Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 105 / Thursday, June 1, 1995 / Proposed Rules 28561

1Standard No. 120 also requires vehicles to be

equipped with rims that are listed by tire

manufacturers as suitable for use with their tires in

accordance with Standard Nos. 109 and 119.

Government procurement, Property

management, Records management, and

Federal information processing

resources activities.

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, GSA proposes to amend 41

CFR Part 201–9 as follows:

PART 201–9—CREATION,

MAINTENANCE, AND USE OF

RECORDS

1. The authority citation for Part 201–

9 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 40 U.S.C. 486(c) and 751(f).

2. Section 201–9.202–1 is revised to

read as follows:

§ 201–9.202–1 Standard and Optional

Forms Management Program.

(a) General. (1) The Standard and

Optional Forms Management Program

was established to achieve

Governmentwide economies and

efficiencies through development,

maintenance and use of common forms.

(2) FIRMR Bulletin B–3 contains

additional guidance on the Standard

and Optional Forms Management

Program.

(b) Procedures. Each Federal agency

shall—

(1) Designate an agency-level

Standard and Optional Forms Liaison

Representative and Alternate, and notify

GSA in writing of such designees’

names, titles, mailing addresses, and

telephone numbers within 30 days of

the designation or redesignation at the

address in paragraph (b)(4) of this

section;

(2) Promulgate Governmentwide

Standard Forms pursuant to the

agency’s statutory or regulatory

authority and issue in the Federal

Register Governmentwide procedures

on the mandatory use, revision, or

cancellation of these forms;

(3) Sponsor Governmentwide

Optional Forms when needed in two or

more agencies and announce the

Governmentwide availability, revision

or cancellation of these forms;

(4) Obtain GSA approval for each

new, revised or canceled Standard and

Optional Form, 60 days prior to planned

implementation, and certify that the

forms comply with all applicable laws

and regulations. Send approval requests

to: General Services Administration,

Regulations Analysis Division (KAR),

Washington, DC 20405;

(5) Provide GSA with a camera ready

copy of the Standard and Optional

Forms the agency promulgates or

sponsors prior to implementation, at the

address shown in paragraph (b)(4) of

this section;

(6) Obtain promulgator’s or sponsor’s

approval for all exceptions to Standard

and Optional Forms prior to

implementation;

(7) Annually review all Standard and

Optional Forms which the agency

promulgates or sponsors, including

exceptions, for improvement,

consolidation, or cancellation;

(8) When requested by GSA and OMB,

submit a summary of the Standard and

Optional Forms used for collection of

information covered by 5 CFR part 1320;

(9) Request approval to overprint

Standard and Optional Forms by

contacting: General Services

Administration, Supply Management

Division (3FNI–CO), 1941 Jefferson

Davis Highway, Crystal Mall Building 4,

Washington, DC 20406 (See 41 CFR

101–26.302); and

(10) Coordinate all matters concerning

health care related Standard Forms

through the Interagency Committee on

Medical Records (ICMR). For additional

information on the ICMR contact:

General Services Administration, Forms

Management Branch (CARM), 18th and

F Streets, NW., Washington, DC 20405.

Dated: May 17, 1995.

Fred L. Sims,

Assistant Commissioner for Information

Technology Policy and Leadership.

[FR Doc. 95–12859 Filed 5–31–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6820–25–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. 95–43, Notice 01]

RIN No. 2127–AF05

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety

Standards; Tire Selection and Rims for

Motor Vehicles Other Than Passenger

Cars

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration (NHTSA),

Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Request for comments.

SUMMARY: This notice solicits comments

to assist NHTSA in determining

whether to propose certain amendments

to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety

Standard (Standard) No. 120, Tire

selection and rims for motor vehicles

other than passenger cars.

This rulemaking action implements

NHTSA’s granting of a petition for

rulemaking submitted by the Tire

Retreading Institute (TRI). The petition

suggested that paragraph S5.1.3 of

Standard No. 120 be amended to permit

the installation of manufacturersupplied retreaded tires on new trailers.

As currently provided, used or

retreaded tires may be installed on new

trucks, buses, and trailers only if owned

and provided by the vehicle purchaser.

This notice solicits comments on that

suggestion and, in addition, solicits

comments on whether the standard

should be further amended to permit

manufacturers and/or distributors and

dealers, in addition to the vehicle

purchasers, to install used as well as

retreaded tires on new trucks and buses

as well as trailers.

DATES: Comment closing date:

Comments on this notice must be

received on or before September 29,

1995.

ADDRESSES: Comments should refer to

the docket and notice numbers above

and be submitted to: Docket Section,

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration, 400 Seventh Street,

SW., Room 5109, Washington, DC

20590. Docket Room hours are from 9:30

a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through

Friday.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.

Terri Droneburg, Office of Vehicle

Safety Standards, National Highway

Traffic Safety Administration, 400

Seventh Street SW., Room 5307,

Washington, DC 20590. Telephone (202)

366–6617.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

Standard No. 120 requires that

vehicles equipped with pneumatic tires

for highway service be equipped with

new tires that meet the requirements of

either Standard No. 109, New

pneumatic tires (49 CFR 571.109) or

Standard 119, New pneumatic tires for

vehicles other than passenger cars (49

CFR 571.119).1 Paragraph S5.1.3 of

Standard No. 120, however, provides

that in place of tires that meet Standard

No. 119, a truck, bus, or trailer may, at

the request of the vehicle purchaser, be

equipped at the place of manufacture of

the vehicle with used or retreaded tires

owned or leased by the vehicle

purchaser. The sum of the maximum

load ratings of the tires must meet the

requirements of paragraph S5.1.2 of the

standard, which requires that the sum of

the maximum load ratings of the tires

fitted to an axle be not less than the

gross axle weight rating of the axle

system. Also, only used tires originally
28562 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 105 / Thursday, June 1, 1995 / Proposed Rules

manufactured to comply with Standard

No. 119, as evidenced by a DOT symbol

marked on the sidewall of the tire, can

qualify for the S5.1.3 exception.

Standard No. 120 was promulgated by

Federal Register notice dated January

23, 1976 (41 FR 3467), and became

effective in phases between September

1, 1976 and September 1, 1979. Initially,

the S5.1.3 exception applied only to

used tires owned or leased by the

vehicle purchaser, if the maximum load

ratings were sufficient to carry the loads

of the axles on which they were

installed. This was intended to

accommodate ‘‘mileage contract’’

purchasers, a common practice in the

commercial truck, bus and trailer

industry in which the purchaser’s

vehicles are equipped with tires

purchased or leased from a supplier on

a cost-per-mile basis.

In reviewing the standard after its

issuance, NHTSA noted some minor

errors and some portions of the standard

that required clarification. The agency

published a Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking (NPRM) on October 30,

1980 (45 FR 71834) proposing to amend

S5.1.3 to permit the installation of

retreaded as well as used tires, but

limiting that exception to mileage

contract purchasers only. The agency

reasoned that suppliers that provided

tires on a mileage contract basis had a

contractual obligation to ensure that the

tires were serviceable and safe for use

on the vehicles for which they were

intended. The agency further believed

that this safeguard would not exist in

the case of any other purchaser who was

merely trying to save the cost of

purchasing new tires, since a purchaser

could send the vehicle manufacturer

palpably unsafe tires for mounting on a

new vehicle.

Thirteen comments to the NPRM were

received, 12 of which opposed the

provision limiting the exception to

mileage contract purchasers. The

commenters stated that it is common

practice for all vehicle fleets, not just

mileage contract purchasers, to send

tires from their tire banks to vehicle

manufacturers for mounting on the new

vehicles they order. Tire banks are

composed of serviceable tires that have

been removed from vehicles that are no

longer in service. The commenters

argued that the proposal in the NPRM

to limit the used/retreaded tire

exception to mileage contract

purchasers would effectively eliminate

the practice of maintaining tire banks,

thereby increasing costs for the vehicle

fleets affected with no safety

justification for doing so. Some

commenters also argued that it made no

sense for a purchaser to spend $65,000

to $75,000 for a new vehicle, then

install unsafe tires on it. Finally, one

commenter correctly pointed out that

Standard No. 120 did not require that

new vehicles be equipped with tires.

Therefore, a purchaser could, if it chose

to do so, order a new vehicle for

delivery without tires, then install

unsafe tires on it after delivery.

NHTSA was persuaded by those

comments and decided not to limit the

use of used and retreaded tires only to

mileage contract purchasers, but to

widen the exception to permit all

purchasers to provide their own tires. In

addition, since all commenters who

addressed the retread tire proposal

supported it, NHTSA adopted that

provision for inclusion in S5.1.3.

NHTSA then published the final rule

promulgating the current provisions of

Standard No. 120 on May 17, 1984 (49

FR 20822).

II. Petition for Rulemaking

The Tire Retreading Institute (TRI), a

division of the National Tire Dealers

and Retreaders Association, suggested

in a petition for rulemaking that the

used/retreaded tire exception of S5.1.3

be amended to permit the installation of

manufacturer-supplied retreaded tires

on new trailers. TRI argued that

retreaded tires from any source should

be permitted as long as they meet

appropriate quality standards and as

long as the vehicle purchaser is

informed that the vehicle has retreaded

tires. TRI believed that permitting the

installation of manufacturer-supplied

retreaded tires would give the purchaser

greater flexibility in the choice of tires

for the new vehicle.

TRI asserted that the current

restriction on the source of retreaded

tires is not supported by safety

considerations. TRI suggested that by

permitting the use of purchasersupplied retreaded tires on new trailers,

NHTSA acknowledged that retreaded

tires can safely be used on those

vehicles. TRI believed that NHTSA

decided to permit installation of only

purchaser-supplied used or retreaded

tires and not manufacturer-supplied

used or retreaded tires because the

agency believed purchasers have an

interest, perhaps not shared by

manufacturers, in ensuring that higher

quality tires are placed on their own

vehicles. TRI argued that, to the

contrary, the vehicle manufacturer

would be more knowledgeable than the

purchaser of the safety characteristics of

the vehicle and its tires and, because of

vehicle warranty and liability

considerations, would select retreaded

tires with the same quality

considerations as in selecting such

vehicle components as axles, bearings,

or new tires. Since the retreaded tires

would be installed at the manufacturer’s

initiative, TRI considered it essential

that the purchaser be advised in writing

that the new vehicle was equipped with

retreaded tires, giving the purchaser the

opportunity to make further inquiries or

impose additional requirements, while

still enjoying the cost advantage of

retreaded tires.

TRI also argued that the current

exclusion of manufacturer-supplied

retreaded tires is unfair to small

purchasers of trailers. TRI said that

currently, only large fleet owners with

tire banks can take advantage of the cost

savings of retreaded tires, while small

businesses with only a few vehicles and

no available supply of tire casings

cannot. TRI argued that the current

regulation discriminates against small

purchasers because these businesses

must acquire retreaded tires from

another source and ship them to the

manufacturer for installation. TRI

considered this an unnecessary,

burdensome practice.

TRI also asserted that in the Resource

Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA),

42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq., Congress

mandated the use of recycled products

to the maximum extent practicable,

including the use of retreaded tires. TRI

further referred to an Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA) regulation that,

in implementing the RCRA, requires

federal agencies to procure retreaded

tires ‘‘to the maximum extent possible’’

(40 CFR 253.10). Accordingly, the

petitioner believed that the current

restriction on manufacturer-supplied

retreaded tires contravenes these

governmental policies of promoting the

maximum use of retreaded tires.

III. Agency Analysis of Petition

As discussed above, paragraph S5.1.3

of Standard No. 120 permits

manufacturers of new trucks, buses, and

trailers to install used or retreaded tires

on those new vehicles only if such tires

are supplied by the vehicle purchaser.

Apart from that narrow exception,

paragraph S5.1.1 of the standard

requires the installation of new tires that

meet the requirements of Standard Nos.

109 or 119.

While there is a Federal motor vehicle

safety standard, Standard No. 117,

Retreaded pneumatic tires, for retreaded

tires on passenger cars, there is no

similar standard for retreaded tires for

vehicles other than passenger cars.

Further, there are no performance

standards applicable to used tires since

this agency does not have authority to

regulate used vehicles or equipment. As

noted above, in issuing the S5.1.3
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 105 / Thursday, June 1, 1995 / Proposed Rules 28563

exception NHTSA reasoned that motor

vehicle purchasers would be likely to

provide safe, serviceable tires for

installation on their new vehicles.

NHTSA believes that reasoning has been

vindicated in that the agency has

received no reports of any safety

problems associated with the use of

purchaser-provided used or retreaded

tires. The agency still believes, however,

that such reasoning would not extend to

manufacturer-supplied used or

retreaded tires and that, warranty and

liability considerations

notwithstanding, manufacturers,

distributors and dealers would not have

as great an interest as vehicle purchasers

in providing safe, serviceable used or

retreaded tires on their new vehicles.

Further, manufacturers would not know

the history of the used or retreaded tire

casings as well as the vehicle purchaser

would be expected to know.

Nevertheless, although NHTSA

disagrees with some of the petitioner’s

arguments, the agency granted TRI’s

petition on August 12, 1993, in the

belief that the petitioner raised some

issues that merit further consideration.

For example, the petitioner argues that

installation of retreaded tires should be

permitted, regardless of their source.

Although this agency has received

mixed reviews regarding the

performance of retreaded tires, the

petitioner correctly pointed out the

policy of the Federal government in

utilizing recycled products, including

retreaded tires, to the extent practicable

(see the Resource Conservation and

Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C. 6901, et seq.,

and implementing regulations at 40 CFR

part 253). The petitioner also correctly

asserted that manufacturer-installed

retreaded tires would provide

purchasers greater flexibility in the

choice of tires for their vehicles, as long

as the purchaser was notified in writing

that the vehicle was equipped with

retreaded tires.

On the other hand, the agency does

not agree with the petitioner’s assertion

that the current limited exception in

S5.1.3 is not supported by safety

considerations. The agency believes that

permitting vehicle purchasers to supply

their own tires for their new vehicles is

consistent with motor vehicle safety.

Given the interest of vehicle purchasers

in their personal safety and their

economic interest in protecting their

investment in their vehicles, vehicle

purchasers have a strong motivation to

install safe tires on their new vehicles.

Further, although the agency is

confident that most vehicle

manufacturers are reliable and reputable

and would select safe and serviceable

tires for the vehicles they produce, it

cannot be assumed that all

manufacturers would be consistently

reliable or conscientious in their

selection of used and/or retreaded tires.

Finally, NHTSA does not agree with

the petitioner that the current exclusion

of manufacturer-supplied used or

retreaded tires discriminates against

small businesses. Large businesses

generally are in a better position than

small businesses to take advantage of

cost savings by large quantity

transactions in return for discount

prices. In this case, the standard gives

both large and small businesses the

advantage of utilizing tires already on

hand on their new vehicles, thus saving

the unnecessary costs of purchasing

unneeded new tires.

Although the petition suggested

relaxing the limitation on the current

S5.1.3 exception only to the extent of

allowing installation of manufacturersupplied retreaded tires on new trailers,

NHTSA believes that it is appropriate to

consider permitting the installation of

manufacturer, distributor, and dealersupplied used tires as well as retreaded

tires on trucks and buses as well as

trailers. This agency is committed to the

use of recycled products to the extent

practicable within the constraints of

motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, if the

use of used and retreaded tires, whether

supplied by the purchaser,

manufacturer, or distributor/dealer, is

not inimical to motor vehicle safety,

then NHTSA is receptive to considering

further relaxation of the exception.

IV. Issues for NHTSA Consideration

As pointed out above, NHTSA has no

data on any correlation between motor

vehicle safety and the use of used and

retreaded tires on new trucks, buses,

and trailers. The agency is hopeful,

therefore, that this notice will elicit

meaningful comments and suggestions

on which to base a decision on whether

or not to amend the exception in

Standard No. 120 and, if so, to what

extent. Accordingly, NHTSA requests

comments on the following specific

issues:

1. How many or what percentage of

new trucks, buses, and trailers are sold

per year with purchaser-supplied used

or retreaded tires installed?

2. Who are the heaviest users of the

S5.1.3 exception, mileage contract/tire

bank purchasers or private citizens?

3. Should any amendment to

Standard No. 120 be limited to

permitting the installation of only

manufacturer-supplied retreaded tires

only on new trailers? Should

distributor/dealer-supplied retreaded

tires also be permitted to be installed on

new trailers?

4. Should Standard No. 120 be

amended to permit the installation of

manufacturer-supplied retreaded tires

on new trucks and buses as well as

trailers? Should installation of

distributor/dealer-supplied retreaded

tires be permitted on new trucks and

buses as well as trailers?

5. Should Standard No. 120 be

amended to permit the installation of

manufacturer-supplied used tires on

new trailers only? Should distributor/

dealer-supplied used tires also be

permitted on new trailers?

6. Should Standard No. 120 be

amended to permit the installation of

manufacturer-supplied used tires on

new trucks and buses as well as new

trailers? Should distributor/dealersupplied used tires also be permitted on

new trucks and buses?

7. Should used and/or retreaded tires

be permitted on new school buses? On

steering and/or drive axles of other new

vehicles?

Note: 49 CFR 393.75(d) prohibits the use of

retreaded tires on the steering axles of buses

operated in interstate commerce.

8. Should NHTSA propose a Federal

motor vehicle safety standard applicable

to retreaded tires for motor vehicles

other than passenger cars? If so, should

it parallel Standard No. 117? Standard

No. 119?

9. What requirements or criteria

should be established for the

installation of manufacturer or

distributor/dealer-supplied used and/or

retreaded tires on new motor vehicles

other than passenger cars?

10. Should new vehicle purchasers, if

not supplying or requesting the tires, be

notified of the installation of used or

retreaded tires? In writing? Orally?

11. What would be the economic

impact of permitting the installation of

manufacturer or distributor/dealersupplied retreaded tires on new trailers?

On new trucks and buses as well as

trailers?

12. What would be the economic

impact of permitting the installation of

manufacturer or distributor/dealersupplied used tires on new trailers? On

new trucks and buses as well as trailers?

13. What would be the environmental

impact of permitting the installation of

manufacturer or distributor/dealersupplied retreaded tires on new trailers?

On new trucks and buses as well as

trailers?

14. What would be the environmental

impact of permitting the installation of

manufacturer or distributor/dealersupplied used as well as retreaded tires

on new trailers? On new trucks and

buses as well as trailers?
28564 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 105 / Thursday, June 1, 1995 / Proposed Rules

V. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures

This notice was not reviewed under

Executive Order 12866. NHTSA has

considered the impacts associated with

this request for comments and has

concluded that it is not significant

under DOT’s Regulatory Policies and

Procedures. As explained above, this

document requests comments to aid the

agency in determining whether to

propose amending Standard No. 120

and if so, the extent of such amendment.

B. Executive Order 12612 (Federalism)

NHTSA has analyzed this proposal in

accordance with the principles and

criteria contained in Executive Order

12612 and has determined that this

proposal does not have sufficient

federalism implications to warrant

preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

VI. Comments

Interested persons are invited to

submit comments on this proposal. It is

requested but not required that any

comments be submitted in 10 copies

each.

Comments must not exceed 15 pages

in length (49 CFR 553.21). This

limitation is intended to encourage

commenters to detail their primary

arguments in concise fashion. Necessary

attachments may be appended to these

submissions without regard to the 15-

page limit.

If a commenter wishes to submit

certain information under a claim of

confidentiality, 3 copies of the complete

submission, including the purportedly

confidential business information,

should be submitted to the Chief

Counsel, NHTSA, at the street address

shown above, and 7 copies from which

the purportedly confidential

information has been deleted should be

submitted to the Docket Section. A

request for confidentiality should be

accompanied by a cover letter setting

forth the information specified in 49

CFR part 512, the agency’s confidential

business information regulation.

All comments received on or before

the close of business on the comment

closing date indicated above for the

proposal will be considered, and will be

available to the public for examination

in the docket at the above address both

before and after the closing date. To the

extent possible, comments received after

the closing date will be considered.

Comments received too late for

consideration in regard to the final rule

will be considered as suggestions for

further rulemaking action. Comments on

the proposal will be available for public

inspection in the docket. NHTSA will

continue to file relevant information in

the docket after the closing date, and it

is recommended that interested persons

continue to monitor the docket for new

material.

Those persons desiring to be notified

upon receipt of their comments in the

rules docket should enclose a selfaddressed stamped postcard in the

envelope with their comments. Upon

receiving the comments, the docket

supervisor will return the postcard by

mail.

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

30117 and 30166; delegation of authority at

49 CFR 1.50.

Issued on May 23, 1995.

Barry Felrice,

Associate Administrator for Safety

Performance Standards.

[FR Doc. 95–13314 Filed 5–31–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P