than 95% of the initial test 

pressure. 

a. Test Speed 

NHTSA proposes to raise the test 

speed for the endurance test to 80 km/ 

h (50 mph) for load range F, G, H, J, and 

L tires, which are not for speedrestricted service. This represents a 25 

percent increase in speed for a load 

range F tire, a 43 percent increase for a 

load range G tire, and a 67 percent 

increase for load range H, J, and L tires. 

It is noted that these tests are performed 

on a curved road wheel, a 67-inch 

diameter steel drum, on which the tire 

being tested runs as on a treadmill. 

Because the road wheel is curved, it 

subjects the tire to reverse deflection 

compared to a tire running on a flat 

surface, which makes the tire run hotter 

(and is therefore a more severe test). 

According to American Society for 

Testing and Materials International 

(ASTM International) research on 

equivalent flat-to-curved speeds based 

on equivalent belt-edge temperatures, a 

load range G truck tire tested on a 67- 

inch diameter road wheel at 85 km/h 

(53 mph) experiences belt-edge 

temperatures similar to what a tire 

experiences when tested on a flat road 

surface at 120 km/h (75 mph). Thus, it 

was determined that the effects on the 

tire in the two situations will be similar, 

even though the one tire is rotating at 85 

km/h (53 mph) and the other at 120 km/ 

h (75 mph). (‘‘Phase 1—Final Report,’’ 

ASTM Truck/Bus Tire Test 

Development Task Group, 9/5/06, 

Docket No. NHTSA–2002–13707–10.) 

In NHTSA’s Phase II testing, tires 

were tested to speeds of 80, 90, and 100 

km/h (50, 56, and 62 mph) as potential 

upgrades to the current test speeds. 

Only 3 of 30 tire samples were able to 

complete a 71-hour, or even a 47-hour 

test, at 100 km/h (62 mph). At 90 km/ 

h (56 mph), all except three of the load 

range G and H tires were able to 

complete 47 hours. At 80 km/h (50 

mph), all of the load range F, G and H 

tires completed the 71-hour test without 

failure, even at 80 percent inflation. 

Load range J tires had mixed results, 

and for load range L tires, only 7 of 21 

tires tested were able to complete 47 

hours of the endurance test. 

Given these results, NHTSA believes 

that a speed of 80 km/h (50 mph) for the 

endurance test, when coupled with the 

inflation pressure and load parameters 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
60054 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

16Tire catalogs were found online (www.—) at 

manufacturer Web sites. 

17The FMCSA study, ‘‘Commercial Vehicle Tire 

Condition Sensors’’ (Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration, Nov. 2003), looked at a total of 

6,087 units and 35,128 tire samples and found, 

among other things, that approximately 7 percent of 

the sampled heavy vehicles have at least one tire 

under-inflated by 20 psi or more. 

18We also note that at higher test speeds, tire 

performance appears noticeably sensitive to 

inflation pressures. At 100 km/h, more failures 

occurred at the 80 percent inflation level, and time 

to failure was also shorter at that inflation level 

compared to 100 percent inflation. 

we are proposing, represents a 

substantial and realistic upgrade over 

current requirements for commercial 

vehicle tires. In selecting this test speed, 

we considered the maximum speed 

rating of the tires we tested and those 

typically used in commercial vehicle 

applications, including motorcoaches, 

and found that, according to tire 

manufacturer catalogs,16 the majority of 

the tires in these usage categories were 

rated at 120 km/h (75 mph). All the test 

tires that were rated at 120 km/h (75 

mph) and some that were rated at 110 

km/h (68 mph) or lower completed the 

proposed 47-hour Endurance test 

without failure. Even though load range 

J and L tires comprise only about 6 

percent of the commercial vehicle tire 

market, NHTSA is aware that load range 

J and L tires are used on some 

commercial inter-city coach buses 

(motorcoaches), operated on interstate 

highways, and their use as such 

highlights the need to propose 

upgrading the endurance test speed for 

these tires. The agency is aware that 

while some load range J and L tires are 

rated at a maximum speed of 120 km/ 

h (75 mph), many others are rated at 

speeds between 88 km/h (55 mph) and 

110 km/h (68 mph). As a result, the 

agency solicits comment on the 

appropriateness of the 80 km/h (50 

mph) test speed for load range F, G, H, 

J, and L tires in the endurance test. 

The agency is also considering 

requiring non-speed-restricted, load 

range M radial tires to comply with the 

upgraded endurance test because some 

of these wide base tires may be used in 

similar applications that load range L 

tires are used. Given that the maximum 

speed rating of these tires allows them 

to be used in high speed operations, 

possibly instead of two lower load range 

tires, the agency believes that they 

should be considered for inclusion in 

the upgrade since they could be used in 

different vehicle applications than the 

typical speed-restricted, load range M 

radial tires. Accordingly, the agency 

solicits comment on requiring nonspeed-restricted, load range M radial 

tires to comply with the upgraded 

endurance test. 

We are unaware of non-speed 

restricted, radial, load range N tires 

being used in high speed operations, 

thus we are not proposing that they be 

required to comply with this upgrade. 

NHTSA does not propose to raise the 

endurance test speed for non-speedrestricted, load range N tires from 48 

km/h (30 mph), given their typical use 

on heavy vehicles, and our concern that 

increasing the speed would not be 

practicable. Due to their design and 

typical application to heavy vehicles 

used in mixed (on/off-road) service at 

slow speeds, load range N tires 

performed poorly even at the lowest test 

speed used by NHTSA. As stated 

previously, these tires make up about 1 

percent of the total market for truck 

tires. NHTSA believes there is no 

demonstrated safety need to upgrade 

these tires to comply with a more 

stringent endurance test, given the 

typical uses of the tires. 

b. Load 

NHTSA proposes to change the load 

combination for the endurance test to 

85, 90, and 100 percent of the tire’s 

maximum load rating, from the 66, 84, 

and 101 percent combination currently 

required. NHTSA’s Phase II testing 

specified test loads at 85, 90, and 100 

percent for the same durations as 

currently required in FMVSS No. 119. 

Increasing the first two load steps from 

66 and 84 percent increased the 

stringency of the first 23 hours of the 

proposed test, and makes them 

consistent with the loads specified in 

FMVSS No. 139’s endurance test for 

light vehicle tires. NHTSA believes 

increasing the test load combination 

from 66, 84, 101 percent to 85, 90, and 

100 percent of the tire’s maximum load 

rating represents an overall upgrade of 

the loading condition for FMVSS No. 

119. 

Tire failure on a vehicle in service can 

occur due to under-inflation or 

overloading, or both. Heavy vehicle tires 

are used predominantly on commercial 

vehicles, such as transit buses, tractor 

trailer combination vehicles, and readymix concrete trucks, for which loading 

to the vehicle’s gross vehicle weight 

rating is typical of normal use. Noncommercial heavy vehicles such as 

recreational vehicles (motor homes) and 

school buses also use truck tires. Unlike 

passenger cars and other light vehicles, 

which are rarely loaded to their 

maximum vehicle weight, heavy 

vehicles are often used in commercial 

service where the vehicle is loaded to its 

rated cargo or passenger load to 

maximize the profitability of the 

vehicle’s operation. Hence, the first two 

steps of the proposed endurance test 

reflect the tire’s performance conditions 

at which it is expected to be used in 

normal service. 

c. Inflation Pressure 

NHTSA proposes to set inflation 

pressure at 80 percent of the sidewalllabeled inflation pressure that 

corresponds to the tire’s maximum load 

rating. This represents a 20 percent 

decrease from the current endurance 

test, which requires tires to be fully 

inflated. Data from a tire pressure 

survey conducted by FMCSA suggests 

that tires on commercial vehicles 

(particularly trailers) are often run 

under-inflated by at least 140 kPa (20 

psi).17 For a load range G tire, which has 

a maximum inflation pressure of 760 

kPa (110 psi), this level of underinflation represents roughly an 18 

percent loss of inflation pressure. 

NHTSA believes that conducting the 

endurance test at some level of underinflation instead of fully inflated better 

reflects real-world conditions. NHTSA 

testing found that all load range G and 

H tires were able to complete the 

endurance test at an inflation of 80 

percent of maximum, even at 80 km/h 

(50 mph).18 Load range J tires, which 

have a higher maximum load rating than 

load range G and H tires, showed mixed 

results, while higher load range L and 

N tires experienced failure rates at both 

the 90 percent and 80 percent levels of 

inflation. 

NHTSA believes that testing at this 

level of under-inflation represents an 

appropriate upgrade of the severity of 

the endurance test for load range F 

through L truck tires. We note that the 

endurance tests in the light vehicle tire 

standards, FMVSS Nos. 109 and 139, are 

conducted with the tire under-inflated 

to 25 percent below its maximum 

inflation pressure. NHTSA is aware that 

the tire industry considers 20 percent 

under-inflation to be essentially flat for 

truck tires, which are designed to run 

close to their maximum inflation. 

d. Duration 

NHTSA proposes not to amend 

FMVSS No. 119’s endurance test 

duration of 47 hours. The current 47- 

hour test at 56 km/h (35 mph) results in 

a distance traveled for a load range G 

tire of 2,632 km (1,645 miles), and 

increasing the speed to 80 km/h (50 

mph) increases the traveled distance to 

3,760 km (2,350 miles), a 43 percent 

increase in distance. NHTSA’s Phase II 

testing extended the endurance test 

duration to 71 hours so researchers 

could assess how long beyond the 47- 

hour duration the tires were able to 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 60055 

19When a tire failed, it generally failed well 

before 47 hours, rather than completing the 47 

hours and then failing. 

20 In FMVSS No. 139, NHTSA requires an 

ambient temperature for road-wheel testing of not 

less than 32 °C and not more than 38 °C. 

21ASTM Truck/Bus Tire Test Development Task 

Group, Phase I—Final Report, September 7, 2006. 

Available at Docket No. NHTSA–2002–13707, Item 

10. 

22The same size tire can become a load range G, 

H, or J tire depending on its construction and on 

its inflation pressure (e.g., for a 315/80R22.5 tire, 

the maximum load rating (3,750 kg or 8,270 lbs) for 

the load range J tire is achieved at an inflation 

pressure of 830 kPa (120 psi), and the maximum 

load rating (3,450 kg or 7,610 lbs) when used in the 

load range H application is achieved at an inflation 

pressure of 760 kPa (110 psi)). A comparison of the 

load/inflation pressure values in the 2007 Tire and 

Rim Association Year Book for the proposed highspeed test conditions (85 percent of maximum load 

rating, 90 percent of maximum inflation pressure) 

indicates that the tires are well within the load 

limits specified for the test inflation pressure. For 

the tire size example used above, the test load for 

a load range J tire would be 3,188 kg or 7,030 lbs 

(85 percent of maximum load rating) and the test 

inflation pressure would be 747 kPa (108 psi), 

which is well above the inflation pressure of 670 

kPa needed to support that test load according to 

the Year Book. 

perform. Because the failure rate did not 

change significantly in testing tires 

beyond 47 hours,19 this indicates that 

the tires’ performance to the endurance 

test is less sensitive to changes in 

duration than to changes in speed and 

inflation pressure. Thus, we believe that 

extending the duration beyond the 47 

hours already required will not provide 

additional performance benefits. 

e. Ambient Temperature 

NHTSA proposes to add a ±3 °C (±5 

°F) tolerance to the current ambient 

temperature specified for FMVSS No. 

119’s endurance test, 35 °C (95 °F). Tire 

test laboratories benefit from an ambient 

temperature tolerance. The proposed ±3 

°C (±5 °F) tolerance for the ambient 

temperature is consistent with FMVSS 

No. 109 and FMVSS No. 139 in 

providing a ±3 °C (±5 °F) tolerance 

needed to facilitate the operations at the 

tire laboratories.20

f. Endurance Test Conclusions 

The agency tentatively concludes that 

the proposed requirements for the 

endurance test better reflect the reality 

of tire usage than the current FMVSS 

No. 119 requirements. The proposed 

parameters for the endurance test, 

particularly the increased test speed and 

the reduced inflation pressure, reflect 

conditions that a heavy vehicle tire is 

more likely to experience in normal 

service. 

Based on research performed by the 

ASTM, a tire operated at a highway 

speed of 120 km/h (75 mph) experiences 

an equivalent level of stringency when 

tested at 85 km/h (53 mph) on a curved 

test wheel.21 We believe that the 

agency’s proposed endurance test speed 

of 80 km/h (50 mph) on the curved test 

wheel is therefore a realistic speed. 

The proposed inflation pressure for 

the endurance test is 80 percent of the 

maximum sidewall pressure, compared 

with 100 percent currently specified in 

FMVSS No. 119. According to the 

results of FMCSA’s tire pressure 

monitoring survey cited above, on 6,087 

heavy vehicle units with over 35,000 

tires sampled, approximately 20 percent 

of the vehicles had at least one tire that 

was under-inflated by 20 psi or more. 

As a result, testing with some level of 

under-inflation reflects the reality of 

what heavy truck tires typically 

experience in service. 

The agency’s testing to the proposed 

endurance test showed that 85 percent 

of all the load range F, G, H, J, and L 

tires tested completed the 47-hour 

portion of the test, with the load range 

J and L tires speed-rated less than 75 

mph comprising 11 out of 12 of the 

failures under 47 hours. All the load 

range G and H tires tested completed the 

47-hour portion of the test without any 

failures. However, even though the load 

range G and H tires met the proposed 

requirements when tested for a duration 

of 47 hours, NHTSA expects that some 

manufacturers of load range G and H 

tires may make some design changes to 

these tires to maintain an adequate 

margin of compliance. We expect that 

design changes will be needed for some 

load range J and L tires, particularly 

those with a maximum speed rating 

lower than 120 km/h (75 mph), to 

enable them to comply with the 

proposed Endurance test requirements 

at 80 km/h (50 mph). The agency seeks 

comments on the appropriateness of the 

proposed endurance test parameters for 

these tires. 

V. Proposed High Speed Test 

In its tire testing program, NHTSA 

performed high speed tests on load 

range F, G and H tires because these are 

the ones predominantly used on 

commercial vehicles and are the most 

likely of all higher load range tires to be 

operated at the speed conditions 

proposed for this test. NHTSA 

performed high speed tests on load 

range J and L tires even though the tires 

have a small market share (about 8 

percent), because some of these tires 

have a maximum speed rating of 75 

mph and are used on motorcoaches.22

NHTSA did not perform high speed 

tests on speed-restricted load range M or 

N tires, because we were aware that 

these tires are not typically operated at 

these speed conditions. After careful 

review of the testing results and of the 

information on the use of load range J 

and L tires on coach buses, NHTSA 

proposes to include in FMVSS No. 119 

a high speed test for load range F, G, H, 

J, and L tires, that are not for speedrestricted service. In addition, the 

agency is also considering requiring 

non-speed-restricted, load range M 

radial tires to comply with the upgraded 

endurance and new high speed tests 

because some of these tires are used in 

high speed operations. Bias ply and load 

range N tires that are for speed 

restricted-service would not be 

subjected to a high speed test. 

NHTSA proposes that the high speed 

test would be initiated after a 2-hour 

break-in at 80 km/h (50 mph) and 85 

percent of maximum load rating, with 

inflation pressure at 90 percent of 

maximum. The break-in procedure 

conditions a new tire for testing since it 

exercises the tire components and 

increases the tire temperature, which 

results in some growth in the rubber 

components of the tire. This tire growth 

results in a slight decrease in the tire’s 

inflation pressure at the end of the 

break-in period and leads to less growth 

and negligible pressure decrease at the 

end of the 90-minute high speed test. 

There is currently a high speed test in 

FMVSS No. 119, but it applies only to 

motorcycle tires and to non-speedrestricted tires with a rim diameter code 

of 14.5 or less marked load range A, B, 

C, or D. Therefore, heavy vehicle tires 

with a load range of F or above have not 

been required to meet the high speed 

test requirements in the current 

standard. Table 22 shows test 

parameters for the proposed high speed 

test. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
60056 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

23We note that all of these terms are defined in 

the current standard. 

24 Docket No. NHTSA 2002–13707–0016.1. 

TABLE 27–HIGH SPEED TEST CONDITIONS

Load ranges Steps Speed 

(km/h) 

Duration 

(minutes) 

Load 

(% max) 

Inflation 

pressure 

(% max) 

Break-in 80 120 85 90 

F, G, H, J, and L ................................................................................................ 1 Max—20 30 

2 Max—10 30 85 90 

3 Max 30 

A tire would comply with the 

proposed requirements if, at the end of 

the high speed test, there is no visual 

evidence of tread, sidewall, ply, cord, 

inner liner, or bead separation, 

chunking, open splices, cracking, or 

broken cords,23 and the tire pressure, 

when measured at any time between 15 

and 25 minutes after the end of the test, 

must not be less than 95% of the initial 

test pressure. Load range M tires are not 

included in the high speed test table but 

the agency seeks comments on whether 

those non-speed-restricted, radial tires, 

should be required to comply with the 

new proposed high speed test 

requirements. We are unaware of nonspeed restricted, radial, load range N 

tires being used in high speed 

operations, thus we tentatively conclude 

that they not be required to comply with 

this upgrade. 

a. Test Speed and Break-In Procedure 

NHTSA proposes to set the test speed 

for the high-speed test at the tire’s 

maximum speed less 20 km/h (12 mph) 

for step 1, maximum speed less 10 km/ 

h (6 mph) for step 2, and at maximum 

speed for the final step. This approach 

is similar to the approach used by the 

United Nations Economic Commission 

for Europe (ECE) tire Regulations, which 

establish tire test speeds based on the 

maximum rated speed of the tire. It is 

also consistent with RMA’s suggestion 

to the agency that tires should only be 

tested for high speed performance up to 

their maximum speed rating.24 We are 

proposing this approach, instead of 

establishing one set of test speeds as a 

minimum requirement for all tires as we 

have done for motorcycle and passenger 

car tires, because unlike motorcycle and 

passenger car tires, heavy vehicle tires 

are designed for a wide range of 

applications and have a narrow range of 

maximum speed ratings. 

The truck tires for which we are 

proposing a high speed test in FMVSS 

No. 119 have speed ratings ranging only 

from 100–120 km/h (62–75 mph), which 

are typical operating speeds for the 

heavy vehicles on which these tires are 

installed. If one set of test speeds were 

applied to these tires regardless of the 

speed rating, a tire speed rated at the 

lower end of the range could be 

subjected to test speeds above the speed 

rating of the tire, which could be 

inappropriate. (An example of this 

situation is a tire speed rated to 62 mph 

tested at a speed of 75 mph.) 

Conversely, subjecting a tire that is 

speed rated at the higher end of the 

range to a test speed substantially below 

the speed rating of the tire might undertest the tire and fail to evaluate its high 

speed performance. Therefore, we are 

proposing to establish test speeds based 

on the tire’s speed rating because we 

believe that it results in a high speed 

test that better reflects the limits of the 

tire’s performance. 

However, we disagree with RMA’s 

suggestion that the high speed test 

procedure should exclude the break-in 

step, which is normally the first step 

when conducting a high speed test. The 

regulatory text of this NPRM does not 

remove the break-in step from the 

procedure but we are soliciting 

comments on whether it is appropriate 

to do so. The agency’s tire testing 

included a break-in step and we plan to 

gather additional data on tires tested 

without the break-in step to determine 

whether there is a difference in the tire’s 

performance. 

We have tentatively decided to retain 

the break-in step because the step helps 

to condition the rubber components of 

new tires through initial flexing that 

allows the tire to expand and grow prior 

to testing. As a result, tire growth is 

minimized during the test, which in 

turn minimizes the decrease of the test 

pressure at the end of the test. Further, 

the high speed test for light vehicle tires 

has a break-in step. When we issued the 

upgraded light vehicle tire standard in 

2003, the agency included the tire 

break-in procedure in FMVSS No. 139’s 

high speed test procedure with the 

support of the tire industry (68 FR 

38151). Since the high speed test 

proposed today would be a new test for 

heavy vehicle tires, we are proposing to 

adopt a break-in procedure similar to 

that of light vehicle tires. As noted 

above, Phase II high speed testing 

included the break-in step to evaluate 

high speed performance, testing that 

involved testing most tires above their 

maximum speed rating. 

Phase II testing used test speeds of 

100, 110, and 120 km/h (62, 68, and 75 

mph). The truck tires tested (load range 

G and H) performed well, and most 

were able to complete the 2.5-hour 

target duration without failure. All 

except one of the tires tested to the highspeed test in Phase II completed the first 

1.5 hours without failure. 

The agency solicits comments on the 

performance of tires to a high speed test, 

and is particularly interested in the 

performance of load range J and L tires. 

We are aware that while some load 

range J and L tires have maximum rated 

speeds at 120 km/h (75 mph), some are 

rated below that speed. Further, 

according to Tire and Rim Association 

Yearbook, manufacturers may 

recommend that tires may be used at 

speeds higher than the tire 

manufacturer’s rated speed if the load 

and pressure are adjusted. As a result, 

the agency seeks comment on the 

appropriateness of the test speeds for 

load range F, G, H, J, and L tires in the 

high speed test. The agency tentatively 

concludes that a high speed test at the 

proposed test speeds represents an 

important and practicable improvement 

to FMVSS No. 119 in the safety 

requirements of load range F, G, H, J, 

and L tires that are not for speedrestricted service. 

In addition, the agency is considering 

requiring load range M tires speed rated 

75 mph to comply with the high speed 

test because some of these wide base 

tires may be used in similar applications 

load range L tires are used. Given that 

the maximum speed rating of these tires 

allows them to be used in high speed 

operations, possibly instead of two 

lower load range tires, the agency 

believes that they should be considered 

for inclusion in the upgrade since they 

could be used in different vehicle 

applications than the typical load range 

M and N tires. Accordingly, the agency 

seeks comment on the appropriateness 

of requiring load range M tires speed 

rated 75 mph to comply with the high 

speed test. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 60057 

25However, the Goodyear brand drive axle tire 

appeared sensitive to load, as it failed more at 90 

percent load. The failure of these tires to reach the 

test target of 2.5 hours duration raised some 

concerns that other drive axle tires with lug-type 

treads may not pass at 90 percent load. 

26NHTSA’s Phase II testing extended the highspeed test to 2.5 hours to assess the limits of 

performance based on current truck tire technology, 

but not specifically with the aim of developing a 

proposal for a longer high-speed test. 

27Currently the maximum speed ratings for most 

tires are listed only in tire manufacturers’ catalogs. 

Some tire manufacturers identify their tires by 

maximum speed, maximum speed limit, or 

allowable speed range, while others may not 

publish the speed capability of their tires. Common 

maximum speed ratings for tires found in catalogs 

are 50, 56, 60, 62, 65, 68, 70, 75, and 81 mph. 

28Tire manufacturers currently may include the 

speed rating, voluntarily, for tires that are not speed 

restricted to 90 km/h or less. 

29As discussed later in this preamble, the Rubber 

Manufacturers Association has suggested to NHTSA 

that the agency require all radial tires with a load 

range of F and higher (that are not speed restricted) 

be labeled with a service description identified by 

an international labeling system. 

b. Load 

NHTSA proposes to set the test load 

for the high speed test at 85 percent of 

the maximum load rating for the tire. 

NHTSA’s testing specified test loads at 

85 and 90 percent. Most tires tested 

were able to complete the 90 percent 

load rating application without any 

failure,25 and additional tire types tested 

to 85 percent load were also able to 

complete 1.5 hours without failure. 

We chose to select a different load for 

the high speed test so as not to duplicate 

the load conditions used in the 

endurance test. The recent update of the 

high speed test in the FMVSS No. 139 

specifies a test load of 85 percent of the 

tire’s maximum load rating. NHTSA 

tentatively concludes that a test load of 

85 percent of the maximum load rating 

of the tire will provide a necessary 

improvement, while setting a realistic 

level of performance for load range F, G, 

H, J, and L tires that are not for speedrestricted service. 

c. Inflation Pressure 

NHTSA proposes that the high speed 

test inflation pressure be set at 90 

percent of the sidewall-labeled inflation 

pressure that corresponds to the tire’s 

maximum load rating. For Phase II 

testing, NHTSA researchers selected 

inflation pressures of 90 and 95 percent 

to assess the tire’s high-speed 

performance at slight levels of under 

inflation. The high speed test in the 

light vehicle tire standards, FMVSS Nos. 

109 and 139, is conducted with the tire 

under inflated to about 8 percent below 

its maximum inflation pressure. 

Therefore, for this Phase II testing, 

inflation pressures of 5 and 10 percent 

below maximum were considered 

reasonable levels. Inflation test 

pressures in this range, with a test load 

of 85 percent, do not result in the tire 

being overloaded for the given inflation 

pressure. Based on the test results where 

only 10 out of 102 tires were unable to 

finish the 150 minute test, NHTSA 

proposes that the high speed inflation 

pressure be set at 90 percent of the 

sidewall-labeled inflation pressure that 

corresponds to the tire’s maximum load 

rating per sidewall labeling. 

d. Duration 

NHTSA proposes a 90-minute 

duration for FMVSS No. 119’s high 

speed test, to be applied to load range 

F, G, H, J and L tires, that are not for 

speed-restricted service. The current 

duration for the high speed test in 

FMVSS Nos. 119 and 139 is 90 minutes, 

consisting of three 30-minute speed 

steps. High speed tests are typically of 

relatively short duration, given that the 

purpose of the test is to assess the tire’s 

performance close to its upper design 

limit of speed. Overall, 90 percent of the 

test tires performed well at the 100, 110, 

and 120 km/h (62, 68, and 75 mph) 

speeds, and were able to complete 90 

minutes of the test without any 

failures.26 Therefore, NHTSA proposes 

to extend FMVSS No. 119’s high speed 

test to apply to load range F, G, H, J and 

L tires, that are not for speed-restricted 

service, with a total 90-minute duration. 

e. Ambient Temperature 

NHTSA proposes an ambient 

temperature range of 35 °C ±3 °C (95 °F 

±5 °F) for the FMVSS No. 119 high 

speed test upgrade. The ambient 

temperature specified for FMVSS No. 

119’s high-speed test is currently 35 °C 

(95 °F) without any temperature 

tolerance. Because an ambient 

temperature tolerance provides test 

laboratories with needed flexibility, we 

propose specifying a 6 °C tolerance for 

the ambient temperature instead of a 

single temperature. The agency 

tentatively concludes that this proposal 

for FMVSS No. 119’s high speed test is 

reasonable and appropriate. 

VI. Tire Maximum Speed Marking 

FMVSS No. 119 currently requires 

certain information to be marked on the 

tire sidewall. S6.5(d) of the standard 

requires that each tire’s maximum load 

rating for single and dual applications 

and the corresponding inflation 

pressure be labeled on the sidewall, 

which provides information to the 

vehicle operator to ensure proper 

selection and use of tires. These load 

and inflation pressure values are also 

used by NHTSA to determine test values 

for compliance testing purposes. 

The tire’s maximum speed rating is 

currently not required to be labeled on 

the sidewall,27 except for tires that are 

speed-restricted to 90 km/h (55 mph) or 

below. For speed-restricted tires, S6.5(e) 

of the standard requires that the label on 

the sidewall be as follows: ‘‘Max Speed 

__ km/h (__ mph).’’ 28 For tires that are 

not speed-restricted, the end user does 

not know from the tire sidewall labeling 

the design maximum speed capability of 

the tire for the specified maximum load 

rating and corresponding inflation 

pressure. We believe that having the 

maximum speed rating labeled on the 

sidewall would benefit the end user, 

especially as the speed capability in any 

one load range can vary. 

As such, the agency is proposing a 

requirement for a maximum speed 

rating label for radial truck tires with 

load ranges F and above. The agency is 

proposing the same speed labeling 

format as the one described in S6.5(e)— 

which requires each tire to be labeled, 

‘‘Max Speed __ km/h (__ mph)’’—subject 

to aspects discussed below. The agency 

believes that a maximum speed label 

that includes a numerical value would 

be less subject to misunderstanding by 

consumers. 

Numerical Value Versus a Symbol 

We are aware that some tire 

manufacturers now voluntarily label the 

non-speed restricted heavy vehicle tires 

they sell in the U.S. with speed 

restrictions that use a different format, 

i.e., speed symbols, to indicate the tire’s 

speed.29 For heavy vehicle tires, the 

speed symbols and the corresponding 

speed category used internationally are: 

F—80 km/h (50 mph); G—90 km/h (55 

mph); J—100 km/h (62 mph); K—110 

km/h (68 mph); and L—120 km/h (75 

mph). We have tentatively determined 

that the speed symbol format is less 

desirable than labeling the tire with a 

numerical value, because the consumer 

is more likely to understand the 

meaning of the latter than that of a letter 

symbol. Further, the letter format could 

be lead to confusion given that the 

current load range label required on 

heavy vehicle tires uses a similar 

lettering scheme (load ranges F, G, H, J, 

L, M and N) that includes letters that are 

identical in some instances to the speed 

symbols used on heavy vehicles (speed 

symbols F, G, J, K, and L). The 

corresponding speed for these speed 

symbols are typically listed in the 

industry publications such as the 

annual Year Book of the Tire and Rim 

Association or the Japan Automobile 

Tyre Manufacturers Association. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
60058 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

30The test tires, from Bridgestone, Goodyear, and 

Michelin, included three drive axle tires with a 

tread depth of 30/32 inch; one steer axle tire with 

a tread depth of 18/32 inch; and one trailer axle tire 

with a tread depth of 12/32 inch. 

We recognize that many large trucking 

fleets work closely with tire dealers, 

who have ready access to the industry 

publications and who recommend the 

best tires for the fleets based on vehicle 

use and in-service conditions. However, 

since many of the small fleets and 

owner-operated fleets make their own 

tire purchasing decisions without such 

help, labeling that is clear and easy to 

understand (the numerical value) 

should help users purchase the 

appropriate tires for their vehicles, 

know the speed restrictions of the tire, 

and use the tires in accordance with 

those speed restrictions. 

Multiples of 10 km/h 

We propose to require that 

manufacturers must label their tires 

with maximum rated speeds in 

multiples of 10 km/h (e.g., 100, 110, or 

120 km/h). The proposed new high 

speed test specifies test speeds that are 

multiples of 10 km/h: the test speed for 

the high-speed test would be the tire’s 

maximum speed less 20 km/h (12 mph) 

for step 1, the tire’s maximum speed 

less 10 km/h (6 mph) for step 2, and at 

maximum speed for the final step. 

NHTSA believes that compliance testing 

for High Speed performance would be 

conducted more efficiently and be less 

subject to test-speed problems, if the 

markings are in multiples of 10 km/h. 

Terminology 

We note that some manufacturers use 

the term ‘‘Maximum Speed’’ in their tire 

catalogs, while others use ‘‘Speed 

Rating.’’ We seek comment on whether 

‘‘Speed Rating’’ should be used on the 

label, instead of or in addition to ‘‘Max 

Speed.’’ 

VII. Other Issues 

a. Alternatives Considered 

1. International Standards 

The ECE regulation that is applicable 

to truck tires is ECE Regulation 54, 

Uniform Provisions Concerning the 

Approval of Pneumatic Tyres for 

Commercial Vehicles and Their 

Trailers. It applies to both heavy truck 

tires and light truck tires, as was the 

case for FMVSS No. 119 prior to the 

establishment of FMVSS No. 139. It 

includes a load/speed endurance test 

that is similar to the existing FMVSS 

No. 119 endurance test for medium/ 

heavy truck tires. The test parameters 

for load, inflation pressure, and 

duration are identical to those specified 

in FMVSS No. 119, except for the 

ambient temperature, which is specified 

at 25 °C ± 5 °C, compared with the 

specification of 35 °C ± 3 °C as proposed 

for the revision to FMVSS No. 119. The 

other difference between the two 

standards is that ECE Regulation 54 uses 

the tire’s speed category to determine its 

test speed, whereas FMVSS No. 119 

uses the tire’s load range to determine 

its test speed. The test speeds in ECE 

Regulation 54 are approximately 48–56 

km/h (30–35 mph) lower than the 

maximum speed rating of the tire, 

which results in test speeds that are in 

a speed range not very much different 

from the test speed required in FMVSS 

No. 119 for non-speed-restricted tires. 

Test speeds in ECE Regulation 54 range 

from 32–72 km/h (20–45 mph) whereas 

the Endurance test speeds in FMVSS 

No. 119 range from 48–64 km/h (30–40 

mph). Hence, the severity of the ECE 

regulation for heavy vehicle tires is 

about the same as for tires under the 

current FMVSS No. 119. Additionally, 

the ECE has no high speed test for truck 

tires. In short, ECE Regulation 54 

contains test parameters and 

performance requirements that are, in 

some cases, similar to the current 

FMVSS No. 119, but that we believe are 

in other cases less stringent. 

The agency is not aware of other truck 

tire standards that are different from 

ECE Regulation 54 or FMVSS No. 119, 

since many national regulations 

typically adopt some version of the ECE 

regulation or the FMVSS. 

2. ASTM Truck/Bus Tire Test 

Development Task Group 

The ASTM Truck/Bus Tire Test 

Development Task Group recommended 

that the agency consider the artificial 

stresses and temperature impacts that 

are introduced into tire testing when 

tires (particularly medium truck tires 

and larger) are tested on a 67-inch 

diameter test road-wheel, as compared 

to a flat surface. The task group has been 

working to develop a tire temperature 

prediction model for two critical crown 

area temperatures, tread centerline and 

belt edge, based on comparisons of tire 

temperatures obtained from tests of five 

load range G tires 30 on a 67-inch 

diameter curved road wheel, on a flat 

track test surface, and on an outdoor test 

track. (‘‘Phase 1–Final Report,’’ ASTM 

Truck/Bus Tire Test Development Task 

Group, 9/5/06, Docket No. NHTSA– 

2002–13707–10. ‘‘Phase I & II Review,’’ 

ASTM Truck/Bus Tire Test 

Development Task Group, 5/15/08, 

Docket No. NHTSA–2002–13707–14.) 

As a result of this work, the task group 

found that, for the five load range G tires 

it tested: (a) The average predicted 

temperature increases an average of 39 

°C (70 °F) at the tread centerline and 22 

°C (40 °F) at the tire’s belt edge when 

tested on a 67-inch diameter curved 

road-wheel as compared to temperatures 

obtained from tires tested on a flat 

surface; (b) equivalent tread centerline 

temperatures were obtained between 

tires tested on a curved road-wheel at 67 

km/h (42 mph) and tires tested on a flat 

roadway surface at 120 km/h (75 mph); 

and (c) equivalent tread belt edge 

temperatures were obtained between 

tires tested on a curved road-wheel at 79 

km/h (49 mph) and tires tested on a flat 

roadway speed at 120 km/h (75 mph). 

The task group recommended that 

NHTSA develop a standard based on 

maintaining equivalent tire crown area 

temperatures (i.e., centerline, shoulder, 

and belt edge) between flat and curve 

test surfaces. 

It should be noted that in 2008, the 

Task Group also completed a Phase II, 

which included load range J and L tires 

to validate the applicability of the truck 

tire test conditions to additional tire 

sizes and service applications such as 

inter-city buses and refuse trucks and 

ready mix cement trucks. ASTM 

concluded from the results of Phase II 

that for tires with a maximum speed 

rating below 120 km/h (75 mph) the 

Endurance test speed should be reduced 

from 80 km/h (50 mph) to 72 km/h (45 

mph). 

NHTSA is aware that a tire operated 

on a curved road-wheel, compared to a 

tire operated on a flat road surface, 

experiences higher centerline and belt 

edge temperatures due to several factors, 

e.g., severe reverse curvature at the tire 

contact patch; distortion of the tire 

contact patch shape; and over-deflection 

of the tire sidewall. NHTSA’s tests are 

conducted on a curved road-wheel. 

There appears to be several anomalies in 

the results from the ASTM model, such 

as the centerline temperatures being 

higher for the 18/32-inch tread depth 

tire compared with the centerline 

temperatures for the 30/32-inch tread 

depth tire. (A tire with a greater tread 

depth generally runs hotter than one 

with a lower tread depth.) There are also 

test conditions where the model 

predicted lower tire temperatures when 

tested on the road-wheel than the tire 

temperatures when tested on the flat 

track machine and the test track. In 

addition, the test duration for the tires 

the task group tested was limited to 60 

minutes to achieve a steady-state 

temperature, which does not reflect the 

level of stringency a tire experiences 

during a 47-hour test as performed 

under the current FMVSS No. 119 

endurance test. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 60059 

31The corresponding values for the maximum 

load and speed symbols of that labeling system may 

be found in literature published by entities such as: 

Tire & Rim Association, European Tyre and Rim 

Technical Organization, Japan Automobile Tyre 

Manufacturers Association, and others. 

32The endurance test is a more stringent test than 

the high speed test, primarily because of the lower 

inflation pressure and longer duration specified for 

the test. 

Nevertheless, we note that our 

rulemaking proposal to upgrade the 

endurance test includes parameters that 

are on the same order of magnitude as 

those provided in the task group’s 

recommendations. Our proposal 

includes an endurance test speed of 80 

km/h (50 mph) on a curved road-wheel, 

up to 100 percent maximum load rating, 

80 percent of the maximum inflation 

pressure, and 35 °C (95 °F) ambient 

temperature. From the results in our 

Phase II endurance and high-speed tests, 

we tentatively believe that these 

parameters are reasonable and 

practicable and consistent with the task 

group’s recommendation. 

3. Rubber Manufacturers Association 

On May 14, 2009, RMA submitted 

information to the agency regarding an 

upgrade of FMVSS No. 119 (see Docket 

No. NHTSA 2002–13707–0016.1 (RMA 

Perspective on the FMVSS 119 

Revisions and Updates Mandated by the 

TREAD Act)). RMA’s information 

included suggestions for a number of 

matters regulated by FMVSS No. 119, 

including the endurance and high speed 

tests, and had data from tests it had 

conducted (although from only one 

manufacturer). The suggestions are 

briefly described below. 

RMA suggested that NHTSA mandate 

that all radial tires with a load range of 

F and higher (that are not for speedrestricted service) be labeled with a 

service description identified by an 

international labeling system, in support 

of global harmonization and that it be 

used as the basis for testing.31 RMA 

suggested that the endurance test speed 

in the upgraded FMVSS No. 119 be 

based on that speed symbol. RMA 

suggested that tires with speed symbols 

of J, K, L, and M be tested at a speed 

equal to the difference between the 

speed symbol and 40 km/h (25 mph). If 

the tire has a speed symbol L, which 

deciphered is a speed rating of 120 km/ 

h (75 mph), the endurance test speed 

would be 80 km/h (50 mph), or if a tire 

has a speed symbol J, which deciphered 

is a speed rating of 100 km/h (62 mph), 

the endurance test speed would be 60 

km/h (37 mph). 

RMA suggested that if a high speed 

test is adopted in FMVSS No. 119, the 

test should be a stepped-up speed test 

with three 30-minute steps. The test 

speeds RMA suggested would be 

indexed to the corresponding speed 

symbol of the tire (i.e., step 1 test speed 

is 20 km/h below the speed symbol, step 

2 test speed is 10 km/h below the speed 

symbol, and step 3 test speed is run at 

corresponding speed for that symbol). 

Further, RMA believed that the high 

speed test should be conducted without 

the initial break-in step. According to 

RMA, there are data supporting that the 

tire growth during the break-in step was 

negligible, and that the step was thus 

unnecessary. 

Test conditions such as inflation 

pressure, load, duration, and ambient 

temperature in RMA’s suggested tests 

(endurance and high speed) would be 

the same as NHTSA’s proposed test 

conditions. Other issues discussed by 

RMA may be found in the docket 

submission. 

Some of RMA’s suggestions have been 

incorporated into this NPRM. As 

discussed above, NHTSA has proposed 

requiring tires to have a maximum 

speed rating label on their sidewalls so 

that users will know a tire’s maximum 

speed capability. Thus, a labeling 

proposal in included in this NPRM. 

However, as explained above, the 

agency believes that using an 

international labeling system to identify 

the tire’s maximum load and speed 

ratings would not benefit end users in 

the U.S. because the literature used to 

reference these values may not be 

readily available for all users, and 

because the lettering system may be 

confusing. Accordingly, the NPRM 

proposes that a numerical value be 

labeled rather than a symbol. 

This NPRM incorporates RMA’s 

suggestion that a high speed test should 

comprise a stepped-up speed test with 

three 30-minute steps using test speeds 

indexed to the corresponding speed 

rating of the tire. However, as explained 

earlier in this document, this NPRM 

does not propose RMA’s suggestion to 

remove the break-in step from the high 

speed test but we are soliciting 

comments on whether it is appropriate 

to do so. 

With regard to RMA’s suggestion 

about the endurance test, at this time 

the agency does not believe that all tires 

should be tested to 40 km/h (25 mph) 

less than the tire’s maximum speed 

rating in the endurance test. RMA used 

research findings from the ASTM as a 

basis for the suggestion to establish the 

test speeds. ASTM found that there was 

an equivalence in belt edge 

temperatures for tires tested on a flat 

road surface at 120 km/h (75 mph) and 

on a curved road wheel at 80 km/h (50 

mph). Hence, this 40-km/h (25-mph) 

differential was used by RMA in its 

recommendations for the test speeds 

NHTSA should propose for the 

endurance test. 

The RMA test data used to support its 

recommendations was limited, 

generated from only one of its members, 

Bridgestone Firestone. Also, the mix of 

tires in the RMA data did not reflect the 

real-world mix of heavy vehicle tires 

sold in the U.S. Although the ASTM 

findings appear to support the finding 

that a 40-km/h (25-mph) differential 

exists in test speeds in the 120-km/h 

(75-mph) range, NHTSA does not have 

enough information to conclude that 

these findings can be extrapolated to 

include speeds much lower than 120 

km/h (75 mph). The agency is currently 

reviewing data from lower speed rated 

tires 100 km/h (62 mph). We request 

data from tire manufacturers on the 

performance of lower speed rated tires, 

particularly for the proposed endurance 

test, and comments from the public on 

RMA’s submission to the docket. 

We believe that the NPRM’s proposed 

test conditions for the endurance test 

are practicable and reasonable and 

reflect our recognition of the severity of 

the endurance test on the curved road 

wheel.32 Our data show that some tires 

that are speed rated 65 mph were able 

to meet the proposed endurance test 

when tested to 80 km/h (50 mph). The 

vast majority of the tires we tested 

completed the proposed 47-hour 

endurance test at 80 km/h (50 mph) 

without failure. 

b. Deep Tread Truck Tires 

The agency tested tires with tread 

depths that are typical of on-road 

service, and included drive axle tires 

with tread depths of about 30/32 inch, 

steel axle tires with tread depths of 

about 18/32 inch, and trailer tires with 

tread depths around 12/32 inch. We are 

aware that there are deep tread truck 

tires with a load range of H, J, or L that 

have tread depths greater than 32/32 

inch, but none of these tires was 

included in our testing because they 

appear to represent a very small 

percentage of heavy truck tires. We are 

soliciting public comments on the 

applicability of the proposed endurance 

and high speed requirements to deep 

tread truck tires and welcome test data 

submissions for the docket. 

c. Correction of Table III 

In Table III, ‘‘Endurance Test 

Schedule,’’ of FMVSS No. 119, there are 

several minor items of information that 

have been inadvertently omitted from 

the table over the course of years of 

amendments to the standard, most 

recently when the standard was 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
60060 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

33The evaluation may be obtained by contacting 

Docket Management at the address or telephone 

number provided at the beginning of this document. 

You may also read the document via the Internet, 

by following the instructions in the section below 

entitled, ‘‘Public Participation.’’ The evaluation will 

be listed in the docket summary. 

amended on June 26, 2003. The Table III 

proposed in today’s NPRM corrects 

those omissions, by including for tires 

described as ‘‘All other,’’ a row for load 

range A, B, C, and D tires, and a row for 

load range E tires, which include biasply tires and others not covered under 

FMVSS No. 139. Footnote text has also 

been added to correspond to the 

footnote superscripts 1 and 2. In 

addition, the current Table III does not 

include load range C and D for speedrestricted service and load range M on 

the list of tires for non-speed-restricted 

service but it does include load range N, 

which is a higher load range tire. Load 

range C and D were inadvertently 

excluded from Table III. Also, load 

range M has been inadvertently 

excluded from Table III since both load 

range M and N tires are included in the 

list of speed-restricted tires required to 

comply with FMVSS No. 119. The 

agency seeks comments on including 

load range M on the list of non-speedrestricted tires covered under the 

standard. In addition, we are proposing 

to change the superscript format from 

numerical values 1 and 2 to alphabet 

letters A and B to enhance clarity. We 

are also seeking comments on this issue. 

d. Separate Standard 

We note for the reader that, assuming 

we issue a final rule on this subject, the 

final rule might separate the non-speedrestricted, radial tires of load ranges F, 

G, H, J, and L, from the requirements 

currently in FMVSS No. 119 that this 

NPRM does not propose to upgrade. We 

might set forth the upgraded 

requirements for the non-speedrestricted, radial tires of load ranges F, 

G, H, J, and L, in a new standard to 

make clear the regulatory language 

between those tires whose requirements 

were not upgraded. The agency took the 

same approach when it upgraded tires 

for vehicles with a GVWR of 4,536 kg 

(10,000 lb) or less, establishing FMVSS 

No. 139. RMA has also endorsed this 

approach in its letter to the agency; see 

Docket No. NHTSA 2002–13707–0016.1, 

p. 13. 

VIII. Proposed Effective Date 

NHTSA proposes that the proposed 

requirements for load range F, G, and H 

tires be effective two years after 

publication of a final rule. The results 

of the tire research indicate that most 

load range G and H tires are able to meet 

the proposed requirements with little if 

any modification. Load range J tires 

might need some design changes to 

comply with the upgraded 

requirements. Given the need for 

modification and the small market share 

of the tires, the agency proposes an 

effective date of three years after 

publication of a final rule for load range 

J and L tires. In addition, the agency’s 

proposal to establish new labeling 

requirements for the maximum speed 

rating of the tire would require changes 

in some tire molds. We propose that the 

new maximum speed rating labeling 

requirements for load range F, G, H, J, 

and L tires be effective 5 years after the 

publication of the final rule. NHTSA 

requests comment on the proposed lead 

time for meeting the performance 

requirements and the labeling 

requirements. 

IX. Costs and Benefits 

According to Modern Tire Dealer, the 

2008 sales for medium and heavy truck 

original equipment and replacement 

tires were 4.3 million and 15.5 million, 

respectively. Comments are requested 

on the number of tire sales by all (F, G, 

H, J, and L) load ranges and speed 

ratings. All of the G load range tires 

tested passed the proposed criteria. 

Also, all of the H load range tires tested, 

except for one brand speed rated at 62 

mph, passed the proposed criteria. For 

the endurance test, of the six J load 

range brand/models tested, all three 

tires from three brand/models passed, 

two of three from a fourth brand/model 

passed, none of a fifth brand/model 

passed, and three tires from a sixth 

brand passed. Costs to bring the H and 

J load range tires into compliance with 

the proposal are not anticipated to be 

greater than $15 per tire. 

Out of the fifteen load range L tires 

tested (three tires for each of five brand/ 

models), only seven tires passed the 

proposed test and two did so with a 

small margin based on the proposed 47 

hours duration for the endurance test. 

Comments are requested on the 

technology needed and cost to make 

other load range L tires pass the 

proposed endurance test. At one end of 

the cost spectrum, improved rubber 

compounds could be a countermeasure 

that could reduce heat retention with 

costs at about an additional $0.25 per 

pound. Since these tires have about 100 

pounds of rubber this would add $25 in 

costs to each L load range tire. At the 

other end of the cost range, one could 

assume these tires need to be made 

significantly lighter to pass the test with 

better materials. This would entail using 

ultra high tensile strength steel costing 

an additional $2 per pound. Those tires 

now have 35 pounds of steel in them, 

totaling $70. Combining these two 

methods could add up to $95 per tire 

(these tires typically cost about $525 

each). Comments are also requested on 

the costs associated with the new speed 

labeling requirement. 

As discussed above, the costs to bring 

load range H, J and L tires to compliance 

with the proposed requirements are 

estimated to range from $15 to $95 per 

tire. The combined H, J, and L load 

range tire sales comprised about 29 

percent of the total medium and heavy 

truck tire sales (19.8 million tires). Of 

the 29 percent, about 23 percent or 

4,554,000 are believed to be H load 

range tires, about 3 percent or 594,000 

are believed to be J load range tires, and 

about 3 percent or 594,000 to be L load 

range tires. There are an estimated 

227,700 sales for H load range tires, 

118,800 sales for J load range tires and 

118,800 sales for L load range tires, all 

with a speed rating of 62, 65 or 68 mph. 

Applying the failure rate and cost per 

tire to the estimated sales of H, J and L 

load range tires with a speed rating of 

62, 65 or 68 mph would result in a total 

cost of $13,314,362. 

NHTSA believes that this NPRM has 

a beneficial effect on safety in that it 

would ensure greater tire durability as 

tires are held to more stringent 

standards than currently required. 

However, the agency has limited data on 

the crashes in the crash databases 

related to tires in these load ranges. 

Comments are requested on the different 

applications of various speed rating and 

load range tires (e.g., over the road bus 

operations, etc.). 

X. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices 

Executive Order 12866 and DOT 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

This rulemaking document was not 

reviewed by the Office of Management 

and Budget under E.O. 12866. It is not 

considered to be significant under E.O. 

12866 or the Department’s Regulatory 

Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; 

February 26, 1979). This document 

proposes upgrades to FMVSS No. 119 

that we believe most tire manufacturers 

will be able to meet without substantial 

difficulty. NHTSA has prepared a 

regulatory evaluation that discusses the 

costs and other impacts of this proposed 

rule.33

NHTSA believes that this NPRM has 

a beneficial effect on safety in that it 

would ensure greater tire durability as 

tires are held to more stringent 

standards than currently required. 

However, there might be some cost 

impacts for manufacturers of lower 

speed rated load range J and L tires. 

Some of these tires may not meet the 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 60061 

34The issue of potential preemption of State tort 

law is addressed in the immediately following 

paragraph discussing implied preemption. 

35The conflict was discerned based upon the 

nature (e.g., the language and structure of the 

regulatory text) and the safety-related objectives of 

FMVSS requirements in question and the impact of 

the State requirements on those objectives. 

36 Indeed, in the rulemaking that established the 

rule at issue in Geier, the agency did not assert 

preemption. 

proposed requirements in NHTSA’s test 

program. Of the heavy-duty load range 

J and L tires that did not uniformly pass 

the upgrade testing, we anticipate that 

the costs to bring them into compliance 

would be no greater than $15 per load 

range J tire and $95 per load range L 

tire. Comments are requested on the 

costs of meeting the proposed changes 

to 571.119. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., as amended by 

the Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 

1996), whenever an agency is required 

to publish a notice of proposed 

rulemaking or final rule, it must prepare 

and make available for public comment 

a regulatory flexibility analysis that 

describes the effect of the rule on small 

entities (i.e., small businesses, small 

organizations, and small governmental 

jurisdictions). The Small Business 

Administration’s regulations at 13 CFR 

Part 121 define a small business, in part, 

as a business entity ‘‘which operates 

primarily within the United States.’’ (13 

CFR 121.105(a)). No regulatory 

flexibility analysis is required if the 

head of an agency certifies the 

rulemaking will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. SBREFA 

amended the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

to require Federal agencies to provide a 

statement of the factual basis for 

certifying that a rule will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

NHTSA has considered the effects of 

this proposed rule under the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. I certify that this 

proposed rule would not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

The proposed rule, which would apply 

to new pneumatic tires, would affect tire 

manufacturers and/or suppliers. The 

agency does not believe that any of the 

tire manufacturers affected by this 

proposed rule are small businesses. 

However, small tire retail outlets across 

the country could in some small way be 

impacted by the proposal, in that the 

cost of some tires might increase. 

The agency requests comments 

concerning the economic impact of the 

proposed rule on any small tire 

manufacturers, tire retail outlets, or any 

other entities which the agency has not 

mentioned. 

Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) 

NHTSA has examined today’s 

proposed rule pursuant to Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255; Aug. 10, 

1999) and concluded that no additional 

consultation with States, local 

governments, or their representatives is 

mandated beyond the rulemaking 

process. The agency has concluded that 

the proposal does not have sufficient 

federalism implications to warrant 

consultation with State and local 

officials or the preparation of a 

federalism summary impact statement. 

The proposed rule does not have 

‘‘substantial direct effects on the States, 

on the relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government.’’ 

NHTSA rules can have preemptive 

effect in two ways. First, the National 

Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act 

contains an express preemption 

provision: 

When a motor vehicle safety standard is in 

effect under this chapter, a State or a political 

subdivision of a State may prescribe or 

continue in effect a standard applicable to 

the same aspect of performance of a motor 

vehicle or motor vehicle equipment only if 

the standard is identical to the standard 

prescribed under this chapter. 

49 U.S.C. 30103(b)(1). It is this 

statutory command that preempts any 

non-identical State legislative and 

administrative law 34 addressing the 

same aspect of performance, not today’s 

rulemaking. 

Second, the Supreme Court has 

recognized the possibility, in some 

instances, of implied preemption of 

State requirements imposed on motor 

vehicle manufacturers, including 

sanctions imposed by State tort law. 

That possibility is dependent upon 

there being an actual conflict between a 

FMVSS and the State requirement. If 

and when such a conflict exists, the 

Supremacy Clause of the Constitution 

makes the State requirements 

unenforceable. See Geier v. American 

Honda Motor Co., 529 U.S. 861 (2000), 

finding implied preemption of State tort 

law on the basis of a conflict discerned 

by the court,35 not on the basis of an 

intent to preempt asserted by the agency 

itself.36

NHTSA has considered the nature 

(e.g., the language and structure of the 

regulatory text) and objectives of today’s 

proposed rule and does not discern any 

existing State requirements that conflict 

with the proposed rule or the potential 

for any future State requirements that 

might conflict with it. Without any 

conflict, there could not be any implied 

preemption of State law, including State 

tort law. 

National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

Under the National Technology 

Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 

(NTTAA) (Pub. L. 104–113), ‘‘all Federal 

agencies and departments shall use 

technical standards that are developed 

or adopted by voluntary consensus 

standards bodies, using such technical 

standards as a means to carry out policy 

objectives or activities determined by 

the agencies and departments.’’ 

Voluntary consensus standards are 

technical standards (e.g., materials 

specifications, test methods, sampling 

procedures, and business practices) that 

are developed or adopted by voluntary 

consensus standards bodies, such as the 

Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE). 

The NTTAA directs us to provide 

Congress, through OMB, explanations 

when we decide not to use available and 

applicable voluntary consensus 

standards. 

NHTSA was unable to find any 

voluntary consensus standards relevant 

to this rulemaking. Additionally, please 

see section VI.A.1 above for discussion 

of international standards considered by 

the agency in this rulemaking. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 requires agencies to prepare a 

written assessment of the costs, benefits 

and other effects of proposed or final 

rules that include a Federal mandate 

likely to result in the expenditure by 

State, local, or tribal governments, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector, of 

more than $100 million annually 

(adjusted for inflation with base year of 

1995). This proposed rule will not result 

in expenditures by State, local, or tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector in excess of $100 million 

annually. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

NHTSA has analyzed this rulemaking 

action for the purposes of the National 

Environmental Policy Act. The agency 

has determined that implementation of 

this action will not have any significant 

impact on the quality of the human 

environment. 

Executive Order 12988 

With respect to the review of the 

promulgation of a new regulation, 

section 3(b) of Executive Order 12988, 

‘‘Civil Justice Reform’’ (61 FR 4729, 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
60062 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

37See 49 CFR 553.21. 38See 49 CFR 512. 

February 7, 1996) requires that 

Executive agencies make every 

reasonable effort to ensure that the 

regulation: (1) Clearly specifies the 

preemptive effect; (2) clearly specifies 

the effect on existing Federal law or 

regulation; (3) provides a clear legal 

standard for affected conduct, while 

promoting simplification and burden 

reduction; (4) clearly specifies the 

retroactive effect, if any; (5) adequately 

defines key terms; and (6) addresses 

other important issues affecting clarity 

and general draftsmanship under any 

guidelines issued by the Attorney 

General. This document is consistent 

with that requirement. 

Pursuant to this Order, NHTSA notes 

as follows. 

The issue of preemption is discussed 

above in connection with E.O. 13132. 

NHTSA notes further that there is no 

requirement that individuals submit a 

petition for reconsideration or pursue 

other administrative proceeding before 

they may file suit in court. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

Under the Paperwork Reduction Act 

of 1995 (PRA), a person is not required 

to respond to a collection of information 

by a Federal agency unless the 

collection displays a valid OMB control 

number. This proposed rule contains no 

reporting requirements or requests for 

information. 

Plain Language 

Executive Order 12866 and the 

President’s memorandum of June 1, 

1998, require each agency to write all 

rules in plain language. Application of 

the principles of plain language 

includes consideration of the following 

questions: 

• Have we organized the material to 

suit the public’s needs? 

• Are the requirements in the rule 

clearly stated? 

• Does the rule contain technical 

language or jargon that isn’t clear? 

• Would a different format (grouping 

and order of sections, use of headings, 

paragraphing) make the rule easier to 

understand? 

• Would more (but shorter) sections 

be better? 

• Could we improve clarity by adding 

tables, lists, or diagrams? 

• What else could we do to make the 

rule easier to understand? 

If you have any responses to these 

questions, please include them in your 

comments on this proposal. 

Regulation Identifier Number (RIN) 

The Department of Transportation 

assigns a regulation identifier number 

(RIN) to each regulatory action listed in 

the Unified Agenda of Federal 

Regulations. The Regulatory Information 

Service Center publishes the Unified 

Agenda in April and October of each 

year. You may use the RIN contained in 

the heading at the beginning of this 

document to find this action in the 

Unified Agenda. 

Privacy Act 

Please note that anyone is able to 

search the electronic form of all 

comments received into any of our 

dockets by the name of the individual 

submitting the comment (or signing the 

comment, if submitted on behalf of an 

association, business, labor union, etc.). 

You may review DOT’s complete 

Privacy Act Statement in the Federal 

Register published on April 11, 2000 

(Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477– 

78), or you may visit http:// 

www.dot.gov/privacy.html. 

XI. Public Participation 

How do I prepare and submit 

comments? 

Your comments must be written and 

in English. To ensure that your 

comments are correctly filed in the 

Docket, please include the docket 

number of this document in your 

comments. Your comments must not be 

more than 15 pages long.37 We 

established this limit to encourage you 

to write your primary comments in a 

concise fashion. However, you may 

attach necessary additional documents 

to your comments. There is no limit on 

the length of the attachments. 

Please submit your comments by a 

method set forth in the ADDRESSES

section at the beginning of this 

document. 

Please note that pursuant to the Data 

Quality Act, in order for substantive 

data to be relied upon and used by the 

agency, it must meet the information 

quality standards set forth in the OMB 

and DOT Data Quality Act guidelines. 

Accordingly, we encourage you to 

consult the guidelines in preparing your 

comments. OMB’s guidelines may be 

accessed at http://www.whitehouse.gov/ 

omb/fedreg/reproducible.html. 

How do I submit confidential business 

information? 

If you wish to submit any information 

under a claim of confidentiality, you 

should submit three copies of your 

complete submission, including the 

information you claim to be confidential 

business information, to the Chief 

Counsel, NHTSA, at the address given 

above under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. When you send a comment 

containing information claimed to be 

confidential business information, you 

should include a cover letter setting 

forth the information specified in our 

confidential business information 

regulation.38

In addition, you should submit a 

copy, from which you have deleted the 

claimed confidential business 

information, to the Docket by one of the 

methods set forth above. 

Will the Agency Consider Late 

Comments? 

We will consider all comments 

received before the close of business on 

the comment closing date indicated 

above under DATES. To the extent 

possible, we will also consider 

comments received after that date. 

Therefore, if interested persons believe 

that any new information the agency 

places in the docket affects their 

comments, they may submit comments 

after the closing date concerning how 

the agency should consider that 

information for the final rule. 

If a comment is received too late for 

us to consider in developing a final rule 

(assuming that one is issued), we will 

consider that comment as an informal 

suggestion for future rulemaking action. 

How Can I Read the Comments 

Submitted By Other People? 

You may read the materials placed in 

the docket for this document (e.g., the 

comments submitted in response to this 

document by other interested persons) 

at any time by going to http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for accessing the dockets. 

You may also read the materials at the 

DOT Docket . 

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571 

Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Motor 

vehicles, Rubber and rubber products, 

and Tires. 

In consideration of the foregoing, we 

propose to amend 49 CFR part 571 to 

read as follows: 

PART 571—FEDERAL MOTOR 

VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS 

1. The authority citation for Part 571 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 

30166 and 30177; delegation of authority at 

49 CFR 1.50. 

2. Section 571.119 is amended by 

revising S3(a), S6.1.2(b), S6.3, S6.5(e), 

S7.1.2, S7.2(a), S7.2(e), S7.4, S7.4.1, 

S7.4.2, and Table III, by removing and 

reserving S3(b), and by adding 

definitions to S4, in alphabetical order. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 60063 

The revised and added paragraphs 

read as follows: 

§ 571.119 Standard No. 119; New 

pneumatic tires for motor vehicles with a 

GVWR of more than 4,536 kilograms (10,000 

pounds) and motorcycles. 

* * * * * 

S3. * * * 

(a) New pneumatic light truck tires, 

for use on motor vehicles with a GVWR 

of 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) or 

less manufactured after 1948, of the 

following type: With a tread depth of 

18/32 inch or greater, bias-ply with 

tread depth of 18/32 inch or less, and 

speed-restricted service. 

(b) [Reserved] 

* * * * * 

S4. * * * 

Bias ply tire means a pneumatic tire 

in which the ply cords that extend to 

the beads are laid at alternate angles 

substantially less than 90 degrees to the 

centerline of the tread. 

* * * * * 

Maximum speed rating means the 

maximum speed, as specified by the tire 

manufacturer, at which the tire can 

carry a load corresponding to the 

maximum load rating for single usage at 

the corresponding inflation pressure. 

* * * * * 

Non-speed-restricted service tire 

means a tire with a maximum speed 

rating above 90 km/h (55 mph). 

Radial ply tire means a pneumatic tire 

in which the ply cords that extend to 

the beads are laid at substantially 90 

degrees to the centerline of the tread. 

Speed-restricted service tire means a 

tire with a maximum speed rating of 90 

km/h (55 mph) or less. 

* * * * * 

S6.1.2 * * * 

(b) The tire pressure, when measured 

at any time between 15 minutes and 25 

minutes after the end of the test, shall 

not be less than 95 percent of the initial 

pressure specified in S7.2(a), for the 

endurance test, and in S7.4.2(a) for the 

high speed test. 

* * * * * 

S6.3 High-speed performance. When 

tested in accordance with the 

procedures of S7.4, a tire shall meet the 

requirements set forth in S6.1.1 and 

S6.1.2(a) and (b). However, this 

requirement applies only to motorcycle 

tires, to non-speed restricted tires of 

nominal rim diameter code 14.5 or less 

marked load range A, B, C, or D, and to 

non-speed restricted radial tires marked 

load range F, G, H, J, or L. 

* * * * * 

S6.5 * * * 

(e)(1) Subject to S6.5(e)(2), the speed 

that corresponds to the maximum speed 

rating for each speed-restricted service 

tire and each non-speed-restricted 

service radial tire of load range F, G, H, 

J, and L shall be shown as follows: 

Max speed ___ km/h (___ mph) 

(2) For each non-speed-restricted 

service radial tire of load range F, G, H, 

J, and L, the speed shown shall be in a 

multiple of 10 km/h. 

* * * * * 

S7.1.2 The tire must be capable of 

meeting the requirements of S7.2 and 

S7.4 when conditioned to a temperature 

of 35 °C ± 3 °C (95 °F ± 5 °F) for 3 hours 

before the test is conducted, and with an 

ambient temperature maintained at 35 

°C ± 3 °C (95 °F ± 5 °F) during all phases 

of testing. The tire must be capable of 

meeting the requirements of S7.3 when 

conditioned at a temperature of 21 °C ± 

3 °C (70 °F ± 5 °F) for 3 hours before 

the test is conducted. 

S7.2 Endurance. (a) Mount the tire 

on a model rim assembly and inflate it 

as follows: For a non-speed restricted 

radial tire of load range F, G, H, J, or L, 

inflate it to 80 percent of the inflation 

pressure corresponding to the maximum 

load rating marked on the tire. For all 

other tires, inflate it to 100 percent of 

the inflation pressure corresponding to 

the maximum load rating marked on the 

tire. Use the single maximum load value 

when the tire is marked with both single 

and dual maximum loads. 

* * * * * 

(e) Allow the tire to cool for between 

15 and 25 minutes after running the tire 

for the required time. Measure the tire 

inflation pressure. Remove the tire from 

the model rim assembly, and inspect the 

tire for conditions specified in S6.1.2(a) 

and (b). 

* * * * * 

S7.4 High-speed performance. 

S7.4.1 Motorcycle tires, and nonspeed restricted tires of nominal rim 

diameter code 14.5 or less marked load 

range A, B, C, or D. 

(a) Mount the tire on a test rim and 

inflate it to the pressure corresponding 

to the maximum load rating marked on 

the tire. Use the single maximum load 

value when the tire is marked with both 

single and dual maximum load. 

(b) Condition the tire and rim 

assembly in accordance with S7.1.2. 

(c) Before or after mounting the 

assembly on a test axle, adjust the tire 

pressure to that specified in S7.4.1(a). 

(d) Mount the tire-rim assembly on an 

axle and press it against a flat-faced 

steel test wheel that is 1708 mm (67.23 

inches) in diameter and at least as wide 

as the tread of the tire 

(e) Apply a force of 88 percent of the 

maximum load rating marked on the tire 

(use the single maximum load value 

when the tire is marked with both single 

and dual maximum loads), and conduct 

the break-in procedure at 80 km/h (50 

mph) for 2 hours. 

(f) Remove the load, allow the tire to 

cool to 35 °C ±3 °C (95 °F ±5 °F), and 

then adjust the pressure to that specified 

in S7.4.1(a). 

(g) Reapply the same load, and 

without interruption or readjustment of 

inflation pressure, conduct the test at 

120 km/h (75 mph) for 30 minutes, then 

at 129 km/h (80 mph) for 30 minutes, 

and then at 137 km/h (85 mph) for 30 

minutes. 

(h) Allow the tire to cool between 15 

minutes and 25 minutes. Measure its 

inflation pressure. Then, deflate the tire, 

remove the tire from the test rim, and 

inspect the tire for conditions specified 

in S6.1.2 (a) and (b). 

S7.4.2 Non-speed restricted radial 

tires marked load range F, G, H, J, or L. 

(a) Mount the tire on a test rim and 

inflate it to the pressure corresponding 

to 90 percent of the maximum load 

rating marked on the tire. Use a single 

maximum value when the tire is marked 

with both single and dual maximum 

load. 

(b) Condition the tire in accordance 

with S7.1.2. 

(c) Before or after mounting the 

assembly on a test axle, adjust the tire 

pressure to that specified in S7.4.2(a). 

(d) Mount the tire-rim assembly on an 

axle and press it against a flat-faced 

steel test wheel that is 1708 mm (67.23 

inches) in diameter and at least as wide 

as the tread of the tire. 

(e) Apply a force of 85 percent of the 

maximum load rating marked on the tire 

(use the single maximum load value 

when the tire is marked with both single 

and dual maximum loads), and conduct 

the break-in procedure at 80 km/h (50 

mph) for 2 hours. 

(f) Remove the load, allow the tire to 

cool to 35 °C ± 3 °C (95 °F ± 5 °F), and 

then adjust the pressure to S7.4.2(a). 

(g) Reapply the same load, and 

without interruption or readjustment of 

inflation pressure, conduct the test at 

maximum speed rating less 20 km/h for 

30 minutes, then at maximum speed 

rating less 10 km/h for 30 minutes, and 

then at maximum speed rating for 30 

minutes. 

(h) Allow the tire to cool for between 

15 minutes and 25 minutes. Measure its 

inflation pressure. Then, deflate the tire, 

remove the tire from the test rim, and 

inspect the tire for conditions specified 

in S6.1.2(a) and (b). 

* * * * * 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
60064 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE III—ENDURANCE TEST SCHEDULE

Description Load range 

Test wheel 

speed 

Test load: Percent of maximum 

load rating 

km/h I—7 hours II—16 hours III—24 

hours 

Speed-restricted service: 

90 km/h (55 mph) ............................... All ............................................................. 40 66 84 101 

80 km/h (50 mph) ............................... C, D ......................................................... 48 75 97 114 

E, F, G, H, J, L, M, N .............................. 32 66 84 101 

56 km/h (35 mph) ............................... All ............................................................. 24 66 84 101 

Motorcycle ................................................. All ............................................................. 80 1 100 2 108 117 

Radial ......................................................... F, G, H, J, L ............................................. 80 85 90 100 

All other ..................................................... A, B, C, D ................................................ 80 1 75 2 97 114 

E .............................................................. 64 70 88 106 

F ............................................................... 64 66 84 101 

G .............................................................. 56 66 84 101 

H, J, L, M, N ............................................ 48 66 84 101 

1 4 hours for tire sizes subject to high speed requirements S6.3 . 

2 6 hours for tire sizes subject to high speed requirements S6.3. 

Issued: September 23, 2010. 

Joseph Carra, 

Acting Associate Administrator for 

Rulemaking. 

[FR Doc. 2010–24347 Filed 9–28–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1