[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 232 (Friday, December 1, 2000)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 75222-75230]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-30647]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Parts 567, 571, 574 and 575

[Docket No. NHTSA-00-8296]
RIN 2127-AI32


Certification; Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Tire 
Identification and Recordkeeping; Consumer Information Regulations

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

ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM).

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

SUMMARY: Section 11 of the recently enacted Transportation Recall 
Enhancement, Accountability, and Documentation (TREAD) Act requires

[[Page 75223]]

the Secretary of Transportation to initiate rulemaking to improve the 
labeling of tires to assist consumers in identifying tires that may be 
the subject of a safety recall. The TREAD Act also provides that the 
Secretary may take whatever additional action is appropriate to ensure 
that the public is aware of the importance of observing motor vehicle 
tire load limits and maintaining proper tire inflation levels for the 
safe operation of a motor vehicle.
    Pursuant to that Act, the agency is considering amendments to its 
regulations to improve the quality and usefulness of tire information 
and its availability and understandability to consumers. To aid in this 
effort, the agency is seeking responses from the public to questions 
relating to such matters as tire identification number content, 
readability and location, loading, plies and cord material, tread wear 
indicators, Uniform Tire Quality Grading Standards, speed ratings, run-
flat and extended mobility tires, tire inflation pressure, and 
dissemination of tire safety information.

DATES: You should submit your written comments so that they are 
received by January 30, 2001.

ADDRESSES: You may submit your comments in writing to: Docket 
Management, Room PL-401, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. 
Alternatively, you may submit your comments electronically by logging 
onto the Docket Management System (DMS) website at http://dms.dot.gov. 
Click on ``Help & Information'' or ``Help/Info'' to view instructions 
for filing your comments electronically. Regardless of how you submit 
your comments, you should mention the docket number of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical and policy issues: Mr. 
George Soodoo, Office of Crash Avoidance Standards, National Highway 
Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 
20590. Telephone: (202) 366-2720. Fax: (202) 366-4329. Joseph Scott, 
Office of Crash Avoidance Standards, National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. 
Telephone: (202) 366-2720. Fax: (202) 366-4329.
    For legal issues: Nancy Bell, Attorney Advisor, Office of the Chief 
Counsel, NCC-20, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 
Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. Telephone: (202) 366-2992. 
Fax: (202) 366-3820.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: You may read the materials placed in the 
docket for this notice (e.g., the comments submitted in response to 
this notice by other interested persons) by going to the DMS at the 
street address given above under ADDRESSES. The hours of the DMS are 
indicated above in the same location.
    You may also read the materials on the Internet. To do so, take the 
following steps:
    (1) Go to the Web page of the Department of Transportation DMS 
(http://dms.dot.gov/).
    (2) On that page, click on ``search'' near the top of the page or 
scroll down to the words ``Search the DMS Web'' and click on them.
    (3) On the next page (http://dms.dot.gov/search/), scroll down to 
``Docket Number'' and type in the four-digit docket number shown in the 
title at the beginning of this notice. After typing the docket number, 
click on ``search.''
    (4) On the next page (``Docket Summary Information''), which 
contains docket summary information for the materials in the docket you 
selected, scroll down to ``search results'' and click on the desired 
materials. You may download the materials.

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. Tire Information Labeling/Marking
    A. Generally
    B. Tire Identification Number (TIN)
    1. Current Requirements
    2. 1980 NPRM
    3. 1999 Final Rule
    C. Other Labeling
III. Questions for Public Comment
IV. Regulatory Analyses

I. Background

    The Transportation Recall Enhancement, Accountability, and 
Documentation (TREAD) Act, Pub. L. 106-414, requires the agency to 
address numerous matters through rulemaking. One of these matters, set 
forth in section 11 of the Act, is the improvement of the labeling of 
tires required by section 30123 of title 49, United States Code, to 
assist consumers in identifying tires that may be the subject of a 
recall. Section 11 provides that the agency must initiate a rulemaking 
proceeding for that purpose within 30 days after the enactment of the 
Act and must complete it not later than June 1, 2002.
    Additionally, that section provides that the agency may take 
whatever additional action it deems appropriate to ensure that the 
public is aware of the importance of observing motor vehicle tire load 
limits and maintaining proper tire inflation levels for the safe 
operation of a motor vehicle. Section 11 states that such additional 
action may, for example, include a requirement that the manufacturer of 
motor vehicles provide the purchasers of the motor vehicles information 
on appropriate tire inflation levels and load limits if the agency 
determines that requiring such manufacturers to provide that 
information is the most appropriate way that information can be 
provided.

II. Tire Information Labeling/Marking

A. Generally

    NHTSA's existing labeling requirements for new passenger car tires 
are set forth in Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 109, 
New Pneumatic Tires--Passenger Cars (49 CFR 571.109). Specifically, 
paragraph S4.3 of FMVSS No. 109 sets forth information labeling 
requirements for tires, including requirements regarding the 
positioning of the information on the sidewall to ensure that it is 
readily visible and to minimize the possibility that it will be scuffed 
off if the sidewall hits a curb or similar object. It provides that the 
information listed in paragraphs S4.3 (a) through (e) (e.g., number of 
plies and maximum permissible inflation pressure) must appear, on at 
least one sidewall, in an area between the maximum section width and 
the bead of the tire, unless the maximum section width of the tire 
falls between the bead and one-fourth of the distance from the bead to 
the shoulder of the tire. For tires for which the maximum section width 
falls in that area, all required labeling must be located between the 
bead and a point one-half the distance from the bead to the shoulder of 
the tire.\1\ Paragraphs S4.3.1 and S4.3.2 provide more extensive 
location requirements for other information (e.g., the DOT 
certification and the name of the manufacturer or

[[Page 75224]]

brand name and number assigned to the manufacturer) to be placed on 
passenger car tires. They provide that the labeling must be done ``in 
the manner specified in Part 574.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The agency initially addressed the problem of labeling tires 
whose maximum section width is close to the bead in a 1985 
rulemaking regarding tires for vehicles other than passenger cars. 
(49 FR 37816; September 26, 1984 and 50 FR 10773; March 18, 1985). 
That rulemaking amended 49 CFR part 574, Tire Identification and 
Recordkeeping (49 CFR 574.4) and FMVSS No. 119, New Pneumatic Tires 
for Motor Vehicles Other Than Passenger Cars (49 CFR 571.119) to 
permit placing markings at a different location in order to permit 
the introduction of a new tire concept for vehicles other than 
passenger cars where the tire's maximum section width is at the 
bead. In particular, Figure 1 of part 574 was amended to specify the 
requirements for the label's position if a tire's maximum section 
width falls within one-fourth of the distance from the bead to the 
tire shoulder. In that case, a marking must appear between the bead 
and a point one-half the distance from the bead to the shoulder of 
the tire. Amending part 574 had the practical effect of applying the 
new requirement to paragraphs S4.3.1 and S4.3.2 of FMVSS No. 109, 
given that these provisions state that the tires must be labeled 
``in the manner specified in part 574.'' A subsequent rulemaking (55 
FR 41190; October 10, 1990) amended FMVSS No. 109 to incorporate 
this provision explicitly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NHTSA's labeling requirement for retreaded passenger car tires is 
set forth in FMVSS No. 117, Pneumatic Retreaded Tires (49 CFR 571.117). 
FMVSS No. 117 requires that each new retreaded tire have molded into 
its sidewall information similar to that required in FMVSS No. 109, 
plus the words ``bias belted'' or ``radial,'' as applicable. FMVSS No. 
117 does not, though, require that the name of the manufacturer or 
brand name and number assigned to the manufacturer be placed on 
retreaded tires as is required on new passenger car tires by FMVSS No. 
109.
    NHTSA's labeling requirements for new tires for vehicles other than 
passenger cars are set forth in FMVSS No. 119, New Pneumatic Tires for 
Vehicles other than Passenger Cars (49 CFR 571.119). Paragraph S6.5 of 
FMVSS No. 119 specifies that all tires for vehicles other than 
passenger cars must have certain markings on the sidewalls. Among other 
things, these tires must show the actual number of plies in the tire, 
the composition of the ply cord material (S6.5(f)), and a letter 
designating the load range (S6.5(j)). S6.5 also provides that the 
designated information must appear, on at least one sidewall, in an 
area between the maximum section width and bead of the tire, unless the 
maximum section width of the tire falls between the bead and one-fourth 
of the distance from the bead to the shoulder of the tire. For tires 
for which the maximum section width falls in that area, all required 
labeling must be located between the bead and a point one-half the 
distance from the bead to the shoulder of the tire. Additionally, 
S6.5(b) requires that each tire be marked with the ``tire 
identification number required by part 574 of this chapter'' and that 
this number ``may be marked on only one sidewall.''
    NHTSA's labeling requirements for new temporary spare non-pneumatic 
tires for passenger cars are set forth in FMVSS No. 129, New non-
pneumatic tires for passenger cars (49 CFR 571.129). Paragraph S.4 of 
FMVSS No. 129 specifies that each non-pneumatic tire must have certain 
markings on the sidewalls including the non-pneumatic tire 
identification code (``NPTIC''), the load rating, and the tire 
identification number. These labeling requirements also specify that 
the labeling information must appear on both sides of the tire, except 
that in the case of a tire that has a particular side that must always 
face outward, the information must appear on the outward-facing side.

B. Tire Identification Number (TIN)

1. Current Requirements
    Section 574.5 of Title 49, CFR, Tire Identification Requirements, 
sets forth the methods by which new tire manufacturers and new tire 
brand name owners must identify tires for use on motor vehicles. The 
section also sets forth the methods by which tire retreaders and 
retreaded tire brand name owners must identify tires for use on motor 
vehicles. One purpose of these requirements is to facilitate efforts by 
tire manufacturers to notify purchasers of defective or nonconforming 
tires and by such purchasers to identify those tires so that purchasers 
can take appropriate action in the interest of motor vehicle safety.
    Specifically, section 574.5 requires each new tire manufacturer and 
each tire retreader to mold a TIN into or onto the sidewall of each 
tire produced, in the manner and location specified in the section and 
as depicted in Figures 1 and 2 of that section. The TIN is composed of 
four groups of symbols:
    1. The first group represents the manufacturer's identification 
mark assigned to such manufacturer by this agency in accordance with 
section 574.6;
    2. The second group represents the tire size for new tires; for 
retreaded tires, the second group represents the retread matrix in 
which the tire was processed or, if no matrix was used, a tire size 
code;
    3. The third group may, at the option of the manufacturer, be used 
as a descriptive code for identifying significant characteristics of 
the tire. If the tire is produced for a brand name owner, the third 
grouping must identify such brand name owner; and
    4. The fourth group identifies the week and year of manufacture. 
The first two symbols identify the week, starting with ``01'' to 
represent the first full week of the calendar year; the second two 
symbols represent the year. For example, ``2198'' represents the 21st 
week of 1998.
    NHTSA originally proposed these requirements in response to the May 
22, 1970 amendments to the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety 
Act of 1966.\2\ Those amendments, among other things, required 
manufacturers and brand name owners of new and retreaded motor vehicle 
tires to maintain records of the names and addresses of the first 
purchasers of tires (other than dealers or distributors) in order to 
facilitate notification of such purchasers in the event tires were 
found to be defective or not to comply with applicable Federal motor 
vehicle safety standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, 
Pub. L. 89-563, was originally codified at 15 U.S.C. 1581, et seq. 
However, it was recodified in 1995 and is now found at 49 U.S.C. 
30101, et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The agency believed that an effective method of tire identification 
was essential to an effective defect or noncompliance notification 
system for tire owners. Accordingly, on July 23, 1970, NHTSA published 
a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) (35 FR 11800) proposing to 
establish a tire identification system to provide a means to identify 
the manufacturer of the tire, the date of manufacture, the tire size, 
and, at the option of the manufacturer, additional information to 
further describe the type or other significant characteristics of the 
tire. The agency proposed a TIN composed of four groups of symbols: the 
first group would contain the manufacturer's identification mark which 
would be assigned by NHTSA; the second group would identify the tire 
size; the third group would identify the date of manufacture of the 
tire; and the fourth group would be the manufacturer's optional 
description of the tire. The symbols would be a minimum of 6 
millimeters (mm) (\1/4\ inch) high and would appear on both sidewalls 
of the tire.
    In a final rule published on November 10, 1970 (35 FR 17257), the 
agency revised the requirements proposed in the NPRM in response to the 
suggestions of various commenters. Specifically, NHTSA reversed the 
order of the manufacturer's optional information and the date of 
manufacture, so that the latter would appear in the fourth grouping and 
the manufacturer's optional information would appear in the third 
grouping. NHTSA also stated that the TIN need only appear on one 
sidewall in response to concerns relating to worker safety, and that 
the symbols need only be 4 mm (\5/32\ inch) high on tires with a bead 
diameter of less than 13 inches.\3\ Many

[[Page 75225]]

commenters requested that the date code be expressed in alpha-numeric 
form in order to reduce the date symbols to two digits. NHTSA declined 
to adopt the alpha-numeric system because it could be confusing to the 
public and because retreaders may not be able to easily determine the 
age of the casing to be retreaded. In order to shorten the stencil 
plate, however, NHTSA dropped one of the two digits representing the 
decade of manufacture, thereby reducing the date of manufacture group 
from four digits to three. The date of manufacture grouping was later 
expanded to four digits (64 FR 36807; July 8, 1999).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ In the preambles to the final rules establishing the 
location requirements for the safety information to be molded on the 
sidewall of the tires in FMVSS Nos. 109 and 119, the agency 
explained that it was establishing location requirements for two 
reasons.
    First, the agency stated that the labeling on retreaded tires 
should use original casing labeling a much as possible, since this 
reduces the chances of incorrect labeling. Accordingly, the agency 
required that new tire labeling appear in an area where it would not 
be buffed off the tire during recapping and similar retreading (37 
FR 23536; November 4, 1972).
    Second, the agency wanted the safety information to be located 
in an area where it would not be scuffed off the tire if the tire 
were rubbed against a curb or other object while parking, loading, 
etc. By requiring that the safety information appear between the 
widest part of the tire (the maximum section width) and the bead, 
NHTSA believed that the information would be less likely to be 
scuffed off the tire, and thus would be available to the user of the 
tire.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. 1980 NPRM
    As stated above, the TIN originated with the May 22, 1970 
amendments to the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 
1966. Prior to that time, there were no tire labeling requirements in 
effect. Tire manufacturers simply followed standard industry practices.
    In the early 1980's, NHTSA granted a petition for rulemaking filed 
by the Center for Auto Safety (the Center) requesting that 49 CFR Part 
574, Tire Identification and Recordkeeping, be amended to require that 
the TIN be placed on the outside sidewall (i.e., the sidewall visible 
when a tire is mounted on a vehicle) of whitewall tires and on both 
sides of blackwall tires. The Center stated that the current tire 
industry practice of placing the TIN on the inside sidewall of 
whitewall tires and on only one side of blackwall tires made it very 
difficult for most motorists to find and read the TINs on their tires 
once they are mounted on vehicles.
    Prior to publishing an NPRM (45 FR 82293; December 15, 1980), the 
agency sent special orders to nine tire manufacturers who together 
represented 84 percent of world tire production and 90 percent of 
domestic production of tires for use in this country to gather 
information on the feasibility and costs of implementing the proposed 
requirements. Among the questions in the special orders were ones 
asking whether the tire presses were operated 24 hours a day seven days 
a week and, if so, what measures could be taken to ensure that workers 
could safely change the identification number plates in the presses. (A 
tire press generally works like a clam shell. The lower half of the 
press remains in a fixed horizontal position, while the upper half is 
movable. The tire mold, which also has upper and lower halves, fits 
inside the press.) None of the respondents suggested that changing the 
number plates would present insurmountable safety problems.\4\ Further, 
based on its evaluation of these responses, NHTSA determined that such 
a requirement would impose costs of between $4.25 million and $5.9 
million.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ From the responses to the orders, the agency learned that of 
the 52 tire plants operated by the respondents in this country, 46 
of them operated only five or six days a week. The remaining six 
plants operated all week. In the case of those 46 plants, workers 
could safely and easily change the number plates during one of the 
days when the molds were nonoperational and at room temperature. The 
practice of the manufacturers was to change the number plates on 
these molds during their nonoperational day. On that day, workers 
could as easily change the number plates on the upper mold as on the 
lower mold. Additionally, the manufacturers operating seven days a 
week indicated that workers could safely change the number plates on 
operating upper molds in any of several ways. One way would be to 
place insulated blankets over the bottom molds. Another way would be 
to mold the whitewall side of whitewall tires on the lower mold so 
that the number plates could be placed on the more readily 
accessible upper molds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On April 9, 1981, the agency published a notice of intent listing 
17 actions that the agency said it intended to take to reduce 
unnecessary regulatory burdens upon the motor vehicle and related 
manufacturing industries (46 FR 21203). Among them was terminating 
rulemaking on the location of the TIN.
    Subsequently, the agency terminated the rulemaking (48 FR 19761; 
May 2, 1983). The agency stated that it was taking that action because 
it was unable to determine that the adoption of the proposal would 
significantly contribute to motor vehicle safety and because the 
compliance costs would be $4.25 to $5.9 million. Although the agency 
anticipated that the adoption of the amendment would increase the 
response to tire recall campaigns and that ultimately the action would 
reduce the chance of potentially unsafe tires being used on public 
roads, it was not able to provide a quantified estimate of the benefits 
to be gained from the proposed amendment. The data relied upon by the 
agency in issuing the proposal consisted solely of anecdotal comments 
by 13 consumers on difficulties they experienced in locating TINs. 
These 13 comments were among about 9,500 responses received by the 
agency in response to a survey in which it sent questionnaires to 
approximately 100,000 consumers. Thus, only 0.013 percent of the 
questionnaire recipients and 0.14 percent of the respondents reported 
this type of difficulty. Prior to issuing the proposal, the agency did 
not have any data or perform any analysis regarding the extent to which 
the proposed requirement would increase the number of people who find 
the identification number on their tires, the number of those people 
who respond to a tire recall, or the number of defective or 
noncomplying tires that would be removed from service. No additional 
data regarding benefits were obtained by the agency as a result of the 
comment process.
3. 1999 Final Rule
    In response to petitions for a rulemaking, the agency amended 
NHTSA's tire identification and recordkeeping regulation in 1999 to 
require the date of manufacture to be expressed in four digits, instead 
of the previously required three, so that consumers would be able to 
determine the decade of manufacture of their tires (64 FR 36807; July 
8, 1999). This rule also reduced the minimum size of the digits from 
the then-currently required minimum of 6 mm (\1/4\ inch) to 4 mm (\5/
32\ inch) to relieve the manufacturers and retreaders of the burden 
they might otherwise have incurred by having to redesign their tire 
molds to accommodate the additional digit.
    In that rulemaking, all commenters supported adding a fourth digit 
to the date code. Two of the commenters, though, opposed reducing the 
size of the numbers in the TIN on the basis that such reduction would 
make it more difficult for consumers to see, especially those with 
visual pathologies. These commenters did not, however, provide any data 
showing that drivers cannot read 4 mm (\5/32\ inch) symbols. NHTSA said 
that its experience to date with 4 mm (\5/32\ inch) symbols on tires 
suggest that symbols of that size do not present a problem.\5\ As 
discussed in the final rule, 4 mm (\5/32\ inch) is approximately the 
equivalent of font size 16 in Windows 95, which is approximately double 
the font size used in the Federal Register and also approximately 
double the size of the largest letters found on the U.S. quarters being 
minted then. Additionally, this agency pointed out that the size of the 
Uniform Tire Quality Grading Standards tire grades marked on tire 
sidewalls has always been 4 mm (\5/32\ inch) and the agency had not 
received any complaints that those letters or numbers were too small to 
read. Finally, Part 574 permits tires of less than 13 inches in 
diameter or those

[[Page 75226]]

that have less than a 6-inch cross section width to have a letter/
number size of 4 mm (\5/32\ inch). Again, the agency had not received 
any complaints about the size of those letters/numbers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ It should be noted that many tire manufacturers actually use 
symbols larger than 4 mm (\5/32\ inch) for the date code.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Other Labeling

    Labeling requirements are also contained in 49 CFR part 567, 
Certification, 49 CFR part 575, Consumer Information Regulations, FMVSS 
No. 110, Tire Selection and Rims, applicable to passenger cars and to 
non-pneumatic spare tire assemblies for use on passenger cars, and 
FMVSS No. 120, Tire Selection and Rims for Motor Vehicles Other Than 
Passenger Cars.
    Section 567.4 requires vehicle manufacturers to affix to each 
vehicle a label bearing, among other things, the Gross Vehicle Weight 
Rating (GVWR), which must not be less than the sum of the unloaded 
vehicle weight, rated cargo load, and 150 pounds times the vehicle's 
rated seating capacity; and the Gross Axle Weight Rating (GAWR), which 
is the value specified by the manufacturer as the load carrying 
capacity of a single axle system.
    Section 30123(e) of Title 49, U.S. Code, requires the Secretary of 
Transportation to prescribe a uniform quality grading system for motor 
vehicle tires to help consumers make an informed choice when purchasing 
tires. NHTSA implemented this statutory mandate by issuing the Uniform 
Tire Quality Grading Standards (UTQGS) at 49 CFR 575.104, which are 
applicable to new passenger car tires.\6\ The UTQGS require passenger 
car and tire manufacturers and tire brand name owners to provide 
consumers with information with respect to the treadwear, traction, and 
temperature resistance performance of their tires. Excluded from the 
UTQGS are deep-tread, winter-type snow tires, space-saver or temporary-
use spare tires, tires with nominal rim diameters of 12 inches or less 
and limited production tires as described in 49 CFR 575.104(c)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The UTQGS is not applicable to retreaded tires.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 575.6(a) of Title 49, CFR, requires that when a motor 
vehicle is delivered to the first purchaser for purposes other than 
resale, the vehicle manufacturer must provide, in writing and in the 
English language, the information specified in section 575.103 
applicable to that vehicle, and in the owner's manual, the information 
specified in section 575.104. \7\ Section 575.104(d)(1)(iii) requires 
vehicle manufacturers to list all possible grades for traction and 
temperature resistance and restate verbatim the explanation of each of 
the three graded aspects of performance. The information must also 
contain a statement referring the reader to the tire sidewall for the 
specific graded performance of the tires with which the vehicle is 
equipped. Section 575.6(c) requires that each vehicle manufacturer, 
brand name owner of tires, and manufacturer of tires for which there is 
no brand name owner to provide the information specified in subpart B 
of Part 575 to prospective purchasers at each location at which its 
vehicles or tires are offered for sale.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Prior to May 24, 1999 (64 FR 27921), passenger car 
manufacturers were required to directly provide general UTQGS 
information and the information specified in Section 575.104 in 
writing and the English language to purchasers and potential 
purchasers at the point of sale of new vehicles. The agency 
eliminated this requirement, instead requiring that the information 
be contained within the owner's manual, because it believed that the 
elimination of the point-of-sale requirement would relieve a 
significant burden on vehicle manufacturers and dealers and yet 
would have little effect on consumers (64 FR 27921; May 24, 1999).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Paragraph S4.3 of FMVSS No. 110 requires manufacturers to affix a 
placard to each passenger car's glove compartment door or an equally 
accessible location showing the vehicle's capacity weight, designated 
seating capacity, the manufacturer's recommended cold tire inflation 
pressure for maximum loaded vehicle weight, the manufacturer's 
recommended tire size designation, and, for a vehicle equipped with a 
non-pneumatic spare tire assembly, the non-pneumatic identification 
code required by FMVSS No. 129, New Non-Pneumatic Tires for Passenger 
Cars. The required information is intended to promote the vehicle's 
safe performance by preventing overloading of the tires or the vehicle 
itself.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Herzlich Consulting (Herzlich) petitioned the agency on 
March 12, 1992, to amend FMVSS Nos. 110 and 120 to include a 
requirement that the manufacturers of the vehicles subject to those 
standards place a warning in the glove compartment or some other 
accessible/visible location which would state, in high visibility 
letters: ``Warning: Underinflation, Overloading, or Damage can Cause 
any Tire to Fail Suddenly.'' In support of the petition, Herzlich 
argued that although the Federal and state governments and the tire 
industry continuously communicate tire safety information, such 
efforts are ``rather unsuccessful.'' Herzlich also argued that tire 
failure due to road hazard damage, underinflation, or overload 
continues to be a problem. The petitioner stated that tires are the 
most important safety component on the vehicle and, perhaps because 
of their high degree of reliability, they are often taken for 
granted by consumers. Herzlich also referred to unspecified surveys 
purporting to show that a ``significant number of vehicles are 
running on underinflated, overloaded, worn-out or damaged tires,'' 
which, it contended, indicates that people get careless and need to 
be reminded over and over again to inspect and properly maintain 
their tires.''
    After a full and careful review of the petition, NHTSA decided 
to deny it based on several factors (57 FR 45759; October 5, 1992). 
First, there already existed a vast amount of information on proper 
tire maintenance. Additionally, the agency stated that there was no 
reason to believe that requiring the same information be made 
available in another place would increase consumer's responsiveness 
to such information. Finally, the petitioner presented no data, and 
this agency was aware of none, that would support petitioner's 
assertion that improper maintenance causes the vast majority of tire 
failures or that a significant number of vehicles are running on 
underinflated, overloaded, worn out or damaged tires.
    In summary, NHTSA believed at that time that the wealth of 
safety materials already available to the public through industry, 
government, and consumer sources adequately addressed the issue of 
proper tire inflation and maintenance; that existing labeling 
requirements provided sufficient information to enable consumers to 
maintain tires properly and safely; and that the petitioner had not 
shown that the amendments it proposed would significantly change the 
behavior of the public in that respect.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Paragraph S5.3 of FMVSS No. 120 requires that each vehicle show, on 
the label required by section 567.4, or on a tire information label, 
the following information: the recommended tire size designation 
appropriate for the GAWR; the size and type designation of rims 
appropriate for those tires; and the recommended cold inflation 
pressure for those tires such that the sum of the load ratings of the 
tires on each axle (when the tires' load carrying capacity at the 
specified pressure is reduced by dividing by 1.10, in the case of a 
tire subject to FMVSS No. 109, i.e., a passenger car tire, installed on 
a multipurpose passenger vehicles (MPVs), truck, bus or trailer) is 
appropriate for the GAWR. The reduction in load rating is intended to 
provide a safety margin for the generally harsher treatment, such as 
heavier loading and possible off-road use, that passenger car tires 
receive when installed on a MPV, truck, bus or trailer instead of on a 
passenger car.

III. Questions for Public Comment

    To aid the agency in conducting this rulemaking, the agency is 
seeking answers from the public to the following questions:

A. General Consumer Knowledge and Behavior/Availability of Information 
to Consumers

    (1) Are consumers being given the information they need to maintain 
their tires properly, to determine how much weight (passengers plus 
cargo) they can safely place in their vehicles, and to identify tires 
that have been determined to be defective or noncompliant? What tire 
information is most important for consumers to have for safety and 
recall purposes?

[[Page 75227]]

    (2) Do consumers read and correctly understand the information that 
they are currently receiving? For example, do consumers understand the 
factors that contribute to tire failure (such as speed, tire inflation 
pressure, and weight) and the steps they can take to reduce the 
possibility of tire failure? Do consumers know where to locate tire 
information in their vehicles, particularly recommended cold tire 
inflation pressure and maximum load information? Do consumers read the 
information in the owner's manual regarding proper tire care? Are 
consumers confused when they find a difference between the recommended 
tire inflation pressure labeled on their vehicle and the maximum 
inflation pressure labeled on the tire? Which of those two pressures do 
they follow in inflating their tires? Do consumers understand the 
relationship/interaction between tire inflation pressure and the load 
that a vehicle and its tires can safely carry? Do consumers understand 
how and when to measure cold inflation pressure? Do consumers 
understand and use the tire labeling information that currently appears 
on the tires and in the vehicle?
    (3) Do consumers routinely use and correctly follow the guidance 
included in that information? For example, do they typically inflate 
their own tires? How often? To what level?
    (4) What tire information do consumers want, how do they want it 
expressed, and where would they prefer to see that tire information 
located on their tires or in their vehicles? If any focus group studies 
have been conducted by manufacturers or other organizations regarding 
the consumers' needs in this area, should the agency use them to aid in 
assessing how to meet those needs? Should the agency supplement these 
studies by conducting its own focus group study? If so, what questions 
should be presented to the focus groups?

B. TIN Information

Location
    The continued use of tires determined to be unsafe poses a safety 
risk not only for the occupants of the vehicles equipped with those 
tires, but also for other highway users near those vehicles. To the 
extent that it is difficult and inconvenient to check the TINs, the 
percentage of people who respond to a tire recall campaign may be 
reduced, and motorists unknowingly could continue to drive their 
vehicles with unsafe tires.
    The side of a tire bearing the TIN is often mounted so that it 
faces inward. In the case of whitewall tires, this occurs because the 
TIN is almost always molded on the blackwall (i.e., inside sidewall) of 
the tire.\9\ Whitewall tires account for a small and declining 
percentage (currently about 5 percent or less) of original equipment 
tire sales in this country, but about 40 percent of replacement tires. 
The ratio of original equipment tires to replacement tires is about 1 
to 3. Blackwall tires have the TIN on one sidewall. The agency believes 
that blackwall tires (other than those with white raised lettering) are 
as likely to be mounted with the number side facing in as out. Thus, it 
appears that a substantial percentage of tires are mounted with their 
TINs not readily visible. We would appreciate information from 
commenters that would help us to estimate the percentage of tires with 
the TIN facing inward.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Blackwall tires with white raised lettering on one sidewall 
have their TIN molded on the opposite sidewall. These tires, like 
whitewall tires, are mounted with their TIN facing inward.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    When the TINs appear on the inside sidewalls of the tires mounted 
on vehicles, motorists have three inconvenient ways of finding the 
TINs. They must either: (1) Slide under the vehicle with a flashlight, 
pencil and paper and search the inside sidewalls for the TINs; (2) 
remove each tire, find the TIN, and then replace the tire; or (3) 
enlist the aid of a garage or service station attendant or tire 
retailer.
    Improved access to the TIN would enhance the owner's ability to 
determine if his or her tires have been recalled. Requiring that the 
TIN be placed on the outside sidewall of whitewall and raised-letter 
tires and on both sides of blackwall tires would significantly 
facilitate finding the TIN and thus should increase the ability of 
consumers to know whether their tires are covered by recall campaigns.
    (5) Based on the above discussion, how should the current 
requirements regarding the location of the TIN be modified, if at all, 
to make it easier for consumers to determine whether their tires are 
covered by a safety recall?
    (6) The agency originally proposed in an NPRM published July 23, 
1970 (35 FR 11800) that the TIN be marked on both sidewalls. As 
discussed above in the background section, one of the objections raised 
by the industry and others to that proposal was a safety hazard said to 
be associated with positioning the TIN on both sidewalls during the 
manufacturing process. Ten years later, in its 1980 NPRM, the agency 
concluded, based on new information from tire manufacturers, that the 
potential safety hazard had been eliminated or at least reduced to a 
manageable level. Was this conclusion correct? Is there any remaining 
significant hazard that is not addressable at reasonable cost? Please 
describe any manufacturing process changes that have been made that 
make it safer now than it was in 1970 to position the TIN manufacturing 
plates during tire assembly. Are there any additional changes that 
could be made to improve the safety of this operation?
    (7) What are the economic costs of requiring that the TIN appear on 
both sidewalls of some types of tires? Are there alternative available 
methods of manufacture that would facilitate placing the TIN on both 
sidewalls? If so, please describe these processes in detail.
    (8) Where, in relation to the bead and the shoulder of the tire, 
should the TIN be positioned on the sidewall to ensure that it can be 
easily located by consumers? Should the current requirements regarding 
TIN location in FMVSS Nos. 109 and 119 be changed to improve the 
visibility of the TIN to consumers? How would your answer to the 
immediately preceding question be affected by the considerations of 
manufacturing feasibility and the vulnerability of the TIN to abrasion 
in certain sidewall locations as a result of contact with curbs and 
other hard objects?
Content and Readability
    (9) Should all of the information currently required in the TIN be 
retained or should the agency cease to require some of it? Should the 
agency require that any information be added to the TIN or otherwise be 
required to be shown on the sidewalls of the tire? For instance, would 
it be helpful for the plant location, manufacturer's name, date of 
manufacture or country of manufacture to be shown on the sidewalls of 
the tire? Should the number, format, and type of symbols be revised? 
Should any of the information currently required to be included in the 
TIN be deleted? Please provide examples.
    (10) The current labeling requirement allows, at the option of the 
manufacturer, the use of up to four symbols in the TIN for marketing 
information. Should these optional symbols be either prohibited or 
separated from the mandatory portion of the TIN to shorten it? Would 
this facilitate reading the TIN and identifying recalled tires?
    (11) What type of changes to the appearance of the lettering and 
numbering would make it easier for

[[Page 75228]]

consumers to read the TIN? Should raised letters with contrasting 
colors be required? If not, should other methods (e.g., reflectivity) 
be used to increase the readability of the TIN?
    (12) What minimum should NHTSA specify for the height of the 
symbols in the TIN? Currently, the required minimum height for the 
symbols in the first three groups of the TIN is \1/4\ inch (0.25 inch 
or 6.35 mm), while the required minimum height for the symbols in the 
fourth group of the TIN is \5/32\ inch (0.16 inch or 4 mm). Should one 
height be specified for all four groups of symbols? If so, what height? 
Please provide data to support your suggestions regarding the 
appropriate height for the symbols. Please discuss how your answer to 
this question would be affected by the adoption of any of the types of 
appearance changes mentioned in the immediately preceding question.

C. Other Tire Labeling Information

Load Ratings
    (13) Should the maximum load rating \10\ in kilograms (kg)/pounds 
(lbs) at the maximum permissible inflation pressure in pounds per 
square inch (psi), as is currently required by FMVSS Nos. 109 and 119, 
continue to be shown on the tire? If the maximum load rating were 
replaced by a load index number (a numerical code associated with the 
maximum load a tire can carry at the speed indicated by its speed 
symbol under specified service conditions), would it be more effective 
or less effective in conveying the load limits of the tire to 
consumers? \11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The maximum load rating is the amount of load that may be 
carried by the tire at the tire's maximum permissible inflation 
pressure.
    \11\ The load index is a part of the labeling required by 
Economimc Commission for Europe (ECE) Regulation 30 Annex 3, which 
requires the load index and the speed-category symbol to be placed 
together near the size designation. For example, the sidedwall would 
contain the size designation * * *. {P215/65R15 89H} where ``89'' is 
the load index and ``H'' is the speed-category symbol. Annex 4 of 
Regulation 30 provides a Tablewith the Load Index and corresponding 
Load Rating in kilograms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (14) Do consumers understand and effectively use the load index 
values that are now provided on some tires? \12\ When purchasing 
replacement tires, do consumers typically refer to the maximum load 
rating and/or the load index for their vehicle? Do they sometimes 
replace extra load capacity tires with standard capacity tires? Please 
provide data to support your responses to this question.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The load index is not required to be labeled on tires sold 
in the U.S. However, the maximum load rating is required in the U.S. 
but no in the ECE Regulation. Often the load index is placed on 
tires so that manufacturers can simultaneusly comply with both ECE 
and FMVSS requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (15) What assistance do tire retailers provide consumers in 
selecting a tire with the correct load rating or load index for their 
vehicle? Is this assistance provided to all customers or only to those 
customers who ask about the rating or index? How much information do 
the retailers provide to ensure that a consumer chooses a tire that is 
right for his or her vehicle? Do the retailers routinely check the 
certification label information for gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) 
or gross axle weight rating (GAWR) to ensure that the load capacity of 
the tires selected by the purchaser exceeds the GAWR/GVWR of the 
vehicle?
    (16) When motorists load a light vehicle (i.e., a passenger car, 
pickup truck, sport utility vehicle (SUV) or a minivan with a GVWR of 
10,000 lbs. or less), how do they determine whether the vehicle is 
capable, given the pressure to which the vehicle's tires are inflated, 
of safely carrying the load? How frequently do they use the load rating 
information on the tires to make this determination? When they do use 
it, how do they do so? Do they make the determination correctly?
    (17) Do consumers often overload their light vehicles? If so, to 
what extent? What factors contribute to overloading? Do consumers 
accurately estimate the loaded weight of their vehicles? If overloading 
frequently occurs, what allowance for such overloading should be 
included in passenger car tire load ratings? FMVSS No. 120 currently 
specifies that if passenger car tires are used on vehicles other than 
passenger cars, each tire's load rating is to be reduced by dividing by 
1.10. The requirement is intended to provide a safety margin for the 
generally harsher treatment, such as heavier loading and possible off-
road use, that passenger car tires receive when installed on a MPV, 
truck, bus, or trailer, instead of on a passenger car.
Plies and Cord Materials
    (18) FMVSS Nos. 109 and 119 currently require that the actual 
number of plies used in the tread area and in the sidewall be labeled 
on both sidewalls. FMVSS No. 109 also requires that the generic name of 
each cord material used in the plies be indicated on the label. Should 
this information continue to be marked on the tire? What is the safety 
value of providing consumers with this information? How do they 
actually make use of the information? Should any descriptive/
qualitative information, such as the tire manufacturer's ``mileage 
warranty,'' \13\ be added to tires?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Manufacturers often warrant that a tire will last for a 
specified number of miles, subject to a number of terms and 
exclusions, e.g., the tire must be rotated at specified intervals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tread Wear Indicator
    (19) FMVSS Nos. 109 and 119 require that tires be equipped with a 
tread wear indicator that enables motorists to determine visually 
whether tires have worn to a tread depth of \2/32\ inch. \14\ 
Notwithstanding the inclusion of information about the tread wear 
indicator in the owner's manual, should any information also be placed 
on a label in the vehicle to inform consumers about the tread wear 
indicator and its purpose? If so, what information should be provided? 
Should markings be placed on the sidewall of the tire to pinpoint the 
location of the tread wear indicator on the tread surface? If yes, what 
type and size of marking would be most effective?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ State inspection systems require that the tread on each 
tire be not less than \2/32\ inch deep. See 49 CFR Sec. 570.9(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

UTQGS
    (20) The UTQGS provides consumer information on the treadwear, 
traction and temperature performance of passenger car tires. What 
changes to the UTQGS ratings should the agency consider in order to 
make the ratings more easily understood and more useful for consumers?
    (21) Section 575.104(c) provides that the UTQGS apply to new 
pneumatic passenger car tires. UTQGS does not apply, however, to deep 
tread, winter-type snow tires, space-saver or temporary use spare 
tires, tires with nominal rims of 12 inches or less, or ``limited 
production'' tires. Should any of these types of tires, such as deep 
tread tires which are frequently used on SUVs/MPVs, be required to be 
labeled with the UTQGS information? Should UTQGS also apply to light 
truck tires (LT-metric) since these tires are also used on SUVs, MPVs, 
and light trucks? Please be specific in your response and provide a 
basis for your answer.
Speed Rating
    (22) The speed rating of a tire is generally indicated on the tire 
although not required by either FMVSS Nos. 109 and 119. Should steps be 
taken to increase the likelihood that consumers purchase replacement 
tires with a speed rating at least as high as the rating specified by 
the vehicle manufacturer? If so, what steps should be taken and why? Do 
tire retailers routinely assist consumers to ensure that the selected

[[Page 75229]]

tires have the correct speed rating for their vehicles?
Run-Flat and Extended Mobility Tires
    (23) Should run-flat or extended mobility tires have that 
capability identified on the tire and/or on the vehicle certification 
label to ensure that consumers know that a tire is categorized as such? 
If so, how should that capability be identified?
Retreaded Tires
    (24) What changes, if any, should be made in the labeling 
requirements applicable to retreaded tires? Please provide the basis 
for your response.
Tire Inflation Pressure
    (25) With respect to passenger cars, a placard containing the 
vehicle manufacturer's recommended cold tire inflation pressure is 
required by FMVSS No. 110 to be affixed to the glove compartment door 
or an equally accessible location, e.g., the driver's door pillar. With 
respect to motor vehicles other than passenger cars, similar 
information is required by FMVSS No. 120 to appear on the vehicle 
certification label or on the tire information label. What other 
pertinent tire information (e.g., tire size and speed rating) should be 
considered for the placard or the labels? What other locations, such as 
the inside of the fuel tank access door, should be considered to ensure 
that the tire information contained on the placard and the labels is 
conspicuous to vehicle users and why? The fuel tank access door is 
regularly seen by drivers who fill their own fuel tanks and at such 
times when an air pump is generally available nearby. Please provide 
the basis for your responses.
    (26) The maximum cold inflation pressure value provided on the 
sidewalls of the tire appears to mislead some consumers, who use it as 
the vehicle's recommended inflation pressure.\15\ Should the maximum 
inflation pressure value (and the corresponding maximum load rating for 
tires subject to FMVSS No. 120) be removed from the tire sidewall? What 
would be the potential safety impact? If no inflation pressure value 
appeared on the tire, would users take the time to seek the vehicle 
manufacturer's recommended cold inflation pressure on the glove 
compartment door, the door pillar, or the owner's manual?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ The maximum cold inflation pressure is labeled on the tire 
by the tire manufacturer to provide the maximum cold inflation 
pressure to which a tire may be inflated based upon the maximum load 
rating for that tire. The recommended inflation pressure is labeled 
on the vehicle on a placard or the vehicle certification label by 
the vehicle manufacturer to provide the correct cold tire inflation 
pressure for the maximum loaded vehicle weight based upon vehicle 
specifications and operation, as determined by the vehicle 
manufacturer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dissemination of Tire Safety Information
    (27) Maintaining proper inflation pressure in motor vehicle tires 
is important to the safe and efficient use of motor vehicles. 
Maintaining tires at their proper inflation pressure, instead of 
allowing them to become underinflated, reduces heat build up, minimizes 
tire wear, contributes to good vehicle handling, and improves fuel 
economy through decreasing the rolling resistance of the tires. In 
light of the trend toward self-service gasoline stations, the 
responsibility for maintaining proper inflation pressure falls 
increasingly on motorists. Surveys indicate that a significant number 
of vehicles are being operated with underinflated, overloaded and/or 
damaged tires and that the public needs to be reminded to inspect and 
properly maintain their tires. What type of tire safety information 
should be provided? Where and how should it be presented so that it is 
readily noticed and easily understood? Should a tire inflation warning 
label be placed in a conspicuous location such as on the exterior of 
the glove box door? In answering these questions, please consider the 
requirement in section 13 of the TREAD Act that the agency complete a 
rulemaking to require a warning system in new motor vehicles to 
indicate to the operator when a tire is significantly underinflated.
Motorcycles and Trailers
    (28) Paragraph S5.1.1 of FMVSS No. 120 specifies that each motor 
vehicle shall be equipped with tires that meet the requirements of 
FMVSS No. 109 or 119. What are the merits of including or excluding 
trailer tires, motorcycle tires, etc., from any amendments to the tire 
information labeling requirements that may be proposed and adopted in 
this rulemaking? Please be specific in your response and provide a 
basis for your answer.
Font Height for Labeling Information
    (29) Currently, the various tire labeling requirements specify the 
height of letters, numbers, etc., used to convey the required 
information. For instance, FMVSS Nos. 109 and 119 require that symbols 
be not less than 0.078 inches (1.98 mm) in height, while the date of 
manufacture symbols for the TIN under Section 574.4 and the UTQGS 
figures under Section 575.104 are required to be not less than 5/32 
inch (0.16 inch or 4 mm) in height. Is there any reason for the agency 
to continue to specify different minimum heights for different types of 
required information or should it require one height for all required 
symbols? What height should be chosen? Please provide a basis for your 
answer. Please explain how your answer to this question would be 
affected by the adoption of a requirement to use contrasting colors or 
other means to increase the readability of the symbols.

D. Harmonization Issues

    The agency is participating in the development of a global tire 
standard as part of a cooperative worldwide effort, through the United 
Nations Economic Commission for Europe, to establish best safety and 
environmental practices for motor vehicle regulations. The issue of 
tire labeling is one of the issues being addressed in ongoing 
negotiations to develop worldwide labeling requirements.
    (30) Are there any voluntary consensus standards or requirements of 
other countries or regions which address the issues raised in this 
ANPRM? Do they provide effective ways of accomplishing the purposes of 
this rulemaking?
    (31) What opportunities are there to accomplish the purposes of 
this rulemaking in ways that minimize any unnecessary differences 
between NHTSA's requirements and those of other countries and regions?

IV. Regulatory Analyses

Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and DOT 
Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    This advance notice was not reviewed under Executive Order 12866 
and under the Department of Transportation's regulatory policies and 
procedures. Due to the preliminary nature of this document, NHTSA has 
identified few specific changes that it might propose to its standards 
and regulations. Further, it has limited current cost information that 
might be relevant to any potential changes. Accordingly, NHTSA is 
unable now to evaluate the economic impacts that this rulemaking might 
ultimately have. At this time, it does not appear that the rule 
resulting from this rulemaking will be significant. However, NHTSA will 
reassess this rulemaking in relation to the Executive Order, the DOT 
Regulatory Policies and Procedures, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 
1995 and other requirements for analyzing rulemaking impacts after 
using the information received in response to this advanced

[[Page 75230]]

notice to select specific proposed changes. To that end, the agency 
solicits comments, information, and data useful in assessing the 
impacts of making changes to the various requirements discussed in this 
document.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117 and 30166; 
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50 and 501.8.

    Issued on: November 28, 2000.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator, Safety Performance Standards.
[FR Doc. 00-30647 Filed 11-30-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P